»!K&LIl«,^M¥lEISSJnrY-

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW
TESTAMENT

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
NEW YORK • BOSTON CHICAGO • DALLAS
ATLANTA - SAN FRANCISCO
MACMILLAN & CO., Limited
LONDON • BOMBAY ¦ CALCUTTA
MELBOURNE
THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd.
TORONTO

APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN
THE NEW TESTAMENT
THE BOHLEN LECTURES, 1915

BY
ANDREW D. HEFFERN, D.D.
PROFESSOR IN NEW TESTAMENT LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE,
PHILADELPHIA DIVINITY SCHOOL

¦NVrofmrk
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1922

V

¦$rmhtGP°eTf,

YALE DIVINITY SCHOOL

COPYBIQHT, 1922
By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Set up and printed. Published March, 1922.

Printed in the United States of America

THE JOHN BOHLEN LECTURESHIP
John Bohlen, who died in Philadelphia on the twenty-sixth
day of April, 1874, bequeathed to trustees a fund of one hundred
thousand dollars, to be distributed to religious and charitable
objects in accordance with the well-known wishes of the testator.
By a deed of trust, executed June 2, 1875, the trustees under
the will of Mr. Bohlen transferred and paid over to "The Rector,
Church Wardens,, and Vestrymen of the Church of the Holy
Trinity, Philadelphia," in trust, a sum of money for certain des
ignated purposes, out of which fund the sum of ten thousand dollars
was set apart for the endowment of The John Bohlen Lecture
ship, upon the following terms and conditions : —
" The money shall be invested in good substantial and safe securities,
and held in trust for a fund to be called The John Bohlen Lectureship,
and the income shall be applied annually to the payment of a qualified
person, whether clergyman or layman, for the delivery and publication
of at least one hundred copies of two or more lecture sermons. These
Lectures shall be delivered at such time and place, in the city of Phila
delphia, as the persons nominated to appoint the lecturer shall from time
to time determine, giving at least six months' notice to the person appointed
to deliver the same, when the same may conveniently be done, and in no
case selecting the same person as lecturer a second time within a period
of five years. The payment shall be made to said lecturer, after the
lectures have been printed and received by the trustees, of all the income
for the year derived from said fund, after defraying the expense of print-
*f ing the lectures and the other incidental expenses attending the same.
_£.' "The subject of such lectures shall be such as is within the terms set
-- forth in the will of the Rev. John Bampton, for the delivery of what are
z. known as the 'Bampton Lectures,' at Oxford, or any other subject dis-
3 tinctly connected with or relating to the Christian Religion.
* "The lecturer shall be appointed annually in the month of May, or as
ij^ soon thereafter as can conveniently be done, by the persons who for the
I time being shall hold the offices of Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal
Church of the Diocese in which is the Church of the Holy Trinity; the
Rector of said Church, the Professor of BibUcal Learning, the Professor

vi THE JOHN BOHLEN LECTURESHIP
of Systematic Divinity, and the Professor of Ecclesiastical History, in the
Divinity School of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Philadelphia.
"In case either of said offices are vacant, the others may nominate the
lecturer." Under this trust the Rev. Andrew D. Heffern, D. D., was
appointed to deliver the lectures for the year 1915.

EDITOR'S NOTE
The Rev. Professor Andrew D. Heffern, D. D., died in
Philadelphia May 2, 1920, a few days after he had completed the
manuscript of these Lectures. The interest that they indicate in
New Testament work began in the author's undergraduate days
at Harvard, developed during his studies at the Universities of
Berlin and Bonn, and was maintained through twenty years of
parish work. From 1900 he held the chair of the New Testament
at the Philadelphia Divinity School.
The undersigned, whom the author honored as his friend with
the duty of seeing the book through the press, acknowledges the
valuable assistance of members of Professor Heffern's family in
the proof reading. He is constrained to append his name by the
sense that only the author himself, with his rare accuracy, could
have given the printed book its perfect form. An Index has been
appended, necessarily imperfect coming from another than the
writer of so compact a book; but it may be of partial service
for topical reference.
James A. Montgomery.
Philadelphia Divinity School,
Epiphany Tide, 1922.

PREFACE
The large element of controversy in the New Testament Writ
ings has suggested the following studies of the progress of Christi
anity amid the earliest attacks upon it, or the attempted perver
sions of it, and of the methods of its original defense and of the
establishment of believers in the faith of the Gospel. An examina
tion of the New Testament from this special historical standpoint
promises to contribute not only to a distincter understanding of the
development of some of the movements of the Apostolic Age, but
also to the exposition of several of its Books or of passages in them,
in the light of their polemic occasions and of their direct interest in
establishing their readers against specific intruding errors. In
some cases it may also contribute to a more precise understanding
of the occasion and formulation of important theological themes.
Such a study will have the additional interest of recognizing the
abiding principles and constant lines of defense, and the bases of
the full assurance of faith to which the New Testament writers
confidently appeal.
We already possess numerous important studies of separate
lines of New Testament apologetic arguments and their validity,
and of the external persecutions; exhaustive investigations of the
Judaistic controversy, and monographs on the errorists alluded to
in several Books of the New Testament, frequently with an
interest in their bearings upon critical theories. In the studies here
submitted, portions of which were presented in the pubhc lectures,
an attempt has been made to gain a connected view of these
various separate features and movements by employing as the
unifying principle the dominating religious interest of the writers
in the genesis of faith by the method of witness and apology, and
in its continued establishment against attacks from without and
within. Such a historical study based directly upon the data of the New
Testament, is obviously affected by literary criticism of the docu
ments, as being based upon it; and it is also in some instances a

X PREFACE
factor in determining its results. In many cases this historical in
vestigation can proceed from fairly generally accepted critical
conclusions. Where, however, there is no such general agreement
concerning the genuineness and date of certain Books, the en
deavor has been made to study their contents, as far as practicable,
apart from critical questions, and to indicate what bearings, if
any, the result has upon their hterary and historical criticism.
Definitely, the critical views here followed are, for the Gospels,
mainly those of B. Weiss, and for the Epistles largely those of
Zahn. Both in the consideration of matters of criticism andin the
related discussion of historical developments and doctrinal features,
invaluable help has constantly been gained from Moffatt's Intro
duction. In the subject of polemic, which has especially since the Tubin
gen movement been regarded as concerned principally with the
Judaistic movement, a detailed study has been made of the other
line of attack by a movement of gnosticizing character. While
this is ordinarily recognized as appearing first in Colossse, as due
to local influence, and as otherwise alluded to only in the latest
portions of the New Testament, it is here concluded that it had
an earlier appearance and wider activity; and that the exposure
and confutation of it is a prominent interest of many other New
Testament Writings. In advocating its emergence in an earher
stage of the Pauline mission and its wider range, it has been found
advisable, in order to guard against any impression that the
evidence for this would rest only on a questionable combination of
scattered allusions in various Epistles, to construct at the outset
such features of it as may be recognized independently in each
Epistle or group; and then to indicate how the separate con
structions point to the identity of one general movement revealing
itself with increasing definiteness. This method involves un
avoidably a repetition in the separate surveys, of the indications
of controlling features of the movement; but it has been deemed
necessary in view of current denials of allusions to such a move
ment before Colossians and in Epistles subsequent to it.
In these surveys no attempt has been made, since the New
Testament data do not suffice, to construct the system in its de
tails; but primarily to ascertain the fact of the activity of such a
movement and its ominous significance for the fundamentals of

PREFACE XI
Christianity, as indeed it is thus definitely viewed and confuted
in the New Testament from the standpoint of its threatened in
fluence. It will also be found that these separate studies of the
movement in the Apostohc Age have been made with no attempt to
identify the New Testament errorists with any special forms of
later gnosticism; and, apart from an occasional illustration, with no
attempts to support them by direct parallels with second century
gnostic terminology. Should the view here proposed meet with any
general measure of approval, then second century gnosticism in
some of its detailed doctrines and terms is further available in
possible illustration of certain New Testament expressions, special
lines of reasoning and doctrinal formulations, and of some obscure
phrases and passages, in view of the recognition in these instances
of a background of reference to a general gnostic usage, whether
appropriated or repudiated by the New Testament writers.
If the thesis here advocated is tenable, it also offers through the
movement as it has been here constructed in its controlling out
lines, a contribution towards the filling in of the gap in our knowl
edge as to the link connecting pre-Christian gnosticism in the first
half of the first century and the great gnostic systems of the first
half of the second century.

CONTENTS
chap. PAGE
I. The Controversial Element in the New Testament  1
II. The Genesis of the Apostles' Faith  13_
III. The Polemic in the Gospels  27
IV. The Apostolic Apologia of Witness and the Call to Faith
in the Gospel of Salvation  56
1. To the Jews and Godfearers  57
2. To the Gentiles.  78
V. Acceptance of the Gospel and Standing Steadfast in
Faith   104
1. The Primitive Catechesis  104
2. The Confirmation of Faith  123
3. Establishment in the Faith  134
VI. Establishment against External Oppositions  149
1. The Jewish Attacks  149
2. The Conflict with the State  159
VII. The Judaistic Controversy  185
VIII. The Inteuding Gnostic Teachings  209
1. The Thessalonian Epistles  213
2. I and II Corinthians and Romans  228
3. Epistles of the Imprisonment  '  264
4. The Pastorals  290
5. Hebrews, Catholic Epistles and Revelation  304
IX. The Attack and Repulse of the Gnostic Movement in
the New Testament  363
1. Its Provenance and Advance into the Church  366
2. Exposure and Discipline of the Errorists  376
3. Methods of Establishment of the Faithful  384
Index of Selected Biblical Citations  403
General Index  409

APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW
TESTAMENT

APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT
CHAPTER I
THE CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Among the subjects to be treated in this lectureship, according
to the terms of the foundation, is the confirmation and establish
ment of the Christian faith; and I have chosen as my topic its
original defense, confirmation and establishment, as found in the
New Testament. I shall endeavor to present this by an historical
study and discussion of Apology and Polemic in the New Testa
ment. The New Testament is primarily a book of religion. It has
flowered out of the inspired teaching, rehgious life and aims of
the primitive Christians; and through the Christian generations
it has been a source of rehgious illumination, power and peace.
It is, however, equally true that the origin of the Book and of the
religion of the New Testament was closely allied with controversy
and contest. What Wrede complains of as the character and
tendency of the Fourth Gospel, the most devotional of our New
Testament writings, is indeed true of it and of all the New Testa
ment books: it was born out of conflict; although it is not true,
as he claims, that it was written for conflict.1 That books of con
troversy should at the same time be books of devotion is due to
the fact that in the primitive contest for the faith delivered, its
defenders preached and wrote according to the rule enunciated by
Isaiah and followed by Christ (Mtw. 12, 18): that the Lord's
servant must not strive, nkx^Sai, but be gentle towards all,
apt to teach, patient of wrongs, in meekness correcting those that
oppose themselves, II Tim. 2, 24 f . They were ready always to
give answer, airokoyia, yet with meekness and fear, I Pet. 3, 15.
1 W. Wrede, Vortrage und Studien, 1907, p. 208.

2 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
The prominence of these oppositions to the Gospel was predicted
in Simeon's warning in Christ's infancy: this Child is set for the
falling and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which is
spoken against. So too the Christian Apostle near the close of
his lifework, echoes Simeon's prophecy in describing his ministry
as an appointment for the defense and confirmation, airo\oyla
Kai (8€|8aiw<rts of the Gospel, Php. 1, 7,16.
Emphasis on this element of opposition may seem to conflict
with the truth that the New Testament Age was the fullness of
time; that it was the acceptable time, the «cup6s when the Gen
tile world was prepared to receive the Gospel of salvation and
when Israel had been prepared to bring it to them. It was in
truth this fullness and nick of time, just because it was a supreme
crisis in humanity's history. The opposing spiritual principles,
ideals and forces of the old world-order and of Christ's new revela
tion and redemption met then in decisive conflict. In such a
crisis, the Christ realized that He was come not to send peace on
the earth; "not to permit it to remain on the old level," but to
send a sword, Mtw. 10, 34. So St. Paul looked on the fullness of
time as the opening of a great door and effectual; yet a door that
opened out on many adversaries, I Cor. 16, 9. Conflict was in
evitable in such a crisis. The Incarnation was the inbreathing
and involution of a new creative force into the hfe, thought and
institutions of the human hfe. It had to be organically correlated
with the existing religious hfe: with the life of Israel under the
preparatory discipline of the Old Testament revelation in law and
prophecy; with the messianic hope of the Baptist, of the Pharisee
and of the Zealot; with the moral and social systems of Jew and
Gentile; and in general with their need of salvation, and with
their imperfect receptivity for Christ's revelation of that salvation
in himself. If as the older Hegelianism taught, Christianity was
a natural evolution out of Aryan intellectualism and Semitic
rehgionism, there would have been no such conflict as we find in
the New Testament. There was indeed a commingling of those
elements going on in this period; yet the result was not the Gospel
of Christ, but the quiet coalescence of Orientalism with Graeco-
Roman thought in the various forms of Syncretism. The fact
and the character of the conflicts of the Apostohc Age, as well
as its spiritual triumph, are themselves testimonies that Christian-

CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 3
ity was a new creative force, a new covenant, a new and complete
revelation, a new hfe.2
Our New Testament writings are in varying measure related to
the emergence, development and overcoming of these oppositions.
This is recognized in the famihar characterizations of many of
these books. Matthew is entitled by Zahn as an apologia to the
Jews. Acts is regarded by Bartlet and J. Weiss as an apology to
the Romans. Farrar finds in II Corinthians St. Paul's apologia
pro vita sua. Edmundson and many others see in Romans his
apology for his gospel; and Bruce studies Hebrews as the first
Christian apology. A study of the New Testament from this
viewpoint may contribute to our understanding of the historic
setting and aims of its writings, and of their treatment of the
various attacks from without, and of the controversies within, the
Church of the Apostohc Age.
There is besides the same need of confirmation and establish
ment of faith to-day, which involves a study of the method and
validity of its defense in Apostohc days. And this especially
because of current claims that our New Testament Books, in
particular the Gospels, are dominated by an apologetic aim.
Wernle, in the opening number of the Zeitschrift fXir die N. T.
Wissenschaft, 1900, discusses the ancient Christian apologetic in
the New Testament, and concludes, p. 63 f. that all four Gospels
are distinctly apologies; each advancing beyond its predecessor in
the task of defending the Christian faith against Jews and heathen ;
apology is their controlling aim, and it develops into inventive and
freely creative apologetic. Wrede, in the essay on the Character
and Tendency of the Gospel of John cited above, has even more
definitely attacked the Fourth Gospel, because of the aim, charac
ter and worth of the Apology he finds in it. Baldensperger 3 sees in
2 Liddon, Clerical Life and Work, p. 149, recalls the task confronting the
Apostles in taking up their commission to make disciples of all nations: 'Before
them were vast political bodies with the prestige of antiquity and the prestige
of possession, and committed to the support of popular falsehoods. Before
them were intellectual systems, elaborated by generations of thinkers, and
commanding, if not the belief, yet certainly the respect of the educated classes.
Before them all the ambitions, all the lusts, all the luxuries, all the vested
interests of a large and corrupt society.'
' W. Baldensperger, Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums: sein polemisch-
apologetischer Zweck. 1898.

4 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
this Gospel an apologetic purpose in a polemic against the School
of the Baptist. J. Weiss has exploited in his unfinished work on
Primitive Christianity, his earher views of Acts as apologetic, in
order to prove its composition at 100 A. D., and to reduce it to the
level of a second century apology. Weinel too has appropriated
this view of the apologetic element in the Gospels, in the con
struction of his Bibhcal Theology of the New Testament. The
real significance of these recent theories of the character of the
apologetic of the New Testament, is that it is claimed to be not a
defense of Christ's Gospel, but of an alleged transformation of that
Gospel; in other words, it is only an apology for the faith of the
Church at the close of the Apostohc Age.
The direct discussion of this claim would involve a detailed in
vestigation of the many relevant topics of hterary and historical
criticism of the Gospels. We can therefore here only recall that in
some instances the alleged apologetic interest has to be read into
the narrative; that in general its influence in the composition of the
historical Books has been pressed out of proportion; and that a
determination of its definite function and character will furnish no
support to the theory of a creative apologetic. Wernle himself
recognizes, op. cit., p. 63 n., that the Evangehsts were influenced by
many other tendencies, although he claims that the apologetic
interest was dominating. In this conclusion Menzies decides that
'he perhaps goes too far.'4 Menzies himseh in discussing the
motives of the formation of the Gospel tradition, finds the general
motives to be three: the etiological, by which any rehgion seeks an
explanation of its own character, arrangements and institutions;
the apologetic, which provides a defense against attacks from
without by presenting the tradition of the life and teaching of
Christ as the best defense of the faith; and the devotional, to
reahze its own spirit and gain fresh vigor in the spring of the
Christian movement, Christ himseh. While allowing that the
Gospel tradition was modified by these three impulses, he empha
sizes the historical character of the Gospels. Concerning the
apologetic motive he states: 'No one would say that these elements
of the Gospel tradition were invented to serve the purpose of
arguments for the Christian cause;' and he adds, 'but that they
4 A. Menzies, The Earliest Gospel, 1901, p. 15 n., pp. 4-19.

CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 5
did serve in this way is undeniable, and that those who arranged
and handed on the tradition must have felt it to have this virtue is
equally plain. '
In such a construction the apologetic element of the Gospels is
presented in a truer proportion. Yet Menzies' closing suggestion
of the Evangelists ' interest in defense against external attacks has
to be qualified in view of the fact that the Gospels are addressed to,
and written in the interest of the estabhshment of, behevers already
confirmed in the faith.6 They were therefore not composed with
the aim of winning the readers to faith; nor with a direct aim of
guarding them against external attacks and objections. For these
would have been urged with full force at the time of the readers '
profession, and even in Christ's lifetime, and hence had been al
ready met and overcome at their conversion. We must rather look
for their apologetic significance in connection with internal attacks.
As will appear in the closing chapters, instead of being designed as
apologetic for an advanced doctrinal development at the date of
their composition, they may, with a great degree of probabihty,
have been intended to serve among other general interests, as a
recognized basis of appeal from, and a criterion of, spurious de
velopments of faith, perversions of Christian morals, denials of the
Christian hope and rejection of apostolic authority and tradition,
made on the plea of advance by means of alleged spiritual gifts.
They in fact provide the distinct statement of the earhest and
original Gospel facts and teachings, to which the Epistles appeal
as a test of false teaching and for the estabhshment of disciples
who wish to abide in that which they had heard from the
beginning. The occasions for a special study of the New Testament defense
and confirmation of the Gospel are increasingly recognized both in
recent surveys and in a few direct treatments of the subject, of
6 Weinel, Bib. Theol. N. T., p. 445: 'No one of the N. T. Writings is in fact
addressed to those who are outside.' Harnack, The Mission and Expansion
of Christianity, 1. 385 n.: 'The N. T. does not contain a single missionary work.
The Synoptic Gospels must not be embraced under this category, for they
are catechetical works, intended for the instruction of people who are already
acquainted with the principles of doctrine, and who require to have their
faith enriched and confirmed. . . . Primarily, at any rate, even the Fourth
Gospel has Christian readers in view, for it is certainly Christians and not
pagans who are addressed in 20, 31.'

6 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
varying range. The starting point of general histories of Christian
apologetic is ordinarily the second century, as being especially the
Age of the apologists.6 Among works on the earhest period, the
prize essay of G. Schmitt, Die Apologie der 3. ersten Jahrhunderte,
1890, presents in a historic and systematic method the apology of
only the later half of this period. James Macgregor, History of the
N. T. Apologetics, 1894, is principally interested, pp. 21-121, in the
discussion of Christ's 'manner of dealing with matter of proof in
rehgion, and what He ordained regarding the sources and grounds
of Christian evidence;' and more definitely, in the appeal made by
Him and His Apostles, to prophecy, miracle and personal testimony.
A constructive general survey of apology and polemic in the New
Testament age, made from his special standpoint of hterary criti
cism, is given by Arnold Meyer.7 In it the prominence of the
apologetic element in the New Testament Writings is emphasized,
its definite occasions and the main lines of attack and defense are
presented along with characterizations of the method, spirit and
results of the controversies both in the ministry of Christ and of
His Apostles. A few years earher E. F. Scott8 gave what is probably
the first ' separate discussion of the primitive Apology as a whole. '
With an introductory exposition of the prominence, methods and
issues of the New Testament apology, and a concluding estimate of
its permanent value, he has given a most clear and valuable history
and discussion of the primitive claim and defense of Jesus' mes-
siahship, and of the controlling phases of the Church's developing
conflict with Judaism, heathenism and gnosticism, and of its own
ultimate claim to be the absolute rehgion. In the present lectures
it is proposed to study in such varying degree of detail as the
several topics may seem to require, the historical conditions and
development of the primitive controversies, especially in their
relation both to the genesis of Christian faith and also to its estab
lishment in conflict with emerging oppositions. This later phase of
the subject will involve in particular a special examination of the
indications, character and influence of a gnosticizing movement
' The older works are briefly listed in A. S. Farrar's Critical History of Free
Thought, 1862, p. 460, and most fully in Zoeckler, Ges. d. Apologie des Christen-
thum, 1907.
7 Die Religion in Geschickte und Gegenwart, I, coll. 565-575.
8 The Apologetic of The New Testament, 1907.

CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 7
within the Church shortly after the beginning of the Pauhne
mission. In approaching the consideration of the general subject, our
natural starting point is the evident fact that in the New Testa
ment Age, the Gospel was beheved, cp. I Thess. 2, 13. In spite of
obstacles of preconceptions, disappointment of messianic hopes,
reversal of life-long convictions, revolution of world-view and
stern demands for the highest moral obedience, the New Testament
defense of the Gospel was successful. So complete is the conviction
of the converts, that in the Epistles to them we find nowhere an
apologetic for the fundamental faith. That faith is made, in the
Epistles, the acknowledged basis of instruction and exhortation,
upon the emergence of any danger of perversion by false teaching
or immorality. Even in Hebrews, with its warning of the danger of
apostasy, there is no renewal of the original defense. It assumes, in
its opening words, the truth of the fundamental faith and states it
in its highest christological terms.
This behef of the primitive Christians was moreover the highest
and most complete certitude. Its full assurance was even more
than intellectual conviction of the truth of the doctrinal statements
and of the reahty of the historical redemptive facts preached in the
Gospel; even more than a conviction of the worth of its moral
ideals, and of the certainty of the judgment which it proclaimed.
It was nothing less than the direct certitude, /3«|8<uw(ris, of the ful
fillment of its promise of a moral and spiritual renewal of their
whole personal hfe. It was certitude of an entrance into a state of
salvation by union with the glorified Christ. Such certitude of sal
vation on the part of the primitive believers could only rest upon
the fullest proof, witness and defense. It set therefore before the
Apostolic preachers, the task of an adequate satisfaction of the
intellect by all the means of proof of truth and historic fact. The
task was the greater since the truth of the redemptive facts was
presented along with supreme moral demands on the will, affections
and conscience for a response of self-renunciation and of self-
devotion to the divine offer of salvation. Since the response could
be made only because of conviction of the divine authority for such
demands and offers, the proof and defense of the Gospel must be
accompanied with a direct divine awakening, illumination and in-
vigoration of the whole personality.

8 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
The means by which the genesis of this certitude and full assur
ance of faith was effected, will be considered in detail in the study
of the Gospel propaganda to Israel and to the Gentiles. We may
here, however, briefly recall the outstanding hindrances to its
acceptance as they appear at the first preaching of the Gospel at
Pentecost. Among the hearers of that apologia to Israel were
Jews of the Dispersion, who had come under the broadening in
fluences of hfe outside Palestine. While such Jews would be apt to
be more receptive towards Christ's spiritual teaching and inter
pretation of Israel's rehgion, in contrast to the rigid ceremoniahsm
and particularism of Palestmian Judaism, they had not, on the
other hand, received the deep impression made upon the Palestin
ian multitudes by Christ's life, character and gracious ministry of
mercy and power in word and deed. They would therefore nat
urally adopt the position of Palestinians, who in spite of every
form of Christ's witness to His messiahship in His ministry among
them, had rejected Him. At Pentecost all the earher obstacles to
Jewish conversion remained in full force, and had been enhanced by
the supreme obstacle of His death upon the cross. He had failed to
reahze the messianic ideals of any of the parties: zealot, pharisee
and those who like Simeon and Cleopas looked for redemption of
Israel. He had further failed to satisfy their demands for proof
of his exalted claims: a line of objection exploited by the ruling
Jewish authorities. These two obstacles correspond to the second
and third temptations of Christ: to satisfy the national expectation
of a conquering warrior-messiah; and to satisfy the national de
mand for an over-powering sign and proof from Heaven, of His
claims. But the first temptation, concerned with the suffering
Christ, pointed to the completing obstacle to behef in His Gospel
of the kingdom, and in His claim to be its King. The cross, ever a
stumbling block to the Jewish hope of messianic glory, removed all
possibility of further interest in His cause. Hence the Apostles had
the threefold task of removing this stumbling block of the cross; of
establishing His claim to»be the Christ, Lord and Son of God; and
of winning them for personal devotion to Him in the kingdom as
He preached it and as He established it.
They had, on the other hand, in their Jewish propaganda the
advantage of addressing men trained by and devoted to the Old
Testament religion and the messianic hope of its prophets. Their

CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 9
Palestinian hearers are also aheady familiar with the chief events
in Christ's hfe and with the principal teaching of His ministry.
They accept the possibihty of miracles. And they are trusting for
salvation in a coming judgment by means of a covenant union with
God, secured by faith and repentance; as this salvation was fully
preached by their Scriptures, the Baptist and the Prophet of
Galilee. In preaching to men thus prepared, several essential
topics in the defense of the Gospel, such as revelation, prophecy
and miracle, would be assumed; while in the later propaganda to
the Gentiles and in propaganda to-day in Christian and heathen
lands, these topics call for direct presentation.
The method of the preachers in winning believers from among
the Jews, with such helps and hindrances to faith in Jesus as the
Christ, was naturally the method by which Christ Himself had won
the Apostles to faith. The difficulties of the apostohc propaganda
among their fellow countrymen were at least no greater than those
which their Lord had faced and overcome in winning Gahlean
peasants to behef that Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah;
and in transforming them into men assured of their personal
salvation and endowed with spiritual power by their faith in him.
Their hope of success in preaching the Gospel could therefore be
built only on their following the method of their Master, which was
besides the only method they knew and the only method we can
conceive. In attempting, however, to trace this genesis of the Apostles'
faith, we have first to consider the question of the method of the
use of the Gospels as the sources of the history of this genesis.
Where these Gospels are regarded as 'creative apologetic' for the
later christology of the Church; and where as in many hberal works
they are treated as being largely transformations of a simpler
gospel of one who was but a prophet and an unique rehgious
genius, it would be indeed arguing in a circle to regard these gospels
as the foundations of the faith of those who created or transformed
them; since they are the results and nottthe causes of that faith.
It is not possible here to discuss the historical criticism of the
Gospels in order to determine directly the question of scientific
method which confronts us at this point. Some general consid
erations will, however, support our method of use of the Synoptic
Gospels primarily and the Fourth Gospel as supplementary to

10 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
them, in tracing Jesus' method in educating the Twelve to behef in
Him as Christ and Lord.
The trend of recent criticism is toward the recognition that the
alleged transformation of the Gospel into a defense of the Church
christology must in any case have been a primitive rather than a
late transformation. It is no longer customary to regard St. Paul
as the author of such a transformation. The essential features of
his christology were those of the primitive Christians at the date
of his conversion, in or before 36 A. D.9 Our written Gospels likewise,
besides their agreement with Pauline views of Christ,10 present the
same fundamental features concerning faith in Christ and the same
witness for it as appear outlined in the Oral Gospel in Acts 2, 3, 4,
10 and 13, which indicate the primitive and traditional form of
Gospel preaching and defense during the period 30 to 50 A. D. On
this view of the essential correspondence of the Gospels with
primitive teaching, the question that calls for answer is not merely
when or how the faith of the apostohc preachers could have trans
formed the Gospel of Christ, but when and how His Gospel trans
formed them: how Galilean peasants and fishermen, with fixed
Pharisaic ideals of Old Testament piety and legahsm, and with
fixed apocalyptic conceptions of the Messiah and the Messianic
kingdom, could be transformed into the men of Christian faith as
we find them in the Acts and Epistles. Their fellowship with
Christ as he is portrayed in the written Gospels of His ministry,
death and resurrection fully and alone accounts for their faith.
The Gospels have therefore a rightful claim to be used as primary
9 H. Weinel, Bib. Theol. N. T., pp. 212, 218 in §§ 37, 38; and p. 238: 'Paul
is heir also in Christianity. As he stands behind Jesus and is not conceivable
without Jesus, so too the great transformation of the Gospel into a message
concerning Jesus as the Christ, Lord and Son of God, concerning the resur
rection, baptism, and Lord's Supper, had already taken place before he was
drawn into the movement.' J. Weiss, Urchristm., p. 341, introduces his ex
position of the special developments of Christology by Paul, with the re
minder: "We should however misrepresent Paul's complete view, if we did
not bear in mind that in his view of faith in Christ, there is also still present a
general primitive Christian, and indeed a definitely Jewish Christian sub
stratum upon which the individual — Pauline 'Christ piety' first builds itself."
Julicher, Paulus u. Jesus, Rel. Ges. Vbucher, I, 14, p. 69: 'If the religion of
Jesus has in any event suffered a definite transformation, then that transforma
tion takes place in the period before Paul's conversion.
10 Cp. the works cited, p. 73.

CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT 11
sources explanatory of the genesis of the primitive faith instead of
being regarded as the transformed products of an early or later
faith. More definitely, the Synoptic Gospels can in particular be used
as sources for the history of Christ's discipline of the Twelve in
faith, because this history is not based on special sections which
have been suspected as created or colored by later dogmatic or
apologetic tendency. The development of the Apostles' faith
emerges incidentally and indirectly. Since it does not appear
within the direct scope of the Evangelists, there can be no thought
of their giving an unhistorical view of the subject. Even the con
fession of St. Peter at Csesarea Philippi is presented more definitely
as a critical stage in Christ's ministry and self-revelation than as
the climax of the Apostles' behef around which the Gospel history
centered. Further, the present stage of synoptic criticism enables
us to use confidently for our purpose the generally recognized
sources of the synoptic tradition: Mark; Q, the largely non-marcan
discourse material common to Matthew and Luke; and L, the
source of the material peculiar to Luke.11 J. Weiss, Das Urchristen-
thum, p. 8, while regarding our Gospels as influenced by Pauhne and
ecclesiastical ideas, accepts these sources of the synoptic tradition
as originating as to their substance from the primitive Christian
community. He also finds, p. 3, that even the Fourth Gospel as
well as the other Johannine books contains so much ancient
material both in feeling and in mode of thought, that he decided to
attempt to call them also as witnesses for his portrayal of the
Beginnings of Christianity.
The Fourth Gospel, unlike the Synoptics, shows direct interest
in the genesis of Christian faith.12 In view, however, of the critical
discussions concerning the historical character of the discourses or
narratives of this Gospel, we shall first ascertain the indications of
the synoptic data; and then compare them with the similar indica
tions and statements in the Johannine account. The result of the
11 Reconstructed in Greek by B. Weiss, Texle und Untersuchungen, 1908.
Bd. 32: Q, p. 1-75; L, pp. 97-168.
12 H. S. Holland, Creed and Character, 1887, treats this Gospel in the first
two sermons 'as the Story of an Apostle's and Disciple's Faith: "The
Fourth Gospel tells how the Apostohc faith was built and estabhshed,"
p. 20.

12 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
comparison may itself contribute towards the determination of the
historicity of the relevant Johannine material.
Adopting this method of use of our Gospels or their sources in
order to ascertain Christ's method of winning the first disciples to
behef in him, we can also say with J. Weiss when adopting the same
method for his study of Primitive Christianity, p. 2 : " The attempt
must speak for itself; and the knowledge so obtained must itself
show whether it is convincing, free from self-contradiction and
possible. "

CHAPTER II
THE GENESIS OF THE APOSTLES' FAITH
The genesis of the Apostles' faith was conditioned not only by
the nature of the claims Jesus made concerning Himself and by the
obstacles to recognition of these claims, but also and primarily by
the spiritual character of the Apostles. Their fundamental inter
est in Him must be a rehgious interest. This spiritual interest was
aheady manifested by them in their acceptance of the preaching of
John the Baptist. With their nation, they came to his baptism
confessing their sins and devoting themselves to works worthy of
repentance. Whatever other elements were comprised in their
messianic hopes of national glory and apocalyptic bliss, the es
sential blessing in their messianic expectations was to them justifi
cation; acceptance in the messianic judgment; entrance into
eternal life at the coming redemption of Israel, upon their admis
sion into the Kingdom of God.
This rehgious attitude was involved in the current apocalyptic
idea of the Kingdom coming by means of the sudden entrance of
the all holy God into their earthly life; and was also involved in the
view of life in the Kingdom as a hfe in God's presence and as en
dowed with the gifts of His Spirit.
Lack of such direct rehgious interest in the preaching of the
Kingdom's imminence was of course only too possible. The
Baptist saw the necessity of sternest warning against rehance on
national Jewish prerogative as Abraham's children, for immunity
in the Judgment. But throughout the Gospels, the positively
rehgious character of the Apostles is indicated. Christ has to
lament their slowness to understand; but no rebuke is recorded of
their sins or lack of spiritual interests, save in the case of Judas.
The failure of Christ to win or to retain him, as a behever was due,
so far as we can trace his spiritual history, to loss of rehgious
interest and to deterioration of moral character, when his mes
sianic hopes were shattered upon Christ's refusal to be a king, after

14 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the feeding of the five thousand. He has to chide the Apostles for
their strife as to precedence (Mk. 10, 42 ff., cp. John 13, 12 ff.);
yet even here the gentleness and lofty plane of His reproof, (cp.
Mk. 9, 33 ff .,) indicates that their ambitions to be first or greatest
were not rooted in seh-aggrandisement but in zeal to be chief in
devotion to Him and in self-sacrifice for His cause. His own satis
faction and approval is expressed in the facts that He chose them
as His Apostles 'that they might be with Him,' (Mk. 3, 14);
and that at the last He calls them 'no longer servants but friends,'
(John 15, 15).
Their spiritual receptivity expressed in their penitential devo
tion and in their desire for messianic salvation, was definitely
evoked by the Baptist's preaching of the presence among them
of an unknown "mightier one" fitted to inaugurate the Kingdom.
Ah men were in expectation, (Lk. 3, 15), and the question arises
at this point, whether the Baptist left them to discover or to
recognize the Coming One for themselves; or whether he directly
testified in addition that Jesus was He of whom he spoke. In
the Fourth Gospel, after Jesus' baptism, there is reported the
Baptist's direct testimony to a group of his disciples that Jesus
is the Lamb of God and Son of God,1 who has the Spirit abiding
on Him and who will Himseh baptize with the Spirit. All these
titles and descriptions express his messianic character. Even if
viewed as originating with the Evangehst, they express his claim,
which is repeated in 3, 26; 5, 33-36; 10, 41; that the Baptist gave
a personal testimony to Jesus as related to the messianic Kingdom.
This claim of the Fourth Gospel may be tested by the references
to their relations in the Synoptics and Acts. In the summaries
of the Oral Gospel in Acts 10, 37 ff. and 13, 24 f., among the fixed
lines of proof of Jesus' messiahship is the ministry of the Baptist.
Paul in his synagogue address when advancing from the Old Testa
ment predictions of the Christ to their fulfilment in Jesus, begins
with a reference to the Baptist's ministry and to his testimony
to the coming of the more exalted One. Although the report of
the address does not contain a personal testimony of the Baptist
to Jesus, yet since the Apostle is not here concerned to give in
detail a history of the Gospel movement to which the Baptist's
ministry was an introduction, but to give the several lines of
1 Zahn adopts the reading ^kXckt6s.

THE GENESIS OF THE APOSTLES' FAITH 15
proof of Jesus' messiahship, the prominence of his reference to the
Baptist presents the probability that the full discourse contained
his direct testimony in support of the Apostle's thesis. This
probability is strengthened by the similar compressed reference
in Peter's oral Gospel to Cornelius, Acts 10, 37 f . To the mention
of John's baptism is added the statement that God anointed Jesus
with the Holy Ghost and with power. If with commentators in
general, Christ's baptism by John is here alluded to, the report
of his anointing with the Spirit would naturally come from the
Baptizer to some of his disciples; and it would be in itself his
testimony to them of Jesus' messiahship. Still more definitely in
the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew 3, 13 ff . reports John's impression
of Jesus' excelling spiritual worth; and all the Synoptists report
the descent of the Spirit at Jesus' baptism and the heavenly voice
acclaiming Him as Beloved Son. In Mark and Luke the Voice
is addressed to Jesus. But a consideration of the narrative itself
supports the view that the voice was heard also by the Baptist.
For an audible voice would not be needed if addressed to Christ
alone; and there is no ground for conceiving this theophany as
an autobiographical communication by Christ. The First Evan
gelist by reporting the words 'This is my beloved Son,' indicates
as does the Fourth Evangelist that the theophany was not only
Jesus' spiritual experience, but was as well a divine communica
tion to His prophet on the Jordan. As such it would be the basis
of his conviction of Jesus' office and of his direct testimony to
Him. A well-known objection is raised against the Baptist's convic
tion and testimony to Jesus' messiahship in view of his later mes
sage, 'Art Thou He that cometh or look we for another' (Mtw.
11, 2 ff., Lk. 7, 18 ff. from Q). But upon examination the section
directly supports the other indications of John's personal testi
mony to Jesus. The Baptist's question does not, as Loisy and
others suppose, express his dawning sense that Jesus' works may
be pointing TTiwi out as Messiah. Such a theory is at once seen
to be inconsistent with Mtw. 11, 6, the warning in the beatitude:
'blessed is he whosoever shall find no occasion of stumbling in
me.' And this warning points to an earher conviction of Jesus'
messiahship, now clouded with perplexity concerning Jesus' min
istry and works of mercy and pardon, in utter contrast to the

16 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
dread work of initial judgment which the Baptist had expected
and preached. Had there been no such earher personal convic
tion in regard to Jesus, we can conceive of no ground for the
Baptist's perplexity. And that there had been this conviction
and a personal testimony to Jesus, is equally the assumption
underlying Christ's emphatic testimony to John as a prophet and
more than a prophet. Such a vindication would be needed only
if the multitude had learned that John had given some personal
witness to Jesus with a prophet's certainty, and now seemed to
be wavering or in perplexity concerning his earher witness. If, on
the contrary, his testimony had been simply that the Kingdom
was imminent and that the unknown mightier One was among
them, there would have been no occasion to reassure the multitude
that John was still a prophet despite his perplexed inquiry con
cerning Jesus.
One clear result of the Baptist's ministry was that the Apostles'
discipleship to Jesus was from the first based on their messianic
interest in Him. This can be recognized in the Marcan account
of the first association of the Four with Jesus upon His call: Come
after me and I wih make you fishers of men (Mk. 1, 16). The
explanation of their immediate response, with the sacrifice of home
and hfework, is in the Marcan statements introducing it. It is
the result of the Baptist's ministry and announcement of the im
minent coming of the inaugurator of the messianic kingdom; of
his personal witness, as indicated above, to the revelation of Jesus
as the Messiah at His baptism; and of Jesus' preaching that the
time is fulfilled and the Kingdom at hand. To 'come after' Him,
was therefore to be associated with His preaching of the messianic
kingdom. To leave ah 'for His sake and the Gospel's sake,' (Mk.
10, 28 f .) showed that they recognized in Him the One mightier
than the Baptist, who made no demand for personal following,
and called for no sacrifice or abandonment of their homes. Yet
the call is so abrupt; the sacrifice to be made is so absolute; the
nature of the new work so undefined, that the question constantly
arises in view of the seemingly mutual understanding between
the Four and Christ and of their alacrity to respond, whether
Mark's account does not point to an earher acquaintance and
relationship. Luke's rearrangement of the Marcan order of the
events in this section implies his intention to supply grounds on

THE GENESIS OF THE APOSTLES' FAITH 17
which the prompt obedience of the Four can be more clearly
understood. He places the group of miracles and the first preach
ing tour which in Mark, (1, 21-39,) immediately follow their call,
immediately before the call (Lk. 4, 31-44). The call itself is ac
companied by a miraculous draught of fishes; and the whole sec
tion is introduced by Jesus' visit and sermon in Nazareth. In
this arrangement the response to the call was the result of the
impression of Christ's personahty, His gracious word and His
words with power, His miracles, one of which had been wrought
in Peter's home and one in the sphere of His work; and probably
in Luke's intention was also the result of their knowledge of His
claim in Nazareth (4, 21) that the messianic prophecy was ful
filled in His Gospel preaching. While this rearrangement pro
vides the necessary explanation of the response of the Four to
the call to follow Jesus in His messianic work, it is not based
except in the Nazareth narrative taken from Luke's special source,
on any source other than Mark. Ah indications, however, point
to the probabihty that Mark has here preserved the historical
sequence of the events connected with this call of the Four. In
such case their messianic interest in Jesus, and their personal
faith in Him is not accounted for by their previous relations with
Him in Galilee. It is, however, definitely accounted for by their
earher acquaintance with Him as recorded in the Fourth Gospel,
to which we wih now turn.
According to the Fourth Gospel, a ministry of probably a year's
duration and principally in Judea, (John 1 to 5,) preceded the call
of the Four to join Him in a new form of ministry in Galilee.
When this is accepted, their call and their response, (Mk. 1, 16 ff .,)
is fully explained along the lines of Luke's indications of the prep
aration needed to receive and obey the call. This preparation is
shown in the Fourth Gospel as the result of their previous personal
acquaintance and association with Christ and with His teaching
and work.
Without entering into the discussion of the critical question
raised by the contrasted Synoptic and Johannine types of Gospel,
it will suffice for the present purpose to indicate the Johannine
view of Christ's Judean ministry, and to recognize that if it was,
historical it would naturally issue into the form, method and
character of the Galilean ministry of the Synoptics.

18 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
In the Fourth Gospel the pubhc ministry is first addressed to the
nation, corporately. Christ's pubhc seh-manifestation begins
appropriately at the nation's capital; during the national feast; in
the national shrine; and before the nation's rulers. His first act of
cleansing the Temple is a revelation of His will to purify the
nation preparatory to the inauguration of the Kingdom. As
messianic king, He manifests His authority; much more, claims
God as His own Father. His discourse with Nicodemus, a ruler of
the Jews, is replete with even more definite and profounder self-
revelations. This initial self-presentation having ended in practi
cal rejection, He engages in supplementing the work of the Baptist
in purifying and preparing the nation; and finally returns to
Jerusalem, (John 5), to compel the nation's leaders to a definite
decision. By His Sabbath miracle he evokes the rulers' attacks on
His work and claim; meets "it by most definite declarations of His
Sonship; and supports these by several hnes of witnesses, (5, 31 ff.).
The rulers' rejection of Him and their resolve to kill Him, ends
this Judean ministry. Such rejection by the rulers of the Church
of Israel in Judea naturally determines the scene, character and
methods of His subsequent ministry, as we find it recorded in the
Synoptic Gospels. It is a ministry in Gahlee; is addressed to indi
viduals; is characterized by preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom,
which gradually transforms both by word and deed the zealotic,
pharisaic and popular conceptions of it; and in connection with
this preaching, it is further characterized by the beginnings of
organization of the Kingdom by personal calls to discipleship and
apostleship. When therefore the Fourth Gospel's early Judean
ministry is regarded as historical, the beginnings of the Apostles'
faith are not to be sought at their call in Mk. 1, 16, to the new
work of the Gahlean ministry, but in connection with their first
meeting with Christ, in the previous year, as recorded in John 1,
35 to 2, 11.
It is, however, constantly urged as an objection to the historicity
of this section, that these first disciples recognized immediately
that Jesus was the Messiah. The Evangelist in fact records this
recognition in clearest terms; and his record shows itself to be
inherently probable, since it shows that this recognition would be
the reasonable outcome both of their expectations and also of the
impression made upon them by Jesus at their first meeting with

THE GENESIS OF THE APOSTLES' FAITH 19
Him. For they came to Him as men made expectant by the
Baptist's preaching for the appearance of Messiah; and still more
definitely, if John and the Synoptics have been rightly interpreted,
as men possessing the Baptist's personal witness to Jesus. They
were besides, men with spiritual receptivity for Jesus' self-revela
tions; and it is this which is distinctly emphasized by the Evangel
ist as the condition for the genesis of their faith.
To these expectant, open-hearted men the initial behef in Jesus'
Messiahship had as its foundation and as the coefficient of ah
other forms of witness, Jesus' own personahty. His self-witness in
His hfe and character of hohness and love; His words such as
never man spake and as they were now heard for the first time;
His power to pierce down into their own lives and personalities, and
find them; His spiritual exaltation and serenity that yet shared
their abode, journeys and hfe in meekness and lowliness; in a word
His unique and incomparable Presence constrained their reverence,
affection and devotion of faith. That faith in Andrew and his
companion is the direct outcome of their abiding with Jesus that
first day. Peter's discovery of the Christ in Jesus, rests on Jesus'
discovery of him; on His penetrating insight into Peter's inmost
life and future growth in character. Philip came and saw in Jesus'
personahty, words and character, the mightier and worthier One of
whom Moses and the prophets wrote and to whom the Baptist
witnessed. Nathanael, with the same expectancy yet with de
mands for a supreme type of holiness and divine fellowship, rec
ognizes the Christ in Jesus' supernatural knowledge of his own
inner hfe of devotion; and receives the promise of stih greater
divine witness to Him. If earher the crowds mused in their hearts
whether the Baptist were the Christ, and if later the crowds, with
far less intimate association with Jesus debated whether He were
the Christ, there is no reason to set aside the Johannine record that
under the soul-stirring impression of the personality of Jesus,
the earhest disciples became His followers under the conviction of
His messianic character. This same conviction reappears in and
furnishes the needed explanation of the Synoptic record, (Mk. 1,
16 and plls.,) of their prompt sacrifice of all earthly interests and of
their self-devotion to His service, in the behef that His work was to
be messianic work and that he was essentially related to the
Kingdom.

20 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
A further development of this initial behef as recorded in the
Fourth Gospel, into the definite faith of their later confessions and
ultimate convictions, was obviously required in view of the fact
that on their first association with Him there was as yet no mani
festation of what to them were some of the essential messianic
characteristics. The Man of despised Nazareth exhibited no
external feature of the glorious Messiah of the Old Testament
predictions. He gave no indication of beginning the messianic
judgment which the Baptist announced. His references to the
Kingdom, both in the early chapters of John and equally in the
Gahlean preaching in the Synoptics were at variance with the
current apocalyptic expectations. Their continued faith in Him
despite the continued absence of these messianic features, points,
therefore, to their developing recognition and acceptance of the
character of His Messiahship as He revealed it to them. We
can mark critical stages of this development not only in
the Synoptics at Peter's confession, (Mk. 8, 29,) but also
in John. Long after the initial confessions in the first chap
ter of John, we find Peter's confession, "We have beheved
and know that Thou are the Holy One of God," (Jno. 6,
69); and at the conclusion of the Last Supper the Eleven
confess, "Now know we that Thou knowest all things: by
this we believe that Thou earnest forth from God," (Jno. 16,
30). The method of developing their faith in the Christ as Jesus
revealed Himseh to be, in contrast to the Christ of the current
messianism, is identical in both the Johannine and Synoptic rec
ords. It is aheady forecast in His attitude to the professions of his
Messiahship made by the first disciples in John 1, 41 ff. Although
they employ a fuh series of definite messianic titles, He Himself
while not disavowing them, describes Himseh by none of them.
He calls Himself the Son of Man. It is His self-chosen title in
response to His disciples' willingness to regard Him as the Christ.
By His use of it in all the Gospels, He transformed the leading
contemporary conceptions of the Messiah and of the Messianic
Kingdom. What He, in whom the first disciples beheve they have
found the Christ, truly is as the Son of Man, will be revealed in the
historic progress of His life; and more definitely by His statements
concerning Himseh as the Son of Man and by the various Old

THE GENESIS OF THE APOSTLES' FAITH 21
Testament uses of the term.2 At the definite crises in John and the
Synoptics when He will test the growth and character of their faith
in Him, it is in connection with His use of this self-designation.
When many of His disciples went back and He appealed to the
Twelve: Would ye also go away, the occasion was His statements
concerning Himseh as the Son of Man in John 6, 27, 53 and 62.
Similarly Peter's confession at Csesarea Phihppi is in response to
the demand: Who do men say, do ye say that the Son of Man is
(Mtw. 16, 13). In both instances, to the responsive faith of Peter
and the Apostles, the Son of Man as Jesus had revealed Himself to
be, was realized to be indeed the Christ of their first hopes and
professions. The addition in Mtw. 16, 17: the Son of the living
God, which Sanday is disposed to accept, (H. D. B., IV, 572 a,
574 b) in spite of Dalman's rejection of it (Words of Jesus, p. 274),
recalls that along with the self-designation as the Son of Man,
was Jesus' constant interest in presenting His Messianic work
as related to His Sonship to God. He who is the Son of Man
brings also the complete revelation of the Father's life and
truth and of His Father's grace in the estabhshment of the
kingdom of redemption.3
The mode of this revelation of Himseh to His Apostles as the
Son of Man and the Son of God, in order to impart to them true
conceptions of the person and work of the Christ they beheved they
had found in Him, is most intimate personal association with
Himseh. In the several recorded calls to disciples, the invitation
is primarily to share His hfe and experiences; to imbibe His teach
ings; to cooperate in His work; to be identified with Him in spirit:
in the phrase of the Gospels, "to be with Him." The Synoptics
and John are at one in this view of the basis of discipleship. In
John the first two followers seek this personal fellowship: "Where
dwellest Thou"; and are welcomed with: "Come and ye shall
2 Dalman, Words of Jesus, IX, 6, holds, however, that the investigation of
the statements in which Jesus designates Himself as the Son of Man leads,
in view of their multiformity, to no result in the determination of its meaning.
He decides that Christ took the title from Dan. 7, 13, and very probably found
'The Son of Man' of Dan. 7 in Ps. 8, 5 ff. also. Others whose positions are
summarized by N. Schmidt, Ency. Bib. s. v. Son of Man, § 24, consider that
several other O. T. passages and ideas are united in the self-designation.
s Cp. Sanday, H. D. B., IV, 576 a, who also refers to Holtzmann, N. T.
Theologie I, p. 281 f .

22 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
see." Their confession of faith is the outcome of the fact that they
"abode with Him." Philip is called to follow Him, first on His
journey to Gahlee. Nathanael is invited to 'come and see' Him,
in following whom for one day, Phihp had been convinced of the
fulfillment in Him of the Old Testament predictions.
In Mk. 1, 16, the Four are called to be trained as fishers of men.
Yet the sole method of training is: 'Come ye after me.' The
Apostles are chosen, (Mk. 3, 14,) for definite work; and again, the
aim in their selection is: "that they might be with Him" and
thereby be trained for His work. Their Lord's description of them
at the close of His life is: 'ye that have continued with me, ol
SianepevriKores per' ipov, in my temptations' (Lk. 22, 28; cp. Jno.
15, 1 to 17) . The Sanhedrin, (Acts 4, 13,) account for the Apostles'
boldness by recognizing that they had been with Jesus. Similarly
the Apostles describe His ministry as the whole period in which
He 'went in and went out among us,' from the Baptist's ministry
until the Ascension.4 They are to be his witnesses, (Jno. 15, 27),
because: 'ye have been with me from the beginning.' In contrast
to the three classes in the Parable of the Sower in whom Christ's
ministry made no lasting impression, these Apostles were neither
hardened by prejudice, nor moved by a merely superficial interest,
nor lacking in detachment from worldly interests. But with open-
hearted, whole-hearted and single-hearted devotion, they an
swered the call, 'Follow me.' And in their continuous most in
timate association and communion of hfe with Him, they were
experiencing as the true foundation of their behef in Him as the
Christ who was to redeem Israel, the fulfillment in themselves of
His promise: Come unto me; learn of me; and ye shall find rest
unto your souls.
For in their coming and learning of Him in closest intimacy of
a common life shared by Him and them, He was able most fully
to reveal Himseh. As He went about with them doing good, as
He taught them in pubhc or instructed them in private, as He
spent His whole life among them, they recognized His perfect
filial spirit; His abiding communion with the Father; His absolute
4 Thayer-Grimm, s. v. Aaipxopa.1, 1 a: 'to go in and out,' representing a
Hebrew phrase, "is used of familiar intercourse with one." 'Eiflr- and
iniropebopat. (Acts 9, 28) is used similarly of St. Paul's life in Jerusalem,
cp. Gal. 1, 18^

THE GENESIS OF THE APOSTLES' FAITH 23
obedience and devotion to the Father's will; His purity and sin-
lessness; His brotherly love for men as His Father's children; His
hope for the world's salvation and His self-devotion to its ac
complishment at any cost of struggle and supreme self-sacrifice.
They saw in Him one that serves; that came not to be ministered
unto but to minister. In contrast to the wicked husbandmen in
the parable, (Mk. 12, 6) they reverenced the Son.
The correlate of this self-witness of His life and character as
Son, was the witness of the Father. They saw reflected in Him
and expressed by Him the spirit, love and wih of God. For shar
ing His life of communion with God in prayer and loving service,
they realized more and more that they were living with Him in
the divine presence. Just as "we turn again and again to the
portraiture of his divine presence which hves in the Gospels, to
every trait of holiness, of sacrifice, of mercy, of calm reproof and
gracious encouragement," so they knew as "we know, that in these
we have the image of our Father." 5 Throughout the Synoptic
Gospels, He based all His teachings, acts, promises, sufferings, and
offices on the assertions that they were the expressions of the
Father's will, truth, power and redeeming love. Their acceptance
of this claim was based on their recognition of the direct divine
witness to this perfect revelation of God's Fatherhood in Jesus'
life of Sonship. "As soon as the thought of 'the Fatherhood of
God' is gained, it is felt that 'the Son* expresses it absolutely.
The witness of the perfect coincidence therefore finds its cogency
in the response which it calls out from the soul of man. Man
recognizes the voice as naturally and supremely authorita
tive." 6
The indications of this claim of divine witness and of the Apostles'
recognition of it, which are inwoven in the Synoptic tradition are
5 Westcott, Revelation of the Father, p. 143. Similarly H. R. Mackintosh,
Expository Times, Vol. 27, p. 346 ff., The Revelation of God in Christ: "It
is still as true as in the first century that Jesus 'reflects God's bright glory and
is stamped with God's own character,' Heb. 1, 3. All that we have to say
(and it is much) about the unveiling of God in the Old Testament, in the
course of history and the constitution of man, or in the world of Nature,
must be subsumed under, and controlled by, the self -delineation he has given
in our Lord.' And, 'we are made immediately aware that in this Man God is
personally present.'
« Westcott, St. John, p. XL V.

24 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
paraheled and developed in the constant direct statements of the
Fourth Gospel. The definite assertions of this divine witness in
John 5, 31 ff., 7, 16 ff., 8, 18 ff., etc., are summed up at the close
of the ministry, (Jno. 14, 8 ff .) in the reply to Phihp's request,
"Show us the Father, and it sufficeth us: Have I been so long
time with you, and dost thou not know Me? He that has seen
Me hath seen the Father. Behevest thou not that I am in the
Father and the Father in Me? The Father abiding in Me doeth
His works."
The witness of the Son and the Father is combined in the wit
ness of His words. As in Mk. 9, 10, the three disciples seized and
clung to His word concerning the resurrection,7 so the Synoptics
constantly report his word as filling the multitudes now with as
tonishment at their power and authority; and now with wonder
as being words of grace. In all cases they were words that to
them that had ears to hear, revealed and illuminated the Father's
will, the Old Testament revelation, the mysteries of the Kingdom,
the secrets of human hearts. If even the multitudes pressed upon
Him to hear in this witness of His words the word of God, and the
common people heard Him gladly, we can the better realize the
influence of His words in the genesis of the faith of the Apostles,
who were the constant hearers both of His pubhc teaching and
of His private instruction; and who accepted it as the revelation
of the Father who has dehvered ah things to the Son, (Mt. 11, 27,)
whose words shall not pass away. The Fourth Gospel but repeats
this Synoptic view of the impressiveness, authority and compelling
force of the witness of His words. It is the Temple officers of the
common people, (Jno. 7, 49.46) who say: Never man so spake!
It is the Apostles who say: Thou hast words of eternal hfe, (Jno.
6, 68). It is Jesus Himseh who declares: I spake not from Myself;
but the Father hath given Me a commandment what I should
say and what I should speak, (Jno. 12, 49).
The Synoptics and John share the same view of Christ's works:
they are the witnesses of the Father to Him and through Him.
In Luke 11, 20, his exorcisms are by the finger of God: in the
Matthew parallel, (12, 28,) they are by the Spirit of God. Simi-
7 Gould, St. Mark in loc. shows this to be the meaning of the Evangelist
and not as B. Weiss holds: they observed the command of silence in
vs. 9.

THE GENESIS OF THE APOSTLES' FAITH 25
larly in John, (14, 10) : the Father abiding in Me doeth His works;
and the works which the Father hath given Me to accomplish
bear witness of Me that the Father hath sent Me, (5, 36). They
are thus not merely evidences of His Messiahship, but revelations
of the redemptive power in His life. They are a divine witness to
His Sonship; and definitely, to the power and purpose of His
Sonship to reveal and accomphsh the Father's redeeming will
through the Son's administration of the Father's sovereignty.
This fourfold witness in the revelation of Himself in the closest
intimacy and communion of hfe with the Twelve, was steadily
developing their faith to recognize in such a Son of Man and Son
of God, the fulfillment both of the Old Testament ideals and re
demptive prophecies and also of the Baptist's predictions of the
coming One, bringing in the Messianic Kingdom with its gifts of
the Spirit: even the faith to recognize Him as the Christ of God.
The several lines of witness to Christ in the Fourth Gospel are
grouped and discussed by Westcott, Gospel of St. John, pp. XLIV
to XLVII: The Truth and the Witness. He points out seven
types of witness which "cover the whole range of the possible
proof of rehgious truth, internal and external. The witness of
the Father and of Christ Himseh is internal, and rests on the
correspondence of the Gospel with that absolute idea of the divine
which is in man. The witness of works and of Scripture is ex
ternal and historical and draws its force from the signs which the
Gospel gives of fulfilling a divine purpose. The witness of the
prophet and of the disciples is personal and experiential and hes
in the open declaration of what men have found the Gospel to be.
Lastly, the witness of the Spirit is for the behever the crown of
assurance and the pledge of the progress of the Truth." The
subject is discussed in further detail in his exegesis of Chap. 5,
31 to 47: The witness to the Son and the ground of unbelief.
Along with these forms of witness was developing the witness in
themselves: a growth of sympathy, union and identification with
His own mind, spirit and hfe. The Yea of His self-witness had
become more and more the Amen of their personal experience.
This gradual growth into the mind of Christ was the condition of
clearer response of faith to His increasing seh-revelations, and of
distincter understanding of His teachings concerning the Kingdom.
The development can be traced in connection both with His

26 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
personal ministry to the Twelve,8 and also with His ministry of
inevitable conflict, which issued in their further confirmation in
faith. 8 As in Bruce, Training of the Twelve; Latham, Pastor Pastorum: the School
ing of the Apostles by our Lord, 1891; Forrest, The Christ of History and of
Experience, 1901: Methods of Christ's Self-manifestation, pp. 106-128, and
esp. to the Twelve, p. 129 f.

CHAPTER III
THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS
We have already recognized that conflict would be an inevitable
accompaniment of Christ's ministry. On what issues it would
arise and on what lines it would be conducted, would be determined
by the attitude, expectations and spiritual receptivity of the
various classes of the nation.1 This ministry which was introduced
by the Baptist as a messianic movement and was adopted as such
by the earhest disciples, challenged attention both as to its nation
alist character and also as to its rehgious and theological features.
Its relation to Israel's national life and future, which would in
volve its relation to the Roman world-dominance, was obviously
the element of essential interest to the ruling classes: Roman
officials, Sadducean rulers and Herodians; and at the other ex
treme, of the party of Zealots: the irreconcilable propagandists of
messianic revolution. On the other hand, its relation to the
rehgious ideals of Israel's written and Oral Law and to the pre
dictions of Israel's prophets and apocalyptists, would be the direct
concern of the Pharisees and their adherents, whose chief interest
was in rabbinism and in varying forms of apocalyptic messianism;
and also of the "Quiet in the Land," like the group in Luke,
Chaps. 1 and 2 and in 24, 21.
Although Christ was finally put to death by a combination of the
former class of ruling officials, His death was in reahty the outcome
of the persistent opposition of His theological opponents in the
latter group. The Sadducean proposal, (John 11, 49,) to make the
charge that continuance of Christ's ministry would tend to stir up
sedition against Rome, (vs. 48,) is evidently a change of pohcy.
Hitherto as rulers of the State under the Romans, they had let Him
go on. In the Fourth Gospel up to this point, there has been no
1 Schurer, H. J. P.,I I, Vol. 2, pp. 4 ff.; 126 ff.; 188 f.; Buhl, H. D. B. V, p.
45, N. T. Times; and the articles in H. D. B. on the various parties,, with
bibliographies; G. Hoennicke Das Judenchristenthum, p. 36 f.

28 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
interference by Jewish or Roman official on the ground of danger
of a pohtical character. Similarly in the Synoptics, His Galilean
and Perean ministry is free from interference and from controversy
with the officials of Herod. The Herodians' plan to destroy Him,
(Mk. 3, 6,) was characteristic of their policy to forestall any
possible issue of a new popular movement, so closely related to
that of the Baptist, who was now in Herod's prison; and the
Tetrarch's wish to kill Jesus, (Luke 13, 31,) seems based in addi
tion on his superstitious fears, (Mk. 6, 14 ff.). But their final plot
with the Pharisees to entangle Him through a decision concerning
tribute to Csesar, shows that throughout His ministry Christ had
successfuhy avoided any pohtical conflict with the Jewish or
Imperial authorities. His death on the charge of sedition first
introduced the Jewish charge of Christians' disloyalty to Rome,
which meets us constantly in the Apostohc propaganda.
There is no reason to suppose any direct relation or controversy
with the Zealots. Both their intense sympathy with Pharisaism,
(Josephus, Antiq. 18, 16,) and the complete absence of pohtical
messianism in Christ's preaching concerning the Kingdom, would
prevent their interest in His Gospel. If the thought, (John 6, 15,)
to take Him by force and make Him a king, proceeded from them,
it was a sudden new impulse; and it was immediately dispelled by
Christ's withdrawal. The fact that the Apostle Simon is cahed a
Zealot is insufficient to prove that Christ had relations with the
party in general. More indeed could be said in favor of Judas
Iscariot's interest in Christ and his defection as having been based
on a Zealot's hope and disappointment. His defection is first
mentioned the day after Christ's refusal to be king, (John 6, 15.
70 f .) ; his betrayal of Christ occurs the day after Christ's recogni
tion of Caesar's right to tribute.
The principal element of controversy in the Gospels is therefore
connected with the opposition of the popular leaders of the rehg
ious hfe and teaching: the Pharisees and Scribes. With their
attacks the Sadducean and Herodian rulers would ordinarily be in
sympathy. At times they would be the alhes of the Pharisees,
especially in Jerusalem; but at length, (John 11, 47 ff.,) taunted
them with their ineffectiveness, and thereupon took upon them
selves the leadership in accomplishing Christ's destruction. This
persistent pharisaic opposition was evoked not by direct claims

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 29
of messiahship, but by the same method of self-revelation as
evoked the faith of the Apostles. Owing to the avowed aim of the
Fourth Gospel, (20, 31,) to establish faith that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of God, is due the prominence of the controversies in which
Christ's self-affirmations are called forth by the denials and
rejections of His opponents.2 In the Synoptics, though written
with wider scope, wih be found a closely similar controversial
element. For comparison, we first trace its main features in St.
John. There the opponents are ordinarily "the Jews," five times
they are "the high priests and Pharisees," (7, 32.45; 11, 47.57;
18, 3); in general they are the hostile rulers and leaders of the
people. That the Pharisees are the prime movers in the concerted
attacks of these rulers may be concluded both from the mentions of
their direct conflicts with Christ and from the statements that they
were the principals or instigators of attacks upon Him, (7, 32.47;
9, 13 ff.; 11, 46; 12, 42). It is, however, no doubt true that 'the
Jews,' (2, 18), who demand a sign and warrant for His implicit
claim of authority over the Temple and the national life and
worship, are clearly the Sadducean rulers, in control of the Tem
ple.3 But His enigmatic response, which neither 'the Jews' nor
His disciples understood, precluded controversy with the Sad
ducean questioners. A similar treatment of the Sanhedrin's de
mand is found in the synoptic account of the Temple cleansing,
Mtw. 21, 23 : a question concerning the authority of the Baptist,
and a reference (Mtw. 21, 42) to a stone rejected by the Temple
builders becoming the corner sfone; a reference repeated in Acts
4, 11, by the Apostles in reply to the Sadducean question as to the
source of their miraculous power.
The Pharisees, however, are interested first of ah in Christ's
teaching. Parallel with the synoptic references to Christ's fre
quent conciliatory method with them, we can recognize in John's
brief report of Christ's meeting with Nicodemus, (3, 1 to 15), the
essential features of His message to these Pharisaic Teachers in
Israel. It can here be given to one who despite lifelong theological
prepossessions is stih relatively receptive, and who besides is im
pressed with the loftiness of Jesus' personal character and with the
2 This is the principal thesis elaborated by W. Richmond in his discussion
of the Fourth Gospel as the Gospel of Rejection, p. 28 ff.
» So B. Weiss: 'the hierarchy as in 1, 19'; Edersheim: 'the Temple officials.'

30 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
spiritual significance of His miracles. To Him the Gospel is re
vealed as supplanting salvation through legalism by its free gift of
a new birth, (vs. 3). Jewish particularism and sole claim of divine
election to the blessings of the Kingdom is refuted by the assertion
that admission to the Kingdom is the universal privilege of all who
accept this new birth from God's free Spirit, (vs. 5 to 8) . Freedom
from legalism and particularism upon spiritual rebirth, points also,
(vs. 6), to a hfe in the Spirit, (cp. Rom. 8, 2) in contrast to hfe in
the flesh. The answer, (vs. 11 to 13) to 'how these things can be, '
is that this Gospel is grounded upon his personal witness: upon the
revelation of the heavenly things in Himseh, the Son of Man from
heaven; and likewise, (vs. 14, 15), upon the offer to faith of re
demption and eternal hfe secured in the Son of Man's exaltation
through death. Thus the Fourth Gospel presents the character
istic elements of Christ's response to Pharisaic interest in His
teaching. And the Evangehst's comment, (vs. 16 to 21), states the
spiritual principles which determine their acceptance or rejection
of this Gospel resting on Jesus' claim of Sonship. In all the later
controversies with the Pharisees, the interest necessarily centers on
this prior fundamental question of His Sonship. Upon the Sabbath
healing of the impotent man in John 5, He claims authority to heal
on the Sabbath by reason of His filial union with the Father,
which is stated in most explicit and absolute terms, (5, 19 to 30).
He again offers as evidence supporting this claim, the same witness
which evoked His Apostles' faith. The seh-attestation is vahd
because of the witness of the Father in His hfe and words, (30.38 b.
43 cp. 7, 16 to 18; 8, 26; 12, 49) ; and in His works, 'inclusive of all
His spiritual ministry,' (Riggs). He has in addition the prepara
tory prophetic witness of the Baptist, (33 to 35) ; and the Father's
witness to Him in the Old Testament, (37 to 40; 46.47). Their
rejection of all these forms of witness is due to their rejection of the
unifying witness of the Spirit in their personal experience. They
had not seen in Jesus' words and hfe the voice and form of God,
(37.38), because they had not 'spiritual aptitude for discerning the
presence and revelation of God, however and wherever made,'
(Milhgan-Moulton) ; and had not therefore God's word abiding in
them; and had not, (41 to 44), the love of God in themselves,
making them responsive to its manifestation in Christ. Finally
their charge, (vs. 18), that He is destroying the Sabbath is turned

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 31
agamst themselves, (41 to 47); for Moses the Lawgiver is their
accuser for the rejection of Him to whom his writings and institu
tions pointed. Their outward zeal for the law became spiritual
rebellion, (Westcott).
The teachings of these early chapters are developed along the
same fundamental lines in later chapters, leading to increasing
definiteness of Christ's self-revelation and claim, and to fuller
exphcation of the essential forms of witness.4 Before considering
the controversies of those chapters, we may pass to the conflicts in
the Synoptics which intervened, according to the view here held
that the events in John, chaps. 1 to 5, preceded the Gahlean min
istry. In the Synoptics Christ's controversy with the opposing Jewish
leaders is presented in its relations with the wider range of interest
and topics in those gospels, and is given in several distinct sections.
In Mark 2, 1 to 3, 6, are recorded five conflicts with scribes and
Pharisees, as a counterpart to the initial popular enthusiasm in the
Gahlean ministry. In similar contrast to increasing popular favor,
is given in 3, 22 to 30, Christ's repulse of their charge of league with
Beelzebul. At the crisis of the Gahlean ministry occurs in 7, 1 to
23, his definite break with them on the issue of the Oral Law.
In 8, 11-13, their demand for a sign from heaven is refused, just
before the Apostle's confession of his Messiahship. Finally in 12,
38 to 40, His public ministry closes with a summary denunciation
of the scribes.
Matthew incorporates all these controversies, and in the Marcan
sequence of the sections as wholes. In addition, he repeats in 12,
38 ff., the demand for a sign. With the Marcan material he has
combined the controversy section of Q, Two topics of this Q sec
tion are combined with Marcan and other matter to form Mat
thew's controversial twelfth Chapter; and its last topic appears as
the final denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees in Chap. 23.
4Th. Calmes, L'Evangtle selon Saint Jean, 1904, p. 296: Toutes les dis
cussions que l'on rencontre dans le rVe Evang. entre Jesus et les Juifs, ses
ennemis, roulent sur un mime fond doctrinal: divinite et 6ternit6 du Verbe,
son union avec le P6re, sa mission reciemptrice. Mais ces idees sont rendues,
selon les circonstances, d'une maniere plus ou moins explicite. ... La
chose en question, dans les disputes que reproduit le IVe Evang., c'est la
mission messianique de Jesus; la base de I'argumentation, c'est son caractere
divin.

32 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Luke reproduces Mark's first and last group in the same position;
omits the conflict concerning the Oral Law and the demand for a
sign just before the Day at Ca?sarea, as he omits the whole section of
Mark, (6, 45 to 8, 26), of which they form a part. But both of
these topics and the Beelzebul charge appear as parts of a special
controversy section, 11, 14 to 54, formed from Q, Mark and Luke's
special source L. This section is imbedded in the longer section
10, 25 to 18, 14, containing additional reports from L of Christ's
relations with scribes and Pharisees, which reproduce his experi
ences of their hostility and his teachings concerning them and
their oppositions, which are found in the reports of Mark and Q.
While in some of these Marcan sections there are probably, and in
their Matthew and Luke parallels there are certainly groupings on
a topical rather than a chronological basis, yet both the topics of
the several groups and the naturalness of their sequence point
strongly to the general correctness of their chronological arrange
ment in Mk, and to the actual stages of the historic progress of the
controversy. The divergence of the Lucan order of the conflicts
will be considered where it first appears.
1. All the Synoptists agree in recording as the occasion of the
first conflicts in Galilee, the rising tide of popular enthusiasm
caused by Christ's preaching and miracles of healing. On the
view aheady stated, the controversies in John, Chaps. 1 to 5, oc
curred before the opening of this Gahlean ministry; and the pres
ence of the scribes, (Mk. 2, 6,) or Pharisees and doctors of the
law, (Mk. 5.17,) would indicate their purpose to inquire into
the character of this new phase and method of ministry. On the
opposite view that Christ's ministry began not in Judea but in
Galilee, we find that His first preaching tour brings these rehgious
leaders to Capernaum, as Luke says from every village of Gahlee,
Judea and Jerusalem; evidently to investigate the beginnings of
this new movement. The result is the five conflicts in Mk. 2,
1 ff . ; and in the same position in Lk. 5, 17 ff . In connection with
the First Evangehst's hterary plan, the first three conflicts are
presented together in Mtw. 9, 1 to 17; while the last two form the
introduction to the next controversy section, Chap. 12.5 In this
6 Summaries of hterary criticism aflecting this Marcan section are given
in Moffat's Introduction, p. 227 f. His own view (pp. 222, 231) is that in this
'cycle of conflict stories, the first probably existed in the Ur-Marcus in a

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 33
Marcan section and indeed in all the Synoptic reports of the
Pharisaic controversy, it is noticeable that Christ changes from the
simpler style and levels of Gahlean peasant instruction, to enig
matic and profound utterances and to compressed argumentative
aUusions, such as He uses in the Johannine discourses addressed to
the Pharisees and rulers. Here in these initial Gahlean conflicts,
His preaching of the Kingdom is shown in act and word to be in
direct contrast to dominant features of pharisaism; and definitely
to their conceptions of messianic salvation as related to legahsm,
sacrifices, ceremonial fastings, separation from all things or men
that are common or unclean, and to a rigorous mechanical view of
Old Testament revelation. For the paralytic is granted forgive
ness of sins freely, without reference to law and sacrifice. One
claiming to be absolving Son of Man, enters into fehowship not
with those who boast of their righteousness but with outcast
pubhcans and sinners; and even admits one of them to be a sharer
of His ministry of preaching the Kingdom. Joy and gladness is the
abiding keynote of the new Gospel, controlling and spiritualizing
fasting as a free expression of piety. The Old Testament and its
sabbath law is to be interpreted not by the casuistry of the Schools,
but by sympathy with the merciful intentions and gracious mind
of the divine Lawgiver.
The basis of these antipharisaic revelations of the true nature of
messianic salvation is as before in the Fourth Gospel, the authori
tative self-witness of Jesus. He claims to be the Son of Man with
the divine prerogative to forgive sins on earth; to be the Lord of the
Sabbath; to be the Bridegroom instituting a festal new hfe with
new forms of devotion and with a new spirit of freedom. Along
with this self-attestation in life and word, is the Father's witness
in the healing of the paralytic at the word of the Son who pro
nounced his forgiveness. If those commentators6 are right who
detached form'; the second and third are merely connected topically, and
'it is impossible to be sure . . . that both debates or either occurred at
so early a period'; the fourth and fifth 'are set in very vague connections of
time; and the allusion to the Pharisees and Herodians is again proleptic' He
adds, however: ' but the fact that Jesus had already raised the suspicions of
the authorities explains the inquisitorial visits of the Jerusalem scribes in
3, 22 and 7, 1.'
*-E. g., Plummer, St. Luke, on 9, 34; Zahn, Evg. d. Matthdus, on 9, 15, p. 376.
In spite of the veiled wording of the thought, Jesus reckons on the under-

34 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
find in Mk. 2, 19, an ahusion to the Baptist's reference to Christ
as the bridegroom, (John 3, 29), the Baptist's disciples are here
reminded of their Master's witness to Jesus. And the Old Testa
ment too bears its witness that in His fehowship with sinners and
in His sabbath ideals, He is revealing the will and mind of God.
If the Pharisees had 'the word of God abiding in then,' (John 5,
38); if they had the antecedent witness of the Spirit, 'the love of
God in themselves,' they could have recognized not only the pre
ceding forms of witness but also the witness of the Spirit in the
changed hfe and devoted loyalty of the sinners who responded to
Christ's call. But in the absence of that preparatory witness of the
Spirit, the result of this initial Galilean conflict is that they adjudge
Him as in Jerusalem, (John 5, 18) a blasphemer and destroyer
of the Sabbath; and conferred with the Herodians on the means
of destroying Him.
Luke by reversing the order of Mk. 3, 7 to 12 and 3, 13 to 19,
places the choice of the Twelve and the Sermon on the Mount
immediately after the five conflicts; and most probably with the
aim of showing that the Sermon was the direct issue of the con
flicts. The First Evangehst, who first mentions the choice of the
Twelve as preliminary to their instruction for the Mission in
Chap. 10, reports the Sermon with extended reference to pharisaic
opposition; although he has not yet brought them on the scene.
In the Beatitudes the true members of the Kingdom and its real
blessings are presented in almost direct contrast to the pharisaic
assumptions repudiated in the first Marcan controversy section.
The Sermon next meets the evident pharisaic charge that the
rehgious teaching and practices in that Marcan section are a
destruction of the Law and Prophets; and it proceeds to reveal the
true righteousness of the divine kingdom in opposition to the
righteousness of the scribes as seen in their interpretation of the
Old Testament, and to the righteousness of the Pharisees as ex
pressed in their prayer, fasting and almsgiving. Again as in the
Marcan controversy and in the Johannine discourses, He bases His
standing of it by the disciples of John. A satisfactory historical explanation
of this assumption and of all its presuppositions lies alone in the fact that
these disciples of John or their associates, had once heard from the mouth of
their teacher the metaphor, (J. 3, 29) in reference to Jesus and the community
gathering itself around him: he that hath the bride is the bridegroom.

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 35
teaching on His personal authority as revealing absolutely with His
' I say unto you, ' the Father's will in the Law and Prophets; and as
professing that the final judgment wih depend upon His decision.
2. The next controversy in the Marcan and Matthsean order is
concerning the charge that Christ is in league with Beelzebul.
It is reported in Mk. 3, 22 ff., Mtw. 12, 22 ff., and Luke 11, 14 ff.
Mark thus places it directly after the five initial conflicts. Mat
thew too introduces it after the two sabbath conflicts, which are
followed by Christ's withdrawal from controversy (12, 15) ; thereby
fulfilling the ideal of the Old Testament Servant, (12, 19. cp. II
Tim. 2, 24). But when His exorcisms have raised popular en
thusiasm to a danger point, (12, 22 f.), controversy is again forced
upon him by his enemies' attack on the vahdity of these miracles
as witness to his claims. They are ascribed by the Pharisees to
demonic influence. Luke, however, places this conflict in the latter
part of His ministry as part of the controversy section, 11, 14 ff.
In favor of the chronological arrangement of the first two
Evangehsts is the fact that it would be the natural order of attack.
It is indeed the actual order of these two controversies even in
Luke. It would also naturahy be made in the earher period of the
Gahlean popular success and excitement, rather than in the final
journeyings towards Jerusalem, as in Luke. Further, Synoptic
criticism has enabled us to recognize that Luke's arrangement in
11, 14 ff., is clearly topical; as will appear from a brief summary
concerning the Synoptic sources of the Beelzebul sections.7
AU three Evangehsts have here used Q : Mtw. using Mk. also, and
incorporating in addition related Sayings; Luke too combining
with Mk. his recension of Q, together with some material from
his special source, L. This last source was according to B. Weiss,
parallel to Q in Lk. 11, 37 ff., and was here used instead of Q.
FoUbwing the main features of Weiss' reconstruction of this sec
tion,8 Q included a series of controversial discourses, Q. Syn. Ueb.,
p. 88, without definite chronological indication. Its topical order
7 The detailed criticism of the passage and a discussion of recent representa
tive critical views is given by Prof. B. S. Easton, in the Journal of Biblical
Literature, 1913, pp. 57 to 73: The Beelzebul Sections.
8 The Greek text, pp. 34 to 47 of Die Quellen der Synoptischen Ueberlie-
ferung, in T. and U. Bd. 32, 3. 1908, with discussion in Die Quellen des Lu-
kasevangeliums, pp. 75 f.; 115 ff.; 289 f.

36 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
has been best reproduced by Luke: the Beelzebul section, the
demand for a sign, which was followed in Q by the Woes on the
scribes and Pharisees. Since Q in the common opinion contained
no account of the Jerusalem ministry, this final denunciation is
joined for topical reasons to the two conflicts just mentioned; and
this order is retained in Lk. 11, 39, although Mk. and Mtw.
rightly place the Woes at the conclusion of the ministry in Jerusa
lem; and Luke himself at the same point, (20, 45), repeats from
Mk. his earher verse, 11, 43. This absence of chronological
interest in the Lucan section containing the three controversies,
justifies us, therefore, in the absence of any opposing reason, in
accepting Mk.'s assignment of the Beelzebul controversy to the
middle period of the Gahlean ministry. We may also accept the
statement, (Mk. 3, 22), that the authors of this charge were scribes
from Jerusalem; and also that they were Pharisees, (Mtw. 12, 24).
Weiss on the contrary urges that Lk. 11, 14, refers the charge to the
populace; and that Luke here represents Q's view.9 Apart, how
ever, from the consideration that a popular calumny might eashy
have been initiated by the rehgious leaders, the fact that Lk. 11,
37 ff ., in which Pharisees are denounced by name and to their faces,
is a section topically related in Lk. and Q to the two preceding
conflicts, indicates that the same pharisaic opponents are assumed
in the whole Q controversy.10
In the threefold account, Christ's reply appears to be the ex
pression of profoundest amazement at the mahgnity of such a
charge. The solemnity of His treatment of it is not surpassed in
any other conflict in the Gospels; and is due not only to its danger
ous effect in distorting the witness of His miracles into confutation
of His claims, but also to its disclosure of the bhndness of the
hearts, minds and consciences of those who made it.11 Beelzebul, to
9 Q. d. Lukasevangeliums, pp. 103, 115 n.; Q. Syn. Ueb., p. 80.
10Zahn, Das Ev. d. Lukas, p. 461, n. 41, notes that in Luke 11, 19, the ex
pression 'your sons' used in designation of the adherents of the circle ad
dressed, points primarily to a party and profession. It would thus refer as in
Mtw. 12, 24, to the party of the Pharisees.
11 Gould, St. Mark, p. 62: The charge "is not merely an attempt to explain
these miracles, so as to do away with the effect of them, but a distinct charge
on the strength of them. " It involved," p. 60, " a complete upsetting of all
moral values, and a stupendous and well-nigh irrecoverable moral bhndness
in themselves."

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 37
whom they ascribed his power, is probably to be understood as
meaning 'Lord of the Dwelling,' considered as the Jewish substi
tute for ' Lord of Heaven ' : the name of the god of the hated foreign
rehgion, whom they regarded as a demon.12 Yet none but 'the
blind,' Christ's subsequent constant characterization of the
Pharisees and their alhes, could fail to see in His miracles of benefi
cence and of release from the power of evil, a self-evident contra
diction to alliance with that evil. It was unthinkable that Satan
would permit willingly such destruction of his power and kingdom.
Even Jewish exorcists who unite with material means the invoca
tion of demonic powers,13 will themselves condemn the Pharisees
for imputing such influence to Jesus, whose exorcisms by His own
authoritative word, (Mtw. 8, 16) reveal that the spirit operating
through Him is the Spirit of God. In the divine testimony to Him
in these works, which is self-evident to all who are not morally
blind, there is also a witness to His words announcing the coming
of the Kingdom. These victories over the kingdom of evil testify
that the Kingdom of God has come upon them in the person and
work of One who approves Himself to be Satan's conqueror and the
dehverer of ah who are in bondage to Him. Thus the more definite
pharisaic attack has led to a more definite assertion of His claims
and of their support in the witness of His own life of redeeming
spiritual power; in the witness of the Father in His revealing word
and work; and in the witness of the personal experience of those
who have entered into the blessings of the Kingdom He has brought.
Passing from apologia to polemic, (Mtw. 12, 30 ff.), he warns them
that their refusal to recognize this witness makes them the aUies of
the enemy He has conquered, and blasphemers of the Holy Spirit of
"This conclusion of several older scholars is supported by W. E. M.Aitken
in Journal of Biblical Literature, 1912, pp. 34-54. Bertholet, R. G. u. G., II,
1223, holds that while scrupulously pious Jews might hear in the word Beel
zebul, 'the god of filth,' yet it designates in reahty 'the Lord of the (heavenly)
dwelling,' t. e., the Sun God. If the reading Beelzebub is adopted, it too as
being the name of the Philistine 'god of flies,' is probably the name of a Sun
God. Cheyne in Ency. Biblica considers that to Jews in the New Testament
age, the name meant 'Lord of the nether world.' Nestle in D. C. G. finds all
the proposed derivations unsatisfactory. Other derivations are discussed in
the above articles and in the commentaries.
u J. A. Montgomery, Aramaic Incantation Texts, III, §§ 9-13, with full refer
ences to the relevant literature.

38 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
God revealing Himself in the life, words and works of the Son of
Man. Their rejection of this witness of the Spirit in Jesus and
their blasphemous accusation is due to the absence of God's spirit
of purity and goodness in their own inner hves. It is the fruit of a
root of corruption, the expression of an evil heart; the revelation of
their hidden treasure of wickedness.
3. In Q, as may be seen in the sequence common to Mtw. 12
and Lk. 11, the Beelzebul strife was followed by the demand for a
Sign. The significance of this conflict is affected by decisions con
cerning the debated questions of Synoptic criticism, exegesis and
the eschatological element in the Gospels which converge in this
section. The question of the order of this demand in the series of
controversies is raised by the fact that in Mk. (8, 11) it is preceded
by demand for obedience to the Oral Law, (7, 1). In Mtw. on the
contrary the controversy concerning the sign, (12, 28), precedes
the section on the Oral Law (15, 1); but the demand for a Sign
appears again at 16, 1, as a doublet from Mk. 8, ll.14 Lk. omits the
portion of Mk. which contains these two sections; but presents
the discourse concerning the Oral Law, (11, 37) as following the
section on the Sign (11, 29). This too, as stated above, is the order
of Q which reappears in Mtw.'s framework: in chapter 12, the de
mand for a sign; and in chapter 23, the pharisaic emphasis on the
Oral Tradition. This would seem to be the logical and historical
sequence of the two conflicts. The claims involved in Christ's
repulse of the Beelzebul charge would lead more naturally to a
challenge for an indubitable sign to accredit them, than to a de
mand for obedience to the tradition of the fathers.15
But while adopting this sequence of the two conflicts from Q
instead of Mk., we may on the other hand conclude from internal
indications in the Gospels that Mk.'s assignment of the demand
for a Sign to the period after the Gahlean ministry, (8, 11) is to be
preferred to Mtw.'s earher assignment of the discourse (12, 38)
within the Galilean ministry and to Luke's report of it in the later
Perean Ministry, (11, 29). These latter assignments obviously
depend only on the topical arrangement of Q. In favor of the
Marcan chronological setting of the section is the fact that Christ's
"J. C. Hawkins, Horce. Synoptical, pp. 78. 71.
16 The Marcan sequence of the two controversies will be considered further
on p. 46 f.

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 39
reference to the people as a wicked and adulterous generation
which has rejected the preaching of one greater than Jonah and
the wisdom of one greater than Solomon, presupposes a stage of
ministry not amid the popular enthusiasm indicated in the context
of Mtw. 12, cp. vs. 23, but after the Gospel had already been re
jected, as at the close of the Gahlean period. Such a rejection is
definitely stated in the Fourth Gospel, (Jn. 6, 66) to have taken
place after the feeding of the 5,000; and it would be the natural
occasion for Christ's withdrawal from Galilee stated in Mk. 7, 24,
and the parallel Mtw. 15, 21.
This reference to Jn. 6 recalls that in the Fourth Gospel the
Gahlean ministry itself closes in connection with a popular de
mand for a sign like the manna from Heaven. This demand,
however, although related to the demand for a Sign in the Synop
tics is not a variant of it. The two reports differ as to the scene,
the specific demands, the replies to them and the results. In
John the demand is made in the Synagogue; in Lk., (11, 29),
when crowds were gathering. In the Synagogue it is as yet, for
manna to be brought down by Him from heaven; while later, as
will appear, it is specifically for a sign in the heaven itself. There
is no refusal of the manna sign, but an assurance that it has al
ready been given in Himself, the true Bread from Heaven; while
to the other demand there is only the warning that no sign shall
be given but the sign of Jonah. In Capernaum the discourse on
the sign of Himself the Bread of Life, includes the offer of resur
rection and eternal life; in contrast to the denunciation of those
who ask for the other sign, as a wicked and adulterous generation
which will be condemned in the judgment. In John His refusal
of an additional sign causes their rejection of Him; in the Synoptics
their rejection of Him causes His refusal of any sign to them. But
while the demands in John and Mark are not variant reports of
the same incident, the similarity of their general subject points
to a close relationship; and this is probably stated correctly in
B. Weiss' view that the challenge in Mark is the outgrowth of
the request in John.16 According to his construction of the situa
tion, in Mk. (8, 11 ff.), the Pharisees renew the earher demand of
the populace, (Jn. 6, 30 ff.), as a subtle temptation: they would
recognize Him, if He will grant a legitimating sign from heaven,
18 B. Weiss, Life of Christ, III, p. 10 f.

40 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
which they know He has already refused to give; and the antici
pated renewed refusal will fatally discredit Him with the crowds
again gathering around Him. Mark reports Christ's profound
emotion; His groaning in His spirit at the subtle leaven of their
hypocrisy; His refusal of their challenge; and His retirement from
them. Q reports His discourse to the surrounding crowds, who
shared in the desire for a sign, (Mtw. 12, 38; Lk. 11, 29).
But of more importance than these debated critical questions
of the sequence, chronology and relations of these sections in the
Synoptics and John, is the determination of the specific character,
of the sign demanded in the Synoptics. Evidently it is not a
demand for a more striking miracle of the ordinary class. For
although Christ asserts in reply to it that no sign will be given,
(Lk. 11, 29), He proceeds in the following chapters to perform the
usual miracles, which indeed are not called signs in the Synoptics.
All the available data indicate that this new demand for a sign
of a special character would come from a special class with dis
tinct messianic expectations: the pharisaic apocalyptists and
their sympathizers. The differing attitudes to Christ's miracles,
(cp. Jn. 7, 31), and this demand for a specific sign would thus
be related to the distinct types of contemporary messianic ex
pectations. Volz 17 distinguishes two current conceptions of the
manifestation of the Messiah. In the popular view, He was to
manifest Himself by miracles. Volz finds this view expressed in
the Synoptics, in Josephus' account, (p. 191), of Theudas, of the
Egyptian under Felix and of the sorcerer under Festus, who prom
ised to work miracles and who probably wished to be viewed as
Messiah; and also in the reference to the doctrine of the rabbis,
(Justin, Trypho, 110) that Messiah would be recognized when 'He
shall become manifest and glorious.' In contrast, however, to
this popular view, the Messiah in Jewish Apocalyptic is to reveal
Himseh as such by the manner of his coming: He comes from
heaven in the clouds; or from the sun; or as the rising of a star;
or as a lightning flash; or out of the sea.18
" P. Volz, Judische Eschatologie von Daniel bis Akiha, p. 220.
"Volz refers to Danl. 7, 13; 4 Ezra 12, 3; Orac. Syb. 3, 652; Tests. Juda 24,
Levi 18; Apoc. Baruch 53. So B. Weiss (Life of Christ, III, p. 11) : to command
the sun to stand still or to cease shining; or to cause some token to be seen in
the sky. Gould (St. Mark, p. 144): the kind of signs we find in the eschato-

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 41
From a special group of Pharisees holding such a view, we
conceive the demand, (Mk. 8, 11), to have come.18 The sign
they had in mind was some distinct phenomenon in the sky as
a prelude to the messianic age. Such a demand would evidently
have been first occasioned by some indication or act or implied
claim on Jesus' part that He was the Christ. Whatever impres
sion His earher preaching of the Kingdom or His references to
Himseh as the Son of Man may have made upon them, He could
not possibly be the Messiah of their apocalyptic expectations.
Even among the enthusiastic multitudes in the Gahlean ministry,
His usual miracles had led only to the behef that He was a prophet,
(Mk. 8, 28; cp. Jno. 9, 17; Mtw. 21, 11). But in the Fourth Gos
pel the miracle of feeding the five thousand at length definitely
raises the question whether He be not the prophet that should
come into the world, (Volz, p. 190). He then refuses to be the
Messianic King, of the popular expectation. Yet the next day
when He claims their faith in Himseh as sent from God, (Jno. 6,
29), He is confronted with a special form of messianism: that the
Messiah would be a prophet like unto Moses, (Volz, p. 191), and
is chaUenged to perform miracles similar to those of the Mosaic
Age. In response to this demand for an authenticating sign of
Messiahship of this Moses-type, He does not deny that He makes
any such claim, but asserts that it is aheady given in Himseh
as the true bread from heaven. Such a claim, especiaUy in com
bination with mysterious references to Himseh as the Son of
Man coming down from heaven and ascending thither, gives the
natural occasion for Pharisaic apocalyptists and their adherents
to make their challenge recorded in Mark immediately after
His account of the feeding of the four thousand, of a sign from
heaven.
logical discourses, ch. 13, this being what they were led to expect in connection
with the Messianic period; a voice from heaven or anything coming from above.
Plummer (St. Luke, p. 307) : a voice from heaven, a pillar of fire; after Neander,
(Life of Christ, § 92), a visible, celestial phenomenon unequivocally authenti
cating Him as a messenger of God.
"Lagrange, Le Messianisme chez les Juifs, p. 133, holds that while the
majority of apocalyptists belonged to the Pharisees, yet they did not
present themselves in that character and had not the authority which
knowledge of the Law conferred upon the Scribes. Cp. Box, Ezra Apocalypse,
p. 284.

42 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
In the Mtw. paraUel, (16, 1 ff.) the character of the sign de
manded is interpreted by the early gloss in vs. 2 b and 3, in
which the ironical contrast expresses Christ's rebuke of their as
sumption that discernment of the phenomena of the skies can
lead to discernment of the ' signs of the times' : aripeia t&v naipSav.
Hort, (N. T. Appdx., p. 13) has stated the results of the text-
criticism of the passage: the words are 'no part of the text of
Mtw. They can hardly have been an altered repetition of Lk. 12,
54 f . ; but were apparently derived from an extraneous source,.
written or oral, and inserted in the Western text at a very early
time.' Zahn, Mts. Ev., p. 528, suggests that this source may
possibly have been in Papias' report of the sayings of Christ's
disciples; and considers the gloss to be in itseh both per
tinent and credible and not inappropriately inserted in this
context. In Lk. 17, 20 f., however, the ahusion to a pharisaic expectation
of an apocalyptic sign of the coming of the messianic kingdom,
is more definite. Christ denies that it comes with ' observation,'
so that the observers can point it out: lo, here! or there. On the
contrary the Kingdom comes or is present not as a result of watch
ing for a sign from heaven: whether ivrbs ipuv iamv be viewed
as meaning 'is' or 'shall be' among or within you. That
7rapaTi7p7j<ns is here used of observation of the skies, is supported by
the citations in all the Greek Lexicons of passages where it and
its cognates are used of auguries from the phenomena of the skies
and of astronomical and astrological observations. It is even
possible at least that there may be an allusion to contemporary
apocalyptic expectation of such a sign from the skies in Christ's
second temptation: to cast Himseh down from the height of the
pinnacle of the temple with the accompaniment and support of
angels, is there demanded as proof of His divine Sonship. Streeter,
(Foundations, p. 101) has suggested that the significance Of this
temptation is: "If the Kingdom is not to be estabhshed by the
sword, it can only be by an act of God such as the apocalyptists
picture." McNeile on the contrary, (Mtw., p. 40) regards the
suggestion of Streeter to be 'far-fetched.' But if Christ had thus
at the outset of His ministry faced this messianic expectation of
the apocalyptists and their sympathizers, He did not merely refuse
to accede to it whenever it was pressed upon Him; but as in the

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 43
case of other messianic conceptions, He transformed it.20 It was
based on the conviction that Messiah would come from the tran
scendental sphere, (Volz, p. 210 f.) ; and after His refusals to reahze
the current expectation as to the method of His manifestation
from that sphere, and after His gradual disclosures of His own
method, He used this conception and its symbolism as He had
transformed it, to express in His eschatological teachings the final
revelation of Himseh as glorified Son of Man. The discourse on
the Last Things, at the close of His ministry, (Mk. 13 and pUs.),
is in response to the inquiry of the four Apostles closest to him:
' when shall this be and what the sign of thy Parousia and of the
end of the world?', (Mtw. 24, 3). His direct answer to them,
(vs. 30), is that after the powers of heaven are shaken, shaU be
seen the sign of the Son of Man in heaven; 21 and as on the day
of Caesarea, (Mk. 8, 38 f.), which in Mark follows closely on the
demand for a sign, this sign of Mtw. 24, 30, is his coming with
power and glory for the gathering of his elect and for Messianic
Judgment. Our Lord's refusal to meet the Pharisaic challenge for a sign
from heaven, is at this point based on their rejection of aU
the previous witness of His life and ministry. That witness
had met with no response of faith. Their demand was in
reahty for a credential which would, as in the second tempta
tion, reheve them of the exercise of the personal devotion of
mind, heart, will and conscience that is involved in every act of
faith. No sign can be given to such a generation but the sign of
Jonah. The earhest comment on this statement, outside of the Gospels,
20 Cp. Streeter, op. cit., (p. 101): "His independent interpretation of the
Old Testament and His trenchant criticism of the traditions of the scribes,
forbid to Him a slavish literalism in the acceptance of contemporary apoc
alyptic symbolism."
21 McNeile, (Mtw. p. 352), in a brief summary of interpretations, thinks
this sign is possibly the 'great glory' of vs. 30; or less probably it may be the
sign consisting of the Son of Man. B. Weiss and Wellhausen maintain this
latter view; and W. C. Allen regards it as the more probable. Zahn, however,
regards the' sign as a phenomenon in the heavens distinct from, yet contem
poraneous with the Son of Man's appearance. For the patristic view that
the sign is the Cross, cp. Bousset, Apoc. 220 f., and Antichrist Legend, pp.
232-236.

44 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
is that of Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Trypho, c. 107:
"Since he spoke this obscurely, it was to be understood by the
audience that after His crucifixion He should rise again on the
third day." But it has not been so understood since Paulus'
time, (1801), by a great number of critics and exegetes who under
stand the sign of Jonah to be his preaching. This interpretation
is based first on the critical decision that Mtw. 12, 40, which states
that like Jonah, Christ will be in the heart of the earth three days
and three nights, was not in his source Q; or with Loisy, (1.997 f.),
was interpolated in his recension of Q; in either case is not a report
of the words of Christ. Further it is claimed that though it is
the Evangehst's explanation, it is nevertheless a mistaken inter
pretation of our Lord's meaning.
With the critical decision numbers of conservative critics are
disposed to agree, in view of the absence of the verse in the Lukan
parallel. Among these are Salmon, (Human Element in the Gos
pels, p. 217; cp., however, p. 218), Zahn, McNeile and AUen who
marks it as an editorial passage, though with a question mark.
B. Weiss omits it in his printed reconstruction of Q, (p. 37); yet
in a note remarks that the inappropriate reference to 'three days
and three nights' might be in favor of the view that vs. 40 stood
in Q. It seems, however, more probable to suppose that the verse
was added to Q by the Evangelist, by direct quotation from Jonah,
as iUustrating our Lord's meaning.
The remaining question, whether he was justified in his inter
pretation of the enigmatic saying of vs. 39, has to be determined
by the exegesis of the Lukan parallel; (11, 30): as Jonah was a
sign to the Ninevites, so shall the Son of Man be to this genera
tion. Is the basis of this comparison the preaching of Jonah and
Jesus; or the persons of the two preachers? Wellhausen, (Ev.
Matth., p. 64), while stating that Lk. 11, 30, viewed as a contrast
between the two instances of preaching would make an appro
priate transition from Mtw. 12, 39 to 12, 41, cannot, however,
comprehend how such an antithesis can be spoken of as a sign.
And inasmuch as Luke does not next speak of the men of Nineveh
but of the Queen of the South, who had no connection with Jonah,
he decides, as B. Weiss also, (Quellen d. Luk, p. 75 and McNefle),
that both in Mtw. and Lk. these two references to Jonah's preach
ing and Solomon's wisdom had originaUy nothing to do with the

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 45
sign of Jonah; in which case Mtw. 12, 40, deserves preference over
Lk. 11, 30.
Others, asB. Weiss and Zahn, have emphasized that in Lk. 11,
30, we have not a contrast and antithesis but an analogy and simi
larity which cannot be based on the respective preachings. For
this in the one case is addressed to heathen with success; and in
the other case to Jews with its rejection. Such a contrast could
be made better with many other Old Testament prophets than
with Jonah. Moreover in Lk. 11, 30, there is neither comparison
nor contrast between Jonah's preachmg in the past and Christ's
preaching in the present; but a reference to the sign of Jonah
in the past and the sign of the Son of Man in the future. Neither
was Jonah's preaching a sign of anything to Nineveh, nor def
initely could His preaching be in any way related to a sign of mes
siahship: for which object the sign of Jonah is introduced by
Christ. The succeeding reference to the preaching at Nineveh is
not, as Wellhausen and B. Weiss have recognized, related to the
saying concerning the sign of Jonah, but is a distinct reference to
Christ's declaration concerning the Jews as a wicked and adulterous
generation. Rejecting therefore with the recent commentators, Ahen, Mc-
NeUe, B. Weiss, Wellhausen and Zahn, the view that Lk. 11, 30,
refers to the preaching of Jonah, we find the basis of the compari
son of the sign in the persons and history of the prophet and
Christ; and that the First Evangehst's later gloss rightly inter
prets Christ's enigmatic utterance as referring to the story of the
prophet's deliverance from death, preparatory to a ministry in
a restored life.22 The only sign that wih be given to the Jewish
nation rejecting the sign of Christ's own life among them, will
be not a sign from heaven above, according to the apocalyptists'
demand, but from below: the sign of His resurrection from death,
crowning aU the other witness aheady given to them. The fact
of their demand for a sign is itself evidence that they had aheady
21 McNeile (Mtw., p. 181) agrees that in Mtw. we have a gloss interpreting
the sign of Jonah as referring to the resurrection. But he holds that in the
Lukan parallel the reference is neither to preaching nor resurrection, but to
Christ's second advent. To express this idea he is compelled to paraphrase
thus: "The Son of Man will come, as it were from a foreign land, with a mes
sage of doom to this generation as Jonah to the Ninevites."

46 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
rejected the signs of His earthly appearance and ministry. "His
hfe was full of signs; nay it was a sign; He Himseh was the sign.
Jesus refuses especiaUy to give a sign to that generation. It was
an age fuh of signs; it was the period of the Incarnation; and yet
its leaders went about asking for signs, and refused to beheve the
self-witness of the Son of God" (Gould, Mark, p. 145). Hence
His groaning in spirit (Mk. 8, 12) ; His warning that their rejection
of Him revealed them to be less spiritually receptive than the men
of Nineveh and the Queen of the South; that their fahure to ad
vance from their initial interest in the preaching of the Baptist
and of Jesus, has now led to a worse spiritual state, (Mtw. 12,
41-45); and that this faUure and their rejection of Him and His
testimony, (Lk. 11, 33-36), is due to their spiritual bhndness,
filling them with darkness.
4. Luke's succeeding section, (11, 37 ff.) represents as the next
stage of opposition, their attack upon him for disregard of the
Oral Law, and his open denunciation of them. The discourse
which Luke introduces at this point, (vs. 39 ff.),from the section
of Q that followed the preceding controversy, is rightly placed
by Mtw. in chapter 23, and is referred to in Mk. 12, likewise at
the close of the ministry. But the introductory incident, (vs. 37 f .) ,
is without doubt properly placed sometime after the close of the
ministry in Galilee. We have in Mk. 7, 1 ff . an unusually detailed
and vivid report of our Lord's open breach with the Pharisees on
this issue. Mark indeed places this conflict before the demand
for a sign; and as Keim states it is not possible to decide with
certainty as to the order of the two demands. He adopts the
order we are here following. Whhe the Pharisaic criticism could
no doubt have been made earher during the Gahlean ministry,
yet both the denunciation of them and its tone point to a later
period and to a definitive breach. It has also been noted, e. g., by
Allen, (S. Mark, p. 19), that Mark introduces it with no indica
tion of time or place; and his interest may be here primarily in
the subject rather than in its position in the historical progress
of the ministry. It would seem to be the logical stage of direct
attack after the earher complaints in the five Markan conflicts,
the disparagements of his exorcisms and the chahenge for a sign
from heaven.
The concrete charge, (Mk. 7, 5), of disloyalty to the tradition

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 47
of the Elders, because of His neglect of the oral law of cleansing
before food, is met by the equally concrete charge of Pharisaic
disloyalty to the Word of God, betrayed by their scribal decision
concerning Korban: such a dedication of gifts as prevents obe
dience of the Old Testament commandment. Against this accusa
tion of His transgression of a merely human rule, He hurls back
the charge of their annulment of divine law, in the interest of
their law of oral tradition. Hypocrites are they; fulfilling Isaiah's
description of hypocrisy and dishonoring God by pretext of a
piety stricter than the Old Testament standard. As the issue
had been raised on cleansing before meals to avoid ceremonial
defilement, He announces to the people in His parable, (Mk. 7,
14 f.), which He interprets to the Twelve, (vs. 17 f.,) that the
inner fount of purity of heart is the ideal aimed at in the Old
Testament law concerning defilement:, thereby as Mk. comments,
(vs. 19), "cleansing all food."
This in Keim's words,23 " was a worthy conclusion of this con
flict: opposed to ordinance, the Law; to cleansings, the heart;
to ceremony, moral character and the love of man. Every path
must lead him to the same goal. Out of the ridiculous washing
of hands to the glory of God, must develop the noble warm care
for humanity, in the personahty of one's self and others : a trans
formed rehgion."
Before considering His final denunciation of the Pharisees at
the close of His ministry, we may turn to the intervening con
flicts as reported in the Fourth Gospel. After the Gahlean con
flicts and after the annunciation of the passion and resurrection,
we have in John, chapters 7 to 12, a record of controversies in
Jerusalem at the feasts of Tabernacles and Dedication and near
the final Passover. The reported references to division among
the people, (7, 12.40; 8, 22; 10, 19; 12, 41), and even among the
ruling class, (7, 50; 9, 16; 11, 45), reveal the result of the earher
and of the renewed conflicts. While some consider Him 'a good
man,' or 'a prophet,' and are even debating whether He is not
the Christ, others reflect the now settled attitude of the Pharisaic
leaders after their Gahlean attacks and Christ's open denunciation
of them. There are, however, no essentially new hnes of apologia
13 Ges. Jesu von Nazara, II, p. 355.

48 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
or polemic. The Pharisees do not initiate controversy with Him.
Their oppositions are rather of the nature of counter-attacks and
retorts against the open polemic which Christ began in Galuee
and now develops in the Capital; and at the same time they are
repudiations of His renewed and absolute claims of union with
God, of mission from God and of the divine witness in His life
and lifework.
Thus, in the six chapters covering the closing months of the
ministry are found reiterated assertions of the witness of Christ
Himseh: 24 that He has come down from above, (8, 23) ; from God,
(8, 42) ; with whom He is one, (10, 30) ; by whom He was consecrated
for His mission, (10, 36); who speaks and works through Him,
(8, 28) ; that He is the sinless Son, (8, 46) ; that He returns to God,
and if any will keep His word, (8, 51) and will hear His voice as
the Good Shepherd, (10, 27), He gives them eternal hfe. To meet
these declarations the Jewish leaders oppose to the witness of His
life, their denunciations of Him as a Samaritan, as possessed by a
demon, insane; and possibly as born in fornication, (8, 41), a
sinner and Sabbath breaker. In rejection of His claim to have
the Father's witness in His words and teachings, they assert that
His utterances blaspheme God and deceive the people. His mirac
ulous works are not denied, (10, 32 f.) ; neither the earher works
nor the two recorded in John in this period: the restoration of
the blind man at the Dedication and the raising of Lazarus. But
they are blind to the witness of these works, (9, 39 f.), as forming
with His words the revelation of the Father, (10, 37 f.). Both in
John 7, 27, and in the Synoptics, (Mk. 6, 3), the effective counter
vailing argument against any witness he offers, is probably taken
from a current apocalyptic theory of the concealment of the
Messiah prior to His sudden revelation in a sign from heaven,
(Volz, pp. 219-221). The possibility that He might be the Christ,
(7, 26), is nullified by the consideration that "we know this man
whence he is; (cp. 6, 42 and Mk. 6, 3); when Christ comes, no
man knows whence He is." Justin Martyr, (Dial. c. Trypho,
c. 110), is probably reporting the same objection, and in its com
plete form; the Jewish teachers assert that Christ has not yet
come; 'or if they say that he has come, they assert that it is not
24 For the correspondence of these assertions with Synoptic statements
see Wendt, Das Joh. evangelium, pp. 178-184.

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 49
known who he is; but when he shall become manifest and glorious,
then it shall be known who he is.'
As in the Synoptics Christ's conciliatory method with opponents
charges at length into open polemic, so in this later period in the
Fourth Gospel the Jewish rulers are attacked as being themselves
breakers of the Law of Moses, (7, 19) ; and as manifesting in their
hves that they were not, as they boasted themselves to be, Abra
ham's seed, but children of the Devil, (8, 31-59). In the Synop
tics He had repeUed the Pharisaic charge of His alliance with the
prince of demons, with the warning of blasphemy against the
Holy Ghost and of the guilt of an eternal sin, (Mk. 3, 28 ff.). But
in the closing conflict at Tabernacles He denounces them not
merely as the alhes but as the offspring of Satan: they are of then-
father the devil; slaves of sin, accomplishing the lusts and works of
their father, a murderer from the beginning and a liar; as his off
spring they now seek to kiU Jesus, (8, 37, 40), and are liars rejecting
the truth and words of God in the Son, (8, 55) . In direct contrast
to theirs, is His own divine Sonship : He had a timeless existence
before Abraham's birth and came forth from the Father, (8,
58.42) ; His mission is to bring freedom from sin's slavery through
revelation of the truth; and the keeping of His word, the truth He
has heard from God, will dehver from death, (8, 31.51).
After this definite break with the rulers in Jerusalem at Taber
nacles, we have finally in chapters 9 to 12, as in the Synoptics, the
references to His death and to His glorification in His resurrection.
Advancing from the earher enigmatic allusions to His death and
departure to the Father, (7, 33; 8, 21.28), He declares Himseh
pubhcly at Dedication as the Good Shepherd giving His hfe for the
sheep, yet taking it again that He may be the Good Shepherd of the
other sheep as well as of those of the Jewish fold; and closes His
ministry with the utterance: I, if I be lifted up will draw all men
unto Me.
In the Synoptics this controversy with the Pharisees is summed
up in its essential features and issues in Christ's final denunciation
of them at the conclusion of his pubhc ministry. Mark, (12, 38),
has compressed the Q discourse in his report of the exposure of
their characteristic ostentation, greed and pretentious piety,
which will bring them the greater condemnation. Luke, (20, 45),
repeats this, although he has already used a part of it, (11, 43), in

50 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
his controversy section, 11, 37-52. As stated earher, this section
and Mtw. 23 point to a controversy discourse in Q formed on the
plan of seven woes: three on the scribes and four on the Phari
sees.25 These woes turn against His opponents, as in Mk. 7, 1 ff .,
the charges and attacks they had made against himself: Their own
failure to obey truly and fully the Law of Moses, in spite of their
unspiritual casuistry and petty tithings; their burdening of weary
and heavy laden souls with the minutiae of oral traditions con
cerning fastings, defilements and washings; their ostentations and
self-seeking practice of piety in absolute contrast to Himseh, meek
and lowly in heart. Their charge that He is a deceiver of the people
is repelled with the counter-blow that it is they who are blind
guides, shutting up the Kingdom from those who would enter, and
making their proselytes twofold more the children of hell than
themselves. Taunts of disregard of ritual purity and of fellowship
with pubhcans and sinners, are flung back with the exposure of
their boasted ceremonial purity as but a mask for their inner spirit
of extortion, wickedness and of such, foulness as is hidden within
the marble tombs. And they who saw in His hfe, words and
mighty works of mercy, the influence of the prince of the devils,
are at length denounced as being themselves controlled by the
serpent spirit of persecuting hate and murder, for which there is
threatening them the judgment of hell.
The abiding allegiance of the Apostles in spite of these attacks by
the honored leaders of the religious life and thought of the nation,
testifies to the firmness of the faith founded on personal fellowship
with Him. Their allegiance points also to the development of their
faith as the result of these controversies.
Besides receiving in them the increasingly definite self-revela
tions of his Sonship, they have also absorbed and adopted His
teachings concerning the Old Testament ideals of righteousness;
and of the heavenly Father's grace and pardoning love, which
will free them from the scheme of salvation by the method of
legahstic obedience, and from the observance of the human law of
the oral tradition.
In Jesus' piety and sinless purity they found that the Pharisaic
ideal of an external and ceremonial purity had been surpassed and
26 Weiss, Quellen d. Syn. Ueberlieferung, p. 128 ff.; Quellen d. Lukasevange-
liums, p. 262 ff.

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 51
done away. Rejecting utterly the Pharisaic charge of their
Master's affiance with Beelzebul, they reahzed with absolute
definiteness that it was indeed the Spirit of God which spoke and
wrought through Him; and in their fehowship with Him and devo
tion to Him, they found rest unto their souls.
The Pharisaic and popular demand for a sign from heaven in
accordance with current apocalyptic expectations, had for them
been aheady largely met by his instruction of them concerning the
mystery of the Kingdom of God. In the parable discourses
summed up in Mtw. 13, they had learned that the Kingdom would
not be introduced by the messianic judgment, but by a preparatory
stage of merciful preparation for that judgment and this introduc
tion would not be by means of a catastrophic irruption of divine
power, but by a gradual and extending reception of the implanted
word and revelation of God in the redeeming hfe of the Son of Man.
EvU wih be rooted out only at the final judgment. Admission to
the Kingdom, instead of being a prescriptive right, demands
absolute personal self-sacrifice. The ideals and spiritual activities
of the new life within the Kingdom are further portrayed in the
parables reported by Luke from his special source in the section 9,
51-18, 14.
But the final stage of developing their faith in Him begins at
Caesarea Philippi: faith in Him as a suffering Christ, and as a
Christ reigning over His Kingdom invisibly in a resurrection life.
It was the task to which He seems to have devoted the chief effort
of His remaining earthly ministry in the period extending from the
Transfiguration to his last discourses with his Apostles on the night
in which He was betrayed. For this consummating self-revelation
no preparation was available in their understanding of the Old Tes
tament as referring to the coming of a glorious Messiah. Nor could
they fit it into their conceptions of the Gospel of the Kingdom,
nor into their constant experience hitherto of the divine support of
their sinless Master mighty in word and deed. He therefore pre
pares them for it by summoning them to a definite profession of
their faith in Him, which was already manifest in their coming to
Him as foUowers and in their continued allegiance to Him in spite
of the non-fulfillment of the Baptist's prediction of His initial
judgment; in spite of His repudiation of the current ruling
Pharisaic rehgious ideals and practices; in spite of both official and

52 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
general popular rejection of Him as the promised Christ; and above
ah in spite of his transformation of their conceptions of the mes
sianic Kingdom. To them He is stUl the Christ of God. This
direct certainty of faith in Him, He in turn assures them, is their re
sponse of faith to the divine revelation in Himseh. And He next
proceeds to give to their spokesman, Peter professing the faith that
Jesus is the Christ, the promise of the complete fulfillment of their
messianic hope through the building up of His Church, in which
they shah be His empowered representatives; and which, in the
later New Testament interpretation, (cp., e. g., I Cor. 15, 24;
Ephes. 5, 26 f., 4, 5) shall at length issue into the Kingdom of
glory.26 To those however without their faith in Him in response
to the divine witness and with acceptance of His messianic teach
ing, His Messiahship must still remain a secret, (Mk. 8, 30).
Public avowal of it could only be understood in the terms of popu
lar messianism.
But it is on the basis of his Apostles' faith in Him as the Christ
and of their hope of the messianic kingdom He had preached to
them, that He now announces openly to them His death and resur
rection. Peter's rebuke and protest discloses that the earher
veiled allusions to this had been but enigmas only understood
after His resurrection, (Cp. John 2, 18). 27 From the Day at
Caesarea onward He was therefore engaged in preparing them
directly for His approaching passion. In the Synoptics its an
nouncement is immediately followed by an instruction of them and
other disciples in the truth that self-sacrifice is the law of the high
est hfe; and it is therefore the supreme element both in His revela
tion of the Father's wiU and in His perfect obedience as the Son
of Man. In the Transfiguration, which is in closest relation with
the revelations of the Day at Caesarea, three of the Apostles have a
vision of Jesus in His approaching glorified humanity; hear the
Old Testament representatives themselves speak of the exodus
He was to fulfill at Jerusalem; and hear the divine voice attesting
the Sonship of Him who thus dies and is thus glorified.
The command of silence concerning this Transfiguration reve-
26 Cp. A. Robertson, Regnum Dei, p. 49 ff.
27 A. T. Robertson, Did. of Christ and Gospels. Announcements of Death
, p. 7 of § 1. Schwartzkopf, Prophecies of Jesus Christ relating to His death,
tc, p. 28 ff.

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 53
lation of His passion and exaltation, until after His resurrection, is
accompanied by the fact that even in this stage of ministry to the
Twelve, He does not appear to have presented to them in detaU the
necessity of His death from the prediction of the Suffering Servant
in Isaiah, or of the Psalms. Yet His references to His approaching
passion are expressed in Old Testament terms. We have at most
three Old Testament passages concerning the suffering Messiah
referred to by Christ; and these at the very close of His ministry to
the Apostles. Immediately preceding the week of the passion, He
speaks of giving His life a ransom 'for many,' (Mk. 10, 45). In
this use of 'many' instead of 'all' as in I Tim. 2, 6, and Hebrews 2,
9, a reference to Isaiah 53, 10-12, "bare the sin of many" is not
merely 'just possible,' (McNeUe on Mtw. 20, 28), but with
Schwartzkopf (1. c.,p. 37) is 'undoubtedly' made. Edghill too,
(Evidential Value of Prophecy, pp. 440-442), argues in favor of this
view. He also recognizes a reference to the same passage in the
words at the Last Supper in Mtw. 26, 28: This is my blood of the
covenant which is shed for many for the remission of sins.28
Again, even in this last hour, it is uttered with no direct quotation
or comment, and is received with no question for explanation.
As they start out for Gethsemane, (Mk. 14, 27), the direct
quotation of Zechariah 'I will smite the shepherd and the sheep
shall be scattered abroad, ' is given primarily as a warning of their
imminent abandonment of Him, because they stih have no con
ception that Messiah must suffer according to the Scriptures.
Luke adds, (22, 37), Christ's direct statement that in Him must be
fulfilled the Old Testament passage concerning the Suffering
Servant: and He was numbered with transgressors. But their
utter lack of understanding Him is shown both in their answer:
here are two swords, and in our Lord's reply of mingled resignation
and saddest irony: it is enough.
These data of the Gospels favor the idea that whUe Christ was
devoting the closing months of His ministry to the preparation of
His Apostles for His death and its messianic significance; and whUe
in Luke 18, 31 ff., He assured them in general that it was the fulfill-
as Zahn on Mt. 20, 28 and 26, 28 makes no reference to the Isaiah passage
but gives an exegesis of 20, 28 which would make the statements in Isaiah
applicable to those in the Gospels. He finds, (Evg. d. Lukas, p. 686), the only
reference to Isaiah, 53 in Lk. 22, 37.

54 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
ment of all that is written in the prophets, there was until His
entrance upon His passion, no specific quotation or exposition of the
Old Testament statements related to it. While impressing upon
them the divine necessity of His death, " His instruction certainly
did not aim at being exhaustive or even systematic; but consisted
rather of concise but expressive hints frequently repeated,"
(Schwartzkopf, p. 37). The Evangelists distinctly report, (Mk. 9,
32; Lk. 9, 45; 18, 31) the Apostles' lack of understanding and
their fear to question Him upon the subject. Not indeed until the
incomprehensible mystery of His death was dissolved in the hght
of His resurrection hfe, could they recognize that the divine neces
sity of His death was already declared in their Scriptures. The
first ministry of the risen Lord to the two disciples en route to
Emmaus on the day of the resurrection is to show them from the
Old Testament Writings that the Messiah must suffer and enter
into His glory. Their hearts were burning within them as they
listened to His detailed expositions; yet it was only when they had
recognized Him as risen that they recognized the Old Testament
teaching in reference to His death. It was likewise only after His
appearance as risen Lord to the Eleven and those with them, that
He was able to open their minds to understand the Scriptures con
cerning the suffering and rising Christ. "These are the words,"
(Lk. 24, 44a), do not mean a repetition of the earher general
annunciation of the passion and resurrection in 44b; but they sum
up the detailed exposition, (cp. 45), now first given to the Apostles,
but not recorded by the Evangelist who also omits the record of the
exposition in vs. 27.
Yet whatever had been their amazement and difficulties upon
hearing predictions of His suffering and death, their faith in Him as
the Christ continued stedfast to the last hour of His ministry
among them. It was fortified in His successful closing conflicts
with the Jerusalem rulers, in which He asserted Himseh to be the
Son and Heir sent by the Father whose mind He discloses in the
utterance: It may be they will reverence my Son. In spite of His
renewed declarations of His rejection and death, the Synoptics re
cord as their last words to Him their wilhngness to go with Him to
prison or death, (Mk. 14, 31). In John, upon His concluding self-
revelation, (16, 29): "I came forth from the Father and am come
into the world; again I leave the world and go to the Father" they

THE POLEMIC IN THE GOSPELS 55
make their final confession of faith: "By this we beheve that
Thou earnest forth from God. "
The immediate collapse of this faith upon His crucifixion shows
that without their reahzation of the rehgious significance and
divine necessity of His death for the estabhshment of the kingdom
of redemption, His death was able to shake the foundations upon
which rested their faith in Him as the Christ. The taunts of His
enemies were mockeries of the very forms of witness which had won
them to behef. The witness of His life was contradicted by His
execution with criminals as a malefactor. The witness of the
Father was triumphantly challenged by the demand: Let God
dehver Him now, if He desireth him; for He said I am the Son of
God. The witness of His words is confuted by His death for blas
phemy against God and for deception of the people. The witness
of His miracles is mocked by His faUure to save Himseh: let the
Christ now come down from the Cross, that we may see and be
heve. However the Apostles might reject these alleged conse
quences of his crucifixion, Pilate's superscription was the death
knell of their hope and faith that it was He who should redeem
Israel by establishing the Kingdom of God.
That faith could only be restored by His return to them in His
resurrection life. His resurrection reaffirms, estabhshes and
crowns all other forms of witness. It effects the Bebaiosis, the di
rect certainty of their completed faith in Him. They beheve in
Him as raised by the glory of the Father, according to the Scrip
tures; and as He showed Himseh in His risen hfe of word and deed
as glorified Son, Lord and Christ. Their own personal experience
of union with Him and of the redemptive power of His resurrection,
is witnessed to them in the gift of His Spirit. They had been won
to this faith by Christ as their Paraclete, in personal presence and
ministry with them. Now they receive another Paraclete and
presence : the indwelling Spirit of Christ, in whose power they are
commissioned to bring messianic salvation to the world through
the faith which they themselves had attained by the personal
ministry of their Lord.

CHAPTER IV
THE APOSTOLIC APOLOGIA OF WITNESS AND THE CALL TO FAITH
IN THE GOSPEL OF SALVATION
The Gospel which the Apostles at once preached in Jerusalem
was the Gospel which theh earthly and heavenly Lord had
preached. In the New Testament the phrase ' the gospel of Christ '
is not the Gospel concerning Christ, but the Gospel Christ preached.
It has been shown by Zahn in his extended discussion of the phrase
and its equivalents, that the Gospel of Christ in the mouth of His
Apostles is not essentially different from what it was in the mouth
of the great Apostle of our profession. The 'preaching of Jesus '
to which Paul refers at the close of Romans is the original form
of the Gospel, which when preached by the Apostles after His
departure does not cease to be the Gospel of Christ.' Introd.,
§ 48 n. 2, II, 377. This essential identity of Apostohc preaching and
Christ's Gospel is asserted by Peter when describing His message
to Cornelius to be the Word which God sent, preaching good tidings
of peace by Jesus Christ. Even more definitely in I John 1, 3.5,
the Gospel is the message ayyeKla, the Apostles heard from Christ,
which they declare, avayyiKkeiv, and report, airayy&Keiv. The
same claim is made in Hbws. 2, 5 : the New Testament salvation
was spoken first through the Lord, and later was confirmed to
Christians by those who heard him. As then the Apostles preached
the same Gospel as their Lord, and sought to win their hearers to
their own faith in Him, we could not conceive of any other method
for the genesis of this faith than the method by which they them
selves had become behevers.
A comparative study of the references to the original propa
gation of the Gospel points to a common type of oral Gospel
preaching, which was enlarged in content and detail in the primi
tive instruction preparatory to baptism. One portion of this
related to 'the things concerning Jesus.' In the teaching and
prophetic exhortation in the Church worship, provision was made

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 57
to 'stir up the minds of behevers by putting them in remembrance
of these things, though they know them and are established in the
truth which is present with them,' II Pet. 1, 12. To 'remember
the words of the Lord Jesus' is the primitive phrase for reference
to the repetition, exposition and apphcation in the Church services
of the Gospel of the words and deeds of Christ.
1. THE APOLOGIA AND CALL OF THE GOSPEL TO THE JEWS AND
GODFEABERS
The aims, contents, method and apologia of the primitive type
of the oral Gospel to Israel, may be learned from the summaries of
the preaching in Acts, chaps. 2, 3, 10 and 13. These and the
references in the Epistles to this primitive propaganda, can be used
as trustworthy sources, since they can be shown to be, and are
recognized to be, free from suspicion of any later dogmatic bias.
From a comparison of the topics in these discourses we may judge
that the oral preaching to Jews would normally include the follow
ing subjects in the apologia that Jesus was Christ and Lord: the
assertion that He was Son of David; the witness of the Baptist;
the witness of His own life, teachings and work; of His miracles;
and of the Old Testament; the Apostles' witness to His sinless
sufferings, with detaued narrative of His rejection by the Jews,
His condemnation by Pilate, His crucifixion on the tree and burial
in the tomb; to His resurrection on the third day and His appear
ances to the disciples for many days, when He ate and drank with
them; to His commission to them to preach a universal salvation;
to his ascension, exaltation and heavenly ministry; and to His
coming again for world judgment. Upon this apologia is based the
offer of salvation and the gift of the Spirit, and the warning to
beware of neglect of so great salvation. All these subjects are to be
found in a combination of the four reports of the oral Gospel to the
Jews; and with certain exceptions to be noted, the principal and
controlling subjects appear in the separate reports.1 The relations
of these subjects and the method of their presentation can be most
clearly recognized in Peter's discourse at Pentecost in Acts 2.
It is a divine call to accept and share with the already beheving
1 Zahn has discussed the Unwritten Gospel in his Introduction, § 48; and
Missionary Methods in the Apostolic Age in his Skizzen aus dem Leben der
Alten Kirche, 1898, p. 42 ff.

58 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Apostles and brethren, salvation by faith in Jesus of Nazareth.
It is an appeal and summons based on theh witness: a call to
repent and be baptized upon profession of faith in the name, the
self-revelation of Jesus, for the remission of sins and reception of
the Holy Spirit, vs. 38. It is likewise so presented as a word of
salvation in the other reports: 3, 19.26; 10, 36, cp. 11, 14; 13, 26.38;
and in the latest written Gospel, John 20, 31. Response of faith in
this call involves, however, the necessity that the hearers should
know assuredly that the crucified Jesus is definitely avouched by
God as Lord and Christ, vs. 36. The certitude of faith must rest
on the apologias and witness of the Gospel. Hence Peter begins,
vs. 16, with the claim that the disciples' experience of a new life of
faith and their gift of the Spirit is evidence that Messiah is come;
and is now imparting the redemptive blessings of the messianic
kingdom as predicted by Joel. On this basis of Christian ex
perience he proceeds to bear his witness that Jesus is the Messiah.
For these men of Jerusalem have themselves already had the
witness of the hfe and character of 'Jesus of Nazareth,' vs. 22.
This title with which the apologia opens, is a summary reference to
Christ's self-revelation in his ministry among them. It sums up
the content of the recurring phrase: 'the things concerning Jesus,'
t& 7repi 'Irjaov. Should any hearer ask, 'what things,' we already
have in Lk. 24, 18 f., the answer: 'Dost thou sojourn alone in
Jerusalem and knowest not the things concerning Jesus the
Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before
God and all the people? " Luke in his Gospel has already recorded
these things for the readers of Acts. But in the propaganda
preaching and especially in districts distant from the centers of
Christ's own ministry, this witness of the character, words and
deeds of Jesus must have been given in its essential contents.
In the report of the next sermon this reference to the revelation in
his life is again summed up in the titles : the Holy and Righteous
One; the Prince of Life, 3, 14 f . Accompanying this witness of His
redemptive life and work is the witness God gave to Him : He has
been approved of God unto them by the miracles God did by Him,
even as they themselves know. They are never denied by the
Apostles' opponents; and the original or continued disparagement
of them by the Jewish rulers as wrought by Satanic power, is met
as in the Gospels by pointing out that in His exorcisms Christ

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 59
healed and freed those who were held down by the tyranny of the
Devil, and is thus not the ally but opponent of Satan, 10, 38.
To claim for Him, however, the title of Christ, is in itself an ap
peal to prophecy. Not only to the Jew but to the Godfearer,
10, 43, the heathen, Rom. 1, 2; 3, 21, and to ah behevers in a
historic revelation of a coming redemption, the Gospel must
furnish the witness of the Law and the Prophets. It is therefore an
essential element in all forms of New Testament Gospel preaching.
But the obstacle to a recognition of this testimony, and to an
acceptance of the witness to which Peter has aheady appealed, was
the crucifixion. Even to Christ's disciples, Lk. 24, 21, the Cross
dispelled the otherwise assured hope that Jesus was he that should
redeem Israel. How much more was that Cross a barrier to faith
for all classes of contemporary Jews, whose messianic hopes and
ideals based on the Prophets, it so absolutely contradicted. A
suffering messiah had no place in the Jewish thought of that age.
While G. Dalman 2 has shown the later development of the idea of
a suffering messiah in the doctrine of the Synagogue in the first
Christian mihennium, the Jews of the Apostohc days did not so
read or understand their prophets; and "in the pre-Christian
extracanonical hterature, there is no trace of the idea." 3 Defense
of the Gospel to Israel must therefore meet the demand for proofs
that the Messiah according to Old Testament predictions was to
suffer and thereby enter His glory.
These proofs accordingly appear in ah the propaganda to Jews
as a fundamental element in the Apostohc apologia: by Peter at
Jerusalem, 2, 23; 3, 18; 4, 11; by Paul in Pisidian Antioch, 13, 27,
and at Thessalonica, 17, 2, where as his custom was he reasoned
with them in the synagogue from the Scriptures, opening and
aUeging that it behooved the Christ to suffer. At Caesarea before
Agrippa, he characterizes his ministry as saying nothing but what
the prophets and Moses did say should come; and first, 'how that
the Christ must suffer.4 The data of the Gospels and Epistles
support the theory that very early a cohection was made of the
Old Testament messianic passages, especiaUy those relating to the
2 Der leidende Messias, 1887.
3 V. H. Stanton, H. D. B., Ill, 354 b.
1 E. A. Edghill, Evidential Value of Prophecy, discusses in detail the use of
prophecy in the Acts, pp. 484-524.

60 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
suffering Messiah. The growth of such a coUection can be traced
through the Apostohc Fathers and second-century apologists
down to the Testimonia, or Old Testament witness, of Cyprian.5
So throughly famihar are the original readers of the New Testa
ment books with this witness of prophecy, that the writers are
content to refer to it in a condensed summary as in Lk. 24, 26 f.
and 45 f.; or as in the first sermon where Peter's presentation of it
is compressed in the statement that Jesus' death was 'by the
determinable counsel and foreknowledge of God, ' 2, 23. We can
conceive of few occasions where this witness of the Old Testament
to the sufferings and death of the Christ would be given in fuller
detail than here at Pentecost before the men who had been associa
ted with Jesus' crucifixion, and by the men whose minds had first
been opened by the risen Christ to understand those Scriptures.
Yet neither here nor in any other portion of the New Testament is
it presented in detail and in a formal connected argument, as we
should expect if these writings were intended directly for those
who were not yet behevers, and if they were primarily and domi-
nantly apologetic.
This witness of prophecy concerning the death of Christ is
naturally connected directly with its witness to His resurrection.
As however on Easter Day it was the appearance of Jesus risen
that made possible the Apostles' recognition and understanding
of the prophecies of His death and resurrection, so both Peter at
Jerusalem; 2, 24, and Paul in Pisidian Antioch, 13, 30 f., introduce
the prophecy of the resurrection by the declaration of the fact that
God has raised Jesus from the dead. On the basis of this an
nouncement, Psalm 16 is interpreted as pointing to, and as receiv
ing its fulfillment in, the dead, buried and risen messianic Son of
David. The vahdity of this interpretation of prophecy has, how
ever, still to be supported by the witness of the Apostles to the fact
of their Lord's resurrection. And on this first announcement of
His resurrection, their testimony must evidently have been given
in fullness of detail. The brief assertion, ' of which we all are wit
nesses, ' vs. 32, would clearly be inadequate for conviction. Even
in the extremely condensed report, indications of a fuUer testimony
may be recognized. The reference in vs. 29 to David's death,
6 See J. R. Harris, Testimonies, Pt. 1, 1916, and the references to Florilegia
in Moffatt's Introd.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 61
burial and tomb suggest their apphcation in the Apostle's inter
pretation of the Psalm, to the significant facts of Christ's death
and His burial in the tomb; and the mention of the resurrection
on the thud day in the oral gospel to Cornehus, 10, 40 f., and
in the primitive tradition repeated by Paul, I Cor. 15, 1.4, would
reasonably indicate a recital in their preaching of their experiences
at the tomb and of its condition on the thud day. In addition, the
emphasis by both Apostles, 2, 31; 13, 36, on the fact that unlike
David, Jesus risen ' saw no corruption, ' likewise suggests that in
their propaganda preaching of which we have received only sum
maries, they testified to Christ's resurrection appearances in a
form revealing that he was freed from death's dominion. The full
witness of the Apostles to the resurrection is, however, like the Old
Testament witness to the suffering Christ, assumed throughout
the Acts; since it has aheady been recalled in Luke's Gospel, and
since his readers have been famihar with it since their conversion.6
But the climax of the Apostle's apologia is his declaration of
the heavenly exaltation of the risen Jesus as Lord. With what
witness, however, can such an assertion concerning his state in the
invisible world be supported, and be made a basis of conviction
of its hearers? As in theh defense of the gospel of the resurrec
tion they offered the evidence of his appearances to them, it is
possible that they may also in connection with 2, 34 f . have re
ported his Ascension. Chase, Credibility of Acts, p. 151, and
Edghill, Evidential Value of Prophecy, p. 497, have suggested that
these verses may include a reference to Psalm 68, -Hr; since they
take up three of its words: inj/udeis, \a^6}v and aviSw; and it is
this Psalm passage that is apphed in Eph. 4, 8 ff . to the Ascension
and the succeeding gifts. In any case Peter adds as in his defense
of the resurrection, the witness of the Old Testament: using, as
throughout the New Testament, Ps. 110 as a prediction of the
exaltation of the Messiah. And in support of this fulfillment of
it, he points his hearers to the effects of Jesus' exaltation, as seen
6 In preaching to Cornehus, 10, 42 ff., there is an announcement at this
point, as in the written gospels, of an Apostohc Commission from the risen
Christ to preach his Gospel of salvation. Peter's concluding exhortation,
2, 38 ff., assumes and recalls this commission; cp. also 3, 19.26; 4, 12.19.
Paul in his synagogue sermon in Acts 13 does not definitely refer to the com
mission of the original Apostles; but in 26, 16 ff. connects his own commission
as apostle to the Gentiles with the appearance to him of the risen Jesus.

62 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
in the gifts of the Spirit to His disciples: 'Being by the right hand
of God exalted and having received of the Father the promise of
the Holy Spirit, he both poured forth this which ye see and hear.'
This ministry of the exalted Jesus could be recognized both in
the special spiritual ghts at Pentecost and also then and later
in the absolute conviction and in the reahty of the spiritual experi
ence of the Apostohc preachers. There was a boldness, irapprjo-ia,
fervor, and clearness of piercing insight into the hearers' mental
and spiritual needs and hopes; a manifestation of certitude,
faces shining like angels; at times a rush of power, leading the
heathen Festus to exclaim that the preacher was raving; or when
as in Corinth, they preached in weakness, fear and trembling,
yet it was with the evident presence of the Spirit and with power.
The manifestations of the Spirit in the behevers at Pentecost
were ghts from the exalted Jesus; and they completed the mani
fold witness by which the hearers could know assuredly that God
had made Him both Lord and Christ.
This is Luke's report for behevers, of the fundamental outlines
of the first witness and defense of the redemptive facts attesting
Jesus as the Christ. Its general characteristics and structure are
controlled by its direct purpose. It is not an apology to meet
later or currect objections to Jesus' character, miracles, fahure
to fulfill prophecy, or to the reality of His resurrection and of the
spiritual ghts of His disciples. It records the Apostohc presenta
tion of Him as redeeming Lord and Christ as the basis of then call
to salvation by faith in Him as thus presented. On this occasion,
as we should expect, and as we find, theh witness to Him centers
around the Gospel of His resurrection. It was then first announced ;
and with no suggestion of the possibihty of denial. It here crowns
the witness of His life and miracles. The Old Testament prophecy
relating to it, reveals at the same time the determinate counsel
and foreknowledge of God concerning His death, and prepares for
the Apostohc testimony to its fulfillment. And it is this gospel
of the resurrection which makes possible the gospel of Jesus'
exaltation and heavenly ministry in which he bestows forgiveness
of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, 2, 38.
The result was that of the multitudes at the feast of Pentecost,
the majority of whom were famihar with the teachings and works
of Jesus, three thousand were spiritually receptive; vs. 37, to-

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 63
wards this message of combined witness and appeal; and in bap
tism professed their acceptance of it with penitence and faith.
The effect on the rest of the multitude is not indicated; save that
we learn of no opposition, and that in this earhest period the dis
ciples had favor with all the people. But whtie the people of
Jerusalem thus looked with favor on the new movement and its
teaching, they are thereby described as not looking upon it with
conviction. Any further witness to them must necessarily follow
the essential lines of the sermon in Acts 2. So we find it in Luke's
reports of later propaganda among the Jews. Differences in the
several Lukan reports of the primitive apologia may be due partly
to varying measures of condensation; to the fact that the later
reports assume the lines of testimony previously recorded; to the
special features and interests of his various sources of these dis
courses; but principaUy to the definite exigencies of the occasions
on which these later discourses were spoken.
In Acts 3 the preaching of Peter after healing the lame man
marks a new stage of evangehzation. The hearers are men of
Jerusalem familiar with the Apostohc message in the previous
chapter. It has, however, not led to their conviction of its truth.
And we may judge from the new form, new emphases and de
velopments in Peter's renewal of it, that the obstacle to their
behef was the death of Jesus as a malefactor; thus contradicting
their conception of the messianic predictions and rebutting the
claim of His resurrection. There was besides the difficulty of
grasping the significance of an invisible Messiah, whose absence
precluded the establishment of the messianic kingdom of their
expectations. To meet these difficulties Peter addresses to the
crowds attracted by the miracle of healing, a new call to salvation,
3, 19.26, by faith in Jesus as the Christ.
Central again for the genesis of this faith is the claim that God
has glorified Jesus, vs. 13. The self-revelation of His earthly life
is not given, either because it is aheady known to the hearers,
or to the Christian readers of the Acts; but it is summed up in
entitling Him the Servant, the Holy and Just One and the Prince
of Life, which titles themselves express his fulfillment of the Old
Testament messianic ideals, Edghill, 500 f . He faces at once the
skandalon of the Cross; and instead of apology for its ignominy,
charges his hearers with the crime and sin of delivering to death

64 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Him whom they knew as the Holy and Just One; whose innocence
even the heathen PUate recognized, when they preferred a mur
derer to Him and murdered the Prince of Life. Again the fulfill
ment of the divine counsel in His death is shown in God's raising
Him from the dead; and the Apostle's testimony to this fact was
either given at length in the original discourse, or is assumed to
be aheady known by his hearers. But a new testimony to it is
now given in the fact of this miracle of healing wrought through
them by the risen Jesus, 3, 12.16; 4, 9.10.
In general this is but a renewal of the claims in the Pentecost
sermon which have hitherto faUed to win the present hearers'
acceptance. The Apostle cannot offer new lines of evidence in
support of them; but he can hope to remove theh special difficulty
of believing that the Christ was according to the Old Testament
to suffer, by a fuller development of the argument from prophecy
on this subject. He had intimated his intention to do this in his
opening words announcing the theme of his sermon : God has glori
fied his Servant Jesus. These words are recognized to be an as
sertion that the passage in Isaiah 52, 13-53, 12, concerning the
suffering and exalted Servant, points to the death and resurrection
of Jesus. And now, 3, 18, he adds to the Pentecost sermon the
definite statement : The things which God foreshowed by the mouth
of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He thus fulfiUed.
This mere assertion was not sufficient to produce conviction.
The definite and complete proof of it was precisely what was
needed by the hearers to enable them to accept it, and along with
it the other lines of testimony. We must conclude that this was
then given to them; though as before noted, it is not here re
corded for the believing readers who were aheady fully acquainted
with it.
The sufferings of the Christ are next, vs. 19, related to the offer
of salvation; and this in turn is connected with the other Jewish
difficulty of an invisible Messiah and the delay in the restoration
of all things promised in the messianic prophecies. The Apostles
themselves had aheady questioned the risen Christ concerning
this subject, 1, 6-8, and received answer that the times and seasons
were in the Father's own power. Here in v. 21 is an echo of that
answer: the heavens must receive Him until the times of restorar
tion. His Parousia whl be the season of 'refreshment'; probably

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 65
from the tribulations of the last times. The subject appears to
be one of the topics in the primitive Gentile propaganda, II Thess.
1, 7-10; and we can note its continued discussion in the later
period: cp. Heb. 9, 24-28; II Peter, 3, 8ff.; Rev. 6, 10 f. Yet
Luke has again not recorded Peter's discussion of this prominent
subject of eschatology, save in the general reference in vss. 22 to
25 to the whole prophetic teaching concerning "these days.' From
this teaching he quotes but two texts: one the warning of Moses
against the rejection of the 'prophet like unto me'; the other an
appeal to them as sons of the prophets and of the Covenant to
accept the covenant promise of universal blessing in the seed of
Abraham. The success of this discourse in meeting the special Jewish diffi
culties, is seen both in the increase of converts to five thousand,
and also in the attempt of the Sadducean element in the Sanhedrin,
cp. 4, 5; 5, 17, to repress the rising movement based on the preach
ing of the resurrection, to which the Sadducees were fundamen-
taUy opposed, 23, 8. Before the Sanhedrin therefore the Apostles
repeat the claim that the miracle of healing had been effected by
the power of the risen Jesus; and thereby witnessed to the ful
fillment of Christ's own words to the Sanhedrin: He, the stone,
rejected by the Jewish bunders has become the head of the corner,
Mtw. 21, 42. At their subsequent arrest and examination by the
CouncU, 5, 30 ff., we observe that no reference is recorded of the
witness of Christ's character, teachings and works since the Coun
cil had aheady rejected this by their crucifixion of Jesus; nor to
the witness of prophecy, in whose interpretation by Pharisaic
messianism the Sadducean element had no interest. The apostohc
apologia in these circumstances centers in the resurrection and
divine exaltation of Jesus as Israel's redeemer; with no fear of
contradiction of theh witness to the Easter facts; with the wit
ness of miracles performed in the name and power of the risen
Jesus; and with the witness of the religious experience of behevers,
in theh possession of the Holy Spirit.
After this propaganda to Jews in Jerusalem, with its indication
of a definite type of apologia whose several lines of defense could
be developed to meet special demands, Luke has added a history
of the extension of the gospel to Samaritans, to the Ethiopian
proselyte and to Jews only in Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch.

66 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
The absence in these narratives of the discourses which led to
conversion, may be partly explained as by Spitta and J. Weiss
as due to the characteristics of the sources used by Luke in these
sections; 7 or to Luke's use of them to emphasize the fact of the
admission of the new groups of converts rather than the mode of
theh conversion. That this was effected by the original prop
aganda preaching of Acts 1-5, with the necessary adaptations
and special emphases, may be concluded from Luke's references
to it by his usual summarizing general titles for the gospel preach
ing. Thus in Samaria, corresponding to the general description
of the 'evangelizing' of Peter and John, 8, 25, as 'testifying and
speaking the word of the Lord,' cp, 2, 40, and to the Samaritan
reception of 'the word of God,' 8, 14, Phihp preached the Christ,
vs. 5; and 'evangelized concerning the kingdom of God and the
name of Jesus Christ, vs. 12. At the close of Acts, Luke sums up
Paul's work at Rome in very similar terms: preaching the kingdom
of God and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ.
Paul could base his exposition of the Gospel to the Jews in Rome,
both on the Law of Moses and on the prophets, 28, 23. But to
the Samaritans whose only sacred book was the Pentateuch, the
general Christian apologia had clearly to be presented in a special
method. Concerning this we have no record. Yet the opening
statement, vs. 5, that Phihp preached the Christ to them would
justify us in concluding that his preaching would have to be
founded on a declaration of the Jewish Christian doctrine of Mes
siah as correcting and completing the messianism and eschatology
of Samaria. Professor Montgomery in his presentation of these
doctrines8 has shown that 'the Samaritan notion of Messiah,
which can be traced back to a fairly early period, makes of him
only a second Moses; he is primarily the prophet that shall come,
like Moses; he was to be a revealer of hidden or lost truth; his
proper title is Ta'eb, the Restorer, whose chief function is to in
troduce the millennium, that wiU be followed by the day of ven
geance, resurrection and judgment.'
Philip's Gospel of Christ 'who will declare aU things,' John 4,
7 The theories as to these sources are tabulated by Moffatt, Introduction,
286 ff.
8 J. A. Montgomery, The Samaritans, p. 239 ff., especially p. 243 ff . on the
Samaritan notion of Messiah.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 67
25, is necessarily based on Jesus' own preaching of the kingdom
of God, vs. 12; and the witness of these words of Jesus is sup
ported by the witness 'concerning the name of Jesus Christ' : His
self-revelation in His life, teaching, redemptive works, death and
resurrection. In aU accounts of initial preaching to Jews, special
mention is made of the witness of the Old Testament Psalmists
and Prophets to Messiah's death, resurrection and exaltation.
Its omission here may have its sufficient explanation in the brev
ity of the narrative. But wrule it was probably referred to as
being both a constant element of apologia and also of the prim
itive baptismal profession as early as the conversion of Paul,
which was contemporary with this period, I Cor. 15, 3 f.; cp. vs. 1,
yet we should anticipate that it would not have its usual prom
inence among hearers who neither recognized nor knew the Hebrew
prophecies; who would find no stumbling block in the doctrine of
a suffering Messiah; and in whose later hterature, cp. Montgomery,
pp. 248 ff., Messiah was to die in peace. In this situation the
emphasis on Philip's miracles, vss. 6.7, 13, and the interest in the
ghts of the Spirit, with which he was himseh endowed, 6, 3, be
come specially significant. As in Acts 3 and 4, such miracles and
ghts are witnesses to the reahty and redemptive power of Jesus'
resurrection and heavenly ministry; and led to their faith in
Philip's Gospel and to theh baptism into the name of the Lord
Jesus. The next step in the extension of the Gospel is Philip's preaching
to the Ethiopian proselyte, 8, 26 ff . Here again the special in
terest of the writer in the admission of the Eunuch into the Church,
is shown in his recording the convert's question : what doth hinder
me to be baptized; and in the divine directions in vss. 26.29, cp.
10, 47; 11, 17. And again the preaching is summarized in the
statement: he brought to him the good tidings of Jesus, vs. 35.
evqyye\UraTO avrw rbv 'naovv. But in this case it was dis
tinctly based on the messianic interpretation of the suffering and
death of the Servant in Is. 53.
In contrast to these brief and general summaries of the Gospel
apologia in Philip's evangehzation, Luke has recorded in unusually
definite outlines Peter's presentation of the Gospel to Cornehus,
10, 34^43. Although it is addressed to a heathen godfearer, it
may be considered here in connection with the propaganda among

68 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Jews, since he declares that it is the Gospel to Israel which he
will preach to this man who is aheady famihar with the Christian
movement throughout ah Judaea, vs. 37. As in the two earlier
discourses in Acts 2 and 3, the primary and controlling interest
of both preacher and hearers is in the Gospel as an offer of per
sonal redemption. Cornehus as a pious godfearer had aheady
accepted the Jewish behef in a coming world judgment. And this
belief had awakened his sense of need of forgiveness and acceptance
with God. When therefore he was divinely moved to send for
Peter, it was 'to hear words by which he should be saved,' 11,
13 f. Hence to him Peter brings, as to the Jews at Pentecost, the
"word God sent, preaching peace by Jesus Christ, the Lord of
all." Again the defense and exposition of these claims is given
in the apologia of witness: the preparatory witness of the Baptist;
God's witness in Jesus' baptism, when He was anointed with the
Holy Spirit and with power; the witness of His own redemptive
life, as He went about doing good ; the witness of God's working
through Him in His Healings and exorcisms; and the witness of
the Apostles to His ministry of word and deed, to His death and
resurrection, vss. 40-43. To the previous witness to the resurrec
tion, there are here added specific references to the Third Day,
the appearances to the disciples and the eating and drinking with
them. On the other hand, there is no reference in our record to
the Old Testament witness to the death and resurrection of the
Messiah. 'All the prophets' are indeed referred to; but as wit
nesses that every behever in the Christ shall receive remission of
sins. It has already been stated that Christ's death and resur
rection 'according to the Scriptures,' would either be preached in
the initial presentation of the Gospel or be the subject of instruc
tion before the baptismal profession. There would, however, be
no occasion to emphasize this witness of prophecy in preaching
to the Centurion, who would not experience the constant diffi
culty of the Jew in recognizing the resurrection of a Messiah whom
they could not conceive of as dying. For Cornelius, the infamy
of the crucifixion is dispelled by the witness to Jesus' holy hfe
and work; and the reahty of the resurrection is assured by the
testimony of the divinely accredited Apostle.
Thus to the Gentile godfearer the emphasis of the defense and
confirmation of the Gospel that Jesus is Christ and Lord is on

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 69
the redemptive facts of His life, death and resurrection. The
accompanying appeal and call to accept Him as the Christ rests
on the Apostle's assurance of a divine commission from the risen
Christ to preach unto the people, Xa6s; and the assurance was
supported in this case by the divine communication to Cornehus
to hear Peter's message, vs. 22. The call rests further on the
declaration that it is the risen Jesus who is appointed Judge of
the living and the dead; and that forgiveness in that judgment
is offered through His name to every one that believeth in Him,
vss. 42 f.
We must notice, however, that there is no mention of the wit
ness of the ministry of the exalted Christ in the personal expe
rience of Christians; and that no appeal for faith is based on the
promise of receiving the Spirit. If in the ten-verse summary of
the discourse, there is intentional omission by the Apostle of
reference to the gift of the Spirit in view of the problem of the
baptism of the uncircumcised, his doubts were dissipated by their
sudden reception of the Spirit, which was manifested in the gift
of tongues with grateful adoration of God. This reception of
the blessing of the sacrament of baptism was to him and to the
Church of Jerusalem, 11, 17 f., divine warrant for their reception
of that sacrament and for their admission into the feUowship of
the Church.9
• In contrast to the view of the method of primitive apologetic here pre
sented, may be compared P. Wernle, Verhandlungen d. II, Internat. Kon-
gresses f. AUgemeine Religionsgeschichte, Basel, 1904, pp. 362-369. He there
constructs the primitive apologetic in three stages. As its basis, the argument
from miracle and prophecy, as in the Gospels; next, the genial development
by Paul, in whose system is presented the proof of the miracle of the spiritual
life of Christians based on Christ as the supreme miracle, and this in apologetic
polemic against any other rehgion; while finally in the Prologue of the Fourth
Gospel is the transition to the Logos Apologetic, in which Christianity is
presented as the unification and completion of whatever truth is found in the
Greek popular philosophy, with its concepts of Logos and the Law of Nature,
although Wernle definitely recognizes that in the body of the Fourth Gospel,
the two earher forms of apologetic are still emphasized. Such a theoretical
construction disregards the facts that the assumed second, Pauline, stage is
historically the apologetic by which converts were won before his mission and
in a period long antedating the composition of the Gospels; that the Gospels,
besides their witness of miracle and prophecy, most directly present the
unique character and life of Christ, the divine witness to him and his effectual
offer of spiritual renewal and salvation; and that the view in the Johannine

70 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
So fixed became the type of apology to the Jews, that we find
Paul near the end of the second decade of propaganda, presenting
the Gospel in the Galatian synagogues with essentially the same
features and in the same general method as that of the Jerusalem
Apostles. And this, despite the differences of conditions in ad
dressing the crowds in the Temple courts and in preaching to
the congregations of hellenistic Jews and godfearers in the syna
gogues of the Dispersion. There seems to have been no synagogue
of Christians in Jerusalem, cp. Weizsacker, Apos. Age, I, 46;
and there are no references to apologetic propaganda there. The
speaking and disputing of Stephen and of Paul in the hellenistic
synagogues of Jerusalem, must, in view of the prompt charge of
blasphemy and of the ensuing deadly persecution, have been
direct polemic against Jewish legalism.
In the synagogues of the Dispersion, Paul's preaching had to
be related to a messianic hope which it may be conjectured would
not be of the Palestinian zelotic type,10 nor so dominantly affected
by pharisaic legahsm and apocalyptic. In the face of Graeco-
Roman culture, the Jew would be intensely conscious of his
superior divine election, and would the more dwell upon the hope
of the coming of the Kingdom to Israel. At Pisidian Antioch,
therefore, in natural connection with the synagogue reading of
the Law and Prophets, Paul prefaces his Gospel message with
an extended exposition of the messianic hope as its foundation,
13, 17-22. This hope rests on the election of the patriarchs and
on the divine leading of the elect nation from the days of Moses
to those of. David, to whom is given the distinct promise of a
messianic Son of David. According to this promise God has now
brought to Israel a Saviour, Jesus.
In the succeeding outline of the defense of this claim, vss.
23-37, and from the later summaries of it in the Acts and Pauhne
Epistles, we can mark the characteristic feature of the Apostle's
method of presenting the Gospel in the Jewish synagogues. He
Prologue, of Christianity as the full certainty of revelation completing all
previous knowledge of divine truth, already appears in Paul's summary of his
apologia to the heathen, Bom. 1, 18-2, 16, in the christology of his Epistles,
as well as in his address at Athens. For a related view in the Synoptics, see
Forrest, op. cit, pp. 45 ff. and 107.
10 Cp. K. Lake, The Stewardship of Faith, p. 21.35.44.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 71
constantly emphasizes that both the facts and doctrines of his
Gospel are according to the Scriptures; have the witness of the
law and the prophets; are the Gospel of God which he promised
afore through His prophets. More definitely, in view of Jewish
ignorance of these prophecies although they are read every Sab
bath, his Praeparatio Evangehca is an exposition of the real
content and import of the messianic teachings of the Old Testa
ment. When by reasoning in the synagogues, by opening the
meaning of the Scriptures and by bringing forward proofs by
comparison of passages, 17, 2 f., Paul had recalled in Antioch,
Thessalonica, Berea and Corinth, the real Old Testament teaching
concerning Messiah, his kingdom and salvation, he could proceed
to press the conclusion that 'the Christ is this Jesus whom I
proclaim unto you.' Before Agrippa, 26, 22, he describes this
preparatory messianic teaching as ' saying nothing but what the
prophets and Moses did say should come: how that the Christ
must suffer, and how that he first by the resurrection of the dead
should proclaim light both to the people and to the Gentiles.'
The Christ's death and resurrection are likewise the special
messianic prophecies emphasized in Thessalonica, 17, 3, at Pisidian
Antioch 13, 27.34 and at Corinth, I Cor. 15, 3.4. Theh definite
exposition was necessary both to remove, as in Acts 3, 13 ff., the
Jewish difficulty in accepting a suffering messiah, and also be
cause they were the 'primary points,' kv irp&rois, in his Gospels
of messianic salvation.
In the structure of the apologia in Act 13, 23 ff., thus dominated
by the witness of prophecy, the framework of the earher Pales
tinian oral Gospel can still be recognized. The defense of the claim
that the promise of a messianic Son of David has been fulfilled in
Jesus, begins with the witness of the Baptist as the messenger
prophesied in Malachi 3, 1, preaching the baptism of repentance
'before the face of his entrance'; u and testifying to his approach
ing ministry and to his exalted character. At this point, vs. 26,
with the announcement that 'the word of this salvation has been
sent forth,' we should expect as in Peter's similar introduction
to his summary of Christ's ministry, 10, 36, a reference to Christ's
11 With Acts 13, 24: 7rpd irpoo-ojirov ttJs tuxbhov avrov, cp. Mai. 3, 1,
LXX: bSbv irpb irpoo-inrov pov, and vs. 2: r)pipav elabSov avrov.

72 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
own witness in His ministry and teaching. Yet in our record it is
passed over. It proceeds at once to the witness of the prophecies
fulfilled in His death, and to details concerning Pilate, the tree,
the burial in a tomb. These point onward to a full account in
the original discourse of the facts of the resurrection from the
tomb. In' our summary report, however, it is simply announced
as God's act and witness to him; and the witnesses to this resur
rection are the Galileans, cp. I Cor. 15, 5 ff., to whom he appeared
for many days. And again the resurrection and exaltation are
' according to the Scriptures ' ; the same 16th Psalm being quoted
as earher by Peter, and as bearing the same witness to Jesus' res
urrection without 'seeing corruption.' Here the apologia of
witness ends. Upon it is based the succeeding appeal, vss. 38 f.,
to accept the salvation offered by Jesus who has thus been made
known unto them, as in the similar conclusion of Peter's apologia,
as Lord and Christ.
We may notice that Luke's interest in reporting the prominence
of the Old Testament witness which characterized the Apostle's
synagogue preaching, has occasioned a very compressed indica
tion of the use of some of the other constant hnes of witness.
Thus the divine witness is generalized in the statements that
God has brought to Israel according to promise, a Saviour Jesus,
of David's seed, vs. 23; that He has fulfilled the promise made unto
the fathers, by 'raising up' Jesus as Messiah, in accordance with
Psalm 2; 12 and that God has raised up Jesus from the dead,
vss. 30.34.37. A compressed reference to His heavenly exaltation
and to the promised ministration of the Spirit, with which Peter's
argument closed, 2, 33 ff., has been found by exegetes, including
Meyer and B. Weiss, in the citation in vs. 34: 1 will give unto you
the holy and sure blessings of David, as in R. V. They regard
the words as a text for an argument, developed in the original
discourse, that the blessings of messianic salvation promised to
David will come through Jesus as the mediator of salvation in
His heavenly hfe, cp. vs. 35. The witness of the preachers' spiritual
experience is not offered in the synagogues in the form of miracu
lous ghts. We can only conclude indirectly from their offer of
12 So Wendt, with citation of authorities, who is followed by Knowling.
Meyer, B. Weiss, V. Bartlett are among those who refer the statement to the
resurrection.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 73
the word of salvation in vs. 26, and of forgiveness and justification
in vs. 38, that the preachers themselves professed the reception
of the Spirit.
There is also, however, the more important omission of refer
ence to the witness of Christ's ministry, and hence of its redemptive
significance. No allusion is made in Luke's report, to His hfe,
character, teaching and miracles, from the witness of the Baptist
to the Passion. This omission, coupled with the character of
such references in the Pauline Epistles, is made the basis of the
ories of the Apostle's ignorance of Christ's earthly hfe and teach
ing, or of interest solely in his death and heavenly life. These
theories necessarily determine the formulation of Paul's theologi
cal system; and as has appeared in the recent discussion of the
topic, whether Jesus or Paul was the founder of Apostolic Christi
anity, they affect fundamentally the historical criticism of the
Gospels. Our interest, however, at this point is in the omission
of references to the earthly ministry of Jesus in the report of the
synagogue sermon. It cannot in any case be due to Paul's ig
norance of the Gospel tradition of Christ's words and deeds, or
to lack of interest in the redemptive significance of Christ's whole
human experience and work. This result has been reached in
recent years in numerous critical investigations of the subject.
Among these, starting with Paret's article, Paulus und Jesus,13
and Keim's estimate of Paul as a source for the life of Christ, 14
are Paul Feine?s work, Jesus Christus u. Paulus, 1902; R. J.
Knowling, Testimony of St. Paul to Christ, 1905; and especially
the work of the Danish scholar, Olaf Moe, Paulus u. die evangelische
Geschichte, 1912. 15
Apart from the details of the discussion, a summary of which
appears in Zahn's Introd., § 48.4, it can be recalled that Paul
before his conversion would have ample acquaintance with the
13 Jahrbuch f. deutsche Theologie, 1858, p. 1 f.
14 Geschichte Jesu von Nazara, 1867, I, p. 35 f. ¦
16 M. Goguel, L'ApStre Paul et Jisus-Christ, 1904, discusses Paul's knowledge
of the life and words of Jesus, with a list of the principal earlieir discussions,
on p. 69. He concludes that Paul probably knows fairly well the life of Christ.
Yet the events of his life, if Paul knew them, have for him no rehgious interest.
For the object of his faith is exclusively the glorified Christ, the heavenly
Being, the Spirit, p. 97 f. Knowling, op. cit., pp. 511-515, gives a brief account
of this third chapter of GogueFs work.

74 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Oral Gospel preached in Jerusalem by the Christians with whom
he disputed in the Hellenist synagogues, and by the Christians
whom he persecuted for this preaching. At his baptism at Da
mascus, there was dehvered to him the Gospel which he preached,
I Cor. 15, 1, whose 'primary points' were Christ's redemptive
death and resurrection; yet this Gospel dehvered to him and
preached by him must have been the complete Oral Gospel which
Ananias held in common with the Jerusalem Apostles. FuUer
details of it would be gained by him in intercourse with Christians
at Damascus; with Peter, James and other workers at Jerusalem,
Gal. 1, 15; with Barnabas, both at Jerusalem and at Antioch in
the year of their teaching of the Church in that city. If his years
at Tarsus that preceded the association with Barnabas, included
as is usually understood independent missionary work in Cihcia,
he must have been equipped to furnish fullest information con
cerning the hfe, ministry and teaching of one whom Jew and Gen
tile were asked to accept as their Messiah, Saviour and Lord.16
On his first missionary journey Barnabas and Mark, both members
of the primitive Jerusalem Church, were his fellow-workers; and
again, from their personal communications or from their instruc
tion of converts, his full acquaintance with the Gospel tradition
would result. On the next journey, Silas of the Jerusalem Church
and Luke who has written most fully of Christ's hfe and ministry,
are his companions. Zahn indeed strangely holds, Skizzen, 84 f.,
that Paul when by himseh as at first at Corinth knew scarcely
anything else to preach than 'the Crucified Jesus'; and that he
needed the men from Jerusalem to supplement and confirm his
preaching by a vividly detailed narrative concerning 'the Lord
Jesus.' This however is to confuse the propaganda preaching
which must necessarily include some outline at least of Christ's
hfe and work, with the later instruction of converts for baptism.
It also overlooks the fact that his companions were, hke himseh,
not original disciples, cp. Acts 1, 21 ff., and must themselves have
19 Zahn, Skizzen aus dem Leben der Alien Kirche, 1898, p. 84: Mission
preaching without a vivid narration of the deeds and words of Jesus, would
have been an impossibility (Unding). We must entertain a very singular
view of Paul as missionary and especiaUy of his well-disposed hearers, if we
suppose he reached his results by means of a 'Gospel' without a fullness of
historical material.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 75
learned the Gospel tradition, as Paul too could have learned it.
It is therefore incredible that upon reaching Corinth alone, he
should have 'known scarcely anything else to preach than the
great fundamental fact of Jesus crucified.' Further, the Pauline
Epistles reveal an acquaintance by the Apostle and assume a
knowledge on the part of his converts, both of Christ as the
object of faith on the basis of his complete self-manifestation,
Feine, pp. 45-56, and also of the essential topics of Christ's teach
ing, Moe, 102-130; Feine, 150-297. 17
The omission of reference to the witness of Jesus' life and teach
ing in the synagogue address was therefore not due to Paul's
ignorance of it or of its persuasive power and redemptive sig
nificance. Nor could it be due to its irrelevance to his apologetic
argument from prophecy. On the contrary his argument postu
lated that his presentation of the prophetic conception of the
Messiah must be followed by or interwoven with a presentation of
the hfe, character, teachings and work of Jesus, as its fulfillment.
Such we find was his method with the Jews at Rome, Acts 28,
23 ff.; the witness of the Old Testament was correlated with the
witness of the life of Christ. His exposition to them of the hope of
Israel combined his 'testifying the Kingdom of God,' naturally as
preached by Christ, and his persuading them from the law and
prophets concerning Jesus, which would involve an account of his
life and ministry as the fulfillment of messianic prediction. That
he was equipped to give this account appears from the closing
description of his work at Rome as preaching the Kingdom of God
and teaching 'the things concerning Jesus,' which as is seen in
Luke 24, 19, included not only his death and resurrection but his
whole ministry of word and deed. Since this Gospel preaching in
Rome is entitled, 'this salvation. of God, ' the use of the same title
in 13, 26, 'the word of this salvation' cp. 10, 36, points again to
Paul's delivery of the witness of Christ's life in the synagogue at
Antioch. Luke's omission of it in his resume" of the synagogue
sermon is amply accounted for by the fact that he has not only
17 J. Weiss, Urchristm., p. 167: 'It is one of the strangest theological errors,
when it is supposed that among all the primitive Christian preachers, Paul
alone dispensed with the missionary method of illustration through narratives
from the life of Jesus, on the view that he knew nothing of it nor wished to
know.' See also Harnack, Date of Acts, p. 116.

76 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
recorded it in his Gospel but has also already summarized it in his
reports of propaganda preaching in chapters 2, 3 and 10.
Recognizing therefore that the Pauline discourses in the Jewish
synagogues included this witness of Jesus' character and ministry
and correlated it with the other essential lines of testimony to his
messiahship, we find that his apologia to the Jews conformed to
the type which we have already found indicated in the discourses
of the Palestinian Apostles. Like them it consists first of a defense
of the Gospel in the form of manifold witness to its redemptive
facts and truths; and next, of an appeal, solemn exhortation, a
divine call to accept this witness, to repent, be baptized for re
mission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, to enter into the
fellowship of believers. In the structure of all the reports of the
Oral Gospel in Acts, this division is evident. At the conclusion of
the witness at 2, 36 follows the call to profession of faith in vss.
38 ff . ; the witness in 3, 12-18 leads to the exhortation to conversion
at vss. 19 ff . ; the same structure of the evangelization controls the
replies of Peter to the Sanhedrin in 4, 8-12; 5, 29-32; his witness
to Cornelius ending at 10, 42 introduces the prophetic witness of
forgiveness to believers; the apologia of witness in 13, 26-37 that
the messianic promise of salvation in vss. 16-25 has been fulfilled
in Jesus, Son of David, is followed in 38-41 by the offer of forgive
ness and by warning of rejection of this witness and divine call.18
18 This division is also indicated in Luke's special use of hiap.aprvpop.ai as
apphed to the witness. It expresses not simply 'bearing personal testimony'
i. e., paprvpelv, but 'declaring solemnly,' and in this connection, the whole
body of witness to Jesus as the Christ, which would of course include the
testimony of the preacher's personal experiences, as in Acts 23, 11: <bs Sie-
paprvpw ra. irepl ipov, ovra o~e Set paprvpfjo-ai. It is used four times in
Acts in connection with the apologia topics, and is twice joined with a distinct
expression, which in 2, 40 points to the call to accept the salvation presented in
the witness, and very probably there are the same references in 8, 25. In the
report, however, of Paul's address at Miletus, it is used, 20, 24, somewhat
more generally than elsewhere in Luke, as solemn attestation of the Gospel
of the grace of God; and in a distinctly extended reference, vs. 20, to the call
to repent and beheve. This more general use appears also in I Thess. 4, 6,
where it is concerned with initial moral teachings, although in I Thess. 2, 12;
Eph. 4, 17, the simple form paprvpopai is used in this connection, as also
in Acts 26, 22, of the apologia of the Gospel in the report of Paul's address.
Knowling's view that biapaprbpopai expresses in 2, 40 a solemn 'protest'

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 77
For the apologia of witness was never relied upon by the Apos
tolic preachers as sufficient in itself to win their hearers to faith.
It did not and does not always produce conviction. It could not
effect the immediate certainty of faith, although its direct aim was
to awaken a faith that would issue in a divine certitude of salvation.
So Paul views his office, Php. 1, 16: I am appointed for the apolo
gia of the Gospel; and in vs. 7 the apologia is to lead to bebaiosis,
the direct certitude of the Gospel.19 Hence in all the propaganda
addresses in Acts, there is a concluding exhortation, a call to hear
on the basis of the preceding witness, a divine invitation to accept
the salvation effected by the redemptive life, death and exaltation
of the Christ of God. It is a call not merely for assent to the
truths preached concerning Christ, but for a response of personal
faith in which is united the conviction of intellect and conscience
with the devotion of the affections and will. Being an offer of
divine salvation, it must convince its hearers of their need of it, by
awaking a consciousness of their sins; must convince them of a
coming divine judgment of these sins; must convince them also
that Jesus is the messianic Saviour from sin and that He is the
Lord of their life. And it must assure them of a gift of spiritual
power with which to realize the ideals it reveals or which it illumi
nates with a divine hght and glory.20
Such a faith calling for absolute devotion and sacrifice must rest
on the conviction that this call to accept the offer of salvation is
fully authenticated as divine; and that the apologia of the witness
against the false views of Peter's hearers, is not in accord with their receptive
attitude in vs. 37. Nor can Rackham be followed in regarding it "a special
word for the apostohc witness,' since Luke has recorded only addresses by
Apostles, or in restricting it, e. g., 18, 5 to Paul's witness based on his conversion
by the risen Jesus, for which paprvpelv would be used as in I Cor. 15, 15.
19 The other views of this verse are considered, pp. 124 ff.
20 Harnack, Mission and Expansion, I, p. 382, is disposed to consider that
'it was Paul who first threw into such sharp relief the significance of Jesus
Christ as a Redeemer and made this the central point of Christian preaching.'
Yet he recognizes that the earher missionaries also proclaimed that Christ
died for sins. His suggestion that in their contact with Jews and godfearers
they would be inclined to confine themselves to preaching the imminence of
judgment and to proving from the Old Testament that Jesus was to return as
judge and Lord, must be qualified by the fact that this witness is followed
by their exhortations cited above, to accept the Gospel of salvation in Christ
in this judgment, as is shown by B. Weiss, N. T. Theology, 40.d.

78 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
is irrefragable. And moreover this full assurance of faith demands
more direct illumination of mind, kindling of heart and invigora-
tion of will, than can be effected by any human ministry, even that
of inspired Apostles. It is therefore to the divine ministry in both
preachers and hearers that the New Testament ascribes the gene
sis of the faith of the primitive behevers. By this ministry their
eyes were opened; they were turned from darkness to light; were
converted; were pricked at the heart, and ask, 'what shall we do
then' to obtain forgiveness and inheritance among those who are
consecrated by faith in Jesus. In answer, the Apostles summoned
them to baptism in the name of Jesus Christ unto remission of sins
and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, 2, 38; to be baptized and
wash away their sins, calling on the name of the Lord, 22, 16.
But in such a spiritual crisis, and such a sudden and complete
revolution of intellectual, moral and social life of the Jewish
hearers and their adherents, there was clearly needed a further
definite ministry to lead them to the, direct certitude of their
salvation by faith, SeBaiaxns, and to prepare them for Christian
life, work and worship after their baptism. As the same prepara
tory ministry was needed as well by Gentile converts, we shall
consider it at the conclusion of our study of the defense of the
Gospel to the Gentiles.
2. THE APOLOGIA AND CALL OF THE GOSPEL TO THE GENTILES
That the Gospel should be preached to the Gentiles, must, in
view of the theological and practical difficulties of such a concep
tion to Jewish Apostles, rest ultimately on the revealed purpose
and command of Christ. The long delay, however, in undertaking
this Gentile mission, is itseh evidence of the Apostles' uncertainty
as to the means of reahzing their Master's ideal of a universal
Kingdom. They knew as every Jew knew, of the universalism of
the predicted messianic blessings.21 They knew of their Lord's
interest in the other sheep outside the Jewish fold, which He must
bring; that He, when lifted up, would draw all men unto Him. He
had assured them that many would come from the East and from
21 Bertholet, Die Stellung d. Israeliten u. d. Juden zu den Fremden, p. 91 ff. •
303 ff. For a discussion of Christ's attitude to the Gentile world and to its
evangelization, see K. Axenfeld in MissionswissenschafUiche Studien zum G.
Warneck, p. 70 ff.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 79
the West and sit down in the Kingdom of God, Lk. 13, 29. Most
definitely, in all the written Gospels a fixed element is the command
of the risen Christ for a universal mission:— Mt. 28, 19; Lk. 24;
27; our present ending of Mk. 16, 15 f. ; possibly in the lost ending,
if with E. J. Goodspeed, Amer. Jnl. Theology, 9, p. 484 ff., it was
the basis of the Mtw. parallel; also in the intermediate ending as
printed in the Nestle editions of the Greek New Testament;
John 20, 21-23; cp. Acts 1, 8. And in correspondence with this, in
the condensed summaries of the Oral Gospel, the Apostles bear
witness to the universality of his salvation: — Acts 2, 17.21.39;
3, 25 f.; 10, 34.43; 13, 29; cp. 15, 14 ff.; Rom. 10,11-20. Yet for a
decade the mission was not begun.
Their delay in fulfilling the commission to evangehze the Gentile
world, might with probability be ascribed to the fact that they had
received no teaching as to the method of heathen propaganda; or
as to the definite terms and mode of Gentile admission into the
life and worship of believers. They had besides the example of
Christ and His purpose in confining His earthly ministry to Israel;
and also as introductory to the Command to preach to all nations,
the initial direction: 'beginning at Jerusalem,' Lk. 24, 47, which
is recalled in the frequent formula and its equivalents: to the Jew
first and also to the Greeks; — cp. Acts 3, 26; 13, 46; 26, 20; Rom.
1, 16; 2, 9 f. ; Ephes. 1, 12. For the Gospel must be preached to the
Jew first to confirm the promises made to the fathers, Rom. 15, 8,
that thus the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy revealed to
and through Israel. As Achelis has stated,22 "the return of the
Apostles to Jerusalem was the first great missionary act." It
was necessary to consolidate the Gospel with the Old Testament
religion represented in Jerusalem by every element of the national
life and thought both in Palestine and in the Jewish Dispersion;
to win Israel or a saving remnant of Israel as a foundation, as the
steward of the universal Gospel, as a witness to the fulfillment of
the Old Testament promises of salvation in Christ Jesus; and to
realize concretely in Jewish Christendom the ideal sketched both
in Ephesians and I Peter of an Israel of God, an elect race, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, a
spiritual house, a temple of God into which the Gentiles also are
builded together for an habitation of God in the Spirit.
22 Das Christenthum i. d. ersten drei Jahrhunderten, I, p. 2.

80 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
In the providence of God, the historic occasion of the Gospel's
advance towards the Gentiles was the persecution and death of
Stephen. Hitherto Stephen, although presumably a hellenist, and
certainly imbued with a distinct conviction of the universalism of
the Gospel and of the freedom from legalism which it brought, had
himself confined his ministry to Jerusalem alone. They that were
scattered abroad upon his death, included his sympathizers; and
they carried with them his convictions and his free daring spirit.
Philip evangehzed Samaria; others of them preached, though to
Jews only, in Phoenicia, Cyprus and the metropolis of Antioch; and
at length the Cyprians and Cyrenians among them boldly preached
to heathen Greeks at Antioch, not waiting for the authority of the
Jerusalem Church and its Apostles.23 As no details are recorded of
this last mission, we may proceed to the consideration of the means
by which the genesis of faith in Christ was effected by Peter and
Paul; with special interest in the apologetic character of their
propaganda. The foundation upon which this evangelization was laid was the
Jewish mission among the Gentiles during the two preceding
centuries. This had succeeded in making numbers of full converts
to Judaism, proselytes; perhaps more largely from among heathen
women. But more closely related to the Christian mission was
Jewish success in winning a class of ' Godfearers, ' throughout the
Empire. These while holding back from circumcision, were at
tached to the Synagogues after they had been won to belief in
monotheism, to observance of the Jewish moral code and their
Sabbath, and to acceptance of their messianic hope and their
expectation of a coming judgment.24
23 In support of this general view of the tendencies of Stephen's teaching
and its influence in the primitive Church, see the discussion by B. W. Bacon,
Stephen's Speech, its argument and doctrinal relationship, in the Yale Bi
centennial Bibhcal and Semitic Studies, 1901, pp. 213 ff., and cp. his Story of
Paul, pp. 107 f.; K. Pahncke, Stud. u. Krit., 1912, pp. 1 ff.; Harnack, Miss.
and Expansion, I, pp. 49 f. A different view is presented by A. Grieve,
H . D. B., IV, 614 f., and by McGiffert, Apos. Age, pp. 83-89, who maintains
that 'to call Stephen a forerunner of Paul and to think of him as anticipating
in any way Paul's treatment of the Jewish law and his assertion of a free
Gentile Christianity, is to misunderstand him. He neither questioned the
continued validity of the Jewish law nor suggested in any way the call of the
Gentiles.' 21 Schiirer, H. J. P., II, vol. 2, p. 291 ff., especially 311 ff. and references

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 81
Obviously this class was the special seed plot of the Christian
Gentile preaching; and its conversion on a large scale 25 was one of
the principal occasions for Jewish hatred of the Christian mission
and of their incessant attack upon it. As we saw in the previous
chapter, Luke has recorded with unusual detail the means of
gaining the first representative of this class, the centurion Corne
lius. It was substantially the method of apologia to the Jews,
although with obvious differences of emphasis on the several lines
of witness. We may here note further that his conversion is
definitely recorded as being the result of a direct ministry to him
and not as the incidental result of his attendance at the synagogue
preaching of the Christian missionaries. His conversion being due
to a distinct revelation of the divine will, would serve later as an
incentive to propaganda among this class of Godfearers when it
was met in the synagogues of the Dispersion. And specially his
admission to the Church without being circumcised, would in
evitably suggest and vindicate the extension of the Gospel mission
to Gentiles in general; although the method of preaching the Gospel
to them without their previous acquaintance and sympathy with
the religion and hope of Israel, which the Godfearers possessed,
was not yet indicated.
The first direct Gentile propaganda was made by the Cypriote
and Cyrenian refugees from the Jerusalem persecution, Acts 11,
20. In contrast to those who in the previous verse spoke the
word to none save only the Jews, these men in Antioch spoke
unto the Greeks also, "EXX^as, preaching the Lord Jesus.
Knowling follows the reading 'EWrjviaras; 26 and this on the
ground 'that as far as Antioch Jews only had been addressed.
But on the contrary, Stephen and Paul had addressed Hellenists
in their synagogues at Jerusalem, Acts, 6, 8; 9, 29; and they al
ready formed part of the Jerusalem Church, 6, 1. The reading
'Greeks' is moreover supported not only by the contrast with the
on pp. 219 and 304; Von Dobschutz in Hauck's P. R. E., Bd. 16, p. 120 ff.;
Bertholet, op. cit, § 7, p. 328 ff.; F. C. Porter,, H. D. B., IV, p. 134 f.; Harnack,
Miss, and Expans. 1, p. 10 f.; Lake, Earlier Epistles of St Paul, p. 37 f.
26 P. Wendland, Hellen.-Rom. Kultur, 120, holds that Havet (Le Christi-
anisme, IV, 102) is not justified in the exaggerated statement that in Paul's
lifetime no one that was actually a heathen, i. e., who did not already know
Judaism and its Bible, became a Christian.
21 See further reference to the reading, chap, vii, n. 3.

82 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Jews, 11, 19, but also by the scope of Luke's comment in the
succeeding verses, 21-26. They serve to justify this advance of
the Gospel to a distinct new class. It had signal divine blessing,
vs. 21, it attracted, hke the Hellenist Philip's bold mission to
Samaria,27 the attention of the Church in Jerusalem. Barnabas
is sent to Antioch not as a mere assistant of an already successful
work, vs. 21, but to inquire into it; and he gives his joyful approval
of it as a manifestation of the grace of God. His long journey to
Tarsus to seek Paul and engage him in this new work might be
best explained as based on his knowledge, 9, 27, of Christ's words
at Paul's conversion, which as Luke thrice records contained a
commission to preach to the Gentiles: 9, 15; 22, 21; 26, 17. The
whole section thus points to a work distinctly in advance of the
mission to Hebrews, and Hellenists, Samaritans and Godfearers,
which had already the full approval of the Church of Jerusalem.
Yet of the method of leading these Greeks at Antioch to faith,
we have no information. We must therefore attempt to con
struct the method of Gentile evangelization from the New Testa
ment references to the later missionary work of the Apostle to
the Gentiles.
When Paul turned from the synagogue propaganda among
the Jews to preach to Gentiles, he not only incurred the unre
lenting hatred of the unbelieving Jews for his teaching and for
his success in winning from them the Godfearers, but he had to
face the problems of approach to the heathen. There was the
initial problem of opposition to a Gospel preached by Jews, and
which seemed identical with or essentially related to the Jewish
religion. In Philippi Paul and Silas are attacked, because re
garded as Jewish preachers, 16, 20, by a heathen populace obsessed
with the widespread popular charges against the Jewish behefs
and abhorrent practices. According to P. Wendland, p. 109, this
antisemitism dominated the literature concerning Judaism and
the popular feeling from the beginning of the first century b. c
'The worship of God without images, the godlessness revealing
itseh in the contempt for alien religions, the social isolation pro
moted by singular observances, in which is betrayed the hatred
of mankind and the haughty pride which is all the more without
warrant, since the Jews have contributed nothing to culture:
"Lake, op. cit., pp. 19-23.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 83
these perhaps are the essential denunciations with which the hate
of the antisemitists upbraid them; not to speak of the malicious
fictions which this hate has first created.' 28 These slanders are
most fully recorded and refuted in Josephus, Contra Apionem.29
This initial opposition of the heathen, some features of which
had still to be dealt with by the Christian apologists of the second
and third centuries, would be partly met by the association of
Paul with the converted Godfearers. The unbelieving heathen
could see in these converts, Gentiles who had accepted a form
of Jewish religion which was free from circumcision, mosaic legal
ism and many characteristic Jewish observances; and especially
was not identified with the synagogue. But there still remained
the difficulty of bringing the heathen to accept as preparatory
to their acceptance of the Gospel, the fundamental truths which
had already won the godfearers for the synagogue. The need of
this preparation is recognized in the statement of the Epistle to
the Hebrews, 11, 6: Without faith it is impossible to please God;
which is the Septuagint translation and explanation of the He
brew phrase 'to walk with God,' that is used of the moral life of
Enoch. For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and
that He is a rewarder of them that seek Him. So too the Gentile
Clement of Rome recalls in chaps. 35, 36, which we may thus
summarize on the basis of Lightfoot's translation: this is the Way,
686s, in which we found our salvation, even Jesus Christ; when
our intellect became established by means of faith towards God;
when we sought out those things which are well pleasing and
acceptable to Him, and followed the way of truth, casting off
from ourselves all unrighteousness and iniquity, and the rest of
the vice list; and when there fell under our apprehension, the
things preparing for them that patiently await Him: life in im
mortality, splendor in righteousness, truth in boldness, faith in
confidence, temperance in sanctification.
There was then but one way for Paul to effect this praparatio
28 Schurer, H. J. P., II, 31.v, furnishes fuller details and references. The
texts have been collected by Reinach, Textes d'auteurs grecs et romains rel-
atifs au judaisme, 1895.
29 The contents are outlined in Schurer, II, 33. vi. 1; Geffcken, Zwei grie-
chische Apologeten, xxix ff.; M. Friedlander, Ges. d. Jiid. Apologetik, 346 ff.
J. Bergmann, Jud. Apologetik im N. T. Zeitalter, passim; Niese, Histor.
Zeitschrift, N. F. 40, p. 229 ff.

84 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
evangelica: the method of the Jewish propaganda to the heathen.30
It is to be found throughout the remains of Jewish hellenistic
literature, whose home is Alexandria, and which is dominated by
apologetic tendency, Friedlander, p. 22 f. It began with vindica
tion of the Jewish religion against the contempt and misunder
standing that arose when the Jews of the Dispersion spread
abroad through the communities of the North African and iEgean
coasts. As in Christian apologetic Christ is the first apologist,
so in Friedlander's view, p. 27, 'in the Septuagint was the apologist
/car' H-oxyv to arise for Judaism.31 That translation, while it met
the needs of Dispersion Jews unfamiliar with Hebrew, had ac
cording to Philo 32 this additional result: 'that the holiness of
our laws became an object of admiration not only for the Jews,
but also for all other nations. Originally written in Chaldaic
language, these laws were long inaccessible to the rest of men.
Gradually through the practice and observance of them by their
professors, their fame spread through the earth. For since even
what is noble is temporarily dimmed by envy, and yet at the
right time the excellence of its nature is flashed forth, so certain
men devoted themselves to a translation of our laws.' Thus, as
Friedlander comments, it was made when Mosaism was for a
period darkened by the envy of heathen attack at its rapid prog
ress. Therefore its dissemination in a Greek translation would
illuminate the heathen as to its true character; would parry their
attack and render them receptive for the Jewish faith.
The letter of Pseudo-Aristeas is among the oldest monuments
of the Alexandrian Jewish spirit, if Schiirer's dating of it as not
later than about 200 b. c. is accepted.33 It contains the legend
30 Schurer, H. J. P., II, vol. 3, p. 248 ff.; Harnack, Mission and Expansion
of Christianity, I, p. 9 ff.; M. Friedlander, op. cit; K. Axenfeld, Die jtidischc
Propaganda als Vorkuferin und Wegbereiterin der urchristlichen Mission,
pp. 1-80 of Missionswissenschaftliche Studien, zum G. Warneck, 1904. Sup*\
plementary to the histories of Hellenistic Jewish apologetic, Bergmann, op.
cit., presents the line of defense by Palestinian teachers agamst the attacks
by heathen, Jewish freethinkers, Christians and gnostics, extending through
the first four Christian centuries.
31 Axenfeld quotes Gratz, Gesch. d. Jud. 3, 336: The Septuagint is 'the first
Apostle that goes forth into all the world and teaches all nations.'
32 Vita Mosis, II, p. 138, quoted by Friedlander.
33 Bertholet dates it in the first half of the first century, b. c, Fiebig, 96

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 85
of the translation of the Pentateuch, and uses it as a framework
for a panegyric on the Mosaic laws and institutions, in rebuttal
of heathen attacks, and contrasts them with heathen folly and
idolatry.34 The Alexandrian Jew Aristobulus, c. 175 b. c, in his
Exposition of the Mosaic laws, next presented a glorification of
them; and again sought thus to win respect and admiration for
the Jewish religion. Not content to assert the essential agree
ment of Moses and the Greek philosophy, he claimed that the
philosophers and poets of Greece had borrowed much from Moses.
About the middle of the second century b. c, Alexandrian
propaganda appropriated to its use the form of the Sibylline
Oracles. The oldest Jewish portions of the present collection of
them is contained in Book Third. In it we find, along with the
familiar apologetic features in vss. 8-45, a direct attack on the
idolatry and immorality of the heathen world, and in vss. 46-62
the warning of judgment. The date of the Wisdom of Solomon
is unsettled, though the period 100-50 b. c. is frequently as
signed. It is likewise a defense to the heathen of the supreme
revelation of divine wisdom in the religion of Moses; and it too
advances in chaps. 13-15 to an attack upon heathen polytheism,
idolatry and immorality; renewing the polemic of Isaiah 44, 12 ff.
and Jer. 10, 2 ff., cp. Ps. 115, 3 ff., with appropriation, according
to Geffcken, p. xxiii, of the forms of Greek philosophic criticism
of polytheism.35
This combined apology and polemic was the basis of the success
ful hellenistic Jewish propaganda from the synagogues scattered
throughout the Roman Empire, in the two centuries preceding
Paul's mission. Briefly stated, the method of winning over op
ponents to Israel's faith followed a fixed general type: a type so
simple, logical, popular and effective, that it could impress the
° 34 The text has been edited in 1900 both by Wendland, who also gives a
translation in Kautzsch, Apokryphen u. Pseudepigraphen, II, p. 1 ff.; and by
Thackeray in an appendix to Swete's Introd. to the O. T. in Greek, with a
translation in the Jew. Quart. Rev. 15., p. 337 ff. A translation with intro
duction and commentary is also given by H. T. Andrews in R. H. Charles,
Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the O. T., II, pp. 94-122.
36 Siegfried, Hastings B. D., iv, 928, however, regards the author as moved
by a definite polemical aim in opposition to the Book of Ecclesiastes, in which
he finds opinions partly Stoic, partly Epicurean, exactly corresponding to
those opposed in Wisdom, 1, 10—2, 20.

86 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
mind of the common man, awaken his conscience, and stir up his
soul with fear and with longing and hope for salvation. Since
this Jewish propaganda sought to win the whole world to the per
fect wisdom and to the supreme blessings of Israel, it was careful
to put no insuperable obstacle in the way of those whom it sought
to teach the fear of the Lord, cp. Friedlander, op. cit., p. 216 f.
It seemed good to lay upon the heathen approaching Judaism,
no more than these three necessary things: first, behef in Jewish
monotheism, which involved renunciation of idolatry and all
its associations; second, a moral walk in piety towards God, in
fulfillment of brotherly duty to man, and in personal uprightness
and purity, in accordance with the famihar passage in Micah
6, 8, concerning 'what is good': what doth the Lord require of
thee but to do justly, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly
with thy God; third, the behef in a world judgment when God
whl requite to every man according to his deeds, and will admit
the righteous into the messianic kingdom promised in Israel's
Scriptures. The system of Jewish mission teaching is based as regards its
monotheism upon the famihar Old Testament references to the
vanity of heathen idolatry; and it also appeals to and appropriates
the polemic in the later Greek popular phhosophy against poly
theism.36 Its ethical teaching rests on the precepts of the Old
Testament and on various forms of moral catechetical instruction
by Palestinian Jewish teachers, such as Jewish forms of the Two
Ways; and again, it is supported and enforced by appeal to the
Greek unwritten law. Its remaining eschatological feature is
founded alone on the Jewish messianic hope of the prophets and
apocalyptists; and it was the means employed to rouse the dor
mant sense of sin and to stimulate the heathen world's awaking
consciousness of a need of redemption.
This constant type can be traced in all the remains of Alexan
drian propaganda literature from the Jewish sections of the
SibyUines on through the Wisdom of Solomon to Phokylides and
Philo, and with equal definiteness in the writings of the Palestinian
Josephus in the first Christian century. Reuss's summary de-
311 See the summary in P. Wendland, Die Urchristlichen Literaturformen,
p. 325 f., and the references and fuller discussion in Geffcken's commentary
cited earlier, on the Apologies of Aristides and Athenagoras.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 87
scription of the Sibylhne Oracles,37 which is practically adopted
by Schurer, H. J. P., § 33, vii, 1, characterizes the dominant
features of the whole Hellenistic propaganda: 'the aim and task
of the Sibyllines was the advocacy of monotheism and criticism
of idolatry; an energetic denunciation of the corruption of the
pagan world; and finally the proclamation of the last Judgment;
and in connection with all this, the glorification of Israel.' This
moreover has tended to fix the type and range of Christian apologia
to the heathen in the second century and later. It is addressed
to them as praeparatio evangehca leading to the definite defense
of the Gospel in the demonstratio evangehca.
We are therefore prepared to find that it has been adopted by
Paul, as may be concluded from the summary of Christian prop
aganda to the heathen, which he has given in the first two chapters
of Romans. It is based like the Wisdom of Solomon, with which
the Apostle is famihar,38 on the universal revelation of God's ex
istence, eternal power and wisdom in his creation, which calls
for the true worship of adoration of his manifested perfection,
and for the grateful worship of recognition of him as the true
source of aU blessings, 1, 18-21. Upon this section concerning
monotheism follows, as in Jewish apologetic, his denunciation
of the heathen sin of idolatry; of the resulting rejection of duty
to God and man; and of their progressing moral degeneracy, 1,
22-32. For such sins hsted in this section concerning morahty,
there wiU come a day of wrath and righteous judgment upon
every soul that worketh evil, in spite of the universal subjective
revelation of duty written in the heart; while on that day God
wUl give life eternal to those who through patience seek the
supreme moral ideals of glory, honor and immortality, 2, 1-16.39
At this point we are at the parting of the ways between the
37 Quoted by Friedlander from Nouv. Revue de Theologie, vii, 1861, p. 198.
38 Sanday-Headlam, Romans, 52: "At some time in his life St. Paul must
have bestowed upon the Book of Wisdom a considerable amount of study."
The fullest treatment is by E. Grafe, Das Verhdltniss d. paulin. Schriften
zur Sap. Solomonis, in Theol. Abhandlungen f . C. von Weizsacker, 253.
39 This threefold structure, the doctrine of God, the teaching of the Two
Ways, the eschatological teaching, has already been pointed out by A. Seeberg,
Didache d. Jud. u. d. Urchristenheit, p. 43. He compares, in addition to par
allels in Christian hterature, a similar structure in Orac. Sibyll., 3, 8-35; 36-45;
46 ff.

88 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Jewish and Christian mission to the GentUes. Acceptance of
this threefold teaching was naturally followed by the demand,
what shall I do to be saved in the coming judgment by the One
God, on my sin and immorality? The Diaspora Jews who were
not Pharisaic, and who themselves were not able to keep the whole
ceremonial law, owing to theh absence from the Temple and its
sacrifices, welcomed the Godfearers to their synagogues, in the
hope that they would later follow on to full profession by cir
cumcision and proselyte baptism; and meanwhile assuring them
of the divine favor, because of their devotion to Israel's God,
Way of hfe and worship, and to Israel's hope. More definitely,
Peter concluded from the vision to the uncircumcised Cornelius,
that in every nation he that f eareth God and worketh righteous
ness is acceptable to Him, Acts 10, 35. The full Jewish answer
and indeed the answer of the Pharisaic converts to Christianity,
was: it is necessary to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses;
and thus be incorporated into Israel and inherit its covenant
promises of salvation. But in direct opposition to this answer,
Paul who assumes, Rom. 3, 21 ff., that the heathen once con
vinced of their sins, 1, 18-2, 16, will realize their need of salva
tion, offers it to them in the Gospel of God's justification of them
by His grace; by the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, 3, 24 ff.
Such was the Gospel which had won the godfearers and full
proselytes in Pisidian Antioch, Acts 13, 38. Yet when on the
next Sabbath he turned to the Gentiles, he had himself to take
up the task of preparing them for the Gospel of salvation, by the
method of the Jewish missionaries to the heathen.
Irenseus, Contra Haer, IV, 24, sees in the accomplishment of
this task the ground of Paul's assertion that he labored more
abundantly than the Apostles to the Jews; and points to the
fact that to secure a basis for his Christian doctrine, Paul had to
instruct the Gentiles ignorant of the Scriptures, in a certain
foreign erudition: to depart from superstition of idols and to
worship one God the Creator, whose Son was made a man among
men, died, conquered the enemy of the man and reformed the
human race; had to teach them that adultery, fornication, theft,
fraud and whatsoever things were done to our neighbor's prejudice
were evU and detested by God. In addition, they were destructive
to those who engaged in them; while immortality, release from

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 89
suffering and life in the kingdom of heaven was offered to those
who beheve in Christ. The three subjects of the Diaspora mis
sion preaching, which appear in this arrangement of the contents
of Irenaeus' chapter, would be all the more familiar to Paul if
before his conversion he had himself engaged in such Jewish mis
sion work, as Ramsay, Axenfeld, p. 44, and Weinel, St. Paul, 154,
have suggested : If so, it must have been in the Pharisaic method
condemned by Christ in Mtw. 23, 15: woe unto you scribes,
Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make
one proselyte, and when he is become so, ye make him twofold
more the child of hell than yourselves. The difficulty in the ex
position of this statement is not merely the contrast between
'the one proselyte' and the great harvest of Jewish conversions
of which the Greek and Latin authors complain; and not alone
in the probable fact that the Pharisaic party was averse to the
propaganda of the Hellenistic Jews; but chiefly in Christ's ap
parent condemnation of the zeal of the Jews in converting heathen
from their idolatry and immorality, and thus preparing for the
spread of the Gospel throughout the Empire in the first Christian
generation.40 But these difficulties disappear as we recognize
that he is not referring to Jewish ministry in the GentUe world,
cp. Tobit's Prayer, 13, 3.4.6, but to the mission of Palestinian
Pharisees in the Dispersion synagogues 'to bring half-judaized
GentUes individuaUy to complete submission to the whole Law
and espeCiaily<to acceptance of circumcision.' 41
Turning now tothe history in Acts of Paul the Christian Apostle
to the heathen, we find there few detailed records of his method
of converting them. Church after Church is founded among the
Gentiles, but in no case have we an account of the preaching
which won them to belief. Luke's readers, who were the con
verts in those churches, already knew 'what manner of entering
in the Apostle had unto them and how they had turned from idols
to serve a living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven
<0 Axenfeld, p. 42: 'Secular historians, e. g. Mommsen and Ed. Meyer have
employed this word of the Lord as reliable historical report; Christian the
ologians have raised doubts concerning it or have weakened it; Jewish scholars
have from ancient times vehemently contested it.'
11 Axenfeld, p. 43, who illustrates the two methods of Jewish propaganda
from the narrative of Prince Izates' conversion in Josephus, Antt. xx, 2.

90 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who dehvereth us from
the wrath to come. ' I Thess. 1, 9 f . To them Luke in Acts has
given a summary of the Oral Gospel to the Jews, with its lines
of witness that Jesus is Christ and Lord; but in only three pas
sages has he outlined the preparatory preaching upon which this
defense and appeal of the Gospel was based: in the addresses at
Lystra and Athens, and in the reference to Paul's conference with
Felix; and in all three cases the preaching was unsuccessful. The
occasion of its record in Lystra seems to have been incidental
to his narrative of the singular experience of Paul being first
mistaken to be a God, and then stoned; in Caesarea, incidental
to the narrative of his relations with the procurator; but in the
address at Athens, he seems to have selected the striking sur
roundings of the intellectual and artistic capital of the Gentile
world as the fitting scene to record the outlines of the Apostle's
general method of approach to the thought and moral life of
heathenism. In addition, however, to these three accounts in
Acts, the Pauhne epistles abound in references to the heathens'
acceptance of the Gospel, from which can be recognized the es
sential features of its initial presentation to them.
The first record of Paul's preaching to Gentiles is his address
to Sergius Paulus, Acts 13, 7 ff. Since we have no report of it,
though as in the case of Felix, 24, 24, the Proconsul ' sought to
hear the word of God,' no decision can be reached as to its con
tents. It did not, however, effect his conversion. His 'behef,'
vs. 12, was not faith in Christ, since no reference is made to his
baptism; but was belief in the Didache of the Lord, as preached
by Paul in the power of the Spirit.42
42 Wendt on the contrary understands Luke to assert his conversion.
Knowling though undefinite is favorable, as is also V. Bartlett. Rackham
agrees with the majority of critics in not regarding Sergius as a convert. The
five passages in Acts usually quoted to show that 'beheved ' implies baptism,
are imbedded in contexts which point to faith as full acceptance of the Gospel.
It may also be noted that Elymas' opposition is not the usual outspoken
blasphemy of orthodox Jews against Paul's arguments for the messiahship
of Jesus, Acts 13, 45; 18, 6, but is full of 'wile and cunning trickery; is enmity
to all righteousness and is a perversion of the right ways of the Lord, i. e., is
not attack on the specific Christian redemptive facts and doctrines. Such
an unusual description may possibly refer to an opposition to Paul's intro
ductory exposition of the Jewish apologetic, which astonished Sergius as later
it terrified Felix. Since the false prophet is described in terms very similar

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 91
At Lystra the miracle of the healing of the lame man was con
ditioned by his faith that the Apostles were ministrants of the
power of the One God in the Christ whom4hey preached, 14, 9.7.
The populace, without that faith, see in the miracle a proof of their
superstitions. It was viewed as a confirmation of theh polytheism
and led to a proposal of idolatrous worship. Hence the preaching
here is directed to that one heathen error; using the famihar
Jewish propaganda arguments against heathen gods, which are
vanities, and in favor of behef in the one living God whose exist
ence, is witnessed in the universe He created, and who therefore
claims theh sole worship; and whose beneficent providence as
ruler of nature has blessed their labors and supported their hfe,
and therefore calls for their grateful obedience. The extremely
condensed aUusion to the fact, vs. 16, that God had hitherto per
mitted the nations to walk in theh own ways, might suggest in
connection with Acts 17, 30 and Rom. 3, 25.26, a reference to the
heathen sins of idolatry and immorality; but that this and the
remaining topics of Jewish and Christian preaching were not
developed, is accounted for by the consideration that the emer
gency demanded emphasis on the subject of monotheism. And
so httle impression did it produce that even at its close, he could
scarcely restrain them from going on with the sacrifices. There
would be slight prospect of the attention of a crowd in such a
mood, to further topics of the mission preaching.
In PhUippi whUe the heathen mob can recognize Paul and
Silas as Jewish missionaries preaching the usual apologetic and
polemic, 16, 20 f., we can only conjecturaUy recognize in Luke's
narrative a few more or less probable indications of its range of
contents. The slave girl has learned from their preaching that
they are servants of debs vftaros, the one supreme God, whose
name was common to Jew and Greek. Her owners may possibly
be distorting theh preaching of the moral rules of the Jewish
catechesis by suggesting that it includes Jewish customs, e. g.,
circumcision and food regulations, contrary to Roman use. More
clearly their slave's reference to the 'way of salvation' and the
jailer's cry 'what shall I do to be saved,' points to the Jewish
to those apphed to the Jewish false teachers in the Epistles, his opposition
to 'the Didache of the Lord' could be based on the same false philosophy
as underlay their perversion of it.

92 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
preaching of a world judgment and to the Christian preaching
of salvation in that day through Christ the Redeemer and Judge.
It was, however, only* because the jailer accepted the warning
of a judgment for human sin, by the One God, that Paul could
proceed to preach to him: Beheve on the Lord Jesus and thou
shalt be saved.
It is at Athens appropriately that in the Areopagus address
we have the most definite indications of the method, range and
aim of the preparatory preaching, and an unusually full outline
of the first of its topics.43 Knowling's remark, Acts, p. 379, that
'the speech contains so httle that is distinctively Christian' is
a needed reminder that the address is not, as is often assumed, a
complete model of the Apostle's missionary preaching. Harnack,
Miss, and Expans., I, 382 f., in connection with the carefully
qualified statement, 'in that model of a mission address to edu
cated people which is preserved in chap. 17, the Pauhne manner
of missionary preaching is perfectly distinct, in spite of what
seems to be one vital difference,' gives what is undoubtedly the
outline of the missionary preaching. But in order to construct
that outhne from this address, he has to insert into it the dis
tinctively Christian features; although Luke records the refusal
to hsten further, upon hearing the assertion of the resurrection of
Jesus, which would have introduced the specifically Christian
*' The most recent argument in favor of the redaction theory of the authorship
of Acts, is urged by Edward Norden, Agnostos Theos, 1913. He assigns the
composition of the Athens address to a writer using the traditions of the hfe
of Apollonius of Tyana recorded by his follower Damis the Assyrian in the
beginning of the second century, and utilized by Philostratus in his life of
Apollonius, written c. 237 A. D. This theory has been accepted by Wendt
and Preuschen in the prefaces to their commentaries on Acts, and by Reit
zenstein, N. Jahrb. f. Klass. Alterlhum, 1913, p. 393. It is rejected by Har
nack, Texte und Unters, 1913, Bd. 39, p. 1 ff., both because of the positive
arguments for Lukan authorship based on language, style and contents; and
also because no proof can be produced from the statements of Philostratus
to show that the reference to altars of the unknown gods was taken
from Damis; that Apollonius was ever concerned with such Athenian altars;
that he ever made an address starting from a reference to an altar in
scription or to altars of unknown gods. The theory has also been re
jected by Burkitt, Jnl. Theolog. Studies, 1914, p. 455, by Lagrange, Revue
Biblique, July, 1914, and by Birt, Rhein. Mus. f. Pkdog., 1914, Bd. 69,
p342.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 93
message.44 This had indeed aheady been dehvered in Athens,
17, 17 f., not only to Jews and godfearers in the synagogue, but
also to GentUes in the Agora. But as throughout Acts, Luke has
not here recorded the contents of this Gospel preaching to the
heathen, which was to realize the aims set before the Apostle to
the Gentiles at his conversion, Acts 26, 18-20. Harnack while
emphasizing that this is true of Acts apart from the address at
Athens,45 insists, however, that Luke intends this address to be
his report of Paul's Gentile preaching. This claim rests upon his
assumption that such a report was absolutely necessary in view
of the literary structure of Acts, which he thinks caUs for an ad
dress to Jews, ch. 13, to heathen, ch. 17, and to assembled Chris
tians, ch. 20; and on the further assumption that the aim of Acts,
since it is a continuation of the Gospel, must be to report ' con
cerning all things which the Apostles began to do and to teach.'
A report of the GentUe preaching would obviously be necessary
on this last assumption. But it must be rejected not only as being
a misconception of the relation of the Gospel and Acts, but as
being inconsistent, especially with regard to Apostohc teaching,
with the actual character and contents of Acts. The other as
sumption connected with the literary structure, also calls for
such modifications as would counteract its support of Harnack's
a priori theory of the absolute necessity of a distinct report of
Gospel preaching to the Gentiles.
Luke's interest, on the other hand, is in this chapter, in Paul's
contact with heathen philosophers, who by wisdom knew not God;
and who though asking to know what this new teaching is and
44 J. Weiss, Urchristm, p. 184: 'The Areopagus address however has surely
delineated only one side of the preaching of Paul, when it presents him as
employing the philosophical methods of the hellenistic enlightenment and
appealing to the reason of the hearers. And it is, as it seems to me, a skillful
feature of the recital that the attention and assent of the hearers is immediately
at an end, when he begins to announce the specific content of the Gospel;
the approaching world-judgment and the risen Christ.'
46 Texte u. Unters, Bd. 39, p. 2: 'If Acts 17, 21 ff. be removed, we ascertain
from the whole Book only quite insufficiently, what kind of a teaching Paul
brought to the Gentiles. The aim of the Book to report 7repi Travrwv
2>v rjpj-avro ol airbaroXoi iroieiv re Kai bibao-Keiv, would remain un
realized as concerns the chief Apostle, in regard to the most important
point, that of teaching.'

94 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
means, yet like doubting Pilate asking 'what is truth,' would not
stay to hsten to the foolishness of the preaching of the cross and
resurrection, as reveahng the power and wisdom of God. The
method of approach to them is, as in aU Paul's preaching to Gentiles,
cp. Acts 19, 37, respectful and conciliatory throughout. At the
outset they are addressed as 'exceedingly Godfearing.' The
structure of the address reveals that it is based on the usual type of
Jewish and Christian propaganda preaching: monotheism, vss.
23-29; the Way of righteousness and of sin, calling for repentance,
vs. 30; and the messianic world-judgment, vs. 31. This disparity
in the length of the record of the discussion of the three subjects,
points to the special interest in the true doctrine of God as the
basis of approach to all the rest of his Gospel preaching, which is
essentially related to the existence, moral rule and eternal redeem
ing purpose of a personal God.46 The occasion of the address,
moreover, naturally led to this emphasis on the subject of mono
theism: the preacher's spirit had been provoked within him, as he
beheld the city full of idols; and his hearers' interest in him had
been evoked by his seeming to be a setter forth of strange
gods. The mode of approach to them in declaring unto them his
doctrine of God, is his appropriation of the polemic common to the
later Greek philosophy and Jewish propaganda, against polythe
ism and idolatry; and in advance upon this his reference to the
doctrine of Agnostos theos, cp. Norden, 55-124, both to present his
Jewish and Christian monotheism as a divine self-revelation, and
also the heathen ignorance shown in their worship and sin, ayvoia,
and calling for repentance. The parallels in Jewish and Christian
literature and in Greek philosophy, especially in Stoicism, are
noted in the commentaries from Wettstein's collections, in Geff
cken's work already cited and most fully in Norden, op. cit., p.
13 ff. Harnack, op. cit., p. 23, however, enters a caveat against'
48 Lightfoot, Philippians, 317. The fundamental and invincible error of
Stoic philosophy was its theological creed; its theology was, as dogmatically
expounded by its ablest teachers, nothing better than a pantheistic material
ism. And with the behef in a Personal Being, the sense of sin also will stand
or fall, p. 319. It was a matter of indifference to the Stoic whether he doubted
or beheved or denied the immortality of man; for the doctrine was wholly
external to his creed, and nothing could be gained or lost by the decision,
p. 322 f. •

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 95
exploiting these parallels in the interest of the theory of a second
century redactor who here directly borrows his material from the
literature of Jewish polemic.47
In connection with these parallels it is also to be recalled that in
the original full discourse, of which we have only a summary of
extreme brevity, there must have been developments of the
essential differences between Christian and Stoic theology, such as
are noted in the passages that have been quoted from Lightfoot.
Suggestions of the lines of such development are offered in the
application of the Apostle's declaration of God to sin and world-
judgment in vss. 30.31. While the Stoic doctrine of God makes
temple worship and idolatry merely unreasonable, Paul's doctrine
of God the creator has made it a sinful ignorance which caUs for
repentance, vs. 30. And the whole trend of the statements, vs.
26 ff., concerning divine providence, the unity of mankind under
one moral government and in order to realize the eternal purpose
of communion with God, must have been developed along supple
mentary lines in definite contrasts to Stoic irpbvoia, so Knowling
and Blass, in loco, and self-sufficiency 'which stood in no need of
atonement and feared no judgment to come, ' Knowling; since it
led up, vs. 31, to the Apostle's warning of a day of judgment in
righteousness. On this basis he is prepared to offer to them his Gospel: it will be
the message of salvation in this judgment; and a present gift of the
Spirit wiU be the pledge of that future consummation of salvation.
The Apostle's transition from Jewish to definite Christian apologia
is in the declaration that the Judge is the Man proved so divinely
appointed by his resurrection from the dead. At this point he
would be in a position here in Athens as in all Gentile evangeliza
tion to present the constant type of Christian apologia, already
recorded by Luke as addressed to Jewish hearers with the neces
sary differences of emphasis on special features of the witness;
cp. Acts 26, 20. And following this witness that Jesus is Christ and
Lord, would be given the Paraklesis not to neglect so great salva-
47 ' In view of the force and compactness of the address, one must also be very
skeptical towards the hypothesis of direct borrowings of particular statements
in it, from determinate sources. He who could compose this address did not
delve among mosaic-scraps, but drew out of an abundance and out of long
familiarity with all the thoughts which he has here set forth.'

96 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
tion, but to accept it with faith and repentance to be professed in
baptism after full instruction in the preparatory catechesis.
But we know the Athenian mockery of the Resurrection and
Paul's conviction of the uselessness of further attempts at evan
gelization of a salvation in a general resurrection, so long as this
was to them not only incredible but absurd.
A final instance of the ineffectiveness of the Gospel apologia in
winning a heathen who does not accept the preparatory Jewish
apologetic, is Paul's experience with Felix, Acts 24.24 ff . J. Weiss,
Urchrstm., p. 60, finds in vs. 25 a reason for believing that Acts was
not written until c. 100 a. d. He claims that an author who can
define the content of Paul's preaching 'concerning the faith in
Christ Jesus,' vs. 24, to be a reasoning concerning righteousness
and self-control and the judgment to come, can have little connec
tion with primitive Christianity, and betrays that he belongs to
the class of second Christian century apologists. It would, however,
be truer in this verse, to find its source in the apologists of the
second pre-Christian century.
But apart from the consideration that Acts elsewhere contains
numerous adequate summaries of the essential Gospel preaching
of the Apostle, this reasoning with Felix is not intended as a de
scription of Paul's complete presentation of the Gospel. Felix
was a heathen. Having married the Jewess Drusilla, though
refusing unlike her first husband Azizus, King of Emesa, to be
circumcised, he was doubtless familiar with the Jewish propaganda
teachings; and even knew accurately ra trepl rijs 'Odov, vs. 22.
We may further observe that in his previous pubhc defense before
Felix, Paul had described his Christian faith in the only category
the heathen procurator could understand: that of its relation to
the three fundamental topics of Jewish propaganda. The Chris
tian Way, vs. 14, which the Jew proscribes as a ' heresy, ' i. e. a
teaching distinct from the Jewish religion, is in fact true Judaism.
For in accordance with this Christian Way, first he worships
Israel's God and believes fully in the Old Testament revelation.
Next he shares Israel's hope of a general resurrection, with its
accompanying awards in a judgment. Finally in view of that
judgment, he exercises himself to have a conscience void of offense,
i. e., of sins against God and man, the special topic of the Two
Ways. Therefore the real difference between him and the Jews is

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 97
concerning the means of salvation in the general resurrection for
judgment. Paul stands before Felix because of his preaching of
Christ's resurrection as Festus too learns later, and as Agrippa
learns in full detail; and definitely for preaching that because He is
risen, He is the sole source of salvation for Jew and heathen, 26, 18.
In the private conference with this heathen concerning the faith
in Christ Jesus, Paul again begins with the fundamental topics of
the religion of Israel. The topic concerning monotheism that was
developed at Lystra and at Athens is here omitted. And therefore
Felix having a Jewish wife who is expressly mentioned as being
present, and having also a position which would imply familiarity
with contemporary Graeco-Roman philosophic culture, may not
unreasonably be presumed to be a nominal monotheist. As Paul
on Mars' Hill had proceeded from monotheism to repentance for
sin, so Felix as preparatory to an understanding of redemption by
faith in Christ, must be brought to a penitent conviction of his
need of righteousness and self-control demanded in the Two Ways.
And likewise as at Athens the Apostle advanced to the day ap
pointed in which God will judge the world in righteousness, so here
he brings to Felix the terrifying warning of the judgment to come.
Here too as at Athens he is dismissed at this point of transition to
the defense and confirmation of the faith in Christ. The Gospel
of salvation from judgment by this faith in Jesus, had therefore
not obtained a hearing either in Caesarea's Palace or on the Hill
of Mars.48
48 A similar question has been raised concerning the description of the
gospel in Rev. 14, 6 f. Moffatt remarks that the substance of its eternal
gospel is not much of a gospel and the prophet does not look for much result,
if any. So Simcox: it is pure natural theism; and Swete: it seems to be the
reverse of a gospel. Swete's further comments: that cd&viov evayyeKiov
without the article is not 'The everlasting Gospel,' the Gospel as a whole,
similarly Bousset, but rather a Gospel which is a particular aspect of it; that
it is an appeal to the conscience of untaught heathendom, cp. its universal
destination in 6b, incapable of comprehending any other; that the basis of
the appeal is pure theism; that it sums up the claim of the Creator as such
upon the allegiance of mankind, and the appeal to Nature can go no further;
that like the address at Lystra it contains no reference to the Christian hope,
and no ' beheve in the Gospel,' Mk. 1, 14, tempers the sternness of the cry;
are all suggestions that the final warning to the heathen world by the angel
of judgment, is not merely, with Swete and Bousset, 'the Gospel of the
Parousia and the consummation which the Parousia will bring,' but is framed

98 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
The fact then remains that nowhere in Acts has Luke recorded
the details of the presentation of the Gospel to the GentUes. It is
assumed throughout the narrative of the mission work of Paul,
to be the same message as is given to Jews in the earher chapters.
The three addresses at Lystra, Athens and Caesarea are given in
compressed summary as a record of the Apostle's preparation of
his Gentile hearers for his Gospel of the common salvation. And
these indications of his method of preparing for the presentation of
the Gospel correspond to and are confirmed by the frequent
allusions in the Epistles to former heathen, concerning the initial
preaching among them. Whether we consider Paul's summary of
his introductory propaganda preaching, or his descriptions of the
state of the heathen before and after their conversion, we find that
his statements are uniformly framed upon the basis of the pre
paratory apologia concerning idolatry, the resulting immorality
and impending judgment upon it, which would serve to awaken in
the heathen a conviction of sin and a hunger for the salvation
offered to them in the succeeding witness and call of the Gospel.
We have already recognized this method of approach in Rom. 1,
18 ff. ; and may here add that Paul had aheady given in II Thess.
2, 10-12, the same view of heathenism as receiving not the love of
the truth and dehvered, cp. Rom. 1, 28, to a working of error to be
lieve the he, 'opposed to the truth of the Gospel ' ; as having pleasure
in unrighteousness, cp. Rom. 1, 32; and as awaiting Judgment. As
the counterpart, the heathen converts of Thessalonica, at Paul's
'entering in unto them,' turned to God from idols, in order to
serve the living and true God and to await his Son from heaven,
Jesus the deliverer from the wrath to come, 1 Thess. 1, 9 f. In
summing up the previous condition of the Gentile readers of his
upon the whole contents of the preaching introductory to the Gospel of sal
vation at that Parousia. And on comparing the contents of his gospel with
Paul's summary of his preaching to heathen in Rom. 1, 18 ff., we find the
declaration to God as creator in Rev. 14, 7, developed in Rom. 1, 19 f.- the
call to fear God, to give him glory, to worship him, closely paralleled even in
wording in vss. 21-25; the need of repentance in view of the hour of his judg
ment, summarizing Rom. 1, 26-2, 16. And the description of the angehc
warning to the heathen of the hour of judgment and of their need of repent
ance and of conversion to God, as aliiviov evayyihiov, is repeated in Paul's
description 2, 16 of the divine judgment as being 'according to my Gospel
by Jesus Christ.'

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 99
encyclical to the Ephesians, he uses the same three fold description
of it, which would furnish the occasion for the three fold intro
ductory apologia of the mission preaching. For in Eph. 4, 17 ff.,
the readers were formerly alienated from the life of God, and this
as in Rom. 1, 18 ff . and in Acts 17, on account of their ayvoia due to
the vanity of their vovs, the darkening of their Siavoia and the
hardening of their napS'ia; consequently in the sphere of morals
they had given themselves over to lasciviousness to work all un
cleanness with greediness, vs. 19; whence cometh the wrath of
God, 5, 6 and pll. Col. 3, 6. The same description underlies the
brief parallel summary in Col. 1, 21; and it reappears in I Pet. 4,
3-5, addressed to Gentile converts who formerly walked, 1, 14,
in their ayvoia, in idolatries contrary to the eternal principles of
right, godless, adtpirot,; in lasciviousness and other vices; for
which sins the Gentiles will give account to Him who is ready to
judge quick and dead.
And when, further, the Apostle so frequently recalls his converts '
response to his initial preaching and to his own zeal for the develop
ment of their new life, it is always in terms directly corresponding
to the three fundamental subjects of his original approach to them.
The converts, Eph. 4, 22, have been renewed in the spirit of their
mind from their previous alienation from God in ayvoia; in con
trast to their former immorality, they have put on the new man
created in righteous and holiness of truth; are no longer facing the
wrath of God, 5, 6, but have inheritance in the kingdom of Christ
and God, vs. 5. He prays for the growth of the Colossians in
epignosis of God and of his will; for their worthy moral walk; for
their strengthening in patient endurance, inspired by grateful joy
for admission to the inheritance of the saints in light, 1, 9 ff. In
his latest summaries of the Gospel, Titus 2, 11 ff. and 3, 3 ff., the
basis is again the Epiphany of the grace, kindness and love of God
our Saviour towards man, training us to renounce ungodliness and
worldly lusts, and to hve soberly, righteously and godly; and
inspiring us to such life by the blessed hope and appearing of the
glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.
The fact that these sections in Titus are paralleled and summed
up in the opening verse as faith, godliness and hope; that the three
fold structure in Col. 1, 9 ff. is summed up in 1, 4 as faith, love and
hope; that the description, Eph. 4, 17 ff., is related to faith, love and

100 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
hope in 1, 15.18; and, to add but one more instance, that the
threefold characterization of the Thessalonians' conversion, 1,
9.10, has already been given in 1, 3 as a life of faith, love and hope,
strongly points to the origin of this triad as related to the response
of faith by the heathen converts in the revelation of God in
Christ, to their obedience to the caU to a new moral life of love
fulfilling aU law, and to their appropriation by hope of the con
summated salvation at the coming of Christ in glory. But they
are obviously distinctively Christian terms related to the definite
Gospel preaching and instruction and to professions at baptism.
This combined relation to the preparatory apologia and to the
perfected Christian life, cp. I Cor. 13, 13, leads us therefore to
recognize, as we can only hope to do from the allusions to evan
gelization in the Epistles, that the propaganda apologetic was not
a bare repetition of Jewish themes, but that it was throughout
vivified with the Christian revelation, moral ideals and inspiring
and invigorating hope. We have already observed that even the
compressed outline of the Areopagus address pointed to a definite
Christian development of its topics. In the general Gentile mis
sion preaching, the ignorance concerning the true God would
certainly call for the presentation of the 'light of the knowledge of
the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, who is the image of
God, ' II Cor. 4, 4-8. And this would involve some portraiture of
the life, message and redeeming work of the Christ, tending
of itself to effect the realization of his own revelations of the
divine purpose: 'It may be they will reverence my Son,' Mk. 12,
6; Lk. 20, 13. Surely too the Jewish Didache of the Two Ways
of hfe and death, light and darkness, with its vice lists and
precepts of virtues, needed and received from the preaching of
Christ as the moral ideal and from his own perfect fulfillment of
the divine will and law, the Christian revelation that love is the
fulfillment of all law; and more, the revelation of the moral
dynamic in the love of Christ constraining us to walk in love even
as he loved us and gave himseh up for us, Eph. 5, 2. And the
reiteration of the Jewish proclamation of divine judgment had
not only to be enforced by awaking personal conviction of sinful
ness, but also to be supplemented by the Gospel of redemption
by Christ, himself the Judge, with its hope of inheritance in the
kingdom of his glory. A hope assured by the promise of the

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 101
present gift of his Spirit as a pledge and earnest of the perfected
salvation. The GentUes' response of faith to this caU to salvation, would
necessarily demand most certain proofs of the vahdity of the
apostohc witness to Jesus as Christ and Lord in whom is the
absolute revelation of God and the sole redemption of humanity.
All objections to that witness would be urged among the Gentiles
by Jews who spoke evil of that Way; by phUosophers who mocked
at the Cross and Resurrection; by adherents of the mystery re
hgions, who themselves offered revelation and redemption in
their cults. Heathen converts were, besides, called upon to make
in some ways greater sacrifices than the Jews. The latter could
continue to share in the synagogue and Temple services; while
the GentUe Christians would be called upon to abandon the heathen
temple worship, although it was intertwined with theh famUy
life, commercial relations and civic fellowship. In view of such
objections and sacrifices, and of the revolution which the Christian
faith demanded of his whole world-view, of his moral conscious
ness, habits and motives: literally to put off the whole old man
and fixed character, we realize how complete and compelling must
have been the defense of the Gospel call and witness that proved
successful in effecting such a transformation. The preaching
that evoked this new hfe of faith could not have been in mere
persuasive words of wisdom but only in demonstration of the
Spirit and in power.
In the absence in the New Testament of any reiteration of this
'demonstration of the Spirit' to the GentUe readers who had
been converted by it, we can only theorize as to the details of the
method. The several lines of witness to the Gospel would with
out question not only receive differing emphases, but would also
necessarily be presented in an order different from that foUowed
in the apologia dehvered in the synagogue. There, as we could
expect and as is recorded, the approach was from the Old Testa
ment messianic hope to its fulfillment in Jesus; the obstacle of
the cross being removed both by means of the witness of prophecy
and by the Gospel of the resurrection resting not only on the
witness of the Old Testament and on the Apostles' testimony,
but also on the witness of their personal experience of the gift of
the Spirit from the risen Christ.

102 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
But among the Gentiles, as we should anticipate and as Paul
recaUs in the four Epistles to churches he himself had founded,
this witness of the personal spiritual experience of the preachers
is in the forefront. The evangehsts of Thessalonica describe their
preaching there as having been not in word only but also in power
and in the Holy Spirit and in much full assurance, ifK-qpoipopia,
I Thess. 1, 5. It is, of course, not here meant that they began
with an assertion of their spiritual gifts, but that their message
was throughout a manifestation of the Spirit in theh lives and
ministry. It was not 'the threshed out arguments of the age of
the Greek enhghtenment that could convert their hearers. So
important as it was that an intellectual framework for the proof
of monotheism was already provided, yet the impelling and de
termining force must have been supphed by convinced personali
ties.' J. Weiss, Urchristm., p. 184 f. In the Apostles' declaration
of the revelation of the true and hving God in the person and
work of Jesus Christ, it was theh own full assurance of its cer
tainty, theh evident personal devotion to its truth, theh own
clear consciousness of direct communion with the divine life,
that offered a most impressive demonstration of the Gospel
they preached.49 Theh own possession of the mind and Spirit
of the Christ, manifest in their walk in love, cp. I Thess. 2, 10,
and in their own realization of the ideals of piety revealed both
in the Old Testament and in the teachings and hfe of their Master,
was likewise a living demonstration of the incomparable moral
worth and transforming power of their Gospel. And the call to
accept Christ's salvation and to enter into the new hfe of the
Spirit came from them with the persuasiveness and assurance
of their own peace, union with God and exulting hope of glory.
This manifestation of the Spirit and of power in their personal
experience accompanied and confirmed each of the essential
forms of their witness; and it was itself the definite confirmation
of their witness to the Gospel of Christ risen as the source of their
new life of the Spirit's indwelling and of their gifts of spiritual
power. Yet even this equipment of the preachers with the Spirit, cp.
Mtw. 10, 19 f.; Acts 1, 8, was not of itself sufficient to effect theh
hearers' conviction. Not only might the Tongues of Pentecost
49 Cp. Phillips Brooks, Lectures on Preaching, Truth and personahty, p. 5 ff.

THE CALL TO FAITH IN THE GOSPEL 103
and of the Corinthian Church, I Cor. 14, 22, produce merely
the impression of intoxication or madness, but even the exalted
apologias of Paul in the great hours on the Areopagus and in
the palace of Caesarea evoked only the similar mocking, 5ia —
xXeudfeip of Athenian philosophers and the similar charge of
'madness' by the Roman Procurator, Acts 26, 24. There was
therefore needed in addition to the demonstration of the Spirit
in the witness of the preachers, an accompanying ministry of the
Spirit in the personahty of the hearers, in order that they might
accept the word of the message not as 'the word of men but as
it is in truth the word of God which is made operative in them
that beheve.' I Thess. 2, 13. The first result of this operation of
the Spirit is expressed in the description, Acts 2, 36, of the hearers
of Peter's apologia being 'pricked at the heart.' It is not yet
definitely conversion, repentance and certitude of faith, as is
evident both in their inquiry 'what shall we do' and in the con
tents of the reply to it; cp. also Acts 16, 30 ff. It is, however, a
spirituaUy effected recognition of the truth of the witness; an
opening of the eyes, 26, 18, and of the heart 'to attend' to the
things spoken, 16, 14; 8, 6. Paul once recalls, I Cor. 14, 23 ff ., the
vivid picture of a typical instance of this initial response to the
Spirit's ministry in the prophets of Corinth:, the hearer 'is con
victed by all, he is judged by all, the secrets of his heart are made
manifest; and so he will faU down on his face and worship God,
declaring that God is among you indeed.'
The apologia of the Gospel to Jew and Gentile has thus by the
ministry of the Spirit in evangelist and hearer effected its definite
purpose. It is not only to teach and to arouse conviction, but is
to be the means to prepare the way for the supernatural action of
God, J. Weiss, op. cit., p. 187. That divine activity begun in the
mission preaching and issuing at length in full assurance of faith ,
wiU next be exercised in connection with the ministry of catechesis,
in preparation of the converts for their profession of faith in
baptism.

CHAPTER V
ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL AND STANDING STEADFAST IN THE FAITH
1. THE PRIMITIVE CATECHESIS
Indications of an instruction preparatory to baptism, are of
frequent occurrence in the New Testament; yet its prevalence
is ordinarily recognized in works on primitive Christianity only
by undeveloped allusions to it, as by Weizsacker, Apos. Age, II,
262.303 f. and V. Bartlet, Apos. Age, 354 ff. And in special
treatises its character and possible contents have not, until re
cently, been investigated in detail. The interest of scholars has
ordinarily been devoted rather to the catechesis of the early
Church, beginning with the direct references to it near the close
of the second century, and in the developed institution of the
catechumenate. In some cases, moreover, catechesis in the New
Testament has been confused with instruction of any character.
Thus G. Bareille, in Diet, de Theologie Catholique, s. v. Cat6chese,
offers St. Peter's Pentecost sermon and especially the portion of
it which is apologia, as the first record of New Testament cate
chesis; and further includes the second century Apologies as
examples of catechesis.
Its distinct character has, however, been briefly indicated by
Holtzmann in his essay, Die Katechese der alten Kirche,1 which
is concerned principally with the later period. But in accordance
with this brief summary of the New Testament data, he recognizes,
p. 65, that catechesis would be just as old as Christianity itself.
The children begotten through the preaching of the Gospel, and
the babes in Christ must be fed with milk, I Cor. 3, 16; Hbws. 5,
13. There is further the distinction between the initial elementary
teaching and the instruction of the more advanced Christians,
Hbws. 5, 22-6, 2; and also between the catechists and catechumens
of the relatively young churches of Galatia, Gal. 6, 6, and the
teaching functions in the churches of the Pastoral Epistles, with
a larger development. While to Holtzmann, p. 63 f ., Mtw. 28, 19,
1 Theolog. Abhandlungen C. von Weizsacker gewidmet, 1892, p. 59 ff.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 105
"is not a word of the Lord in strict historical sense, yet in it is
made known the fact that Christian baptism appeared from the
first as organically connected with an instruction which qualified
for its reception." In this passage he finds the subject of in-
instruction to be, not the Trinity, but "the complex or Christian
moral commands," which in the mind of the First Evangelist
refers above all to the new law of the Sermon on the Mount. In
Acts 8, 35; 18, 26, he finds a summary instruction preceding
baptism, in reference to the chief points of faith.
The publication of the Didache in 1883, and its very general
assignment to a date in the early second century, inevitably
awakened direct interest in the catechetical instruction of the
Apostolic Age. Notably an attempt has been made by Alfred
Seeberg to reconstruct its form and some of its contents, in a
series of monographs.2 Our present interest in the fact of such
definite preparatory instruction, however it may be recon
structed, is its relation both to the defense of the faith awakened
in the propaganda preaching and also to the apologetic element
in the Epistles and Gospels.
That there was need for it may be concluded from the fact
that the propaganda preaching, although it was fuller and more
developed than the brief summaries of our records, could not meet
with sufficient definiteness the various intellectual and spiritual
needs of the individual hearers in the crowds to which it was or
dinarily addressed. The Church too would need to be assured
of the convert's full understanding of his baptismal profession of
penitence and faith, and of his preparation to enter into the hfe,
worship and work of the Christian Brotherhood. Such under
standing and preparation involves the necessity of the Church's
provision of the convert with the appropriate definite initial in
struction. These anticipations of the occasion and need of teach
ing preparatory to baptism are confirmed by the facts of the
early converts' developed faith and high plane of Christian knowl
edge and morality, which are recognizable in the Acts and Epistles.
Their stage of Christian life and thought postulates a completer
and more definite instruction than the initial gospel preaching.
2 Der Katechismus der Urchristenheit, 1903; Das Evangelium Christi, 1905;
Die beiden Wegen und das Aposteldekret, 1906; Die Didache des Judenthums
und der Urchristenheit, 1908.

106 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
No doubt such instruction was constantly given in the Church
services, where both the words of the Lord Jesus, cp. Acts 20, 35;
II Peter 3, 2, and also the ways which are in Christ Jesus, I Cor. 4,
17, were called to remembrance and made the basis for doctrinal
instruction and prophetic exhortation. But the New Testament
data point in addition to the earlier instruction preparing the
convert for baptism and for fellowship in this church worship.
We should also expect such preparation in the Apostolic Age
from the references to it in the second century. The Didache
enjoins at 7, 1: "Baptize, having first recited all these things,"
i. e., Chapters 1 to 6 containing the Two Ways. Justin reports
in I Apology 61: Those to be admitted to baptism are 'as many
as are persuaded and believe to be true, the things taught and
said by us, and who pledge themselves to be able to five in ac
cordance with them." 3 In Chapter 65 the issue of this instruction
is worthy moral conduct and guardianship of the things com
manded. As Holtzmann observes, p. 65, op. cit, the contents of
this instruction are most fittingly constructed from the teachings
of Christ, which are recalled in the Apology, Chaps. 14 to 17. It
should moreover be noticed that in Justin's summary presenta
tion of the Christian teaching, the moral precepts of Chaps. 14 to
17 are preceded in Chap. 13 by teaching concerning the true God
and his Son crucified under Pontius Pilate, and the Prophetic
Spirit; and are followed in Chaps. 18 to 20 by teaching concern
ing topics in eschatology.
In the New Testament Age the references to the instruction
of converts before baptism are for the most part in the brief sum
maries alluding to the beginnings of their Christian life. There
are besides seven instances in six passages of the use of the word
narr)xia. In four cases it is used in connection with elementary
religious instruction: Rom. 2, 18, the Jews' religious position and
knowledge rests on the fact of their fundamental instruction out
of the Law, narnxovpevos Ik rov vbpov; Acts 18, 25, Apollos, with
John's baptism had received elementary instruction in the Way
of the Lord, Kary\xW*vos TVV bdbv rod Kvpiov, which in vs. 26 had
3 "0(70t av ireio-daat. Kai Tnarebosai-v aKndrj ravra rd ixp' iipuv
Si8aaKbpeva Kai \eybp.eva elvai, Kai (Stovv outws hvvaadai vino--
xv&vrai.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 107
to be expounded to him more accurately; I Cor. 14, 19, the sim
plest form of speech with the understanding for the purpose of
elementary instruction, Iva Kai aXXovs Karrixvo-oi, is contrasted with
the alleged highest form of speaking with tongues: Gal. 6, 6, the
rule that he that is taught in the word, 6 Karrixovpevos rbv
\byov, is to communicate unto him that teaches, t£ Karrjxovvri,
in all good things, is found to follow an exhortation, 5, 13 ff.,
which puts them in remembrance of Paul's ways which are in
Christ. The instruction alluded to in these passages does not therefore
refer as Zahn holds, Ev. Lukas, p. 58; Galaterbrief, p. 272, to
"all instruction within the congregation (alle innergemeindliche
TJnterweisung)," but with A. Seeberg, Kat. d. Urchristenheit p.
269 f., to an instruction which catechumens received in preparation
for baptism. The word which is taught is as in Heb. 6, 1 : rbv rrjs
apxv* tov xP^tov \byov. The "communication," Gal. 6, 6, in all
good things, i. e., material benefits, unto the teacher of spiritual
things, is the same rule as in I Cor. 9, 7-14; Rom. 15, 27; and
Mtw. 10, 10 f.
The word Kar-qx&u is found again in Acts 21, 21 and 24 with
out this technical reference to elementary religious instruction.
St. James informs St. Paul on his final visit to Jerusalem, that
the Jewish Christians are "taught concerning him," Karyx'tlOrio-av
irepl aov, that he teaches to Jews apostasy from Moses. Zahn
insists, Introd., Ill, 82, that the word means here merely "informed,
have heard a report or rumor; " and that it has therefore the same
meaning in Luke 1, 4. But the word in itseh can here have equally
its usual meaning in the New Testament: to teach, to instruct.
The choice of it rather than any other of the numerous words for
informing, fits the situation and the speaker perfectly. St. James,
using this word, warns St. Paul of the deliberate and constant
attack upon him by Judaizers and Jews, in the form of this de
famatory teaching concerning him. On the same page, vs. 27,
Jews of Asia are its teachers. In vs. 28 we have its formulation:
This is the man who teacheth the people, etc. Here is more than
report and information. It is a settled, dehberately inculcated
teaching concerning him, as a method of polemic.
This use of the word by Luke in Acts, does not therefore offer
any support for Zahn's denial that Luke 1, 4 refers to the cate-

108 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
chetical instruction given to Theophilus. The use of the title
"most excellent" has convinced Zahn that Theophilus is still
a heathen. The word KarrjxvOris cannot therefore mean "been
instructed," but only that many of the narratives related in
Christian circles had come to his ears and had interested him.
But they were so fragmentary and marvelous that an attitude of
doubt as to their reliability seemed to be demanded of him.
Opposed to this conception is both the general character of the
Gospel and the special features of its preface. The book contains
too much that has no direct relation to the alleged purpose of
convincing Theophilus; and too much that assumes the interest
and knowledge of a Christian reader. On the other hand, it lacks
several of the lines of apology found in the Acts; although in
Zahn's view Theophilus is a Christian when the Acts were sent
to him. In the preface, there seems to be no reason for mention
to a heathen of earlier Gospel writings. In vs. 1 and 2, "us"
would naturally suggest a Christian reader. If Theophilus is still a
heathen in doubt, the writer would need to prove the credibUity
of the eye-witnesses and ministers of the word. But the aim of
the Evangelist is not to win a heathen but to establish a Christian
in the faith which he professed in baptism after his preparatory
instruction in the logoi of which this consisted. Their irrefragable
certainty, aercpaXeia, will be established upon the words and deeds
of the Lord Jesus. Luke 1, 4 refers therefore to a catechesis on
several more or less fixed topics, and not as Zahn claims to casual
reports of some incidents in Christ's life.
This view is supported by an examination of the relative clause
in vs. 4. The usual resolutions of the attraction are:
1. aa<f>a\eiav irepl rwv Xo^wf irepl S>v Karrix'flOrjs
2. ao-<ba\eiav irepl r&v X67WP ovs KarnxnOrfs
3. ao-<j>a\eiav rwv Xbyiav irepl 5>v KarnxvOils
That is, 1. 'Certainty concerning the words concerning which
thou wast instructed'; or, 2. 'certainty concerning the words
wherein thou wast instructed ' ; or 3. ' certainty of the words con
cerning which thou wast instructed.' Against the first and second
resolutions is the fact that, with Zahn, we should expect 'the
certainty' to be defined by 'the words' directly, rather than by
a certainty 'concerning the Words.' The first part of the third

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 109
resolution is therefore probably correct. But the question of the
meaning of the relative clause remains. Zahn assumes that it
refers simply to the antecedent 'words,' with the meaning: the
certainty of the words concerning which you have heard. Yet as
in other New Testament passages Karvxeu points to instruction,
and since the word is not used with the genitive of things, this
view is inadequate.
One other resource remains: to combine the second and third
resolutions, by regarding &v as a case of the frequent assimilation
to an omitted antecedent and resolving it as in the second view:
aa<f>a\eiav rdv \bywv irepl [iravruv or 'IrjaoO] ovs Kar-qxh^- The
meaning in this case would be: the certainty of the logoi, the topics
entitled 'concerning' such and such matters, in which he had
been instructed in the catechesis. In support of this view is
Luke's form of expression in Acts 1, 1 : \byov irepl iravrwv &v Jesus
did and taught. And the relative 8>v is seen to refer not to X670S
as its antecedent, but to iravruv; thus corresponding to the resolu
tion here proposed. In a similar summary, Acts 22, 10, we have
corresponding to X6701, \a\-q6-naerat, irepl iravrwv &v reraKrai <roi
iroifjaat.. It may also be noticed in Acts 18, 25 that Apollos being
himseh Karrixwpe'vos r-hv bdbv rod Kvpiov, was able to speak and
teach Td irepl rov 'Irjaov. Further support of this view is to found
in the fact that in Acts there are about a score of instances where
the topics of initial instruction are referred to under the title
'irepl' etc. The same use appears in the Didache: 6, 3; 7, 1; 9, 1.
In I Cor. the subjects of theh letter and of the Apostle's instruc
tions are six times introduced by the same formula. There seems
therefore to be sufficient reason for believing that in the phrase
7r«pt &v Karrfx^'ts \by<i)v, Luke is making a summary reference
to the detailed topics of a preparatory instruction.
Besides the use of this word Karr\x^ and the references to topics
of preparatory instruction, there are moreover frequent summaries
aUuding to the initial steps in Christian life, which include a ref
erence to an instruction which is distinct from evangelization and
from the later teaching in the Church services.4 In II Thess. 2,
13 f. the reminder of the readers' experiences at conversion, is
made the basis of the appeal to 'stand fast and hold the traditions
which ye were taught whether by word or by epistle of ours.' That
* Cp. Seeberg, Katechismus: pp. 42, 46, 169, 212, 249, etc.

110 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
he has here in mind teaching preparatory to entrance upon the
Christian hfe, may be concluded from the teaching in his first
Epistle to them. For in I Thess. 4, 1 to 5, 22, he repeats and in
cludes a number of definite topics of this initial instruction.
In Romans 6, 17, the readers' obedience to 'that form or pattern
of teaching, rviros 5i5ax»?s, whereunto they were delivered,' is
viewed in the context as beginning with theh renunciation of sin
and with their emancipation from it; and in the verse itseh, it is
indicated that the norm of teaching included ethical instruction.
Rom. 16, 17 ff., also points to this fundamental moral teaching
as the norm they learned, rr\v oidaxyv Vv vpels epadere, and which
naturally they learned upon their admission to baptism. I Cor. 6,
9 ff. contains a direct reference to baptism, vs. 11, after knowledge
gained, vs. 9, concerning the list of sins which exclude from the
Kingdom of God, vs. 9, 10. The Colossians, 2, 6, 7, are likewise
to walk in Christ as they were taught, Kadus eSiSax^vre, when
they accepted the Christ, even Jesus the Lord. The parallel
section in Ephesians 4, 17 ff. points also to initial teaching. An
tecedent to their regeneration, vs. 23, 24, there was an instruction,
vs. 20, which included learning the Christ by hearing His message
in the preaching and being taught that He is in truth in Jesus.
Robinson,. Ephes., p. 190, prefers 'that truth is found in the per
son of Jesus who is truth'; though he admits the above interpreta
tion, reading akndeia. And also moral teaching, vs. 22 ff., con
cerning putting off the old man and the former sinful way of life,
and putting on the new man created in righteousness and holiness
of the truth.6
Besides these allusions in the Pauline Epistles, sinular indica
tions of this initial teaching appear in later New Testament Books.
In Mtw. 28, 19, disciples are made by baptism, with instruction
'to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.' Since
the converts at Pentecost continued stedfastly in the Apostles'
Teaching and in the Fellowship, the Breaking of Bread and the
Prayers, Acts 2, 42, it is at least presumable that this didax'h r&v
airoarb\o)v was given them at their admission into the Fellowship.
'The rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God,'
Hbws. 5, 12, and the doctrine of the first principles of Christ,
6 Schenkel, quoted by Holtzmann, finds presupposed in this passage ' in
troductory catechetical instruction.'

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 111
Hbws. 6, are found in the context, 5, 12 to 6, 5, to refer to instruc
tion preparatory to baptism. A. B. Davidson, Hebrews, p. 118
finds that 'the subjects are enumerated in the natural order in
which they would be brought before men's minds, whether in
preaching or catechetical instruction.' The allusions to such
catechetical instruction are presented in detail by A. Seeberg,
Der Brief an die Hebraer, 1912, pp. 59 to 65.
It may be urged against this view of an instruction between
conversion and baptism, that if its general contents be such as
in Hbws. 6, 1, the Jews would have had no need for it: they already
beheved the six fundamentals here mentioned. But as Peake
remarks, Hebrews, pp. 14, 141, 'so far as these fundamentals were
present in Judaism, the word of the beginning of Christ (refers)
to the specifically Christian presentation of them. No doctrine of
Judaism can be simply taken over into Christianity. It is trans
formed in the process, and therefore it was especially necessary
that Jews who became Christians should be taught to re-interpret
their old doctrines from their higher point of view.' It may
further be urged that in several cases in the Acts, baptism fol
lowed immediately upon conversion. It is a fact that in the ten
cases of baptism in Acts, the promptness of baptism after con
version is stated in five cases: the 3,000 converts on Pentecost,
the Eunuch, Saul, Cornehus and the Jailer at Philippi. In this
last case, certainly, the promptness is emphasized: 'He took them
the same hour of the night and washed their stripes, and was
baptized he and all his immediately,' Acts 16, 33.
We notice, however, in aU these five cases that there are also
recorded special facts connected with their conversion. The 3,000
converts hsten to Peter's sermon under the initial impression of
the gift of tongues. Saul and Cornehus have already received
heavenly visions. The Jailer has become receptive for St. Paul's
preaching of salvation by a conviction of supernatural events
connected with the Apostle's imprisonment. Phihp has been
impeUed to preach to the Eunuch by an Angel of the Lord and
by the Spirit. Peter has likewise been sent to Cornelius by a
vision and the Spirit's command; whUe Ananias' divine com
mission in his vision, evidently included the baptism of Saul,
Acts 9, 15 ff ., 22, 16. This element of a special divine manifestation
in these instances of conversion, and of divine indication in some

112 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
of these cases of theh preparation for admission to the Church,
is related to a second fact in aU these cases: the completeness
and intensity of theh conviction of the truth of the Gospel preach
ing. This centered around the proclamation that Jesus was
Christ and Lord, with indications of the several lines of witness,
which would be developed in varying amount of detail. Faith
in this proclamation involved obedience to the Gospel caU to
repentance in view of the impending messianic judgment; and to
works worthy of repentance, which were inspired by the Gospel
offer of the hope of salvation, which was pledged now in the gift
of the Spirit as an earnest of the consummation of salvation on
the Lord's return in glory. In the degree therefore of the in
tensity of the immediate conviction of faith in Jesus, would be
the degree of the prompt and clear-sighted acceptance of these
necessary terms of admission to baptism.
Further, in three if not four of these cases of prompt baptism,
the converts had already a large measure of acquaintance with the
essential contents of initial Christian instruction, as far as we can
reconstruct it. Acquaintance with the ministry and self-revelation
of Jesus on the part of the converts at Pentecost is definitely
asserted by Peter, Acts 2, 22. He makes the same assumption in
the case of Cornehus, Acts 10, 36. Saul had full opportunity and
occasion to acquaint himself with the beliefs and admission rite of
the Christians whom he persecuted for their beliefs. It would be
strange if the Eunuch returning from Jerusalem in the days of the
persecution upon the death of Stephen, had not become acquainted
with the Christian movement. All of these men, Jews and God
fearers, were besides famihar with the moral teachings of the
Two Ways and with the messianic hope and current eschatology.6
In such cases, a large general acquaintance with the topics of
preparatory instruction actually preceded conversion. The
awakening of personal faith would therefore make them quickly
responsive to an instruction concerning specifically Christian
beliefs, practices and hope, preparatory to their definite profession
in baptism. In the cases of the Eunuch and the Jailer, indisputably
6 Afford on Acts 2, 41 and Stokes, Acts, p. 138, deny that at this period
there was any preparatory training or instruction in doctrine; and Afford
approves Neander's view that the seeds of the later Judaizing form of Chris
tianity were brought by many of these uninstructed converts of Pentecost.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 113
baptism foUowed immediately on conversion. The spiritual
emergency demanded their prompt admission into the Church.
But the principle of definite preparatory instruction could stiU be
acted upon in these special instances by incorporating its essential
features in the preaching. That the preaching of Phihp, Acts 8, 35,
included an explanation of baptism is revealed in the Eunuch's
question: Here is water, what hinders me to be baptized? Paul
too at Philippi first answers the Jailer's question "what must I do
to be saved" by repeating the baptismal profession, Acts 16, 31,
"Believe on the Lord Jesus," cp. Rom. 10, 9.10, and then spoke
unto him the word of the Lord. His immediate, irapaxPVpa-,
baptism, and the Eunuch's desire for immediate baptism, seem to
be recorded as an evidence of the thoroughly awakened positive
faith of these converts, which included prompt acceptance of all
terms of admission to baptism that were presented to them in the
preaching or in connection with it.
All of Luke's references in the Acts to baptism assume his
readers' familiarity with the rite. He has in no case described it,
its mode or its ritual. It is not then strange that in his compressed
accounts and references, he should omit the definite catechesis
which prepared for the ceremony. His direct interest in all his
summary references to baptism is in the conversion of those
baptized; in their definite profession of faith; and in their entrance
into the Christian fellowship. His passing over the intermediate
steps between "they beheved and were baptized" is therefore
entirely consistent with the existence of a preparatory instruction
as the normal rule. Indeed in some of Luke's references, a de
tailed study would disclose intimations of this instruction. At
Pentecost upon the conclusion of the sermon, those who "were
pricked in their heart" and ask what shall we do, receive in vss.
38 f . a supplementary instruction concerning baptism as related to
faith in Jesus Christ, to penitent renunciation of the work of dark
ness and to the gift of the Spirit as a pledge of the hoped for mes
sianic salvation. To this instruction there are added, vs. 40, many
other words of solemn charge and exhortation, before their bap
tism in vs. 41. The fact, in vs. 42, of their adherence to the teach
ing of the Apostles and to the Fehowship, the Breaking of Bread
and the Prayers, more naturaUy points to stedfastness in instruc
tion they had received at the outset, than to addiction to later

114 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
doctrinal instruction in the faith they had professed. Cornehus'
reception of the Spirit proved his possession of the qualifications
for baptism in which the Spirit was given. Yet the fact, Acts 10,
48, that Peter did not himseh forthwith baptize him, which would
be a matter of a few moments, but instead gave directions, irpoai-
ral-e, to some others to baptize him, suggests that the delay before
baptism may have been connected with such instruction as was
necessary for the observance of the primitive rite. In the case of
Paul, I Cor. 15, 1 ff. and 11, 23 ff., refer to his own instruction in
the Christian tradition concerning the baptismal formula and the
Lord's Supper. The two compressed accounts of his baptism in
Acts 9 and 22, with their references to several definite features of
that rite, imply knowledge of the professions involved. With
much or almost all of this, St. Paul could be already acquainted.
His spiritual experience at Christ's appearance to him led directly
to his personal acceptance of it as he knew of it, and as any sup
plementary details of this Christian tradition were dehvered to
him for profession in baptism.
In proceeding next to the consideration of the range of subjects
in this initial instruction, we are concerned here only with the
general results of investigation of the primitive Christian cate
chesis based on the New Testament indications and their relation
to earher Jewish instructions and to the later Christian catechetical
hterature. The New Testament instruction seems to have been on
three fundamental subjects and probably on two supplementary
topics concerning participation in the corporate Christian hfe after
baptism. The pubhcation of the Didache led to a recognition that
it pointed to a similar type of instruction in the New Testament
Age; and also that it was based on an earher Jewish instruction for
proselytes. Bernays in his classic monograph, ' Uber das Pho-
kylideische Gedicht,' 1856, had already shown that the Greek
hexameter poem of Pseudo-Phokyhdes was a Jewish work of moral
instruction for heathen. Klein7 names it, 'the oldest catechism
for the heathen.' Its parallels to the Didache are listed by Seeberg
in Die beiden Wege, pp. 25 to 31; and paraUehsms between the
Didache, the Sibylhne Books and Phokylides are presented by
J. R. Harris, The Teaching of the Apostles, pp. 40 to 47. Klein adds
7 G. Klein, Der AeUeste Christliche Katechismus und die Jiidische Propaganda
Literatur, 1909.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 115
paraUels to the Palestinian Derech Erez hterature, pp. 150 to 153.
FoUowing Bernays, he holds that the material for Phokyhdes and
similar works was gathered principaUy from Leviticus, Chapters
17 to 20; but maintains as his special thesis that the primitive
Jewish Didache was a tractate of the Derech Erez literature,
p. VII, whose subject he at length identifies, p. 63, with Natural
Rehgion. Schurer, History of the Jewish People, etc., II, vol. 3,
p. 248 ff ., gives in fuU the history of the hterature of Jewish propa
ganda, instruction, apology and polemic, and concludes that its
fixed type consists of teaching concerning Jewish monotheism,
morals and eschatology.
In the Didache Christian monotheism is assumed. After the
moral instruction in the Two Ways of Chapters 1 to 6, foUows
teaching in Chapters 7 to 10 on the celebration of the two sacra
ments, on fasting and prayer; in Chapters 11 to 15 on the ministry,
worship and church alms ; concluding with the chapter on the last
things.8 Harnack in Hauck, P. R. E., 1.724, records the general
recognition that Chapters 1 to 5 and most probably Chapter 6 are
based on an earher Jewish instruction. He grants also the possi
bihty that the Jewish work contained directions corresponding to
the Christian directions as to baptism, prayer, first fruits, etc.,
especiaUy in view of chapters 8 and 12.
1. On a type of this proselyte instruction with a similar range of
topics treated from a specifically Christian standpoint, the in
struction of Jewish converts preparatory to Christian baptism
would seem to have been based. First, corresponding to the sec
tion of teaching in the hellenistic heathen propaganda on Jewish
monotheism, there would necessarily be detailed exposition of the
announcement in the Gospel preaching that Jesus was Christ, Son
of God and Lord. This would be based as in Christ's own training
of the Twelve on the witness of the self-revelation of His hfe,
character and redemptive work. It would thus include the com
munication of the essential facts of Christ's hfe, ministry, death
and resurrection. This exposition of the Gospel facts as reveahng
Jesus' Sonship and Lordship, would be the fitting occasion for
8 Harnack, I. c, p. 712, arranges the contents in two or three sections. He
combines Chapters 7 to 10 with the Two Ways, as containing the definite
church rites which constitute the Christian character of the congregations;
while Chapters 11 to 15 contain directions for church fellowship and life.

116 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
definite apologia in order to enhghten the catechumen as to the
true bearings of the G0SPel facts and teachings, and to guard him
from current slanders and attacks on the faith. The design of this
first part of the catechesis was to lead to a clear profession of faith
in Jesus, in a baptismal formula which became the basis of the
Creed. A generation later, large portions of this instruction relat
ing to the words and deeds of Jesus were fixed in writing in our
earhest Gospels or their sources. The early ceremony of the
Traditio Evangehorum to the catechumen at baptism 9 is in keep
ing with this view of definite initial instruction in the Gospel facts.
The view is further supported by the consideration that on the one
hand these facts could not be given in sufficient detail in the
general propaganda preaching; and on the other hand, in the
Epistles they are assumed as known and are referred as having
been taught.10 So that there remains only the period between
conversion and baptism for the communication, necessary elucida
tion and defense of the Gospel facts, in order to a solemn profession
of faith in baptism. We can also anticipate that in the later
written gospels addressed to behevers aheady thus prepared for
the baptismal confession of faith, the apologetic element will not
be found to be the predominant feature and controlhng aim.
2. There was next, clearly, the need of a full practical instruc
tion concerning the new hfe in this Christ, to which they were
called. This would expound the summons to repentance, to cease
from sin; no longer to hve to the lusts of men, but to the will of
God, I Peter 4, 2. In general it was instruction as to ' how they
ought to walk and to please God. ' Its basis and framework was a
Christian adaptation of the Jewish proselyte instruction in the
Two Ways. We have forms of this not only in the Didache but in
the pre-Christian Jewish propaganda and in early Christian
hterature. The New Testament, especially in the hortatory
sections of the Epistles, is full of reminders, detailed expositions
and special applications of this primitive moral instruction, which
prepared the convert for formal renunciation of sin in the baptis
mal confession of repentance. The content of this moral teaching,
8 J. Kaunze, Die Uebergabe der Evangelien beim Taufunterricht, 1909.
10 Cp. R. J. Knowling, Witness of the Epistles, 1892; and Testimony of St
Paul to Christ, Lectures IX to XVI, 1905; and the works referred to on
p. 73.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 117
in particular in regard to his walk in newness of life, is summed up
in the statement : Love is the fulfilling of the Law.
3. There was obviously need of a fuller instruction of the con
vert concerning the Christian transformation of the Jewish mes
sianic Hope concerning the last things : as to the consummation of
the promised salvation in the messianic Kingdom at Christ's
coming in glory; and as to the pledge and earnest of inheritance in
the Kingdom to be received in the gift of forgiveness and of the
Spirit. This need was met by a third topic of instruction concern
ing the last things and the present appropriation of their essential
blessings by the Christian hope of glory and of the full possession
of the messianic salvation. It would be based on the eschatological
teachings of Jesus, later recorded in the Gospels. In the Epistles it
is constantly recalled in the summons to patient hope, and in the
assurance that the God of Hope is faithful and will preserve them
blameless to the day of Christ. The Didache in Chapter 16 and
other forms of instruction in early Christian literature likewise
contain teaching concerning these last things.
The presumption that these topics would be the leading features
of the converts' initial instruction is strengthened by the preva
lence in the Epistles of summaries of Christian hfe as a life of faith,
love and hope. Thus in the early I Thessalonians, their Christian
hfe is summarized as the Apostle remembers ' how their faith works,
their love toils and their hope on the Lord Jesus Christ endures, '
Findlay. In the later epistle to the Colossians, Christian hfe is
still described as faith in Christ, love to all the saints and hope
which is laid up for them in heaven. The fixed formulation of this
triad and its constant recurrence in New Testament writings is
most naturally understood as a reference to the three essential
professions in Christian baptism, for which the converts would
need to be prepared by the definite three fold instruction that has
been indicated.
4. There were doubtless additional topics of instruction needed
as the convert normally entered the new life of Christian fellow
ship: the nature and effect of the baptism for which they were
preparing; and of the Breaking of Bread, in which they would
share, as well as the subject of Christian fellowship in the Church's
work, worship and discipline. A. Seeberg, Katechismus der Ur
christenheit, p. 247, concludes that in the Apostolic Age the cate-

118 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
chism included the following topics: the Formula of Belief; the
Ways; Baptism and the Gift of the Spirit; the Lord's Prayer and
a statement of the words with which Jesus instituted the Lord's
Supper. He holds that we cannot determine a priori whether it
contained additional topics; and he also leaves undecided the
question whether the sections on Baptism, the gift of the Spirit
and the Lord's Prayer formed independent topics, or were com
bined as two or as one subject of instruction. He further maintains
that the catechism consisted entirely of words of Christ.
The framework of the New Testament Epistles points to an
earlier instruction of the readers having this general range of
topics. Their doctrinal portion assumes, develops and applies
the original teaching concerning the person and work of Christ;
their concluding hortatory division develops the moral teaching
of the Ways by inculcating a walk in love inspired by the Christian
hope. Attached in varying methods to these exhortations are
references to the Christian life as related to corporate worship
and work. Thus in I Thessalonians, after the first three chapters
concerning their faith in the Gospel preaching of Jesus as Lord,
follow exhortations concerning the moral walk in love, 4, 1 to 12;
and concerning the state of the Christian dead and other topics
of the Christian hope of salvation at the Parousia, 4, 13 to 5, 11.
These constant subjects of the Epistles are here followed by ex
hortations concerning the ministry, 5, 12 to 15, and worship, in
cluding the exercise of spiritual gifts, 5, 16 to 21. In Hebrews
also, the initial instruction included besides teaching of repentance
from the works of the way of death, of faith in God, of the resur
rection and judgment, teaching also concerning baptism and
laying on of hands, 6, 1 ff. These subjects are mentioned as re
lated to the initial steps of their admission to the Church. That
this instruction contained additional topics may be indicated in
the introduction to the concluding hortatory division of the
Epistle, 10, 19 ff., which like the section 6, 1 ff. seems to be based
on the framework of the initial teaching. After the ten dogmatic
chapters on the person and redemptive work of Christ, succeed
exhortations to life within the house of God as related to faith
professed in baptism, to hope and to the good works of love, 10,
19 to 24. Following these is the reference, vs. 25, to 'our own
assembling together,' rijv eirio-vvayioyriv iavr&v, and to mutual

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 119
exhortations. The rest of the Epistle is constructed on this frame
work: a chapter on faith, the 11th; on the patience of hope ani
mated by the issues of the final judgment and awards, the 12th; a
brief repetition of some of the good works of love from the Two
Ways, 13, 1 to 6; and in vss. 7 to 17 references to the ministry
and worship, which would parallel the remaining topic, 'our own
assembling' in 10, 25.
Besides the clear indications of its definite range of topics in
these and other Epistles, cp. Eph. 4 ff. and Rom. 12 ff., there are
also traces at least, in the New Testament and later literature, of
the form of the catechesis. Naturally and even apart from Old
Testament precedents and Jewish religious educational methods,
it would follow Christ's method of training the Twelve, in which
instruction by question and answer played so prominent a part.
And this method would evidently be directly suited to guide the
thought of the new converts concerning the fundamental import
and the bases of the Gospel truth they had accepted, and to frame
their inquiries for direction in the new life they entered. Reflec
tions of this catechetical method appear, e. g., in Rev. 7, 13, where
one of the elders anticipates the Seer's questions and asks, 'who
are these and whence come they? and I say unto him, My Lord,
thou knowest'; which is 'a confession of ignorance and an appeal
for information,' Swete in loc., who also refers to Zech. 4, 2 f. and
Ezek. 37, 3. ' And he said unto me, these are they that come out,'
etc. And in Rom. 10, 9 f., Paul in referring to the baptismal
profession, and probably to some of its terms, passes into what
is practically a catechetical method of discussion, in which also
the Old Testament Testimonia are interwoven.11 Fully recog
nizing the extremely conjectural character of any attempts at
definite construction of the primitive preparatory instruction,
we shall offer, and for brevity in the form of positive statement,
the following suggestions concerning some of its features.
The witness for the catechesis form of instruction in matters
of faith, is the interrogative form of the Creed. We could con-
11 For the use of the catechesis form, Kara irevaiv Kai airoKpiaiv, in Greek
and Roman writers on metaphysical and ethical questions, see E. Norden,
Agnostos Theos, 101-108, where he also refers to his article in Hermes, XL,
1905, 517 ff., on the hterature of the ipcorripara, which were typical for the
eiaayoiyi].

120 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
elude from Hbws. 11, 6; Rom. 3, 30 and numerous paraUels, that
the instruction began with el els eanv b debs, the answer being
based of course on Dty. 6, 4 and other Old Testament teachings;
and after inquiries and replies as to his nature and his relation to
the world and to man, foUowed the question and answer concerning
Christ. This the gloss in Acts 8, 37 most probably reproduces
from the primitive catechism, as does also Rom. 10, 9. 10: el iriarev-
ets 'Inaovv elvai. rbv vlbv deov, Kvpiov, xpt-o-rbv. In order to answer
iriarevb) e£ SX77S rijs KapSias, the catechumen was taught rd
irepl rov 'Inaov, rd irepl rrjs BaaCKeias rov deov, something at least
Trept iravruv av fjpl-aro b 'Irjaovs iroielv re Kai hibaaKeiv, and pvn-
poveveiv ru>v \bycov rod nvpiov 'lyo-ov. And he learned, in con
nection with the Testimonia, to examine the Scriptures el exot
ravra ovras: el iradnrbs 6 xpio-r6s, Acts 26, 23; cp. also Mk. 9, 12 ff.;
el irp&ros e£ avao-raaeus veKp&v <p«s piKKei KarayyeKhetv rib re
Xaw (cat rots edveo~iv; ro 'KviB-q rl ecrrtv.
From I Thess. 4, 1, we learn that the catechesis in fulfillment of
the moral law by love was termed rb ircos Set fipas irepiirarelv Kai
apiffKeiv decc; as in Ephes. 5, 10, ri eariv evapearov ru Kiiptcjj, and
vs. 17 as understanding ri rb dikripa rod Kvpiov; or as introductory
to the hortatory section of Romans, 12, 2: ri rb de~ki)pa rov deov, rb
ayadbv Kai evapearov Kai reKeiov. It included of course as its es
sential element, the teaching and imitation of Christ; cp. Mtw.
28, 20; 7, 24 ff.; John 14, 15; 15, 10. The range of its contents has
been suggested above.
The catechesis on the eschatological hope appears to have been
entitled, irepi r&v xpbvuv Kai ruv Kaip&v, I Thess. 5, 1; cp. Acts
3, 20 f . Its direct dependence, even in form, on Christ's teaching,
appears, e. g., in Acts 1, 6 f.; Mk. 9, 10 ff.; as well as in the Dis
course on the last things. The general character of the questions
on this topic are suggested in Eph. 1, 18 ff., what is the hope of his
caUing, what the wealth of the glory of his inheritance in the
saints, what the might of his power in the resurrection of Christ, in
which we already share. Under this special topic of the resurrec
tion whose title seems to be indicated in Mk. 12, 26, irept r&v
veKpdv or 1 efeipovrai, or as in Mtw. 22, 31 7rept rrjs avaardaeus ruv
veKpwv, some definite questions may be recognized, as in Acts
26, 8 ei 6 0e6s veKpovs eyeiper, I Cor. 15, 31 irus tyeipovrai ol veKpoi;
and eif7rep SUaiov irapa de£> avrairohovvai, II Thess. 1, 6. The

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 121
general reply to this last question which is incorporated in the
next verses, repeated in Rom. 2, 5-10 and referred to in Col. 3,
24; Eph. 6, 8, as well known, eibbres, is based as before on the
Testimonia and on Christ's general teaching on the resurrection,
cp. Mk. 12, 24 ff. and on avrairbooins, Mtw. 16, 27; Lk. 14, 14;
cp. John 5, 29. The instruction in prayer while watching for
Christ's coming: rb helv iravrore irpooevxeo'dai Kai /xi) kvKaKelv, is
likewise based on Christ's teaching in the parable of the Unjust
Judge, Lk. 17, 1; and in Rom. 8, 26, another question in the cate
chesis on prayer appears in rb ri Trpoaevi-oipeda Kadb Set. The
general outline of the response might probably be reconstructed
from Eph. 6, 18 f. and the paraUels to it in the context of the
question in Rom. 8, 26. We learn too from I Thess. 3, 3 f. that
among the earliest topics of instruction was that concerning the
boKipiov rrjs iriareics amid manifold tribulations. In Acts 14, 22
this instruction seems to be recapitulated in the expression art
Sid iroXXwj' dXixj/eow Set ripas etcreXfletj' eis r-nv Ba<ri\eiav deov.
Instruction as to the new relationships of converts to the
Apostohc preachers of the Gospel and as to their fehowship in the
Christian brotherhood in work, mutual service and worship, could
be comprehended in the summary concerning Church order in
I Tim. 3, 15 : irus Set iv oiku deov avao-rpecbeo-dai. How early and in
what detail such teaching was given, would be almost entirely
conjectural. Yet that at least elementary principles were im
parted at an early stage of the converts' connection with the
Church, is suggested in Acts 2, 42, where the new disciples are
described as continuing not only in the Apostles' didache, but in
the Koinonia, Breaking of Bread and the Prayers; and also in
I Thess. 5, 12-22 where the new converts of Thessalonica can be
reminded of such initial instruction, in briefest aUusions. It will
be observed that later in the Pastorals in the dokhnasia for the
admission of presbyter-bishops and widows, the catechesis form
is still apparent. And in matters of worship, not only do the
interwoven liturgical formulae assume the readers' familiarity
from the first with the Church's prayers, psalms, hymns and
spiritual songs, but also as Seeberg has shown in the the passage
aheady cited, the convert was taught at baptism the Lord's
Prayer and the words of institution of the Holy Communion.
Who were the teachers of this preparatory instruction is not

122 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
definitely stated. But that it was commonly assigned by the
Apostles to their feUow-laborers may be gathered from Acts 10, 48,
where Peter, who has been accompanied to Caesarea by six breth
ren, 'commanded them, ' irpoaeral-ev, to be baptized; and from 13, 5
where Mark is the birnptrns of Paul and Barnabas on the first
missionary journey; though upon his retirement at Perga, Paul
himself gave this instruction in South Galatia, Gal. 5, 21. On the
next journey he had with him Silas of Jerusalem, whom Zahn re
gards as chosen to communicate the Evangehcal tradition of the
Jerusalem church; and who, in our view of Acts 15, 28, as sum
marizing the moral teachings of the Christian didache, could also
as the representative of that church impart those teachings. But
as prophet, Silas was more probably engaged in the higher work of
preaching and exhortation; especially since Paul, as soon as he ad
vanced to new propaganda work, took Timothy as helper. We
learn from I Cor. 4, 17, that Timothy is able to teach "my ways
which are in Christ, even as I teach everywhere in every church."
The elementary character of this didache appears, as has been
mentioned, in the contrast I Cor. 14, 19 between Tongues, which
are assumed in Corinth to be the highest form of utterance, and the
simplest form, here described as : ' I had rather in the church speak
five Xoyoi, cp. Hbws. 6, 1, with my understanding that I may
Karijxyo-w others also.' Hbws. 5, 12 assumes that any mature
Christian of experience and zeal could become a teacher of what in
the context is the elementary instruction for baptism. Such was
the teaching of Priscilla and Aquila, Acts 18, 26, where too, cp.
also vs. 27 f., it is evident that Apollos's teaching had a far wider
range. It seems therefore that in the New Testament Age, this
instruction was not as yet assigned to a special class 12 but was a
12 In Gal. 6, 6, 6 Karnx&v might suggest such a specialized office. But in
fact the section is not concerned with the special relations of catechumens
and catechists, but with generous support of the clergy. It has been recalled
above that this form of description of disciples and clergy is due to the fact
that it concludes an exhortation, 5, 13 ff., on topics of the catechesis. It may
further be recalled that the duty of support in return for Gospel instruction is
enforced again in I Cor. 9, 7-14; and also that the description of this instruc
tion in Gal. as initial teaching is similar to the comparison of it in I Cor. to
the initial plowing, sowing and planting, as well as to shepherding. The Apos
tle's choice of <T7reipeii' and Kar-qxelv could express and emphasize the fact
that the spiritual life of converts was a continuous growth of the word of the

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 123
function exercised in the mission field at times by Apostle, Evan
gelist or fellow-laborer; and in local churches would most natu
rally be a subordinate function of the Teacher, who with whatever
other duties, imparted in the services an exposition, development
and application of the doctrinal and practical truth delivered in the
Gospel preaching and in the instruction preparatory to baptism.
It may be added that this primitive catechesis was not in
written form, nor in one fixed form. Hence along with clear
indications of its definite range of topics and of compendious for
mulations of its controlhng elements, we find throughout the New
Testament and in the writings of the post-Apostohc Age, a marked
freedom in recalling it and in developing its contents. It was
ultimately absorbed by the written Gospels and Creeds, which
provided instruction concerning matters of faith and hope; by the
hortatory sections of the Epistles concerning love and hope; and
by their sections aUied to the Pastorals, as well by the later Church
orders and liturgies, concerned with Church fellowship.
The direct aim of the preparatory instruction was to lead the
convert to certitude of faith; to deepen, with the accompanying
divine witness both in the preaching and in the ensuing fuller
instruction, his conviction that in the Gospel, salvation was offered
in the risen Jesus, Son of God, Lord, Christ. This divinely
effected result foUowed upon the profession in baptism: a profes
sion involving a grateful devotion of faith in the Christ of the
Apostohc preaching and instruction; a self-renunciation; a new
view of hfe, a new bent of mind; a hunger for righteousness, moral
purity and power inspired by hope of a heavenly inheritance and of
consummated mystic union with God in Christ, already pledged in
the gift of the Spirit in a new hfe of brotherhood and common
fellowship in worship, mutual service and of consecration to the
work of the world's redemption.
2. THE CONFIRMATION OF FAITH
In the New Testament accounts of the genesis of faith, the result
of the divine witness accompanying the Apostohc defense of the
Gospel and the instruction which foUowed it, was that the disciples'
truth of the Gospel definitively communicated and implanted in the initial
preaching and teaching, as the regenerating word of life. Such too is the
thought of Col. I, 5.6, and of I Pet. 1, 23-25.

124 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
faith reached at baptism, direct certitude and full assurance. The
faithful are constantly referred to as ippifapivoi, redepekwpevoi,
eSpatot, aperaKivnrot, BeBaiovpevoi, ev ir\ripo<l>opia 7rt0Tecos.13
The 'grace' of Paul's apostohc office, so B. Weiss, Phpbf.,
p. 58, in which the Philippians participate, is the defense and
confirmation of the Gospel: diroXo7ia /cat (Se^atwcrts, Php. 1, 7.
In the context these terms refer to his whole ministry of the Gospel
from the first day of the conversion of the Philippians until now
when he is in bonds; and^in this vs. 7 the Gospel preaching is
characterized by its presentation in the initial apologia of the
kerugma and by its completion in the converts' bebaiosis: the
fuU assurance and confirmation of faith. Our present interest
in the statement is that it introduces the subject of the nature of
'the confirmation of faith' and its relation to the defense of the
Gospel witness and call. The interpretation of the terms and of
their relation which has been here briefly given, will be supported
by other passages. But the famihar opposing views of this pas
sage claim our notice, as they reveal the conflicting efforts to ob
tain a satisfactory distinction of the terms when viewed simply
as two forms of human proof.
The fact that the Apostle is in bonds awaiting trial has often
suggested to commentators, and recently to Deissmann, Bible
Studies, p. 108, a reference to his defense and to his vindication
of the Gospel in a judicial process. But the Gospel was not on
trial in Nero's court. It is possible that not even Paul was put on
his trial at this period, if as Lake has again proposed, the Jeru-
13 Clement of Rome, 42, 3, describes the Apostles as preaching the Gospel,
'being fully assured, ir\r)po<bopr)devres through the resurrection of our Lord
Jesus Christ, and confirmed, irioruiQivres, in the Word of God with full as
surance of the Holy Ghost.' Ignatius addresses the Church in Philadelphia
as 'firmly established, -fiSpao-pivn, in the concord of God, rejoicing in the pos-
sion and resurrection without wavering, dStaKptrcos, being fully assured in
all mercy.' He describes its clergy as those whom Christ 'established in con
firmation,' iffrripi^ev iv BeBawovvn by his Holy Spirit.' The Smyrneeans,
chap. 1, he perceived 'are established in faith immoveable, Karnpriapivovs iv
aKiV7)TC)) iriarei, being as it were nailed on the cross in flesh and spirit; and
firmly grounded, flSpaffpivovs, in love in the blood of Christ; and fully per
suaded as touching our Lord,' viz., as Son of David, Son of God, Virgin born,
baptized by John, suffering under Pilate and risen.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 125
salem charges were not pressed against him in Rome.14 If they
were, any apology of the Gospel such as Paul entered upon at
Ciesarea, Acts 26, 24, would have been sUenced as it had been by
Festus's loud cry ' Thou art mad,' and by Agrippa's sneer. Nor
could there have been in the Roman court a ' vindication' such as
Deissmann followed by G. C. Martin understands. For on the
suggested theory that the word bebaiosis is used in the sense of
the Attic juristic term 'warranty of title,' it would signify the
fulfillment of a pledged engagement, which as Deissmann, p. 108 f.
shows would suit Paul's use of the term in other passages and
also in this passage as we have interpreted it above; though we
cannot conceive any such relation of the Gospel and its preacher
to the Roman tribunal.
Hence other views range from the restriction of the defense to
the judicial trial and of the confirmation to preaching at Rome,
to the reference of both terms to evangehzation in Rome in its
defensive and aggressive character, and finally to his gospel
ministry in general, as by Lewin, St. Paul, II, p. 281. B. Weiss
and Lightfoot 15 are among those who distinguish the terms as
positive and negative defense. The plausibihty of this distinc
tion is favored by our familiarity with it in formal treatises on
apologetics in modern and ancient times.. But it implies an im
probable distinction of methods of evangehzation that were un-
suited to the conditions of the primitive mission preaching, in
which according to our records the defensive and positive elements
were interwoven. It also overlooks the fact that a few verses
later, Paul evidently includes in the statement ' I am appointed
"Interpreter, 1909, 147 ff. and Theol. Tidjschrift, 1916, p. 360 ff. The
same view was suggested by Lewin, St. Paul, II, 281: 290.
16 Weiss, Phpbf. 57, lists the distinctions between the two words advocated
by the older commentators. He concludes: 'As concerns this defence we can
think of every kind of defence, official and unofficial in word and course of
life, as even the imprisonment offered him opportunity. Associated with
this activity for the Gospel, the bebaiosis can thus only describe an analogous
activity exercised through the word and course of life; only more positively,
in contrast to the former antithetical activity (Meyer).' Similarly, J. B.
Lightfoot in loc.: 'Apologia imphes the negative or defensive side of the
Apostle's preaching, the preparatory process of removing obstacles and
prejudices; bebaiosis devotes the positive or aggressive side, the direct ad
vancement and estabhshment of the Gospel. The two together will thus
comprise all modes of preaching and extending the truth.'

126 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
for the apologia of the Gospel,' vs. 16, all forms both of positive
and negative defense, so De Wette. We are thus left to seek in
the bebaiosis of vs. 7 neither a mere rhetorical repetition of
apologia nor any special phase of it; but a term referring to the
distinct goal of apologia: the grounding and confirming of dis
ciples who had been won by the apologia of the Gospel witness
and its call to salvation, in fuU assurance of faith. It was there
fore most natural that both terms should here be employed
by him in his comprehensive description of his ministration
of the Gospel. Confirmation and full assurance both of the
truth he preached and of the redemptive blessings he offered
was the direct aim of his evangelization, and it was also
the basis of aU his subsequent estabhshment and nurture of
his converts' Christian hfe and growth into the fullness of the
Christ. For our understanding of the character and contents of this
confirmation and assurance, it is essential that we first recall the
New Testament view of it. It is a direct certitude not only as
to the truth of the revelation and redemptive facts declared in the
Gospel preaching, but also as to the fulfillment in the behever of
the promise of personal salvation based on those redemptive facts.
It is the experience of the behever's undivided life and whole per
sonality. As it is described in Hbws. 6, 4 f., where upon response
to the preaching and instruction concerning the personal con
ditions of salvation, the means of entrance into it, and its relation
to the ultimate issues of hfe, vss. 1.2, the converts received in
baptism their illumination, being turned from darkness to hght;
they then tasted the heavenly gift of forgiveness and became
sharers of the Holy Ghost; they tasted the Word of God as good,
viz., his word of promise of inheritance, cp. vss. 12.17; and as the
pledge and means of realizing this hope, they tasted the powers
of the world to come, in their reception of the manifold gifts of
the Spirit, Hbws. 2, 4. Parallel to this direct certitude of salva
tion in the undivided spiritual experience of illumination, forgive
ness and hope of glory inspired by the indwelhng Spirit, is the
fuU assurance in the experience of justification by faith in Rom. 5,
1 ff.: peace with God, introduction into the life of grace and an
exulting hope of glory. It was the fulfillment in the behever of
the ministry committed to Paul, Acts 26, 16 ff.: to open their

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 127
eyes, that they may turn from darkness to hght and from the
power of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of
sins and an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith
in me. They were confirmed, BeBaiovpevot,, in faith, Col. 2, 7;
rooted and grounded in love, Eph. 4, 17; they held fast the hope
set before them as an anchor sure and stedfast, aa<pa\rj re /cat
BeBaiav, Hbws. 6, 18 f.16 They had the witness of the Spirit
himself with their spirits that they are the children of God, Rom.
8, 16.
This personal experience of salvation to which the New Testa
ment writers thus confidently refer as the possession of behevers,
is the /3e/3aiojcrts of the Gospel; the ir\r\po(popia of faith. While
necessarily embracing conviction of the truth of the witness and
apologia of the Gospel, it is evidently more comprehensive: a
direct certitude of the whole personahty; an experience illuminating
and confirming the conclusions of the intellect, and a basis for
their development in all the relations of the new hfe and new
world view. J. Weiss connects the relation of these two modes of
knowledge with the Pauhne distinction between 'knowing God'
and 'being known of God' in I Cor. 8, 2 f.; 13, 12; Gal. 4, 9. After
stating, as already cited, that 'the mission preaching is not only
to give instruction and to awaken conviction but is a means to
prepare a way for the supernatural activity of God,' he adds:
' this view often receives expression by Paul in a very remarkable
form. If he speaks of 'knowing God,' the contrasted idea, 'being
known of God' forces itself upon him as by a compulsion; and in
Gal. 4, 9 as in reahty the more appropriate expression. Knowing
God is only possible, where God has aheady known men. This
thought is indeed only clear, when 'knowing' is here as often in
the Old Testament, Amos 3, 2; Jer. 1, 5, not merely a theoretical
acquainting oneself with or knowing another, but an inclination
to him with the will, a setting of oneself in relation to him, a choos
ing of him, an appropriation of him; and in the sphere of personal
religion even more: the inner contact of one soul with the soul of
11 In the Book of Common Prayer, pp. 245, 258, this full assurance is like
wise viewed as a gift at the entrance into the Christian life: "that they may
be received into the ark of Christ's Church; and being stedfast in faith, joy
ful through hope and rooted in charity . . . they may come to the land
of everlasting life.''

128 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the other. The paradox of these three Pauline passages is the
paradox of mysticism, Urchristm., p. 187.1V
This confirmation of faith is always referred to in the New
Testament as effected directly by the Spirit, to whose 'demon
stration' in both preacher and hearers is ascribed hkewise the
initial response of faith in the message as a revelation which has
evoked recognition, acceptance and obedience by the whole per
sonahty. The direct divine confirmation of the behever corre
sponds both to the New Testament record of the genesis of his
faith and to its teaching concerning the character of the Gospel.
For the essential characteristic of faith in the revelation of God
in Christ cannot be adequately accounted for as the result of any
of the factors into which we can psychologicaUy analyze the
process of the origin of our convictions and behefs. It cannot be
explained as the result of a wish to beheve. Both the solemn in
terests of their souls' salvation, and the renunciations and sacri
fices involved in the converts' baptism, would demand fuUest
conviction as to the objective vahdity of the word of the truth of
the Gospel. Nor was it produced by the argumentative skill of
preachers or by their impressive eloquence; and not alone by the
preachers' own evident conviction of the truth of their message
and of the reahty of their salvation and gift of the Spirit. The
mocking at it on Pentecost, in Athens and in Festus's court
reveals its insufficiency to convince the hearers of the message
even when given by the demonstration of the Spirit and of power
in its preachers. Nor was conviction and full assurance due to the
compelling force of truth. Although three thousand were con
verted by the Pentecost sermon, even that number was but a
small portion of the pilgrim hosts that heard the same sermon,
that were best prepared to respond to it, and yet were not con
vinced by it. Nor for the same reason of constant rejection of the
Gospel, can faith be due to a responsive chord in the human soul
which is innately attuned to vibrate in unison with the tones of the
message of God's redeeming love, wherever those tones are heard.
A searching historical and psychological analysis of the genesis
17 The relation of the direct certitude of personal experience of salvation
by faith and the historical and philosophical convictions involved in it are
discussed at length by Dorner in the introduction to his System of Christian
Faith, §§ 1-14.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 129
of the certitude of faith has been made by MiiUer in his study of
the origin of the personal Christianity of the Pauhne Churches.18
He cannot account for it as the product of human arguments and
persuasions; or of the behever's predispositions to faith; or of
his unaided power to apprehend and obey the message as true,
authoritative and divine. He therefore concludes that the certi
tude of faith postulates a divine factor and power for its produc
tion. This result of a scientific investigation of its genesis cor
responds with the claim of its preachers; and for the reahty of
such direct divine activity they constantly and confidently appeal
to the personal experience of their converts.
Nowhere, however, is there any suggestion that the certitude
of faith was divinely effected apart from the psychological laws,
personal conditions and social relationships which condition the
genesis of aU knowledge and conviction. The divine coopera
tion accompanied each step in the ministry leading to the con
firmation of faith. Souls were made receptive in the initial
preaching by a divine method and ministry to the personal hfe
and spiritual state of each individual, known only by him that
received it. Ears, eyes, hearts were opened; consciences were
awakened, to see the hght of the glory of God in the face of Jesus
Christ. In the ministry of the catechesis, divine iUumination and
invigoration accompanied the fuller instruction concerning the
person and work of Christ, His commandments of love, His caU
to inheritance in His kingdom. At baptism, upon the soul's free
response of faith in the revelation of the Apostohc witness, caU
and teaching, came the divine gift of bebaiosis and plerophoria:
a direct certitude of a new hfe in God which rested upon the reahty
of the redemptive facts and on the fulfillment of the promises
preached in the witness and defense of the Gospel.
Corresponding to this view of the divine factor in the genesis of
faith are the New Testament statements concerning the character
of the Gospel and the method of its preaching. While distinctly
recognizing both the limitations of the human messengers and the
right of their hearers to examine 'whether these things were so,'
the Gospel message is everywhere regarded in the New Testament
as the Word of God; not man's word concerning him, but God's
18 Johannes Muller, Die Entstehung des personlichen Christenthums der
paulinischen Gemeinden, 1898.

130 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
own word: X670S deov, subjective genitive, cp. Findlay, I Thess.
2, 13. This because he sent it, Acts 13, 26; and those who like the
Thessalonians received it, 2, 13, received it not as the word of men,
but as it truly is, the word, message and call of God. And defi
nitely it is the word of salvation which God sent to the sons of Israel
preaching good tidings of peace by Jesus Christ, Acts 10, 36. In
this definition is included the claim and recognition of a direct
divine activity in the ministry of this word he sent; and this claim
is continued in the statements of the messengers of the divine word.
The authority of Christ's teaching rests on His union with the
Father. God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himseh;
II Cor. 5, 19; God spoke in his Son, Heb. 1, 1; Christ's own claim
at the close of his pubhc ministry is, I spoke not from myself; but
the Father that sent me, he hath given me a commandment, what
I should say and what I should speak, John 12, 49. The authority
of the Apostles' preaching rests also on the activity of God in and
through them. They traced their commission to God speaking in
the Son: as the Father hath sent me even so send I you, John 20,
21. Having received from God the ministry of reconciliation,
II Cor. 5, 18, they as his ambassadors beseech men, as though God
were entreating by them, vs. 20. They speak, II Cor. 2, 17, as of
God, in the sight of God and in Christ; and they speak in words
which the Spirit teaches, I Cor. 2, 13.
The ministry of the word was moreover accompanied by the
divine energizing both in the manifest spiritual experience of the
evangelists, which has already been considered, and also in their
spiritual gift of working signs and wonders. The word of so great
salvation, Hbws. 2, 3 f., having at the first been spoken by the
Lord Christ, was confirmed, iBeBai&dri by the Apostles who heard
him. And the confirmation and certitude were effected because it
rested on the authority of Christ in whom God spoke, and on God's
accompanying witness both by external signs, wonders and mani
fold powers, and by the internal gifts of the Holy Spirit according
to his willing.19 So too in the Acts: the Lord bore witness to the
19 F. H. Chase, Old Syriac Element in the Text of Codex Bezm, p. 157, notes
the coincidence between Hbws, 2, 3 f. and Mk. 16, 19 f., which appears to
him to confirm the verdict of the Markan section's antiquity, as ' either
founded on language current at a very early period, or the section itself at least
substantially was known in the Apostohc Age.'

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 131
word of his grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by the
Apostles' hands, 14, 3; 15, 12; cp. II Cor. 12, 12. Besides this
witness, the direct activity of God was manifested in the whole
work of the Apostolic ministry. Round about from Jerusalem unto
IUyricum, the Gospel was 'fully preached,' ireir\rip(>>Kevai., or
'brought to full development,' because Christ wrought through
Paul in word and deed as well as in the power of signs and wonders.
His whole ministry was in the power of the Holy Spirit, Rom.
15, 19. He labored, Col. 1, 29, according to Christ's energy which
was operative in him 'in power. ' As elsewhere in the New Testa
ment these miracles and work in the power of the Spirit are not
referred to as proofs in substantiation of the doctrines preached,
but as manifestations of the possession of the Spirit; as revelations
of the divine presence, purpose and power working with them as
they ministered in God's name.20
The divine activity, moreover, cooperating with the preaching
of his word through the manifold ministries and media of ap
proach, in order to awaken and confirm faith, energizes directly in
the focus of our personality. His word, Heb. 4, 12 f., is living,
active, and therefore heart searching; piercing to the basal ele
ments of our nature: to the ultimate point of division between
soul and spirit and physical nature. And it is heart revealing:
calling to judgment our inner life of volitions, affections and
20 Westcott, The Gospel of Life, p. 80 and chap. 7: Signs as a vehicle of
revelation. The signs 'are not properly proofs of a teaching from which they
are dissociated, but the teaching itself in a limited form which appeals to men
through human experience. They have a spiritual power, and, so far, they
are 'spiritually discerned' while the intellect prepares the way for this dis
cernment. . . . They are more properly in their highest form the sub
stance than the proofs of revelation. According to this view (of p. 221) it is
wrong to speak of miracles as being in a primary sense proofs of a revelation,
or of Christianity in particular. No such claim is made for them in the N.
T. . . . They were the flashings forth of the more glorious Divine life when
an opening was made for its course.' The miracles wrought by the Apostles
'were not offered as proofs to the unbelieving, but as blessings, and lessons,
to the believing. They could be accepted as real, and yet carry no conviction
of faith. On the other hand, they undoubtedly moved sympathetic witnesses
and hearers; and St. Peter appeals to Christ's works of power and love as
witnessing to the presence of God with Him.' Similarly Bruce, The Miracu
lous Element in the Gospels, chap. 8, advocates the view that miracles 'enter
into the very substance of the revelation, and are not merely signs confirma
tory of its truth.'

132 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
reasonmgs. Thus directly present at the meeting point of every
element of our personality, his living word energizes to produce the
flash of conviction and direct certitude of the presence of God, the
truth of God and the redeeming purpose and power of God.
Two brief references of Paul to the divine activity in the con
firmation of faith, will summarize the preceding statements. In
I Cor. 2, 1 ff., his preaching was a declaration of the witness of God
in Christ, which led to conviction not by his persuasive words of
wisdom, but by demonstration of the Spirit and of power. And
equally his converts' faith was not the product of human wisdom
and reasonings, but was 'in the power of God,' as his living word
penetrated to the soul's depths; flashed within it the light of God's
exposure of its real state, of his hope for its redemption, of his
manifold witness in the redemptive facts of the Gospel; and evoked
a response of acceptance of its promise of a personal experience of
salvation. The second reference, II Cor. 1, 18-22, is more specially con
cerned with this resulting personal certitude of faith. Again,
vs. 18, it rests on the faithfulness of God as revealed in the Gospel.
For the Son of God Christ Jesus, as preached by His apostolic
messengers was not found to be yea and nay: promise and non
fulfillment of promise. But in Him is God's yea: the fulfillment of
all the divine promises of salvation. Hence through Him and His
Gospel preachers is the Amen: the profession of the believers'
certitude and experience of salvation by the yea of God in Christ.
And this Amen is to the glory of God; for it is He who confirms
into Christ, BeBai&v: who effects their immediate full assurance of
faith in communion with the certitude of the Apostles and all
saints; it is He who has anointed, and sealed and has given the
earnest of the Spirit in their hearts.
In this verse a reference to the baptismal rite is found by one
group of exegetes in 'anointed, ' as already used of Christ's baptism
in Acts 10, 38; and by another group, in 'sealed.' It is possible
that such a reference may be intended by both terms.21 In any
case sealing is here combined with the gift of the Spirit, cp. Eph. 1,
13; 4, 30, which in the New Testament is uniformly connected with
21 A. Seeberg, Catcsm. d. Urchristenheit pp. 226-234, argues that 'sealed'
definitely refers to the laying on of hands for the gift of the Spirit in the prim
itive baptismal service.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 133
baptism. It moreover states the means by which God is b Be-
fiaiwv. As a seal, the gift of the Spirit is a full assurance of the
fulfilhnent of the divine promises of vs. 20. Definitely it is the
confirmation in believers of the Old Testament promise of in
heritance, messianic salvation, gift of the Spirit. It rests upon the
immutability of His counsel, Heb. 6, 17, shown to the heirs of this
promise by two immutable things: by the divine promise and by
the oath, which is final eis BeBaiuaiv, vs. 16. God therefore is
6 BeBai&v as Christ, Rom. 15, 8, has been made a minister of
circumcision in behalf of the truth of God, that he might 'confirm'
the promises given unto the fathers. For how many soever be these
promises, in Christ is the Yea. The paprvpiov of Christ, I Cor. 1, 6,
His witness of the fulfillment in Him of these promises, was 'con
firmed' unto believers; or as in Heb. 2, 3, the so great salvation,
having first been spoken by Him was 'confirmed' unto them. And
it was confirmed and sealed unto them, vs. 4, by the reception of the
Spirit. With this gift come, Gal. 4, 6, and its paraUel Rom. 8, 15 f.,
full assurance of sonship, including as we saw in Rom. 5, 1 f . pardon
and peace for the past, present union with the Father and an ex
ulting hope of glory, because of assurance of the final consumma
tion of salvation: if sons, then heirs of God, joint heirs with Christ,
8, 17.
Of this ' salvation in hope, ' 8, 24, the initial gift of the Spirit is
an airapxn, a first fruits of a divine fulfillment; an earnest, dppa-
B&v 'with a view to a complete redemption which wih give pos
session,' Eph. 1, 14.22 It is not only a divine promise but a present
divine 'full assurance of hope,' Heb. 6, 11. Since it is to be the
support of the life of faith and an invigoration of moral energy
in the spiritual struggles of the present time, Rom. 8, 18-39, hfe
in the Spirit can be presented in the New Testament as a life
begun and perfected in the assurance of hope given in the earnest
of the Spirit of promise. This plerophoria is the keynote of the
doxology of I Pet. 1, 3-12, to God who begat us again to a living
hope; and the Epistle to the Romans issues in the prayer to the
God of hope that believers may abound in hope 'in the power' of
the Holy Ghost, 15, 13.
22 Deissmann, Bible Studies, 108, 230. The above interpretation of
irepiicoii)0~ is by von Soden and T. K. Abbott would support his explana
tion of BeBaiojffLS.

134 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
In the same prayer it is recognized that abounding in the living
hope is possible only 'in believing.' The plerophoria of hope
cannot be separate from that of faith and sonship. Both are
united in the arrabon of the Spirit of God's Son which He sends in
the confirmation of faith. For faith working through love is
as well the hypostasis, the 'substantiating' of, 'that which gives
real existence' to, the things hoped for. 'For we through the
Spirit by faith wait for the hope of righteousness.' 23
Throughout the New Testament teachings concerning the
confirmation of faith, we find illustrations and verifications of
Westcott's statement: "Revelation is out of life, in life and unto
life." It comes out of God's undivided life; and in the whole of
Christ's life as the truth, the righteousness, the redeeming love of
God. And it is presented as the regenerating power unto salvation
to our whole hfe at its central point of personality, which is the
unity of consciousness as at once feeling, knowing and doing: the
spirit of man whose consciousness of self, the world and of God is
direct and immediate. Upon this spirit of man God ever acts,
through whatever ministries and relationships, directly and im
mediately; and from this center of personality, illuminates the
intellect, constrains the affections with the love of Christ, invigor
ates the will for any renunciation and for absolute self-consecra
tion; and thus evokes the free response of faith, and confirms this
faith with the certitude of salvation in the personal experience of
the indwelling within the believer's spirit of the Spirit of His
glorified Son. 3. ESTABLISHMENT IN THE FAITH
The initial confirmation of faith is the foundation upon which
the succeeding Christian life is to be built up. Among the numer
ous expressions used in reference to the maintenance and develop
ment of the plerophoria, the most general term is establishment,
arnpi^eiv. We meet it in Paul's first missionary journey, Acts 14,
22. The ministry of conversion in South Galatia is followed by the
Apostle's return through the localities of his expulsion and persecu
tions, to 'establish' the souls of the disciples and to exhort them
23 Gal. 5, 5. 'H/uets yap Uvevpan e« irtoreus ekiriSa SiKaioo-vvris
aireKSexbpeda.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 135
to 'abide in the faith' amid the tribulations through which they
must enter the Kingdom of God. His next journey was not
begun as a missionary propaganda, but to visit these Galatian
brethren to see how they fare, and still further to establish them,
15, 36.41. The result of this visit was, 16, 5, that these churches
were fixed solidly, iarepeovvro, in the faith.
The word, its equivalents and corresponding phrases appear
constantly in the Acts and Epistles. All the technical expressions
for this establishment, the parallel ideas and metaphors rest on the
conception of Christian life, individual or corporate as a new
reality. It is a new birth of an incorruptible seed; a new planting
in the likeness of Christ's death and resurrection; a new building
up of living stones upon the foundation that is laid, which is
Jesus Christ.24 The metaphors point to corresponding goals.
The babes in Christ are to attain the measure of the stature of the
fulness of Christ; the plantings are to be filled with the fruit of
righteousness; the living stones to be built up into a holy temple in
the Lord, pillars which shall go out thence no more. To reach this
goal there is presupposed not only the initial work of conversion
but a spiritual feeding with milk and solid food and nurture in the
words of the faith and of the good doctrine; a watering and spirit
ual husbandry of the planting; and a building up of the living
stones upon their most holy faith.
These metaphors which are developed and applied throughout
the New Testament in passages too numerous and familiar for
transcription are directly concerned with the establishment of
faith. The fact that they appear in all groups of New Testament
writings, their frequent combination and at times without regard
to the mixture of metaphor, the working out of the detahs of the
figures in their application to Christian life and the assumed
familiarity of the readers with them, suggest their use in the ser
vices and ministries of the primitive Church; and further their
probable ultimate source in reminiscences of Christ's teachings.
He had declared the need of the new birth and becoming like little
children in order to enter the kingdom; had brought the Gospel of
sonship; had spoken of those who received his revelation of the
Father as babes. Of their growth and bringing forth fruit, he had
24 1 Pet. 1, 23. Jas. 1, 18. Gal. 4, 19. I Cor. 4, 15; Rom. 6, 5. I Cor. 3,
6 ff. cp. Mtw. 15, 13; Eph. 2, 20 ff.; I Pet. 2, 5.; I Cor. 3, 9 ff.

136 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
taught in his parables of sowing and in his allegory of the husbandry
of the vines. But most definitely the apostolic metaphor of
building, oUoSopri, recalls not only the building up of the Church
upon the rock, Mtw. 16, 18, cp. Eph. 2, 20 ff., but also the con
clusion of the Sermon on the Mount. In both reports in Mtw. and
Lk. from Q, the man who not only hears but does Christ's words is
likened to a man buUding, having first founded his house upon the
rock: CfKoibpnaev, redepehimo; and abiding stedfast, not wave-
tossed or wind-driven, Eph. 4, 14, when the floods came and the
winds blew and beat upon that house. The mixture of metaphor
in the Epistles is reminiscent of these Gospel comparisons. In
Eph. 4, 16, the body grows; and its growth is with a view to the
building up, oikoSojui?, of itseh in love. Christians in Eph. 3, 17,
are not only rooted but grounded on a foundation: redepehuapivoi;
and thus rooted, Col. 2, 7, are being built up and kept steadfast,
cp. 1, 23. Similarly in I Pet. 2, 2 f., the new born babes taste the
spiritual \oyiKbv milk that they may grow thereby unto salvation;
come to the living stone and are built up into a spiritual house.
The series of terms for development in the metaphor of body
and seed naturally emphasize the idea of progress towards fullness
of growth and fruitage: av£atj»w, irKeovafa, irepiaaevw. But
in the figure of building, the prominent idea is that of establish
ment, stedfastness, immovability, firm standing and abiding on
the foundation that is laid , as the living stones are built up and
reach the perfection of being a habitation of God in the Spirit:
ffrifpiypos, orepeoi, arrepeapa, iSpaioi, aperaKivnroi., tanna., eTrt-
ep-pevu, Karapriffpbs. The closing assurance of I Peter reviews
the process from the goal to the beginning: God will perfect, estab
lish, strengthen, keep them on the foundation.25 The aim of the
establishment, which is distinct from the confirmation of faith, is to
build up behevers upon it; to strengthen them so as to abide sted
fast and immovable amid all the experiences and trials of their per
sonal hfe; and against all the attacks on their faith and hope which
they were compeUed to face in the internal controversies and ex
ternal persecutions of the Apostohc Age.
Estabhshment by increase of spiritual stature, fruit of the Spirit,
upbuilding on the immovable foundation, is effected like the de-
26 1 Pet. 5, 10. Karapriaei, arripil-eL, adev&aei, Oe/xeXw!xret.

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 137
fense and confirmation of the Gospel, primarily by a divine minis
try in the soul. Paul is confident that he who has begun a good
work in the Phihppians will perfect it until the day of Christ;
and that as the witness of Christ was confirmed in the Corinthians,
God will keep them blameless in their firmness, )3e|8aicbo-et;
Php. 1, 6; 1 Cor. 1, 6.8. In the same conviction, Jesus is caUed
Hbws. 12, 2, the initiator and perfecter of our faith : apxvybs Kai
TeXeiwnfc. These assurances appear in a form and in connections
to suggest that they are echoes of the language of primitive Church
worship. They occur regularly in the prayers, thanksgivings and
doxologies of the writers. The prayers for the Thessalonians are
that God himself wiU establish their hearts blameless; that our
Lord Jesus Christ himseh and God our Father may estabhsh
them in every good word and work, and guard them from the
Evil: 1 Thess. 3, 11 f., cp. 5, 23; II Thess. 2, 17; 3, 3. To the Lord
the Apostle commends the Ephesian elders, since he is able to
build them up and give them the inheritance. And in the doxology
which concludes Romans, God is addressed as the one able to es
tabhsh the readers. The Palestinian writers repeat the thought
in the same forms. The assurance of divine estabhshment at the
close of I Peter has already been cited; and in the same strain is
Jude's doxology to God ' who is able to guard you from stumbling
and to cause you to stand without blemish before the presence
of his glory.' This confidence is moreover repeatedly based on
the hturgical formula, iriarbs b debs. He is faithful to his prom
ise of the messianic salvation brought in the Gospel. 'Faithful
is he who calls us, who also will do ' what He has promised in that
call, I Thess. 5, 24. 'Faithful is the Lord who will estabhsh and
guard you,' II Thess. 3, 2. He wiU 'confirm unto the end,' I Cor.
1, 8f., since 'faithful is God by whom ye were called into the
fellowship of his Son '; cp. I John, 1, 9.
As He uses human organs and means to effect conversion, so
he uses them for its estabhshment. The general means is feUow-
ship in the worship, work, ministry and hfe of the Church.26 Paul's
ideal for the Phihppians, 1, 27, is that they stand in one spirit,
26 A. Dorner, Kirche und Reich Gottes, develops his conception of the Church
from the thesis that 'the primitive Church has presented itself originally as a
Society for worship and that all its ensuing further functions have attached
themselves to this character of the Church.'

138 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
with one soul striving together for the faith of the Gospel. Since
the Apostolic ministry is the organ of this corporate life in one
spirit and soul, growth and establishment as well as conversion
will be found to be an essential function and aim of their ministry.
The function common to the several classes of ministers in Eph.
4, 11 f., is the perfecting of the saints; and for the realization of
this ideal, the various classes of general and local officers are given
'for the work of ministry, for the building up of the body of
Christ.27 This function and duty of the Apostles and founders
of churches is performed primarily by a personal visit whose
direct purpose was to estabhsh the souls of the disciples. So nor
mal a feature of primitive Church life was this, that Paul's fail
ures to make the visitation caUed forth as in I Thess. 2, 17-3, 13;
II Cor. 1, 15-23; Rom. 15, 14-23, most solemn defenses: assurances
to the Thessalonians of his abundant prayers to see their face and
to perfect what is lacking in their faith, I Thess, 3, 10; solemn
oaths to Corinthians and Romans, invoking God to witness the
real causes of his failure to visit them, Rom. 1, 9-16; II Cor. 1, 23.
Even when in bonds in Rome, the thought of official pastoral
visitation rises spontaneously, Philpp. 1, 25-30, and leads to his
conviction that although to depart and be with Christ would be
for himself very far better, yet he would hve to visit the Philippians
for their advance and joy in faith by means of his return and
presence among them. Other indications of this customary per
sonal ministry of the Apostles appear in II and III John. Corre-
27 All the critical texts by the omission of the comma after ' perfecting of
the saints' which is inserted in the Textus Receptus and English versions,
support the interpretation by Westcott, B. Weiss, Robinson, etc., that the
perfecting is for 'service.' Weiss's further omission of the comma after 'serv
ice,' points to their service as the upbuilding of the body. In the view adopted
above, Karapriapos is regarded in this context, as in those where it appears in
liturgical contexts, not merely as the process as in some other passages, but
as the ultimate goal, the reXeiaxris the attainment unto the avdpa riheiov
of vs. 13. The perfecting of the saints would thus be the result of Sta/owta
and OtKoSojui) and not their equipment for these functions. Ellicott supports
this view in connection with the charge of the prepositions: 7rpos Karapriapbv
referring to the more ultimate and final purpose, and ets — ets to the more
immediate purpose of the action. He paraphrases: ' God gave Apostles etc., to
fulfill the work of the ministry and to build up the body of Christ; his object
being to perfect his saints.'

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 139
spondence is inadequate for the many things the Elder has to
communicate, II John 12. He will visit them not simply for the
happiness of personal intercourse, but with the aim of their mutual
establishment, as seen in the solemn formula, 'that our joy may
be made full,' cp. I John 1,4; John, 15, 11 ; 16, 24; and also with the
aim of discipline of Diotrephes, III John 10. Heb. 13, 22 f. ex
presses a similar recognition of the limitations of the brief writ
ten word of exhortation, which is followed by a promise of a
personal visit and ministry. Peter's writing St' 6Xl7wi>, 5, 12,
reflects the same feeling of the advantages of personal exhorta
tion.28 So definite indeed is this recognition of the need of Apostolic
visitation and ministry for the establishment of believers, that
provision is expressly made in case of their inability to visit the
Churches. Timothy is commissioned to represent Paul at Thes
salonica, Philippi, Corinth and Ephesus; Titus at Corinth, Crete
and Dalmatia; Tychicus in Asia. Judas and Silas represent at
Antioch the Apostolic conference of Jerusalem. In this and in
all the other instances there is a distinct emphasis on their office
as ministers of God in the Gospel of Christ and also on the es
tablishment of disciples as the work they were to accomplish
either in association with Paul and Barnabas at Antioch, as by
the two Jerusalem hegoumenoi and prophets; or in Paul's en
forced absence by exile from Thessalonica, or from Corinth by
pressure of work, anxiety and desire to spare them, or from Philippi
and the Asian Churches, by imprisonment.
Of the detailed character of this ministry of personal vis
itation of churches already founded, Luke has given no
record in the Acts. It has been remarked that his direct
interest is in their founding. He has simply stated that
28 The struoturo of the sentenoe, St' b\iyuv 'iypaipa, irapaKaX&v Kai
iiripaprvp&v may illustrate the meaning of Rom. 15, 15: roKptiportpas
'iypaxf/a dir6 fiipovs, cbs iiravapipvhaKUV. It is usually understood as an
apology for portions of the Letter; or by Hofmann for what is fragmentary in
its teaching; or by Godet as reoalling things already known to a certain
degree. In view of the obvious objections to all these explanations, it may
be proposed that Paul is here expressing the usual sense of the limitations of
an Epistle to communioate the fullness of the spiritual gift for establishment,
1, 11 f. cp. 15, 29, whioh he hopes to share with them upon his personal visit,
1, 13; 15, 22 ff.

140 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the visits at the conclusion of the first missionary jour
ney and at the beginning of the second was to estabhsh the
souls of the disciples on the churches, and adds in the first state
ment, Acts 14, 22, a reference to the Apostles' ministry of 'ex
hortation to abide in the faith' and of ordination of presbyters.
Nothing further is narrated of his second visit to the churches of
Macedonia than that he gave them much exhortation, 20, 2. Not
a word is written of the three months' ministry in Greece, vs. 3.
The extended discourse before the Eucharist at Troas is men
tioned as introductory to the narrative concerning Eutychus. We
can therefore only conjecture what were the general features of
these visitations as we may recognize reflections of them in the
Epistles sent in heu of them. Like all letters they construct a
situation in which the writer is present with the readers; and def
initely in this case, present in spirit with the church assembled
for worship. Their fundamental aim is the same as that of per
sonal ministry in such a service: to impart some spiritual gift that
the hearers may be established, Rom. 1, 11. When writing, Paul
though absent in flesh, is yet with the Colossians in spirit, rejoic
ing and beholding their order and the stedfastness of theh faith
in Christ: rty ral-iv Kai rb arepiupa rrjs irlareas vp&v, cp.
1 Cor. 5, 3 f. Reuss, History of the New Testament, § 74, has
stated that the writings of Paul 'might be characterized by the
general name of pastoral epistles, inasmuch as the Apostle oc
cupies himself chiefly in them with the rehgious and ecclesiastical
condition of the churches to which he writes, and in which he had
formerly held, and wished still to hold the position of shepherd of
souls and spiritual guide.'
Since the Letters were written in the consciousness of such a
relation and situation, we should expect to find a general corre
spondence between their character and contents and that of the
personal ministry in the actual church service. Without entering
into the hturgical questions as to the order, forms and ministrants
in the primitive worship, we can recognize from the New Testa
ment allusions to it that it included the reading of the Old Testa
ment and some form of commemoration of the words of the Lord
Jesus; and based upon this, a preaching of the Word and a doc
trinal instruction. In addition there was the prophetic ministry
to whose functions Paul refers when in I Cor. 14, 6 he speaks of

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 141
coming himseh to the church service speaking either by way of
revelation or of knowledge or of prophesying or of teaching.
These utterances of the prophets are described in vs. 3 as edifica
tion, exhortation, consolation, cp. Acts 15, 32, and serve like the
other ministries in the Church service, for the estabhshment of
faith. Hence Timothy is directed, I Tim. 4, 13 ff. to give at
tendance to the customary pubhc reading of the Scriptures, ^
avayvaais, to the exhortation, to the teaching; and again, II Tim.
4, 2, is charged to preach the Word, to be urgent in season, out
of season, to reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long suffering and
teaching. And all these forms of instruction, exhortation and
disciphne are given in connection with the worship in prayer,
psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, and in the thanksgivings of
the Eucharistic service.
Whatever types of services distinct from the Lord's Supper
were developed, to which 'the unlearned and unbelieving' were
admitted, I Cor. 14, 23, 29 the Eucharist as the primitive and
principal Church service would always normally retain the ele
ments of instruction, exhortation and worship.30 McGiffert,
Apos. Age, p. 536, believes that the distinction made by Weiz
sacker between meetings for the Word and for the Eucharist may
fairly be drawn. He recalls, however, that it is not necessary to
suppose that such exercises as those assigned to the meeting for
the Word, 'did not occur in connection' with the Lord's Supper.
'It is altogether probable that when Christians came together to
break bread, they spoke and prayed and prophesied as they had
opportunity or as the Spirit gave them utterance.' A year later
than the references in I Cor. 11 and 14 to what are largely held
to be distinct services, Paul's service of Breaking Bread at Troas,
Acts 20, 7 ff., included extended discourse. In Hbws. 10, 25, the
assembling together for mutual exhortation and incitement to
love and good works, is developed in 13, 9 ff. with references to
the ministry of the Word, teachings, feeding from the altar, sac
rifices of praise and beneficence. We may also note in Pliny's
29 The distinction of services as meetings for the Word and for the Eucharist,
made by Weizsacker, Apos. Age, II, 246 ff., is modified by Lindsay, Church
and Ministry in the early Centuries, p. 43 f., by the further distinction of a
meeting for business.
*> Cp. Rackham, Acts, pp. 37, 39, 378.

142 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
letter to Trajan, that unless the Bithynian Christians altogether
abandoned the celebration of the Holy Communion, it must as
Lightfoot holds have been united with the early morning service
of exhortation and worship, as indeed we find it described a half-
century later in Justin, I Apology, 67. The Sunday service as there
described begins with a prolonged reading, pexpis iyx^PVi °f the
Memoirs of the Apostles or the writings of the Prophets. Where
upon the irpoearus by means of a discourse makes the instruction,
vovdeaia, and exhortation, 7rapd/cXijo-ts or incitement irpoKK-qats, to
the imitation of these good things. Next, all rise together and
offer prayers; after which the bread and wine are brought and the
irpoearus likewise offers prayers and thanksgivings.
It is significant in this connection that the New Testament
Epistles are also constructed in a framework of thanksgiving, prayer,
doxology and benediction. The three opening chapters of I
Thess. are interwoven into the sections of thanksgiving and
prayer which are used in the Pauline Epistles. The whole doc
trinal portion of Ephesians is the outpouring of doxology, prayer,
thanksgiving and again doxology. So too when present in the
spirit with the Colossians, the Apostle communicates his pro-
foundest Christological teaching in the form of thanksgiving and
prayer. Von Soden has emphasized the liturgical character of
these two Epistles. It is in fact a characteristic of all the Epistles
and of the Revelation. 31 We may also be reminded in the com
pressed opening references to the Old Testament and Gospel
foundation of the teaching which follows in the Epistles, e. g.,
Romans, Titus, Hebrews, cp. I Peter 1, 10-12 of the Anagnosis of
I Tim. 4, 13 and the introductory reading of the Old Testament
and Memoirs of the Apostles, mentioned by Justin. Following
this both in the Church service and in the Epistles, are the two
broadly marked forms of instruction: teaching on matters related
to the fundamental faith, and exhortation to a Christian hfe
under the inspiration of the Christian hope and in the fellowship
of the Church.32
31 Lindsay, op. cit., p. 45, in accord with Weizsacker, II, p. 260, beheves
'the author of the Apocalypse used the outline of the Christian worship of
the earhest age as the canvas on which he painted his glorious prophetic
visions.' 32 Deissmann's decision in Bible Studies, 49 ff. that Hebrews and the Catho-

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 143
The relation of this establishment, whether by personal ministry
on epistle, to the original confirmation of faith may be recognized,
next, in connection with the needs, occasions and general means
of the estabhshment. There was obvious need of a continued firm
grasp and of an increasing appropriation of the significance and
power of the redemptive facts and truths in which the disciples
had professed belief at baptism; that they should advance unto
all riches of the full assurance of understanding, unto direct ap
prehension of the mystery of God, even Christ, Col. 2, 2. Equally
constant was their need of establishment in a life of Christian
duty summed up in, 'Love is the fulfilling of the law'; that this
love should abound yet more and more in the sphere of direct ap
prehension and in every form of perception, and that they should
thus be filled with the fruit of righteousness, Php. 1, 9 ff. And
establishment was especially needed in their life of patient hope
of consummated salvation at their Lord's coming. As the hope
of salvation was central in their religious life: the outgrowth of
their faith and the animation of love and duty, it is naturally a
most prominent aim of the New Testament ar-qpiypbs. Every
writer reflects this aim that is revealed in the closing prayer of
Romans: that ye may abound in hope. In organic relation with
these three needs, one other is apparent: to be estabhshed cor-
porately in the life of Christian fellowship in the Church's minis
try, sacraments, worship and work in the Lord.
he Epistles or some of them are not real letters, as those of Paul, but tractates,
treatises in form of letters, booklets for the general Christian pubhc, or 'ht
erary epistles,' might be modified by the above view that the essential char
acteristic of a New Testament letter is not simply an intimate personal com
munication to a definite destination; but a communication to Christians who
recognize the ministry of the writers, containing such instruction and exhorta^
tion as would be given by the writers if they were personally present at the
Church service. The Cathohc Epistles are no more proved to be treatises
instead of letters by reason of variety of destination, than do the encychcals
to the Galatians and Ephesians cease to be real letters, on account of a similar
variety of destination. All of them are, though in part doctrinal, exhorta
tions on the topics and in the method which is found in the hortatory sections
of the Paulines. Hebrews, as regards structure, is no more a literary oration
on the plane of 4 Maccabees than is Romans. Its main hterary divisions
are in marked correspondence to those of Romans: Heb. 1, 1-4, O. T. and
Gospel basis to Rom. 1, 1-4; 1, 5-10, 18, doctrinal didaskaha to Rom. 1, 16-
11, 36; 10, 19-13, 17, paraklesis to Rom. 12, 1-15, 13; 13, 18-25, personal
communications, salutations, etc., to Rom. 15, 14-16, 27.

144 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
All these abiding needs are interrelated in the actual develop
ment of Christian life. Hence whUe the New Testament writers
are ordinarily concerned with meeting some one of them or special
phases of them, yet even in such cases the general needs are kept
in view and a general establishment in stedfastness at the center
and focus of hfe is aimed at. They are for the most part men
tioned together in the various familiar summaries of the aims of
the exhortations and prayers in the Epistles. The readers of
Jude in order to meet the false teachings denounced, need, vs. 20,
to build themselves upon their most holy faith; to worship in the
Holy Spirit; to keep themselves in the love of God; and to await
the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. The behevers
in Heb. 10, 19, already possessing entrance into the holiest by the
High Priesthood of Christ, need to draw near in the full assurance
of faith confirmed in baptism; in holding on without wavering to
the confession of the hope of salvation, resting on the fidelity of
God to fulfill his promise; in mutual stirring up to love and good
works; and along with these, by continuing to assemble in Christian
worship for mutual exhortation and strengthening. The rest of
the Epistle directly develops these four needs of estabhshment.
The disciples in Thessalonica, are standing in the Lord by faith,
I Thess. 3, 7-10; and Paul's prayer is that by his personal minis
try he may perfect what is lacking, rd varep-npara, in their faith;
and that the Lord himself would cause them to abound in love
and establish them in holiness until His Parousia, the object of
their hope; and after developing this walk in love supported by
the eschatological hope, 4, 11-5, 11, he exhorts concerning the
Church fellowship in 5, 11-22. Even in the exalted free move
ment of the devotional form of Colossians, it is noticeable that the
doctrinal establishment against the false teaching, 1, 14-23, is
interwoven with his thanksgiving for the readers' stedfastness in
faith, love and hope under the ministry of Epaphras, vss. 3-8, and
with his prayer, vss. 9-13, for their advance in fruitfulness in the
walk of love, their growth in the iwiyvuiois of God, their continu
ous strengthening unto all patience of hope, and for their joy and
thanksgiving in the interitance and fellowship in the kingdom of
God's Son.
Establishment in these fundamental features by the normal
upbuilding of a Christian life that was standing and strengthened

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 145
in the Lord and in the power of his might, and that was watching
in all perseverance and in united prayers, praise and thanksgivings,
Eph. 6, 20.18; 5, 19, was provided for in the Church worship,
teaching and work under the local ministry. The Thessalonian
clergy, I Thess. 5, 14, are to admonish the disorderly, encourage
the fainthearted, to support the weak, to be longsuffering toward
all, as Timothy is also to minister, II Tim. 4, 2, and as earlier
the Ephesian elders are urged to support the weak, Acts 20, 35.
But in that address and in the exhortations to pastoral ministra
tions in the Epistles a further need of establishment by reason of
perversions of the faith, hindrances to the walk in love, strains
upon the Christian hope or even denials of it, breaches in the
hfe of fellowship, by reason of attacks from within and from
without. The historical occasions of these are to be considered
later. But we may at once observe that the method of meeting
these attacks is from the fixed standing ground of the original
apologia of the Gospel witness accepted and confirmed in the
full assurance of faith. The Epistles are addressed to believers
who accept this basis of argument. We find in them therefore
no renewal of the original defense of the Gospel and no
vindication of any of the forms of its witness. They are
directed against teachings which are shown to be false be
cause they involve a denial of the real nature, implications
and consequences of the acknowledged Gospel facts and their
relation to human salvation; and because they threaten, in
stead of estabhshment in plerophoria, a shipwreck concerning
the faith.
Thus the Galatians are removing to another Gospel, are hin
dered from obeying the truth; yet there is no repetition or defense
of the original Gospel and its message of salvation, but an effort
to estabhsh them in it by proving that their willingness to seek
salvation by legalistic obedience, nullifies that Gospel; sets aside
the grace of God; imphes that Christ died for nought; causes
them to be severed from Christ, Gal. 2, 21; 5, 4. The denial of a
general resurrection, I Cor. 15, 12 ff., is confuted by showing it to
involve denial of Christ's resurrection, the falsity of the Apostolic
witness to it, and the nullity of the Christian's faith in his for
giveness: aU of which contradicts the profoundest Christian con
sciousness and professed belief. The readers of Hebrews are,

146 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
from some still debated cause, discouraged, if not wavering; and
probably concerning the Christian hope of the return of the in
visible Messiah. They again have need to learn the fundamental
elements of the beginning of the oracles of God, 5, 12. Yet the
writer does not teach them; but instead establishes them by his long
discourse and difficulty of interpretation, concerning the heavenly
priesthood of Christ based on the accepted Gospel of Christ's
divine sonship, 1, 1 ff. incarnation, redemptive death and res
urrection, 2, 5-18, and especially on his heavenly exaltation in
accordance with Ps. 110 which closes the Old Testament quota
tions in chapter 1, and of which the section 4, 14-10, 18 f. is his
exposition. Again, the Colossian heresy is met by presenting
the fuller development of the Christ's sonship, supremacy, sole
mediatorship and redemption, in accordance with the word of
the truth of the Gospel that is present with them, 1, 5. The
errorists in I John are likewise opposed by a confident appeal to
what the faithful heard from the beginning, 2, 24, and to their
original Christian experience, vss. 12-14. Those who teach a
docetic Christ, 2, 22; 4, 2 f., deny that Jesus is the Christ;
deny the Father and the Son. To whatever date II Peter
is assigned, it follows the primitive mode of maintaining dis
ciples in their stedfastness and growth in the grace and knowl
edge of Christ, 3, 17 f. This was not by the method of a
new and advancing apologetic, but by 'stirring up their sin
cere mind by putting them in remembrance' of the Old Tes
tament prophecies and of the commandment of the Lord
through the Apostles, 3, 1 ff.; although they know them and
are established in the truth that is in them, 1, 12 and the pll.
Jude, vs. 5.
This constant method of appeal in the Epistles to the original
Apostolic witness of the Gospel, recalls the special aim and
character of the written Gospels in reference to the establish
ment of the faith. The Epistles range in date from 50 to 90 A. D.
They of course refer to the fact of the rejection of the Gospel as
well known to the readers; yet do not state or discuss any of the
direct attacks upon it, which were current and constant. They
do not reveal that their readers are affected by such direct at
tacks. They manifest no tendency to create, strengthen or
develop a new apologetic; nor do they know of any proof different

ACCEPTANCE OF THE GOSPEL 147
from that of the propaganda which we find in the earliest period
in the Acts.
These Epistles, the recognized records of the period during
which it is alleged by Baldensperger, Weinel and Wernle that
there was a constantly developing and freely creative Gospel
apologetic, fail to furnish any support for that theory. The at
tacks on the Gospel preaching obviously demanded and received
an apologetic which could not wait for the composition of written
Gospels, after Christianity had spread from Jerusalem to Rome.
For the attack began with the earliest Apostolic preaching, even
with Christ's preaching. The defense therefore had to be made
at once; and made too against the whole line of objection which
would as readily occur to, and be urged by, opponents of the first
generation, as by those of any succeeding generation. And this
defence had thus to be made in connection with the initial preach
ing of the Oral Gospel, in synagogue debates and in the catechesis
of converts in the words and deeds of Jesus. The Epistles are ad
dressed to those who had certitude of faith in the validity of this
apologia. It is not renewed or developed but relied upon as the
foundation for establishment against any renewals of direct
attacks and also against forms of indirect attacks which would
ultimately subvert the truth of the accepted Gospel and the
Christian life of standing in the faith. That Oral Gospel and in
struction had, however, a far wider range of interests than that
of a defensive apologetic; and our written Gospels are not mere
reproductions of its original apologetic element; do not contain
it fully, much less creatively develop it; and are not dominantly
apologetic, both because they contain so much else besides an
apologetic element, and because they are all written for those
who are already believers. Like our Epistles they are written
primarily for establishment of these believers, not only in matters
of faith in Christ, but also in the Christian walk in love, in the
hope of salvation and in the fellowship in the Kingdom of grace.
Each Evangelist with his gift of 'inspiration of selection,' and
meeting the distinct needs of his readers, presents from the witness
of Christ's own life, teaching and work, the portions of that
self -revelation which will keep them in their stedfastness and full
assurance amid the temptations, attacks, errors and persecutions
surrounding them.

148 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
The historical occasions for this estabhshment and the definite
means of effecting it, can be considered in a survey of the external
attacks of the Jews and of the heathen State; and of the internal
attacks by Judaizers, and at the other extreme by Jewish Christian
gnostics.

CHAPTER VI
ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS
1. THE JEWISH ATTACKS
The Cross is the monument of Jewish rejection of the Gospel
in the person of its first Preacher. The Church of the Gentiles
is the monument of theh rejection of it as preached by the Church
of the Apostles, and of theh expulsion of it from the Jewish national
life. The New Testament has familiarized the world with the
history of their opposition. As their original polemic in the minis
try of Christ has aheady been considered, we need only briefly
recall the occasions and lines of their constant attack in the
Apostohc age.
In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ pointed to the original
and abiding character of that attack. The Jews saw in him a
man who was destroying the law and the prophets. To them
he seemed to be repudiating the messianic ideals of those prophets
and attempting to abohsh the rehgious and national institutions
of Mosaism. In his Sermon he at once refutes the charge with
the assertion: I came not to destroy but to fulfiU.1 He fulfiUs
the prophets, since he brings in his hfe and work the fullness of the
messianic promises of redemption in the kingdom; and he com
pletes the law both by revealing its deepest meaning as the ex
pression of the divine wiU, and also by his own perfect obedience
to it in its absolute meaning. But to men bhnd to this revelation
of the Christus consummator, his personal character and work
became inevitably the object of his opponents' attack. We have
previously found that there may possibly be an ahusion to the
slander concerning his birth in the boast of the Jewish rulers: we
were not born of fornication, John, 8, 41; his provenance from
Gahlee was exploited both as tainting him with its half-heathen
associations, and more definitely as in contradiction of the ex-
1 The passage Mtw. 5, 17-19 is discussed in connection with the principal
recent views by C. W. Votaw, H. D. B., V, pp. 22-25.

150 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
pectation of Messiah's origin in Bethlehem, John, 7, 41 f. His
sympathy with the outcast was the basis of charges that he too
was a sinner, a gluttonous man and a wine-bibber. His undeniable
miracles were turned into proofs that he broke the law of the
Sabbath, was in league with Satan, had a demon.
As W. Richmond has shown in his study of the Fourth Gospel,2
Christ's defense against all such attacks, necessitated a distinct self-
assertion of his Person and claims. Yet these self-assertions evoked
finaUy the charge that he was a blasphemer in claiming messianic
authority for a ministry and teaching which they found abhorrent,
and in basing this messianic authority on the claim of being God's
own Son. To his opponents, all their attacks seemed to be justi
fied by his death on the Cross amid their taunts: he trusteth on
God; let him deliver him, if he desireth him. The Cross would
further make incredible to them any reports of a resurrection,
even if supported by inexphcable facts. To the Sadducees the
idea of resurrection was in itseh impossible; equally impossible
to the Pharisees was the thought of a resurrection which involved
the death of Messiah, contradictory to their understanding of the
Old Testament prophecies. We should therefore expect that the
preaching of the resurrection of Jesus would evoke at once deter
mined attack by the Jewish opponents, especiaUy as it included a
renewal of Christ's own teachings and claims in his ministry. Yet
we are confronted with the fact that, with the exceptions that
will be considered, Christianity was openly preached in Jerusalem
from the Day of Pentecost until the murder of James the Brother
of the Lord, near the outbreak of the Jewish revolution.
This glorification of one who was crucified as a blasphemer,
would seem to be an equal blasphemy; and therefore the tolera
tion in Jerusalem of the constantly repeated Apostohc witness to
the facts and issues of the resurrection is significant. It indicates
that the rulers can bring forward to Jewish inquirers who have
every interest to know the full truth, no rebutting facts that
would satisfactorily account otherwise for the open grave, the
empty tomb, the undisturbed grave cloths, the vanished body.
Gamaliel and the Pharisees in the Sanhedrin a quarter of a century
later, refer to no opposing fact; and at the council in Jerusalem
we hear that Pharisees have become converts. There are, however,
2 See p. 29, note 2.

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 151
three attempts to throttle the new movement : by the Sadducees,
the Pharisees, and by the Herodian King Agrippa I.
The inaction of the Sadducean rulers at the Pentecost renewal
of the messianic movement might be partly accounted for as a
politic non-interference lest there should be an uproar among the
favorably excited multitude. And for a period it might be ignored
as it was clearly not a political but a rehgious movement marked
by strictest Jewish loyalty and by highest type of Jewish piety.
The first attack was occasioned by the new stage of evangehza
tion in Acts 3. This we have seen was a renewed effort to win
converts from among those who while holding the disciples in
favor, withheld their own allegiance partly by unwilhngness to
fulfiU the rehgious conditions; and probably more largely because
their ignorance of the Old Testament teaching of a suffering
messiah prejudiced them against the vahdity of the other forms
of witness for the truth of the Gospel. Hence the emphasis in
Peter's discourse on the prophecies of a suffering messiah which
the Jews and their rulers fulfilled in ignorance; next the significance
of the miracle of healing as a manifestation of the spiritual gift
of the Apostles received from the risen Jesus; and still more def
initely the preaching of the power of his resurrection life as the
sole source of salvation, 3, 26; 4, 12, thus raising the question of the
relation of the Gospel and Mosaism as means of redemption.
The sermon thus centering on the resurrection as prediction,
historic fact, source of the gift of miraculous power, of salvation
and of a general resurrection, 4, 2, while it increased the number
of converts to five thousand, inevitably provoked also the chal
lenge of the Sadducean party as to the source and character of
the healing of the lame man, upon which this preaching of the
resurrection was based. It is met directly by the ascription of
the miracle to the invocation of the risen Jesus and by the procla
mation of the fulfillment of his own prediction to the rulers : the
stone set at nought of the builders is become the head of the
corner. The manifested power of the glorified Christ in the hfe
and ministry of his Church is the final witness, completing all
the other forms of witness. WhUe there could be no denial of
the fact and power of the miracle, the opponents refuse as in their
earlier rejection of the divine witness in Jesus' ministry, to recog
nize its spiritual significance as a manifestation of the power of

152 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Christ's resurrection hfe. Their only answer to the preaching of
the resurrection is to dismiss the Apostles with threats and a com
mand of silence.
And when this first attack leads to a new outburst of Christian
zeal and to successful propaganda accompanied by spiritual gifts
of heahng, the arrest of all the Apostles is again foUowed by their
proclamation of the resurrection, exaltation and redemptive
heavenly ministry of Christ, witnessed by them and by the gift
of the Holy Spirit to behevers, 5, 30 ff . Again there is no opposing
argument and no allegation of facts which would controvert
Gamaliel's counsel of inaction. The Apostles though scourged
for their disobedience to the command of silence which is now
repeated, ceased not to preach both in the Temple and privately
that the Christ is Jesus.
Gamaliel's advice reveals the distinct policy of the pharisaic
party in this Sadducean first attack on the issue of the resurrection.
It was not a pohcy of indifference to the spread of a messianic
movement nor to its preaching of resurrection. They were of
course interested in both. But they refuse to accept or to condemn
the Gospel propaganda on the issue of the resurrection of Jesus.
They will not agree that the Apostles' testimony to the fact of
the empty tomb, the appearances, or their claim of gifts of the
Spirit from the risen Jesus, prove his resurrection. And this, not
because it was incredible that God should raise the dead, but
because it was incredible both that God should raise one who to
them was a blasphemer, and also from their understanding of the
Old Testament, that he would permit the Christ to die. Nor on
the other hand will they agree to put the Apostles to death on the
Sadducean ground of the impossibility of any resurrection; or in
the absence, so far as appears, of direct attack upon the Apostohc
testimony and upon the reahty of their spiritual experiences and
gifts. ' Whether it be of God,' will be determined for the Pharisees
by the tests which time will bring, of the reality of a divine work
in this mission. One test will, to the Pharisees, be the continuance
of their loyalty to Jewish- institutions and of their devotion to
Jewish ideals of piety. This the disciples at present exhibit.
They formed indeed a new party among the many strange
divisions of the Jews of the time; but it was marked by in
tense devotion to the Old Testament, to the temple worship

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 153
and to the hope of a messiah to come in judgment to consum
mate the kingdom.
The general Jewish attack, in which the Pharisees doubtless
joined, was first made when Christianity was suspected to lead
to consequences involving disloyalty to Judaism. The bold
spirit of Stephen had occasion in the wider theological discussions
in the synagogues of the HeUenistic Jews, at which Saul of Tarsus
might weU be present, to develop the universahstic elements of
the Gospel and its true relations to legalism and sacrificial wor
ship. This transpires both from the distorted charges of blas
phemous words against Moses' law and customs and of the
destruction of the temple, 6, 14, ; and equally from Stephen's de
fense that the religion of Israel began with the promise of universal
blessing through Abraham's seed ages before Moses; that in
Moses' age, the sanctuaries were outside the Holy Land; that
Solomon and Isaiah asserted that heaven was God's true temple;
that they and theh fathers resisting the Holy Spirit, had not
kept the law of Moses, but had rej ected him and kiUed the prophets ;
as now they had kiUed the Prophet of whom Moses spoke and the
Righteous One of the prophets' predictions: the Son of Man now
standing at God's right hand.
That such consequences of Christian teaching would especiaUy
arouse pharisaic opposition and impel them to agree to the death
of its preacher, is seen in the approving presence of Gamaliel's
pupil, Saul of Tarsus, at Stephen's martyrdom, and in the per
secution of the Jerusalem Church. Saul's own persecution by
the Jews at Damascus and by the Hellenist Jews at Jerusalem,
although other Christians were unmolested, indicates that his
conversion and his stay in Arabia had resulted in his adoption
of Stephen's teaching. The Jewish and Judaistic opposition to
it wUl meet us in the consideration of Paul's mission work.
The third attack came from the Herodian King Agrippa. No
definite occasion for it is recorded. From the brief mention that
James was lolled with the sword, it has been assumed that the
persecution was for pohtical reasons rather than on charges of
blasphemy or disloyalty to Judaism. The new king is known to
have revived and developed the definite Herodian nationalist
pohcy; with this he inherited the Herodian suspicion of the spread
ing messianic movement, with its possible dangers both for his

154 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
own rule and also for the relations between the Jewish State and
the Empire. In addition, however, to pohtical motives in thus
attacking the organization by the murder of its prominent leaders,
Agrippa would no doubt sympathize with the general Jewish
attitude at this time towards the Church. He has been called ' a
model of Pharisaic piety'; and it is possible, in view of the state
ment that his persecution pleased the Jews, that his attack may
also have been connected with Pharisaic and general Jewish in
dignation that the Jerusalem Church, cp. Acts 8-11, was coun
tenancing the admission into Jewish Christian fellowship, not
only of the hated Samaritans but even of the heathen Greeks of
Antioch. But after the king's death we hear no more of perse
cutions at Jerusalem, where, 21, 20, the many thousands of Jewish
behevers are all zealous for the law; and where they repudiated a
Christianity which would teach to Jews apostasy from Moses,
as Paul was alleged to preach. It should not be overlooked that
even at Paul's arrest, no attack was made on the Jerusalem Church.
Freedom from further Palestinian Jewish attack points both to
Sadducean failure to prevent the preaching of Jesus and the resur
rection, and to the zealous loyalty to Judaism and the Jewish
State, of the mass of Palestinian Christians. But whenever in
Jerusalem and wherever in Paul's preaching in the Dispersion,
that zeal was suspected, all the objections of unbelieving and
relatively tolerant Jews burst forth. Thus in the South Galatian
cities, 13, 45, upon Paul's preaching in the synagogue crowded with
the heathen come to hear his second sermon in which as in the
climax of the first sermon, vs. 38 f., he would develop the uni
versalism of the Gospel and its emanicipation from legahsm, the
Jews were filled with fflhos. This is more in this connection than
the 'envy' of the Authorized Version. It is the 'jealousy' of the
Revised Versions, and definitely a zeal for God: for God's faithful
ness to his promises to his elect nation observing his law. It is
jealousy and zeal for the divine privileges of Israel. Paul's
preaching, they are convinced, ignores and denies them. Filled
with this zeal, 'they denied the things spoken by Paul and blas
phemed.' Now the main portion of the reported speech, as was
fitting to the occasion, was the meaning of the Old Testament
messianic prophecy and its fulfillment in Jesus. Their denial
therefore would most naturally refer to their denial of the witness

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 155
of prophecy. And their blasphemy likewise would apply to the
Apostle's presentation of the witness of Christ's hfe and resurrec
tion, cp. Knowhng, B\aaipr)povvres nomen Christi, and would be
a renewal of the usual Jewish attacks upon it. In the Corinthian
synagogue also, 18, 6, the result of his customary preaching to
Jews and Greeks was the same exhibition of Jewish zeal: they
opposed and blasphemed. From the immediate context it again
appears that their opposition was to his interpretation of mes
sianic prophecy; and their blaspheming was against Paul's claim
that the Christ of prophecy was the Jesus whose hfe, teachings
and resurrection he preached to them.3 Their zeal, as here in
Corinth, in South Galatia and as expressly stated, in Thessalonica,
led also to denunciations of the Apostle to the civil authorities on
the charge of law breaking or disloyalty, which will be considered
later. The attacks of the Dispersion Jews are the repetition of the
original and constant Jewish attacks upon the Gospel. All the
essential features of Jewish opposition to Christ were aheady
present and had been urged against him in his lifetime, as was
discussed in connection with Polemic in the Gospel. They are
all presupposed by his crucifixion. In the Apostohc preaching of
the resurrection, the difficulties of behef in it were obvious to the
Jews at its first proclamation. There was no occasion as Baldens
perger assumes in his Urchristliche Apologie for Jewish unbehevers
gradually to present new arguments against it, to be met as gradu
ally by newly invented proofs. The three attacks on the Jerusa
lem Church were the outgrowths of the original and persistent
rejection and calumniation of the Gospel of Jesus and his resurrec
tion and of the a'lpeais of his disciples, by the ruling classes. The
advance of the mission to the Jewish dispersion, with the bold
preaching of the universalism of the Gospel salvation, was met
at once by the contradiction and blasphemy current in Palestinian
Judaism. Dispersion Jews might have some acquaintance with
it from their attendance at the Jerusalem festivals; but we learn
* The additions in D to the text of both these passages are based on a
similar understanding of the Jews' attack. 13, 45 is introduced with iro\vv
re \byov iroinaapevov irepl rov Kvpiov; in 18, 5 after rbv Xpiarbv
'Iifaovv, ttoXXoO Se X670U yevopivov Kai ypa<pa>v diepprjvevopevcov
is inserted before vs. 6.

156 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
from Justin Martyr and Eusebius of their equipment for opposi
tion by an official counter mission from Jerusalem before its faU.4
We know of Saul's Jewish mission against Christians in strange
cities. Some ten years later he himseh experiences a definite
Jewish denunciation of his Gospel in distant Galatia; later a well-
organized attack at the beginnings of his work in Thessalonica;
and at Rome he hears from the Jewish officials that the Christian
sect is everywhere spoken against. These continuous attacks
iUustrate Justin's statement to the Jew Trypho, c. 117, 'that the
high priests of the Jews and their teachers have caused the name
of the Son of God to be profaned and blasphemed in every land';
and this, c. 17, 'by sending chosen men saying that a godless and
lawless party of Christians had appeared: disciples of a Gahlean
deceiver, ir\avos, who stole his crucified body by night from the
tomb and deceive men by asserting that he is risen and ascended.'
These 'appointed' Jewish missionaries further claim that the
Gahlean 'taught the godless, lawless and unholy doctrines which
the Jews urge against those who confess him to be Christ, teacher
from God and Son of God.' Eusebius, quoting from writings of
the ancients, more definitely reports that Jewish priests and elders
sent 'apostles' with formal letters to Jews of every country
calumniating the preaching concerning our Saviour, rbv irepl rov
aurijpos \byov, commanding Jews not to receive it, and slandering
the teaching of Christ as a atpeais, new and ahen to God.'
These thorough-going attacks on the fundamental faith by
Jerusalem and Dispersion Jews had to be met at once in the
apologetic element of the mission preaching; and as we have seen
by the general method of exposition of messianic prophecy as
pointing to the suffering and exaltation of messiah; of showing
thereupon that this Christ is Jesus, with the manifold forms of
witness in his hfe and ministry, with the witness of his resurrection
from the Scriptures, the Apostohc testimony and the sending of
the Spirit as a ght of a new redeemed lhe in believers and as the
source of their spiritual gifts. AU necessary detaUs of this apologia
would naturally be developed in the preparation of converts for
admission to Church fellowship. Their acceptance of baptism
and the accompanying direct certitude of faith, BeBaiwais, shows
* The texts from Justin's Dialogue with Trypho, cc. 17.108.117 and from
Eusebius on Isaiah 18, 1 are given by Harnack, Mission, etc., I., 58 f.

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 157
that the Jewish attacks on the fundamentals of faith had been
convincingly repeUed by the defense of the Gospel.
The further estabhshment of faith has been shown to be not a
renewed and advancing apologetic against the persistent denials
of it, but against various forms of perversion of it. One such
special need of estabhshment arose in connection with the Jewish
difficulty which has been presented as the source of Pharisaic
persecution in Jerusalem and of the denial in the Dispersion
synagogues of Christian messianism and of Jesus' messiahship.
It was their zeal for the divine privileges of Israel. Stephen's and
Paul's universal Gospel seemed in its consequences to involve a
denial of the fidehty of God to his promises to Israel. When it
came to a conflict between that fidehty and any other teaching
or gospel 'let God be true and every man a liar.' In Paul's direct
grappling with this difficulty he bears fervent witness to the Jews
that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge,
Rom. 10, 1 f. He therefore will estabhsh the Romans by devoting
the most profound chapters of his epistle, 9-11, to the problem
of the election of Israel to the sevenfold glories which he names
as he begins, and as the crown of all: Israehtes, of whom is Christ
as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever.
The genius of F. C. Baur and the penetrating insight of Dr. Hort
recognized the fundamental importance of these chapters in
Paul's estabhshment of Christian faith. It is quite true as Sanday
objects that they are not the heart of the Epistle, which is Chapter
8 with its positive statement of the hfe of justification by faith.
They do not form the climax to which the rest of the Letter is an
introduction, especially if the Letter is viewed with Baur as a
polemic against Roman Judaizing Christians. But they are
aimed at the heart of Jewish attack on the Gospel. They are of
primary importance for the New Testament claim of the con
tinuity of revelation in the law and prophets and Gospel. San-
day's conclusion, Romans, p. xiv, that the section treats of 'a
problem which belongs rather to the circumference of St. Paul's
thought than to the center,' is unassaUable if the basis of the com
parison is the essential relation of the center and circumference,
but not if it meant to suggest the distance of the teaching of these
chapters from the central thought of the Apostle. Something
of this last suggestion seems to be implied in his accompanying

158 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
statement that 'it is not so much a part of his fundamental teach
ing as a consequence arising from its collision with an unbelieving
world'; although to this must be added his final summary of the
chapters, p. Ii, as tracing the method and plan of the purpose of
God 'to sum up aU things in Christ.'
The Apostle's sense of the fundamental importance of the
problem is seen in the fact that he states it in the opening of the
third chapter before proceeding to his intervening six chapters on
justification by faith; and completes the teaching of those chap
ters by the exposition of his Christian philosophy of God's eternal
purpose of universal redemption, to be reahzed Kar' eKhoyhv, by
the method of election. The Jewish objection he had to meet
is: Jewish refusal to accept justification by faith in Christ, in
volves in Paul's teaching that God has rejected his elect people;
that his word of sure mercies and everlasting covenant favor has
failed ; yes, proves that God is unfaithful to his promise. Evidently
the underlying question here, is the real nature of election. The
Apostle affirms it in absolute terms. It is an essential principle
of the rehgion of Israel; of the idea of a Church of God: his se
lection, training and use of men to be his instruments in accom
plishing his wiU that aU men should be saved and come to the
knowledge of the truth. The nature of election is to be learned
from examples of divine elections. It is not mechanical; not a
matter of mere physical descent, as is witnessed in the election of
Isaac, although Ishmael too is Abraham's son. Nor is it based
on human merit of works, in view of the pre-natal election of
Jacob instead of Esau. Elections and rejections depend on the
sovereign grace of God who chooses Moses and overrules hardened
Pharaoh and hardened Israel as instruments to work out the
eternal purpose which is accomphshed by this method of choice,
¦fl Kar' iKhoyhv irpbdeais rod deov.
There is, however, no injustice in these elections and rejections
in view of his longsuffering which enables him to reveal the wealth
of his glory on vessels of mercy, beheving Jews and Gentiles to
whom the Gospel came by reason of Jewish rejection and per
secution of it. The cause of the partial and temporary rejection
of Israel is their zeal, without knowledge, for righteousness by
mosaic legalism; which renders them deaf to Christ's Gospel of
universal salvation. Yet the rejected portion of Israel will at

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 159
length be saved by means of the elect remnant. For it is pre
disposed for re-engrafting into spiritual Israel, because still pos
sessing the zeal for God, of the root and first fruits of the patri
archs' devotion. When the fullness of the Gentiles is come, the
heathen world's conversion to Israel's God by the Gospel which
came to them upon Israel's rejection of it, wiU 'provoke Israel to
jealousy.' They wiU have a new zeal for God thus witnessing to
the Gospel as the power of the world's salvation; will themselves
accept that Gospel, and thus by God's redeeming methods of
elections, aU Israel shall be saved.
Thus were the Roman Christians estabhshed in faith against
this Jewish attack caused by blind zeal for God. But while they
were reading the Epistle, its writer was journeying towards
Jerusalem where this Jewish zeal would seek his hfe from the
Roman State. 2. THE CONFLICT WITH THE STATE
The conflict of Christianity and the Roman State in the period
covered by the Gospels and Acts, is presented in the New Testa
ment as due to Jewish attack and instigation. The apologists of
the second and third centuries likewise ascribe later persecution to
Jewish denunciation. Their charge is summed up in Tertulhan's
statement, Scorpiace 10: synagogas Judseorum fontes persecu-
tionum. In the concluding section of Acts, their lawyer Tertullus
presents to the Procurator Felix the strongest Jewish case against
the Apostle whom they hate for his preaching of universal salvation
and freedom from legahsm. He adroitly formulates four charges
under whichjthe rehgious controversy is presented as a case affecting
Roman law and administration, 24, 1 ff. Paul is first denounced as
to his personal character. He is Xotuos : a pest, and as such spread
ing social disorder, for the repression of which, Fehx had received the
flattering exordium of vs. 2 f . Next, his propaganda is a stirring up
of dissensions or tumults, araaeis, among the Jews throughout the
world. It was a repetition of the charge at Thessalonica, 17, 6, of
being disturbers of law and order in the Roman Empire: of 'turning
the world upside down, ' avaarariaaavres. And here too it is fol
lowed by a charge intimating disloyalty to Rome: he is a ringleader
of the sect of the Nazarenes, whose leader was crucified for sedition.
Finally he had attempted to profane the Temple; thus defying the

160 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
imperial sanction and privileges of Judaism as a religio hcita, and
thereby proving that his sect had no share in the Roman recogni
tion and protection of Israel's religion.
These charges made midway in the Apostohc Age offer a con
venient basis for the consideration of the estabhshment of the
faith in conflicts with the State. They sum up the charges made
to Roman officials in the constant Jewish attacks upon the Apostle
in the mission field. In their range and connection they embrace
the outstanding topics of the later charges in the State persecutions:
personal crimes, contempt for law and estabhshed social order,
disloyalty to the Imperial government and to the State rehgion.
They already suggest the famihar later terms: the fiagitia and
odium humani generis, in Tacitus, Ann. 15, 44; the genus hominum
superstitionis nova ac maleficce, in Suetonius, Nero, 16. They are
reflected in Tertulhan's expostulation: 'you consider a Christian
to be a man guilty of all crimes; an enemy of the gods, emperors,
laws, morahty and of all nature,' Apol., 2. And they are
especially significant as they substantially repeat the Jewish
charges against Christ before Pilate. It has often been pointed
out that Luke recognizes this fact, in view of the parallels in
the literary structure of his accounts of the trials of Jesus and of
his Apostle.
The crucifixion of Christ under Pontius Pilate and Paul's ap
peal to Caesar for judgment on the Jewish charges against him,
bear witness to the inevitableness of an ultimate conflict, under the
historic conditions, between the Gospel and the Roman State.
Christianity was born into a rehgious-pohtical problem. Messiah
and kingdom are terms exploited both by the Sanhedrin at Pilate's
judgment seat and the Jews before the politarchs of Thessalonica,
as charged with pohtical significance and references. These
references range from the materiahstic ideals of the Zealots, down
through the Pharisaic conceptions, to the spiritualized messian-
ism of the Quiet in the Lord, as expressed in the Magnificat and
Benedictus. Here, messianic redemption includes 'scattering the
proud, putting down potentates, exalting humbled and suffering
Israel; salvation from our enemies, that we might serve God in
holiness and righteousness under the coming messianic king.'
Throughout his ministry Christ was transforming even this
spiritualized messianism in his preaching of the kingdom and in

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 161
making known its mysteries. The beatitudes of the Sermon on the
Mount reveal the true ideal of the kingdom. But the inevitable
conflict with the kingdoms of the world, already foreshadowed in
the third temptation, is declared in the beatitude on those who are
persecuted for righteousness' sake and for Christ's sake. The
relation of his disciples to the State was fixed for them in his own
example and teaching. There must be recognition, loyalty and
support of the State : render unto Csesar the things that be Caesar's.
Equally, is his command of absolute devotion to the things of God.
Along with this two-fold relation and duty, he gives on the same
day a direct prediction of a conflict in fulfilling it. "Ye shall be
brought before governors and kings for my sake, " Mk. 13, 9. And
under this persecution, they must submit: 'in your patience ye
shall win your souls, ' Lk. 21, 19. Most directly, however, does he
reveal the relation of his kingdom to the State, when he is himself
brought before the Roman governor. 'Art thou a king? Thou
sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born that I should bear
witness to the truth. My kingdom is not of this world,' John 18,
36 ff. And in 19, 11 in reply to Pilate's claim of authority he
asserts 'the real relation of the civil and theocratic powers: PUate's
judgment was legally decisive; but his right to exercise authority
was derived, not inherent. Human government is only vahd as
the expression of the divine wiU. He who exercises it is responsible
to a higher power.' 5
Before considering the attitude of the Apostohc Church to the
State as based on these principles, reference must be made to the
persistent claim that the New Testament account of conflicts with
the Empire is not a historical picture, but is constructed with an
apologetic aim. It is asserted that in order to defend Christianity
from the suspicion of being a revolutionary movement, since the
crucifixion proclaims the fact that its leader was executed by the
Romans for sedition, the history of the passion in the Gospels and
Acts has been framed so as to excuse the Romans, thus winning the
favor of Roman officials; and so as to make Pilate a witness to
Christ's innocence, thus freeing his foUowers from suspicion of
disloyalty. This view is stated in general terms by Canney, Enc.
5 Westcott, Gospel accdg. to St. John, in loc. See also his essay in Epistles
of St John, The Two Empires: The Church and the World, pp. 249 ff.; and
Sanday-Headlam, Romans, pp. 369 ff., The Church and the Civil Power.

162 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Biblica, 4160 f., and is summarized more definitely by Weinel:6
"Especially in the Third Gospel and Acts are found declarations
that were clearly to protect Christianity against accusations of a
revolutionary disposition and attitude. " In Acts we have " not the
picture of history, but the tendency to prove to the higher circles
of Romans for whom Luke has intended his book, that the first
Roman officials with whom Christianity came in contact . . .
fully recognized its harmlessness for the State. "
Against the assumption underlying this view, that the Third
Gospel and Acts are apologies to the heathen, we again recall the
fact that they are not 'addressed to unbelievers, but are written for
the estabhshment of the faith of disciples. Further, an examina
tion of the unquestioned facts reveals no occasion for such an
apologetic tendency as is alleged. Neither before nor after the
crucifixion, did the Romans regard Christianity as a seditious
movement. Pilate was in office from the ministry of the Baptist
until the death of Stephen. He would have full information con
cerning the ministry of Christ, yet never interfered with him.
Even after the crucifixion he ignored the preaching of the Apostles.
His attitude is expressed by the title on the Cross. It was the
Roman official's mockery and contempt both for the Jewish
teacher and for the Jewish messianic hope and religion. He could
scorn a movement opposed by aU classes of Jews in authority; by
the Jerusalem crowds, who would be the most intense nationalists;
by the pilgrim hosts who were listless; and by Herod, whose
mockery of Christ with a royal robe expressed not only the Te-
trarch's scorn of Christ's person, but also of the political sig
nificance of the movement. Pilate's successor Festus takes the
same position. He speaks of the dispute concerning the resur
rection, Acts 25, 19, as merely ' concerning a certain Jesus who is
dead whom Paul affirmed to be alive. ' To him the Jewish charges
do not involve disloyalty to Rome, but are 'questions concerning
their own superstition. ' So Gallio at Corinth, Tacitus and Sue
tonius at Rome. Christianity was not persecuted as a revolution
ary movement, but as a baleful superstition.
The Evangehsts had therefore no occasion to disarm Roman
suspicion of the disciples' loyalty; nor do they betray an apolo-
• Bib. Theologie des N. T., § 93. Die Apologetik gegen das Heidenthum
und den Staat, besonders bei Lukas, 445 f.

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 163
getic tendency, increasing from Mark onwards, to excuse Pilate
and win Roman favor. The stress, in the narratives of the trial, is
on the Jews' rejection of theh Messiah, even when PUate was
willing to release Jesus. In Mark's very abridged account the two
controlling interests are, first, Pilate's mockery of the charge of
sedition by his scornful use of the title 'King of the Jews' as
addressed to Jesus, 15, 2, and twice to the crowds, vss. 9 and 12;
and, second, in the principal section, 6-15, the Jews' choice of a
murderer in preference to theh Christ, in response to the Pro
curator's first offer to release Jesus according to the custom of the
feast, and theh demand for his crucifixion in reply to the question,
' what evil hath he done. '
In Luke's use of this condensed Markan narrative, he adds in
23, 2, the meaning of the charge ' King of the Jews ' : perverting the
nation, forbidding tribute and claiming to be Messiah, a king. As
introductory to the Herod section taken from his special source
L, a section "which ought never to have been suspected by a sane
criticism," Moffatt, D. C. G., II, 755 a, Luke reports from L. vs.
14/ PUate's declaration of his conviction of Christ's innocence,
which is involved in Mk. 15, 9.14. The Barabbas passage is
abbreviated from Mark, and with no additions or heightening of
Pilate's statements of Christ's innocence. To his two professions,
the one involved in Mk. 15, 9 f. and the other made in Mk. vs. 14,
Luke has added another at the conclusion of the Herod section,
vs. 14; and he therefore states in vs. 22, in reply to the demand for
crucifixion, that PUate has said three times, ' I have found no cause
of death in him. ' Thus, as was noted in Mark's account, Luke's
interest is hkewise first, in PUate's acquittal of Christ of the charge
of sedition, which is simply in accordance with his noninter
ference with the Gospel preaching before and after the crucifixion;
and next, specially in the fact of the Jewish rejection of Christ and
choice of Barabbas, in the section which is both introduced by and
concluded with the description of him as seditious and as a mur
derer. Luke's definite interest in stating Pilate's threefold pro
fession of Christ's innocence is indicated in the speciaUy emphatic
forms of his report of the Jewish repudiation of them. On his
first profession, vs. 4, ' they were the more urgent, iiriaxvov, saving
he stirreth up the people. ' The word eiriaxvov is used here only in
7 B. Weiss, Quellen d. Lukasevg., p. 225.

164 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the New Testament. On the second profession, vs. 18, 'they cried
out aU together, away with this man.' 'AviKpayov is elsewhere
used by Luke in 4, 33; 8, 28, of the shrieks of demoniacs, and
¦Kavirkndei is used nowhere else in the Greek Bible. To the third
profession 'they were urgent with loud voices' irreKeivro <f>avaZs
/ie-ydXats, for his crucifixion.
In Mtw. 27, 11-14, we find only the usual editorial treatment of
the Markan examination passage. In the Barabbas section, the
revision of the Markan paraUels in vss. 17 and 20, emphasises
the deliberate Jewish choice of Barabbas and demand for Jesus'
destruction; and the change in vs. 22 from Mark's 'they cried out,
crucify him' to 'they aU say, let him be crucified, ' shows that the
interest of this Evangelist also is in emphasizing a national re
jection of the Christ. He omits Mark's description of Barabbas's
crimes; but makes two insertions, vss. 19 and 24 ff . Whatever be
theh source, they serve no apologetic interest in the conflict of the
Church and Empire. A dream of PUate's wife could contribute
nothing to the establishment of Christ's innocence. The interest,
in narrating PUate's washing of his hands, is indicated in the reply
of 'ah the people, iras 6 Xaos, his blood be on us and on our chil
dren. ' We thus can find in the Synoptics no increasing heighten
ing of the testimony of PUate to Christ's innocence; no excusing of
his cowardice and dishonor as a judge, much less an increasing
palliation of it; or any suggestion of an apologetic tendency to
remove an assumed Roman suspicion of the treason of Christians,
which indeed was not the basis of the State persecution of them.
In the Fourth Gospel we find the same controlling interests as
in the Synoptics in recording PUate's rejections and mockery of the
charge of sedition which evoke the Jewish rejection of their Mes
siah. Three times is recorded PUate's profession ' I find no crime,
alria, in him.' The first is made after his examination of Jesus,
18, 38, when as in Mark he entitles him in scorn of the Jewish
charge 'The King of the Jews' and offers to release him after
custom. To this the Jewish answer is the refusal of Jesus and
the choice of Barabbas, who ' was a robber. ' The second profession
accompanied with the presentation of the scourged and thorn-
crowned Jesus, caUs from the Jews the cries 'Crucify' which are
met by bis repudiation of them because of his third profession, and
by his efforts to release him in spite of the Jewish charge of bias-

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 165
phemy. His final condemnation of Christ is the result of the Jewish
threat of accusation of his own disloyalty. But the Evangehst's
interest in 19, 12-15 is clearly not apologetic, since vs. 12 is not a
defense of Christian loyalty, but a Jewish denial of it; nor is it in
presenting an excuse for Pilate's criminal cowardice; but it is
shown in the climax vs. 15, 'the high priests answered, we have no
king but Caesar' : the apostasy of the Jewish people in rejecting the
Christ. " The sentence ' we have no king but Caesar ' is the formal
abdication of the messianic hope. They first rejected Jesus as the
Christ, and then, driven by the irony of circumstances, they
rejected the Christ altogether," Westcott, in loc.
The same absence of apologetic aim is to be noted in the refer
ences to the crucifixion in Acts. Of the twelve passages relating to
it, two are general statements: whom they kiUed; who is dead,
10, 39; 25, 19. Five ascribe the crucifixion to the Jews or theh
rulers, 2, 36; 3, 17; 4, 10; 5, 28.30. Five accuse the Jews in con
nection with Pilate. Of these 7, 52 states that the Jews were the
betrayers, irpohbrai, i. e., to Pilate, and murderers of Christ. In
Pisidian Antioch Paul mentions that the Jerusalem Jews and their
rulers asked PUate that he should be slain, 13, 28. In 4, 27,
Herod and PUate with the GentUes and the peoples of Israel were
gathered together to accomplish God's wiU. The Jews, 2, 23,
killed Christ by the hands of lawless men, or 'men without the
law ' ; in either case no flattering reference or persuasive apologetic
to Romans. In only one passage, 3, 15, is it stated that Pilate
desired to release Jesus. It is imbedded in a statement, 13 b— 15,
which is closely parallel to the Markan Barabbas section, Mk. 15,
6-14; and hke it, it is interested not in defending Pilate, but in em
phasizing in connection with bis offer of release of Jesus, the sin of
the Jews in rejecting the Holy and Righteous One and in choosing
a murderer instead. This then is the direct interest of the refer
ences to Christ's death under Pontius Pilate in the Gospels and
Acts. They are not a veUed apologetic to secure government favor
for Christianity; and surely not a defense or excuse for a procurator
who put to death a man whom he beheved to be innocent. Pilate 's
mockings, hesitations, efforts to release and fear of the charge of
conniving at sedition, are given as facts which accord perfectly
with the historical and personal situation, and which are recorded
from the viewpoint of Jewish rejection and murder of their Christ.

166 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
In the second part of Acts, Paul's mission and trial brings
Christianity into contact with the Empire. Weinel, as has been
stated, voices the persistent claim that Luke's account of this sub
ject is controlled by an apologetic interest, in this work aUeged to
be a defense of the Gospel to the Romans, to present an unhistorical
picture of Paul's relations with Roman officials: That they fully
recognized the harmlessness of Christianity for the State, and
never condemned it upon examination. It was undoubtedly one of
Luke's aims to make this presentation of Paul's relations with
officials, for the establishment of his Christian readers. But it
was a subordinate aim, Moffatt, Introd. 303 f . ; and neither proves a
dominant apologetic interest in the composition of Acts, nor, much
less, that in the treatment of this topic it is historically untrust
worthy. It is at once constructive for our understanding of the later
chapters of Acts, that from the crucifixion until Paul's arrest in
Jerusalem in 58 a. d, there was no interference with Christianity
by the Roman officials in Palestine. WhUe Rome granted local
government to Jews in Judea, it would nevertheless control action
in capital charges and treat directly with sedition and neglected
cases of disorder. Outside of Palestine, from Antioch through
Asia Minor and Greece, there was likewise no imperial government
opposition during the period covered in Acts. This was partly
because Christianity appeared as a sect of the rehgio licita of the
Jews; and when repudiated by them, it was treated by the author
ities either as a matter for local administion in case disorders were
occasioned by it, or as a matter of religious dispute, with which the
State would not interfere. But nowhere does Luke betray any
tendency to represent local or imperial officers as defending or sup
porting Christianity. On the contrary, Jewish opposition secures
from local rulers Paul's expulsion from Pisidian Antioch and
Iconium. The Roman magistrates at Philippi condemn him to be
beaten and imprisoned. Their quasi-apology on the next day
was not due to any approval of Paul, but to fear of their iUegal pun
ishment of a Roman citizen, and it was accompanied by their in
sistence upon his expulsion. At Thessalonica, Jews secure his ex
pulsion on the charges of disorder and with insinuations of sedition.
In view of these four cases of official condemnation in two principal
cities both of Asia Minor and Macedon, the three cases of absence

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 167
of official condemnation by Gallio, the Asiarchs and Felix, cease
to reveal a controlling interest of Acts to claim official support;
and especially when they are viewed in their context, details, and
evident aims.
The favor of the Pro-consul Sergius Paulus at Paphos has no
bearing on the present subject. The attack on the Gospel by
Elymas and Paul's defense have no political feature. Sergius's
interest is personal and has no apparent influence, as no further
work in Cyprus is undertaken. It is, however, claimed that the
conduct of certain Asiarchs at Ephesus, 19, 31, betrays Luke's in
terest to prove official favor for Christianity. But the attack upon
Paul is here not political. As at Philippi, it was occasioned by loss
of gains and by the complaint that the gospel was contrary to their
traditional religious usages and beliefs. Paul is given no oppor
tunity to present or defend his cause. The Asiarchs who besought
him not to confront the mob, are simply stated to have been his
friends, and not that they were moved by any favoring interest in
his Gospel.8 The town clerk in quieting the mob's complaint, says
nothing in favor of Christianity, but instead rings the praises of
Ephesian Artemis. In behalf of the two Christians who had been
seized, he says only that they are not robbers of temples and not
blasphemers of the goddess. His interest as local official is evi
dently in preserving order, not in vindicating Paul or his preaching;
especially as in vs. 40 no legal charge has been made, and Paul's
criticism of idol worship against which Demetrius protested,
vs. 26, was constantly made with impunity by the wandering
popular preachers of the Graeco-Roman world. As in Paphos
there is no suggestion of any advancement of Christian interests by
this attack upon the Apostle. On the contrary it may even be
recorded as a hindrance to the cause, if as McGiffert suggests,
Apos. Age, p. 282, we are to consider Paul to be referring to it in the
terms of II Cor. 1, 8 ff.
Some five years earlier occurs in Corinth the only instance in all
Paul's missionary work where direct contact with the Imperial
government is recorded by Luke, 18, 12 ff. The Apostle is there
brought before the pro-consul Gallio by the Jews on the charge of
persuading men to worship God contrary to the law. Luke does
not exploit Gallio's refusal to hear the case, as any vindication of
8 Cp. Ramsay, Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 130-134.

168 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Paul who is not allowed to speak; or as any official favor or interest
in him and his preaching. The case is dismissed because there is no
charge of 'wrong against the State or of moral wrong,' Knowling;
adiKnpa rt fj babioiipynpa irovqpbv, 'misdemeanor or crime,'
Ramsay. The Jewish attack is concerned solely with questions
concerning the relation of Paul's preaching to the Jewish rehgion,
and into these Gallio refuses to enter, cp. Festus, 25, 19.9
In view therefore of the fact that in these four condemnations
of Paul by the local authorities, and in Gallio's dismissal of a case in
which no legal charges were presented and in the town clerk's
denial merely that Christians did not insult the local rehgion, it is
not possible to recognize any apology to the heathen for the
Christian rehgion, or any interest in it, or approval of it, by the
Roman officials. Luke's special aim in recording these incidents
will, however, be more likely to be indicated in connection with the
interests and needs of his Christian readers. From Paul's expulsion
from Pisidian Antioch onwards, and definitely, at any date as
signed to the composition of Acts, the disciples were subject to
attack caused both by Jewish instigation and by GentUe misunder
standing, suspicion or contempt. From the first, they must be
established in the duty of accepting sufferings under these attacks;
and equally they must avoid ' as much as lieth in them,' all possible
occasion of attack. Up to 64 a. d. the conceivable grounds of
accusation of them were breach of loyalty, personal immorality,
attack upon or interference with established religious usages and
social institutions. In the hortatory sections of the Epistles we
find repeated detailed instructions for the avoidance of every form
or appearance of evil, I Thess. 5, 22, and particularly with regard
to 'those that are without.' And besides instruction, Paul at least
pointed to his own example for imitation in this situation. Writing
to the Thessalonians near the time of the Jews' attack upon him
before Gallio, he reminds them, II Thess. 3, 8 ff . ; ' ye yourselves
know how ye ought to imitate us, because we behaved not ourselves
9 Wendt, in loc. The behavior of Gallio is, in the meaning of Luke, neither
an expression of his leniency; nor of marked wisdom in deciding as to the
limits of his office, (Meyer, de Wette); nor further, of a favorable disposition
towards Paul, (Overbeck), which there is nothing to indicate; but simply of
the sovereign contempt which he entertains in general towards the Jews, and
in particular towards their doctrinal disputes.

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 169
disorderly among you,' -nraKriiaapev; and their imitation of him
and of the Lord was, I Thess. 1, 6, in receiving the word in much
tribulation; and was also, 2, 14, an imitation of the Judean
churches, because they suffered the same things. Again, writing to
Corinth, I Cor. 11, 1, shortly before the Ephesian riot, he calls
upon them to be imitators of him as he is of Christ, immediately
foUowing the call 10, 32 to prove themselves offenseless, airpba-
koitoi, to Jews and Greeks and to the Church of God.
It therefore seems justifiable to conclude that Luke has selected
the six incidents from among many others to which Paul alludes
in I Cor. 4, 9; 15, 31; II Cor. 6, 5 ff.; 11, 23 ff., cp. Acts 20, 19, for
his readers' instruction, imitation of the Apostles and Christ and
for their establishment in a situation in which, on Harnack's
dating of Acts in 63 a. d., they were exhorted by Paul at the
same time to be 'children of God without blemish in the midst
of a crooked and perverse generation,' PhUpp. 2, 15. The narra
tive of Paul's expulsions from Antioch and Iconium and his suf
ferings at Lystra is concluded, Acts 14, 22, with the record of his
establishment of the disciples with exhortation that 'through many
tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God.' That Luke
had a direct interest in thus recording the persecution by local
authorities and populace in its relation to instruction of his readers
in patience under tribulation, is supported by a precisely similar
selection of these incidents by Paul for Timothy's imitation and
establishment.10 The persecutions at Philippi and Thessalonica
which Luke records are also recalled to the Thessalonians by Paul,
I Thess. 2, 2; and are followed in 3, 2 ff. by exhortation for estab-.
hshment in tribulation. In the Gallio incident it may be re
marked that its direct connection is with the attacks of the Jews
in 18, 6 and 12, and with the vision of vs. 10, ' I am with thee and
no man shall set on thee to harm thee.'
In the selection of this incident and of the riot in Ephesus con
cerning the Way, Luke has further opportunity to record not only
the Apostle's dehverance out of tribulation, but to point for the
disciples' imitation, to his avoidance of occasion for attack. Gallio
10 II. Tim, 3, 10. But thou didst follow, irapi)Ko\ovdi}aas, my teaching . . ¦
persecutions, sufferings; what things befell me at Antioch, at Iconium, at
Lystra; what persecutions I endured: and out of them the Lord dehvered me.
Yea, and all that will five godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

170 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
states as his pohcy, 'reason would that I should bear with you,
if it were a matter of breach of the law and personal wickedness.'
The Jews bring no such charge and Galho has not otherwise learned
of any grounds for it. Paul has obviously been careful to observe
his own rules of subjection to the higher powers, Rom. 13, 1, and
to take thought for things honorable in the sight of all men, 12,
17 ; or as he wrote from Corinth before GaUio's arrival, ' study to
be quiet, -navxa^eiv; do your own business, irpaaaeiv ra t'Sta; to
work with your hands,' i. e., in contrast to those who in II Thess. 3,
11, work not at all but are busybodies, irepiepya^bpevoi; to walk
becomingly evaxvi^ovus toward them that are without,' I Thess.
4, 11 ff.
As he has avoided any appearance of evU doing or disloyalty
at Corinth, so at Ephesus has he been free from any charge of
being a busybody or dXXoTpioe7rio-K07ros; of intruding into and
interfering with the recognized local rehgion. He had so 'at
tended to his own ' preaching of the Gospel and to his own method
of criticism of idol worship, that the town clerk, 19, 36, states that
Christians have been ' guilty by neither in act nor in language of
disrespect to our goddess,' Ramsay.
It will have been noticed that up to this point no charge has
been considered by officials against the Christian movement as
a whole, that would make membership in the Church and bearing
the name of Christian, ipso facto the ground of persecution. Such
a general charge was indeed insinuated by the Jews at Thessalonica,
17, 7, and no doubt elsewhere: that the movement involved op
position to Roman government, institutions and legislation. But
the pohtarchs show by their release of Jason and the rest simply
upon security taken, vs. 9, that they recognized the charge had
no basis, but grew out of disputes connected with Jewish and
Christian messianic teaching, cp. 7b, into which like Gallio they
would spurn to enter.
Tertullus, however, as remarked, summed up and renewed all
the Jewish accusations against Paul; and among them that of
the pohtical criminality of the sect of the Nazarenes, which the
Jews do not recognize as rightfully claiming a share in the Roman
recognition of Judaism as a religio hcita. It is .this charge, leading
later to the persecution of Christians as such, relating to the re
ligious, moral and political character of the sect of the Nazarenes,

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 171
which is central in the long account in five chapters of Paul's
arrest, trials, defenses and appeal. Claudius Lysias reports that
the real ground of Jewish attack is concerning questions of their
law, 23} 29, and not criminal or iUegal acts worthy of death or
bonds. Tertullus nevertheless renews three such charges along
with the charge against the sect. Paul dhectly defends hhnself
against the three charges by pointing to his orderly personal be
havior in Jerusalem where he was worshiping in the Temple,
and engaged nowhere in disputings and therefore raising no tu
mult. Instead of profaning the Temple, he had come bringing
alms to his nations and offerings, and was found purified in the
Temple. Both in the examination before Felix and in the subse
quent hearings these charges are considered as satisfactorUy re
futed. Like Lysias and Festus, 25, 19, he recognizes that the real
charge concerns the legahty of the sect of the Nazarenes: 'This
I confess unto thee that after the Way they call atpecris, so serve
I the God of our fathers,' 24, 14. He insists on its genuinely
Jewish rehgious character in the three features suggestive of what
is probably a Jewish propaganda instruction adopted and adapted
by Christian missionaries. As a Nazarene or Christian as Agrippa
terms him, his faith and worship is directed towards the One God
of the Jewish fathers; his Christian hope is for the resurrection
at the messianic judgment; his Christian morahty is to exercise
hhnself to have a conscience void of offense in duty toward God
and man, 24, 14-16. FinaUy he reminds the court and his ac
cusers that no charge of crime, dSt/ojjua was brought against him
in the Sanhedrin. The only remaining charge against him, then
and now, is his preaching the resurrection of the dead, i. e., of
Christ, and its religious issues, cp. Festus, 25, 19.
But at this point, Felix 'having more exact knowledge of the
Way' adjourns the case. Whatever motives of administrative
policy or hope of a bribe led to this postponement, it indicates
that the three other charges, which it was his clear duty to adjudi
cate, were not sustained. And it also strongly suggests that he
is unwilling to render a decision on this new charge of the Ulegality
of the sect of the Nazarenes, which would involve a determination
of the intricate theological questions in dispute; and also of the
legal status both of the Palestinian Christians which had been
hitherto practically recognized by the Jews, and of the Pauline

172 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Christians in the Dispersion, who were repudiated by them in the
person of their leader. Festus too dismisses as unfounded the
other charges, and recognizes that the case concerns 'questions
against him of their own superstition and of one Jesus who was
dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.' In his ' perplexity how to
inquire concerning these things,' and upon his proposal to favor
the Jews by deciding the issue in a trial before himself at Jerusalem,
Paul, whether or not knowing of the plot to murder him en route,
25, 3, realizes the need of a decision of such a question by higher
authority; and appeals at any risk, vs. 11, from the incompetence
and indecision of the Procurator to Caesar.
Yet the question of the charge on which he is to be sent to
Nero still remains, 25, 26. Since Festus had already dismissed
the other accusations, 25, 19.25, there remained only the charge of
Paul's leadership among the Nazarenes, a sect whose legahty the
Procurator had failed to determine. Agrippa is consulted to
assist Festus to report on the charge; and the hearing before
the king is definitely concerning the relation of Judaism and the
Way. Paul asserts their essential relation. As a Pharisee he had
lived in the hope of the messianic promise made of God to the
fathers; as a Christian he stands accused concerning this hope
and its fulfillment in the Gospel. While a Pharisee persecuting
the Way, he had been caUed to preach the Gospel by the risen
Jesus; and in this ministry he preaches nothing but what the
Jewish prophets predicted: that the Christ should suffer and rise
to proclaim light both to the people and to the Gentiles. To
Festus the Roman this exposition of the Way in its relation to
Judaism is madness, pavia, as later to Pliny it is superstitio prava
immodica. By Agrippa the attempt to develop the relation is
repelled with a courtly sneer of contempt for the name of Christian.
Yet both agree that it is not a crime calling for punishment by
the State; and they remit the case to Rome by reason of Paul's
appeal from Festus's proposal of a Jerusalem trial.
Luke's interest in the narrative of these Roman hearings is
controUed by his general aim to present historifcaUy in the progress
of Christianity even amid opposition and persecution, what the
Epistle to the Romans presents theologically: the Gospel as a
power of God unto salvation to the Jew first and also to the
Greek. There is no indication of a tendency to prove to unbe-

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 173
hevers that the harmlessness of Christianity was recognized by
officials who avoided a decision, and yet kept the Apostle five
years in imprisonment on the charges; nor of personal favoring
interest by any of the officials. Felix left him bound to gain
favor with the Jews; Festus also desiring to gain favor with
them, proposed an ominous Jerusalem trial. The evident stress
by Luke upon Paul's convincing proofs of innocence of personal
wrongdoing and of attack upon social order or rehgious institutions,
and upon his bold profession of his Christian faith, is as before for
the instruction and estabhshment of his Christian readers in
simUar situations. Paul's conduct under attack had aheady been
exemplified and governed by the principles Peter urged for
the estabhshment of his readers under persecution : let none of you
suffer as a criminal ' or as an evildoer or as an aXXorptoeirto-Koiros;
but if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but
let him glorify God in this name,' I Pet. 4, 15, cp. also 3, 15 f.11
Luke's aims are Ulustrated by Paul's letters in the Roman im
prisonment succeeding his appeal, in which are interwoven ex
hortations for establishment under attack, by his own example
and conduct. The Philippians are to stand fast, in nothing
affrighted by the adversaries; having the same conflict which
they saw in him and now hear to be in him, 1, 27 ff. The rising
opposition and popular defamation is to be met by the strictest
personal morahty, PhUp. 1, 27; 4, 8; Ephes. 4, 17 ff.; Col. 3, 5 ff.
EspeciaUy against suspicion of unsettling social institutions are
the sections emphasizing due subordination in the household, on
the highest Christian principles, Ephes. 5, 22-6, 9; Col. 3, 18-
4, l.12 The runaway slave Onesimus is returned to Philemon,
yet now 'as a brother beloved.' In direct relations with 'those
that are without,' murmurings and disputings are to be avoided,
Pp. 2, 15; speech is to be always with grace, seasoned with salt,
that they may know how to answer each one, Col. 4, 6; and in
general they are to walk in wisdom towards those without, re
deeming the time because the days are evil, cp. the paraUel,
Ephes. 5, 15. No allusion, however, is made to accusations of
11 If with several recent critics Acts was composed in 63 a. d., and if with
Chase, Zahn, etc., I Peter early in 64, they would be practically contempo
raneous. 12 Cp. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, 236, 246, 348.

174 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
disloyalty or sedition, against the Apostle or his readers.13 But
as in Acts, along with this emphasis on Christian avoidance of all
occasion of complaints in the sphere of the things of Caesar, is the
accompanying emphasis on his readiness, shared by his readers,
to suffer in behalf of the Christ, Php. 1, 29.20.
The result of the trial has not been recorded by Luke. His
sUence and the uncertainty of the historical connections in the
later New Testament references to the conflict with the State in
the Apostohc Age, has been the inevitable occasion of divided
views among historical critics concerning the facts, dates and legal
processes of State persecution, which affect also the determination
of critical questions as to the dates and genuineness, e. g., of the
Pastorals and I Peter. Outside the New Testament, Nero's per
secution recorded by Tacitus and Suetonius is the starting point
for the historical discussion of the conflict.14 As our present in
terest is in the establishment of behevers under this and later
attacks by the State or populace, we shall consider it on the theory
that Paul was released in Rome in 63; possibly as the outcome
of the failure of the Jerusalem authorities to prosecute within a
biennium. There was, however, obviously judicial examination of
the Procurator's report of the charges and defense made at Caes
area. The Apostle's release implies not only acknowledgment of
his innocence of immorality, crime and interference with estab
lished religion and social order, but in addition a recognition that
Christianity was not in itself a crime, and not a seditious move
ment. But parallel to this absence of legal condemnation, there are the
indications in the New Testament of a rising popular hatred and
defamation. It is presupposed in the exhortations of Rom. 12,
17-13, 7, cp. 8, 35 ff., which are based on Paul's experience in
Asia Minor and Greece, and are assumed to be needed in Rome
13 Canfield, Early Persecutions of Christians, p. 41 : ' It is doubtful whether
the Christians were formally accused of maiestas even as late as the time of
Tertullian.' 14 For this discussion reference may be made to Ramsay, The Church in
the Roman Empire, p. 226 ff. E. G. Hardy, Christianity and the Roman
Government, in Studies in Roman History. F. H. Chase, Hastings' D. B.,
Ill, p. 783 f. L. H. Canfield, Early Persecutions of the Christians, with the
sources in text and translation. H. B. Workman, Persecution in the Early
Church.

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 175
in 58 A. d. Writing in 63 a. d., his picture of opposition in
Php. 1, 28 f. and 2, 14 ff., is the reflection of the situation of
Rome at the same time. From Ephesians and Colossians we have
inferred allusions to popular discredit and suspicion in Asia Minor
at this period. Tacitus, Ann. XV, 14 is the direct witness of this
widespread feeling in 64 a. d. against the disciples 'who were
caUed Christians by the mob and were hated for their enormities,
flagitia.' He himself views the new rehgion as a ' pernicious su
perstition,' and includes it among the 'atrocia aut pudenda.'
Upon these objects of popular malevolence, Nero seeks to cast
the blame for the burning of Rome and inaugurates the first State
persecution. The legal procedure and outcome of this Neronian trial of the
accused Christians became the precedent for the further official
persecutions in the rest of the New Testament period, under the
Flavian emperors. The authorities referred to above present in
detail the recent theories as to its method; especially whether
Christians were condemned as Callewaert and numerous French
scholars hold, by a special penal law formulated by Nero; or as
Profumo argues, by a rule of evidence, institutum Neronianum,
according to which, 'immorality, sacrilege or atheism, and maiestas
are so intimately associated that proof of one of them implied
guUt of the other two,' Canfield, p. 31; or by trial for violation
of criminal law; or as is more generally accepted, following Momm-
sen, by the magistrate's inherent power of immediate action,
coercitio, in repressing any disorders affecting good order and the
welfare of the State.
More important, however, than this debate in regard to the
procedure, is the debate concerning the ground of the charges
under Nero. In Trajan's reign it is evident that Christians are
punished for the Name: 'for the profession of Christianity apart
from proof of definite crimes.' Ramsay, pp. 242, 253, maintains
that 'under Nero it was otherwise. The trial is held, and the
condemnation is pronounced in respect not of the Name, but of
serious offenses connected with the Name.' He insists that the
development of this policy into that followed by Pliny and Trajan
took place under Vespasian; which he grants involves the dating
of I Peter about 80 a. d.
It seems, however, more probable, with Moffatt, Introd., p.

176 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
324 f., that the action which began with the trial of Christians for
arson and other crimes, issued in a ' second stage of imperial pro
cedure agamst them as hostUe to the human race, inaugurated
under Nero, (which) prevaUed during the Flavian dynasty and
invested the mere name of Christian with perUous and compro
mising associations.' Hardy, who with Mommsen and Sanday
beheves that persecution for the Name might have happened at
any time since 64 a. d., points out, p. 95 f., that in the Neronian
trials, 'while probably several specific charges came into consider
ation, the condemnation was not on the ground of any of them,
but of a summary of them aU amounting to 'odium generis hu-
mani': in other words, the Christians were condemned for what
was involved in the name or profession of their sect.' ' They were
punished,' p. 59, 'not as incendiaries but as Christians.' 16
The conduct of Christians under persecutions which were hable
to break out in the provinces on occasion of popular antagonism
and after acquaintance with the Neronian persecution and legal
precedent,16 is that prescribed by Christ and practiced by Paul,
as he claims in his defenses at Caesarea. It is urged upon the dis
ciples in the Epistles which, on the view of their genuineness,
were written shortly after the attack at Rome in 64 a. d.: the
Pastorals and I Peter. I Timothy and Titus, regarded as Pauline,
are usually assigned to 66 a. d., though Zahn dates them a year
earlier. They make, however, no reference to official persecution,
and as Ramsay emphasizes make no reference to persecution for
the Name. This proves that no general State persecution was
then in progress; and is also inconsistent with the view that under
Nero a specific law had been enacted making Christianity an
ls Hardy, pp. 60, 63, explains the spasmodic character of the later proceed
ings against Christians as due to the fact that 'provincial governors would be
far more likely . . . only to take action when popular feeling forced it
upon them.' Since the whole matter was one of police administration, they
would take action 'when action seemed advisable, but might- at any time
without weakening the principle of such action, allow it to rest either wholly
or in part during long intervals of time.' This action would be simply to
establish the Christianity of the accused, which was itself criminally deserving
execution; though 'as long as Christianity was comparatively unfamiliar,
the special charges would be to a certain extent gone into, while later on this
would be thought in fact as it already was in principle, unnecessary.'
>• Cp. Moffatt, Introd., p. 327.

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 177
illegal society. Yet both from several definite statements and
from general features of theh structure and contents, it is evident
that the two letters are written within the shadow of a threatened
official persecution, which if it takes place wiU be for the Name.
The recent meeting of the Apostle with his f eUow-workers to whom
he now writes renders unnecessary a description of the historical
situation. Nor any need of extended instruction concerning per
secution for the Name. If it arises, every Christian has aheady
been taught the duty of unflinching confession, and of submission
to the resulting death. But as it is stirred up by popular suspicion
and slanders, there is need to provide as hitherto for the avoidance
of occasion for this antagonism. The two Epistles are instructions
in matters of Church order; yet specifically concerning the dis
cipline of Church hfe in order to meet a situation of threatened
external attack and also of an internal danger of a false teaching
whose indifference to morality and tendencies towards emancipa
tion from social order, would furnish occasion for attack on all
professing the Name.
Hence, we mark among the principal topics in each, loyalty
to the Empire expressed in submission to its rulers, Tit. 3, 1 ; in
prayers for kings and all that are in high place; and in recognition
of the validity of laws against flagitia, which are contrary to the
Christian sound doctrine and Gospel, I Tim. 2, 2; 1, 8 ff. while
thus rendering to Caesar the things of Caesar, supreme allegiance
to God is recalled in his special titles in contrast to earthly sover
eigns. As in Php. 3, 20 rip&v rb iro\irevpa iv ovpavols is foUowed
by the title of Christ as Scor^p and Kuptos, so in these letters we
find nine times forms of 6 Swtt)p fipG>v debs or 6 peyas debs Kai
Scoti)p ¦fip&v 'Iqaovs xpwrbs. He is Baaikevs rwv ai&vav; and in
the context referring to 'the good confession' of Timothy and of
Christ before Pilate, 6, 12 ff., he is the blessed and only Avpdcrrijs,
b fiaaCKevs ra>v Baaihevbvrwv Kai Kvpios twv Kvptevbvruv.
We observe next the stress on avoidance of the charge of dis
turbing pubhc order and social customs. Christians are to lead a
tranquU and quiet, f/avxiov, hfe in all godliness and gravity,
I Tim. 2, 2; to ward off accusation of 'odium generis humani,'
which in Tit. 3, 3b, is really a characteristic of their pre-christian
state, by speaking evil of no man, not being contentious but
gentle, showing all meekness toward all men, as foUowers of the

178 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
kindness and <f>i\avOpuiria of God our Saviour, vss. 2.4. Es
pecially in the social order of the household to give no occasion
for complaint, which could arise from the abuse of Christian free
dom by women, I Tim. 2, 9-15; Titus 2, 3-6; or by slaves, I Tim.
6, 1; Tit. 2, 9 f.
There is further a constant emphasis throughout both letters on
personal morality, which is summed up in the injunction, Tit. 3, 8,
that those who have believed in God are to be careful to maintain
good works. The relation of these justifications is expressed
in the two dogmatic passages, 3, 4-7 and 2, 11-14; they are not its
ground but its outcome and goal, 2, 14. The grace of God which
brings salvation instructs us to be zealous of good works in all the
possible relations of a life of duty towards self, man and God : to
live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world. One
definite need of this emphasis is due to the presence of many un
ruly, avvirbraKroi, false teachers of antinomian license, who pro
fess to know God, but by their works deny him; being unto every
good work reprobate, Tit. 1, 15 f . The seriousness of this influence
and its danger both for the truth of the Gospel and for the rela
tion of Christians to the State, can be inferred from the detailed
descriptions of them and from the definite charges for their repu
diation in I Timothy, Chapters 1, 4 and 6, and in Titus 1, 10 ff.;
3, 9 ff . ; and also from probable counter-acting teachings in the inter
vening sections. It is also significant that in both Epistles the
directions concerning the ministry are given from the view point
of discipline in accordance with the above instructions. Titus him
seh, 2, 7, is to be a type of good works, uncorrupt teaching, sound
speech that cannot be condemned; and this, definitely 'that he
that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evU thing
to say of us.' The qualifications of presbyters, 1, 6, are that they
shall be above the possibility of general reproach; then as bishops
and stewards of God above the reproach of characteristics unfitted
for rule and discipline, and known to be zealous of good works; and
also able to exhort in the sound doctrine and to confute the false
teachers. Similar qualifications are demanded in I Tim. 3, with
distinct emphasis on their capacity to rule, as shown by their rule
of theh own homes; and on theh ' good testimony from them that
are without,' vs. 7. By their discipline, sound teaching and refu
tation of the immoral doctrines of the intruding errorists, the

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 179
popular charges against Christians may be dispelled by their
marked loyalty, by avoidance of attack on the social order and by
their type of highest morality. Nevertheless, in spite of such refu
tation of specific charges, persecution for the Name of Christian is
now at any time a possibility. Should it arise, the one duty as
enjoined throughout the New Testament, is unwavering con
fession of the Name, ' rejoicing that as ye are partakers of Christ's
sufferings, at the revelation of his glory also, ye may rejoice with
exceeding joy,' I Pet. 4, 13.
This passage from I Peter refers distinctly to revUing for the
Name. The Epistle, which is here regarded as written from Rome
shortly after I Tim. and Titus,17 is addressed to Pauhne Christians
in Asia who are already suffering persecution on account of the
popular clamor, and are also in imminent peril of persecution
and death for their profession of Christianity. The conduct to
which Peter exhorts in his situation is closely parallel to that which
we have observed in the two Pauline Pastorals. He, too, counsels
loyal submission to the Emperor and Governors, 2, 13; though first
recalhng the disciples' heavenly citizenship, and addressing them
therefore as 'sojourners and pilgrims,' 2, 9. 11. He warns them
likewise against interference with the established social order: let
none of you suffer as aXXoTptoeirio-Koiros ,1S 4, 15; and as in the
Pastorals sends a special message both to the Christian slaves,
2, 18 ff., urging submission and acceptance of suffering, after the
example of Christ; and also to wives, 3, 1 ff., bidding them submit
to unbelieving husbands in ' a chaste behavior coupled with fear'
and with the adorning of a meek and quiet spirit.
There is again in this Epistle the same constant stress on moral
conduct 'as children of obedience, they are to be holy in all be
havior, 1, 14; to have their behavior seemly, Ka\r) among the Gen
tiles, who speak against them as evil doers,' 2, 12, cp. 3, 16. The
17 Moffatt, Introd., p. 323. 'The internal evidence does not appear to carry
us beyond the seventh decade of the first century, as reflected, e. g., in a con
temporary passage like Mk. 13, 9-11.'
"Ramsay, Church in Roman Empire, 293: "It refers to the charge of
tampering with family relationships, causing disunion and discord, rousing
discontent and disobedience among slaves, and so on." And on p. 348 n.
"The Latin term alienum speculari and the noun alieni speculator suggested
the extraordinary Greek rendering ... as a rough attempt to translate a
foreign term that had no recognized equivalent in Greek.''

180 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
immoral influence of the errorists of the Pastorals in spreading a
false spirit of emancipation from external authority and law is here
guarded against in the summary: 'as free, and not having your
freedom for a cloak of wickedness, but as bondservants of God,' 2,
16. In contrast to the Pastorals there is naturaUy only the most
general reference to the duties of the clergy in this pastoral
addressed directly to the Christian disciples.
But in addition to avoiding the specific popular charges, and to
acceptance of suffering on account of righteousness, 2, 12; 3, 14 f.;
4, 15, the disciples must now face a situation in which the Christian
brotherhood anywhere is exposed to suffering for the Name.
Again, the only duty is confession of the faith: be not ashamed;
glorify God in this Name, 4, 16; and humble submission to suffering
according to the wiU of God, 4, 13.19; 5, 6, revealed in Christ's
benediction on the persecuted, 4, 14, cp. Mtw. 5, 11.12, and in his
own glorification through suffering.
The Second Epistle to Timothy points to Paul's arrest in spite of
the avoidance of the popular charges; and presumably as a leader
of the condemned Christian movement, under the precedent of 64
a. d, which we leam from I Peter 4, 12-19 was being acted upon in
this period. The circumstances of his arrest are unknown. If,
however, he was in Greece in 66 a. d, I Tim 1, 3; Tit. 3, 12, it may
be related to Nero's presence there from autumn of 66 to spring of
68. His tours there ' caused no interruption in the course of im
perial bloodshed. Rich victims were to be found in Achaia, as in
Italy,' H. D. B. Ill 517. It was there too that Nero received
the announcement of the Jewish rebeUion and of the terrific defeat
by the Jews of the Roman forces under the legate Cestius in Octo
ber, 66. WhUe such a situation could account for Nero's arrest of
the Jewish leader of the Christians, it stiU leaves undetermined the
charge upon which he was remanded to Rome. But Paul's state
ments in II Timothy point strongly to prosecution for the Name.
The basis of this charge is the earher decision that profession of the
Name involves 'hatred of the human race,' which is a summary of
aU special charges. Hence the Apostle's statement, 2, 9, that he is
suffering as an evildoer, KaKo0p7os, could in itseh express the essen
tial content of the charge of being a Christian. Ramsay on the
contrary insists, p. 249, that 'Kamvpyos refers expressly to the
flagitia, for which the Christians were condemned under Nero,

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 181
and for which they were no longer condemned in a. d. 112 '; though
he adds, 'the flagitia were a standing reproach in all periods.'
But KaKovpyos does not stand alone. He is thus suffering as an
evildoer not in view of specific personal immoralities or political
crimes, but 'suffering in my gospel that Jesus of the seed of David
is risen from the dead.19 In a close paraUel the gospel summarized
in 1, 9.10, of which he is preacher and apostle and teacher, vs. 11,
is the cause of his suffering. In vs. 12 follows his unwavering con
fession of it, and his commendation of his soul, irapadi)Kr)v pov,
to God, as in I Pet. 4, 19, those suffering according to the wiU of
God as Christians are not to be ashamed, but are to commend their
souls, iraparidiadaaav, in weU doing unto a faithful Creator.
Timothy hkewise is now no longer exhorted concerning avoidance
of popular calumny of crimes of Christians, but in 1, 8, is not to be
ashamed of 'the witness of our Lord nor of me his prisoner; but to
suffer hardship with the Gospel'; and 2, 3, with me as a good soldier
of Christ Jesus. In 2, 11 ff., the alternative to enduring is 'to
deny Christ and to cease to be loyal to him,' Holtzmann and B.
Weiss; M the passage being based on the saying Mtw., 10 32 f.
We may therefore conclude that Paul is about to suffer for the
Name, for his confession that he is a Christian. Such a charge
which would affect the disciples in general could account for
the desertions in 1, 15, when ' all that are in Asia turned away from
him'; and in 4, 16, when at his first defense all forsook him. In vs.
17 the aim of that defense is not to clear himseh of charges of per
sonal crimes, but 'that the message might be fully proclaimed.'
And in 4, 7 ff. the righteous Judge is to crown him upon his im
pending death, which is viewed in no relation to false accusation of
crimes, but as the result of his ministry in the gospel and of having
kept the faith. That the statement ri\v iriariv rerripi}Ka includes
his final confession of it at Rome, as already at Caesarea, Acts 24,
14-16; 26, 19-23, is supported by the similar statement, Rev. 3, 8:
irifpnaas pov rbv \byov Kai ovk ifpvnaw rb bvopd pov.
" II. Tim 2, 8.9. Kara rb evayyOkibv pov, iv $ KaKoiradS) pixpi-
SeapSiv cos Kaxovpyos.
20 In 2, 13, airiarevo} is in contrast to iriarbs pivei; in I Tim. 5, 8, we
have the combination airiaros and apveiadai rr\v iriariv; and in Tit.
1, 16, the contrast, apveopai and bpoXoyiw.

182 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
We may briefly notice the references to this conflict and to
Christian conduct in relation to it in New Testament books written
either in this decade or later. In Hebrews, whether assigned to
the closing years of Nero or to the period 80-96 a. d., the perse
cutions alluded to could be both for alleged crimes and for pro
fession of the faith. Formerly, 10, 32, in some undefined locahty
and period, the new converts had endured exposure to popular
revilings and afflictions or had avowed their fellowship with such
sufferers and prisoners; and had accepted the spoiling of their
possessions, as 'the results of mob-rioting.' But now the writer
prepares them 'for bearing the brunt of some imminent danger,
which hitherto (12, 4, not yet unto blood), they have been spared,'
Moffatt, Introd., 454. That this is persecution for their profession
of Christ is indicated in repeated allusions to the temptation and
sin of not maintaining this profession; in caUs to hold fast the
confession of our hope without wavering, 10, 23, cp. 6, 12, and
to joyful confession of his name, 13, 15, bearing the reproach of
Christ, vs. 13. To bear this reproach demands, vs. 14, their first
and supreme allegiance to the abiding heavenly city and Patria,
11, 14 f. It was the reproach of the Christ which Moses deemed
greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, when he forsook that
kingdom to suffer affliction with the people of God. As in I Pet. 4,
12-19, among the motives for endurance 'if they are reproached
in the name of Christ,' Heb. 12, 1-11, hkewise points to fellow
ship thereby with Christ's suffering and glory, and humble sub
mission to the chastening and exalting hand of the Father of
Spirits. All the New Testament instructions for conduct under persecu
tion and especiaUy for confession of the faith at any cost, are based
upon the warnings, commands and promises of Christ. The dis
ciples were familiar with these in the Oral Gospel, in the instruc
tion preparatory to baptism and in the use of them in the Church
services. As according to recent datings the Synoptic Gospels
were written at the beginning of the period of increasing popular
and official persecutions from about 65 a. d. onwards, they served
among other needs, that of estabhshing believers by their record
of Christ's teachings relative to this conflict. Even on theories of
their later date, it is to be observed that all the Gospel passages
relating to the coming persecutions are taken from the earliest

ESTABLISHMENT AGAINST EXTERNAL OPPOSITIONS 183
sources, especially from Q,21 and thus attest the instruction of
converts in the earhest period concerning attacks from Jewish and
local heathen authorities or from popular antagonism. They ap
pear in four out of the five great Discourses in Matthew which
are ended with the weU-known formula and in their parallels.
The first, in the Sermon on the Mount, Mtw. 5, 10-12, con
tains the blessings on those persecuted for righteousness' sake
and on those reproached, persecuted and slandered for Christ's
sake. Next and most fully in the Discourse at the Mission
of the Twelve, 10, 16-39, i. e., 24 out of 38 verses. In the Parable
Discourse, the reference to 'Tribulation or persecution because
of the word,' 13, 21, is usually viewed as taken from Mark, the
earhest of the Synoptics. The remaining passage, 24, 9, is in the
Discourse on the Last Things, in which Mk. 13, 9-13, paraUels
Mtw. 10, 17-22. According to B. Weiss this Mtw.-Mk. parallel,
while not originally in either the charge to the Apostles, Mtw. 10,
5 ff. or in the Parousia Discourse, was yet taken from teaching
belonging to the close of the ministry.22 In John also, warnings
of persecutions are given at the close of the ministry in the dis
courses at the Last Supper, John 15, 18 ff.; 16, 1 ff.
The Christian readers of the Gospels were prepared for perse
cution by these warnings of Christ and by his call for unwavering
confession of faith in him. On the last day of pubhc ministry, his
command to pay tribute to Caesar as expressed in the general
principle of rendering unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's,
embraced the duty of obedience' to all law against crime and of
loyal submission, whereby occasions of persecutions would be
guarded against. Yet should the things of Caesar involve conflict
with the supreme duty of a divine aUegiance, the principle of
profession of the faith at any cost of sacrifice was fixed at the
21 This is dated by Moffatt, Introd., 203 as not later than 70; "so far as the
internal evidence goes, it may even fall within the sixth" decade of the first
century. 22 B. Weiss, Marcusevangem, p. 416 n.: ' Matthew has inserted this series of
Sayings in the Discourse of Instruction, 10, 17-22. But it belongs neither
to this Discourse nor to that on the Parousia; but formed in the Apostohc
source an independent prediction of the fate of the disciples, which Mark
considers and certainly rightly as appertaining to the last disclosures to the
disciples.' This view is presented with additional details in his Matthduse-
vangem, p. 273.

184 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
same time in the command, render unto God the things that are
God's. For support in submitting to any resulting suffering ac
cording to the wUl of God, the later Epistles point to the example
of the suffering of Christ and to his resulting glorification as re
corded in the Gospel witness of his passion and resurrection.
In the Revelation we find the Christians confronted with the
distinct issue of the conflict between the things of Caesar and of
God. There is very general agreement as to the historic occasion
of the conflict and as to the primary aim of the book to instruct
and estabhsh Christians under the trials of an outbreak of per
secution in Asia in the later years of Domitian's reign. That it
was persecution for the Name, appears from the recurring refer
ences to Christians as having borne, holding and not denying my
Name; as keeping the word and commandments of God and the
testimony, paprvpia, of Jesus. The demand for Caesar-worship,
chap. 13, which evoked this 'word of theh testimony' from those
'who loved not their life even unto death,' 12, 11, was not pressed
upon Christians until the close of the Apostolic age. While
Augustus had instituted the cult of Rome and Augustus in the
provinces, the original temple in Asia being at Pergamus, 'no wor
ship of the emperor, which is adequate to the data of the Apoca
lypse, was enforced untU Domitian's reign, ' Moffatt, Introd., p. 503.
Like Caligula he insisted on being entitled 'Dominus et Deus'
and 'looked upon the Imperial cultus as part of the national
rehgion; and in this point of view, refusal to comply with the
prescribed forms of respect to the Emperor constituted disloyalty
and treason,' Ramsay, p. 275; similarly Moffatt, p. 504; cp.
Hardy, p. 71 ff.
Such a demand admitted of no compromise. It made nec
essary the Christians' profession of supreme allegiance to their
heavenly citizenship under the King of Kings and Lord of Lords,
and their renunciation of blasphemous worship of the world
kingdom and its Imperial head, chaps. 12-14. And they were
fortified for the tribulations incurred by their loyal profession
and witness by the example of Christ's victory and lordship through
sufferings, chaps. 1-3; by God's control of the world destinies and
his final destruction of the visible and invisible forces of evil; and
by the divine assurances in prophecy and vision, of the hope of
glory for those who overcome.

CHAPTER VII
THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY
The controversial element in the New Testament is concerned
not alone with external attacks upon Christianity. Two internal
controversies caUed for special establishment of faith in the
Apostohc Age: one the attempted perversion of the Gospel by
Judaizers; and at the other extreme, an insidious gnostic intrusion.
The Judaistic controversy was unquestionably the most critical
in the New Testament Age, and the most vital for the truth of the
Gospel. Its emergence was foreshadowed in the Jewish attack
upon Stephen. The resulting persecution led to the spread of
Christianity beyond Palestine, and eventually among the Gentiles.
That Gentile mission definitely raised the questions at issue be
tween the Judaizers and Paul; and it continued to be the occa
sion of theh relentless attack upon himseh, his Gospel and his
work. Their contention that salvation by faith in Jesus as the
Christ was only possible in connection with membership in the
elect nation of Israel by means of circumcision and observance
of the Mosaic law, would obviously have reduced Christianity
from a rehgion of universal redemption to a Judaic sect. Instead
of ever-advancing world conquest, the new faith might then have
disappeared with the national ruin of Judaism, as was the fate of
the Judaistic Christians in the earhest centuries.1
This controversy, however, was, as Hort has stated, Judaistic
Christianity, p. 6, 'a natural product of the circumstances of the
Apostohc Age. It was involved in the Jewish opposition to
Christ's own ministry. It rested on a faUure to reahze the neces
sary method for accomplishing his world redeeming mission.
He came both as 'minister of the chcumcision for the truth of
God, that he might confirm the promises given unto the fathers'
and also 'that the GentUes might glorify God for his mercy,'
1 Cp. Hoennicke, Das Judenchristenthum im 1. und 8. Jahrhundert, p. 375 ff.
McGiffert, Apostolic Age, p. 442.

186 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Rom. 15, 8 f. His universal mission was to be begun and de
veloped in relation with the hfe, the rehgious faith, institutions
and hope of elect Israel; and this was only conceivable by means
of a creative transformation of Judaism. The necessary trans
formation presents the whole problem of the relation of the Old
and New dispensations; of promise and fulfillment; election and
universahsm; grace and legahsm. In the beginnings of the Gospel,
Jewish misconception of these relations as Christ unfolded them,
is the primary occasion of the opposition which he experienced and
sought to remove by his twofold disclaimer and affirmation : ' Think
not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets; I came not to
destroy but to fulfiU,' Mtw. 5, 17. Yet after two decades of
Apostohc ministry, Jewish Christians still assert, in spite of
Christ's revelation of his twofold relation to the law and its in
stitutions, 'except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses,
ye cannot be saved,' Acts 15, 1.
Hort in his summary of the Gospel teachings concerning Christ
and the law, op. cit., p. 36 ff., indicates as the fundamental source
of this Judaizing misconception, their inabihty to grasp the two
sides of his teaching and action with respect of the law. "Our
Lord declared himself not the destroyer of the law and the prophets
but theh fulfiller, in that he sought to give effect to their true
purpose and inner meaning. He indicated that for himself and his
true disciples the old form of the law had ceased to be binding;
but he did not disobey its precepts, or even the precepts of tradi
tion. ... He did homage to that (for its time) right service of
the old order which was represented by John the Baptist, though
he at the same time proclaimed its entirely lower and transitory
character. He dehberately confined his own ministry and that
of his Apostles within Jewish limits . . ., while he clearly made
known that the privileges of the people of God were to be extended
to mankind. This twofold character of our Lord's action and
teaching, recurring under different forms, specially attested in
Matthew, the most Judaic of all the Gospels, foreshadows the
only way in which the divine purpose, humanly speaking, could
be accomplished; while it was inevitably open to much misunder
standing on the one side or the other. The fundamental point, a
fulfillment of the law which was not a liberal retention of it as a
code of commandments was, as it is still, a conception hard to

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 187
grasp: it was easier either to perpetuate the conditions of the old
covenant or else to blaspheme them."
This vital and naturaUy inevitable Judaistic controversy has
received exceptionally full investigation as the outcome of the
work of the Tubingen School and its successors in emphasizing
its significance both for the understanding of the New Testament
Age and for the criticism of New Testament hterature. The
results are accessible in the works on the Apostohc Age and New
Testament Theology; the special works on Paul and Paulinism;
and in the exegetical discussion of the related New Testament
hterature. It is not our purpose here to refer to the controversy
in its theological aspects further than in their connection with
the historic progress of the conflict and with the establishment of
faith under it.
While the actual agitation arose historically with the extension
of the Gospel to those outside the Jewish nation, the principles
involved came up for discussion in the disputes of Stephen in the
Hellenistic synagogues of Jerusalem. Through the distorted
charges against him and from his own defense, it is evident that
Christian Jews apart as yet from any problems of heathen evangel
ization, were raising questions concerning the continued obliga
tion of Jewish Christian observance of Mosaic law, customs and
worship; and further that these questions sprang ultimately from
the conviction, which was based on Christ's teaching and final
commission, of the universal mission of the Gospel. As we saw
earher, it was with the element of universahsm in Israel's rehgion,
that a leading portion of Stephen's defense was concerned. In
principle there was among all Jewish Christians no question as to
the universal range of messianic salvation. Bertholet 2 in his
study of the attitude of Israel to the alien nations has presented
this universalism of salvation in the Old Testament teachings, and
has shown that varying historic conditions led in different periods
to varying degrees of recognition of it. But at all periods there
would be uncertainty as to the methods and conditions of its
appropriation, along with a general presumption that the nations
would identify themselves with Israel to share its glory, rather
than that Israel should be a steward, an elect servant to dispense
to the world the divine blessings.
2 Bertholet, A., op. cit-, § 3 and § 8; and pp. 393 and 399.

188 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
To its conviction of the universahsm of the Gospel, the primitive
Church had to unite its conviction that the Church was in es
sential relation to the rehgion of Israel, and was the heir of its
promises and of its election. Wherever, therefore, Gentiles should
be admitted to the Christian Church, it would be to a Church in
close relations with Israel. And the problem would arise whether
they must not accept the same conditions as Jewish Christians for
admission and fellowship in the Elect body. In other words, the
universahsm of the Gospel, so soon as it entered on its initial
stages of realization, presented to the Church the questions both
of the divine privUege of Israel's election and of the necessity of
legal observance for salvation. In Luke's record we observe that
the questions arose in this historical order. Phihp in evident sym
pathy with the universahsm as preached by his associate Stephen,
evangelized Samaria. Theh admission into the feUowship of the
Church of Jerusalem presented no doctrinal problem. They
aheady accepted circumcision and Mosaism; by their baptism they
had accepted the messianism of Israel's prophets; and their
reception of the Spirit testified to the divine approval of the work
of Phihp and the Apostles. The definite stage of the universal
extension of the Gospel begins with the conversion of Paul, whose
commission to the Gentiles is in order that they may receive for
giveness and 'inheritance among them that are consecrated by
faith in me,' Acts 26, 18. His own interpretation of these promises
of justification and of fellowship in the inheritance as apart from
the conditions of legahsm and chcumcision, will best account
for his persecution at Damascus, the attack by Hellenists at
Jerusalem, and for his departure thence upon the warning of the
Temple vision and the Church's action in sending him forth to
Tarsus. Peter's baptism of Cornelius, as justified by divine direction
for the delivery of the Gospel to him and by his reception of the
Spirit even prior to the rite, is the first recognition of the right
of a Gentile to membership in the Church, without circumcision.
'They of the circumcision' in Jerusalem promptly raise the general
question concerning such membership in their complaint, 'thou
wentest in to men uncircumcised and didst eat with them.' The
Apostle's^defensefis the definite direction of the Spirit for this
visit, Acts 11, 12; cp. 10, 20.22.28; and more especially the clear

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 189
divine warrant for the evangelization and baptism of these Gen
tile believers. Their right of admission without circumcision was
thus settled in principle for Peter, 15, 7 ff.; and for Luke, in view
of his exceptionally detailed reports, cp. also 11, 18. Those who
later are Judaizers seemed included in its general recognition at
this stage, vs. 18. They could in any case acquiesce in this in
stance of its application as being under special divine direction.
It was besides the baptism of a devout Gentile in particularly
close sympathy with the Jewish nation and religion, 10, 2.22;
and his admission would not be hkely to involve further problems
of fellowship with Church life in Jerusalem.
The occasion of their antagonism could be the new stage of
evangelization at Antioch to Greeks, reading "EW-nvas with
Tischf., Weiss, Blass, etc.3 Their open opposition and attack is
made at Antioch upon the conclusion of Paul's first missionary
journey, in which he had turned to the Gentiles and has organized
churches among them. The claim of the Pharisaic Judaizers is
that in order to the salvation of the Gentile behevers, their bap
tism must be supplemented by circumcision which will admit
them to the election of Israel, and by observance of Mosaic legal
ism, whereby theh fellowship with Jewish Christian believers, the
inheritors of the promises, will be maintained, Acts 15, 1.5.
The issue thus raised was vital for the religion of the Gospel.
"It was the one great crisis in the history of the Church, on the
issue of which was staked her future progress and triumph,"
Lightfoot, Galatians, 283. It had therefore to be settled by the
action of the Church as a whole; and further had to be met and
decided so soon as it was raised. The Judaizers claimed to repre
sent the Church of Jerusalem; the Church of Antioch decided to
send Paul and Barnabas and certain others to the Jerusalem
Apostles and elders; and Paul goes up by revelation, taking with
3 If on judgment of the Mss. evidence, 'EXX^JHords is read with Westcott
and Hort, N. T., II, Appndx. 93 f., Von Soden, etc., yet it is generally agreed
that the context demands 'Hellenes'; whether the change has been due to
copyists of Acts, or as Bacon holds, Story of St. Paul, p. 85, to the author
of Acts in editing his source. Hort, Jud. Christianity, 60, understands a special
mission to Hellenists, perhaps including godfearers; Knowling seems to limit
the reference to godfearers. Wendt on the contrary recognizing that these
views are untenable, holds that 'Hellenists' in this passage is used in a sense
distinct from that in 6, 1; 9, 29, and that it is here equivalent to 'Greeks.'

190 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
him the Gentile Titus. We have two reports of the Conference:
in Gal. 2, 1 ff. and in Acts 15, 6 ff. "In the former Paul is cer
tainly giving his own version of what Luke subsequently described
from a later and a different standpoint; there is nothing incon
sistent in Paul emphasizing the inward impulse, under the cir
cumstances, and Luke recalling the joint-action of the Church,"
Moffatt, Introd., p. 100.
The argument of the Judaizers would naturally be based on
their interpretation of the perpetuity of the law and on circum
cision as the seal of inheritance of the covenant promise to Abraham.
As they, however, had supplemented this by baptism in profession
of faith in Christ, they may possibly have demanded on this
ground that the Gentiles should supplement their baptism by
circumcision and legal observance. From Galatians and Acts
we can recognize that the defense of Gentile freedom was based
on the divine commission and definite direction for their evangeli
zation, with no reference to other conditions than repentance and
faith; on God's gift to them of repentance unto life, Acts 11, 18, and
on his opening unto them of a door of faith, 14, 27; on his approval
of the ministry of the missionaries, as witnessed in the miracles
he granted to be performed in the mission, 14, 3.27; 15, 4.12; and
above all on the fact that the Gentile converts had received at
their baptism the gift of the Spirit, the supreme messianic blessing,
15, 8; Gal. 3, 2. If Jews already possessing circumcision and law
could only receive this gift by fulfilling the conditions for bap
tism, why should circumcision and law be imposed on Gentile
believers already possessing the Spirit?
In Luke's report of the public Conference, it is Peter who
advocates Paul's Gospel of freedom, to which Paul had won the
three PiUar Apostles in the private Conference, Gal. 2, Iff; and
which Peter had long before accepted in principle and acted upon
in his ministry to Cornelius. The summary of his speech contains
his reply to the twofold demand of the Judaizers. He first refers
in vss. 6-9 to his special divine commission to admit the Gentiles;
and to the divine witness to their right of admission into the
Church in their reception of the gift of the Spirit. Circumcision
is, therefore, not a condition for Gentile salvation, since they
already have the same earnest of it as Jewish believers in their
possession of the same indwelling of the Spirit. In vss. 9-11 he

|THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 191
turns to the second demand of the Judaizers: Gentile observance
of Mosaic legalism; and again advocates their freedom from it.
It was a yoke the Jews were not able to bear; a law they could
not fulfill and secure their salvation by obedience to it. It would
be a trial of God to impose it on the GentUes as a condition of
salvation. They will be saved like the Jewish Christians by the
grace of the Lord Jesus. And he can confidently appeal to his
hearers' reliance on this salvation by grace, since otherwise they
would not have sought justification by repentance and faith in
Christ. James concludes the discussion by first quoting the
prediction of Gentile election. This was not merely to prove the
teaching of universalism in the Old Testament, with which his
hearers would be familiar; but to point out that the prediction
had been fulfilled in the election of the Gentiles in vs. 14, and their
admission to the Church, although uncircumcised, through Peter's
divinely directed ministry to them. He next supports Peter's
advocacy of their freedom from Mosaic legalism: not to trouble
them, vs. 19; to lay upon them no greater burden than the four
necessary things, vs. 29.
It will contribute to the understanding of these four interdic
tions of the accepted text, to recall at once that by this action of
the Conference, Gentile freedom has been won. The victory is
recognized in Antioch, 15, 31, where the Church upon reading
the epistle, rejoiced for the exhortation, irapaKKnais. The South
Galatian Churches received the decisions, 16, 5, and were strength
ened in faith. And Paul declares, Gal. 2, 6-9,. that at the Con
ference the Pillar Apostles 'imported nothing, added nothing to
me, but heartily recognized my mission,' Lightfoot, in loc.
Yet with our accepted text of the decision, that victory is at
least largely compromised, if not lost. Instead of the freedom of
faith, there is imposed upon Gentile believers a series of food pre
cepts, singularly grouped with an injunction against fornication.
Hence have been formed critical theories, in some cases denying
the authenticity of the decrees, or more usually assigning them to
a period later than the Conference.4 By those, however, who
maintain the historicity of the decrees in their present text and
position in Acts 15, several distinct explanations of the addition
* See Moffatt, Introduction, 307 ff. The special hterature on the Decrees
is fisted very fully in K. Six, Das Aposteldekret, 1912.

192 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
of these injunctions are proposed. Frequently they are regarded
as a compromise with the Judaizers' demands of legalistic ob
servances. But the issue between them and Paul admitted of no
compromise. Nor could the four prohibitions be a compromise
satisfactory to either side. They would be to the Judaizers no
possible equivalent for circumcision and the general Jewish ritual
and customs. To the Gentile Christians three of the precepts
would be viewed as compelhng their submission to certain cus
tomary Jewish food regulations, even in their private life. A
second explanation has therefore been proposed: the four prohi
bitions were added as conditions of the intercourse of Jewish and
Christian disciples in matters of food. Yet these would be far
from fulfilling the requirements of Jewish food regulations for
those in the Dispersion, as found in the tractate 'Aboda Zara.'
And they were not reckoned as sufficient conditions for table-
fellowship in the conflict at Antioch, Gal. 2, 11 ff., which, in
agreement with Moffatt, p. 101, foUowed Gal. 2, 1 ff. and Acts 15.
Paul's silence concerning the decrees in this passage is not proof
of his ignorance of them, but it points to the fact that they were
not made with reference to table-feUowship. As stated more
generally by Moffatt, 101, Six, 31, and Zahn, Introd., Ill, . 153,
they were not concerned with the regulation of the social inter
course of Jewish and Gentile Christians.
For the same reason the more widely accepted explanation
offered by Wendt and many others, is inadequate. They hold
that the prohibitions are those observed by the godfearers; and
are now enjoined as a fitting means to make possible a certain
degree of intercourse between circumcised and uncircumcised
behevers. The Gentile behevers could observe the two relating to
idolatry and fornication, as agreeing with the Christian moral
view; and the other two, out of consideration for the legal restric
tions of the Jews. But such comphance could effect no real in
tercourse. This, moreover, was not the object of the prohibitions.
Their direct aim is to declare GentUe freedom from legahsm; and
the three precepts viewed as food regulations were legalistic.
We notice, however, that in Wendt's view two of the four
prohibitions are recognized as moral and not ceremonial prescrip
tions. This trend is still more noticeable in Hort's discussion,
Jud. Christianity, 71 ff. The precepts in his view are 'concrete

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 193
indications of pure rehgion and not of Judaism in the exclusive
sense. They were none the worse for being coincident with hal
lowed Jewish laws or traditions, though this was not the source
of their authority. It was a clear gain that their agreement with
the inherited moral associations of Jews should make the whole
arrangement more acceptable to the Jewish party in the Church,
since they were not of a nature to suggest any kind of obligation on
Gentile converts to obey any part of the Mosaic law.' And he
proceeds to develop the spiritual significance of three of the
precepts, those concerning idolatry, fornication and blood, as
related to communion with God, to the most intimate form of
communion with man and to reverence for the mystery of life in
abstention from blood. This clearly approximates closely to a
recognition of the decrees not as food regulations, but as precepts
concerning fundamental moral principles. But the obstacle to a
full recognition of this character is the prohibition in our text of
'things strangled.' Hort points out the difficulty caused by its
addition to the other precepts, and concludes that it 'must at
present be left unsolved.'
In consequence of these several difficulties of conforming not
only Gal. 2 but also Luke's evident aim in Acts 15 to record a
victory for Gentile freedom, with the view of the decrees as Jewish
food rules, which ' things strangled' of our text involves, it has been
proposed to reject itviktov and to regard the three remaining
prohibitions as moral prescriptions. In support of this rejection is
the historical fact that 'there is no evidence of an exactly corre
sponding usage in the first or in any earher century,' Hort, p. 73;
and the textual fact that Codex D and several western writers
omit irviKrov and add the Golden Rule.5 The avaUable textual
evidence attests the existence of both forms of the text in the
middle of the second century. Those who retain the word account
for its omission either as accidental, or because the rule had become
obsolete, or on account of its obscurity, or as an intentional change
'to do away with the Judaic and ceremonial character of the
decrees and to substitute the moral prescription of the Sermon on
the Mount. ' By those who reject it, its insertion is explained as a
6 The textual evidence in the apparatus of the critical texts is discussed in
Zahn, Introd., Ill, 33 f.; G. Resch, T. U., Bd. 28, pp. 7 ff.; K. Six, Apos-
teldekret, pp. 6 ff.

194 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
transfer to the test of a marginal gloss interpreting the prohibition
of blood.6
The Western text which omits the word, and the explanation of
the precepts as moral rules, is rejected by the majority of scholars.
But this view of the decrees is defended by Hilgenfeld, Resch,
Harnack and Lake.7 Adopting this view we find that the recogni
tion by James of GentUe election and his proposal of the three
precepts are directly parallel to Peter's advocacy of Gentile free
dom from circumcision and legalism. Our conclusion, reversing
Wendt's statement, is that the prohibitions are concerned with the
general moral behavior which Gentile Christians are to observe
without reference to Mosaic law. This concurrence of Gentile
freedom from Mosaic law with the duty of fulfillment of all moral
law was later formulated by Paul in I Cor. 9, 21: I became 'to
them that are without the law, as without the law; not being
without law to God, but under law to Christ, ' which is 'the law of
the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus' Rom. 8, 2.8 Viewed thus as moral
precepts, the prohibitions can be concrete references to duty as
related to God, neighbor and self, to use a grouping familiar from
the first, in Christ's summary of the law. This is by no means to
regard them, with Tertullian in his Montanist period, De Pudi-
citia, 12, as statements of the unpardonableness of the sins of
idolatry, homicide and adultery.
Such a summary reference and the definite terms employed in
it, naturally present the chief difficulty in accepting this view. To
* Six, who regards the precepts as food rules, admits the uncertainty of
irviKrov being in the original text; and advances the conjecture that it was in
cluded in the proposal of James, but omitted in the decrees, either for brevity
or as being included in the interdiction of blood. Later the texts were con
formed in the manuscripts of the Orient, where familiarity with Semitic food
rules would justify the explanatory addition. A. Seeberg, Die beiden Wege,
p. 82 f ., had earher conjectured that James had proposed four rules, but con
sented to the adoption of but two: the prohibition of the specific heathen sins
of eating things sacrificed to idols and fornication. Later, the other two in
junctions were added from the Jewish Two Ways.
'Hilgenfeld, Z. f. miss. Theol, 1899, p. 147 ff.; and Acta Apost, 247 ff.;
G. Resch, T. U., 1905, Bd. 28.H.3, pp. 1-179; Harnack, Acts, p. 248 ff.; Lake,
Rev. of Theol. and Philosophy, 1905, pp. 391 ff.; and Church Quarterly Review,
1911, p. 345 ff.
8 1 Cor. 9, 21. Tots avbpois <5>s avopos, pij &v avopos deov dXX'
ivvopos xpkttov.

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 195
remove it, the following considerations may be offered. The fact
of compression is not in itself strange. The prohibitions are given
as the conclusion of the speech of James, which is not further
reported in the condensed narrative. Similarly they are next
referred to only in the conclusion of the brief commendatory letter
for Silas and Judas, who are to report Sid X670U the action of the
Conference which is therefore compressed in the summary of the
precepts. Further they are to be understood as summing up the
fundamental topics of moral instruction given to converts. This
is indicated in part by the negative form, which is a characteristic
of Jewish moral catechetical moral teaching, cf. the Didache, 1-6,
and of its parallels in the New Testament; and was obviously
specially suited for converts from heathen immorality. The three
topics, moreover, are the essential subjects of the instruction in the
literature of the Jewish propaganda. And further, they reappear
freely developed in various combinations and definite apphcations
in the hortatory sections of the New Testament Epistles. In
particular their amplification appears in the numerous sin-lists
throughout the New Testament. It wUl be found that the longer
hsts and the extended general moral exhortations tend to groupings
around these three precepts. An interesting instance of the
controlhng position of idolatry, fornication and murder in the sin-
lists will appear upon a comparison of the hsts in Rev. 9, 20 ff . ;
21, 8; and 22, 15. The clearest illustration is given in Paul's
summary of his Gentile propaganda preaching, Rom. 1, 18 ff. He
there first denounces idolatry, vss. 18-23 ; next sins of personal im
purity, vss. 24-28; then in vss. 28-32 is his hst of 21 or 22 vices in
the sphere of rd pi) Kadr/Kovra : faUures in ' duties which concern
mankind in general, ' and whose practicers are worthy of death.9
In the earher hst, Gal. 5, 19, which he reminds them is aheady
famihar from the preparatory moral instruction, all three topics of
the precepts are expanded: first, three sins of impurity; next, two
relative to idolatry, with which may be compared the hsts already
cited from the Revelation; concluding with ten sins against men.
All three classes of sins occur again in I C. 5, 9, and 11 ; and 6, 9. In
these is Ulustrated the freedom in compressing the hsts in the
9 deoarvyets is not an exception: "ubique significat hominem Dis homini-
busque exosum, i. e., hominem insigniter improbum," Fritzsche, Ep. ad Rom.
I, 85.

196 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
primitive catechism, cp. 6, 9, and in amplifying any or aU the
three precepts of the Conference. The two separated lists in
II Cor. 12, 20 f., are grouped respectively as sins against men and
as sins of impurity. The two lists in I Pet. 4, 3 and 15, cover in the
first group impurities and idolatries; and in the other, sins against
men. The exhortations against sins against 'the neighbor,' Ephes.
4, 25 ff., which are contrasted in 5, 2 with ' the walk in love,' are
foUowed by those against the sin of fornication and its approaches,
concluding with o co-tip etScoXoXdrpqs. The Colossian parallel
presents at 3, 5, a list relating to fornication, again ending with a
reference to idolatry; next, at vs. 8, a list of sins towards men,
which is contrasted with a related list of duties to men, vs. 12.13,
which are summed up, vs. 14, in love as the bond of perfectness.
We also find paraUels to 'briefly comprehending in one word' each
of these fundamental breaches of morality, in the summing up the
precepts of all duty to man as 'love,' Rom. 13, 8; Gal. 5, 14; cp.
Ephes. 5, 12 as the summary with ovv of 4, 25-32; and Col. 3, 14, of
vss. 12.13. In the Epistle of James 2, 8, this love of neighbor has
itseh the title of the Royal Law, BaaCKiKbv, as supreme and as con
trolling aU phases of duty to man.
The special difficulty remains: James's recapitulation of prohibi
tions of sins against men as ' abstinence from blood. ' The possibU-
ity of such a compressed figurative use of blood for murder, is
given in the fact that the Epistle of James is hkewise characterized
throughout by terse, epigrammatic, graphic expressions. It is
more definitely suggestive that in the passage Jas. 4, 1 ff., obscure
by very reason of its abrupt, vigorous and bold figures, we find the
sins of lust, selfishness and jealous hatred of men characterized
as wars, battles and even murders by those who are denounced as
adulteresses and enemies of God. Paul too has summed up the
issues of sins against men, Gal. 5, 13, in a figure of destruction
comparable to that of the 'blood' in the summary of James. The
Galatians are as in Acts 15 caUed to freedom, which yet is coinci
dent with the duty of mutual service in love. And as the whole
law is fulfilled in the one saying 'thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself' so its nonfulfillment is expressed in 'biting, devouring and
being destroyed by each other': baKvere, Kareadiere, avaXudijre.
One further paraUel to this summing up of sins against man as

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 197
murder, destruction or 'blood,' occurs in I John 3, 11 ff. The
antithesis of brotherly love is Cain who slew his brother, and that
because his works were wicked. And hkewise every one who hates
his brother, is a manslayer. Here then we recognize the basis of
this view of murder and blood as the outcome of sin against
brother men, in the Sermon on the Mount, Mtw. 5, 21 : ob
<bovevaets includes prohibition of anger, of bitter and contemptu
ous speech as approaches to murder. And ob poixebaeis too
includes the initial lustful glance, and as in Ephes. 5, 3, all phases
and forms of impurity.
Another Ulustration of the view here taken of the prohibitions as
moral injunctions may be added from the Didache, chap. 3. First
remarking that the exhortations against the sins of the Way of
Death, begin with murder, fornication and idolatry, we notice next
that these terms sum up the issues of special sins. "Be not prone
to anger, for anger leads to murder; nor jealous, nor contentious,
nor wrathful; for of all these, murders are engendered. My child,
be not lustful, for lust leads to fornication; nor foul-speaking, nor
with uplifted eyes; for of aU these adulteries are engendered. My
chUd be not a dealer in omens, since it leads to idolatry; nor an
enchanter, nor an astrologer, nor a magician, nor be willing to look
at them; for of aU these, idolatry is engendered. "
Holding that the injunctions of Acts 15 are recapitulations of
fundamental moral law, we recognize in the further statement that
only theh observance is necessary for GentUe converts, that the
whole question of GentUe freedom from Mosaic legahsm was then
definitively settled. This Jewish Christian recognition of 'the
equal vahdity of a Christianity not bound by the law, could not
indeed but react on men's thoughts on their own relation to the
law, ' Hort, Jud. Christianity, 82. As we know, it led eventually to
their recognition of the breaking down of the middle waU of parti
tion, the law of commandments, whereby the GentUes are fellow-
citizens with the saints and are of the household of God, Ephes. 2,
14-22; and that in Christ Jesus there can be neither Jew nor
Greek, for aU are one man in him, Gal. 3, 23-29. But the New
Testament writings and the history of the Jewish Christian sects
in the succeeding centuries 10 reveal that the course of this develop-
10 Lightfoot, Gal. 3d ed., 300 ff.; Hort, Jud. Christianity, 164 ff.; Hoennicke,
op. cit., p. 177 ff., 225 ff.

198 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
ment was from the first opposed by the irreconcilable Judaizing
element of the Palestinian Church.
We learn of theh initial success at Antioch in Gal. 2, 11 ff.,
where they were able to dissuade Peter and Barnabas from con
tinuance of their table-fellowship with the Gentile Christians.
That these two Jewish Christians should have thus met on equal
footing with converted Gentiles, attests their acceptance of the full
equahty of Gentiles in the Christian Brotherhood. Upon this
principle Peter had acted at Caesarea, and presumably Barnabas
also in his association with Paul in the mission work as well as at
Antioch. It was in fact involved in the action of the Jerusalem
Conference, cp. Bacon, Story of St. Paul, 143. Their withdrawal
therefore from table-fellowship is openly denounced by Paul as
' hypocrisy' : 'the assumption of a part which masked their genuine
feelings and made them appear otherwise than they were, ' Light
foot in loco ;i.e., with Bacon, 140, ' they were false to theh acknowl
edged principles.' The suggestion of Hort, p. 78, seems probable:
that they were persuaded thus to dissimulate by ' a plausible plea
of inopportuneness. Now that we know what offense our fra
ternizing will give at Jerusalem, we will cease from it, without
rejecting them or telling them to be circumcised.' But in such
separation, Paul might well detect the aim of the Judaizers to re
duce the uncircumcised converts to the position of the godfearers
in Judaism. And he therefore denounces Peter's withdrawal
not only as inconsistency but also as tantamount to a declaration
that fullness of Christian hfe is the privilege of Jewish Christians
only, and thereby as a compulsion of the GentUes seeking this
fullness, to become and to live as Jews. This, however, is not only
a contradiction of the emancipating action of the Conference; but
beyond that, it is a denial of the truth of the Gospel, to which Peter
himself had borne witness in his speech at Jerusalem: that both
Jew and Gentile are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus;
and hence through law we have died unto law that we may live
unto God.
From Paul's later references to Peter, and especially from
I Peter, it has been generally concluded that Peter accepted the
rebuke and the full issues of the principle of the common salvation
and Gospel freedom. But whatever the outcome in this instance,
we next find the Judaizers taking a still bolder hne. At Antioch

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 199
they had dissuaded Jewish leaders from intercourse with GentUe
behevers; now in the field of Paul's first mission they proceed to
detach GentUe converts themselves from their Apostle and his
teaching. Their method in this counter-mission is distinctly
reflected in Paul's counter attack upon them in the Epistle to the
Galatians. Regarding this as his earhest letter, written from
Greece in the second missionary journey, we conclude that his
opponents intruded themselves into the Galatian churches dhectly
after they had received the Jerusalem decision from Paul, and had
by him been strengthened in the faith, Acts 16, 4. It could be
anticipated that at this juncture theh endeavor ' to shake the
allegiance' of the Galatians and 'to reverse the Gospel' which
they had accepted, Gal. 1, 7, would be related to their own inter
pretation of the decision of the Conference, and to their attitude
towards Paul, his teaching and its issues. And in fact we recognize
from the letter the controlling features of their constant attack.
It was based negatively on their discrediting the personal character
and the aims of Paul, as seeking to please men by offering them
emancipation from law; by disparaging his Apostolic authority
and competence, in contrasting him with the Jerusalem Apostles;
and thereby denying the vahdity and sufficiency of his Gospel.
Recognizing no doubt, in connection with the action of the Con
ference, the divine calhng of the Gentiles, theh ght of the Spirit and
their freedom, as uncircumcised Gentiles, from legahsm, they yet
bewitched them with the warning that all this wasbut introductory
to a full participation in the privileges of the Church of Israel's
Messiah. Since the entire doctrinal defense of Paul's Gospel
centers in the discussion of the promise to Abraham and of the
purpose and perpetuity of the law, it may reasonably be inferred
that the Judaizers insisted that inheritance of the covenant prom
ises to Abraham and his seed was conditioned upon acceptance of
circumcision; and that the hfe of the circumcised must be under the
divinely given and perpetual law of Moses. Under the conditions
of hfe in the Dispersion, a full and strict observance may not have
been urged. But from chcumcision no dispensation was possible;
even Paul, they charged, 5, 11, still preaches circumcision on occa
sion. Without it, the Galatians could have been warned by the
Judaizers that they were stUl in the position of godfearers, though
keeping the Jerusalem injunctions and now adopting observance of

200 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Jewish holy days. But they were not yet members of the Israel of
God, and their boasted liberty would be found to be an occasion for
immorality, cp. 5, 13.
It was the Judaistic attack along these or closely simUar lines,
that caUed forth the apology and polemic of the Apostle's weight
iest Epistles for the estabhshment of faith in the Apostohc age;
and as the foundation of the Christian philosophy of salvation and
of Christian freedom of faith, in aU later ages. In Galatians,
against the personal attacks, he gives at once his apologia for his
divinely commissioned Apostleship; the recognition of it and of his
Gospel by the Jerusalem Apostles; and his vindication of the
full issues of this Gospel in the equahty of Jew and Gentile in the
Church, even against the temporizing of Peter and Barnabas. In
support of the truth and power of his Gospel, he can appeal
directly to the religious experience of his readers. Through his
ministry they had at the beginning received the gift of the Spirit, in
which also by faith they wait for the hope of righteousness, 3, 3;
5, 5. This gift, the supreme blessing, the law could not provide;
and the law therefore is not needed to supplement or perfect it.
The Judaizers' arguments from the promise to Abraham and from
the law are then turned against them by his estabhshment of the
justification of Abraham by faith, of sonship to Abraham by faith,
of the transitory nature of the law and of its function to " lead the
way for the dispensation of faith.' Any suggestion or proposal of a
partial observance of the law upon accepting circumcision, is
repelled with the warning that no compromise is possible between
seeking salvation by a complete fulfillment of law, and by an abso
lute rehance on divine grace. And finally, life in the Spirit, in the
freedom for which Christ set us free, will give the inner illumination
and invigoration for the fulfillment of the whole law, which is
summed up in love.
His success in establishing the Galatians by this defense of his
Apostleship and gospel, is concluded by B. Weiss, Introd., § 18. 6.
n. 2, from the fact that 'no historical trace indicates that he
ever again had need to warn the Galatian churches against rever
sion to Jewish legahsm.' It could in addition be recognized from
the fact of his repetition and development of the teachings of
Galatians in the Epistle to the Romans, as an already assured
means for their establishment. It is now very generally accepted

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 201
that the Church of Rome was composed predominantly of Gentiles;
and that no local judaistic agitation is presupposed in the Epistle.
The presence of this prominent anti-judaistic element in the letter
is accounted for as a summing up for the Romans, in case his pro
posed visit to them should be prevented, of the result of his
successful vindication of his Gospel, in order to guard them against
any possible attack by his judaizing opponents.
Yet concerning theh later movements in the Apostolic Age, we
have at most only indirect allusions. As McGiffert concludes,
Apos. Age, p. 228: 'There is no sign in any other of Paul's Epistles
that the judaizers were causing him serious trouble; his victory
over them seems to have been complete, p. 232; and p. 389, we
have no trace of their activity in any part of his missionary field,'
in the interval between Galatians and Phihppians, and, as he
decides, not in that Epistle or later. The absence of any allusion to
them in I and II Thess. shows that they had not advanced into
Macedonia. Nor, as will appear later, are they to be recognized in
those who in Corinth say ' I am of Cephas, I am of Christ' " It is
at least remarkable that the (first) epistle is to all appearances
free from direct or indirect warnings against judaistic limitations
of the gospel," Hort, op. cit., p. 95. McGiffert, p. 315, distinguishes
the opposing Jewish Christians of II Cor. from the Judaizers; and
we also foUow him in faihng to find a reference to Judaizers at Rome
in Php. 1, 15 ff ., or in the opponents denounced in Chap. 3, although
we cannot adopt his view that the latter were unbeheving Jews.
The calmer tone of Romans in summing up his antijudaistic
arguments, reveals increasing confidence of success in repelling any
attack from that quarter. In Ephesians at length is heard the
distinct note of assured triumph. To account for this we have
indeed no knowledge of Judaistic attack and defeat in Asia or
in Rome. Nor can the altered tone of Ephesians be due, as has
been suggested by Hort, to a slackening of the attack paraUel to
Paul's enforced inactivity during the imprisonments at Caesarea
and Rome. Clearly his retirement from the scene would be his
opponents' opportunity. But intervening between Romans and
Ephesians is his last visit to Jerusalem, and Luke's account of his
welcome there by James and the elders; and his two years' impris
onment at Caesarea, in which Felix permitted his friends to
minister to him. Why should not the Jerusalem leaders, who

202 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
unwittingly had put him in this peril of hfe, avaU themselves of
this opportunity to visit him? In such most probable Conferences,
and certainly in conferences with the Palestinian Christians of
the church at Caesarea, the way was opened for any needed mutual
understandings, and for a general Jewish Christian recognition of
the full membership of Gentiles in the one Church of Christ. One
means in particular may have been Paul's repudiation, as in Rom.
3, 8; chaps. 6 and 7, of the perversions of his teaching of justifica
tion and freedom by his antinomian opponents, against whom both
Pauline and Palestinian Christians needed to work together, as
against a common enemy.
The unknown course of events in the two years of Roman
imprisonment may also have contributed to the concord. This
result, whatever may have directly led to it, is the ground of the
exultant doxology and thanksgiving of Ephesians. Instead of the
earlier defense and polemic against the Judaizers, there is now
assurance of the unity of Jewish and Gentile Christians in Christ
who is our peace; who has made both one; who has abolished the
law of commandments in ordinances; through whom both have
access in one Spirit unto the Father, and are of the same heavenly
citizenship, divine household, and are on the same foundation
builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit,
Ephes. 2, 11-22. That this is not merely Paul's spiritual ideal his
shown in the same recognition in I Peter, written also to Asia
but a few years later, of the union of Jew and Gentile as one people
of God, living stones built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy
priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices, 2, 4-10.
We shall in the next chapter assign most of the remaining ref
erences to Jewish Christian opponents of Paul, who are usually
regarded as Judaizers, to a separate movement; and there are
few other probable allusions to the activity of Judaizers in the
rest of the New Testament writings, except it be in the Gospels.
They as well as the Epistles were written for establishment in the
faith. And their selection of Christ's teachings could certainly
have been influenced by the need of basing the Church's recogni
tion of the full membership of Gentiles, though uncircumcised and
freeffrom legalism, upon his principles of universalism and higher
fulfillment of law and on his commission to admit the nations into
his Church by baptism. But decision as to definite allusions in

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 203
the Gospels to the Judaistic controversy or its stages, is affected
by the present disagreement as to their dates. Moffatt, Introd.,
p. 255, among the characteristics of Matthew, views our First
Evangelist as a Jewish Christian 'bringing forth out of his treas
ures, things new and old'; who presents both particularistic and
catholic Sayings; the Jewish Christian traits of his Gospel being
due both to Palestinian traditions and to the thesis of his own
work, viz., that Christianity as the new law and righteousness of
God had superseded the old as a revelation of God to men. Mof
fatt, however, assigns our Matthew to the period 75-90 a. d. Yet
if it was written at the end of the seventh decade, or with Allen,
still earlier, it too would serve among its other aims for estabhsh
ment in the universalism and freedom of the Gospel as repre
sented by I Peter, written probably but a few years earlier.
Our present purpose has been to follow the rise and progress of
the movement; and we have found that already in the seventh
decade of the first century, it has been definitely repelled by repre
sentatives of both Gentile and Palestinian Christians. It however
still persisted as a force to be most seriously reckoned with; al
though it naturaUy became less positively aggressive in Gentile
churches, established in faith and freedom by Paul; and less and
less influential in Jewish Christian Churches, especially after the
crisis of a. d. 70, which finally led to distinct organizations of the
Judaistic element. Their later history is traced in the special
works aheady referred to, note 10.
Reference may be made at this point to the possibility of an
other controversy originating from Jewish circles, viz., from the
School of John the Baptist's disciples. After their report of his
death to Jesus, Mtw. 14, 12, no mention of them is made until a
quarter of a century later. Then Apollos arrives at Ephesus,
knowing only John's baptism; which points to their survival in
Alexandria. And shortly after, Paul meets at Ephesus with twelve
disciples having only John's baptism, and ignorant of any other,
Acts 18, 24-19, 7. Yet Apollos is presented as a Christian who
has been instructed in the Way of the Lord, and who also taught
accurately rd irepl rwv 'Inaov, Luke's frequent phrase for Gospel
preaching. The twelve men are also regarded by Luke as padnrai;
and Paul's inquiry, 19, 2, assumes at least that they professed to
be behevers, viarebaavres. The fact of the survival of John's

204 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
disciples, especiaUy in the Dispersion, presents no difficulty; but
that ApoUos and the others knew only of John's baptism and yet
are connected with the Christian movement, demands the Ulum-
ination of more detaUed information than our source furnishes.
Nevertheless it is clear that it is stih a Jewish messianist move
ment. Apollos especiaUy is mighty in the Scriptures, i. e., from
the context, in the messianic prophecies, cp. 18, 28. Further, it
is in no conscious rivalry or opposition to the Gospel. There is
no indication that Luke's mention of the incidents is intended as
an ahusion to a Baptist propaganda. ApoUos is introduced and
characterized in connection with his prominence and his effective
work in Ephesus and Corinth. Both in his case and in that of the
twelve, Luke's interest in relating theh fuUer instruction in the
Gospel and the Christian baptism and spiritual ghts of the twelve,
seems to be to show, as in his Gospel, that the preparatory min
istry and preaching of John received its fulfillment in discipleship
to Christ. It would also be reasonable to conclude from the char
acter of these references in Acts, that the writer indicates by
means of these instances that the surviving groups of John's
disciples tended in general not to competition and controversy
with the Gospel mission, but to a receptive attitude towards it
and to amalgamation with it.
Nothing further is known of their activity until, in any case,
near the close of the first century. The Synoptic Gospels, cp. also
Acts 10, 37 f.; 13, 24 f., which appeared in this interval and prob
ably within its earlier hah, do not reveal any antagonism or con
troversy between the foUowers of Christ and John, at the time of
their composition. Baldensperger n agrees that 'in the circles in
which the Third Gospel arose, nothing was yet known of an open
enmity of John's disciples towards Christianity.' His birth, preach
ing and baptism are recorded as a divinely predicted and approved
preparation and witness for the Gospel. His message 'Art thou
he that should come or look we for another,' is frankly reported
from Q by Matthew and Luke, with no suggestion that it was
being exploited by his later disciples; but as the occasion of Christ's
vindication both of his own messianic ministry of mercy, and of
the exalted character and office of the Baptist. No trace of an
tagonism to the Baptist's disciples is discernible in the Synoptic ref-
11 Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums, p. 137.

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 205
erences to their fasts and prayers. The detailed report of John's
death reveals the abiding interest and the reverence of the Christian
Church for his character, work and relation to the Gospel, which
is perfectly expressed in the coUect of the Western Church for
the feast of his Nativity.
In the Fourth Gospel, however, it is very generaUy held by critics
of various schools, that the marked and repeated emphasis on
the contrast between Christ and the Baptist may suggest the
Evangehst's interest in counteracting thereby the claims of some
who are asserting the superiority of John; cp. 1, 8.15.20 ff.; 3,
26 ff.; 4, 1; 5, 35.36, especiaUy if with Zahn and von Soden we
read juetfaw; and 10, 41. Baldensperger in the work cited above
argues that this contrast is made in denial of the claims of the
sect of the Baptist's disciples, and that their refutation is not
merely a subordinate aim or confined to the passages mentioned,
but is one of the strongest motives, p. 153, the aim or the principal
aim, p. 165, in the composition of the Gospel. He accordingly
interprets both details of the narrative and the development of
the theology as an apologetic polemic against the attacks of the
School of the Baptist. He has first to account for their antagonism
in this late period by such conjectures as that the success of the
Gospel mission in drawing away their disciples, e. g., Acts 19, 1 ff.,
embittered those who stUl adhered to their School, p. 107 f . Their
developing conception of the person and office of John could be
based on Christian tradition and writings; especiaUy upon Jesus'
testimony that he was a prophet and more than a prophet, p. 134.
In Luke's account of the Baptist's birth, they could find so many
messianic features that the forerunner was advanced hazardously
near the Messiah; and only one step more was needed to remove
John entirely from subordination to Jesus and to place him di
rectly alongside or even above Jesus, as the disciples of the Baptist
are reported to have done in the Clementine Recognitions, I, 60.
Next, on these assumptions theh polemic against Christianity,
p. 116 ff., is a matter of conjectural reconstruction from the
Johannine hterature; though it is admitted that their own views
and peculiar doctrines cannot thus be so weU recognized. Balden-
sperger's discussion of his positions are more dhectly related to
the criticism of the Fourth Gospel, than to the history of the con
troversy to which he beheves it to point. His hypotheses as to

206 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the origin of an antagonism of the Baptist's followers are too
insecure to form a probable basis for his construction of theh
assumed polemic. And on his own view, p. 139 n., the School
soon shrivelled up into a harmless sect, and had become in the
age of Justin Martyr a negligible quantity, cp. Dial, with Trypho,
ch. 8, 49 and 88; although he insists that in the Apostolic and Post-
Apostolic age it played a greater part than has been recognized,
p. 151.12
Weinel has developed the theory by asserting that the antago
nism is found not only in the Fourth Gospel, but appears also in
the earlier period of the composition of the Synoptics. In these
and Acts and in an assumed addition in Q, 'he that is but little
in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he,' Mtw. 11, 11, he
asserts that there has been a distinct transformation of the tradi
tion, with a creative apologetic purpose, to meet the claims of a
competing mission and baptism of John's disciples.13 Wrede,
however, while recognizing the possibility of the existence of groups
of Baptist disciples when the Fourth Gospel appeared, though
what we actually know is extremely scanty; and also the possi
bility that the Gospel along with its opposition to Jews, contains
a second antithesis against these disciples of John, proposes an
other explanation: that it is directed against a Jewish exploitation
of John as greater than Jesus. In such a case there would be no
direct controversy with John's disciples, nor any need to assume
a competing School of the Baptist. He leaves the question open.14
Not so Wernle. In his view John's references to the Baptist com
plete a transparent apologetic already found in Matthew and
Luke, which was framed to correct the Christian tradition and to
meet Jewish objections of the inferiority of Jesus to John, based
upon it. He finds in Luke no reason for the conclusion that there
12 J. B. Lightfoot, Colossians, 402 f ., also emphasizes the influence of the
School of the Baptist, and sees in the Fourth Gospel evidence of its direct
antagonism: setting up John as a rival messiah. A. Blakiston, John Baptist
and his Relation to Jesus, 1912, also holds that the Fourth Gospel is directed
against the School of the Baptist. Sanday, Criticism of the Fourth Gospel,
p. 84, grants that 'there may be a certain amount of polemical or apologetic
reference to such a sect.'
13 Biblische Theologie d. Neuen Tests., § 96. Die Polemik gegen den Taufer,
462 ff.
14 Wrede, Vortrage u. Studien, p. 226.

THE JUDAISTIC CONTROVERSY 207
was a historical conflict between Christian and Baptist disciples;
or that the Fourth Gospel was called forth in any way by the
Sect of the Baptist.16
We have concluded with him, whatever may have been the
occasion of the contrast between Christ and the Baptist in the
Fourth Gospel, that it was not due to a controversy with the School
of John. Moffatt, Introd. 531, holds that it is more likely that the
polemic does not represent a direct aUusion to some contemporary
sect of John's disciples; but forms part of the general anti-Jewish
tendency of the Gospel, and is at best subordinate. But Bacon's
remark, Story of St. Paul, 180, that ' Gnosticism fastened upon the
leaderless Johannine movement with even greater ease and avidity
than upon Christianity, ' suggests the possibihty that the manner
of presentation in the Fourth Gospel of the relation of Christ and
the Baptist points neither to a controversy with the School of the
Baptist nor to Jewish exploitation of the Baptist against Jesus; but
to attempts of intruding gnostic teachers to support their tenets
by some misuse of the Gospel tradition concerning the Baptist.
Moffatt, p. 153, mentions that Michaehs thought of the connection
of disciples of the Baptist with the Colossian heresy. Zahn too
recognizes that the polemic in the Baptist passages of the Fourth
Gospel is subordinate to the Evangehst's polemic against gnostic
errors. While he is disposed to regard, though in our opinion
without sufficient warrant, these errors as originating with some
element among the Baptist's disciples, he is yet careful not to
define the polemic as directed against the Baptist School as such.
" It is natural to suppose that the after effects of the wrong attitude
which a part of John's disciples took towards Jesus, were connected
with, or contributed to, the origin of the movement which John
opposes by bis strong emphasis on the incarnation, the truly
human hfe and death of Jesus, as well upon his bodily resurrec
tion, " Introd. Ill, 323. StUl more definitely, III, 367 f ., he ascribes
the false teaching opposed in the First Epistle of John , to Cerinthus.
In view of the statement that he came from Egypt, and of the fact
that Apollos in Alexandria knew only the baptism of John, he finds
a new support for the hypothesis of a movement connected with
the circle of John's disciples, which upon its external acceptance
into the Church in Asia did not give up in principle its pecuhar
16 ZeUschriftf. d. N. T. Wissenschaft, 1900, p. 48 ff.; 53 f.

208 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
opinions. In contrast to this construction which seeks to explain
the Baptist passages by some relation of the false teachers with his
School or with a portion of it, it seems that they are more simply
and adequately accounted for by the perversion of the Gospel
tradition concerning the Baptist, by gnostics who could intrude
into the Church from other directions, in order to support theh
doctrines, and especiaUy theh Christology. WhUe we therefore
find neither in Acts nor John evidence of a direct controversy with
the School of the Baptist, we can recognize that perverted views
of his relation to Jesus were a subordinate part of another internal
controversy which we have stUl to consider.

CHAPTER VIII
THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS
' It has been generaUy recognized that in addition to the Judaizing
attack, there are references in the later New Testament Epistles,
especiaUy in Colossians, the Pastorals, certain of the Cathohc
Epistles and in the Revelation, to the existence and activity of a
distinct class of errorists. ' Theh characterization has necessarUy
influenced New Testament criticism, conceptions of the historical
moveme"+f_of the Apostohc and of the Post-Apostohc Age, and
constructions of the development of New Testament theology;
as weU as the exegesis of the large sections concerned with theh
teachings. The need therefore is evident of the attempts to dis
tinguish, so far as our data permit, this movement and the con
troversy growing out of it.
The Tubingen School found such intimate relation between the
New Testament references to these errorists and the second-
century gnosticism, that it concluded that the New Testament
Epistles containing them must be productions of the second cen
tury. And because of the hterary relation of such Epistles with
several other New Testament books, these too were involved
in this late dating and therefore in the denial of genuineness.
Such denials were of course combined with other hnes of critical
attack. The obvious methods of meeting this assertion of second-
century origin were first, to deny where possible the gnostic char
acter of the false teachings. Thus the Roman Cathohc scholars
Rohr and Wurm stUl maintain the view that not only in I Cor.
but also in I John, we have references simply to Judaizing per
versions. More frequently the references to false teaching are
regarded as pointing merely to gnosticism in its incipiency, and as
confined to I John, near the close of the first century. And in the
case of Epistles traditionaUy assigned to a generation earher, the
references were explained as due to local influences, as in the
Colossian heresy; or to an Alexandrian influence, often referred to

210 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Apollos as its initiator; or in some cases the allusions to erroneous
teachings were viewed as later interpolations.1
• But increasing agreement as to the results of studies in late
Judaism on one hand, and in second-century gnosticism on the
other hand, and of the connection of both with the history of
Oriental and of Graeco-Roman religions, has made possible a new
construction of the New Testament references to the presence and
teachings of a class of opponents distinct from the Judaizers. It
is indicated in the now famihar phrase of Pre-Christian Gnosti
cism. . Thus the possible allusions in the New Testament to
gnostic hnes of thought, cease to be in themselves proofs of second-
century composition. The usual phrases, pre-gnostic, incipient
gnostic, semi-gnostic features in the New Testament, have now to
be understood not as the earhest references to gnosticism in general,
but to the early stages of the special gnosticism of the second
Christian century.
The prominence and importance of the New Testament treat
ment of this false teaching which was distinct from Judaizing
opposition and was in some relation to gnostic systems, was al
ready recognized before the period of modern New Testament
criticism and of the study of the History of Rehgions. In the
seventeenth century Hammond had advocated the view of con
tinuous allusion to gnostics in the Epistles, both in his Annotations
and in a special treatise.2 Edward Burton's Bampton Lectures,
1829, The Heresies of the Apostolic Age, contain in the appended
volume of notes constant references to the hterature up to his
time, in which the relation of gnosticism to New Testament
teachings is discussed. Lutterbeck, Die Neutestamentlichen
Lehrbegriffe, 1852, has in several points anticipated more recent
views as to the early emergence and prominence of a Jewish
gnostic movement intruding into Christianity, cp. I, 268 ff., 445;
II, 3-78. But his theories failed to win acceptance or detailed dis
cussion, owing to their basis on premature generalizations and on
arbitrary schemes of the origin and development of gnosis in the
1 So Pfleiderer, Urchristm., 1.231, follows Schmiedel and Bruckner in regard
to Philippians, 2, 6ff.
2 H. Hammond, Works, 1684, Vol. II and Vol. IV, pp. 713 ff., De Anti-
christo, de Mysterio iniquitatis, de Diotrephe et iv irapbbq de gnosticis sub
Apostolorum aevo prodeuntibus.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 211
Apostohc Age. Since then there have been numerous special
studies on the errorists referred to in separate New Testament
writings. They have not, however, been generally interested in
tracing the possible connections of the false teachings as phases of
development of one or more opposing movements. In many cases,
moreover, they have been controlled by the tendency to view them
as forms or outgrowths of the Judaistic controversy alone. And
their conclusions have also often been influenced by critical pre
suppositions as to the date and authorship of the writings in which
they occur. The well-known works on the Apostohc Age and on
New Testament Theology have of course proceeded more con
structively. The most recent work, and indeed presented as pre
paratory studies to a work on the Apostolic Age, is W. Lutgert's
series of monographs covering already nine Pauline Epistles and
I John.3 In these he maintains, and we hold successfully, that
from the beginning the Christian Church faced opponents on two
fronts : Judaizers and perverters of Christian freedom.
Further progress may be expected along the lines of contem
porary studies in the History of Rehgions, and especially from the
results of investigation of the contemporary and pre-Christian
Jewish mysticism. For it is more and more clearly recognized that .
there were besides Pharisaism with consequent emergence of the
Judaistic controversy, speculative movements among the Jews, and
in particular among those in the Dispersion. On the other hand,
recent research in second-century gnosticism and its origins, make
possible more exact comparisons and conclusions regarding the
character and development of gnostic tendencies and influences in
the New Testament writings. Similarly the advancing studies of
the contemporary Grseco-Roman syncretistic cults, open up
questions of the possible relations between them and special topics
of New Testament teaching.
The characteristic features of second-century gnosticism are
presented in all the encyclopedias, church histories and histories of
dogma, with references to the special treatises on the system, its
origin, sources and structure, and to monographs on its various
3 Freiheitspredigt u. Schwarmgeister in Korinth: Ein Beitrag zur Charak-
teristik der Christuspartei, 1908; Die IrrUhrer der Pastoralhriefe, 1909; Die
Vollkommenen in Philipperbrief u. die Enthusiasten in Thessahnich, 1909;
Ami u. Geist in Kampf, 1911; Der Rdmerbrief als historisches Problem, 1915.

212 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
sects. For the purpose of keeping in view the possibihties of
correspondence between it and the teaching of New Testament
errorists now to be examined, we may here refer to its outstanding
features as sketched in the summaries of Kohler and Harnack.4
Gnosis is revealed knowledge of salvation by means of emancipa
tion of the human sphit from matter and by its conquest of the
cosmic powers in its ascent to the pleroma, the perfection of the
Godhead* Such means and certainty of salvation are secured by
cultic actions in the mysteries and initiations. ^- The system in
cludes a cosmology, a drama of the world's origin, resting on a
theory of metaphysical duahsm in which God is pure Sphit, and
matter an independent principle inherently evU."The necessary
relations between God and creation are mediated by a theory of
emanations, t Creation itself is the work of a subordinate demiurge.
On the same duahstic principle the Redeemer is divided into the
heavenly aeon Christ and his human appearance in Jesus. Since
the Christ is incapable of suffering, he is only related to Jesus by
some docetic method; and his redemption can have no connection
with an atoning death on the Cross/ ' Christ redeems because he
has shown the way, and has overcome the demons.'' Christian
eschatology is necessarily also rejected. '/.In ethics on the duahstic
basis, gnostic systems developed either in the direction of ascet
icism or libertinism. The Old Testament was by some rejected
radically; by others it was utilized in selections. New Testament
writings were adapted to gnostic speculation by means of aUegory,
and supplemented by aUeged secret tradition. <?-The Church was
converted 'into the college of the pneumatic, alone capable of
gnosis and the divine hfe, while the others as the hylic, perish';
though the Valentinians and some others recognized a middle
class of the psychic ' capable of a certain blessedness and knowledge
of the supersensible, through Christian faith. '
It is not, however, our purpose to attempt the construction of a
«W. Kohler, Rges. Vouch. IV, 6, 1911: Die Gnosis, p. 19 ff. Harnack,
History of Dogma, I, p. 252 ff.: The most important gnostic doctrines. W.
Bousset, Hauptprobleme der Gnosis, 1907, discusses the fundamental doctrines
of the gnostic systems, pp. 319-328. W. Anz, 1897, had already maintained
in Texte u. Untersuchungen, XV, 4, that the central doctrine uniting the
many disparate elements of gnosticism, was salvation by the ascent of the
soul from the tyranny of the world-powers to the supreme God and the blessed
ness of the freedom of the pleroma.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 213
theory of the gnostic element in the New Testament by the method
of paralleling the correspondences between it and the gnostic
systems of the next century. We shall restric t our discussion in the
following chapters to an investigation of the earhest New Testa
ment data as to the nature of an opposing teaching of a gnostic
character. If we can thus reach definite results regarding its con
tents, sphit and tendencies, we can more clearly determine what
conditions of rehgious thought seem to be postulated for its
emergence, and what historical development might logically be ex
pected. A comparison of results with the increasingly recognized
results of the study of rehgious thought before, during and after the
Apostohc Age, will of course remain as a necessary check upon our
conclusions as to this New Testament polemic against a false
teaching distinct from the Judaizing movement.
1. THE THESSALONIAN EPISTLES
Turning therefore to the first group of the Pauhne Epistles, we
find no reference to such a movement in Galatians, which on the
South Galatian theory can be regarded as the earhest of the
Apostle's extant Letters. In the Thessalonians, however, written
from Corinth at the beginning of the fifth decade, we meet with a
definite polemic against a special perversion of the Pauline teach
ing. Almost always this controversial element is viewed as due to
attack upon the Apostle by unbelieving Jews. Such attack would
naturally consist of denial of the original propaganda preaching
that Jesus is Messiah. • Yet there is in the Epistle no reaffirmation
of the original apologetic from prophecy, the witness of Jesus'
life, words and deeds, his resurrection and the behevers' gift of the
Spirit. On the contrary his only reference to the Jews, I Thess.
2, 14 ff., is in regard to theh persecution of his converts for their
stedfastness in the faith that Jesus is the Christ. • In reference to
this tribulation, the first Epistle is a stimulation of the patience
inspired by the Christian hope of glory at the Parousia of Christ.
' But there is much more in these Epistles which points beyond
persecution by the Jews; or in Moffatt's view by pagans under
Jewish instigation. • Lipsius, Stud. u. Krit. 1854, 905 ff., cited by
Moffatt, therefore proposed the theory of a defense against a
Judaizing attack. Yet again it is difficult to detect any reference
to such a Judaizing opposition. For we find no allusions to the

214 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
matters around which this controversy centered: circumcision,
legahsm, Sabbath, privileges of Israel and universahsm. • The
summary of salvation, II Thess. 2, 13 f., is not framed to meet a
Judaistic perversion." Salvation, in this statement, is 'in consecra
tion of the Sphit and faith in the truth. ' This is a view in which
every Judaizer would share. And if, as may be, a special formula
tion is here designed against an opposing view of salvation, it is not
against the Judaizing view.
1 There remains the supposition that the references to oppositions
are to the teachings of some party or group within the Church who
are distinct from the Judaizers. • It is not yet clear from these
Epistles whether they are converts from heathenism or Judaism.
The references to them are moreover not direct. We must recon
struct their position from allusions and from significant renewed
emphasis on Apostolic teaching which is minimized, perverted or
rejected. Some clues to the character of the opposition may first
be sought in the designedly vague personal allusions.
Writing from Corinth he asks the prayers of the readers for his
deliverance from 'the definite body or class,' Findlay in loc,
'of absurd, or eccentric or perverse and wicked men': ruv arbirwv
Kai irovijpuv avdp&iruv, II Thess. 3, 2. EUicott admits: 'who these
men were is somewhat doubtful.' They are, however, not the
heathen, since nothing is known of opposition to the Gospel or of
danger to the Apostle from the Corinthians, cp. Acts 18, 10. Nor
are they, as in the usual view, unbelieving Jews; else he could be
expected to name them as such, as he does when speaking of theh
persecution of the Thessalonians I, 2, 14, and of the persecution by
them which he anticipates in Jerusalem: 'those who are dis
obedient in Judea, ' Rom. 15, 31. <He would not moreover describe
as 'absurd and irrational,' the Jews to whom he presented in the
synagogues his elaborated arguments from Old Testament proph
ecy, and to whose objections against Christianity he offered with
most solemn protestations of devotion to his nation, his pro-
foundest teachings in Rom. 9-11. Neither could his opponents in
Corinth be Judaizing Christians, for the same reasons: he could not
have called either their attack a Jewish attack, which was clear
sighted and based on deep conviction, as being against all reason.
Further, his added remark 'faith does not pertain to all men,'
could not refer to pagans or Jews, since it would be pointless to

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 215
assure his readers that these classes had not accepted the Christian
faith. Nor could the threefold description of the opponents apply
to Judaizing Christians. They could indeed be caUed by Paul as
in Gal. 2, 4, false brethren; yet with definite reference to their
denial of the freedom which we have in Christ, and not to denial of
the faith professed by the Church of Jerusalem, of which they were
members.* Even they, however, are not treated in Galatians and
Romans as aroTrot, and are not characterized as irovvpoi, immoral
men. ' We conclude, therefore, that the reference may most naturally
point to a group of men within the Church whose claim to be
behevers Paul repudiates, and whose immoral behavior based on
principles contrary to all reason, is hindering the progress and
success of the Gospel./ These, it may also be noticed, are promi
nent features in the later description of the false teachers in the
Pastorals. < There, the men who within the Church withstand the
truth are reprobate concerning the faith; are corrupted in mind
and without understanding; evil men, irovnpoi and impostors,
ybnres; and as such are contrasted with those that would hve
godly in Christ Jesus, II Tim. 3, 8-13.
Whatever may have been the relation of the Corinthian op
ponents to these later errorists, Paul's request for his readers'
prayers for his dehverance from them, assumes their understanding
of his reference. We next inquire whether the Thessalonians
themselves have acquaintance with, and experience of such a
class. In answer we find in the first hah of the second chapter of
the First Epistle, Paul's reiterated denials concerning the char
acter of his own preaching to the readers. It is almost constantly
understood to be a repudiation of charges made against him by
the Jews in Thessalonica or by the heathen at their prompting.
But we must observe that this is not the characteristic and con
stant form of Jewish attack. They did not concern themselves
with the innuendoes in this chapter in regard to Paul's apostohc
authority, theological conceptions, rhetorical methods, pastoral
relations, personal purity, petty mercenary aims. Theirs, in
Judea, Thessalonica and always was open war upon him to the
death as an apostate attempting to destroy the faith and customs
of Israel; and this, under domination of their special hatred of his
Gospel to the Gentiles. And the same direct methods of attack

216 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
were used by Judaizing Christians. The charges in this chapter
are most intelligible when viewed not as the occasion of apology
but as Paul's polemic against false teachers who have intruded
into the Church of Thessalonica, whose preaching and methods
he denounces in contrasting them with his own. Their exhorta
tion issues from error and impurity and is by means of guile. They
are flatterers and fawners, seeking glory from men; and through
covetousness they demand financial support from their hearers.
These are precisely the methods and motives ascribed to the
gnosticizing false teachers in the later Epistles. So similar, in
deed, is the description of the opponents, as we have understood
the section, to that of those in Corinth, that Baur, Paul, II, 86,
and III Appendix 315 ff., uses as an argument against the gen
uineness of I Thess. the claim that 2, 4 ff. 'is a brief recapitulation
of the principles enunciated in the Corinthian Epistles'; and p.
317, is 'an echo of the last two chapters of II Cor.' 5
Who these errorists were may be known more definitely from
the special topics, interests and emphases in the two Epistles.
The outstanding topic and interest is eschatology. Every section
of the First Epistle reaches its climax in a reference to the Second
Advent. Other doctrines, redemptive facts and ethical exhorta
tions are expressed in their relation to the Last Things. One com
plete section, 4, 13 ff., is a brief apocalypse concerning the state
of the Christian dead and their share in the Parousia; and it is
followed by a section of restatement concerning the times and
seasons of Christ's coming. The first two of the three chapters of
II Thess. are exclusively eschatological. This unusual proportion
of emphasis is not due, as has often been asserted, to an early
interest of the Apostle in matters eschatological, which he out
grew in later years; for the same general conceptions are in
terwoven in his later Epistles. Neither can the prominence of
the subject be due to the readers' ignorance. He states that he
has no need to write of the times and seasons; that they know
accurately that the Day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night.
He can appeal to their knowledge of his original teaching con
cerning that Day, and in detail, concerning the Apostasy, the
5 This and the recent views of the Thessalonian opponents are discussed by
Lutgert, whose own view has here been followed, in Die Vollkommenen im
Philipperbrief u. die Enthusiasten in Thessalonich, p. 55 ff.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 217
Man of Sin and his Restrainer. Nor does the constant tone of
confident reference to the subject, suggest any tendency of the
readers to deny it.
We are thus at a loss for an explanation of his emphasis on the
Last Things, until we learn in the Second Epistle, 2, 2 ff., that
under the pretext of Paul's teaching or of its issues, his opponents
are asserting that the Day of the Lord is 'already present,' ivian\-
Kev,6 not merely 'at hand' or ' just at hand.' It is the same posi
tion as held by some in Corinth who say there is no resurrection
of the dead; and later by those in Ephesus who say the resurrection
has taken place already, fjSri yeyovivai, II Tim. 2, 18. For such,
the only meaning of resurrection was the spiritual resurrection in
baptism. At their own baptism they must have made a profession
of faith in Christ's resurrection, I Cor. 15, 1-8; but in Thessalonica
as in Corinth, their assertion that the Day of the Lord was already
present involved a denial of the Second Coming of Christ and the
gathering together unto him of living saints and dead at the gen
eral resurrection, II Thess. 2, 1; I Thess. 4, 13-18. That this
denial of the resurrection in a glorified body rests as in I Cor. 15,
35, on a gnostic dualism of spirit and inherently evil created matter,
may possibly be already indicated in the unusual concluding
prayer, I Thess. 5, 23, that theh spirit and soul and body may be
preserved entire at the coming of Christ; for the relation of the
body with soul and spirit at the Parousia, is the subject developed
in I Cor. 15, 35 ff., in reply to the deniers of the resurrection in
vs. 12 and to their challenge, vs. 35, concerning a resurrection body.
Another brief statement suggests that the false teaching is
based positively on the claim of spiritual gifts of prophecy, which
in I Cor. includes the gifts of wisdom, gnosis and revelation.
6 See Zahn, Introd., § 37 n. 17, for the view in Acta Theclse, 14, that 'the
resurrection has already taken place' means ' in the children we have,' and
also for the views by later gnostics of the resurrection as spiritual by means
of epignosis of God or of the truth, in conversion and baptism; and for its
relation to 'resurrection of the flesh,' his Apostles' Creed, p. 204. Cp. also
Harnack, Hist, of Dogma, p. 261, n. 1. The suggestion that Ox. Pap. 1187,
line 17, rov xfibvov ivaravros as referring to the approaching year may sup
port the translation of iviarnKev by 'is imminent,' conflicts with the fact that
while the aor. ptcp. can refer to the future, the perfect tense expresses a present
result of a past action; as too in Ox. Pap., 275, line, 10, rrjs iveariaans
r/pepas means 'this day.'

218 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
The Thessalonians are enjoined, I Thess. 5, 19 ff., not to quench
the Spirit and not to despise prophesyings. It is a singular com
mand to be addressed to primitive Christians. To them prophecy
was one of the highest gifts of the Spirit; a distinguishing mark
of Christianity; and one of the strongest attractions in winning
converts. The passage, therefore, indicates that the readers are
disposed, in repudiating the intruding false teachings of those
boasting of their prophetic gift, to hold a decreasing estimate of
this gift. The Apostle's corrective is 'to prove and test all things
and to hold fast that which is good.' Similarly in connection with
the abuse of spiritual ghts, I Cor. 12-14, he gives the rule: desire
earnestly spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. Yet
when prophets speak, the others are to discriminate, as in Rom.
12, 6, whether they prophesy according to the proportion of the
faith. It will appear in later Epistles that the boast of freedom based
on the gift of the Spirit, coupled with gnostic indifference to the
material body and its functions, and with the rejection of the
eschatological hope as the inspiration and invigoration of Christian
morality, issued in an antinomian license. Such an influence may
be recognized as already operative in Thessalonica, in view of the
special ethical interests in the hortatory section of the First
Epistle, 4, 1 ff. After recalling in the opening verses the body of
moral instruction they had received and which they were observ
ing, he proceeds to select a few definite topics for reiteration.
We submit that a satisfactory reason for this selection is offered
in the view that these are topics concerning which the opponents
are insinuating false principles which lead to unchristian practice.
The first of the three topics is a renewed warning against impurity
and disparagement of marriage. The occasion of this re-emphasized
admonition cannot be the readers' proneness to continue in the
sins of their previous heathen life and present environment. He
praises their Christian life and moral walk without qualification,
4, 1; 1, 1-10; 3, 6 ff. It is, therefore, best accounted for as directed
against the practical outcome of an antinomian teaching of his
subtly intruding opponents. At the close in vs. 8, their claim of
freedom from moral law by reason of their gift of the Spirit, is
met by his counterthrust that rejection of the law of purity in
vss. 3-6 is rejection not of a man but of God, who also gives his

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 219
Holy Spirit to be within us to enable us to reahze the holiness
of life of vs. 7, cp. I Cor. 6, 19; Rom. 8, 4. In insisting next in
vss. 9 and 10 on brotherly love, with the acknowledgment that
they already exercise it towards all the brethren in all Macedonia,
he can reasonably be understood as warning them against an in
truding divisive and exclusive spirit, which is characteristic of
gnostic activity in all the later references. The remaining re
newal of the primitive moral instruction in vss. 11 and 12 shows
that the claim of freedom from moral law led naturally to con
tempt for all forms of external authority, including the State.
Hence the need of his counteracting admonition directed against
teaching conflicting with quietness and with seemly behavior
towards those outside the Church.
Passing at this point from the topic of their faith in the gospel,
chaps. 1-3, and from that of theh moral work of love, 4, Iff., to
their Christian hope, he next, 4, 13 ff., removes anxiety concerning
the dead in Christ by his assurance of their share in the Parousia.
That the aim in this section is to refute consequences of a denial
of a general resurrection, appears both from the close paraUel
in I Cor. 15, 18-20, and also from his reassertion in the succeed
ing section, 5, 1-11, of the Apostolic teaching concerning the
Day of the Lord to men who know it accurately and to whom he
has 'no need to write.' But as in Rom. 15, 14 f., he 'puts them
again in remembrance' so as to guard them against those who
like lying prophets in the Old Testament reject warnings in re
gard to that Day, 'saying peace and safety'; and to exhort them
with the inspiration of the hope of glory to a hfe of Christian
duty, which is imperiUed by the principles of the deniers of the
resurrection as in I Cor. 15, 34.
In thus denying a general resurrection and the obligation of
Christian morality on the ground of theh emancipating spiritual
gift of gnosis, the errorists would be also inevitably led to deny
the authority of the Church's original teaching, and equally the
authority of its ministry of teaching, worship and discipline.
Hence in the concluding section concerning Church fellowship,
5, 12 ff., we recognize in the unusually definite exhortation to a
recognition of the clergy and to esteem them exceedingly highly
in love, a reference to some influence tending to the disparagement
of the official ministry. This can be most readily accounted for

220 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
as coming from intruders boasting of their own completer ministry
and charismatic gift of prophecy. In vss. 19-22 as in I Cor. 12-14
and Rom. 12, 6, this prophetic ministry is fuUy recognized. Yet
false prophecy is guarded against by the criterion of vs. 21 and
parallels: to test all things; to hold fast to the good, to abstain
from every form of evil. It is illustrated by the later rule in I John
4, Iff.: Believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether
they are of God ... he that is not of God heareth us not. A
general application of this rule which closes our section, vss. 12-22,
is already directed in the first injunction to the clergy in vs. 14
to 'admonish the disorderly,' araKTOi; and the last third of the
Second Epistle contains Paul's own special charge in reference to
them. They seem thus to be a distinct class. We shall attempt
a construction of their characteristics and relations to other in
terests of the two Epistles, which may serve further to indicate
and to unify the several features of the opposing teaching.
The term araKroi, which is found in these Epistles only, connotes
far more than men of unbecoming behavior, as implied by 'disor
derly' of our English versions. As it occurs in the section concern
ing Church fellowship exhorting to recognition of the local ministry
and to their exercise of the duty of admonishing the araKroi, the
general idea of their 'insubordination' is implied. This is sup
ported by Paul's reference to the class in II Thess. 3, 14: if any obey
not our word by this Epistle. The harm is evidently related to the
famihar Pauline expressions concerning rd£ is, order. This tA£is
in the Church, I Cor. 14, 40; Col. 2, 5, is on the one hand based on
the ordinance, Siaraaaeadai, of the Apostle in all his churches,
I Cor. 7, 17; 11, 34; and rests ultimately on the iirirayh of the
Lord, cp. also I Cor. 14, 37; and on the other hand it is exhibited in
the correlative submission, biroraaaeadai and obedience, bwaKah,
of his converts. The fundamental obedience is to God as is seen
in the use of aireideiv in Rom. 11, 30, etc.; in contrast to previous
failure to be subject to His law and righteousness. From other
viewpoints it is an obedience to Christ, II Cor. 10, 6; of faith; to the
gospel; to the form of 8i8axv dehvered; and then, I Cor. 16, 15-17,
the submission to those who have set themselves to minister to the
saints, and to every one that helpeth in the work and laboreth;
and the obedience to Paul, Phihppians 2, 12; II Cor. 2, 9; Philemon
9.21 ; or to Titus, II Cor. 7, 15. We therefore consider that &t<iktoi

|THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 221
hke the equivalent term dw7r6TaKrot in Tit. 1, 10, refers to in
subordination and rejection of the Church order, its Apostohc
tradition of faith, morals and hope, its ministry and discipline;
and further that this is the imifying term for the introducers and
adherents of the false teachings which are the occasion of the
Epistles to Thessalonica.
In both, the references to them are made in close connection
with the renewed assertions of the Parousia. Theh first mention
immediately follows the eschatological section, I Thess 4, 13-5, 11.
In II Thess. the charge against them alone, 3, 6-16, is only sepa
rated from his stUl more definite teaching concerning the Day of
the Lord, by his prayer for dehverance from the related aroiroi
Kai irovrjpoi of Corinth. Besides this association with denials of
the Advent, these insubordinate men, II Thess 3, 6, walk not
according to the tradition of moral teaching. His reference would
naturaUy be to the special topics from it which he had re-empha
sized in the earlier Epistle: impurity, divisive spirit and disregard,
probably in some form of spiritual excitement, of external authority
and customs. He had also then repeated from the primitive
Didache the rule of self-support. This he renews in II Thess 3,
7—12, against the insubordinate of vs. 6, pointing out his own sub
mission to the tradition: ovk r\raKri\aapev iv bpiv, although he
had authority to be supported, as being an Apostle of Christ. The
reference to this right of apostle, prophet and evangelist, as were
the writers, to support, cp. also I Thess 2, 7-9, is an intimation
that the insubordinate claimed a similar authority on the basis of
their spiritual ghts, and exercised it in a demand for support by
the Church; as we know this was claimed by the false apostles in
II Cor. 11 and 12. Along, moreover, with theh rejection of the
command to work, they became irepiepya$bpevoi: not mere idlers
and gossipers, but in contrast to vpaaaeiv ra ISia, I Thess.
4, 11, they are meddlers, intruders, upsetters of households. The
term reminds us of the later errorists who in II Tim. 3, 6, creep
into houses and take captive sUly women, who in turn, 1 Tim. 5, 13,
learn to be idle, going about from house to house; irep'tepyoi,
speaking rd jui) biovra : things improper or forbidden. Men with
such principles, spirit and practices were not likely to recognize
lovingly the local clergy; nor in their insubordination to listen to
pastoral admonition. Hence the Apostles' discipline of them:

222 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
withdraw yourselves from every brother walking drd/crws; his own
apostohc charge and solemn exhortation to ' such, that working with
quietness they eat theh own bread ' ; and if any refuse obedience
to this apostohc command, the Church is to 'note' him and not
associate with him, though not regarding him as an enemy, but
admonishing him as a brother.
The length and solemnity of this apostohc charge to the local
Church, shows of itseh that it is not directed merely against idleness
which any Church praised by Paul, or which any civic community
was perfectly competent to discipline and suppress. The claim for
Church support correlates itseh therefore with the other traits;
and in its connection with them enables us to recognize in the
insubordinate the wily intruders with whom Paul contrasts him
seh in I Thess. 2, and the adherents of theh subtle and masked
propaganda which in II Thess. 2, 2, is already using, like the later
gnostics, the artifice of forged apostolic documents. That the
several traits we have combined could be thus united in the error
ists at Thessalonica is dhectly ulustrated, Tit. 1, 9-16, in the
delineation of gnosticizing teachers. Theh first and controlling
feature is that they are avvirbraKroi, parallel to the araKroi as
regards Church fehowship. As to doctrine they utter senseless
things and are deceived in their minds, which recalls the earher
ctToirot. Theh teachings are insinuated by the method of the
irepiepya£bpevoi: they overturn whole households; and hke them
they claim financial support for theh immoral teachings. As we
saw in I Thess. 4, 8, a probable aUusion to a claim of emancipating
gnosis in the possession of the Spirit, so here the errorists ' profess to
know God, but deny him in theh works,' as in the passage in I
Thess. they rej ect God. And as in II Thess. 3, 2, faith does not per
tain to the aroiroi Kai irovqpoi, so are the errorists here airioroi
and unto every good work reprobate. And here too it is the duty
of the clergy to confute them and close their mouths, as in Thes
salonica the clergy were to test, to admonish, to withdraw from, to
note and to have no association with the intruding insubordinate
errorists. This construction, in which the view of Liitgert is adopted, is,
however, in direct opposition to the exegetical tradition maintained
in aU the recent commentaries and works on the Apostohc Age.
In these, the insubordinate are a group, often viewed as repre-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 223
senting a general tendency of the Church, which was morbidly
excited by expectation of the imminence of the Advent and thereby
was led to neglect of theh earthly occupations. The consequent
need and the claim to support, and theh failure to receive it, led
next to a spirit of insubordination and to general disorder, which is
paraUeled in historical instances of similar fanaticism caused by
expectations of an immediate Advent. This current conception
rests upon the assumptions that the report, 'the Day of the Lord is
present' refers to an announcement of its immediate coming; that
this announcement would lead to fanatical excitement; and that
this would express itself in idleness and in the disorders naturally
resulting from it.
We have aheady stated, as against the initial assumption, that
the Thessalonians' troubles were occasioned not by rumors con
cerning an impending Parousia and the Last Things connected
with it, but by a denial based on ultra-spiritualizing of the primi
tive eschatology, that such a Parousia would ever occur. Against
this denial in Corinth and Ephesus, II Tim. 2, 18, we have Paul's
reassertion of the Advent hope not only in I Cor. 15, but through
out the Thessalonian Epistles, and most definitely indeed in the
chapters immediately preceding and following the report that the
Day of the Lord is aheady present, without its eschatological
accompaniments. But even on the contrary assumption, it is
by no means evident that the announcement of an immediate
Advent would lead to fanatical excitement of the disciples. Find-
lay, Thess., p. xliv, grants that a disposition to run into morbid
excitement, presumably on the subject of Christ's Advent, p.
xxxviii, and into an unpractical enthusiasm, is not found in any
other of the communities addressed in the Pauline Epistles. This
admission of itself weakens the probability of such a disposition in
Thessalonica; especially as he utters no word, as we shall see, to
correct it there. The reference to his own self-support is not
urged against the insubordinate, as we should expect on the as
sumption of Parousia excitement, as an example of industry even
amid eager expectation of the Advent, but as showing his purpose
not to burden the Church. And more generally, there was no
reason why the most vivid Advent hopes should anywhere lead
to idleness, in view of the famihar Gospel teaching that men who
wait for their Lord should 'let their loins be girded about and

224 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
their lights burning ' ; that, as in the parable group, Mtw. 25, fol
lowing the discourse on the Last Things, they are as in the Talents
to work, and as in the Judgment scene they are to minister to others
while, as in the Ten Virgins, they are watching for and witnessing
to their Lord's return.
Further the assumption of Advent excitement finds no support
in the passage on which it is definitely based: the call 'not to be
shaken from your mind nor yet be troubled. ' This is constantly
viewed as addressed to the insubordinate or in general to the
Church as agitated hke them by the coming of the Day. But on
the contrary it is a call to the Church based on the immediately
preceding chapter of hopes and prayers for the Day, and on the
directly following argument against the report that it is aheady
come without the fulfillment of the hope of glory connected with
it in chapter 1, and without the realization, chapter 2, of the
assurances in the primitive eschatology, vss. 5.6, of the final
victorious conflict with evil in its complete revelation, and of its
destruction by the manifestation of Christ's Parousia, or in Ben-
gel's phrase by 'the first dawn of theAdvent.' SaXeuw and dpoeu,
which are probably terms familiar in apocalyptic teachings and
adopted here in apphcations defined by a qualifiying phrase
and the context, do not, therefore, refer to excited fears lest the
Advent will suddenly take place, but to the mental unsettlement
and to the disheartening discouragement of the faithful, lest it
will not take place at all. Paul's definite reference in the two
words is clearly seen in the structure of the sentence: 'in the in
terest of the Parousia' they are not to be unsettled from their
understanding of this fundamental Christian hope; and 'in the
interest of our gathering together into the Lord,' they are not to
be troubled and disheartened, as they must be if the Day is come
without a fulfillment of their Advent hopes. The direct support
ing paraUels are the exhortations, I Thess. 4, 13-18, not to sorrow,
in view of the reassurance of the Parousia and of our gathering
together with Christ returning in glory; in I Cor. parallel to
pi] aa\ebu, is the call eSpatot yiveade, kperaKivqroi, which is oc
casioned by the same denial of resurrection, vs. 12; and parallel
to dpoeladai is vs. 19 'we are of all men most miserable' if our
hope in Christ is in this hfe only and does not include hope con
cerning those fallen asleep in Christ. This initial indication of

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 225
reference of the unsettlement and trouble to threatened loss of the
hope of Parousia and of our final gathering together unto the Lord,
is confirmed also by the conclusion of the passage. Because of
Paul's reiteration of the primitive teaching, they are in 2, 15 ff.,
in contrast to <raXeueij' to stand and hold fast the traditions which
had been taught by him; while in contrast to dpoeiadai, God the
giver of eternal consolation and good hope in grace wUl estabhsh
them in every good word and work.
It is claimed, however, that the two assumptions of a report
of the imminence of the Advent, and of resulting fanatical excite
ment, are supported by the description of the araKroi as idlers.
This is forcibly argued by Frame both in his commentary and in
his essay.7 He holds that in accord with the usage in papyri, the
word signifies idlers, or with Rutherford, loafers; that the specific
apostohc tradition they faU to observe is the command to work;
that from theh idleness issue aU the other faults ascribed to them;
and that the cause of it is excitement due to the report that the
Day is present. Since there would have been no occasion for
agitations if the Day had actuaUy been present with none of the
predicted accompanying portents, Dobschutz and others regard
'is present' as a future which is almost present. Findlay, Frame
and Zahn practicaUy make the same charge by paraphrasing:
'the period indicated by i^epa has dawned and the Lord is ex
pected from heaven at any moment.' But such modification is
not warranted by the text; and it is agamst the constant New
Testament warnings, as I Thess. 5, 2.3., that the Day wiU break
in unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Besides, throughout the
Apostohc Age, the conviction that the Lord may appear at any
hour, that the Day is at hand, led to no fanatical excitement or
idleness; but was appealed to, as in I Thess. 5, 6 ff., Rom. 13, 11 ff.
as an incentive to soberness and dihgence in the Christian moral
walk. That the araKroi were idlers is true: but not by reason of
paralysis of their energies by adventist agitations. For as Frame
clearly shows, the charge of being irepiepya£bpevoi points to
their meddlesome activities and interference in the conduct of
church affairs. The idleness was only abstention from any work
needed for theh self-support; and we have already considered
7 1. C. Commentary on Thessalonians, p. 197; Essays in Modern Theology,
in honor of Dr, Briggs, pp. 191 ff.

226 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
this as based on theh claim ©f freedom from the duty of such
self-support on the ground that they themselves were apostles,
prophets or evangehsts who have authority to live of the Gospel.
In particular it is not necessary to consider that they are called
araKroi simply because they were idlers; but rather because this
refusal to work with their own hands was one outstanding and
significant mark of their insubordination. In the history of the
usage of the term as summarized by Frame, the root idea of op
position to authority, rule, norm, is maintained; whether it re
sults in a soldier's neglect to observe discipline and commands, in
the citizens' disorderly contempt of established order and moral
customs, or in the apprentice's disobedience of his master's di
rections. From the very interesting papyrus of an apprentice's
indenture in a. d. 66, Oxyr. Pap., II, 275, Frame and MiUigan
quote in support of the contemporary meaning of araKrio) as
simply idleness, the proviso in line 25 that the boy is to be docked
for the number of days on which araKrr\an, which Grenfell and
Hunt render 'plays truant': MiUigan 'faUs to attend'; Frame,
'idles.' It is obvious that the boy's idleness would be a ground
for debiting his account; but even then his idleness could be con
ceived as the outcome of his aral-ia: his refusal to submit to the
employer and his rules. And this view of it is in fact supported
in the document itself, whose first stipulation, lines 10 f., concern
ing the work of the boy, describes him as biaKovovvra Kai iroiovvra
iravra ra iiriraaabpeva abru. Here 'all the directions' is a more
inclusive reference than avoidance of idleness, and indicates also
that idleness is viewed as but one of many conceivable forms of
insubordination to the master's authority. In another papyrus,
Ox. Pop., 725, we have moreover a definite distinction of araKrea
from idleness in the use of the series, hne 40, dp-yew, aadevita,
araKrio): the apprentice is to make up the time he last lost on ac
count of ' idleness Ul-health, disobedience or far any other reason.' 8
In the charge against the araKroi, as Professor Frame has con
vincingly shown, Paul signalizes their refusal to work. This, in
our view, is because the refusal coupled with demand for support
8 In this contract also the distinct reference of araKriw is explained in the
preceding stipulation of fines 10 ff., that the boy is to 'perform all the orders
that may be given him by the said teacher,' and by the later stipulation of
his return to 'perform all his duties as aforesaid.'

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 227
is both the concrete expression of theh repudiation of the admoni
tion and authority of the local ministry, I Thess. 5, 14, and of
the authority of the primitive moral didache 4, 1 ff . and II Thess.
3, 6, which includes the rule of labor; and is also the direct ex
pression of their claim of spiritual authority as teachers, upon
which theh masked doctrinal propaganda is based. We hold
therfore that araKroi describes their general position, and that
Paul makes in II Thess. 5, 11, a specific reference to its significant
outcome in idleness in the appended participle clauses, not of
opposition but of 'more exact specification': 'working not at all';
which is further specified as an idleness that is an activity of med
dlesomeness and interference. We submit, therefore, as before
that these forms of theh disturbance of the peace of the Church in
Thessalonica are fully accounted for as the direct outcome of
their refusal of submission to the authority of the Church's tradi
tion of faith, morals and hope, and to the discipline of its ministry;
and that this refusal was based on their boasts of superior eman
cipating spiritual gifts, united with a demand for recognition of
theh own spiritual authority.
The Apostle's reserve in his references to them and in his
method of repelling theh propaganda indicates that he has not
yet sufficiently complete and definite information; and this be
cause of their insidious and secret mode of disseminating their
views. There is as yet no reference to the relation of gnosis to
redemption; not any certain aUusions to the denial of the Church's
christology: that Jesus is Lord and Christ. It is possible, however,
that he may suspect the trend of theh teaching to deny these
titles to the human Jesus, in view of his own use of them in these
Epistles.9 A general objection to the construction of this opposition in
Thessalonica which we have presented, is that it involves recogni
tion of a movement with several characteristics of second-century
gnosticism as appearing in the middle of the first century; and that
it presents the problem of the possibihty of such a perversion
of Christian principles occurring within twenty years after the
•He names the Christ 48 times; yet even in these early Letters, only 3
times as Jesus, in two passages, in one of which the name being in apposition
with the title, Son of God; while 38 times as Lord or Lord combined with
Jesus or Christ; 4 times as Christ and twice as Christ Jesus.

228 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Ascension and at the outset of Paul's mission in Europe. We can
more satisfactorily consider this general problem after an inspec
tion of the data of the later Epistles. We proceed, therefore, to
inquire what support for the above construction and for the possi
bihty of the emergence of a gnosticizing movement within the
Church at so early a date, is given in the next group of Epistles,
all of which like I and II Thess. were connected with Corinth, and
written only five or six years later.
2. I AND II CORINTHIANS AND ROMANS
THE EPISTLES TO CORINTH
The Epistles to Corinth are concerned principally with apology
and polemic. The errors against which these are directed may be
recognized in the converging results of an examination of the main
topics selected for discussion, of the descriptions of the teachers
and leaders of the opposing movement; and of the doctrinal
interests and contents of the two Letters. The results wiU serve
both to test the indications of the character of the earlier stage of
opposition in Thessalonica, and also of the opposing movement
both in the later Pauline and other New Testament Epistles.
* Surveying briefly the main topics, we find as in Thessalonica a
most direct interest in reaffirming the primitive eschatological
teaching concerning Christ's Parousia and the general resurrection
in opposition to its denial by some in Corinth. • In intimate relation
to this denial, we meet with detailed and applied discussion of the
possession of the Spirit and its manifestations in spiritual gifts.
• EspeciaUy prominent is reference to the claim of individual freedom
by possession of the Spirit, from the authority of the Church's
ministry and definitely from that of Paul; of the ethical precepts
and general customs in worship. Further, there are found constant
protests against the divisive effect of such claims and boasts, upon
Church unity and brotherhood. And, most important, we mark
the unmasking of these boasted spiritual gifts as displacing re
demption by means of Christ's death; and eventually as dis
placing the Apostolic tradition of the incarnation and divine
Sonship of Jesus, by some theory of dividing Jesus from the
divine Christi
' We at once recognize that such teachings as these are utterly

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 229
opposed not only to the teachings of Paul and his fellow-worker
Apollos, but equally to those of Peter; and most definitely to
Judaistic teaching. ¦ Turning therefore to the references to the
opposing teachers in Corinth, there remains the possibihty that
these controverted positions are those advocated by the last of the
four groups named by Paul at the outset: those who I Cor. 1, 12
say 'I am of Christ.'10 In considering such a possibility we are
immediately confronted with a denial not only of its existence but
of Paul's reference to it. Thus Robiger in disregard first of all, of
the grammatical structure, insisted that 'I am of Christ' was the
common profession of the three factions, based on their relations to
the three leaders: 'I as of Paul, Cephas or Apollos, am of Christ.'
More frequently, following Eichhorn, the words are regarded as
expressing the attitude of neutrals who refuse to be inscribed with
any party badge, and are content to be known only as disciples of
Christ. Developing this view Pott, as cited by Baur, argues from
I Cor. 3, 22, that the positions and doctrines of those of Christ are
approved by the Apostle himself; while Mayerhoff, Bleek and
Pfleiderer advance to the conclusion that ' I am of Christ ' was also
Paul's own profession.11 But these theories fail to recognize that
the claim of those of Christ is condemned equally with the party
cries of the other three factions; and in II Cor. 10, 7, Paul's
assertion that we too are of Christ, is made against his opponents
whom he condemns in chaps. 10-13, and whose boast is to be 'of
Christ.' A summary elimination of such a party is made by rejecting the
10 Special literature on the Christ Party, apart from commentaries and
introductions, is listed in W. Ltitgert's Freiheilspredigt u. Schwarmgeister in
Korinth, p. 41; and also in Ignaz Rohr, Paulus u. d. Gemeinde v. Korinth,
1899, pp. 103 ff., where he also presents and discusses a sixfold division of
the various theories concerning the parties. A survey of them is given by
W. Mangold in his edition of Bleek's Einleitung, 1875, pp. 462-465.
11 All these views in combination form a part of McGiffert's arguments,
Apostolic Age, p. 295 f., against the existence of a Christ party. Rohr too
combines these views, but as representing the earher attitude of those who
being grieved at the partisan movements, avowed themselves to be simply
of Christ; yet eventually through a feeling of superiority to parties and their
defects, they became themselves a party, op. cit, p. 153 f. Lightfoot, Gala
tians, 1869, p. 354, in opposing the denial of the existence of a Christ party,
remarks that 'there is in fact more evidence for the existence of a party of
Christ than there is of a party of Peter.'

230 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
words from the text of I Cor. 1, 12. This is done by Heinrici in the
Meyer commentary; by J. Weiss in his commentary and in his
Urchristenthum, p. 257 f., who asserts that it is a gloss by some
reader recalling perhaps II Cor. 10, 7; and the text is also among
those which Moffatt considers it to be a legitimate hypothesis to
regard as interpolations.12 A principal argument for rejecting the
text is that those of Christ are not further mentioned or referred to
in I Cor. But a definite opposing movement distinct from Judais
tic attack, as already stated, appears in both Epistles; it is referred
to in II Cor. 10, 7 under the description of 'to be of Christ,' and
would therefore be appropriately mentioned under the same title
in the list of factions in I Cor. 1, 12. The argument that it is not
mentioned by name in the summary I Cor. 3, 22, overlooks the
reference in the context, vss. 18-20, to boasts of the party to posses
sion of a gift of wisdom, which Paul declares is folly, deception,
empty and in craftiness; and in the next verses, in place of recog
nizing their right to the title 'to be of Christ,' he inserts a refer
ence to a series of antitheses parallel to the series in Rom. 8, 38 ff.;
Col. 1, 16; Ephes. 1, 21, which suggest topics of gnostic teaching
of the party.
The earlier method of eliminating a Christ party with distinc
tive character and policy was to identify it with one of the other
factions. Baur led the way in his article on the Christ Party,
1831, and in Paul I, 269 ff. Following a clue of J. E. C. Schmidt, he
maintained that as the followers of Paul and Apollos formed a
group, so the Christ party was a group of Judaizing Christians
identical with the Cephas party: calling themselves those of
Cephas, because Peter held the primacy among the Jewish Apos
tles; and also called themselves those of Christ, because they
relied on direct connection with Christ as the chief token of genuine
apostolic authority. This identification of the two factions was
soon abandoned in the Tubingen School. Hilgenfeld found the
distinction between them in the fact that in the one case the
adherents were Peter's converts or followers; and in the other, they
were followers of Judaizers most bitterly opposed to Paul, and who
called themselves 'those of Christ' because they had been personal
12 Zahn offers explanation of the omission of reference to the words by
Clement of Rome, ch. 47, occasionally by Origen, and by Adamantius, in a
brief discussion, Introduction, § 18, note 9.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 231
disciples of Jesus. Holsten, Ev. d. Paulus, 218 ff., adds that they
may have been apostles of Christ in the more general sense, as
having been of the number of the Seventy disciples or of the five
hundred to whom the risen Christ appeared. In later criticism the
view that the Christ party was Judaistic has been very generaUy
maintained; and usuaUy they are regarded in contrast to the
milder Jewish Christians under Peter's influence as ultra-Judaists,
radicaUy opposed to Paul; at times as emissaries of a Judaistic
reaction beginning with the conflict of 'certain from James' with
Paul at Antioch; or even as being interested only in 'a fleshly
legal Jewish messiah, ' in opposition to Paul's doctrine of a spiritual
heavenly Christ, based on his visions and revelations.
Zahn too insists that the principal opposition was that of
Judaizers, who are 'those of Cephas.' In his construction of the
Christ party the claim ' I am of Christ ' is the sharpest expression
of the spirit of independence to which the Church as a whole was
inclined; of its deliberate indifference to every human authority;
and of its proud ignoring of all historical dependence of its own
Christian position. While, therefore, he says, no large section of
the two Epistles is definitely devoted to the refutation of those of
Christ, yet Paul throughout in his replies to the Church, asserted
his opinion of the Christian knowledge and judgment and resulting
independence of the boasters. These, however, are not intruders
from Palestine or elsewhere; but individuals of the congregation
whom he singles out as the most advanced representatives of the
Corinthians' claims to independence.
This recognition of an opposition distinct from that of the
Judaizers may serve as a transition to the view which finds no
polemic by or against the Cephas party, but on the contrary a
defense and polemic against the attacks of a Christ party regarded
as intruding teachers; Jews, though not personal followers of
Jesus; opposed to Apostolic traditions; and in independence of its
preachers, attempting to introduce a system of gnostic character.
Several features of this view were early advocated in the theories of
Schenkel, Kniewel and others, cp. Rohr's list, p. 129, which emerged
in the immediate discussion of Baur's essay; and have since found
occasional approval, as by De Wette and Mangold. But the fuUer
construction of the view, with discussion in detail of the data,
appears in a series of monographs by W. Lutgert of Halle, appear-

232 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
ing since 1908 as listed on p. 211. 13 It rests in the first place on the
denial that the opposition in Corinth is Judaistic. ' As has been
stated there is nothing to indicate the Apostle's denunciation in the
two Epistles of any of the characteristic features of the Judaizing
party, as in Galatians and elsewhere. Equally no trace of any op
position to Paul's Gospel of universalism, Christian liberty,
justification by faith or of any feature of his denial of the teaching
of Judaizers. On the contrary, to the Corinthian false teachers the
Apostle is not free enough, not as spiritual as themselves.' And
they seem, although they are Jews, not to make an issue concern
ing circumcision or Sabbath, and to have no interest in the avoid
ance of heathen associations, or in the observance of the Law, or in
the messianic hope. Zahn's assertion is incredible: that Paul's
warning, I Cor. 3, 16 f., against destroying the Temple of God is to
be referred to a faction claiming the leadership or sympathy of
Cephas; much more, the reference to it of his anathema on those
who love not the Lord, with the asseveration of the watchword,
'Our Lord comes,' which not even the most radical Judaizer
13 The tendency in other recent discussion is, while maintaining a Judaistic
activity in Corinth, to recognize also the beginnings of a gnostic movement,
which, however, is not referred to the Christ party. Pfleiderer, Urchristm., I,
102 ff., regards 'I am of Christ' as Paul's profession; those of Cephas as Ju
daizers; assigns the Alexandrian gnostic features of opposition to the followers
of Apollos; and the false developments of freedom to those of Paul. Bacon
in his Story of St. Paul and Introd., finds in Corinth a focus of Judaistic ac
tivity, not by Jewish behevers of the Cephas group but by the Christ party
who are self-styled converts of Christ, opposed to Paul's apostolic authority
and Gospel. The strong, spiritual, enhghtened antinomians and deniers of
resurrection are Pauline converts perverting his Gospel of freedom. And he
also recognizes that a gnosticism of Hellenistic type is already appearing
among the adherents of Apollos, who was himself not tainted with this error.
With this, however, Paul will be free to grapple in the next group of letters.
For Weinel, Bib. Theolog. N. T., the Christ party are opponents from a more
definite Jewish Christian standpoint than that of Cephas. The distinct
gnostic features are based on false developments of the Pauline doctrine of
freedom by some of his converts from the mystery rehgions. Lake, Earlier
Epistles of St. Paul, is inclined with Robiger to eliminate a Christ party;
denies also a Judaistic opposition; and while concluding that Paul's opponents
were probably the spiritual, holds that there is no evidence to determine
whether they are adherents of one of the parties of I Cor. 1, 12. From the tone
of I Cor. 1-4 it is not improbable that they were those of ApoUos: but if
II Cor. 10, 7 refers to a Christ party, it is more probable that it was from it
that the hostility to Paul was chiefly developed.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 233
would deny. Nor if Paul's Corinthian enemies are Judaizers, and
with the Tubingen critics, from Palestine and Jerusalem, can we
understand his intense zeal to secure from his Gentile converts, the
collection for the Jerusalem Church.
Baur explains the absence of Judaistic issues in the polemic of
the two Epistles as due to the necessity that in this thoroughly
Greek Church the Judaizers should appear in a more polished and
less strictly Jewish form. They could not expect a favorable
reception if they had immediately brought forward their princi
ples. Zeal for the Mosaic law may be essentially their actuating
motive; but they fell back on the special ground of their Judaistic
opposition : they attacked the apostolic authority of Paul. This has
been the standing explanation given by those who assert a Judais
tic movement which is characterized by no features of Judaistic
teaching: it was subtly conducting a masked attack; conniving
temporarily at Gentile freedom while assailing Paul's person, and
intending after destroying his influence to impose the Judaistic
position upon his converts. Such a strategy, however, would be a
reflection upon Jewish intelligence and would be doomed to failure.
It would moreover be contrary, as we observe in Galatians, to the
constant Judaistic spirit and methods of zealous, open, direct
attack along the whole line of the Pauline position.
Having therefore found no reason to eliminate a Christ party or
to identify it with an assumed Judaistic movement under any
party cry, we further find no occasion to identify it with radical
partisans of Apollos or of Paul. The reasons for this will appear as
we now proceed to attempt to determine more definitely from the
data of the two Epistles, the dominant features of the movement
which Paul combats, and which we have already identified as that
of those who say ' I am of Christ. '
The intruding errorists are of course professing Christians. As
such they have been baptized after the usual instruction and upon
profession of belief made in a baptismal formula, I Cor. 15, 3 ff.,
which would include the statement that Jesus is Christ, Son of God,
Lord, who died for our sins and rose again according to the Scrip
tures. But Paul's emphasis on the redemptive death and resur
rection of the Christ as among the essentials, iv irpwrots, of his
Gospel instruction, may be in direct contrast to a profession of
faith made 'in vain,' in the immediately preceding words, which

234 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
may also be an allusion to the false teachers and their adherents.
For the most obvious explanation, in the context of vss. 12.17.56 f.,
of the possibility of such vain profession, would be in a distortion of
the doctrine of the Cross and resurrection and evacuation of the
Old Testament teaching of a suffering and redeeming Messiah by
specious exegesis. We can only conjecture that they made the
baptismal profession with their own reservations and under
standing of Christ's person and work; and made it thus, because
of their attraction to Christianity by such other of its features as
its doctrines of revelations, mediation, freedom from legalism and
by its ghts of the Spirit. It is evident that as professing disciples
they took part in the worship, as in chaps. 12 and 14, and attended
the agapae, although they may have taken a special attitude to
wards the Holy Communion, I Cor. 11, 17 ff.; 10, 16 ff.
They are next converts from Judaism, II Cor. 11, 22 ff., not
Greek converts developing Pauhne teaching into phUosophical
theories. They come to Corinth from an unnamed church with
letters commendatory; and therefore claim to be apostles, messen
gers of some church. In II Cor. 8, 23, the brethren sent with Titus
are apostles of the churches, and perhaps significantly as the ' glory
of Christ,' in contrast to these false apostles who in 11, 13 fashion
themselves into apostles of Christ, like Satan fashioning himseh
into an angel of light. They boast in 10, 7 f ., ' to be of Christ ' ; and
probably because of a claim resting on their alleged possession of his
Spirit in full measure, to have immediate revelations of the Lord,
12, 1, and direct authority from him, are taunted as 'the super-
eminent apostles,' 11, 5; 12, 11, who further in 10, 12-18 commend
themselves by their boasts of superior spiritual gifts as listed in the
six series of I Cor. 12-14. As regards their work they are not
missionaries and evangehsts preaching the gospel to the uncon
verted. They intrude, as in II Cor. 10, 15 ff., into other men's
labors and boast in another's province in regard of things ready to
their hand. As yet they are not a heretical party and have made no
formal schism. In I Cor. II, 18 ff., the axiapara are chques at
the. agapae; and the atpeVeis refer to the resulting divisions which
serve the needful purpose, Set, of making manifest those who are
the approved Christians at Corinth.14 Their alleged building on
14 For this view of the passage compare I John 2, 19; 'they went out from
us ... in order that they might be made manifest, <j>avepo)dS>aiv, that

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 235
Paul's foundation, I Cor. 3, 11 ff., evokes the warnings of the
testing fires of final judgment and of the divine destruction of those
who are destroying God's temple; cp. also II Cor. 10, 4. 5. 8; 13, 10.
In contrast to the Judaizers who in Gal. 3, 1 ff . professed to perfect
the mere beginnings which Paul had made by their other gospel of
the need of legalistic obedience after conversion, these intruders
profess to build up the Corinthians from the mere beginnings
of Paul's Gospel of freedom into maturity of spiritual knowledge
and perfection. It is these arrogant pretensions which give rise to
his constant impassioned retorts, not only I Cor. 3, 1 ff ., as to the
immaturity of the Corinthians for the wisdom which he speaks
among the perfect, but also as to the work of the intruders, which
unlike his own and in contradiction of their boasts, is not upbuild
ing but destructive. And in II Cor. 10, 3 ff., he addresses himseh to
the attack upon the alleged upbuilding by his enemies, which will
be the casting down of mighty fortresses, imaginations, \oyiapoi,
and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God,
and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of
Christ. Their general position is illuminated by further details of their
attitude to Paul and his work and by his allusions to them. In
volved in their disparagement of his teaching as mere milk for
babes and not solid food for the mature, as sarkic not spiritual, as
resting on a knowing of Christ only after the flesh, as being indeed
a hiding of the gospel and not the whole counsel of God, was their
disparagement of his insufficient spiritual gifts and of his Apostohc
office. They sneer at his weak bodily presence and hold his speech
in contempt; impugn his failure to revisit Corinth as due to con
sciousness of the weakness of his position, and attribute the post
ponement of his visit to insincerity and fickleness. His own claim
to be an Apostle, they parry with demands for his commendatory
letters and for a proof of Christ speaking in him. His self-support
is distorted as a confession that he dares not claim support by the
church as his apostolic right; and even as a subterfuge to cloak his
purpose of appropriating the collection he was urging for the Jeru
salem church. They may not discredit the truth of his message,
such as it was; but however the debated passage, II Cor. 11, 4, be
not all are of us,' with I Cor. 11, 19: 'there must be atpecreis among you in
order that Kai ol SoKipoi <f>avepol yevwvrai iv vpiv.'

236 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
interpreted, they deny his authority and credentials, the adequacy
and fullness of his gospel, and his right to exercise Apostolic disci
pline in the Church of Corinth.
The dangers of such an attack were heightened by the character
of their own teaching, by which they sought to displace the Gospel
and authority of the Apostle. It was given attractively 'in the
wisdom of words' and ' in exceUency of speech.' Yet it was in
truth 'a handling the word of God deceitfully,' II Cor. 4, 2, and a
making merchandise of it, 2, 17. For they use it in 11, 12 as an
occasion of gain, by demanding support as apostles of Christ. But
the dominating motive of Paul's opposition to it was his realization
that it would inevitably issue in a complete perversion of his
gospel. It is indeed in no small measure owing to his rebuttal of it,
that we possess the record of many characteristic features of the
Apostle's teaching. The difficulty in presenting a positive con
struction of their teaching arises from theh method of propaganda.
For they do not appear to have begun this openly in the public
assemblies, but to have insinuated their tenets in special groups.
Paul's informants therefore have not yet fuU knowledge of the
formative principles and ultimate issues of the movement. " In our
view of the reference to them in the Thessalonian Epistles, he had
already some acquaintance with the personnel of the errorists;
and had begun to discern the nature of their teaching. But in the
Corinthian Epistles, with increasing knowledge of their position,
he attacks it with increasing definiteness; and at length in Romans
we find his stUl more definite recognition and confutation of their
principles, based on the knowledge of it gained in his three months'
residence in Corinth itseh. * The attempt to reconstruct theh
teaching is besides made further difficult by the fact that the
Apostle is combatting men who profess not to be deniers of his
own doctrines, but to be presenting them in their f uUness and conse
quences in contrast to his own immature and merely fleshly com
prehension of them. Hence in his polemic, he cannot always
employ categorical contradictions of theh premises; and we are
compelled to recognize what were their positions from his exposure
of their specious developments and misapplications of his own
principles, issuing in immorality and denials of the essential truths
of the Gospel. We can nevertheless discern the following con
trolling outlines of their doctrinal system.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 237
Since the most definite doctrinal discussion of the opposition in
Corinth is in regard to the denial of a general resurrection, we may
conclude that this is the initial and outspoken tenet of the errorists,
and the entering wedge of their propaganda. They held indeed, as
did also gnostic sects at the close of the first century, the Apostolic
tradition of Jesus' resurrection, I Cor. 15, 4. But in view of
vs. 35, they probably held it with reservations similar to those of
the Ophitic gnostics in Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 1.30. 13 f. who
taught that the heavenly Christ raised up both the psychic and
spiritual parts of Jesus, but sent the mundane part back again into
the world.18 They could also profess belief in the resurrection of
the dead; but again with such reservations as were made by similar
heretics in Justin, Trypho, c. 80, who say there is no resurrection of
the dead, but immediately at their death their souls are taken up
into heaven. In this sense the dead are raised to immortal life;
but they have no avaaraais, no 'rising again,' cp. Luke 2, 34, in res
urrection bodies at the Parousia. This position appears in the
twofold question of I Cor. 15, 35. In connection it may be with
what was possibly a topic in the primitive catechetical instruction:
xept ruv veKp&v on iyeipovrai, cp. Mark. 12, 26, with the
Lukan paraUel and the forms of introducing topics and theh dis
cussion in Justin's apology, its first question irws iyeipovrai is
parried with 'but iroii^ aupari epxovrai.' The rest of the chapter
in rebuttal of this objection is concerned solely with the glorified
resurrection body and its coming when the Advent trumpet shall
sound. Their denial of this could rest not only on Paul's acknowl
edgment, vs. 50, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom
of God, but also on his own teaching as in Rom. 6 of the spiritual
resurrection in baptism, with its accompanying gift of the indwell-
ling Spirit. But instead of regarding this ght as but the first
fruits, Rom. 8, 23, as only the earnest of our inheritance, II Cor.
1, 22; Ephes. 1, 13 f ., and of our being clothed upon with our house
from heaven when mortality shall have been swaUowed up of life,
II Cor. 5, 2 ff.; they boasted that they were already fully spiritual;
already enjoying the full blessings of the messianic age; already
reigning in the Kingdom apart from Paul and his followers, I Cor.
16 Misisse desuper virtutem quandam in eum, quae excitavit eum in corpore
quod et corpus animate et spirituale vocant; mundalia enim remisisse eum in
mundo. Cp. the related Greek terms in I Cor. 15, 45-47.

238 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
4, 8. For them as in II Thess. 2, 2, the Day of the Lord was
already come.
This fundamental tenet necessarily affects their whole con
ception of Christian doctrine and life. It sets aside the primitive
eschatology of Christ's Parousia in glory, the general resurrection
and world-judgment. Christian morality is thereby deprived of
the inspiration of Christian hope for those who in Rom. 2, 7, by
patient continuance in well-doing still seek for glory, honor and
immortality. It is equally ominous for interest in the ethical
teaching of Christ delivered in the Oral Gospel and in the cate
chetical instruction.
For in the sphere of morals, the boast of full possession of the
eschatological blessing of the Spirit led to perversion of the Pauline
doctrine of the Spirit. He proclained without reservation that
the gift of the Spirit was essentially the life of freedom: where
the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. * Yet while with Paul,
Rom. 8, 2 ff., the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus frees us from the
law of sin and death, and as an inner fountain of moral illumina
tion and energy accomplishes the righteousness demanded by
the law, that Spirit was to his Corinthian opponents, subjective
freedom from all external authority : be it of moral law and customs,
of Apostolic tradition or Church discipline.' The evidences of
this run throughout both Epistles. They are libertines on the
principles of antinomianism, cf. I Cor. 6, 9 ff.; 10, 6 ff.; II Cor.
12, 21, because they are not under law but grace. It would very
reasonably be the women converts of these errorists who asserted
their freedom by self-emancipation from the social customs ex
pressive of due subordination in family life and in public worship.
The recurring claims of Apostolic authority, the references to the
customs of the churches of God, the denunciations of disorders in
the worship and the direct polemics against the spiritual boasts
of the errorists, aU point to the fact that the false apostles and
their adherents repudiated not only Paul's Apostolic position but
all official and corporate authority in the Church's ministry of
teaching, discipline and worship.
We can thus construct with reasonable clearness the trend of
their teaching as it affects Christian hope and Christian love as the
fulfilling of all law. But we are not yet so clearly informed, as
we are in later Epistles, as to their doctrinal positions concerning

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 239
the Christian faith; and especially in regard to their doctrine of
God and his relations to the universe, and of the Person and
work of Christ. This very probably was at first an esoteric por
tion of theh system, reserved for their initiates. Paul seems only
gradually to have learned of it; and would not in any case be dis
posed to disseminate by direct citations, false teachings not
generally advertised. Yet throughout the Epistles to the Thessa
lonians, Corinthians and Romans we suddenly meet with em
phatic statements summarizing his own teachings on these sub
jects and revealing his increasing realization that the fundamental
doctrines of the errorists are in direct opposition to his own.
If their system already contained any features of the second-
century gnostic cosmogonies having recourse to a demiurge or to a
series of mediating emanations, as the outcome of their theory of
evil resting on a dualism of the world of matter and divine spirit,
it may have been glanced at and in any event it was guarded
against by the statements: the universe is e« deov, I Cor. 11, 12;
II Cor. 5, 18; and fuller in Rom. 11, 36, e£ avrov Kai St' aiiroO Kai
ets abrbv ra iravra; and most definitely, I Cor. 8, 6, to us there is
one God the Father ei- ov ra iravra Kai fipeis els abrbv, and one
Lord Jesus Christ St' oS rd iravra Kai r/pels St' avrov. * Col. 1, 16,
written some five years later, is recognized to be directed against
a gnostic theory; and it is simply a more explicit statement of
creation by, in and unto Christ, already made in the preceding
passage in I Cory
Having adopted the view that they are speciaUy referred to in
I Cor. 1-4, we observe that their rejection of the Gospel of re
demption by Christ's death is now recognized by the Apostle.
The word of the Cross is to them as well as to unbelievers not, as
to the Judaizers, to be supplemented by legalism; but I Cor. 1,
18, it is foolishness and weakness. Hence, his renewed emphasis
upon it as the heart of his Gospel. He determined upon coming
to the Corinthians, not to know anything among them save Jesus
Christ and him crucified; since 1, 18 ff. the word of the Cross is
the power and wisdom of God, unto salvation, Rom. 1, 16. Christ
was made unto us not only wisdom, as the errorists preach, but
at the same time righteousness and consecration which we share
in our union with him. And all this because 1, 30 he was made
unto us redemption. Rejection of the atoning life and death of

240 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the human Jesus, points in connection with the boast of redemp
tion in the possession of the Spirit of the exalted Christ, to the
probable source of their false teaching in some perverted view of
the relation of the heavenly Christ to the earthly Jesus. This
would as well involve questions concerning the preexistence and
incarnation of Christ. Whatever they may have been, they were
doubtless highly speculative and, as suggested, reserved for the
initiated. Yet a number of christological assertions suddenly
appearing in the polemical sections could be occasioned by Paul's
growing acquaintance with their concealed teaching.
In his controversy with them concerning the resurrection we
have statements significantly emphasizing the relation of our
Lord's humanity to redemption. Since by man came death whose
sting is sin, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, I Cor.
15, 21. And this man is the Christ of the preceding verse and is
the second, last Adam and head of humanity of the following verse
and of the Two Adams section, vss. 45 ff . He is the Adam who is
both a life-giving Spirit and is the Second Man, from heaven.
In the parallel in Rom. 5, 12 ff., as Second Adam he is definitely
named as 'the one man Jesus Christ.' So real is his humanity
that the Christ though he knew no sin was made to be sin on our
behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in him,
II Cor. 5, 21; and so complete is the union that in I Cor. 2, 8, Paul
can speak of the crucifixion of the Lord of glory. SpecificaUy is
redemptive significance claimed for his human experiences of
sufferings and death, and notably in the passages of polemic.
In I Cor. 15, 3, it is the Christ who died for our sins and in II Cor.
5, 14, died for all. The death proclaimed in the Eucharist, I Cor.
11, 26, is the death of the Lord. If Paul bears about, II Cor. 4,
10 ff., the dying of Jesus, it is in order that the life also, i. e., of
the^exalted Jesus may be manifested in his body. Guarding
against|denials|or subtle perversions of the truth of the incar
nation, Paul affirms when contrasting his preaching with that of
the errorists in II Cor. 4, 1-6, that the Christ Jesus Lord whom
he preaches is the eU6)v, 'the perfect image, the visible representa
tion and manifestation of the unseen God.' The use of the same
term in Col. 1, 15, is recognized by Lightfoot as directed against
heretical teaching in support of the true doctrine of Christ as the
eternal Logos. The Corinthians already know the Apostle's

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 241
teaching, II Cor. 8, 9, that our Lord Jesus Christ though he was
rich 'in the glory of his heavenly state' became poor, 'when he
descended into the poverty of his earthly career'; so Meyer and
B. Weiss in opposition to Heinrici. God was in Christ reconciling
the world to himseh, II Cor. 5, 19; and the Christ Jesus preached
by Paul, is Son of God, II Cor. 1, 19.
In accordance with these indications of pointed reiterations of
the Apostolic teaching of the relation of Jesus to the Christ and of
Christ to man and to God, are the probably intentional uses of
the human name Jesus in various combinations with statements
concerning the exalted Lord 16 - Instructive for his choice of titles
and for their combinations are his two sudden uses of anathema
in connection with them. In I Cor. 12, 3, he introduces the section
concerning the abuse of boasted spiritual gifts, with the declaration
that no man speaking in the Spirit of God says Anathema Jesus;
while the confession Kurios Jesus is a mark of possession of the
Spirit. We find the same rule later in I John 4, 2 f., in reference
to gnostic errors. The statement therefore points to a concrete
denial by some professing Christians at Corinth of Jesus as Lord;
and more definitely to their repudiation of his real union as hu
man, with the heavenly Christ and Kurios. Paul at the outset
deliberately refuses to discuss any claim of spiritual ghts which
is not founded on this initial evidence of possession of the Spirit.
No other allusion is justified. 'Anathema Jesus,' as assumed here
to be uttered by one claiming to speak in the Spirit of God, cannot
be denunciation by a blasphemous heathen or by a Jew; nor can
it be the utterance of a Judaizer or of any approved believer. A
sufficient clue to the occasion and character of the anathema has
already been suggested in I Cor. 1, 13. There, immediately after
the claim ' I am of Christ 'is the declaration: the Christ has been
divided.17 In such division 'those of Christ' can be conceived,
19 In the statistics and discussion of Paul's use of the names of Christ in
Feine, Jesus Christ und Paulus, p. 21 ff., the name 'Jesus' alone appears only
seven times in I and II Cor.; all of them in three polemical sections: I Cor. 12,
3 f ., II Cor. 4, 5.10, and 11, 4. Six of these uses are accompanied with references
to his exalted state; the other use in 11, 4 being connected with a reference
to reception of the Spirit.
17 So Meyer. While pi) could be omitted in a question of surprise, the text
in fact indicates that the interrogative sentence is intended to begin with the
pr) introducing the next words. If we are to take seriously Zahn's argument

242 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
cp. I John 4, 2, as confessing the heavenly Christ alone as Lord
and rejecting the separated Jesus as abandoned by the Christ to
his death upon the Cross. The anathema may be an exploitation
as in later Docetic systems of the words on the Cross: My God,
why hast thou forsaken me.18
In some relation to this first anathema passage is the auto
graph preface to the closing salutation, I Cor. 16, 23: if any man
loves not the Lord, let him be anathema. Again it is incredible
that he should thus refer to unbelieving Jews, cp. Rom. 10, 1;
or to heathen, cp. II Cor. 5, 14.19; or to Judaizers, who could
not be described as not loving the Lord, and who themselves use
in their worship the watchword Maranatha, 'our Lord comes'
or as in Rev. 22, 20, ' Come Lord Jesus,' and who in their Euchar
ists proclaim the Lord's death till he comes. The anathema would
be seen at once to have the force of a direct retort on those who
say Anathema Jesus, if the reading of the Textus receptus were
retained on the authority of the second corrector of the Sinaitic
manuscript, of the manuscripts C, D, etc.; Loves not the Lord
Jesus Christ. But with our critical texts, it may still be so under
stood; since the Lord is 'the Lord Jesus' of the next statement,
and is the 'Christ Jesus' which is the Epistle's final word. This
closing verse 24, my love be with you all in Christ Jesus, indicates
the anathematized 'any man' as distinct from the general body
of the Corinthian Church. The anathema could therefore most
fittingly fall on those of Christ, who divide Christ; who affirm
that pv is omitted to avoid an imitation of the bleating of a goat in prj pepi-
piarai, which of course both the contemporary vowel sounds and accent in
tonation make impossible, we find in Rom. 9, 20, a far better imitation which,
however, is not avoided.
18 The words as reported in the Docetic Gospel of Peter, § 5, are: 'And the
Lord cried out saying, My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me. And
when he had said this he was taken up.' In The Gospel according to Peter and
the Revelation of Peter, edited by J. A. Robinson and M. R. James, 1892, Rob
inson points out, p. 21, the Docetic 'perversion of our Lord's quotation from
Ps. 22, 1, in this description of 'the power' so often emphasized in Luke in
connection with the person of our Lord, as forsaking him: the divine Christ
is taken up, the human Christ remains on the Cross; Eh being rendered as
my power. He also adds the references in Irenseus to such claims, the use
of the text by Valentinians, and suggests a parallel in the interpolation in
cod. Bobbiensis at Mk. 16, 4 as closely corresponding to the ascension of
the divine Christ from the Cross.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 243
'Anathema Jesus'; who deny that the Lord comes; who unlike
Paul, cp. II Tim. 4, 8, have not loved his appearing; and who in
both Epistles are lacking in the Christian grace of love.
Thus opposed to Paul's teaching of Christian hope, Christian
love as the perfect fulfillment of the law, and as far as we cap
judge, opposed to the fundamental Apostohc faith in God in
Christ Jesus, they could be expected to be opposed also to the
Apostle's ideal of Christian brotherhood and of fellowship in the
Christian hfe, worship and institutions.' And in fact both the
opening and closing words of the correspondence, I Cor. 1, 10 and
II Cor. 13, 11, sum up his controlhng anxiety regarding the danger
of dissensions and rupture of fellowship in the one body and temple
of the Church. Apart from a general tendency to the sins of strife
and faction hsted in II Cor. 13, 20, which can be viewed as a com
mon characteristic of Greek communities, there are clear sug
gestions of a specially divisive element in the Corinthian church
life. For it is noteworthy that the sections of the Epistles con
cerned with cultivating unity and fellowship, are also those con
cerned with the special oppositions to Paul's teaching and author
ity which we have been presenting.
• Their boast to be of Christ involved of itseh, as previously
stated, a claim of independence of the ministry and organization of
the Church. It revealed besides a spirit of division based on their
claim of the more excellent spiritual gifts. Their activity in this
spirit and on their principles, instead of edifying, was destructive
of all the unifying bonds of a common faith, hfe, work, worship.
So Paul denounces it in connection with his opening counter
attack on their repudiation of his ministry and Gospel of redemp
tion by Christ and him crucified, cp. I Cor. 3, 10-17. Their
antinomian indifference to fornication is in 6, 12-20 a pollution of
the Body of Christ and of the temple of God. The Church's danger
from associations with heathen worship arises from their abuse of
freedom resting on their boasted superior gnosis. EquaUy, the
threatened breaches in Christian fellowship in the sacrament of
unity itself, could most reasonably be referred to their separations,
axiapara, with their adherents in the agapae, cp. Jude 12, and to
their attitude towards the Holy Communion. For on the view of
their principles here advocated, we cannot understand how they
could sincerely participate in a sacrament contradicting their

244 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
'division of Christ' in theh docetic denial of a real union of the
suffering Jesus with the heavenly Christ; much more their denial
of the possibihty of relation between the spiritual Christ and the
inherently evU matter of bread and wine; of the redemptive power
of the death of the human Jesus, and therefore of the rehgious
significance of any symbols of it; contradicting also theh denial of
Christ's visible return to which this sacrament witnesses until he
comes.19 ' If it is granted that such teachers were present in Corinth, it is
submitted that Paul's two references to the sacrament are so ex
pressed that it is possible to regard them as made in pointed antag
onism to essential errors of these teachers. * His opening statement
in the first reference, in contrast to theh divisive sphit claiming an
exclusive position by reason of their alleged gifts, is an emphatic
affirmation, I Cor. 10, 15 ff., that communion with Christ in the
sacrament is also a reahzation of the fellowship of believers in a
corporate unity in the glorified Christ; since in vs. 17, seeing that
there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all
partake of the one bread.20 In contradiction of any docetism he
speaks here of the body and blood as that of the Christ; and next,
11, 23 ff., states that the sacrament was instituted by Kurios
Jesus, and that its celebration is a proclamation of the death of
'the Lord.' Denial or perversion of his death as redemptive, is
guarded against by the express words of the Lord Jesus: the body
broken is on our behalf; the cup is the new covenant in his blood.
19 Bousset, Hauptprobleme der Gnosis, p. 305: "The sacrament of the Eu
charist seems on the whole to have been largely disregarded in gnostic circles.
A ceremony in whose center stood the idea of 'a communion of the blood and
body' with the Redeemer, must have seemed alien and unserviceable to the
gnostic sects with their dualistic-ascetic fundamental conception. Then-
celebration of it, when met with, seems to vary widely from the general
Christian Eucharist," as is shown in his discussion, pp. 305-313, 'and in W. M.
Groton, The Christian Eucharist and the Pagan Cults: The Gnostic Eucharist,
pp. 35-63.
20 This marginal rendering of the R. V. is also that given by Weizsacker,
Pfleiderer, Juhcher, Schmiedel. R. Schaefer, Das Herrenmahl, 1897, pp. 352-
359, discusses the various conceptions of the 'body' in this verse; and con
cludes that it is not the Church nor the ethical body nor the mystical body of
Christ, but the spiritual body of the exalted Christ. He grants, however, that
the unity of behevers as a result of communion with Christ is assumed by
Paul as self-evident.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 245
'Until he comes' is as well a rejection of their eschatological teach
ing that this coming has already taken place. If they still attend
and communicate ' unworthily, ' not discriminating the Eucharistic
meal from other food, they are both warned and are called upon
to examine themselves; and this both in the context and in view
of II Cor. 13, 5, may refer not merely to their spiritual condition
but to their faith in the significance of the Eucharist as dehvered
from the Lord.
Later in Jude, which many conservative critics date within the
next decade or c. 66 a. d., the errorists are vs. 12 airi\a8es,
'hidden rocks or spots in your agapae, when they feast with you
without fear, shepherds that feed themselves ' ; and in 13 ff . as in
I Cor. 11, 28, are destined for judgment. In 19 these psychics, not
having the Spirit, are those who make separations. ' The similar
false teachers in I John 2, 19, went out from us, but they were not of
us, . . . that they might be made manifest that they all are not of
us. . At length we learn in Ignatius of errorists who conduct their
services apart from the one Eucharist of the bishop; and as in
I Cor. the direct interest of the writer is in their destructive in
fluences on the unity and fellowship of church life and worship.21
The disorders in worship occasioned by the errorists in the
exercise of the spiritual gifts which they claimed, are discussed,
I Cor. 12-14, entirely from the standpoint of love as the essential
and universal gift for the common profit of the one body animated
by the one indwelling Spirit. In 13, 4-8, this love is the opposite of
the spirit of these errorists; and in chap. 15 their denial of resur
rection would make vain and nugatory all preaching, all faith and
all labor in the service of the Lord. When further in the second
Letter he can rejoice in the Church's restored fellowship with
himself and with each other in the proofs of their love, 8, 24,
cp. 9, 13 ff., he turns in the last four chapters to relentless assault
upon his unmasked enemies. Yet controlling this Apologia pro
vita sua, is his interest in exposing their work of destruction in
beguiling, as the serpent beguiled Eve, the Church which he had
espoused as a pure virgin to Christ. In direct contrast to the
»» Ignatius, Ephes, 5, 1. Philad. 4, 1. Smyrn. 8, 1; 9, 1. See the discussions
in LUtgert, Ami und Geisl im Kampf, pp. 124 ff., where these errorists are
held to be in the same connection with the general heretical movement as
the antichrists of I John and the separatists in Corinth.

246 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
baleful effect of their teaching and aims, is his own zeal for its
edification in the communion of the Holy Spirit, as expressed in
his closing appeals and assurance : be perfected, be strengthened, be
of the same mind, hve in peace; and the God of love and peace shall
be with you. •
• An additional warrant for this construction of the data of the
polemical element in the Corinthian Epistles as pointing to a
definite propaganda by those of Christ, is that all the features we
have assigned to it are unified by their boast of gnosis. This gnosis
is recognized by Paul to be a specifically Christian gift and mani
festation of the Spirit, I Cor. 1, 5; 12, 8. As throughout the New
Testament, it is not a product of human speculation in contrast to
faith and practical piety; nor an intellectual interest in the Gospel
apart from the devotion of feelings and emotions. It is a spiritual
illumination begun at conversion, and is the outgrowth of faith:
Resting upon divine revelation, it is developed in our union with
God in Christ until we know fully even as also we have been fully
known by God.22* It is the deepening 'apprehension of the revela
tions and activities included in Christian faith': both the deep
things of God and the things graciously bestowed upon us by God ;
the mysteries of the Kingdom and especially its eschatological
mysteries. And further it is an application of this developing
illumination in all the relations of the personal life of faith. As
later in Ephes. 3, 14 ff. so in I Cor. 8, 3 and chap. 13 this spiritual
gift is rooted and perfected in the love of God.
The errorists at Corinth, however, boast of this universal Chris
tian gift as their pecuhar endowment, or as theirs in excelling
measure; and more, by its possession, to be alone the spiritual, the
fully mature, the perfect Christians. 'Hence with them, gnosis,
especially in their conception of it, is the essential element in
rehgion. 'Paul's polemic, therefore, while recognizing gnosis as a
principle of Christian growth, rests on his denials that gnosis is the
sole and fundamental blessing of the Gospel; and that they in fact
possess gnosis. They are therefore not spiritual; and their teach
ings and activities based on their merely human wisdom and
speculations have no warrant, as they claim, of wisdom specially
revealed to them.* The climax of the Apostle's Hymn of Love is
22 See the fuller discussion of the character of gnosis in the N. T. Epistles
on p. 394 ff.; and also the works cited on p. 388, note 20.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 247
that the essential and abiding elements in the Christian life are
faith, hope and love; and of these love is the greatest, as being the
perfected outgrowth of faith and the animating life of hope. All
other gifts profit solely in their connections with the triad of
Christian graces.' Definitely as to gnosis: though I know all
mysteries and all gnosis and have not love, I am nothing. And yet
we know only in part; we see now only in a mirror, iv alviy pan.
Temporary also is this partial gift: till we see face to face. In the
opening prayers of all the four Prison Letters five years later, we
recognize again both his interest in gnosis and also his subordina
tion of its function in the development of the Christian personal
ity. It is the love of the Philippians which he prays may abound in
the definite sphere of epignosis and all a'lad-qais. The fellowship of
Philemon's faith is to become effectual in the epignosis of every
good thing which is in us unto Christ. To be filled with epignosis
of God's will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding, is in his
prayer for the Colossians not an end in itself but a means to walk
worthily of the Lord; while the gifts of wisdom and revelation in
the epignosis of the Father of glory, which are invoked for the
Ephesians are to promote their knowledge of the Christian hope.
But along with full and discriminating recognition of the gnostic
element in the development of Christian life, is his denial that what
his opponents boast of is really Christian gnosis. While in I and
II Cor. he does not directly communicate the contents and system
atic construction of their system, he refers to it as a human wisdom;
as that of the rulers of this world who are coming to naught; as
received from the spirit of this world and expressed in words which
human wisdom teaches, I Cor. 2, 6 f . ; 12.13. Their gnosis is in truth
ayvwaia of God, 15.34; and his warfare against these false apostles
and ministers of Satan is in II Cor. 10, 4 ff. for the casting down of
their fortress: their X0710-JU01 and every height exalted against
the gnosis of God; and for bringing every vbnpa, cp. 2, 11, into
captivity to the obedience of Christ. From the claim of such
a gnosis viewed as the essential element in Christianity, issued the
main features of their system and activities which we have at
tempted to reconstruct. It led naturally to arrogant disparage
ment of all other spiritual gifts as in I Cor. 12, and to their ex
clusive claims to be the spiritual and perfect. These next were
manifested both in a spirit of separation from the general body of

248 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
converts whom they viewed as immature, psychic, fleshly; and
also in a spirit of harsh domination and in a demand for recognition
and support, II Cor. 11, 20. From theh gnosis was derived, I Cor.
8-10, their perverted conception of freedom in contrast to love's
freedom even to-sacrifice its rights for the profit of the many. This
freedom of false gnosis concerning the relation of spirit and nature
was the principle of theh antinomian emancipation from the moral
law. It was too the aU-sufficiency of this gnosis which emanci
pated them from aU other external authority of Apostohc minis
try, tradition and institutions. Theh denial of the Parousia and
future consummation of the Kingdom rested likewise on their
present possession in their spiritual enhghtenment, of the supreme
messianic blessings which to others were stUl objects only of Chris
tian hope. The duahstic element of their gnosis appearing in their
denial of any resurrection body, determines their rejection of a
redemptive death upon the Cross. And it would leave no place
for a real union of the spiritual Christ and the earthly Jesus; for a
heavenly Christ obedient to death, yea the death of the Cross. A
false gnosis moreover already assuming its possession of wisdom
and power from a direct subjective divine revelation, would find no
revelation of divine power in a Christ crucified in weakness; and no
wisdom in a Cross on which it failed to recognize the supreme
revelation of the love of God in Christ, which passes gnosis.
These results of an attempt to reconstruct the controlling
features of the movement in Corinth opposed to Paul, thus accord
with and Uluminate the indications of a similar propaganda in the
earher Epistles to Thessalonica. It remains for us to inquire
whether any support for our construction can be found in the Epis
tle to the Romans, written in Corinth within less than a hah a year
after the Apostle's intense polemic with 'those of Christ.'
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS
Just before closing the Epistle to the Romans, Paul warns them
against the influence of certain false teachers, 16, 17 ff. They are
not described as already present in Rome, or if so, as already
operating in the Church. We are here regarding the passage and
the chapter as an integral part of the Epistle to the Romans,
and not as very largely held, as belonging to a letter to Ephesus.23
23 The arguments in favor of the Ephesian address and the hst of its ad-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 249
After the commendation of Phoebe and the greetings to friends and
loyal churchworkers in Rome, follows in 17 ff. a contrasted de
nunciation of the errorists. The sudden change of tone has led
R. Scott, Pauline Epistles, p. 246, to regard the passage as 'a
mamfest interpolation' of Timothean authorship. Yet the
abruptness of this denunciation is not due as Sanday and Head-
lam plead, p. 429, 'to zeal and earnestness making his letters
somewhat formless' or leading to 'absence of regular method.'
For we find such juxtapositions so constantly in the New Testa
ment Epistles as to suggest a custom; and possibly a custom
related also to some definite church method of recognition or
rejection of strangers seeking communion with the Church. Thus
we find the commendatory letters for Timothy, Philippians 2, 19,
and for Epaphroditus 2, 25, immediately followed by warnings
against the intruding evil workers and enemies of the cross in 3,
2-21. I Cor. closes with commendations and greetings, 16, 15-21,
upon which foUows the anathema on his opponents. The com
mendations of Titus and the brethren, II Cor. 8 and 9, are followed
with the same abruptness as Rom. 16, 17 by four chapters of
denunciation of the Christ party. Galatians closes likewise with
sudden renewed denunciations of the Judaizers, 6, 6-15, and a
benediction on those who walk by Paul's rule. In the Pastorals,
I Tim. closes with a definite warning against those professing the
false gnosis. Titus ends with a direction to shun after two ad
monitions a man that causes divisions alperiKov, and that as
Titus knows is one who is perverted, sinning and self-condemned.
This again is linked with Paul's commendatory note in favor of
the four feUow-workers he names. His last letter follows the
vocates are given by Moffatt, Introd., p. 134 and H . N. T., 209. Among those
in favor of the Roman destination are Lightfoot, Hort, Sanday-Headlam,
Drummond; Godet, Jacquier; Riggenbach, Schlatter, Zahn, Heinrici, Har
nack, C. Clemen. Lake, while concluding in favor of the Ephesian hypothesis,
recognizes the force of the fact that 16, 1-23 is an integral part of all the MSS.
of the Epistle we now possess. Spitta, who assigns the passage to a later
smaller Letter to Rome states the case thus: only when the proof is produced
that vss. 3-16 cannot belong to a Roman Letter, can we approach the Ephe
sian hypothesis. Harnack, Z. N. T. W. 1, 23 n., holds that 'Zahn has proven
anew that the grounds upon which it is supposed to be necessary to remove
chap. 16 from Romans, are not sufficient.' Lietzmann concludes that the
difficulty of understanding chap. 16 as a portion of Romans is not so great
as that of the hypothesis that vss. 1-23 are a fragment of a lost letter.

250 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
same form: it too closes with a definite warning agamst Alexander
and with a sorrowing prayer for those who had abandoned him,
II Tim. 4, 14 ff., followed by his greetings. One of his earliest
Letters, II Thess., has a similar form. It likewise closes in 3,
6-15 with a denunciatory charge against his opponents, which is
abruptly joined at vs. 16 with his benediction and greeting. In
particular in vs. 14 the Church is to 'note' the man disobeying
the charge and to have no company with him. FinaUy, the latest
New Testament Letters are framed on the model of a commenda
tory letter. II John 1-6 first commends the Church addressed;
next, vss. 7-11, it denounces gnostic teachers and warns against
their reception into the Church and even against offering them
the Christian salutation. Ill John 1-8 commends Gaius for his
Christian life and for his acceptance of the commendatory letters
sent to him; in 9-11 it denounces the opposition and conduct of
Diotrephes in his repudiation of the writer and his refusal to
accept commendatory letters sent to him, such as in vs. 12 is here
given to Demetrius.
There is, therefore, nothing unusual in this coUocation of de
nunciation in Rom. 16, 17 ff. with the preceding commendations
and greetings, which are normal features of the usual rhetorical
framework of a Pauline letter. Against the more serious criticism
that both greetings and warnings were sent not to Rome but
Ephesus, we may repeat Godet's remark that it is inconceivable
that Paul would address our passage to a Church wherein he had
just spent three years, and where he had written I Cor., and
which must, therefore, aheady know of the Corinthian opposition
and have been warned long since by him against such adversaries.
To this may be added that we have in Acts 20, 17 ff. Luke's report
of a similar warning to the presbyter-bishops of Ephesus, given
a few weeks after the warning of Rom. 16, 17. Comparing them
we can observe that they point to different groups of hearers: in
the Ephesian group, to those already acquainted with the opposing
movement; in Rom. 16 to those needing a description of its
dominant features. In Acts 20 he first vindicates as in I and II
Cor. and with an appeal to their own knowledge, the completeness
of his Gospel ministry, vss. 18-27, both in his initial preaching
and also in his communication of the whole counsel of God. On
the foundation of this ministry the Ephesian clergy are charged

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 251
to shepherd the Church of God. And the statement that it was
purchased by his blood, his own, receives iUumination from his
emphasis, known to them in any case from his Corinthian con
troversy, upon the Cross and blood of Christ.24 Definitely, they
are to watch both against the entrance of grievous wolves and
against the arising from among themselves of errorists whom to
his Ephesian hearers aheady instructed, vs. 31, he need not
further describe than as men not sparing the flock; as speak
ing perverse things, cp. Acts 13, 8.10, in reference to Elymas, to
draw away disciples after them; and possibly in connection with
33-35, as demanding financial support for theh teachings. But
concerning the contents and methods of the false teaching itseh,
there is no need to warn the pastors of Ephesus. Being aheady
instructed and having in memory Paul's three years' ministry of
admonition among them, they are now to guard against the
destructive activity of the false teachers in the flock and against
their attempt to cause divisions. In contrast, the more definite
references, as wUl be shown, to the teachings and methods of the
errorists in Rom. 16, point to the fact that they are addressed
not to these instructed Ephesian Christians, but to Romans who
as yet have no direct acquaintance with the movement which it
could be rightly anticipated would appear among them.
' Holding that the warning in Rom. 16 was sent to the Christians
in Rome we can further regard it as directed against a possible
intrusion of the Corinthian false apostles into this Church loyal
to Pauline principles. The reference cannot be as commonly
asserted to Judaizing opponents, since Paul would not so describe
u Hort, N. T. Appendix, p. 99, suggests that in early transcription TtoO,
whose insertion leaves the passage free from difficulty of any kind, has dropped
out. This could result not only from similarity in sight and sound of the
fully written TOTIAIOTTIOT, but from the usually abbreviated form
IAIOTTT. This conjectural phrase appears in a somewhat related context,
Rom. 8, 32: 5s ye rod ibiov TtoC oi>k icfreiaaro, dXXd U7rep fipuv iravruv
irapebwKev abrbv. It accords also with all the other N. T. references
to blood in connection with redemption, as the blood of Christ: Rom. 3, 25; 5,
9; I Cor. 10, 16; 11, 25.27; Ephes. 1, 7; I John 1, 7 the blood of Jesus ro9 vlov
avrov. In Rev. 5, 9 appears the same thought as in Acts 20, 28: the Lamb
purchased unto God men of every tribe, etc., iv rig aipan aov and made
them unto God a kingdom; cp. also 7, 14 ff.

252 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
them, especiaUy as slaves to theh own belly. Nor to the 'strong'
Christians of chap. 14, with whom he identifies himself, 15, 1,
and whom the weak, 14, 3, are not to judge, for God has received
them. Understood as pointing to the Christ party, even his
compressed description of them reproduces significantly their
most prominent features as we have recognized them in the
Corinthian Epistles. • In view of the threatened danger to the
unity and fellowship of Church life which would be the ultimate
issue of their activity, they are at once denounced as those who
cause divisions: such as have appeared at the Corinthian agapae
and in the general spirit of the Corinthian Church life, which
were the definite occasion, I Cor. 1, 10, of the Corinthian corre
spondence and whose removal was, II Cor. 13, 11, its dominating
purpose. In the sphere of Christian morals they furnish occasion
of stumbling within and without the Church, cp. I Cor. 10, 32,
as the abusers of spiritual freedom in Corinth were recognized to
be such occasions by their antinomian libertinism. For here too
they are men who act contrary to the didache the Romans learned
at their conversion: the instruction in faith, morals, the last things
and the Church fellowship. They are also indicated as professing
the object of their faith to be our exalted Kurios Christos, in
contrast to the human Jesus; but their boast of service of the
Christ is in truth a selfish and sensual service of their own belly,
as already alluded to in the quotation from the Christian liber
tines, I Cor. 6, 13, and as later asserted of the same class of errorists,
Philippians 3, 19. And as in I Thess. 2, 3 f. and I Cor. 2,4; II
Cor. 11, 3, cp. also the irtflaj'oXo'yia, of the Colossian heresy 2, 4,
they beguile the hearts of the innocent by smooth discourse and
flattering speech. This persuasive speech may even be teaching
concerning the nature of gnosis, based upon their allegorical ex
position of the Genesis account of the temptation at the tree of
gnosis of good and evil. For his own closing words are based
upon it; and they may like II Cor. 11, 3 be a retort, turning their
own weapons against them. In both passages the Churches are
viewed as exposed to temptation while in a state of innocence.
The Corinthian Church is compared to Eve. Its innocence is
stressed; and it is espoused as a pure virgin to Christ. As Eve
was deceived by the serpent, so these ministers of Satan who
fashions himself as an angel of light, seek to corrupt the thoughts

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHING^ 253
of the Corinthians from their innocence: their simplicity and
purity towards Christ. The same comparison reappears in
Rom. 16, 18 ff. In their widely known obedience to the Gospel
the Roman Christians are as yet aKaxot: innocent in the singleness
and purity of their devotion to Christ. The intruders may seek
to 'deceive' them, as in II Cor. 11,3 and Gen. 3, 13, by the smooth
speaking and flattering speech of Gen. 3, 4.5, concerning the
tree, Gen. 2, 9, roO elbivai yvuarbv ko\ov Kai irovifpod.26 But Paul
aims to maintain them in Christian gnosis vs. 19 as wise unto the
good and free from admixture with the evil, cp. also I Cor. 14, 20.
Summing up then the teaching of the spurious gnosis as a work of
Satan, as in II Cor. 11, 13-15, he makes a further allusion to
Gen. 3, 15: the God of peace and not of aKaraaraaia, Rom. 16, 17,
and I Cor. 14, 33, shall bruise Satan under your feet. The ad
dition iv rdxei as has been conjectured by Schultz, has probably
also a reassuring reference to Christ's speeding victory at his
return which the false teachers deny. The phrase summarizes and
applies constant formulae concerning the conflict with evil ending
with the Lord's coming iv raxei which is found in every group of
New Testament writings.
If at this point it is urged that these characteristics and paral
lels may reveal the references to be in Paul's mind to his Corin
thian opponents, but that these references would not be evident
to his Roman readers, we may recall the presence of Aquila and
Prisca to furnish the needed explanations. And if further, us is
frequently asserted, the passage is thought to be out of harmony
with an Epistle 'so completely destitute of direct controversy';
or that the passage of mere warning furnishes no means of re
pelling the deceptive smooth speaking, we may next notice that
the readers have been already directly forearmed against it by
the Epistlo itself.
Written at the close of the period of the defense and confirma
tion of the Gospel in his five Epistles to Galatia, Thessalonica and
Corinth, and while facing the deadly perils of his Jerusalem visit
Rom. 15, 30 f., the Apostle finds occasion to sum up his controlling
" This Genesis referenoe is a better clue to the meaning of XP17(7'T0^07^a
and eb\oyia than the traditional quotation from Julius Capitolinus and the
passages in Wettstein.

254 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
teachings as these have been further developed and apphed in the
preceding controversies, and to send them to Rome, to serve as it
might prove to be, in B. Weiss's phrase, Introd., § 22.7, as his
bequest and testament to that Church and in it to Christendom
in general. For here was a Church which in its as yet imperfect
organization needed his teachings; which would be able to utihze
it for the extension of the Gospel; and to which he had long been
hoping to deliver it in person. Such an aim, to establish them
in his Gospel on the basis of the results of his apology and polemic
against its opponents, we find clearly reflected in the structure
of the Epistle. At one point indeed, 3, 27-31, the swift questions
recall respectively the twenty years of conflict with Jewish re
jection of the universahsm preached in his Gospel; the ten years
of Judaistic opposition to salvation by grace instead of legalism;
and the five or more years of antinomian perversion of the free
dom of faith. In a broad survey of his Apologia of his Gospel, the
first two chapters sum up his teaching of the need of a divine
justification in view of the coming judgment of Gentile and Jew
for their sin, by the one God, and in accordance with his preach
ing of the Gospel, which for the heathen began with the Jewish
apologetic, as appears in the framework of this opening section.
The next chapters, 3-5, 11, summarize his teaching of justifica
tion by faith, as it was wrought out in the Judaistic controversy.
Chapters 9-11 attest against the ignorant zeal of Jewish attacks
that justification by faith is in harmony with the eternal redeem
ing purpose of God which is realized by the method of election.
Of the doctrinal portion of the Epistle there remain the chap
ters 5, 12-8, 39. It is the exegetical tradition based on dogmatic
interest, to regard chaps. 6-8 as treating of sanctification as the
corollary to the justification presented in the preceding three
chapters. But although the section contains much characteristic
teaching concerning 'progressive righteousness' resting on mystic
union with the risen Christ, Sanday-Headlam, p. 38, this is not
the unifying theme. In this section as in the whole Letter his
aim is the establishment of the readers in the life of justification.
And the definite purpose of these chapters becomes clear when
we view them as the summing up for this estabhshment of Roman
Christians, of his experience and teachings in his remaining con
troversy with the pneumatic and gnostic errorists in Thessa-

ITHE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 255
lonica and Corinth, as it bears upon his doctrine of justification
by faith in the incarnate, atoning and glorified Redeemer.
This involves a refutation of their perversion of the freedom
of the Gospel by antinomian libertinism and boasts of perfection
by gnosis: turning the grace of God into lasciviousness; sinning
that grace may abound; spurning the holy Law as being itself
sin. This refutation in chaps. 6 and 7, including the resulting
exhortations to walk in newness of hfe, is founded on the Two
Adams section 5, 12 ff., in which he develops for the Romans his
arguments against the Corinthian deniers of Christ's Parousia
and the general resurrection, whose libertinism and boasts of
gnosis are also aUuded to in I Cor. 15, 33 f. In I Cor. he had begun
his discussion of the eschatological denial with a reference to the
Two Adams, the heads of humanity facing respectively death and
life eternal. In the climax, vss. 55 ff., he had correlated death,
sin and law: sin, the sting of death, law the strength of sin; and
the triple links of the series were contrasted with the victory in
the Second Adam, which, therefore, includes freedom from legal
ism, from the power of sin and from the sting of death.26
It is these compressed statements which are now developed in
Rom. 5, 12 ff., and with the same purpose of establishing his
readers against the intrusion of the Corinthian errorists. In the
heart of the argument in Rom., vs. 17 as in I Cor., is seen the
controlhng interest in the redeeming and glorifying power of
Christ's resurrection hfe: as death reigned by the sin of the one
man, much more shaU all in Christ 'reign in hfe' by the one, Jesus
Christ, who is thus the first fruits of them who are faUen asleep.
Yet this universal offer of eternal life in Christ can only be re
ceived by those who also receive the abundance of grace and the
gift of righteousness, unto justification which is life, vs. 18. This
freedom from the sting of death by the union of the justified be
hever with the risen Christ is thus at the same time a freedom
from sin and its power, manifested in a life of righteousness in
contrast to the false apostles' indifference to morahty. With
vs. 20, in exphcation of his statement in I Cor. that the power of
Sin is the Law, he meets the abuse of the teaching of freedom and
28 Moffatt is in agreement with the view of the scholars cited by him, H. N. T.
628 and Introd. 114, that I Cor. 15, 56 is an unauthentic and inappropriate
interpolation of an exegetical marginal gloss.

256 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
of the peace of law in the rehgion of Spirit, by a renewal of his
fundamental teaching, Gal. 3, 19 ff., that the Law is temporary;
yet is only transcended, not by antinomian independence of all
authority but by the royal rule and domination of grace by means
of righteousness.
The whole section is thus the foundation of the developed
teaching and exhortations to holiness of life in the two following
chapters, and of their apphcations against the libertines and
antinomians to whom they allude. That they are directed against
such opponents abusing justification by faith and not against
Judaizers' complaints concerning its consequences, appears from
the fact that the three questions, 6, 1; 6, 15; 7, 7, are not unwar
ranted dialectical taunts of Paul's enemies as to the logical out
come of his Gospel, but as Pfleiderer recognizes, Urchristm., 1,
164, are conclusions actually drawn and put in practice; although
not as he holds by 'many heathen Christians,' but as he too per
ceives by the false teachers of Corinth. ' Upon the conclusion of
his repudiation of their positions, he gives in chap. 8, the heart
of the Epistle, his full and positive statement of justification
in aU its relations to God's eternal purpose of world-redemption
as revealed in the Gospel of his Son. Yet it is so constructed, and
it may reasonably be believed constructed with such direct in
tention, that it meets and repudiates every feature of the false
teaching he has unmasked at Corinth. *
The chapter opens with a special affirmation of the mystic
union of believers and Christ in the phrase 'those in Christ Jesus.'
It may here be significant as a reassertion of II Cor. 10, 7: if
any man trusts in himself that he is 'of Christ,' let him consider
this again with himseh that as he is of Christ, so also are we. For
such a description of Christians, and its equivalent, 6, 11, 'living
unto God in Christ Jesus,' as summing up the mystic union with
which this section opens in 6, 1-10, occurs here for the first time in
the Epistle; and the title, 'to be of Christ' appears in the Epistle
only in vs. 9 of this chapter: if any man has not the Spirit of Christ,
oSros obK eanv avrov. The phrase in vs. 1, 'those in Christ Jesus'
may have been originally further qualified by the contrast to
'those in Christ' in Corinth, in the words now omitted in our
critical texts: who walk not after the flesh.27
27 This is the reading of A, a corrector of D, Vulgate, some Old Latin MSS.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 257
In this mystical union the Christian possesses the Spirit of
Christ; and it is a spirit of freedom. But by the phrase, vs. 2,
' the law of the Spirit,' Paul guards against the antinomian error
ists who claimed emancipation from all law just because of their
possession of the Spirit. For freedom by this law, not of the ex
ternal letter but of the indwelling Spirit as an inner iUumination
of duty and an invigoration of the will, is here presented not as
an emancipation from the oiKaitapa, the righteousness required
by the holy law of God, vs. 4, but from the law, vs. 2, the im
pelling force of the sin and death in our members, cp. 7, 21. This
freedom moreover in vss. 3.4, is possible only as the result of the
incarnation and redemption of Christ, and is reahzed only in our
moral walk according to the Spirit which we have received.
The extremely difficult exegetical problems centering in the
several debated expressions and structure of thi3 third verse, are
illuminated by the view that it presents in antitheses Paul's refu
tation of the positions of the errorists. The conciseness and the
compression of so many profound subjects in a single formulation
ranging from the sending of the preexistent Son to our moral
walk, points out that it is a definite summary of the conflict with
false teachers at Corinth which has been just won by him. In
contradiction of them he has given already in chap. 7 his teaching
of the relation of the flesh not inherently sinful, to sin and the
Law. Against any form of docetic christology he now asserts
that the condemnation of that sin in that flesh has been accom-
and other versions and fathers. In many MSS. there was later added to it:
'but after the Spirit, ' to conform to vs. 4. It is possible that scribes correcting
this addition, were led to delete both the phrases. The retention of 'walk
not after the flesh' would accord with the thirteen mentions of flesh in the
succeeding twelve verses, and also to 'the law of sin and death in our mem
bers' in vs. 2. See Sanday-Headlam, in loc., who, however, regard the variants
as interpolations in two steps. Zahn rejects the addition since in his view it
would result in the meaningless statement that those in Christ could be also
thought of as walking after the flesh. This overlooks the possibihty that the
combination could allude to Paul's exposure in I and II Cor. of the really
fleshly mind and conduct of those falsely claiming to have the Spirit of Christ.
In II Cor. 10, 2.3 it was the charge of the Christ party against Paul himself;
and in the related polemic against their principles, Rom. 6, he similarly com
bines union with Christ, vs. 1-11, with exhortations against service of lusts in
our mortal body. Jude 18.19 likewise describes the errorists as walking in
lusts while falsely claiming to be spiritual.

258 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
phshed by God sending, not a Christ either temporarily or in mere
appearance united with Jesus, but his own Son. And the full
reality of his incarnation and redemptive death is summed up in
the expressions, sent 'in the likeness of flesh of sin and for sin.'
The dogmatic import of these expressions is, as well known, the
subject of keenest current debate. But we are here concerned
only with the fact that the occasion of them is satisfactorily ac
counted for on the view that they are directed against a docetism
based on a false duahsm and issuing in an indifference to Christian
morality. In opposition to it, there is in these verses a declara
tion of an incarnation in full reahty, and a definite reference to
the redemptive death of the incarnate Son in the phrase irepl
apaprias. Our present interest is to recognize that the com
pressed statements are closely parallel to the fuller statements in
his controversy with the Corinthian opponents, II Cor. 5, 12-20,
and especially with the climax in vs. 21 : rbv pf) yvbvra apapriav
birep rjp&v apapriav iiroinaev, that we might become the right
eousness of God in him. We find also later in Philippians 2, 7,
iv bpoiwpari avdpuiruv, axtipari ebpedels us avdpuiros, paraUel
to Rom. 8, 3, directed against gnosticizing erroists.
On the foundation of the teaching of these vss. 3 and 4 which
had been successfully maintained and in several lines developed
in his conflict with the Christ party, and definitely against theh
indifference to the moral walk of Christians, he proceeds, vss.
5-17, to establish the Roman Christians in walking according to
the Spirit as free children of God with the spirit of adoption and
as fellow-heirs with Christ. And as constantly in the New Testa
ment, the inspiration for this filial walk in obedience is the hope
of sharing the glory of Christ at his return in glory. The faithful
saying 'as truly as we suffer with him in order that we may be
also glorified with him,' is the key-note of the rest of the chapter,
in which is estimated the worth of the sufferings of the present
Katp6s and the glory that is going to be revealed to us-ward. It
is the fullest development of the eschatological theme 'through
much tribulation we must enter into the Kingdom of God'; which
as here, was the basis of the estabhshment of the first Pauline
converts, Acts 14, 22. Coming directly after his conflict with
the Corinthian deniers of resurrection, cp. I Cor. 15, 19 and
contra, vs. 58, we can recognize in Rom. 8, 18-25 reflections of

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 259
that conflict and a renewal of his affirmations that the promise of
resurrection hfe is not completely realized in our present gift of
the Spirit. In that ght, vs. 23, we have as yet only the first fruits
and earnest of our perfected sonship, which we stUl await in the
redemption of our body. ' Contradicting Corinthian dualism
of spirit and inherently evil matter, he asserts that both our body
and the whole creation shall yet be dehvered at the Parousia from
the servitude of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the
children of God: a glory assured to those who love God, by his
eternal purpose, vss. 28-30, that we should be sharers of the
essential form of the image of his Son who in his resurrection is
the first-born of many brethren; or as in I Cor. 15, 20 the first fruits
and pledge of a harvest of general resurrection.* From this
redeeming love of God in Christ, vss. 31-34, can nothing separate
us: not the seven-fold earthly sufferings of vss. 35-37; nor, vss.
38.39, the superhuman, superterrestrial or sub-terrestrial powers
of gnostic teaching threatening to bar us from our direct access
by Christ in one Spirit unto the Father.
The indications of this section 5, 12-8, 39 of establishment of the
Roman Church by means of his Corinthian experiences, against
the possible inroads of the false apostles of Corinth, are further
strengthened by the section of practical exhortations in 12, 1 ff.
In this paranetic division of the Epistle as Sanday and Headlam
state, "the main idea running through the whole section seems to
be that of peace and unity for the Church in all its relations.
As in the earher portion of the Epistle, ... he lays the foundation
of unity and harmony on deep and broad principles," p. 351.
Accepting this religious aim, we submit also that the method and
basis of this establishment is the utilization and application of his
experience and teachings in conflict with the Corinthian errorists.
In 5, 12-8, 39, he had already applied these results in regard to
matters of faith, moral walk in the Spirit of Love and Christian
hope. He wUl now apply them in connection with the remaining
topic of primitive instruction, Church f eUowship. The scope of the
section is indicated in its initial and concluding summaries. In
each the corporate life of the Church is referred to in terms of
spiritual sacrificial worship and service, which is animated by the
gift of gnosis from the indwelhng Spirit, issuing in aU forms of
'well-doing,' ay aduabvn, towards those within and without the

260 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Church. Thus at the close, 15, 14 ff . , he states that in this section of
admonition he is impressing upon their memory certain features,
airb pipovs, of the earlier instruction given to them whereby they
are able to admonish one another. For they are full of well-doing,
and this because they are filled with all gnosis. He has, however,
written with the purpose of fulfilling his Apostolic ministry, here
described in spiritual sacrificial terms. Directly parallel to this
passage, with the topics in reverse order, he bases in 12, 1 ff. the
succeeding admonitions on his reference to Church life as a whole
in sacrificial terms. It is a devotion of a Church, a Xaos, vabs,
as in I Pet. 2, 4-10, existing by the 'mercies' of God in calling the
Gentiles and finally restoring Israel, which in Rom. 11, 30-32 is the
climax of his argument based on the Old Testament citations
9, 15.25 ff. 33; 10, 19; 11, 26, and practically of all the texts em
ployed. Hence their bodies, as the Corinthians were instructed at
the outset, 6, 15.20, ovk otbare, are members of Christ, are a temple
of the indwelling Spirit, in which they are to glorify God; and as in
I Pet. 2, 5, as living stones in a spiritual house built on Christ the
living corner stone, they are here as a holy priesthood, to present
and devote themselves as a living sacrifice, their spiritual Xarpeta.
In order to do this, as in 15, 14 they are filled with all gnosis, so here
they have a metamorphosis, an essential change in the renewing of
their vovs. With this they no longer fashion themselves to the
moral standards and conduct of this world, which as in the parallel
admonitions, I Cor. 7, 31; I Pet. 1, 13-15.24; I John 2, 13-17,
passes away; but with this fullness of gnosis, enhghtenment and
power, they are as in 15, 14 filled with weU doing: they may as in
Ephes. 5, 17.10 understand, and here, approve the will of God for
the renewed life in all its relations.
The selection of admonitions from this topic of primitive in
struction, is found to be controlled by the discussion in I Cor.
12-14 concerning fellowship and unity in the Church as it was
threatened by errorists whose boasted gnosis is without love and
is endangering the order, worship and work of the Church by the
claim of superior spiritual ghts freeing them from ministerial
authority. First in vss. 3-8, to guard against arrogant claims of
a superior gnosis, he repeats the argument of I Cor. 12 as to the
function of the several gifts for the profit of the one body of the
Church. This leads in vss. 9-21 as in I Cor. 13, to Love as the

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 261
supreme principle in mutual service, fellowship and devotion, and
in long-suffering and endurance in the face of opposition. In
direct development of these latter admonitions, and as has been
suggested, to warn against the probable indications of an ominous
spirit of emancipation from the social order and customs, I Cor.
7, 20 ff. 11, 3 ff., on the false principles of the errorists, we find
the injunction of loyalty to the State, 13, 1-7; and in 8-12 he
renews the teaching that love inspired by the hope of the Parousia
denied by the false teachers, is the fulfillment of all law, in con
trast, vss. 13.14, to the disorder, sensuality and divisive spirit
which we found as characteristics of the errorists in the earlier
Epistles. The remainder of the section 14, 1-15, 13 treats of unity within
the Church by mutual toleration. With Sanday-Headlam we
consider that it does not refer to any existing controversy in
Rome, or to definite parties of weak and strong. Rather, it is
aimed to guard against such a situation by inculcating principles of
Church fellowship generalized from his experience and decisions
in the Corinthian controversy. Since he includes himself among
'the strong,' he evidently refers to the power and freedom of faith
which is the outcome of true gnosis. But he again guards against
the abuse of it as being the essential and determining principle,
which in 14, 15 as in I Cor. 13 is love. In Corinth it was thus
abused so as to become a stumbling block to Greeks, Jews and
the Church, by participation in heathen temple worship. There is,
however, nothing to suggest such an abuse in the Roman Church.
The occasion of the section has therefore to be sought in a deter
mination of the disputed question, who are 'the weak,' which to
Lake, p. 382, appears to be insoluble. For as he and Sanday-
Headlam show they cannot be converted heathen ascetics, who
would have no interest in the observance of days; nor, we may add,
ascetics on Jewish gnostic principles, whom he opposes in Colos-
sians; nor Essenes, who are not known outside Palestine; nor
aUeged Ebionites nor Judaizers whom he would not treat in this
lenient manner, and who would not be obliged to abstain from
flesh and wine; nor is it likely, in view of the definite Jewish al
lusions, that Paul here presents, as Sanday-Headlam conclude, the
eater and non-eater as types of an excessive scrupulousness and of
an utter indifference to external observances.

262 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
As a remaining possibility we may suggest, in development of
'the oldest explanation,' Sanday-Headlam, p. 400, that the ref
erence is to Jewish Christians in Rome and elsewhere who, as yet,
weak in the freedom of faith, continue to live MosaicaUy like theh
brethren in Jerusalem whom Paul recognizes; and specifically to
hve as heretofore according to the definite rules for Jews associated
with heathen especially in foreign lands. We have these rules in
the Mishna tractate on Idolatry, 'Aboda zara.28 In it, although
abstinence from wine and flesh is not commanded in the Mosaic
law, various forms of abstinences from them are enjoined upon
Jews in the midst of heathen life, in order to avoid possible defiling
associations with idolatry. As wine may have been devoted to
idols by libation at the vintage or in any case defiled by contact
with a heathen, its prohibition in every conceivable case forms a
principal interest of the tractate. There is a similar prohibition of
meat and all other foods which could have any association with
idolatry or involve a possible breach of Mosaic food-laws.29 The
description of the abstainer, Rom. 14, 2, as eating herbs or vege
tables, is iUustrated by the prohibition of heathen bread or of
eating bread with a heathen, chap. 2, 6, cp. 3, 9, with the notes of
Ehnslie, p. 38, and of Strack, p. 9. The scrupulousness even in
regard to vegetables is exhibited in the curious prohibition, chap.
2, 6.7, of the juice of a root which must be cut, and thus possibly
with a contaminated knife; and in the permission to eat the leaf
of the same plant, which could be plucked by the hand. The
Jewish Christian abstainer in Rom. 14 could thus be referred to as
observing the food rules preserved in this tractate. When he is
also described as esteeming one day above another, the reference is
obviously to his Mosaic sabbath observance. And Paul enjoins
that these converts living in such heathen centers as Rome and
28 It did not indeed assume its present form until c. 200 a. d., yet its de
cisions are the results of discussions of earlier generations; and 'the legislation
which it sets forth arose to satisfy the religious scruples of orthodox Judaism
contemporary with Apostolic or sub- Apostolic Christianity': Ehnslie, Texts
and Studies, VIII, p. iii, citing also Abrahams, Camb. Bib. Essays, pp. 184 ff.
28 "As in old Israel all slaughter was sacrifice, so animal food was partaken
by Greeks and Romans as by Semites, through the mediation of sacrificial
consecration. The problem of eating meat consecrated to heathen gods was
felt ahke by Christians and by Jews": Ehnslie, p. 32, quoting also W. Robert
son Smith.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 263
Corinth, shall be granted liberty to continue their previous observ
ances. This was neither an approval of Judaizing attempts to
foist Mosaic customs upon heathen converts, nor of Colossian
Jewish gnostic attempts to introduce abstinences on duahstic
principles of asceticism. He therefore urges their reception without
controversy: without disputes concerning the views underlying
the conduct in this matter, of either class.30 Paul who in the
interest of church unity and fellowship recognized the liberty of
the Jerusalem Apostles and Christians fully persuaded in their
own minds, to live MosaicaUy, is here in the same interest urging
'the strong' at Rome to exercise the same toleration; 31 on the
general principle, 14, 15, of walking according to love as in I Cor.
8-11, 1; 13, under the Lordship and example of the One Christ who
pleased not himseh; who became minister of circumcision both to
confirm the promises to the Jewish Fathers, and also that the
Gentiles might glorify Israel's God. Accordingly the section
closes with Old Testament citations apphed to the Jewish Messiah
praising God among the Gentiles; while they join the Jewish
people in praises with one mouth to Israel's God, since their hope
is fixed upon Israel's Messiah, the root of Jesse. In this united
30 This paraphrase by Zahn of SiaKpiaeis OidXoyiapuv has in its favor a
number of N. T. parallels in language, substance and context, e. g., I Tim. 2,
8; I Cor. 11, 16, which suggest a primitive Christian phrase and rule, possibly
related to the Jewish rule controlling controversy, 'machloqeth.' The term
appears in 'Aboda Zara, 1, 6, following a reference to observance of local
custom: 'Let no man alter this for fear of controversy'; and Ehnslie notes:
'The clause is a warning against being eccentric in matters of ritual observ
ance and hghtly causing dissension in the Jewish community.'
31 The Pauline teaching of chap. 14 f. is renewed in the resolution of the
General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church, on motion of the
Rev. Dr. F. W. Tomkins, deputy from Penna., Journal of 1906, p. 217. After
the preambles that the attitude of the Church Universal towards the Jews,
since the days of Constantine, has caused the opinion to be widespread in
Jewry that loyalty to Christ involves disloyalty to Israel; and that the Jews
are on the eve of national restoration to the Holy Land, the Convention
"proclaims to the Jews that they are left free, if they so desire, to observe the
national and social customs of Israel when they accept our Lord Jesus Mes
siah, according to the teaching and practice of Christ and the Hebrew Chris
tians in the primitive Church. In adopting this Resolution the General Con
vention distinctively affirms that neither Jew nor Gentile can be saved by
works of the Law, but only through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ
our Lord and Saviour."

264 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
worship the Jewish Apostle of the Gentiles joins with the prayer
that God who gives this hope will fill them with all joy and peace in
believing, that they may abound in hope in the power of the Holy
Ghost; and already in I Cor. 15, 58, establishment in the hope of
glory with the returning Christ is to be their inspiration always to
abound in the work of the Lord.
We have thus recognized in our examination of the group of
Pauhne Epistles written between 51 and 58 a. d. many of the
distinctive features and methods and the probable doctrinal
trend of a Jewish mystic, gnostic movement. We have found it to
be pre-supposed in the Thessalonian Letters, attacked with in
creasing deftniteness in I Cor., openly denounced in II Cor., and
guarded against by means of his successful earlier defense and
polemic, in large sections of Romans. We turn now to the later
New Testament Epistles in which such a movement or its begin
ning is generally admitted, to compare the indications of its
characteristics and activities, and of the defense and polemic
directed against it, with the results we have thus far reached.
3. EPISTLES OF THE IMPRISONMENT
COLOSSIANS, EPHESIANS AND PHILIPPIANS
We have first considered the indications of the existence and
characteristics of a gnostic movement in the earlier groups of
Pauline Epistles dating from 51 to 58 a. d., and all of them con
nected with Corinth. This order of investigation has been chosen
not only as the chronological and logical basis for the study of the
later activities of the movement and of the Pauline polemic against
it, but also because its existence in this early period is generally
either denied or ignored or not utihzed constructively.32 Those
Epistles exhibit the Apostle's polemic while writing amid his work
in Corinth, Proconsular Asia and Macedon; and the latest of the
group reveals his interest to guard against the intrusion of the
32 B. Weiss, Introd., § 24, 4, sees in Colossians a new opposition to Paul.
McGiffert, Apos. Age, p. 369, finds in that Epistle 'the first appearance of
that syncretism of Oriental theosophy and Christian faith which in one
form or another characterized all the gnostic systems of the second century.'
To Pfleiderer also, Vrchristm., 1, 187, 'the errors combatted in Colossians are
of a different kind from those with which Paul had heretofore had to deal.'

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 265
movement into the Church of Rome. The succeeding group of the
four Prison Letters written from Rome about 63 a. d., will ex
hibit his continued attack upon its activities as it appears in the
provinces of Asia and Macedon. We shall endeavor to show that
in this group of Epistles the characteristics of the opposing move
ment are the same as those in the earlier group; that they follow
the same line of development; and that the now distincter features
of the system accord with and elucidate the intimations and con
jectural construction of the data we have proposed; and that
therefore the polemic of this later group is directed against the
same movement which was opposed in the Epistles written some
five years earlier.
It is usual to find the first appearance of such a movement in
Colosse, and as occasioned there by well-known syncretistic local
conditions. Even with this limited recognition we should also
expect to find references to it in the companion encyclical Epistle
to the Ephesians intended to circulate in the adjacent districts;
and we are also led to expect references to it in Philippians, written
in the same surroundings and probably at nearly the same time.
We shall therefore examine the group as a whole, and consider the
evidence for the presence of a gnostic propaganda in the general
structure and leading topics of the several Epistles; as our limits
will not permit. a direct study of the various special expressions
which are the usual grounds for concluding the presence of gnostic
influence, and which are studied in the leading commentaries in the
light of recent researches in the History of Religions. The results
of literary criticism, which has indeed been affected by the question
of the gnostic allusions, enable us to accept as genuine all the
letters of the group: Philippians and Philemon being long since
accepted by critics of all schools; Colossians, with some exceptions,
yet by such representative scholars as Bacon, McGiffert, Moffatt
and von Soden; Ephesians, very generally; and though not ac
cepted by Moffatt, von Soden and others, is yet distinctly recog
nized by Bacon, N. T. Intdctn., p. 116 ff., as well as by M. Dibelius
and McGiffert. Julicher favors the genuineness of Colossians, yet
thinks, Enc. Bib. 868, concerning Ephesians that 'perhaps the
question ought to be left open as not yet ripe for settlement.'
We first observe that all the churches addressed in this group
are loyal to Pauline teachings. Expressions emphasizing his

266 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
confidence and rehance characterize all the four Epistles. He
joys when beholding in spirit the order, rd£ts, and stedfastness,
arepiiapa, of the Colossians' faith in Christ, 2, 5; cp. 1, 3-8; 2, 6 f.;
and the aim of the Letter and of the prayers of Epaphras is their
abiding, grounded and stedfast, 1, 23; 4, 12. In Ephesians, since
it is a circular letter, the references are naturally less concrete,
but no less positive, 1, 1.15; 2, 5 f. 19; 4, 20; and the pervading
devotional spirit presupposes the fullest sympathy of the readers
with his teachings and exhortations. The Phihppians are his
'joy and crown,' evoking his thanksgiving for theh fellowship,
in the Gospel; cp. also, 1, 26 f.; 2, 12-18; 4, 10 f.v We notice also
that the readers of the three Epistles are aheady acquainted with
the false teachings which are combatted. The swift aUusions and
the compressed descriptions of them, point to the readers' fanul-
iarity with them. We may recognize the controlhng features
and the developments of these teachings in the structure and in
terests of the main divisions of the Letters: the introductory
prayers, the sections of positive doctrinal statement, the direct
attack upon the errorists, and the resulting sections of practical
exhortation. .
• That among the aims of establishing these readers was that of
warding off the claims of teachers offering gnosis or a superior
gnosis, can be concluded not only from the definite allusions to
them in the later sections of the Epistles, but also from the sig
nificantly elaborated prayers for the readers' development in
gnosis. s These prayers enable us to recognize more clearly the
predominant function assigned to gnosis by the errorists, in view
of the Apostle's carefully contrasted correlation of it with the
other elements of the Christian hfe. In I and II Thess. his prayers
were simply for his converts' development in faith, love and
hope, I Thess. 3, 10; II Thess. 1, 11.12. With increasing informa
tion of the gnosticizing movement, his thanksgiving in I Cor. is
that his own converts have been enriched in all utterance and in
all gnosis; and this, definitely, as the issue of their confirmation,
BeBaiiaais, viz., of faith in his Gospel witness of Christ and in ex
pectation of his coming apocalypse in glory. In place of prayer,
is his assurance that God will confirm them blameless, in a life
of holy love, until that Day of the Lord. As the continuation of
the correspondence, the devotional introduction of II Cor. is one

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 267
of thanksgiving for theh renewed loyalty; while in Romans his
prayer is for a visit to them in order to share on the basis of their
faith, some spiritual ght; and his concluding wish, 16, 19, is that
they may be wise as to the good and innocent as to the evU.
But now in Colossians, issuing from thanksgiving for theh
faith, love and hope, is definitely a long prayer concerning gnosis
in a series of interwoven clauses. These assert the readers' real
possession of epignosis of God's wiU as the result of the Pauline
preaching and teaching through Ephaphras; theh true and com
plete development wiU be by means of it, in aU spiritual wisdom,
aotbia, 'to apprehend God's verities, and in aU intelligence, abv-
eais, to foUow his processes' ; the purpose of this gnosis is to lead
to the moral walk worthy of the Lord and approved by him; and
the increase in the enhghtenment of this epignosis of God, with
the accompanying increase in aU Sbvapis from the might of the
divine glory is fitting them for theh inheritance among the saints
in the kingdom of hght. In this way the gnosis in vss. 9-12 is
guardedly linked in closest relations with the faith, the moral
walk in love, the eschatological hope and the feUowship, which
are based, vss. 3-8, on the Apostohc tradition of the word of truth
in the Gospel; on the epignosis of the grace of God in truth.
In Ephesians hkewise the opening doxology interweaves among
every spiritual blessing in the heavenhes in Christ, the wealth of
the divine grace abounding towards us in the enhghtment of
gnosis in aU wisdom and discernment. Again on the basis of their
faith, love and hope resting, 1, 13 f., as in Colossians on the Apostohc
tradition of the word of truth, the gospel of theh salvation, he
prays, vs. 15 ff., that they may receive the gift of a spirit of wisdom
and revelation in the epignosis of God, which wUl not only en
hghten theh hearts concerning the Christian hope and the wealth
of glory of fellowship of the inheritance, but also concerning the
exceeding greatness of the divine Sbvapis to us-wards who beheve.
And he resumes in 3, 14 his prayer that they may have the ght of
Sbvapis from the Father through the Spirit: the indwelling of
Christ through faith; that thus rooted in love they may be enabled
to know with aU saints the love of Christ surpassing gnosis, and
be fiUed unto all the fullness of God. Here too in Ephesians he
can both confidently claim for his ministry and for his converts
the fullness of gnosis; and also duly assign its function in the de-

268 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
velopment of Christian life. In the remaining Epistle also his
prayer for the Phihppians, is based on theh fellowship in the fur
therance of the Gospel, and gnosis is again discriminatingly co
ordinated with Christian growth; it is that their love may abound
in epignosis and in all atadnais, 'perception, in practical applica
tions'; that so they may approve the things moraUy exceUent;
may be sincere and void of offense until the Day of Christ, being
then found filled with the fruit of righteousness. " Thus, in all
three Epistles, cp. also Philemon, vs. 6, gnosis instead of being
the essential and constitutive principle of the Gospel, or as di
vorcing us from moral obligations, or as supplanting the primitive
echatology, is seen in these prayers as in I Cor. to be a subordinate
principle of hght and power by which love, the outgrowth of faith,
manifests itself in every good work under the inspiration of the
Christian hope. -
"" The familiarity of the readers with a gnosis which is the antithesis
of the gnosis in Paul's prayers, is also indicated in all three letters
by the Apostle's developed restatement of the content of the
gnosis which he preached and which they had received.* At the
conclusion of this positive statement of it in Col., he terms it 'the
epignosis of the mystery of God, even Christ.' Lightfoot long ago
recognized that the term 'mystery' was probably appropriated
from its use by gnostics. It could be conceived as expressing their
claim to an esoteric knowledge by means of visions and revelations
of all mysteries, I Cor. 13, 2; II Cor. 12, 1, and of their power by
imparting it to make their initiates reXetot.33 In opposition to
this claim, just as he had emphasized that all Christians had a gift
of gnosis, so now the Apostle asserts that his Gospel was itself a
revelation to all believers, of the supreme mystery of God. This
had been hidden in God from eternal ages; but now in his own
seasons, in a dispensation belonging to the fullness of the times, it
has been revealed in the preaching of the Gospel with which Paul
and the holy Apostles and Prophets have been intrusted. It is
therefore a mystery divinely revealed in the Spirit, and revealed
33 Robinson's argument, Ephesians, p. 30 f.; 234 ff., that the currency of
the word mystery in common parlance and in Jewish Apocolyptic in the
colorless sense of a secret of any kind, makes improbable Paul's adoption of
it from the terminology of the mystery rehgions, does not meet the point that
he could have adopted it from the errorists' appropriation of it from those cults.

THP INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 269
universaUy in the Apostohc preaching and teaching ministry to
every man, in all wisdom, that thereby every man may be pre
sented perfect, riheios in Christ. This vindication of a universal
revelation in the Gospel of the supreme mystery, is made not only
in this group of letters, Col. 1, 25 ff . ; Ephes. 1, 9 ; 3, 2 ff . ; but earlier,
I Cor. 2, 6 ff.; and probably vs. 1; II Cor. 4, 3-6; Rom. 16, 25; and
later in Tit. 1, 2 f.; cp. also I Pet. 1, 10 ff. and the basis of this
teaching in Mk. 4, 22 and parallels.
The content of this revealed mystery is, however, not merely as
defined in most of the commentaries, the admission of the Gentiles
and theh full feUowship in the Church. That is an essential ele
ment in it. It is naturally duly emphasized by the Apostle who
was the principal organ of its communication and administration,
and who was called upon to vindicate it against its Judaizing
opponents. Yet Paul's own most comprehensive description of the
mystery is 'the mystery of God,' the mystery of his will made
known according to his redemptive purpose, Col. 2, 2; Eph. 1, 9,
cp. Rev. 10, 7. As its revelation, the illumination of the gnosis of
the glory of God, is in the face of Christ the image of God, II Cor.
4. 6, the Apostle can speak in Col. 2, 2, of the mystery of God, even
Christ; and in Eph. 3, 4, of the mystery of Christ; or of the gospel
preaching, as speaking the mystery of Christ, Col. 4, 3, and as
making known the mystery of the Gospel, Eph. 6, 19. Its Apostohc
preachers being, I Cor. 4, 1, ministers of Christ and therefore
stewards of the mysteries of God, their ministry would include
revelation of definite elements in the supreme mystery. Such as
are referred to are connected with the concluding reahzation of the
divine purpose: the restoration of Israel when the times of the
Gentiles shall come in, Rom. 11, 25 ff.; the transformation of the
living at the Parousia, I Cor. 15, 51. EspeciaUy is the union of Jew
and Gentile in the Church, emphasized as a revealed mystery,
Col. 1, 26 f.; Eph. 3, 4 ff, The consummation of this union, cp.
Rom. 11, 26 and vs. 15, belongs, however, to the 'seasons of re
freshing from the presence of the Lord and the times of restoration
of all things,' Acts 3, 19 f.; when the mystery of God purposing
to sum up aU things in Christ, Eph. 1, 10, is accomplished.
But whUe this is the reXos, the end when Christ shall deliver up
the Kingdom to God, I Cor. 15, 24, cp. Eph. 5, 27, and is the
accomplishment of the mystery of God, Rev. 10, 7, yet this final

270 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
purpose and goal is not the complete revealed mystery, which is
nothing less than God's revelation of himseh in the person and
redemption of Christ. When in Eph. 3, 3, Paul refers his readers to
his statement of Christ's reconcihation of Jew and GentUe in
one body to God, 2, 11-22, as evidence that the mystery was made
known to him, he adds that he has written only iv o\iyu, briefly
and in part, of the mystery of God he has aheady in 1, 3-14 viewed
from before the foundation of the world until the summing up of
all things in Christ. And further in 3, 4-12, he speaks of the
Gentiles being coheirs, not as a complete statement of the mystery
of Christ, but as a means whereby his readers may perceive his
abveats, his ' apprehension of the bearings' of that mystery. His
administration of this definite revealed mystery wUl make known
to heavenly principalities through the Church uniting in one body
Jew and Gentile, the new glories of the richly varied wisdom of God
according to his eternal purpose in Christ Jesus our Lord. Simi
larly in the Colossian parallel 1, 25 ff ., the whole Gospel, the Word
of God, the revelation of God in Christ, is the mystery in its full
ness. Its revelation to the saints included the definite revelation,
especially through Paul, of the wealth of the glory of this mystery
among the Gentiles, which is 'Christ in you' the hope of glory; but
in 2, 2, the whole wealth of the full assurance of understanding,
abveais, is the epignosis of the mystery of God, even Christ in
whom are all the treasurers of sophia and gnosis, hidden, but
accessible to those in Christ.
It is this fuller presentation of the mystery which is given in
Col. 1, 12-2, 3, as the basis from which the attack on the whole
line of the errorists' position is pressed. So distinctly is it framed
and expressed for this purpose that it led Baur, Paul, II, 1-45, to
the view that it betrayed a reference to second-century gnosticism
and thus proved the Epistle not to be genuine. For simUar reasons
Pfleiderer, Urchstnm., 1, 187-191, II, 210-226, regards Colossians as
a second-century antignostic-gnosticizing redaction of a Pauline
original. But the present recognition of its genuineness carries
with it Paul's acquaintance at this period, with the aheady emerg
ing issues of the gnostics' attempt to amalgamate theh cosmologi-
cal speculations and redemptive theories with the Christian faith.
Keeping in mind therefore that the section 1, 12 ff. grows out of
the prayer for gnosis without transition, and that at its conclusion

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 271
it is said to be written to guard against the false teachers who are
then dhectly attacked, we find in the section the Apostle's positive
revelation of the mystery of God.
The section is essentiaUy christological; and therefore the work
and person of Christ is presented as a revelation and accom
plishment of the Father's eternal redemptive purpose. ' In opposi
tion to any system of mediating 330ns, to duahstic theories of evil
powers of darkness, or to gradual ascent to the divine through
gnostic revelations and observances, Paul declares that the Father
himseh has already made us competent for sharing the inheritance
of. the saints in light; has already dehvered us from the power of
darkness by translating us into the Kingdom of the Son of his love:
the Kingdom in which we already possess redemption and freedom,
in our forgiveness and mystic union with the redeeming Son. His
sole lordship in this Kingdom and his redeeming power rests next
on the revealed mystery of his person.^ He is in relation to God, the
eUuv, the perfect representation of the invisible God; and there
fore the whole revelation of God is already complete in him, the
preexistent Son, cp. Hbws. 1, 1 ff. In his relation to the universe,
in antithesis to any gnostic cosmology of a creation by an inferior
demiurge or emanations, in order to explain the existence of evU on
duahstic principles, Christ is the first born, ' the absolute heir and
sovereign Lord' of all creation. For he is himself the creator,
sustainer, hfe and goal of the visible and invisible universe and of
any conceivable orders of existence in the gnostic series of angehc
mediators. And in contrast to their speculations concerning man
and his salvation and perfection, the eUuv and Son is hkewise the
head of the body, the Church; being, in contradiction to their
denials of resurrection, the first born and first fruits of resurrection
from the dead; the power of his resurrection being the apxh, the
abiding source and principle of the life of his Church. His sole
lordship in all worlds, his irponebeiv, is based on the truth that the
whole pleroma, 'the totahty of divine powers and attributes,' in
distinction from gnostic teachings, dwelt permanently in him, with
the eternal purpose that in him God might reconcile the universe
unto himself.34 t Against the denials of a real incarnation and re-
" Holtzmann, N. T. Theologie, I, 480 f., II, 240 ff., who regards Col. and
Eph. as Deutero-Pauline, states: 'The influence of gnosis and also the direct
point of the polemic against it, becomes most clear in the view of our Epistles

272 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
demptive death, on docetic and duahstic principles, he adds with
unmistakable definiteness that the Son's universal reconcihation
was affected in his body, the body of his flesh, by death, by the
blood of his cross. •
That this section of positive doctrinal statement is framed to
repel false teachings is distinctly stated in introducing the section,
2, 4-3, 4, in which the false teachers are now directly attacked
and definite tenets and tendencies of their system are specificaUy
repudiated. It is usually the main source for determining the
nature of the Colossian opposition and its later developments.
In regard to the description of the errorists, it is evident from the
references to Jewish institutions that they are Jews. That they,
however, are not judaizers is very generally recognized, since
the Jewish topics are not treated from the standpoint of Paul's
anti-judaistic polemic; the prohibitions of 2, 16 ff., exceed the
Mosaic prescriptions; and the references to philosophy, wisdom
and gnosis, show that the movement comes from a different
quarter, cp. Dibelius, Geisterwelt, u. s. w., p. 153. The various
theories as to what other than a judaizing source the Jewish
Christian false teaching can be assigned, are listed in the Meyer
commentary, Dibelius as above, cp. also his commentary in
Lietzmann's Handbuch z. N. T., 85 f., and in Moffatt, Introd., 153.
Dibelius concludes that 'if we attempt to give the child a name,
we can speak of a parallel to the mysteries, a forerunner of gnostic
tendencies on Jewish Christian soil.' Moffatt, p. 152, recognizes
in it semi-gnostic tendencies; but agreeing with Dibelius and
others, finds in it indications of a local phase of some syncretistic
concerning the pleroma. This, p. 480, formed 'in contrast to the lower, void
world a supersensual realm of the godhead, in which the forms of dazzling
hght, of its aeons and syzygies, i. e., aeon-pairs, bring life, movement and or
ganization in the repose of the Godhead.' In these Epistles, p. 481, 'that
which was for the gnostics made up of a motley multiplicity of ranks of spirits,
of an extended series of aeons, is here claimed to be organically summed up
in the One Christ as the concrete central point of the realm of spirits.' Simi
larly Pfleiderer, Vrchristm., II, p. 216: 'The church teacher could not combat
more simply the gnostic syncretism which made Christ one of the many
spiritual beings, i. e., aeons, of the pleroma, than in expressly emphasizing
that the whole pleroma dwells in Christ, and indeed bodily; that is, that the
person of the historical Saviour is the embodiment, the totality, the sole
vehicle and mediator of all divine powers of life and salvation, from the be
ginning.'

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 273
theosophy blending disparate elements rife within the popular
rehgion of Phrygia, with practices current among Jewish circles
sensitive to semi-Alexandrian influences. But since its teachers
had a footing within the Christian Church, or with Dibehus, p.
153, were 'von Haus aus' Christians, the above description would
seem in itseh to point to a definitely gnostic movement. The
hesitation of these scholars to pronounce the Colossian errorists to
be gnostics may be justified when the construction of their position
is made prmcipaUy from this section of direct attack, 2 4-3 4. But
when this section is taken in connection with the prayer for gnosis
and the succeeding antignostic doctrinal statement in this Colos
sian Letter; and also with the three similar sections in the other
two Letters of the group; and further with the characteristics
of the opponents which we have presented from the earher Letters,
we can clearly recognize in the Colossian false teaching a definite
gnostic system, and of far wider sweep than that of an elhpse, to
use Dibelius' figure, having angel worship and asceticism as its
foci. Turning to the features speciaUy emphasized in this polemic
section, the opposing system is at once contrasted generally with
the revelation of God in Christ proclaimed universaUy in the
Gospel tradition of Apostolic preaching; and it is pronounced to
be but a philosophy and vain deceit according to the tradition of
men. It is not according to Christ, as he is presented in the
mystery of God in Christ, 1, 13 ff., but according to the stoicheia
of the cosmos, the ruling cosmical powers, the bearers of the
pleroma, cp. I Cor. 2, 6 ff. The two systems are next contrasted
in the definite teachings as to Christ's person and work and as to
the means and result of the believer's appropriation of his redemp
tion: in 2, 9.10 in connection with Christ and the pleroma, and
also in connection with the perfection and fulfillment of Christians
by mystic union with him, iare iv abrQ ireirXripapivoi. ' Summing
up 1, 13 ff., and in antithesis to the errorists' human tradition,
kabbala and speculative cosmology and angelology, the whole
pleroma is again affirmed to dweU permanently in Christ; and is
now said to dweU bodily, and, therefore, in Christ reaUy incarnate.
And further, redemption and victory over the powers of evil is
won by the heavenly Christ, crucified, buried and risen. By direct
mystic union with the heavenly, dying and rising Christ, is our

274 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
forgiveness and our perfection. 'In him we are 'filled full.' We
are in him, moreover, not by means of a bodily circumcision but
by the circumcision of Christ: a baptismal death and resurrection
with him into a new covenant union of our lives now hidden with
the Christ in God, but to be manifested in glory at Christ's mani
festation at the Parousia, 3, 4.
Not only is this last assurance directed against the prevailing
gnostic denial of the general resurrection, but the emphasis
throughout the section on our present mystical union that is to be
consummated by 'perfecting,' cp. 1, 28, is in antithesis to the
opponents' system of perfection. What stress was laid by them
on circumcision, and what was its import in their system, cannot
be determined. Whatever attitude Jewish false teachers might
take concerning the Mosaic law, the pre-Mosaic institutions of
Sabbath and circumcision were distinguishing marks of their
Jewish standing, and could be expected to have a place in a
system of any Jewish character. More clearly appears in this
section their method of perfection by gnosis, whose enlightenment
and power came by means of boasted visions. These, cp. Dibelius,
p. 153, may be the method of communication with the elemental
ruling stoicheia of the cosmos, and be the basis of the tradition
and empty deceit, 2, 8, to no purpose puffing them up by the
vovs of the flesh. Instead of perfecting growth in fellowship
with the Church's communion with Christ the head, this system
of the false teachers was an ide\odpnaKeia a self-invented in
dividual service, a self-imposed humility expressed in the worship
of subordinate angelic bearers of the pleroma, in order to share
their power for the ascent of the soul from the evil creation.
Zahn's contention renewing Ewald's view, that this worship is
not offered to angels, but is the worship which the angels offer,
seems disproved by the fact that in the Wisdom of Solomon,
dpnaKeia is always followed by the objective genitive. Yet it may
be possible that objective worship of angels would lead to an ideal
of a life of abstinence from foods, drink and marriage, like that of
angels. In any case the outcome of the volunteered worship was
an ascetic system and a ritual observance of days. In this, as
based on their empty speculations and dualism, the Apostle sees
a return to the principle of legalism as opposed to the freedom of
the Spirit. And it evokes a renewal in 2, 14 ff. of the gospel of

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 275
freedom from 'the bond in ordinances' that was blotted out on
the Redeemer's cross and in his absolute triumph there over the
powers of evil. The religious discipline of prescriptions and
ceremonial observances was but a shadow of the religion of free
obedience and worship in the Spirit, an outline of the body and
reality of the spiritual religion of the Christ who was to come.
In the conclusion of the section, vss. 20-23, the outcome of this
system of perfection by ascetic observances such as 2, 21, abstin
ence from specific food, or possibly from flesh, wine and marriage,
is declared to be 'the full satisfaction of the flesh.' All commenta
tors note the obscurity of the grammatical and exegetical con
nection of this phrase with the preceding series of parenthetical
clauses intermingling compressed statement and swift repudiation
of the opposing system. Adopting the construction of von Soden
we can regard the phrase as the Apostle's exposure of satisfaction
of the lowest side of human nature as the real result of the boasted
X670S <ro<ptas ; and even more definitely, we may consider irknapovn
rijs aapKos as the final contrast to the initial Pauline declaration
2, 10 iare iv avrQ ireir\r)po)pevoi. Combining the references to the
errorists' system of perfection, we find that it is presented, 2, 4, as
before in I Cor. 2, 4 and Rom. 16, 18, in persuasiveness of speech,
though in 2, 8 and 18 they make spoil of believers in robbing
them of, or in deciding against their attainment of, the prize of
their high calling by means of their present union with the fullness
of Christ. Their system is opposed as being only a human tradi
tion and speculation resting on the assumption that Christians
are still living in a cosmos ruled by the stoicheia of the cosmos.
It is, therefore, a denial of Christ's victory over these powers, and
of the freedom of the Spirit won for us in his redemptive death.
Their rules for perfection by ascetic practices are directly
opposed to Christ's teaching concerning foods in Mk. 7, 18 ff.
Their gnosis is not a divine spiritual enlightenment, but a
puffing up by the vovs of the flesh and rests on empty boasts
of visions and communications with elemental world-rulers. It
is besides a gnosis which bestows no real spiritual power. It has
only a repute of wisdom, \byov, ob Sbvapiv, Chrysostom, on the
basis of self-imposed worship and humility, and of unsparing
treatment of the body. The only honor which the observance
of their precepts brings, is 'such as satisfied the carnal nature;

276 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
d<petSta awparos was in very truth ir\r]apovri rijs aapKbs, Abbott,
with Von Soden.
The 'enigmatic brevity' of the collocation of 'severity to the
body' and 'full satisfaction of the flesh' recalls the constant two
fold tendency of gnostic ethics resting on the conception of matter
as the principle of evil: either to a rigorous repression of bodily
life as interfering with perfection of the spirit, or to indifference
to the satisfaction of its impulses, since they are without spiritual
significance. In the earlier Epistles the gnosticizing movement
is characterized by this latter libertine indifference; here in
Colossians the errorists are unmistakably ascetics. Yet in spite
of this contrast they belong to the same movement, in view both
of the controlling common features we have recognized, and also
in view of the same contrast of asceticism and libertinism repre
sented in the later divisions found in the hydra-headed system of
second-century gnosticism. The Colossian errorists might, there
fore, be considered a special group or as advocating a special
phase of the system. But the statement that severity to the
body is 'for' full satisfaction of the flesh, coupled with the fact
that repudiation of the asceticism of 2, 20-23 is immediately fol
lowed 3, 5 ff. by exhortations against sensual indulgence reveals a
closer relation between gnostic asceticism and licentiousness than
simply that of two subdivisions of a general movement. In some
way which it may not now be possible to determine satisfactorily,
but which the data of Colossians and of earher and later Epistles
suggest, the principle and the actual practice of spurious asceticism
tended ultimately to immorality. In I Thess. 4, 4, and I Cor. 6
and 7 the occasion of combining injunctions against fornication
with commands to enter into and maintain marriage relations, is
found in the whole contexts to be more than the need of counsel
as to the means of escaping temptation to impurity. The passages
seem to assume and to reply to a theory of disparagement of
marriage which was held in conjunction with indifference to 'full
satisfaction of the flesh.' Similarly in the later description of the
errorists in I Tim. 4, 1 ff., abstinence from foods and marriage is
an outstanding feature of the antinomian immorality combatted
in the Pastorals. Such a relation of false asceticism and libertinism
could be variously conceived as that of reaction under inability
to bear the seh-imposed strain; or possibly as that of separate

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 277
standards for distinct classes of psychics and pneumatics; or more
probably the combination was due to some sophistry, cp. 'knowing
the depths of Satan,' Rev. 2, 24, by which indulgence was made
compatible with the claim of the enlightened spirit's conquest of
the bodily nature.
The closing section of exhortation, 3, 1-A, 6, presents in con
trast to this gnostic system of perfection and its failure to reach
it, the Christian goal, pathway and power. Not by spurious as
cetic severity to the body but in mystic union with the risen
Christ who died unto sin, may the Colossians kill out all carnal
affections, 3, 1-7; may put off the sins, vss. 8-11, causing divisions;
and in contrast to the divisive spirit of the false teachers, may put
on the new man renewed unto epignosis of the Creator, in which
life of spiritual renewal all divisions disappear in Christ who is
all in all. Positively this life of fellowship is to be developed not
by self-imposed worship and humility, but by the Christian
graces of mutual love, with the peace of Christ ruling in theh
hearts; in the worship of his Church; in due subordination within
the home; and in a walk in wisdom towards those who are without,
in final contrast to the errorists' false spirit of emancipation from
authority. This Epistle attacking the whole system and practice of gnostics
whose activity has been reported in the promising field of a Pauline
church amid a variety of syncretistic cults, was naturally needed
in the adjacent church of Laodicea. It is, therefore, to be sent
thither also, 4, 16. From thence, moreover, the Colossians are
to receive an additional Letter of Paul, which will supplement the
Letter sent directly to them. The acceptance of Ephesians as
genuine commonly leads to the view here adopted, that it is the
companion letter referred to. In this case we should expect to
find in it a similar interest in guarding against gnostic teaching.
The method of such defense is, however, necessarily affected by
the fact that it is an encyclical addressed to the churches widely
scattered throughout the Province of Asia. In their differing
rehgious situations and in the varied methods and stages of
gnostic activity among them, the Apostle's treatment of it in
Ephesians must naturaUy be of a more general character than
in his Letter to the single Church in Colosse. Hence also the
fundamental elements of Christian truth and life directly exposed

278 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
to gnostic perversion, must be most positively emphasized as the
safeguard against their attack on the faith, hope, morality, order
and unity of the Churches. But as a supplement to Colossians,
it must also have a special feature guarding all the Asian churches
from gnostic influence; and at the same time a feature not already
developed in Colossians. This is found to be its teaching con
cerning the Church and its unity. It is presented both in closest
relation to the doctrinal and practical teaching of the two Epistles;
and also, as definitely, as a bulwark against the separatist spirit
and disruptive tendency of the gnostic propaganda. In Col. we
have only the statements: 1, 18 Christ is the head of the Body, the
Church; and in 2, 19 the antithesis to the self-imposed worship
of the errorists, is the whole Body holding fast the Head and sup
plied and knit together by the joints and bands. Upon reading
Ephesians, the Colossians will receive the supplementing develop
ment of these summary statements. And they will in addition
find it a counterpart of his direct rebuttal of false doctrine in their
own Epistle, in its devotional strains of positive exposition of
Gospel truth and life to enable all the churches of Asia to withstand
the wiles of the error.
Against the usual denial of a controversial element in Ephesians,
Weinel, Bib. Theol. 438, recognizes that 'in Ephesians also, the
author contends against gnostics who excite distractions in the
churches, 4, 14; and that against them he advocates the same
doctrines as those of Colossians. ' In agreement with this, we have
previously noticed the similarity of the general structure of both
Epistles in their common emphasis on Christian gnosis in the
prayers, and in the positive content of this gnosis in the revelation
of the mystery of God in Christ. We may further remark that
Ephesians in its prayer supplements Colossians by a more definite
reference to the 'power' as well as to the enlightment of Christian
gnosis. The boast of the errorists to be alone the Svvaroi, is
silenced by the Apostle's confident prayers, in 1, 19, that the
spiritual enlightenment of his readers in the epignosis of God will
include a knowledge of the exceeding greatness of his power to
us-ward who believe, according to the working of the strength of
his might; in 3, 14-21, that by the ght of this fourfold divine
power, in the indwelling of the Christ, they may know the love of
Christ which passes gnosis, that they may be filled full unto all the

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 279
pleroma of God; and he closes his Letter with the exhortation thus
to be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might by putting on
the whole armor of God. This prayer for power is besides the
climax of the prayer 1, 18 for gnosis of the Christian eschatology
rejected by the errorists: that they may know what is the hope of
God's calling and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance
among the saints. This hope and inheritance rests, vs. 20, as in
I Thess. 4, 13 ff.; I Cor. 15, 20 ff., on God's resurrection and heav
enly exaltation of the dead Christ, with whom we are in direct
union by spiritual resurrection with him, 2, 6; and we have now the
gift of the Spirit, 1, 14, as the earnest of the glory of the inherit
ance still awaiting us.
Surveying the positive doctrinal statements, we mark that the
antignostic christology of Colossians is expressed devotionally in
the opening doxology: the preexistence of Christ; the Father's
eternal purpose to gather up in one, the incarnate redeeming and
glorified Messiah, in the fullness of the times, the heavenly and the
earthly universe. Hence 1, 20 ff. as in Colossians his supremacy
over every conceivable order of angels, over the worlds of nature,
over the Church of humanity redeemed in him its head and sole
source of life and growth. This redemption, freedom and universal
salvation is 2, 1 ff., as in Col. 1, 20-23 against opposing teaching,
already won by his death and resurrection. And again docetic
denials of his incarnation and passion are repelled by the emphasis
on this redemption in his flesh, by the Cross and in the blood of the
Christ; while the appropriation of the redemption by mystic union
with him is declared in the recurring characteristic phrase iv
XpiOT$. Supplementary to these common doctrinal features of the two
Epistles is the special emphasis on the Church and its unity,
2, 11-22; 3, 6 ff. The earher Epistles are found to have the same
interest in this goal of a divinely effected human fellowship and
brotherhood in a common faith, life, order and work, which the
divisive spirit of the gnostic movement constantly endangered.
This unity is here viewed as effected upon the removal, by Christ's
redemptive death, of the fundamental division of humanity into
Jew and GentUe, who both have now their direct access by Christ
in one Spirit unto the Father. It is further, in contrast to the
gnostic system based on empty visions, a union of men in one

280 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Church and Temple of God which has been both revealed to
Apostles and prophets, 3, 5, in the mystery of God, and is also,
2, 20 ff., founded and built upon the Gospel tradition and ministry
of these Apostles and prophets. The opening section of the suc
ceeding exhortation, 4, 1-16, manifests Paul's interest in warding off
the disruptive influences of gnostic propaganda within this Church,
by his calls to zealous preservation of the sevenfold unity of the
one Body, vs. 5 f., of which Christ is the head, 16 f., and which
grows by means of his gifts of ministry, 7 ff . , f or its upbuilding, until
we all come in the unity of the faith and of the epignosis of the
Son of God unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of the
Christ. Paul's antithetic reference in this section to gnostic repudiation
of the authority and function of the Church's fellowship and
ministry, is evident from his insertion of a description of his op
ponents in vs. 14. It has the central position among the con
trasted clauses of the single sentence of six verses, 11-16, con
cerning the Church and ministry, in which too he deals with
several characteristic gnostic terms. The disruptive activity of
the opponents is in contrast to that of the Church's ministry,
vss. 12.13, for the perfecting joining together of the saints and the
building up of the Body of Christ, cp. II Cor. 13, 10; in contrast
also to the still unattained goal: the ' oneness' that comes from the
faith and epignosis of the Son of God, the reXetos avhp, the measure
of the mature stature of the pleroma of Christ. In spite of their
boasted offers of perfection, they and their foUowers are really
vnirioi, immature and with no means of growth. The effect of the
false teaching is unsettlement and disruption, instead of the unity
and upbuilding on the immovable foundation, Col. 1, 23; 2, 7.
Using the figure with which the Sermon on the Mount closes,
they are wave-tossed and wind-driven by the teaching which
is not only 'of men' cp. Col. 2, 8, but in the 'sleight' of men: the
gamester's artifice in casting or upturning the dice fraudulently,
ut semper appareat quod ipsi placet, Bengel; or as in the parallel
II Cor. 4, 2, SoXovvres, corrupting the word of God. The mode of
teaching, as constantly in his allusions to it, is in craftiness with a
view to the perversion of the Error.35 It is the opposite of the
3* MefloSta a word found only here and in 6, 11 is not pidobos, the system
of error or the wily method of the Devil; but following the most common use

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 281
Gospel manifestation of the truth both in teaching and in a moral
life of love, which is the one pathway of growth unto maturity and
perfection; unto Christ the head, as members of the one Body of
Christ, vs. 12, 'fitly framed together and compacted by every joint
of supply ' of the one Spirit of Christ through his ghts of grace, vs. 7,
in the fellowship and ministry of his Church, vss. 7-11.
Proceeding to- other topics of exhortation selected from the
primitive instruction in which they learned Christ, and specifically
in contradiction of docetism, 'as he is in truth in Jesus' W. H. mg.,
he first warns 4, 25-5, 2, in the interest of unity and as being
members one of another, against sins leading to divisions and
thwarting upbuilding. With the foUowing exhortation against
sins of impurity, 5, 3-14, is the warning concerning deception as to
their sinfulness and punishment. It is a deception wrought
through empty discourses, vs. 6, of libertine teachers, who as
'sons of disobedience' assert on principle their emancipation
from authority even in the sphere of morals, and whose
acts in secret it is disgraceful to relate. These charges could
not be made against Jewish or judaizing opponents. Nor can
the reference be to heathen immorality, which he had aheady
described in 4, 17 ff. in different terms, and which his readers had
definitively renounced. Since then their feUowship with the sons
of disobedience, 5, 7, is a present danger, and from no other assign
able source, we are led to conclude that these deceivers of vs. 6 are
of pera in composition to express reversal and transmutation, signifies the
perversions and reversals of the truth by the false teachers. So Lightfoot
decides in his comment on Polycarp, Philippians, 7. But even more defi
nitely it seems to refer to perversion of the moral teaching of the Way. For
on the one hand Polycarp uses the verb in this technical reference to perverted
moral doctrine and practice, in his fourfold description of the errorist who con
fesses not the incarnation and the atonement; and who pedoSebv ra X6'yia
roO Kupiou 7rpos rds iStas e7rt0iuitas, and says there is neither resurrection
nor judgment. On the other hand, the exhortations on moral topics of the
didache in Ephes. 4, 17-6, 9 are both introduced and concluded by the warnings
against pedoSia in 4, 14 and 6, 11. In II Sam. 19, 27 the LXX uses the verb to
express the perversion of the truth by the statement of 16, 3. If this suggestion
that the reference in Ephesians is to perversion of the Way of the didache is
tenable, pedoSia rijs ir~kavr)S would have a parallel in Hbws. 13, 9: SiSaxaTs
7T0i/ctXais /cat Rivals, where irotKtXos could have its frequent meaning of
change.

282 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the libertines of the earher Epistles and the false teachers of
4, 14.
Thus, as is often recognized, the warnings in Ephesians are
directed against gnostic hbertinism, while Colossians warns
directly of its spurious asceticism. Yet in Colosse where this
phase of the error was in the forefront, it was related to 'full
satisfaction of the flesh' as its ultimate issue. In Ephesians,
addressed to the whole group of Asian churches, this outcome and
general feature of hbertinism would naturally be selected for
warning. But the Colossian polemic against asceticism is not
entirely without paraUel, even in Ephesians. Here we meet,
5, 25-33, with an extended vindication of the holiness of marriage
as divinely instituted and as pointing in its unity to the absolute
union of Christ and his Church. In the absence of any neglect or
disparagement of marriage by Jews, judaizers or Gentile converts,
such an elaborated defense imphes a detraction of the institution
which could be assigned to some group of ascetic Jewish gnostics,
as in Colosse, misinterpreting on duahstic principles and by al
legorizing, the opening chapters of Genesis to whose definite state
ments the Apostle appeals. His repetition in this connection of the
figure of Christ as the head of the Church and Saviour of the body,
links this vindication of marriage with his exposure of the teach
ing of error in 4, 12 ff. We may notice also that the teaching con
cerning marriage is part of the exhortation to subordination in the
household, checking as in Colossians the errorists' false spirit of
emancipation from authority.
The Colossian readers of this Epistle would therefore find in it
a supplement to Paul's polemic against gnostic teaching in his
Letter to themselves. Philippians written probably shortly after,
contains along with other features a polemic against the same type
of error. As in the two Epistles just examined, the references to it
are constructed in the same method : in the prayer for true gnosis,
which we have already considered; in the positive christological
statement; and in the description of the false teachers accompany
ing the direct warning against them.
The doctrinal statement grows out of the controlling interest of
the Letter in the unity and feUowship of this church which is his
joy and crown. He had no fear that external persecution, 1, 27-30,
would weaken this unity. His prayer and anticipation was that

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 283
they were meeting it by standing in one spirit, with one soul
striving together for the faith of the Gospel. His joy would be
be fulfilled, 2, Iff., if in their internal church hfe they would be of
the same mind and love, of one mind, of Christ's mind. The
possible dangers to such a unity being faction and eagerness for
empty glory, he exhorts to an unselfish unity by the example of
Christ. The profundity and fullness of its dogmatic statement
reflect his interest in safeguarding them from a false christology
based on KevoSoi-ia and issuing in a divisive spirit of faction.
Parallel to the revelations of the mystery of God in Christ, in the
two preceding Epistles, its positive statements are at the same
time denials of fundamental errors concerning Christ with which
we have already met. Against those who divided the Christ or
reduced the heavenly Christ to a rank among the celestial orders,
it declares that Christ Jesus subsisted in the form of God and em-
tied himself of the glorious mode of existence on an equahty
with God. His real incarnation is included in the statement that
he took the form, pop<jyb, of a servant. And any special docetic
theory of the union of the Christ and Jesus only from the baptism
and until before the passion, is repelled, since the form of a servant
was taken when he came into existence in the likeness of men, and
was continued even to death, yea the death of the cross. His
exaltation by the Father above every name, as in Eph. 1, 21 and
Col. 2, 10, follows upon his humbling himself, when 'in fashion as
a man ' he became obedient, even unto death. The homage of the
celestial, terrestrial and subterrestrial worlds in is the human
name of Jesus: in the confession, cp. I Cor. 12, 3; Rom. 10, 9,
Kbpios 'Irjaods Xpiarbs.
The probability that these doctrinal emphases were in view of
an opposing system is strengthened by the special reference to
apiraypbs. We are not here concerned with the extended discus
sions of this term and with the various renderings of vss. 6.7:
whether with Gifford 'glory and majesty with God was not deemed
a prize to be held fast ' ; or as in the A. V., was not thought a robbery
or usurpation; or with Dibelius, as a spoil to be seized. The
humiliation of Christ was expressed in the non-polemic passage,
II Cor. 8, 9, in the simple statement, 'being rich, he for your sakes
became poor. ' The fact, however, that here he uses this unique
form of expression, not tenaciously grasping a prize, or not re-

284 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
garding its retention as an usurpation, or not striving to obtain it
by force, suggests that its pecuhar use especially in its connection
with the other safeguarding statements of the section, was in
antithesis to a christology in which some such view was involved.36
In addition to the prayer for true gnosis and the christological
statement which seems framed to guard against a disrupting
system, we have as in the two earher Epistles of the group, a
direct description of the errorists in chapter 3. Most commonly
they have been adjudged to be Judaizers. Dibehus on the con
trary represents the view that they are Jewish agitators. Moffatt
more generaUy considers them to be Jews or Jewish Christian
agitators. Bacon, Paul, 368 ff., sees in them a type of Judaizers
yet distinct from those in Galatians, and he points out their re
semblances to the errorists in Ephesians and Colossians. WhUe
Zahn restricted the legahstic references to Judaizers to vss. 2-16
and referred the immorality of vss. 17 ff . to Philippian Christians,
Lightfoot found in the two sections of the chapter two distinct
groups of errorists, Judaizers and libertines. B. Weiss, Phpbf.
221 ff., following some much earher critics recognizes three groups
in the three epithets of vs. 2, the counterparts of those who rejoice
in the Lord. The Dogs are immoral heathen; the Evil Workers
are teachers with unworthy and selfish motives, such as the
Roman clergy in 1, 15 ff.; the Concision are unbelieving Jews, not
Judaizers. We find, however, that in this chapter the Apostle has in mind but
one set of opponents, and further we hold that the initial denuncia
tions are against one and the same party. Their abruptness and
incisiveness has been made possible, because they are summaries
M Among the conjectures attempting to account for the expression was
Baur's Paul, II, 45 ff., that it betrayed the influence of the second-century
Valentinian myth of Sophia striving to become one with the Father. But
the failure of his attack upon the genuineness of the Epistle and his admission
that the reference of the gnostic myth to Christ in a moral sense, as in the
text, is meaningless, led to the rejection of his theory. Pfleiderer, however,
renews it, Vrchstm., I, 181.229, in regarding vss. 6.7 as a later interpolation
based on the myth of Sophia or of the world-ruler Jaldabaoth's desire to dis
place the highest God. Dibelius, Geisterwelt, 105 f ., rejects this in favor of
some possible contrasted reference to the envy and strife of the spirits of the
firmament described in the descent of Christ in Ascensio Jesaia, 10, 29 ff.
Ernesti in his reply to Baur proposed the contrast of the first Adam attempting
'to be as Gods,' Gen. 2, 5 cp. 22.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 285
of the Apostle's frequent earher descriptions of those 'of whom he
had told them often, ' vs. 18. Since he had visited Phihppi shortly
after writing I Cor. and had probably written II Cor. there, and
had revisited the Church immediately after writing Romans, it
would evidently be the antinomian errorists of these Epistles of
whom he had thus often spoken to the Philippians. The reference
to Jews in the third epithet should not therefore mislead us to
suppose that Paul would apply to them as such, the terms dogs and
evil workers, or would apply them to judaizing Christians, who made
up the Church of Palestine. Nor as Apostle of the heathen and
here writing to heathen, would he speak of them as dogs. Its use
here is based on its Jewish apphcation to heathen on theh idea of
the repulsive, unclean associations of dogs as the symbol of abom
inable immorality. Paul's definite reference to 'the Dogs,' in
connection with his following description, vss., 17 ff., of those who
glory in their shame, alludes therefore to the libertinism of error
ists well known to the Phihppians. The same class is similarly
denounced in the Pastorals as BSeKvKroi, Tit. 1, 16, foul and
detestable. In the sin hsts in Rev. the iBSehvypivoi of 21, 8 and
27 seem to be those referred to as 'the dogs' of 22, 15; and to the
antinomian libertines of II Pet. 2 is applied the proverb: the dog
has returned to his own vomit.
The next term 'the evil workers,' passes from their immorahty
to theh teaching. The Apostle could not refer to Jewish or judais
tic obedience to the holy law as evil work. His own Jewish obe
dience is not described as evil but as blameless: it had been 'gain'
but now is regarded as loss, but only in comparison with the
excellency of the gnosis of Christ. Hence the evU workers of
Philippians are not observers of the law, but as the deceitful work
ers of II Cor. 11, 13 are teachers fashioning themselves into apostles
of Christ and ministers of righteousness. Dibehus regarding them
as Jews adopts Bultmann's rendering, 'Werkhelden,' champions
of works. But in all three of Paul's independent uses of the
word, as the Lexicons exhibit, he refers to teachers: here and in II
Cor. to false teachers, and in II Tim 2, 15 in contrast to them
Timothy is to be ipyarns aveiraiaxwros by 'handling aright the
word of truth.' The same usage and practically the same term,
ipyarai aSidas in Luke, which the Syriac versions render 'work
ers of falsehood,' and ol ipya£bpevoi rr\v avopiav in Mtw. and

286 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
LXX, is apphed to the false prophets and teachers in the Sermon
on the Mount.
These immoral false teachers are further characterized as the
Kararopri, whereby is fixed theh Jewish provenance and boasts.
This term, however, in its connection with the other two epithets,
with the succeeding description of the opponents and with the
situation of the Phihppians, makes impossible a reference here to
unbelieving Jews. Theh presence in PhUippi, or theh propaganda
there, is improbable in view of the antisemitism displayed against
Paul himself in Acts 16, 20. Moreover, Jewish missionaries in the
Dispersion would not emphasize as here, chcumcision, but the
usual topics to attract godfearers as shown in Chap. IV. It would
besides be superfluous to warn the Phihppians of persecution by
Jews or at Jewish instigation, of which they themselves would have
more direct knowledge; which could not be warded off by any such
Gentile claim as vs. 3, 'we are the chcumcision'; and which would
not be traced back to Jewish circumcision or concision, but as in
I Thess. 2, 14 to Jewish hatred of Christianity. Nor for similar
reasons can ' concision' refer to Judaizers, although the reference to
justification has led many to this opinion. For, in general, there are
no indications of judaistic agitation in Philippi, where Paul's
apostohc authority was unquestioned; and while the same doctrine
of justification as in Gal. and in the parallels in Romans is affirmed,
yet it is here presented with a different interest. More especiaUy,
the denunciations of the immorality and false doctrine referred to
in vss. 18 ff . , could not possibly apply to judaizing Christians.
When, however, we recognize in these Jews the antinomian Jews
of II Cor. 1 1 , 22 of whom the Apostle could have spoken often to the
Phihppians, we obtain a view of the opponents in Php. 3 which
unifies both the threefold description of vs. 2 and its development
in the rest of the chapter in reverse order: concision, vss. 3-11;
evil workers, vss. 12-16; dogs, vss. 17-19. They are first de
nounced as the concision in connection with their boasts to be
Jews and of consequent superiority as representatives of the real
rehgion of Israel and as ministers of its Messiah. It is suggestive
that the feature of the Jewish standing emphasized by them or by
Paul is not their legahsm but their circumcision, the pre-Mosaic
institution. We have no data for determining how they definitely
exploited circumcision in their system, save that its spiritual signif-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 287
icance and the realization of the fullness of its meaning and privi
lege in Christian baptism was ignored. Here in vs. 3 f. it is to
them boasting and confidence in flesh, even in fleshly mutilation.
In Col. 2, 11 it is contrasted with a circumcision not made with
hands, cp. Eph. 2, 11. That it, however, gave them superiority as
supereminent apostles, is denied by Paul's claim II Cor. 11, 22, to
have equal standing as Hebrew, Israelite and Son of Abraham; and
as minister of Christ to have a higher standing, birep iyu. But here
in Phihppians 3, 4.5, he asserts himseh to be more truly a Jew
than his opponents, iyu paWov. We observe, however, that the
specific claims of truer Judaism which he makes, could, apart from
the persecution of the Church, probably be equalled by many a
pharisaic judaizer; and we submit the view that they therefore
form a contrast of his complete and thoroughgoing Judaism to the
distorted and attenuated Judaism of the errorists, which was
adulterated with the syncretism environing them in the Dispersion.
As they made boast of the circumcision which they could not deny,
Paul too emphasizes his own circumcision on the eighth day as of
true Israehte stock, in the loyal tribe of Benjamin, and though of
the Dispersion, a Hebrew-speaking Son of Hebrews. But far more,
and with probable reference to their sophistical antinomianism,
he was a Hebrew Kara vbpov : of strictest interpretation of it as a
Pharisee, of intensest zeal for it as a persecutor, of blameless
obedience as regards legal righteousness.
Yet the gains of this full Judaism with the advantage of being a
Jew and with the profit of circumcision, Rom. 3, 1; 9, 1-5, he had
counted as loss that he might win Christ. In his ensuing reference
in vs. 9 to these two contrasted relations, he uses, as we should
expect him to use as in Eph. 2, 4-8; Tit. 3, 4; II Tim. 1, 9 f., the
terms already wrought out in controversy with judaizers maintain
ing the general position of Judaic privilege and righteousness by
law.37 In contrast to having any righteousness of his own, which is
87 The similar boasts of Jewish standing in II Cor. 11, 18 ff. have been
found to be made, as here in Php. 3, not by Judaizers but by Jewish gnostic
errorists. In the polemic against the Judseo-gnostic heresy, Col. 2, 11 ff. and
its parallel Eph. 2, 11 ff., the claim of being the true circumcision and its
development by references to justification in mystic union with the dead
and risen Christ, shows that in Php. 3, 2-10 the similar allusions to circum
cision and justification are not made with reference to Judaizing but to
gnostic opponents.

288 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
of the law, he is now found in Christ, having God's righteousness by
faith in Christ. Wherefore in vs. 3 is his boast in Christ against
any and every form of Jewish confidence in flesh. And in vss. 8-11,
this Pauline boast is seen to be not against Judaizers, in the fact
that the completing statements are not concerned with theh posi
tions but with the fundamental issues of his controversy with
Jewish gnostic opponents of the earher Letters: the transcendence
of the gnosis of Christ Jesus the Lord, cp. Col. 2, 2.8; Eph. 3, 3;
4, 14; and the gnosis of him in fellowship with his passion and
death and in the Sbvapis of his resurrection, as the means of attain
ing the resurrection of the dead, in direct antithesis to his oppo
nents' denial of the passion and resurrection of the heavenly Christ
and of a general resurrection.
He is thus led, vss. 12-16, to expose them as the 'evil workers'
of vs. 2. The work has been explained above as that of a teaching
and prophetic ministry. The spurious prophetic teaching we con
cluded was in view in the christological passage, 2, 5 ff. It is here
in view from the eschatological standpoint, from which we first
recognized it in the Thessalonian Epistles. His direct repudiation
of it, vs. 12, 13, discloses it as a robbing believers of their prize,
Col. 2, 18, viz., the hope of their high calhng of God in Christ
Jesus, Ppns. 3, 13, and of the wealth of the glory of their inheritance,
Eph. 1, 18, when at Christ's manifestation at the Parousia, they
too shall be manifested with him in glory, Col. 3, 4. Correlated
with denials of these Last Things was, as in the prior Epistles,
theh false teaching of present perfection in a Kingdom aheady
fully come, I Cor. 4, 8, in the coming and ghts of the Spirit. And
that they were reXetot by their alleged possession of gnosis, cp.
I Cor. 14, 20; Col. 1, 28; Eph. 4, 13 f.; appears in the Apostle's
disavowal of his own perfection, since he must still press on to
apprehend 3, 12, KardXaBo), as in Eph. 3, 18, KaraXa|3e(r0ai, with all
saints, and to know the love of Christ surpassing gnosis. The
same denial that rb rikeiov was come, with the same emphasis on
the related fact that our gnosis was stUl in part, and the same ideal
of apprehending and knowing as we have been apprehended and
known by Christ Jesus, when at last we see face to face, was in
I Cor. 13, his teaching opposing the perfect, the spiritual, the
possessors of gnosis in Corinth.
Obviously such perfectionism based on a spurious emancipating

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 289
gnosis which repudiated the moral invigoration of the Christian
hope, endangered the moral hfe influenced by these Jewish evil
workers. The Apostle exhorts therefore not only to a foUowing
in his own moral walk, but in the concluding vss. 17-21, gives a
denunciatory warning of the moral abominations and doctrinal
perversions of the errorists by developing his characterization of
them as ' The Dogs ' in vs. 2. Theh immorality was the outcome of
their enmity, not to the Christ in view of their boast 'I am of
Christ' which Paul denied, Rom. 16, 18, but of enmity to his cross.
This would appear in theh rejection of the redemptive, emancipat
ing and renovating efficacy of the death of one who to them was
the abandoned Jesus, and in their refusal 'to be conformed to his
death ' in dying with him to sin and rising with him to newness of
hfe. There was equally an inevitable outcome of hnmorahty from
the system of redemption by antinomian gnosis with which they
displaced the cross. The goal of their immoral walk is perdition.
In spite of their boasts to be the spiritual, to be glorified with gifts
of power, to be exalted by visions and revelations to celestial
spheres, they are fleshly: their god is theh belly; they are sensual,
and glory in their shame; theh interests are in things of the earth.
But in the final antithesis to them, the Pauline Christians seek the
things above, since their citizenship is in heaven. Thence, as the
inspiration of a hfe of heavenly morahty, they still await their
perfected salvation with the coming of him who in negation of the
false teaching is Saviour, the undivided Lord Jesus Christ; and
who in contradiction of any duahstic theory, wiU fashion anew the
body of our humiliation to be conformed to the body of his glory.
We, therefore, submit that in each of the three Letters of this
later group, in their prayer, doctrinal statement and direct descrip
tion of opponents, one definite group of false teachers is in view;
that the same class is combatted in aU three Epistles; and that the
definite denials of the Christian faith and hope, the rejection of the
moral ideals of the Christian walk in love, and the divisive opposi
tion to the Church fellowship found in this group, are the same as
those found in the earlier groups or are developments of them.
We conclude that this result points to the activity of a gnostic
movement in Pauline churches beginning shortly after 50 a. d.
Surveys of the recognized gnostic activity in the later Epistles will
serve as a test of the vahdity of this conclusion.

290 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
4. THE PASTQBALS
Constructions of the descriptions of the errorists in the Pastorals
and of the frequent incidental allusions to them, both affect and
are affected by the critical discussions as to the genuineness of
these Epistles. In Baur's construction the mention of the an
titheses of gnosis, contests about the law and teachers of the law,
were viewed as referring to the Antitheses of Marcion and to
his opposition to the Jewish law; and, therefore, as an additional
proof of the second century date of the Pastorals. Many hberal
critics, however, have subsequently agreed that they do not
refer to any definite gnostic sect but to a blend of incipient gnostic
ism and Judaism later than 66 a. d., and that the Epistles are
to be assigned to date between 90 and 115 a. d.
Representative conservative critics, as B. Weiss and Zahn, on
the other hand maintain their genuineness on the ground that
the features similar to later gnosticism are not descriptions of
errors current in the writer's day, but are predictions of heresies
of the future. Weiss also holds that in the Pastorals errors are
combatted of which we can find no trace elsewhere in the Pauhne
Epistles, although he grants, Introd., 28.2, that they at least
proceed parallel to those in Colossians. He also asserts that these
errors are not attacks on any fundamentals of Christian faith and
hfe, but are simply a teaching concerning extraneous things,
foolish investigations of matters about which nothing can be
known, and profane only in the sense that they are void of aU
true religious content. Even the denial of resurrection is not
characteristic, but only an example of the godless assertions to
which some individuals are driven in disputations. Asceticism
and libertinism are likewise viewed by him not as practices of
contemporary errorists but as predictions of coming errors. In
Zahn's construction the Pastorals combat a distinct new false
teaching in a rabbinical method, corresponding to nothing in the
second century or in the other Epistles of Paul. There would,
therefore, be no occasion to invent such a movement in the post-
apostolic age or to connect Paul's name with its refutation.
There is no reason, however, for such denial of gnostic elements
in the interest of defense of the genuineness of these Epistles.
Moffatt, Introd., 153 f., points out that 'the germs of what was

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 291
afterwards gnosticism can be detected in various quarters during
the earlier hah of the first century. At any time after 40 a. d.
early Christianity was on the edge of such speculative tendencies';
and their existence 'renders it quite possible that such a rehgious
temper as that controverted in Colossians could have prevailed
during the first century.' Lake, Earlier Epp., p. 46, states that
'the argument, that documents such as some of the Pauline Epis
tles which imply a point of view similar to that of the gnostics
must be late, is unsound: gnostic ideas are earher not later than
Christianity, and to prove that any given document is engaged in
controverting a gnostic point of view . . . has no necessary
bearing on the question of date.' While agreeing with Weiss as
to the genuineness of the Pastorals, but confining ourselves here
to the study of the data concerning the polemic agamst the er
rorists, we proceed to consider the definite indications of their
gnostic features, which he denies. The previous construction of
these features in the earlier Epistles will enable us to decide whether
we have not in the Pastorals a direct development of the general
movement we have found emerging in Thessalonica and ex
tending its activity in the Pauhne Churches of Achaia and Pro
consular Asia.
As in the earlier groups of the Epistles the errorists are 'es
pecially those of the chcumcision,' Tit. 1, 10. This points to
them rather than to the Gentiles as initiators of the movement,
since Gentiles can be more easily conceived as adopting a Jewish
system, than Jews as foUowers of a heathen movement. The
definitely Jewish features alluded to are Jewish myths and fight
ings concerning the law, and also some perverted teaching of the
law by the errorists who neither know what they say nor whereof
they confidently affirm, I Tim. 1, 7 f. Since this description is
introduced by the statement that they have swerved from 'faith
unfeigned,' they are not unbelieving Jews; and that they are not
Judaizers is equally clear from the description that they have
swerved from love and good conscience, and from the reference to
their ignorance of the law, which would not be true either of
Pharisaic teachers of the law or of its Judaistic Christian observers
and advocates. The reference can, therefore, be to antinomian
Jewish Christians alone. And this is indicated also in vss. 8-11
by the repetition of the earlier exposition directed against an-

292 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
tinomians. As in Rom. 7 the law is «aX6s if used vopipus, as
knowing that it is not made against a righteous man, but against
all forms of lawlessness, insubordination, impiety and immorality
contrary to the sound doctrine and in accordance with the Gospel
committed to Paul's trust.38 This interest at the opening of
I Tim. in combatting antinomianism is prominent in the entire
group of the Pastorals. It is the direct occasion of the constant
emphasis on good works, which is not a reduction of Christian
morality to an ethical code, but is a continued affirmation of the
Christian duty of a moral walk in love in opposition to a false
emancipation from the moral law, which we have traced from
I Thess. 4, onwards.
The antinomianism is, moreover, as in the previous Epistles,
based on the principles of the false teaching. This as didaskaha
is not Gospel preaching, from which it is clearly distinguished, but
is instruction. By the writer and his followers the instruction
concerning Christian faith and life, ebaiBeia, is based on the
faithful word which is according to the didache, Tit. 1, 9. The
didaskalia of the opponents on the contrary is denounced at the
opening and conclusion of I Tim., as well as in 4, 1 ff.; 6, 3 ff.; in
II Tim. 2, 14-3, 9; Tit. 1, 10-16; 3, 9-11, besides the incidental
allusions and contrasted statements. In general it is a different
teaching, eVepo5i5ao-/caXta; and this primarily as in opposition to
the Apostolic tradition of the Gospel, as in Eph. 4, 20 and Col. 2,
5. The opening assertions in I Tim. and Tit. of the writer's
apostleship by the command of God, are followed by asseverations
of his being divinely intrusted with the Gospel, I Tim. 1, 11 ff., as
preacher, apostle and teacher 2, 7; II Tim. 1, 11, cp. Tit. 1, 1-3;
the contexts point to these claims as a defense of his office, au
thority and teaching. In the midst of his claim to be an Apostle,
I Tim. 2, 7, he feels compelled to assert, 'truth I am speaking,
I am uttering no lie,' which reveals denial of his apostleship, and
by the same class of opponents as in I Thess. 2; I Cor. 8, 1; II Cor.
11, 5; 12, 11 ff.; cp. Eph. 3, 3 ff.; Col. 1, 25 ff. The difference of
their teaching is further presented in its contrast to the words of
faith and of the good didaskaha, I Tim. 4, 6, and more definitely
to the sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the
38 See the discussion of the passage in LUtgert, Irrlehrer der Pastoral-briefe,
p. 10 ff.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 293
didaskalia which is according to ebaiBeia, 6, 3. While Timothy
following these is nourished, the errorists by refusing adhesion to
them are diseased concerning questions of controversy and
contentions of words. Hence, their insubordination to the Church
system and teaching, their besotted pride, deception and profane
babblings. They are reprobate both concerning the faith, II
Tim. 3, 8, and also unto every good work, Tit. 1, 16.
The false teaching, next, is the outcome of a false claim of
gnosis, of whose possession, as we know, the earlier opponents also
boasted. " In the group of Prison Letters Paul had emphasized
true Christian gnosis in antithesis to the claims of the errorists.
Here too the false gnosis is in fundamental antithesis to epignosis
of the truth. » This phrase, while found in several passages in
immediate connection with faith, is not simply a general syn
onym for believing; but it expresses the initial direct divine cer
tainty and bebaiosis of the revelation and redemption accepted
by faith. The development of this initial confirmation of faith
in epignosis of the truth, is by means of a spiritual gift of in
creasing gnosis of the divine life, love and will; and it will be
manifested in a developing life of good works of love. The essen
tial connection of saving faith and epignosis is traced back in
I Tim. 2, 4 to God, who will have all men to be saved and to
come to the epignosis of the truth. In the formal introductory
declaration of his office and Gospel against the aspersions of his
opponents, Paul is an Apostle in accordance with the faith of God's
elect and with the epignosis of the truth which is according to
godliness. Christians are also described, I Tim. 1, 4, 3, as the
faithful and as those who know the truth; while the women under
the influence of the teachers of false gnosis, II Tim. 3, 7, are ever
learning and never able to come to the epignosis of the truth; and
their teachers too who, vs. 8, oppose the truth are also reprobate
concerning the faith.
The repudiation in I Tim. 6, 20 of their gnosis as spurious is
repeated in Tit. 1, 15 f. in the charge that while they profess to
'know God' they deny him by their works. It is false gnosis by
reason of its source. Earlier in Cor. and Col. the errorists claimed
higher illumination and power by means of visions and revelations
in their communications with celestial powers. In the Pastorals,
it has been suggested by Liitgert, p. 59 f., that the emphases in

294 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the doxologies, I Tim. 1, 17; 6, 15, on God's inapproachable
majesty and invisibility are occasioned by false claims to direct
mystic visions and knowledge of God exalting the beholders above
the revelation in the Old Testament or even in Christ. Such
claims of a divine iirubaveia would be refuted also in the special
use of this term in the Pastorals to declare that the true Epiphany
of God and Christ is in Christ's earthly appearance and Parousia.
However this may be, the alleged prophecies and teachings are
denounced in I Tim. 4, 1 ff . as utterances in the hypocrisy of men
who speak lies and whose conscience is branded. The real super
natural source of the false teaching is seen in its fulfillment of the
current New Testament prophecy of an apostasy in later times,
due to adhesion to deceiving spirits and teachings of demons;
cp. II Thess. 2, 10 f.; II Cor. 11, 3.13 ff. The false gnosis, there
fore, instead of being spiritual illumination, proceeds from an
evil conscience, is the dpoia of men corrupt in mind and 'knowing
nothing,' cp. Eph. 4, 14. Its content is not epignosis of the truth
but Jewish myths, endless genealogies, profane babblings and
antitheses of a gnosis falsely named and the occasion of con
tentions in regard to the Old Testament law.
What concretely were these bases of the system is whoUy con
jectural and is stiU problematical. Ultimate approach to some
tenable conjecture commending itself by most reasonably ac
counting for both the data of the Pastorals and the rest of the
New Testament references to gnostic errorists, may be furthered,
as stated, by the results of present investigations of the sources of
second-century gnosticism, and of the character of pre-Christian
Jewish gnosticism, especially in connection with Philo's references
to such speculations in Alexandrian religious philosophy, as well
as his own relations to it. Any such theory should account in
one view for the several terms listed above in the descriptions of
the false teaching. Hence, the current disconnected expositions
are at once questionable: myths merely as Jewish Haggadoth,
which indeed as such would probably not be denounced as pro
fane; antitheses as rival rabbinical decisions of points in the
Mosaic law, with which Pauline churches would have no con
cern; genealogies as haggadic developments of Old Testament
lists or histories, whose perverting influence on the fundamental
words of faith is not apparent. Nor would any of these con-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 295
jectures sufficiently explain the tendency of interest in such mat
ters, to antinomianism and immorality.37 But apart from any at
tempts to conjecture the bases of this false gnosis, we can recognize
its essential oppositions to Christian faith and life; and also the
close similarity of these oppositions to those in the three earlier
groups of Epistles. Most distinct is the opposition to Christian
morals. The recurring positive exhortations to a quiet life in all ebai-
/3eta and gravity, and to maintain good works, are in express an
tithesis to the different teaching; and they are accompanied with
direct denunciations of the aaiBeia of the errorists: men with
defiled conscience, abominable, and unto every good work repro
bate. Again we find as in Colossians the alliance of antinomian
rejection of Christian morality with false asceticism. Men with
branded conscience, I Tim. 4, 2, and reprobate as to good works,
Tit. 1, 16, prohibit marriage and certain foods as impure. The
problem of such a combination is frequently resolved by distin
guishing groups of libertines and of ascetics, as in the later multi
form gnostic systems. Hence the tendencies to find both in Col
ossians and Pastorals two sets of errorists, or with Liitgert to
regard the earlier opponents in Corinth as libertines and those in
the Pastorals as ascetics. Yet the data in all groups of the Epistles
point rather to the general features of but one movement. How
close its similarities in Col. 2 and 3 and I Tim. 4 are, appears in
the parallel structure of the descriptions of the errorists: asecticism
based on spurious revelations; rejecting as evil in I Tim. 4 what
God had created and pronounced good, while enforcing on the
contrary in Col. 2, 21 f., commandments of men in self-imposed
observance. In each passage also it is described as hard treatment
w Uniting the terms of the description and observing the constant allusions
in sections of polemic with gnostic opponents, to the early chapters of Genesis,
there may be a possibility that already as at the end of the century, op. Mof
fatt, Introd., p. 408, the system rested on myths concerning the topics in
those chapters: creation explained on duahstic principles; gnosis in connection
with the tree of knowledge of good and evil; issuing from this the gnostics'
attempt to account for evil by their genealogies of aeons, emanations and
angelic powers, presented in the pairs or antitheses of gnostio systems. The
antinomianism reflected in contentions about the law might also be conceived
as connected with myths concerning gnosis and subjection to commandment
in Gen. 3.

296 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
of the body or as the bodily yvpvaaia. This in Col. is 'not in any
honor,' and in I Tim. is useful 7rp6s okiyov. Finally in Col. it is
in the interest of full satisfaction of the flesh, as in I Tim. 4, 2,
it is a teaching of men with seared conscience and who as else
where in the Pastorals are rejecters of Christian morality.
The connection of these two features of what appears to be one
general movement, is not indicated in the Pastorals as simply that
of libertine reaction from ascetic overstrain. It is an antinomian
ism which replaces good works from faith unfeigned by command
ments of men based on Jewish myths,* I Tim. 4, 7; Tit. 1, 13. - The
commandments mentioned are prohibition of marriage and of
certain foods, which, however, are accompanied by indifference to
moral purity and with disregard of other standards of morality.
These commandments are opposed in the repeated stress upon
maintenance of the marriage institution, upon childbearing and
upon fulfillment of the duties of affection and subordination in the
home, I Tim. 2, 14; 5, 14; Tit. 2, 4. They are likewise opposed in
the requirement of marriage and normal discipline of home life for
presbyter-bishops and deacons; and the five references to use of
wine with moral restrictions are in probable contrast to abstinence
from it and from foods, on some theory of evil inherent in creation^
We have noticed in I Cor. 6.7, a similar occasion both to insist
that there is no sin in marriage and also to warn agamst fornication;
in Col. both to repudiate commands to touch not, taste not,
handle not, and to add exhortations against impurity and to
maintain the ideals of family life; in Ephesians too to emphasize
the sacredness of the marriage relation on the basis of its divine
institution in Genesis. Here in the Pastorals the prohibition of
marriage and foods is definitely connected with Jewish myths.
Apart from the illustrations in later gnostic systems which are
listed in the commentaries, the possibility that these myths are
speculations based on Genesis 1-3 is suggested by the parallelism
of the topics in these chapters and in the polemic sections of the
Pastorals: creation pronounced good in contrast to a view of evil
inherent in it; the appointment of food; the institution of marriage;
the tree of gnosis in connection with good and evU, obedience and
freedom, and with Jewish speculations concerning its reference to
sex relations; subjection of the woman to her husband and her
childbearing.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 297
Essentially related to this rejection of the Christian morality
was a second point of similarity to the errorists already considered:
the denial of Christian eschatology. In their teaching, the resur
rection has already taken place, II Tim. 2, 18; and this, as we have
understood, in their baptism and present possession of the Spirit.
That ght is again declared to be but an earnest of the completed
Messianic blessing, since in Tit. 3, 6 ff. by this regeneration and
renewal of the Spirit, we as justified become heirs according to
hope of eternal life. The prominence of the denial of general
resurrection in their system is marked not only by this definite
reference but also by the antithetical emphasis at the opening of
all three Epistles: Paul an Apostle of Christ Jesus our hope;
Apostle according to the promise of the life which is in Christ
Jesus, cp. I Tim, 4, 8 ff.; Apostle on the ground of the hope of
eternal life. Hence too the stress on the final Epiphany, I Tim.
6, 14, and on the waiting for the blessed hope and Epiphany of the
great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, Tit. 2, 13, and the refer
ences to the Day. Not till that Day, II Tim. 1, 12; 18; 4, 8; 2,
10-14, shall we reign with him or be denied by him. And the
Apostle's closing confession is in the Christian hope that God will
save him unto his Kingdom, the heavenly; and as righteous Judge
will then give the crown of righteousness not to him only, but also
to all them that have loved his appearing.
These two denials of the Christian moral life in the walk of love
and of the Christian hope are further, as in the earher polemic,
directly related to denials of the Christian faith. Some who in
I Tim. 1, 19, have thrust from them a good conscience have made
shipwreck concerning the faith. Denial of the resurrection over
throws the faith of some, II Tim. 2, 18. Professors of gnosis have
swerved concerning the faith; do not adhere to sound words, those
of our Lord Jesus Christ; are reprobate concerning the faith.
They are still within the Church and profess its faith, but theirs is,
I Tim. 1, 5, a feigned faith. Their definite perversions are gener
ally recognized as the antitheses to the significant dogmatic empha
ses, especially in the polemical sections. And they are also closely
parallel to the errors concerning fundamental matters of faith,
gradually appearing in the earher Letters with the Apostle's in
creasing recognition and exposure of the movement.
Less definite in these Letters to his coadjutors and their circles

298 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
than in the Epistle to the Colossian Church, is the allusion to
false teaching as to the relation of .God to the creation. In his
attack on false asceticism, we have however noticed his assertions,
I Tim. 4, 3, f., of God's direct creation and that 7ra> Kriapa of God
is good, thus counteracting any doctrine of creation by an inferior
demiurge and of the essential evil of things created. The title of
God as Saviour, and of all men, his will that all should be saved and
come to the knowledge of the truth, his grace bringing salvation to
all men, are declarations of universahsm which are recognized to
be, as in the Prison Letters, in contrast to the exclusiveness and
separatist spirit of the gnostic teachers.
More distinctly, however, do the christological errors of the
earher Epistles reappear. In I Tim. 2, 5, universal salvation is
provided by the One God and by the One Mediator between God
and men. Since there is but one Mediator, he is destined for all;
and more, as one, he is as well the sole Mediator displacing as in
Colossians all other alleged mediators of aeons or an angelic hier
archy. Further, in opposition to docetic theories, the one Medi
ator is the man Christ Jesus, in his manhood really united to the
heavenly Christ and truly giving himseh to death, a ransom for aU.
Introductory to the section concerning the errorists, Timothy is
called upon, II Tim. 2, 8, to remember the cardinal truths of Jesus
as Messiah of the seed of David as regards the flesh, and of his
resurrection from the dead. The reference here to denials of the
incarnation, passion and resurrection of the dead heavenly Christ,
cp. vs. 12, is supported by the parallel use of the statements of
vs. 8 by Ignatius, Trail. 9.10. In contradiction to docetic gnostic
denial of the union of the heavenly Christ with the man Jesus,
cp. I Cor. 12, 3, the good confession I Tim. 6, 12 f., of Timothy in
the sight of many witnesses and of Christ Jesus before Pontius
Pilate when facing the Cross, is that he, the man Jesus, is the
Christ. Against the related gnostic denials of the redemptive
death of Christ, we again meet, as in I Cor. 1, 18 f. and in the suc
ceeding Epistles, with the opposing reaffirmations that the One
Mediator gave himself a ransom for all; that God saved us by the
Epiphany of our Saviour Jesus Christ who abolished death and
brought life and immortality to light; that he gave himseh for us
to redeem us.
All the dogmatic passages reveal the same interest in safeguard-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 299
ing fundamentals of Christian faith against errorists whose 'other
teaching' involves a swerving from, a denial of, a blasphemy
against, a shipwreck concerning, that faith. The five Faithful
Sayings are to be considered in this connection, although they are
variously assigned to statements preceding or following the phrase.
Liitgert may be right in considering, p. 52, the formula iriarbs
b X670S as an assurance indicating that the statement of faith is
oppugned. RendaU's view that b \byos refers to the Gospel as a
whole, is advocated by Evill, Exp. Times, XXIX, 442 ff., who
holds, however, that I Tim. 1, 15 is the only Faithful Saying, the
others being reminders of it. But he also offers the attractive sug
gestion that the reference of the saying to the preceding or foUow
ing context is determined by the use of save, salvation or Saviour.
This would fix the reference of the first and third Sayings to the
words following, and of the second, fourth and fifth to what
precedes. In such case, the first, I Tim. 1, 15, affirms the faith in
the incarnation and redemption of Christ Jesus. The second,
2, 15, against the ascetics' opposition to marriage and their anti
nomianism, is an assurance of salvation in the state of marriage,
childbearing and in abiding in the Christian faith and moral life of
love, purity and sobriety. In the third, 4, 10, the Christian hope
of hfe still awaiting us who are not aheady perfected but are stUl
laboring and striving, rests on the promise of the living God and
Saviour of all. The fourth, II Tim. 2, 10, cp. Phpns. 3, 10 ff.,
against errorists concerning the person of Christ who refuse to be
conformed to his suffering and death, affirms that the salvation
which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory, awaits those who
suffer and have died with him that they may reign with him. The
fifth, Tit. 3, 4-7 or 6.7, recaUs that Jesus Christ our Saviour has
poured out the Holy Spirit upon us richly that we may become
heirs according to hope of eternal hfe.
It is also to be noticed that aU these Faithful Sayings are linked
with the polemical sections. The first three in I Tim. each con
clude a polemic passage. The fourth, II Tim. 2, 10, introduces the
first mention of the errorists in that Epistle. The fifth, in Titus,
introduces the final reference to them. The other dogmatic
summaries are likewise directly related to the false teachers.
I Tim. 3, 16 f., introduces the denunciation of them in 4, 1 ff.
II Tim- 1, 8 ff., is introduced and concluded with a disavowal of

300 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
'being ashamed ' of the Gospel he preaches and for which he suffers,
intimating therefore that it is impugned. And Tit. 2, 11-14, sums
up positively the features of his Gospel opposed by the false
teachers: the Epiphany, the revelation of God in the appearance
and redemptive death of Christ Jesus on earth and in his re
appearance in divine glory; the sober, righteous and godly life,
in contrast to antinomian immorahty and asceticism; the ex
pectation of the blessed hope, the Parousia, consummated salva
tion and resurrection; and the Xa6s irepiobaios, the people and
Church purified for his own possession, zealous of good works.
These are all antignostic teachings. That they were directly de
signed to oppose the errorists, is evident from the command in
vs. 15 to use them not only in instruction and exhortation but in
confutation, with all authority, of those ready to despise Titus.
And these we may find in the preceding section, 1, 9-16: the
opposers whom the presbyters are to confute; the intruding false
teachers whose mouth must be stopped by Titus, confuting them
sharply, airorbpws.
The reference to 'the people for his own possession,' recaUs the
inevitable dangers of this movement for Church fellowship and
life. As in the earliest allusion to their activity in Thessalonica,
they are with their individual gift of gnosis, 'insubordinate.' In
their boast of being pneumatics, they ignore as heretofore the
apostleship of Paul and the authority of any ministry, either of
apostles, evangehsts or local presbyter-bishops. Besotted with
pride, they assert also their independence of the Apostohc tradition
of the Gospel, the primitive instruction of converts and the doc
trinal teachings based upon them in the Church services. The
'gainsayers,' avriKiyovres, Tit. 1, 9, are such in reference to the
faithful word according to the didache and to the sound didaskaha;
just as in I Tim. 6, 3 those who teach a different doctrine, do not
adhere to the words of the Lord Jesus and to the didaskaha ac
cording to ebaeBeia. Claiming divine inspiration for themselves,
they, although of Jewish provenance, go beyond what is written in
the Old Testament, cp. I Cor. 4, 6; and in contrast to the function
and use of the Old Testament in relation to Christian faith and
life, as enjoined on Timothy, II Tim. 3, 14-17, they evince their dis
regard for its authority by their myths and antinomian contentions
concerning the law.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 301
Such an attitude towards the Gospel, teaching, discipline and
ministry, involves their insubordination to the institution of the
Church as the household of God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
Their activity within it could therefore tend only to undermine its
peace, unity, fellowship and life. The leaders are consequently
described as atpertKot, men causing divisions. These are raised,
as in Corinth, in the Church services, in which it is necessary to
enjoin, I Tim. 2, 8, that the men pray lifting up holy hands without
wrath and disputing; and that in the teaching at the services, those
in charge should repress foohsh contentions which engender strife,
disputes about words subverting the hearers, myths, genealogies
and fightings about the law which cause unprofitable strifes rather
than the dispensation or stewardship of God in faith.
Hence too the specific directions to the two Evangelists con
cerning the choice of a ministry fitted for teaching and discipline in
this situation. To confute errorists, as well as to minister in the
word and didaskalia, they must themselves be blameless in faith
and morals: holding the faithful word according to the didache, as
the deacons hkewise must hold the mystery of the faith in a pure
conscience. In contrast to the pride and contentious spirit of the
false teachers, they must be not self-willed, Tit. 1, 7; I Tim. 3, 3;
II Tim. 2, 24, men disposed to anger and strife, but gentle and
forbearing. RepeUing antinomian indifference to Christian
morals, they must themselves be examples of the good works of the
sober, righteous and godly life. The three prohibitions of the love
of money and base greed of gain, recaU this characteristic of the
false teachers both in the Pastorals, Tit. 1, 11, and in the earlier
Epistles. The duty of the presbyter-bishops to receive and to
extend hospitality to visiting brethren, may possibly in these
contexts as in III John 5 f . and 10, allude to the exclusiveness and
separatist spirit of the errorists; and Liitgert, p. 71, suggests that the
emphasis on sobriety of mind, gravity and aoxbpoavvq is directed
agamst the extravagances and agitations of the excited visionaries.
In the remaining qualifications it will be noticed that the ministry
will not be chosen from the false ascetics or their sympathizers.
Bishops, presbyters and deacons are to be married and to maintain
their family hfe. Instead of abstinence from wine based on some
duahstic theory of creation as evil, there are injunctions on moral
grounds against being 'given to much wine,' and being irapoivos,

302 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
which probably from its position in both lists means ' violent over
wine, ' cp. also I Tim. 5, 23; Tit. 2, 3.
The specification regarding theh marriage is related to a divi
sive influence outside the Church services: the intrusion of false
teachers into home life. They overthrow whole houses, teaching
what they ought not, Tit. 1, 11. The method of this overthrow
appears to be connected with four pecuhar references to married
women. Immediately foUowing the description of the errorists in
Titus, are given injunctions concerning the household. While
the elder men are to receive only most general exhortation to
soberness of mind and soundness in faith, love and patience of
hope, and the younger men to be soberminded, there are specific
instructions for older women, and still more for the younger
women. There is occasion to urge them to love theh husbands
and children, to be soberminded, chaste, workers at home, kind,
being in subjection to their own husbands. The motive for the
stress upon such ordinary and normal conduct is 'lest the word
of God be blasphemed.' This special warning to them could be
accounted for by the hypothesis that under some form of teaching
claiming to be Christian, households were being overthrown; and
that the reason for blaspheming the word of God was the re
pudiation by Christian women of marriage, childbearing, sub
jection to husbands, home duties. There is besides in the list of
duties impressed, the ominous reference to chastity.
We have also in II Tim. 3, 6 f. a similar collocation of errorists
and of their activity among women. Here too they creep into
the houses and bring into captivity silly women. Paul in polemic
against the gnosis of Corinthian opponents describes himself as
bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ,
II Cor. 10, 5. These women on the contrary are brought into
captivity to the intruders' system; and although ever learning in
it, are never able to come to the epignosis of the truth. These
adherents of antinomian teachers are besides described as laden
with sins and led by divers lusts. The widow that lives riotously
and the young widows reproached in I Tim. 5, 13, are not stated
to be followers of the errorists. But the ensuing injunction that
young women or widows marry, bear children, rule the house
hold, to give no occasion for reviling, with the addition 'for some
have already turned aside after Satan,' again suggests an opposing

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 303
teaching. Uniting these three references to women in the house
hold with that to women in the Church service, I Tim. 2, 9, we
can recognize not only with Liitgert but also with Dibehus in
his commentary, p. 195, the influence of a gnostic teaching of
freedom of the spirit, emancipating women in the household from
chUdbearing, from the institution of marriage, as well as from the
morahty of law and social custom. The allusions to Genesis in I
Tim. 2, as aheady suggested, could be a retort to a gnostic myth
exploiting the reference to eating of the tree of gnosis in connection
with sex relations, the childbearing, and the husband's rule over
the woman, Gen. 3, 16.40 This gnostic perversion of the Pauline
gospel of liberty would also be expected to affect the slaves in the
'whole households' which the errorists overthrow. Liitgert, there
fore, argues, p. 43 ff., that the formulation and contents of the in
structions for slaves in I Tim. 6, 1 ; Tit. 2, 9, point to an emanci
pating tendency fostered by the false teachers. Their spirit of
insubordination and independence of all authority and social order,
would also account for the reaffirmation of submission and loyalty
to the State in I Tim. 2, 2 and Tit. 3, 1.
Thus even in these Epistles concerned definitely with Church
Order, irws Set iv o'ikco deov avaarpetpeadai, we find the occasion
and controlling interest to be the instruction of the Evangelists,
not in the general principles of Church administration in its various
spheres, but specifically in the needed discipline of the churches
of Ephesus and Crete, which are exposed to the internal danger
of gnostic teaching. I Tim. opens with the charge against heterodi-
daskaha, as it ends with the denunciation of the pseudognosis
upon which the teaching is based. Intervening are the warnings
of its denials of faith and hope, of its perversions of morals in
individual and family hfe, of its disruption of fellowship within
the Church's order of worship and ministry. A summary of the
principles by which the false teachings are to be repelled, serves
as the letter preface to Titus, introducing, 1, 5, the call for their
application in setting in order the things that are wanting; and
40 For the r6le played by women among the errorists of the Pastorals and
in later gnostic systems, see M. Dibelius, Hdbuch., Z. N. T., Excursus to
I Tim. 2, 15. Cp. also Harnack, Miss, and Ex-pans., II, p. 75 ff. concerning
the special prominence of women in the heretical sects, with the patristic
references and the summary in Jerome, Ep., 133, 4.

304 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the Epistle concludes with the injunction to refuse errorists who
reject the Church's admonitions. The central sections of even
the personal, II Ep. to Timothy, are concerned with the discussion
of the same movement.
Being addressed to associates fully famihar with his conflict
with the graduaUy emerging error, these Letters naturaUy do not
so much present as the earher Letters, discussions of its princi
ples and teachings, as positive concrete dhections for combatting
them by Gospel principles and by personal discipline of their
propagandists. Yet even from this new viewpoint we submit that
at every essential point of comparison, the false system is found
to belong to the same movement as that whose activity we have
recognized in the churches of Asia, Greece and Macedon from
five to fifteen years earlier. Consideration of the provenance,
more general character and methods of the movement and also
of the Apostle's methods of opposing it as it became more clearly
recognized, wiU follow our examination of remaining Epistles;
since in them too, we beheve, wUl be seen the activity of a gnostic
movement with the same controlhng characteristics, and combatted
on the same principles of defense and polemic.
5. HEBREWS, CATHOLIC EPISTLES AND REVELATION
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS
The Epistle to the Hebrews has been frequently described as
an apology for Christianity. In this case, however, it is to be
recognized, cp. Moffatt, Hist. N. T., p. 344, that it is apologetic
in the definite sense that its primary interest is to estabhsh be
lievers in their BeBaiccais: theh full assurance of faith in theh
confession of hope. The occasion for this estabhshment is a
strain upon their Christian hope, due both to external persecu
tions, 10, 32 ff., 12, 3 ff., and internally to the intrusion of teach
ings depriving them of the inspiration of the patience of hope to
endure, and eventuaUy causing them to drift from the faith upon
which this hope rests.
- It has been usual to regard the Epistle as addressed to Jewish
Christians whose loyalty to Christianity is weakened, especially
amid persecutions, by the difficulty of a delayed Parousia, by the
standing Jewish difficulty of a suffering Messiah, and more con-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 305
cretely by the loss of the privUege of sharing the Jewish Temple
worship. The relapse of the readers would, in such a view, ob
viously be to their former legahstic and ceremonial Judaism. In
favor of this interpretation of the situation is the fact that the
central teaching of Christ's heavenly priesthood directly meets
these assumed difficulties. But the remaining sections of the
Epistle may point to a different situation. And in fact the
general trend of recent criticism of various schools is against the
view that the danger of a relapse is that of a return to Judaism.
It is shown by Von Soden, Handktr., p. 12, that several of the
principal exhortations would not be appropriate or effective as
dissuasives against such a return; that some of the sins involved
in a relapse are equaUy opposed by the law; that there is no evi
dence of inclination to legalism as among the impelling motives
to it; and especiaUy that a return to theh former Judaism would
not be described as in 3, 12 as falling away from the living God.
Besides, a relapse to Judaism involves a rejection of Jesus' mes
siahship. ^Yet the Epistle assumes throughout the readers' be
hef that he is the Messiah, whUe it warns against misconceptions
which would nullify his messianic character and work. There is
no repetition or reenforcement either of the original apologia
proving Jesus to be the Christ, or of the usual form of the argument
from the Old Testament pointing to a suffering Christ. '
These considerations have led next to the view that the relapse
must be to heathenism; and, therefore, that the readers are GentUe
converts wavering under the strain of persecution and of the
delay of the Parousia. • Against this construction, however, is the
whole impression made by the Epistle that the readers are of
Jewish nationahty/cp. Zahn, II, 323 ff. All the topics and argu
ments are not only derived from the Jewish Scriptures, but as
sume Jewish interests, meet special Jewish difficulties and appeal
to Jewish motives and sympathies. GentUe converts are of course
familiar with the Old Testament. But on the supposition that
they are tempted to return to heathenism, arguments from the
Old Testament would not be effective to men rejecting the mani
fold witness of the Gospel which had originally led them to recog
nize the Old Testament as one of the forms of the witness they
were now supposed to be repudiating. The reference to the
primitive instruction in 6, 1 ff. does not prove the heathen pro-

306 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
venance of the readers; nor is it determined, as wUl appear, by
the warnings against departing from the living God or treading
under foot the Son of God. It should be noticed in this connection
that many scholars who hold the Gentile destination of the Epistle,
would agree with Zahn that the readers are not disturbed by false
doctrine or errorists. McGiffert, Apos. Age, p. 466 ff., views the
threatened apostasy as not due to the influence of Judaism, or
as connected with it in any way; the discussion of the priestly
office of Christ and the comparison between the old and new
covenants not being written to convince skeptical minds, but to
arouse the courage and zeal of believing but weak and fainting
souls, upon the occasion, p. 469, of external persecution. Ropes,
Apos. Age, 269 f., also finds a purely practical aim in guarding the
Gentile readers against a relapse into rehgious indifference and
a worldly hfe; and similarly Windisch, Hb. bf., pp. 45 and 111 views
the situation of the readers as that of general rehgious exhaustion,
and not an inclination to any rehgious false doctrine, specificaUy
not to a Judaistic or syncretistic gnosis. MacNeill too, Christology
of Hbws., holds, p. 13 ff., that the writer fears not the attractive
power of any definite form of rehgion, but the subtle power of
unbehef. He adds, however, p. 115 ff., that in the writer's own
frame of thought, the three strands of classic Judaism, Alexandri-
anism and primitive Christianity are 'filled out also from the
syncretism of the mystery rehgions of his day. This element
may be small, but it is an influence which must be noted.'
These concluding statements recall another construction of the
situation which finds the speculative interests revealed in the
Epistle not primarily in the writer but in opponents. In this
case the persecuted readers are also exposed to speculative teach
ings tending to pervert both the Apostolic Gospels and the funda
mentals of the Jewish faith. Thus Peake, Hbws., p. 11 f., notes
as the occasion not only moral defect and intellectual stagnation
but also intellectual error: 'the danger of falling under the fas
cination of varied forms of false teaching foreign to Christianity.'
Haring, Stud. u. Krit., 1891, pp. 589-598, proposed as the occasion
the danger of succumbing to the speculative Judaism of Alex-
andrianism, in the most general sense: without circumcision or
full legal demands; iUuminated, spiritualized; open towards and
adopting the tendencies of the Age, yet with complete connection

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 307
of its own ideas with elements of positive rehgion; seductive also
as a protection against external dangers, since the Christians
were increasingly exposed to persecution. 'Departing from the
living God,' which could not be a return to Judaism, is conceivable
as a relapse of heathen Christians into this speculatively tinged
Judaism, 'for this had really no living God in the sense of actual
religion.' Several other constructions of the historical occasion
would seem to tend in various degrees towards such a view.
Moffatt, Introd., pp. 445, 449 f., though with careful reserves,
conceives as a subordinate factor in the situation of the readers,
the possibihty that they have been nourishing their faith on the
Levitical portions of the Old Testament; and that they are ex
posed to the seductive tendencies of a speculative Judaism allied
to certain ritualistic and sacerdotal proclivities, similar perhaps
to those controverted in Romans or Colossians; with this was the
presence of elements drawn from pagan cults. Bacon too, In
trod., p. 145, finds the contents adapted to those in danger of
overrating the Old Testament; and, p. 148 f., exposed to both
orthodox and syncretistic worship of the letter of the law. The
Judaism opposed in the Epistle is the ' divers and strange teach
ings '; and if we may judge from the effort of chapters 1 and 2,
tendencies as in Colossae toward gratuitous self-humiliation and
worshiping of the angels; and the ordinances of the law were
inculcated in a mystical and eclectic spirit, reminding us rather
of the false teachers of the Pastorals.
These latter constructions imply in general that the speculative
influence was a propaganda of opponents outside the Church.
There remains, however, the possibility that it was exerted within
the Church by a speculative Judaism which included in its syn
cretism Christian elements and professions. This view is advo
cated by Weinel, Bib. Theol. N. T., p. 432: 'In Hebrews which in its
positive doctrines is nearest Colossians, the supposition of a con
flict against this movement, i. e., Jewish Christian gnosis, first
brings unity into the otherwise completely disconnected theses of
the polemic against the doctrine of angels, which lowers Christ and
yet will not allow him to be considered as Man; and against
Judaism with temple, sacrifice and priesthood.' He, however,
p. 455, considers the whole conduct of the discussions of the
Epistle as purely academic apologetics.

308 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
It is obvious that all theories of the occasion and aim of the
Epistle must, in the absence of data as to the author, destination
and date, be conjectural. Our sole criterion for their probability is
their accordance with such indications of the situation and purpose
as is supplied by internal evidence. We therefore proceed, in a
survey of these indications, to inquire whether with Weinel an
opposing gnosis is to be assumed, and also whether it presents the
general features of the movement as constructed from the Pauline
Epistles. In such a case we should of course expect special em
phases on these features and a distinct mode of their treatment, due
both to the individuality of the writer and to the definite situation
of the readers, who may have been exposed to a special form of false
teaching by some one of 'the infinite variety of gnostic sects.' An
affirmative decision as to gnostic references, it may also be prem
ised would not determine either the date or destination of the
Epistle; since on the view we have advocated, a gnostic movement
was operative within the Church from 50 a. d. onward, and
probably in all the quarters of the Jewish Diaspora to which the
Epistle has been variously assigned.
• We are first impressed with the general correspondence recog
nized by numerous writers between the implications of the argu
ments in Hebrews and the polemic against the errorists in Colosse,
written about 63 a. d. It is most clearly marked in the two
opening chapters.* As in Col. the basis of the argument against the
opponents is in 1, 1-4, the supreme and final revelation of God in
Christ, who is again as in Col. 1, 16 ff. cp. II Cor. 4, 4, the eUwv of
the invisible God; and as Son is the heir, creator and ruler of the
universe.* Any gnostic theory of creation and rule by intermediary
powers, or of evil as inherent in creation, is thereby repelled in both
Epistles. And similarly in both is the emphasis on his redemption,
followed by his exaltation. In the immediate development of these
opening statements, the Son's superiority to angels is declared in a
series of arguments implying a direct opposition to the false doc
trines of angelic mediators of revelation and redemption in Colos
sians., > The commentaries present in detail the Christ's superiority
as the only Son of the Father, and the object of angelic worship;
as the divine heir and creator of a universe in which angels have but
'ministerial and transitory offices'; as sharing the divine throne,
around which the angels serve and from which they are sent

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 309
forth not to receive worship but to minister to the heirs of
salvation. In still more definite contradiction of any doctrine of angelic
mediation of this salvation, it is shown, 2, 3-18, that human re
demption and perfection could only be effected by a method which
no angel could follow; a method moreover in direct contradiction
of gnostic docetic christology. For it is a redemption which was
possible only by a real incarnation, passion, death and exaltation.
The Son and Lord who, 1, 3, made purification of sins, is now, 2, 9,
the human Jesus who has been made a little lower than angels,
made in all things like unto his brethren; and since they are sharers
of flesh and blood, he also in like manner partook of the same. For
not of angels doth he take hold, but he taketh hold of the seed of
Abraham. And this real union with humanity by incarnation was
for its redemption by equally real suffering under temptation; by
the suffering of death, in order that by death he might, cp. Col. 2,
15, bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is the
devil, and might, cp. Col. 1, 21 f., deliver those subject to bondage
through fear of death. Being himself perfected by these sufferings,
crowned with glory and honor on account of the sufferings of death,
he is the author, apxnybs of salvation of the many sons. The re
demption in this union with his brethren by incarnation, death and
resurrection, is finally summed up as his work as high priest to
make propitiation for the sins of the people. And it is also, in
contrast to gnostic exclusiveness, a universal salvation, a tasting
death for every man, cp. also 2, 15.
This concluding description of the Son as high priest develops
the statement concerning his purification of sins, 1, 4, and the
reference to his session as Melchizedek priest in 1, 13, in connection
with the exposition of Ps. 8, in 2, 6-16. It controls also the
succeeding teachings and exhortations in 3, 1-10, 18, whose sub
ject is Jesus the high priest though whom we have our entrance
into the holiest, as the basis for the exhortations to hold fast the
confession of our hope without wavering under external and in
ternal oppositions.
This declaration of his high priesthood as summed up in 2, 17, is
repeated with the same significant emphases of the two opening
chapters, in the summaries at 4, 14; 5, 7; 7, 26; 8, 1; 10, 19: his
divine sonship; his incarnate life as Jesus, Son of God, in the days of

310 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
his flesh; his sinlessness, the reality of his temptations and his
ability to sympathize with our weaknesses; his human obedience as
Son, his one sacrifice of himseh, his perfecting by these sufferings;
his heavenly exaltation and priesthood, in which he is the author of
salvation: forgiveness, direct access to the throne of grace, boldness
to enter into the holiest, and this by the blood of Jesus, by the
new and living way, through the vail, that is his flesh.
In the discussion of the theme emerges from time to time this
same special interest in affirming redemption by a really incarnate
and dying heavenly Christ; a perfected head and representative of
humanity as the author, apxvybs of its salvation, the forerunner
entering within the vail on our behalf, the mediator and surety
of the new Covenant, the Son over God's house, which house are
we; all of which relations are gathered up at the close in his descrip
tion as the great high priest over the house of God. As every high
priest is taken from among men in behalf of men, our Lord hath
partaken of and come forth from Judah; and using the LXX text of
Ps. 40, came into the world at his incarnation, in a body God pre
pared for him. By the offering of the body of Jesus Christ we have
been consecrated. In his own blood he entered into the holiest : the
blood of the Christ offered through his eternal spirit. And from
his death as mediator of the new Covenant proceed the blessings of
forgiveness and eternal inheritance.
These references to his true humanity and redemptive death are
of course essential to the writer's exposition of Christ's high priest
hood. But since his several recapitulations of it are linked with his
presentation of it in the two opening chapters which are closely
related to the Pauline refutation of the false teaching in Colossians,
we can recognize with Weinel that the interest of chapters 1 and 2,
in repelling a false doctrine of the person and redemption of Christ,
is reflected in the teaching concerning his high priesthood, and
unifies the several sections of the Epistle. "-Adopting this view of a
reference to the opposition of a speculative Judaism within the
Church and of the suggestions of its similarity to the errors com
batted in Colossians and the Pastorals, and, therefore, to the
general gnostic movement we have found in the earlier Epistles,
we can further infer that among the occasions for the ex
position of Christ's priesthood was not only the need of rebuttal
of a denial of the redemptive death of an incarnate heavenly

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 311
Christ, but also of the opponents' attitude to historic, objective
revelation. The Pauhne Epistles pointed to errorists claiming superiority
in their individual gift of the Spirit, both to the Old Testament
and to the Apostolic tradition of the Gospel. In antitheses to
such a position, this Epistle opens with the affirmation that God
spoke in many portions and modes in the Old Testament prophets;
and in the quotations that follow, instead of the usual formula
'it is written,' it affirms that God is the speaker. Even in the
Tabernacle structure the Holy Spirit is recognized as 'signifying'
its meaning. Likewise the Gospel salvation is divinely revealed :
having at the first been spoken by the Lord, confirmed unto us by
the Apostohc witness, with God's accompanying witness by signs
and wonders and ghts of the Holy Spirit. Upon this basis of
revelation, the Apostolic tradition of salvation in the incarnate,
dying and exalted Christ, can be expounded in its relation to the
utterance and oath of God in Ps. 110, whose discussion as Wind-
isch, p. 120, states 'forms in fact the great central section, 4,
14-10, 18.' FoUowing Haring, p. 595 ff., we may see in the
writer's interpretation of the Psalm and of the accompanying
references to the Old Testament sacrificial institutions, his rela
tion to the opponents' method of interpreting their Scriptures.
By these speculative Jews, 'the Old Testament rehgion was
made a danger for Christians, since they taught them to discover
in it images, copies of eternal truths, of a heavenly world of ideas.
But to the author, the Old Covenant was a copy, a shadow in a
sense which goes beyond and contradicts the sense of the oppo
nents. It was not merely an allegory, but a historical preparation,
actual prophecy of the New Covenant. Jesus, to whose revela
tion and priesthood the Old Covenant points both by the way of
type and copy and also by the way of historical preparation, is
the archetype of aU types; and is the reahty of this highest arche
type in the simple literal sense as Christians understand it, as
in their experience they know that access to God is revealed
through the one sacrifice of their actuaUy exalted high priest,
and that theh unerring hope is assured.' 41 Haring thus postulates
41 Jowett, Interpretation of Scriptures, p. 271 f., concludes his essay on St.
Paul and Philo with statements similar to those of Haring. 'There is truth
in saying that ... in the Epistle to the Hebrews a higher use is made of

312 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
a speculative Jewish teaching and its attitude to historic revela
tion, from the form of the author's interpretation of the Old
Testament and its sacrificial system, on the principle, p. 594:
'it is, in accordance with parallel New Testament instances, an
tecedently probable that the utilization of definite forms of
structure in the interest of polemic, serves for the paralyzing of
theh utilization with an antagonistic purpose.' And as already
stated, the doctrinal emphases in the contents of the exposition
can be similarly regarded as antitheses to concrete denials of the
real incarnation and death of the heavenly Christ, as the sole
ground and means of a real forgiveness, divine access and inheri
tance by hope.
The main division of ten chapters of doctrinal exposition re
sembles the doctrinal section of Col. 1-2, 3, in the method of posi
tive affirmation which would counteract denials of christology and
the Christian hope as the inspiration of the walk in love, in the
fellowship of the one body of Christ. But unlike Colossians and
the Prison group of Letters, there is no description of the errorists.
In the interwoven hortatory section, however, we may find a few
additional intimations of the character of the opposing teaching,
from possible allusions to its threatened effect upon the readers.
If then the 'perverted and alien teachings' were of a gnostic
character, they would include the assertion that the previous
Apostolic teaching was but rudimentary, and would also promise
the Alexandrian ideas, and the figures of the Mosaic dispensation. That is
to say, the form ... is an expression of the same tendency which we trace
in the Eastern or Alexandrian Gnosis. But admitting this similarity of
form, the difference of spirit which separates the author of the Hebrews from
Philo, is hardly less wide than that which divides him from St. Paul.
And although he approaches more nearly to Philo in his conception of faith,
and carries the allegorical method further than St. Paul, ... he too
never leaves the groundwork of fact and spiritual rehgion. Alexandrianism
knew nothing of the God who made of one blood all nations of the earth; of
the victory over sin and death; of the cross of Christ. It lifted up the veil
the temple, to see in a glass only dreams of its own creation.' Cp. also, p. 269.
'Philo has no connection with the prophets, and no real connection with the
law. To the former he seldom refers, while to the latter he assigns a purely
arbitrary meaning. He does not catch the real preparations and anticipations
of a higher mode of thought in the books of Moses themselves. He is unable
to see the light shining more and more unto the perfect day in the Psalmist
and the Prophets.'

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 313
maturity and spiritual perfection by means of the new system.
It is, therefore, significant that in the first direct description of
the readers, 5, 11-6, 12, they are warned that they are in reahty
vhirvoi; and as immature stiU needing milk, not the solid food of the
reXetot who have been trained to discriminate the good and evU.
Both the detailed statements and the connection of the passage with
the warning of danger of lapsing from the initial Christian faith,
suggest an antignostic aUusion in view of the close paraUels in pol
emic statements: I Cor. 3, Iff.; 14, 20; and Rom. 16, 19, in their
contexts; Eph. 4, 13 ff., cp. Phihppians 1, 9 f.; 3, 15. The contrast
between his confidence, 6, 9 ff . , in the readers' loyalty and its reward
and his warning of the dread issues of the implied false teaching, is
presented, vss. 7, 8, as that between soU bearing Boravn evderos,
herbs meet for them for whose sake it is tiUed and blessed by God,
and soil putting forth thorns and thistles, which is rejected,
aSbKipos, nigh unto a curse, whose end is to be burned. The
figure, as constantly in previous New Testament polemic against
gnostic errorists, is taken from Genesis, 1-3: the divine creation
of plants with the blessing of increase, and their appointment for
the food of man, Gen. 1, 11 f. 29; and the divine curse, 3, 17, on
the ground because of the eating of the forbidden tree of gnosis.
The possibility that thorns and thistles and theh rejection and
burning could aUude to false teachers and their doom, is shown
by Christ's use of the same figure, Mtw. 7, 17 ff., in his descrip
tion of the fruits and fate of false prophets. Similarly Ignatius,
Ephes. 10, 3, warns against the Boravn of the devil, in concluding
the reference, 9, 1, to 'certain persons passed through you from
yonder, having evU doctrine.' In PhUad. 3 abstinence from evil
herbs is likewise urged in a passage referring to false teaching;
and in TraU. 5 f . the readers are as vnrrioi to abstain from strange
Borkv-q, which is heresy; cp. also TraU. 11. These passages seem
to be based on Hbws. 6, 7 f., and in any case support the inter
pretation of these verses as aUuding to errorists.
Nothing, however, is said in the Epistle as to the source of theh
doctrine: whether as in the earlier Letters, in visions, revelations
or other aUeged gifts of the Spirit. The author's method is the
positive presentation of his own doctrine with its bases in the
Old Testament, the revelation in Christ, the Apostolic tradition,
the word of the Lord as spoken by the hegoumenoi, and in the

314 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
personal experience of the readers. Any possible claim to special
revelations through angelic mediation or in exclusive gifts of the
Spirit are repelled by the angelology of the first chapters, by the
affirmations of the common participation in the gifts of the Spirit
in 2, 4 and 6, 4, as well as by the declaration of the privilege of all
believers, of direct access to God.
The perverted and alien teachings can be conjectured as alien
to the topics of the Christian didache summarized in 10, 22-25.
The 7roiKtXat StSaxai concerning the person and work of Christ
and the Christian hope are refuted in the doctrinal section es
tablishing the readers 'in fuU assurance of faith and unwavering
hope,' which are also the topics of the succeeding exhortations in
11, 1-12, 13. The remainder of the hortatory section, 12, 14-
13, 17, develops the two remaining topics of 10, 24 f . : love and
good works, and the iiriavvayuyh ; the portions of the didache
referring to Christian morals and Church fellowship, cp. Seeberg,
Didache d. Judenthums u. d. Urchristenheit, p. 112. But the special
character of the development of these topics indicates that the
injunctions are not concerned with the general conduct of the
readers, but with their relations to a special disturbing influence.
This is clear in the matter of Church fellowship. The separatist
spirit is distinctly described as only the custom of some, Kadus
edos riaiv. The need of 'stirring up to love and good works'
appears likewise to be not the need of the Church as a whole, but
of some element within it. For in 6, 9 it is commended, with
assurance of God's remembrance, for its work and love shown
both in past and present ministrations to the saints. Yet, there
in vs. 11 is added a desire that each individual, 'iKaaros vp&v,
should show the same zeal. So, too, in 10, 24, the exhortation is
not simply to zeal in good works but to the Church's ministry to
its individual members: Karavo&pev dXXi^Xous to stir up unto love
and good works. And in the development of this in 12, 14 f. the
ministry of personal attention and watchfulness is more definitely
urged as e7r«r/coiroi)i'res, 'looking carefully' as to the intrusion of
an influence of individuals described as 'any man drawing back
from the grace of God, any root of bitterness troubling you and
thereby the many be defiled, any fornicator or profane person
as Esau, who for a mess of meat sold his own birthright.' This
peculiar formulation is not the usual warning to Christian readers

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 315
against the commission of familiar forms of sins, but as stated is a
warning against the influence of some tendency to such sins in
truding into the Church. And again, its perversion of grace, its
divisive spirit as a root of bitterness leading to defilement of the
many, the fornication, profaneness, |3e"|3?jXos, and contempt for
the Christian inheritance and hope, all leading to apostasy and
divine rejection from the kingdom point to characteristic features
of the gnostic movement.
In 13, 1-6 only some five precepts of the Two Ways, cp. See
berg, Hb.bf., 141, are selected for exhortation. Yet from earlier
references in the Epistle it appears that the readers are already
observing them. Their brotherly love is simply to continue.
Their hospitality to strangers, remembrances of those in bonds
and afflictions, absence of covetousness, has been affirmed in
6, 10; 10, 32 ff. Fornication, in 12, 16, is not mentioned as a sin
practiced by the readers, but as a sin against whose entrance into
the Church, they were to be on guard. The occasion, therefore,
for this selection is, not the non-observance of the precepts by the
readers, but as in 12, 15 f., the need of warning against the out
standing immoral tendencies of the alien teachings. These tend
encies are here, breaches of the Church fellowship by the false
teachers' separatist and exclusive spirit, without brotherly love
or welcome of Christian strangers; refusal to accept or to sympa
thize with sufferings for the Gospel's sake in fellowship with
Christ's sufferings, being conformed unto his death, Philip. 3, 10,
cp. Liitgert, Irrlehrer d. Pastoralhriefe, p. 75 ff . ; and the love of
money, which characterized the errorists in Thessalonica, Corinth
and in the Pastorals. Especially, there was a tendency as in all
four groups of the Pauline Epistles, to reject marriage and at the
same time to treat fornication with indifference. Hence, the
assertion: 'Honorable is marriage among all'; and 'God will
judge fornicators and adulterers.'
These indications of the general features of gnostics' teaching
concerning morals are, finally, supported by the reference to
their attitude towards the Church's worship and ministry. The
readers are exhorted, 10, 25, against receding from the assembly
of themselves. This has been understood by Zahn as an injunc
tion not to remove from their own house church in Rome to
another. But as Windisch notes, the duty of exhortation, vs. 25b,

316 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
could be equaUy well fulfilled in a new Church home. More
usually it is viewed as a call not to abandon Christianity for the
Jewish synagogue; or when the readers are considered to be Gen
tile converts, not to return to their former hfe. Such an abandon
ment would, however, be one definite act which would not be
described, 'as the custom of some is.' Windisch avoids this ob
jection by translating 'neglect not our assembly' and by inter
preting the passage as referring to the duty of regular attendance
at the assembhes. But this exposition accords neither with the
meaning of e7KaraXet7ra>, nor with the wider outlook of the con
text, nor with the succeeding warning, which is the most solemn
in the whole Epistle.
Westcott accounts for 'the evil habit,' as arising from three
motives: partly to escape Jewish hostility; partly to enjoy the
greater attractions of Jewish assembhes; partly 'through self-
confidence, as though they no longer needed the assistance of
ordinary common worship, where the general average of spiritual
hfe might be counted too low to aid more mature believers.'
But it is evident that these are disconnected motives which would
not combine into a threefold motive of the definite group in the
writer's mind. Only one of them can be the actual motive; and
since we find no indication of the existence of the first two, we
conclude it is the third which points to the concrete occasion
of the exhortation.
In it, iiriavvayuyi) eavr&v recaUs to us Paul's description of
the assembly for worship in I Cor. 14, 23.26: iav avvikdv r/ ex/cXr;-
aia 6\v iirl rb abrb; and e7KaraXel7rocres, his references, I Cor. 11,
17 ff. to axiapara when they 'come together iirl rb abrb.' These
we have considered to point to the errorists' separatist attitude
in the assembly for the Agapae and Eucharist, both for doctrinal
reasons and also as Westcott suggests in regard to Hbws. 10, 25,
through self-confidence, as no longer needing, as mature believers,
the assistance of ordinary common worship. Westcott himself
finds traces of 'forsaking the gathering of our own selves together
for fellowship in divine worship,' in Jude 19: 'those who cause
divisions.' The Didache, ch. 16, 2 f., is a similar parallel both
in wording and context. And among other parallels in the Apos
tolic Fathers, our view of the passage and of I Cor. 11, 17, is most
distinctly illustrated in Barnabas 4, 10: 'Do not entering in

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 317
privily, stand^apart from yourselves as if ye were already justi
fied, but assemble yourselves together and consult concerning
the common welfare.' 42
This topic of the assembly for church fellowship and worship is
moreover developed in 13, 7-17, in the order of the topics in
10, 22 ff., after the discussion of the themes of faith, hope and the
good works of love. Spitta43 also recognizes these verses as a
definite compact section concerning Christian assembhes for wor
ship in Eucharist and Agapse. In view of its selection and treat
ment of special topics relating to Church order, it too may have
been constructed with allusion to the contrary custom of those
who cause separations; as in 10, 25 the exhortations are to be
based on the approach of the Day, which contemporary errorists
denied. The special topics in 13, 7-17 are the Church's teaching,
worship and discipline. The first two are presented in direct con
trast to some opposing tendency; and the third wUl also be found
to suggest a simUar contrast.
The exhortations of 10, 25 are to be based in 13, 7 f. on the
Apostohc tradition of the hegoumenoi who have spoken the word
of the Lord, and on theh faith in Jesus unchangeably the Christ.
And this in contrast to the perverted or mixed and ahen teachings
of vs. 9; and is also in renewal of the exhortation of 2, 1-4 against
drifting away from the things heard, from the salvation which
having at the first been spoken by the Lord was confirmed unto us
by them that heard.
We can also observe with Spitta as cited above, whose view
Goetz is disposed to favor,44 a contrast in vss. 9-16 between
the worship of the Church in the Eucharist and the Jewish sac
rificial meals. The approach to the interpretation of the passage
can best be made, not by a decision as to the disputed meaning of
the 'altar,' 45 but by a determination of the reference in Bpi)para
42 Mt) Kad' iavrobs ivSbvovres pova^ere us ijSty SeSucaico/xei'oi, dXX'
eiri rb abrb avvepxbpevoi aw^r/retre irepl rod Koivfj avptfripovros.
*» Zur Geschichte u. LUeratur d. Vrchristenthums, I, p. 325.
44 Die heutige Abendmahlsfrage, 1907, p. 195.
46 Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, p. 269n., sees the possibihty of uniting
the view of Lightfoot that 'the altar is the congregation assembled for Christian
worship' both with Westcott's primary reference of the words to the Cross
on which Christ offered himself, and with his secondary reference of them to
the Eucharist.

318 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
in vs. 9. We can reject with Windisch the view that it is to the
Holy Communion; or to Mosaic food laws; or on Von Soden's
theory, to heathen sacrificial food. Windisch himseh deems as
most probable a reference to the influence of a Jewish syncretism
even in Christian circles. This we believe is to be found in the
section as a whole, but not in Bpupara as an allusion to syncre-
tistic food rules, since these in Colossians and the Pastorals refer
to abstinence and not to participation of foods. We therefore
find with Spitta and Westcott, the reference to be to Jewish
sacrificial meals; and more definitely to the Bpupara of Hbws.
9, 10, which are there in the same contrast to vss. 11 ff. as in
Hbws. 13, 10 ff.
On this basis, 13, 10 ff. presents a contrast between Christian
worship and the sacrificial worship of Mosaism; and definitely, in
connection with the Jewish sin offering and with the thank offer
ing, accompanied here with free will offerings of beneficence and
contributions. Spitta points to the direct comparison of the
Eucharist with the sin offering in the specific references to the
body and blood of the temple victims. For while the Jews cannot
eat of the body of the sin offering burnt without the camp, and
while the blood of goats and bulls offered in the earthly tabernacle
can never, 10, 4, take away sins or perfect the worshiper, 9, 9;
10, 1, Christians on the other hand feed in their worship on Christ
the true offering for sin, and are consecrated in the New Covenant
by his blood. Theh confession of God's name through Christ,
in worship and praise is in vs. 15 a thank offering of praise: 'as
buUocks, our lips.' Theh beneficence and contributions in the
Eucharist and Agapae, a free wUl offering, as in Phihppians 4, 18,
'an odor of sweet smell'; and in both passages is a sacrifice ac
ceptable to God.46
The traditional view of the occasion of this passage is that it is
the readers' disposition to return to Jewish sacrificial worship.
Such a relapse we have not, however, been able to recognize in the
rest of the Epistle. And in view, moreover, of the connection of the
passage with the preceding and following injunctions concerning
the hegoumenoi, and with the introductory summary in 10, 25,
48 Spitta, p. 328. "In Hebrews the whole Meal obtains the character of a
sacrificial meal; and indeed to the extent that all its characteristic elements,
prayer and beneficence included, fall under the concept of dvaia."

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 319
we regard it as evoked by the 'custom of some' who both hold
aloof from the Church's eucharistic worship and also reject the
teaching and authority of the hegoumenoi. Against them the
writer emphasizes, as Paul in I Cor. 10, 16, the reality of feeding,
and in the context on the sacrificed body of the heavenly Christ,
cp. 10, 10; and the real redemptive significance of Christ's own
blood. The compressed argument is here again in terms and con
ceptions of the Jewish sacrifices. This form suggests that the
passage is to meet the same situation as called forth the discussion
of the person and work of Christ as the true high priest transcend
ing the Old Testament sacrificial system. Those who denied the
reahty of the blessings in the eucharistic worship, would be also
those indicated in the rest of the Epistle as denying the high priest
hood of Christ as incarnate and atoning. As they had been re
futed in theh doctrinal positions by means of the argument from
the Levitical system, so their opposition to the Church worship is
met by a similar argument that in it is a feeding upon a sacrifice;
the full reahty of the blessings of divine communion and worship
towards which the Old Testament sacrifices pointed. And we can
make here an additional apphcation of Haring's view, sup. p. 311,
that the form of the discussion of Christ's priesthood is related
to the opponents' perversion of the meaning and character of
the Old Testament and its institutions. The Jewish sacrifices
though but temporary, insufficient to perfect the worshipers, a
shadow, 10, 1, of ayada peWovra, were nevertheless not to be
allegorized into mere 'images and copies of eternal truths and of a
heavenly world of ideas'; but were real anticipations, shadows and
copies of ay adk yevbpeva; of the blessings which were reahzed by
Christ's offering, 9, 11, and in which Christians participate in their
eucharistic communion with Christ the eternal high priest.
The whole section closes with a call to obedience and submission
to the hegoumenoi. Von Soden observes here evidence of some
strained relation, since the readers are urged to submit with a
view to obedience. He sees also in the mention of ahen teachings,
a reference to some who seek to force themselves forward into the
place of the departed hegoumenoi; and he conjectures as the
general cause of differences in the Church, the question of Bpupara.
In our construction of the section, we have, however, found in all
its three topics, the influence of those who oppose the Church

320 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
teaching, worship, and in vs. 17 the Church authority. The con
crete occasion of this last opposition is indicated by the reference
to the pastoral ministry as dominated by the eschatological con
victions concerning the Judgment at the Parousia, which was
repudiated by errorists, but which in 10, 25 ff. also is to be the
subject of the exhortations in the Church services. The mention
of the lamentation of the hegoumenoi and of the readers' loss,
dXwtreXes, cp. Luke 17, 2, is the final aUusion to the internal
dangers from perversions of the Church's faith and hfe. What
they were, is seen in the expansion and explanation of this closing
warning in 10, 26-29, which foUow upon the introductory sum
mary of the four topics of fundamental instruction: the fearful
expectation of judgment of those who tread under foot the Son
of God, count 'the blood of the Covenant' a common thing, and
insult the Spirit of grace.
We find therefore that every test which the data of the Epistle
permit us to apply, leads separately and in combination to the con
clusion that the aim of Hebrews is to estabhsh its readers who are
wavering as to the Christian hope both by reason of external
persecution and of the intrusion of false teaching of gnostic char
acter; and that it is this opposing teaching which is controverted
in the doctrinal estabhshment of faith and hope in Christ the
great High Priest, and in the succeeding exhortations to faith,
hope, love and Church fellowship.
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER
In the group of Cathohc Epistles, we shaU not discuss the possi
bihty of references to errorists in James or III John. For if the
early date and general Palestinian destination of James is accepted,
we have no evidence of an active propaganda of gnostic errorists
in the churches of that district in the period of 45 to 50 a. d. If
on the other hand it is dated 62 a. d., in James's lifetime, or stUl
later, we faU to find any allusions to Jewish gnostics asserted by
Pfleiderer, Urchristm. II, p. 546, and Weinel, p. 435, in the practical
apphcations of chaps. 2-5 of the rehgious principles in chaps. 1-2
governing the training and discipline of faith amid trials, 1, 3; cp.
Acts 14, 22 and I Thess. 3, 2-4. We also pass over III John, as it
is still debated whether the opposition of Diotrephes was 'ecclesi
astical or doctrinal'; and even if it were on doctrinal grounds or

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 321
was based on refusal to admit brethren who would attack intruding
errorists, we should stUl have to find the polemic against them in
the Second Epistle. There is of course no question of a polemic
against errorists in I and II John, Jude and II Peter. But with
few exceptions, the remaining Catholic Epistle I Peter is held to
contain no allusion to them. We beheve, however, that such a
possibihty merits a further consideration.
The First Epistle of St. Peter is addressed to Christians in four
provinces of Asia Minor at a date variously placed from 62 a. d.
onwards. Since we have concluded that at least in the Province
of Asia, a gnostic movement was active at the beginning of this
period, and since its activity there, in view of the Johannine
writings, is recognized at the later dates assigned to the Epistle, the
question arises whether this Epistle contains any reference to
gnostic errors. If no such allusions are made in it, it would not
contravene our previous conclusion as to the early emergence of the
movement. For if it were not extended throughout the whole
district addressed, the writer might decide that it was not necessary
to refer in such a circular letter, to a special local danger. And it
is also obvious that the Letter might have had a special occasion
and aim, which did not call for reference to this definite subject.
Whether, however, the movement is alluded to, must be de
termined by a consideration of the aim and contents of the Epistle.
On the usual view it is written on occasion of persecutions, to
estabhsh the readers in the patience of Christian hope, and to
exhort them to loyalty, strict morality and peaceableness in order
to ward off suspicion and attack. Such a construction is justified
by portions of the contents, which caU for no reference to internal
doctrinal errors; and accordingly no such aUusions are ordinarily
recognized. But the data of the Epistle point to the need of a
construction of its purpose along this additional line. For both the
stated aim of the Apostle and the contents in theh entirety show
that the writer has in mind not only the danger of an external
fiery trial, but also the accompanying strain of internal attacks.
WhUe encouragement in regard to the manifold trials is given
throughout the Epistle, yet this encouragement is interwoven
with doctrinal estabhshment. Further, the concluding statement
that the purpose of writing, 5, 12, is to exhort and testify that
'this is the true grace of God: stand ye fast therein,' shows that

322 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the Letter along with its encouragement amid persecution, is also
a vindication of a doctrinal position. Upon reviewing the struc
ture, this combined character can be recognized. We find not only
that doctrinal statements are made in direct support of the exhor
tations to patience and moral behavior under trials, but also that
thesestatements are further frequently developed into more funda
mental doctrinal affirmations, testifying to the true grace of God.
The occasion of these additions could conceivably be the vindica
tion of this true grace of God against perversions of it. This con
jecture would, moreover, increase in probabihty, if the assumed
references to perversions were found to combine into a definite
form of opposition, such for example as we have already found in
the Pauline Epistles.
This Pastoral to widely scattered churches develops the funda
mental topics of primitive instruction and current Apostolic
teaching, in connection with the situation of the readers : faith and
hope amid persecution; and emphasis on Christian morahty and
Church fellowship. Our present interest is to notice whether in the
treatment of these topics, gnostic perversions of them are assumed.
The most distinct gnostic error is its perversion of Christian
eschatology: the Parousia, general resurrection and judgment.
It is therefore at once significant that the writer's emphasis on this
topic is so prominent that Peter has on this account received
the title of the Apostle of hope.47 If the sole occasion of writing was
external danger, it was directly met in the closing main division,
4, 12-19, by establishment in the patience of hope along the lines
common in New Testament writings: as ye are partakers of
Christ's sufferings, rejoice; that at the revelation of his glory also
ye may rejoice with exceeding joy. In addition to this, however, we
have an opening eschatological section, 1, 3-12, in the doxology for
regeneration to a living hope. There too the hope of salvation is
the basis of rejoicing amid manifold temptations. But the greater
part of the section is for the doctrinal estabhshment of this basis
of hope itself. It rests on the personal experience of regeneration
by the Father, on the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.
It is the hope of a salvation not yet perfected; of an inheritance
reserved in heaven; of a salvation ready to be revealed in the last
time at the revelation of Jesus Christ. This hope of salvation rests,
4' Cp. B. Weiss, Der Petrinische Lehrbegriff, pp. 25-98.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 323
further, on the witness of the Spirit of Christ in the Old Testa
ment prophets concerning the sufferings and glories of the Christ,
and on the Apostohc preaching of the Gospel in the Holy Sphit.
In contrast to any view of angelic mediation, angels desire irapa-
Kbf/ai, to bend over and look into these things.
The writer's interest in doctrinal estabhshment of the escha
tology is seen also in the apphcation of the doxology: they are to
gird up the loins of theh intellect, and to set theh hope perfectly on
the grace that is to be brought unto them at the revelation of Jesus
Christ. And the more definite apphcation of the section in vs. 14,
is again not to endurance of trials as in 4, 12 ff., but to Christian
morahty inspired by this hope.
The fact that the main features of this opening section are em
phatic affirmations of positions opposed to gnostic errors, may be
considered accidental, or as simply showing the Apostle's interest
in the topic of hope expressed in terms of current teaching. But
on the other hand, when these features are viewed in their definite
structure, in theh connection with the readers' situation and with
the writer's expressed aim, 5, 12, the probabihty that they are in
tended to fortify patience in trials which is in danger of being
weakened by denials of the Christian hope, is strengthened by the
consideration that this first section would in fact serve to meet
directly these specific denials.
Turning to matters of faith, the basis of hope, we again notice
passages which are not directly related to encouragement in trials,
but to some need of estabhshment in 'the true grace of God.'
Besides the positive statement, 1, 11 f., that the Apostolic Gospel
rests on the witness of the Spirit of Christ in the Old Testament
and is dehvered in the Holy Spirit, we have the assurance, 1, 23 f .,
that it is an incorruptible regenerating seed, the eternaUy abiding
word of the living God, and that the new born grow unto salvation
by reception of this Xo7ik6»» dSoXov 7dXa: the milk, without decep
tion, offered to them in this word. The immediate apphcation of
this passage, 1, 22-2, 1 ff., is, again, not to support of external trials
but to avoidance of immorality in brotherly relations. The em
phasis on this divine basis of faith and hope would of course tend
to the estabhshment of both; but the concrete references to those
who preached the Gospel in the Holy Sphit and to their Gospel as
the word of God, imply also the need of establishing the Apostolic

324 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Gospel against some claim of its insufficiency in comparison with
a higher communication by individuals with superior prophetic
ghts of gnosis and revelation.
The references to christology point in the same direction.
Christ's redemptive death, 1, 18 f., is presented as a motive for
holiness; but with a specific development. It is a redemption by
the blood of Christ as of a lamb without spot, even of the heavenly
Christ foreknown before the foundation of the world and mani
fested at the end of the times, cp. Rom. 16, 25. His real sufferings,
though he was sinless, are recalled, 2, 21 f., as an example for
suffering slaves. And here too, vs. 24, is added an emphatic state
ment of his death as redemptive: who his own self bare our sins in
his body on the tree, that we having died unto sins might hve unto
righteousness. The statement is parallel to Paul's rebuttal of
gnostic teaching and hbertinism in Rom. 6, 3-11 ff. In 3, 13^4, 6
the suffering of Christ the righteous is once more the basis of ex
hortation to holy living by those suffering for righteousness' sake.
And again an additional doctrinal interest emerges in the specific
references to his suffering in the flesh; to his being put to death in
the flesh, but made ahve in the spirit, in which he preached to the
spirits in prison; to the resurrection of this dead Christ, who is
now on God's right hand; and further to angels, authorities and
powers made subject to him as theh Lord.
These statements of the manifestation of the preexistent Christ
as suffering in his body of flesh for sins, rising from the dead to
God's throne, supreme over angels, together with the references to
flesh and spirit and to Christ's approaching apocalypse in glory,
form in fact a definite antignostic christology. They are not,
in their details, directly called for by the sole occasion of the
readers' need of support in trials, and of prompting to holy hving in
order to parry accusations. They do, however, estabhsh them in
the true grace of God, which the Apostle states is his object in en
couraging them in their crisis of fiery trial. In these matters
therefore of fundamental faith, as before in the subject of the
Christian hope, the probability appears anew that internal dangers
from false teaching are met by the specific doctrinal affirmations
of the Epistle.
We shall find the same indications of a reference both to ex
ternal and internal dangers in the passages concerning the Chris-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 325
tian moral hfe of love. To the exhortations to morahty is added,
as before, teaching pointing to doctrinal occasions of possible
moral indifference. It is teaching concerned with the funda
mental motives and inspirations to holy living. Preceding the
main section, 2, 11 ff., on the need of good works with which to
silence accusations, the section 1, 13-2, 3 exhorts to holiness in all
manner of living on the basis of the antecedent development of
Christian hope, 1, 3-12, as the invigoration of moral obedience; and
it adds the motive of moral responsibility for the blessing of re
demption from former sins by the death and resurrection of the
heavenly Christ. The Apostle proceeds in 1, 22 to exhort to
unfeigned brotherly love, and in 2, 1 ff. against sins in contrast to
it, by the motive of their regeneration upon obedience to the
truth: the word of God as preached to them in the Apostolic
Gospel. In 3, 18 ff. the means of death to the lusts of men, and of
life in the flesh according to the will of God, is in vss. 21 f. as in
2, 24 union with the dead and risen Christ. Certainly these doc
trines are the bases and inspirations of Christian morahty in any
circumstances. But it is significant that here they all are em
phasized, and that they are doctrines directly contradicting
gnostic teachings which in the earher Epistles are opposed as
destroying the foundations of morahty.
Moreover, the discussion of the moral duty of Christians in the
State and in the household as slave, wife and husband, which as
elsewhere in the New Testament is based on the initial instruction,
reflects the exposure of the readers to the influence of gnostic
teaching of emancipation. Its boast of individual freedom by the
possession of the Spirit would tend, as was noticed in previous
Epistles, to affect not only the duty of submission to the author
ities and ordinances of the State, but would also especially rouse
up the spirit of unrest among slaves and excite the women to
assert their independence in the home and in the social hfe. The
section 2, 13-3, 8 assumes and meets such a situation. Loyalty to
the State is urged and is specifically coupled with the warning of
2, 16 : as free and not having your freedom for a cloak of wicked
ness. Slaves are bidden to submit under any circumstances of
injustice. The length of the exhortation to them, greater here than
elsewhere in the Epistles, points to theh special danger in this
crisis, which would be heightened by any manifestation of the

326 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
perversion of the Christian hberty mentioned in the preceding
verses. The motive for submission is here the example of the
suffering Christ, and the additional development of the redemp
tive efficacy of his sufferings and death, which gnostic teachers
denied. The call to women to obedience to their own husbands, to
sobriety in dress, to the incorruptness of a meek and rjabxtos
spirit, assumes hke I Tim. 2, 9 and parallels, the influence of an
opposing spirit of false emancipation. Due subordination within
the home, the Apostle concludes, does not involve contradiction
of woman's dignity and Christian liberty, since they are not to
fear with any terror. And the accompanying injunction to hus
bands, 3, 7, concerning the maintenance of marriage relations, re
calls by its special terms the same opposing teaching as in I Thess.
4, I Cor. 7, Hbws. 13, disparaging the marriage institution.
If there was then in the Asian churches an internal danger from
gnostic teaching, it would appear not only as threatening faith,
hope and the morality of Christian love, but also as an insubordi
nate and divisive spirit in the corporate fellowship of the Church.
This fellowship of the Church we meet as the concluding topic of
each of the three main divisions of the Epistle. In the last of these,
the local ministry is addressed, 5, Iff., in direct connection with the
fiery trial. In it their pastoral work is to be inspired with the
recollection of Christ's suffering and with the hope of glory. Their
pastoral spirit, to adopt the terms of B. Weiss and Chase, is not to
be that of slaves, hirelings or tyrants. There is, however, no refer
ence, even in the last two expressions, to church officers of a con
trary spirit. The close parallels in I Cor. 9, Acts 20, and the gospel
commands, reveal these directions as part of primitive instructions
concerning Church order; being gradually formulated. The only
possible allusion in this passage to an element of insubordination to
church rule, is the call to humility within the Church, vs. 5, which
has no apparent relation to the dangers from without.
The first main division concludes the positive affirmations con
cerning eschatology, morality and redemption by the death and
resurrection of Christ, with the subject of Church fehowship in
1, 22-2, 10. This passage, however, is not related to present suffer
ings, but to 'the true grace of God,' cp. 2, 10: the readers who
formerly were no people, are now the people of God; they had not

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 327
obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. It is a grace in
which they are to stand; by which they have become living stones
in a spiritual house of which Christ is the head corner stone; an
elect race, a holy royal priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices
through Jesus Christ. These detailed affirmations, 2, 4-10, of the
corporate character of their Christian life, and this interest in the
unity and spiritual functions of the Church, would of itself suggest
a need of controverting some divisive influence subversive of the
Church's fellowship. And in fact we find this teaching concerning
the Church to have been given to support the exhortation to mu
tual fervent love, since they have purified their souls in obedience
to the truth, to the word of God preached to them in the Apostolic
Gospel, unto unfeigned love of the brethren. It may well be that
the frequent collocation in the Epistles of brotherly love and
matters of Church order, is due to their connection in the primitive
instruction. But their selection for emphasis in this Epistle to
support Christians in a crisis of trial, can be most readily under
stood as intended to guard them against an internal danger of
false teaching which in addition to dissolving the Christian faith
and hope steeling them to endurance, was an element disrupting
the unity of love, sympathy and brotherhood that would as in
Philippians 1, 28, enable them with one spirit and one soul not only
to believe on Christ but also to suffer on his behalf.
The same principle of selection may hkewise control the section
relating to inner Church life and worship, which closes the second
main division, 4, 7 ff. Its reaffirmation against any denials that
the end of all things is at hand, is to lead the readers to be sober
unto prayers; and also, in contrast to any separatist influence, to
mutual fervent love and to welcome of Christian strangers, with
out murmuring. The pneumatics, definitely, are not to use their
charismatic gifts of utterance or ministry as exclusive and vaunted
individual endowments, but as stewards in God's household, of his
manifold grace.
We thus find in the Epistle indications of an aim to establish
readers exposed both to an outer fiery trial and to an internal
danger perverting the true grace of God. Hence the encourage
ment amidst trials rests upon reemphasis on the Christian hope
based on faith, as the inspiration to a moral life of love in Christian
fellowship; and this reemphasis is in opposition to gnostic teaching

328 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
subverting these fundamentals. This primary interest in estab
lishing his readers in order to his encouragement of them, accounts
for the Apostle's method of positive statement of the true Christian
principles, rather than of direct discussion of the opposing system.
We have, however, seen that practically aU the characteristic
features and results of gnostic teaching in the New Testament age,
are in fact rebutted in the Epistle; and they can therefore reason
ably be assumed to have been in the writer's view. While there is
no special reference to a false teaching concerning the incarnation,
yet the repeated emphasis on the redemptive death of the heavenly
Christ, cp. 1, 19 f., guards against a docetic christology. And
gnosis as the principle of the system may, apart from possible
verbal allusions, be assumed to be the basis both of the false
emancipation from the authority of the Apostohc teaching, the
moral rule and social order, and also of the divisive spirit; all of
which we have found to be opposed throughout the Epistle.
SECOND PETER AND JUDE
" The references to gnosticism in I Peter could be still more
definitely recognized if II Peter were accepted as genuine. In it
there is no doubt of such reference. If then it was the work of
the Apostle, he shows full acquaintance with the movement and an
intense interest in opposing it. • He would therefore have been
animated by the same interest when writing the first Epistle to the
Asian district, where we have previously found the movement to
be active.
The contrast in the method of referring to it and of opposing it
in the two Epistles might then be explained, as by those main
taining the genuineness of both, by various theories of different
destinations: the first Epistle to Gentile converts in Asia Minor, the
second to Jewish Christians in Palestine and neighboring districts,
so Zahn; or to churches which in the view of B. Weiss have changed
in the interval of a decennium to a predominantly Gentile Christian
character; or which, with Bigg, are now troubled by the intrusion of
errorists from Corinth; or the first Epistle being an encyclical
hke Ephesians might be viewed as characterized by general
references to a situation common in churches in the four provinces,
while the second, like Colossians, as interested in a danger looming
in a special district.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 329
In view, however, of current critical denials of the genuineness of
II Peter even by many leading conservatives, we shall consider its
references to errorists apart from the question of its relationship
to I Peter, and on the largely accepted view of its dependence on
Jude. It will suffice for the present purpose to construct the main
features of the system combatted in these Epistles. We proceed on
the theory that II Peter as a whole and not merely in its second
chapter is constructed on the basis of Jude, as may be concluded
from Mayor's comparisons, pp. i-xvii, and the texts in parallel,
pp. 1-15.48 As Salmon, Introduction, p. 477, was inclined to find
in Jude ' heads of topics enlarged on, either in a larger document or
by the Apostle himself in viva voce addresses,' so we may notice in
II Pet. such enlargements in chaps. 1 and 3 of the topics of true
gnosis, the Apostolic faith and the Parousia. We therefore use
Jude as the basis of the description of the errorists in the two
Epistles, and compare II Pet. as developing and applying Jude's
description.49 The errorists are still within the Church. Their methods,
characteristics and teachings are well known to the writers; al
though from the urgency of the denunciations and warnings in
Jude it has been suggested that their activity in the churches
addressed by him, has but recently begun. 50 They have ' intruded ' ;
and an outstanding mark of their propaganda is their separatist
spirit. This is probably alluded to in the description, vs. 3, of
Christianity as our common salvation, and possibly in the state
ment, II Pet. 1, 1, of faith as labnpov, with Field 'equally privi
leged.' Since there is no suggestion in the Epistle of inequahty of
privilege in the faith of Gentile and Jewish converts or in that of
the Apostles and their converts, the remaining alternative may be
that the expression is an allusion to the claim of the intruders to
special spiritual honors. They are in any case those who cause
separations, Jude 19, and in II Pet. 2, 1, privily bring in destructive
48 J. B. Mayor, Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 1907.
49 E. I. Robson, Studies in the Second Epistle of St Peter, 1915, advocates
the theory of fragmentary documents attributed to Peter, first used by Jude
and then by an Alexandrian redactor, 130 a. d., who in II Pet. adds to Jude
fragmentary material welded together by his editorial connections, as in
dicated in special type in a reprint of the text, pp. 9-14.
60 H. Werdermann, Die Irrlehrer des Judas-und 2. Petrusbriefes, 1913,
p. 122.

330 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
divisions, atpeo-ets a7rcoXetas. Naturally these become manifest
at the Christian assembhes for the Agapae and the associated
Eucharist. And in fact the most direct description of their activity
is given in connection with their relation to it in Jude 12 ff., and the
parallel II Pet. 2, 13 ff.
While the Agapae is an expression and means of furthering
Christian fellowship and unity, the intruders are in Jude 'hidden
rocks,' with Mayor; and as such, sources of danger and division,
and centers of agitation. Or if with Bigg airiKaSes is equivalent to
o-irtXot /cat pupoi, the spots of II Pet., there is expressed the same
idea of marring and contaminating the peace and unity of the
Christian service and life. As in I Cor. 11, 18, the ax'iapara are
connected in vss. 27 ff. with participating in the Agapae and
Eucharist unworthily and without discriminating the body, so
those who cause separations 'feed without fear,' or in Bigg's render
ing of avvevuxobpevoi, 'Carouse together by themselves.' Jude's
meaning of atpbBus is indicated by the expression in II Pet. 2, 13:
'counting our sober daylight joy (the Agapae) mere vulgar pleas
ure,' in the translation proposed by Bigg. Thus revelling they are
spots and blemishes when 'feasting with you in their Agapae.' If
the reading dirdrats is adopted, we may have here the writer's
repudiation of the name of Agapae for their behavior and can
render with Mayor after Hofmann ' revelhng in their deceits, while
feeding with you.'51 Their divisive influences in the eucharistic
worship as the service of unity is further expressed in 'shepherding
themselves.' This is not to be restricted as by Bigg to their
defiance of church rulers, but in connection with the famihar New
Testament use of iroipaivu it refers to their rejection of the general
pastoral ministry of the Church exercised in this context in the
instruction, worship and disciphne in the AgapavEucharist, as in
I Thess. 5, 12 ff., and the Ignatian Epistles. It points thus to their
withdrawal from the main group of worshippers; eating apart with
their followers and expounding to them their teachings.
Jude's opening reference to them in vs. 4, is in denunciation of
their false teachings; and these it would seem were imparted in the
61 Werdermann, p. 83 adopts dirdrats, but finds in avvevuxobpevoi a
reference to feeding in the Agapae, and regards favorably Ewald's conjecture
of a word-play in d7d7rat — d7rdrat.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 331
schisms at the Agapae, vs. 12 f.52 The waterless clouds as inter
preted in II Pet. 2, 18, describe their boasts and promises of superior
spiritual gifts, especially of freedom. These, however, are not
fulfilled, but lead to renewed slavery, to corruption in lusts, as was
already taught in Paul's warnings against the errorists in Rom. 6,
16 ff. As wind-driven clouds, cp. Ephes. 4, 14; II Pet. 2, 14; Mtw. 7,
27, their teaching is destructive of establishment in faith, of growth
and upbuilding. As fruitless autumn trees, their teaching issues in
no fruit of the promised perfection, but in uprooting and death,
cp. Mtw. 7, 19; II Pet. 1, 8. The figure of the destroying flood and
of being tossed to and fro by the waves of error, is applied in
Jude to the intruders as 'wild waves of the sea foaming up their
own shames ' in their libertinistic teaching. In II Pet. 2, 14, it seems
that this immorahty of teachers with eyes full of adultery and that
cannot cease from sin, is closely connected with practices at or
issuing from the Agapse.63 Finally in their antinomian emancipa
tion they are, in contrast to 'the heavenly luminaries which trans
gress not against their appointed order,' wandering stars dashing
off as meteors into the blackness of darkness.
In the more generalizing references these manifestations of the
activity of the innovators are seen to be based on boasts of gnosis
as theh pecuhar possession of the Spirit and, therefore, of free
dom of the Spirit from all forms of external authority. In Jude
those who separate themselves as being the pneumatics in con
trast to ordinary Christians, who are viewed by them as merely
psychic, cp. I Cor. 2, 14 ff., are denounced as not possessing the
Spirit.54 And, therefore, in v. 10 they have 'no knowledge'
of that of which they speak evU, but only a psychic knowledge like
the beasts without reason; and they even pervert this psychic
instinct to their destruction. In the parallel, II Pet. 2, 12, their
62 Von Soden: The four comparisons, whose origin from Enoch, 2-5, 4 is
made very probable by Spitta 's proofs, characterize successively the insta
bility, unfruitfulness, impurity and the certain doom of these persons.
53 Werdermann, p. 83: They probably arranged for special meetings in
which they promised a more definite introduction into their secret teachings.
In these meetings individuals could participate upon payment; and not im
possibly, indeed according to the statements of the Epistles it is even certain,
they combined orgies with the meetings, which proceeded to acts of lewdness.
64 Windisch notes that the psychics do not here represent an intermediate
class, as among the Valentinians, but the contrast to the pneumatics.

332 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
railing is the result of theh lack of gnosis, kyvoiu; and again they
are compared to beasts without reason, born creatures of instinct
for sensual gratification, whose destruction they wiU share; cp.
also I Cor. 6, 12 ff. and Phihppians 3, 19.
These compressed aUusions in Jude to false gnosis are expanded
in II Pet. 1, 3-11 concerning true gnosis, and are again summar
ized in the antithetic conclusion, 3, 18, concerning growth in
grace and gnosis of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as well as
in the opening salutation that grace and peace may be multiplied
in epignosis of God and of Jesus our Lord. His readers already
possess all ghts that pertain to lhe and godliness, through their
epignosis of God who called them. Theh Christian life is not to
be idle and unfruitful, but to abound by a sevenfold development
of their faith in love, vss. 5-8, and thereby in epignosis of our
Lord Jesus Christ. The passage recalls the simUar growth and
relations of moral fruitfulness, love and gnosis in PhUippians 1,
9 ff.; Col. 1, 8 ff. The gnosis of the errorists despite their boasts
of visions and ecstasies as in II Cor. 12, 1 and Col. 2, 18, rests on
mere dreams, Jude 8, ej'uirj'iaJ'6juej'oi.55 In a somewhat similar
context, II Pet. 1, 9, we meet with the retort that they are blind,
closing their eyes to the light. Allied with boasts of gnosis and
revelation is their pride, arrogance, daring self-wUl, and great
swelling words of vanity which characterize the errorists of the
earher Epistles, and the same greed of money, loving hke Balaam
' the hire of wrong doing.' II Pet. 2, 19, points dhectly to their
claim of hberty as the basis of these boasts. It emerges in both
Epistles as independence of all forms of external control of theh
individualism. Theh superiority to the Apostohc tradition of the Gospel is
revealed in Jude's need to call his readers to contend earnestly
for the faith once for all delivered to the saints, and in the caUs,
II Pet. 1, 12 f.; 3, 1 f., putting the readers in remembrance of the
66 Moffatt, Historical N. T., p. 595, renders this, 'men of sensual imagina
tion,' who, p. 589, claim to possess visions. Similarly in his Introduction, p. 355,
it has the force of false prophets, with their sensual dreams, p. 349. Mayor,
p. 33, cites the LXX passages where it is used of lying dreams of false prophets
as contrasted with the word of the Lord. On p. 74 while understanding it
to mean men who live in an unreal world, he yet finds possible a further
allusion to II Thess. 2, 7-11 'which may perhaps refer to the wild dreams
of Gnostic mythology.'

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 333
words spoken before by the holy prophets, and the commandment
of the Lord and Saviour through theh Apostles. In the practical
scope of Jude's brief and compressed Epistle there is no discussion
of the doctrinal bases of their opposition to Apostohc teaching.
In his opening description of them, vs. 4, he, however, summarizes
it as a denial of ' our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.' Mayor
decides for the other rendering: denying God and Christ: yet
thinks the phrase ' cannot mean less than that they put forward
ideas out of harmony with the doctrine of the Incarnation and
of the Divine Nature,' p. clxxv, and p. 27. II Pet. 2, 1, adds to
this their denial of the Master that bought them. This would
point to their rejection of his redemptive death, as in the earher
descriptions of them; and this could here also be on the familiar
duahstic ground of theh docetic denial that the suffering Jesus
was the divine Christ. In opposition to theh perversion of mes
sianic prophecy aUuded to in 1, 19-21, which was constantly
presented in support of the teaching of a suffering Christ, and
to theh cunningly devised pvdoi which are here dhectly related
to the Parousia of Christ and might also be connected with their
denial of the Lord and his redemptive death in the succeeding
statement, 2, 1, the reference to the Transfiguration, 1, 16 ff.,
would be a direct refutation of theh christology. It occurred in
connection with the first annunciation of the Passion. In the
appearance of Moses and Elijah speaking with the transfigured
Christ concerning his exodus which he was to fulfill at Jerusalem,
we have the word of prophecy made sure. The transfiguration
was besides in confirmation of his own immediately preceding
announcement of his Parousia in power and great glory. And the
divine assurance, 'This is my beloved Son in whom I am well
pleased,' is given to Jesus whUe stiU in his life of real humanity;
already accepting the humiliation of his Passion; and aheady, be
fore the resurrection, revealed in glory as the heavenly Christ, as
the incarnate Son of God. We know from the Pauline Epistles how
even the Apostohc christology could be perverted by a cunningly
devised docetic gnostic theory of the resurrection of the heavenly
Christ. But aU forms of docetism, denials of a real incarnation,
redemptive death, resurrection and Parousia of the heavenly
Christ, are impossible of acceptance by those who have received
the Apostohc witness of Jesus in the glory of his transfiguration.

334 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Jude, again, has no direct statement of the intruders' denial
of the Christian hope of the Parousia. We should expect this
denial as being a common feature in the other New Testament
descriptions of errorists simUar to those denounced in Jude. And
we may find intimations of it in the countervailing stress upon
the hope of the Parousia in the opening salutation, in the central
exhortation and in the concluding doxology. The readers are
kept, vs. 1, unto Jesus Christ: the reference being to the recur
ring New Testament teaching, of preservation unto the coming of
the Lord, I Pet. 1, 4 f.; I Thess. 5, 23; I Cor. 1, 7-9; cp. John 17, 11.
In the exhortation, vs. 21, they are to keep themselves in the
love of God while looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ,
i. e., 'which he will show at his coming,' unto eternal hfe. The
doxology, vs. 24, hkewise is to him that is able to guard them
from stumbling and to set them before the presence of his glory.
On the other hand, the repeated references to past divine judgments
and to prophecies of judgment to come, could be the writer's method
of rejoinder to those who along with their impiety and immorality
denied a Parousia and world-judgment.56 They are further de
scribed as mockers, vs. 18, and as predicted in Apostohc teachings
concerning 'the last time.' And with Mayor we can recognize
the subject of their mocking from the account already given of
them: with theh libertinism, boast of enhghtenment, contempt
for authority, denial of God and Christ, 'they would naturally
laugh at the idea of a judgment.'
This conjectural construction of their attitude to the Last
Things is supported by the development in II Peter of this passage
concerning the predicted and now present mocking, Jude 18, as
mockery of the Parousia, chap. 3. It appears here as a challenge
supported by the delay of the promised coming; and besides this
popular form, as an argued conclusion from the unchanging course
of the created world. This latter objection could be made at the
earliest preaching of the Parousia. It is already met and repudi
ated in Rom. 8, 18-25. It is here repeUed by recalling that the
unchanging continuance of nature is disproved by the Genesis
66 The commentaries illustrate the intruders' walk in the way of Cain
from the Jerusalem Targum, Gen. 4, 7, in which Cain says: There is no judg
ment, no judge, no coming age, no reward to the righteous, no vengeance
upon the wicked.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 335
teachings that once the world was not, and once was destroyed in
a world catastrophe and world judgment, as now is predicted
in Christian eschatology. The other objection from the death
of the fathers, vs. 4, could be pressed with the passing of the first
Christian generation from 60 a. d. onwards, without the fulfill
ment of the primitive hope of the Coming. It is met by the re
minder, vs. 8, that 'measures of time have relation to man, not
to God ' ; and also by the assurance that the delay is the expression
of the divine long-suffering in the hope of the world's repentance.
The discussion closes with a reiteration of the primitive eschatol
ogy, vss. 10 ff., and with this as an inspiration to aU holy hving
and godliness.
It is indeed the threatening danger to Christian morahty from
the intruders' principles and practices, which is naturaUy a prin
ciple if not the central interest in both these pastoral Letters.
Their sexual impurity is exposed in the references to theh im
moral conduct; and in all the various aUusions it is seen to be a
hbertinism dehberately practiced on the principles of theh sys
tem of error. Jude's initial denunciation of theh hcentiousness
refers to it as a perversion of grace, and links it with theh denial
of the faith in Christ. II Pet. 2, 18-22, explains that this perver
sion grows out of a boast and promise of freedom: an antinomian
emancipation issuing in a slavery to lusts. In both Epistles theh
unnatural sexual vices are pointedly connected with a gnosis
which reduces those claiming to be pneumatics to, or beneath,
the level of unreasoning psychic beasts. Their separatist spirit
in the Agapae and in their own private meetings is hkewise the
occasion for impure influences and shameful practices. And on
the probable view of the several examples and predictions of
divine judgments as antithetical to their denial of a world judg
ment, the sins resulting from their scoffing at it, are the sexual
sins of the Jews in the wilderness, cp. I Cor. 10, 5-11, of the angels
of Gen. 6, and of Sodom. The method of counteracting this hn
morahty also points to its basis in theh false teaching. It is met
by exhortation to loyalty to Apostolic commandment and tradi
tion ; to advance in true gnosis by the practice of Christian morahty
and piety; by the warning that acceptance of the false doctrine
of emancipation wUl lead to a last state worse than theh pre-
Christian hnmorahty; and by the warnings from Old Testament

336 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
examples, of judgment on perversions of divine grace and on neg
lect of predictions of judgment.
The claim of freedom of the Sphit and of gnosis which deter
mined theh independence of the Apostohc faith, hope and moral
walk in love, emerges also in theh attitude to Church order. Be
sides its manifestation in theh divisive sphit in the Agapae, it is
expressed also in the sphit of Korah, murmuring and complaining
against the authority of the Church and its ministry, Jude 11.16.
Bigg and Chase find a similar reference to the Church rulers in
the S6£as against whom the intruders rail, Jude 8, II Peter 2, 10;
and Chase supported by post-Reformation expositors regards
Kvpibrns as expressing the abstract principle of authority. But
the combination of the two terms and theh connection with the
passage concerning Michael, from the Assumption of Moses, is
recognized by the majority of commentators as pointing to the
intruders' attitude of contempt for the powers of the invisible
world. Among the widely divergent interpretations of the two
objects of their repudiation, we may accept the more usual refer
ence of Kvpibrvs to Jesus' divine lordship as in vs. 4. If, next,
with von Soden and others we understand 86£as to refer to holy
angels, we are able to eliminate a supposed reference to the er
rorists' scornful denial of being influenced by evil angels, whose
existence or power they deny; or to theh possession of secret
gnostic formulae enabling them to rise beyond the successive ranks
of the current angehc hierarchy; or to the late, Carpocratian doc
trine of supremacy over the angehc makers of the world, Iren.
Adv. Hcer., 1.25. It, however, stUl remains uncertain, in view of
the many developments of the current angelology, what was the
special character of theh contempt for the angehc powers as
these were regarded in the Church. Among the several sugges
tions offered in Mayor and Werdermann, p. 30 ff., it may have
been antinomian contempt for angels as mediating the giving of
the Law, whose commandments they transgress on principle; or
in connection with Jude's quotation from Enoch of the coming of
the Lord with his myriads of holy ones, their setting aside of
the Parousia of the Lord Jesus with the glory of his Father and
of the holy angels, Luke 9, 26; Mtw. 25, 31, and their parallels.
It may, however, be possible that S6£as in combination here with
Jesus' Kvpibr-ns, refers as in I Pet. 1, 12, to the glorification, heav-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 337
enly ministry and the coming in glory of the incarnate Lord, which
foUowhis redemptive sufferings. Yet whatever interpretation
be adopted, there is no question that their denial and railing rests
on their boast of freedom in theh ght of gnosis.
This general construction of the characteristics of the errorists
in their independence of the Apostohc faith, their rejection of
Christian morals and hope, theh divisive spirit in the Church
f eUowship and theh repudiation of its order and ministry, is sup
ported by the summary description of them in Jude 11 in his com
parison of them with Cain, Balaam and Korah. Theh walk in
the way of Cain is Ulustrated in the current conceptions of him as
reported in the PhUo passages cited from Siegfried by Windisch
and Mayor, as a symbol of skepticism; 'sunk in the world of
sense, a polemical sophist, spiritually dead.' This would express
their impious opposition to God and divine truth, and theh sensual
hnmorahty. The Targum of the Cain passage already cited would
hkewise point to their denial of the final judgment. In Heb. 11, 4,
he is contrasted with Abel, whose faith and righteousness are
declared, and whose life and speaking after death is in a singular
contrast to Cain's denial of a future hfe, according to the Targum.
SimUarly in I John 3, 12, Cain was of the evil one; his works are
evU; and in vs. 11 in antithesis to the Church's feUowship in
brotherly love, he slew his brother. The definite method of prop
aganda of those who thus walk in the way of Cain is denounced
as a giving themselves to the error of Balaam. For hke him they
were corrupted to become false prophets for gain, to lead God's
people to mingle with idolatry, and to indulge in fornication. As
in I Cor. 10, 5-11, the description is completed with the compari
son of their rejection of the Church order and its representatives,
to the gainsaying of Korah against Moses and Aaron.
The absence of reference to the errorists' doctrine of creation and
to denial of a resurrection body, which would be the outcome of the
duahstic aUusions found by Moffatt, Introd. p., 353, Werdermann,
p. 93 f. and Bleek-Mangold, 1875, p. 645, would be sufficiently
accounted for by the compressed character of Jude and by the
interest of both Jude and II Peter in the controUing general features
of the false teaching. Omission of mention of asceticism could be
due to the absence of this feature from the special form of the
hydra-headed gnostic system here propagated. There is also, how-

338 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
ever, the possibility that it could emerge as elsewhere, in here un
recorded forms of contempt of the psychical nature by those who
boast to be pneumatics.
From this study of the direct references and of the possible aUu
sions to the positions of the errorists combatted, we conclude that
whUe their hnmorahty and abuse of the agapae are the chief ob
jects of the writers' denunciations and warnings, yet these features
of the movement are the outcome of their perversion of the
Church's fundamental faith, hope and fellowship, and rest on
the boasts of emancipating gnosis. Further, as Zahn, Liitgert,
HoUmann and Werdermann agree, all these features aheady
appear in the opposition of the errorists at Corinth; and we have
found them reappearing in aU the Pauline Epistles after Galatians
as well as in Hebrews and I Peter.57 We fail also to detect in
Jude and II Peter any indications that the opposing error betrays
the special characteristics of gnostic systems as developed in the
second century. Werdermann, p. 138, shows that of five essential
features of the Carpocratian system, to which since Clement of
Alexandria our two Epistles are alleged to refer, only one is com
mon: 'antinomianism combined with contempt for angelic powers.'
Antinomianism is no proof of identity with this special gnostic sect,
inasmuch as we have found it to be a constant element among all
the errorists since their emergence in the Thessalonian Epistles;
and the contempt of angels, which has been found in Jude and
II Peter, has by no means a central position, such as it has in Car-
pocrates. It can be, as aheady suggested, an accompaniment of
either of the constant features of the earliest form of gnosticism,
antinomianism and denial of Christian eschatology.
So far therefore as the date and genuineness of the two Epistles
are affected by the character of the error opposed, we have met
with nothing while restricting our attention to it, to prevent a
view of their pubhcation at any time from the seventh decade on
ward, in the lifetime of the writers whose names they bear. Wer
dermann, who regards II Peter as pseudonymous and who assigns
both Epistles to a date about 80 a. d., nevertheless concludes that
67 Werdermann compares the errorists of Jude and II Peter with those in
the N. T. Epistles in pp. 124-135. See also Mayor's commentary on Jude
and II Peter, chap. XI: False teachers in the Church towards the end of the
first century.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 339
'such gnostics are historicaUy possible just as well at 70 as at 150
a. d.' This first century dating will be still further supported by a
comparison with the Johannine Epistles, which are assigned to its
closing decade, and which we shall next briefly survey.
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN
The First Epistle of John is written for the establishment of
readers who have already overcome an attack on their Christian
faith and life. ' It is a specimen of Apostolic preaching to believers,
a masterpiece in the art of edification. The Apostle sought in the
strengthening and purifying of the spirit of love, the prophylactic
for the Church against intellectual error.68 Similarly, Law, 'al
though explicit controversial allusions in the Epistle are few, are
limited indeed to two passages, 2, 18 f., 4, 1 ff., in which certain
false teachers designated as antichrists are unsparingly denounced,
there is no New Testament writing which is more vigorously
polemical in its whole tone and aim.' 59
The character of the error attacked could in large measure be
reconstructed from the contents and literary structure of the
opening section 1, 1-2, 17, with the help of the recurring phrases,
' If we say,' ' I write,' ' By this we know,' ' He who says,' and by the
contrasts in the parallel statements. And the validity of this
method, which we have elsewhere applied would be supported
by the succeeding references. We shall begin, however, with the
direct description in 2, 18 ff. of 'those who deceive you,' vs. 26. As
in the Paulines, II Peter and Jude, their appearance is a fulfiUment
of the Gospel predictions of false prophets in the last times. Their
attack has indeed been repelled: 'ye have overcome them,' 4, 4;
and their withdrawal from the Church, 2, 19, can be regarded as
due to theh failure to draw away the readers, vss. 14-17, from the
Apostolic tradition of the Gospel. Their reentrance is barred by
the injunction, II John. 10 f. : receive him not into your house and
68 G. G. Findlay, Fellowship in the Life Eternal, pp. 59.50.
S9 R. Law, The Tests of Life, p. 25. A list of the works relating to this
polemical element in I John is given by A. Wurm, Die IrrUhrer im 1. Joh-
annesbrief, 1903. His own view is that the errorists are secularized Jewish
Christians who have been led by Jewish taunts to regard Jesus as only a
great prophet, and to elevate the Jewish Law above the Christian moral
ideals. We shall, however, accept in general the construction of W. Liitgert,
Amt und Geist im Kampf, 1911.

340 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
refuse him Christian greeting. The readers will naturally stiU be
exposed to their influence and continued propaganda, which is
therefore controverted in the Epistle in its controlling features.
Here again, in connection with the practical religious aims of the
writer, we have no delineation of the opposing system, but of its
contradictions of the essential Christian positions.
Its fundamental doctrinal error, denial and lie concerns faith in
Christ. The liar is he who denies that Jesus is the Christ, 2, 22.
That such a denier is the antichrist, does not point, as Wurm
argues, to Jewish rejection of Jesus' claims, but to a denial of the
possibility of a real union of the heavenly Christ and the human
Jesus. This appears in the fuUer statements and consequences
of their denials in the section against false prophets, 4, 1 ff . Paul
in I Cor. 12, 1-3, has a similar reference: negatively, no one in the
Spirit says Anathema Jesus; and no one is able to say Kurios Jesus
but in the Holy Spirit. Here in I John, positively, the confession
in the Spirit is 'Jesus as Christ come in the flesh'; whence the
refusal of this confession is in itself a denial of Christ as really
incarnate in Jesus.60 The textual variant o Xi>ei 'Irjaovv in vs. 3,
he who annuls or divides Jesus, is regarded byZahn, Introd., § 70,
n. 6, as the probably original reading. If adopted, and especially
with the addition in various manuscripts of Lord or Christ, it
would express the mode of their denial more definitely as a dividing
of heavenly Christ from Jesus: either on the theory of a literal and
lifelong docetism and phantasm, or of a division before and after
his public ministry. But even in our critical texts the denial of a
real incarnation is plainly indicated; and it is to be further recog
nized in the succeeding section of the contrasted apostolic confes
sion, 4, 7 ff . : Jesus as Christ come in the flesh, is the only begotten
Son sent into the world that we might live through him.
In this denial of a real incarnation of the Son of God is included
the denial of his real death and therefore of its redemptive power,
especially when, as in the false teaching, there is a denial of sin and
hence of any need of atonement. Consequently in the special
sections rebutting the teachings of the false prophets, recur the
opposing reaffirmations of the Apostohc gospel. The Son is sent to
•° For this construction of 'Christ come in the flesh' as secondary predicate
which is recognized as permissible by Westcott and Holtzmann and which is
adopted by Law, following Haupt, see Law, p. 94, note, and Findlay, p. 317 f.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 341
be the Saviour of the world, 4, 14; was manifested, 3, 5, to take
away sins; was sent to be the propitiation for the sins of the whole
world, 4, 10; 2, 2; whence our sins are forgiven for his name's sake,
2, 12, since he laid down his hfe on our behalf, 3, 16. And it is the
blood of Jesus, God's Son, which cleanses us from all sin, 2, 7; for
in 5, 6, he came not in the water only, but in the water and in the
blood. These representative christological statements are recognized by
the majority of scholars as directed against some form of gnostic
docetism and its accompanying rejection of a redemptive death of
the Christ. Frequently Cerinthus, with whom tradition connects
John, is regarded as the leader of the opposing movement; although
this Epistle assumes groups of false prophets rather than a definite
leader of the errorists; and further, these doctrinal errors have been
found to be the fundamental principles of the false teachers
attacked in the earlier Pauhne Epistles. The exact form of the
docetic doctrine in I John is stiU debated. Liitgert, pp. 10 ff. and
45, maintains that it was docetism in the full literal sense: denial of
the reahty of the body, the flesh, the death of Christ, who was re
garded only as a theophany. On the contrary, and in agreement
with Moffatt and Zahn, we find in connection with 5, 6 f., a refer
ence to a theory of some temporary union of the heavenly Christ
with Jesus from his baptism until the assumed abandonment be
fore his passion, thus depriving his death on the cross of significance
as a redeeming ministry of the divine Christ.
Besides this perversion of the fundamental faith, the errorists
are equally opposed to the Christian hope of the Parousia. Denial
that Jesus is Christ is itself a denial of his coming as Messiah in
glory at a general resurrection with its accompanying world-judg
ment. Hence in 2, 28-3, 3, foUowing the discussion of the denial of
Jesus' messiahship, the form of the references to his manifestation
and to our boldness in his Parousia, when we shall be like him and
see him as he is, is viewed by Knopf, Liitgert and others, as occa
sioned by the rejection of this hope by those who deny that he is
Christ, the Son of God come in the flesh. But estabhshment
against these errors concerning Christian faith and hope is not
sought to be effected by the method of discussion of the opposing
system. The various 'Tests,' around which Law has grouped his
exposition of the Epistle, by which we know the Spirit of truth and

342 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the spirit of error, are based on conformity with the Apostolic
tradition of the Gospel, 1, 1-4: the witness concerning the reality of
the manifestation of the Word of hfe, both in his earthly ministry,
in his resurrection appearances when 'our hands have handled
him,' and in the personal experience of direct fellowship of believers
in him, with the Father and with his Son.
The aUusions to denial of the Parousia, 3, 3, closed with the con
stant New Testament statement that the Christian hope of glory
is the effective inspiration of Christian morals; and the immediately
ensuing section of warning against deception concerning freedom
to sin, shows that the christological error was linked with false doc
trine as to Christian morahty. The contents and structure of the
whole Epistle likewise show that it is directed against these two
errors. Haring analyzes it into three sections beginning at 1, 5;
2, 18; and 4, 7, each in two divisions of discussion of the ethical
and christological theses, which advances from their separate
treatment in the first section, to their connection and finaUy to the
basis of their inseparability.61 Wurm also clearly shows, pp. 129 ff.
that for the practical pastoral aims of the writer, the moral error
was the more pressing danger; especially ' as it appears to be per
fectly plain that every believer knows that the denial of Jesus as
the Christ is a lie,' cp. also 2, 14; 4, 4.
It is, however, frequently denied that the immoral teaching is
the outcome of the christological error, as by Zahn, Introd., Ill,
363, who finds a lack of every trace and intimation of connection
between the ethical discussions and the statements concerning the
Person of Christ; and further, that the ethical injunctions are not
directed against hnmorahty on a theoretical basis. Even when
the two errors are ascribed to the same system of teaching, it is
often denied, as by Wurm, that the immorality is opposed as being
founded on an antinomian theory; and still more frequently is it
denied that the immorality refers to sensual libertinism.62
81 Th. Haring, Gedankengang und Grundegedanke des 1. Johannesbriefs,
in Theolog. Abhandlungen zum C. Weizsacker, pp. 173-200. Law, Tests of
Life, p. 24, finds this analysis to be on precisely the same lines as his own in
three cycles, pp. 5-24, although he considers preferable his own division of
the ethical test into that of righteousness and love.
82 Windisch, Hbuch. *. N. T., IV, 2, pp. Ill, 117, 122, is undecided as to
the identity of origin of the two errors; and while admitting the possibihty
that the ethical error may be antinomian in character, denies in any case a

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 343
We beheve on the other hand with the scholars hsted by Wurm,
p. 128, to whom are to be added, Haring, Law, Liitgert and Mof
fatt, that the moral and christological errors belonged to one sys
tem of false gnosticizing teaching. We can also recognize with
Liitgert, p. 22, that the emphasis on the 'commandment,' which
occurs in I John 14 times, oftener indeed than in any other New
Testament writing, is due hke the similar stress on good works in
the Pastorals, to the Apostle's antagonism to an hnmorahty on
antinomian principles. When the errorists teach that for those
endowed with the Spirit's ght of freedom, disobedience to any
moral command is not sin, he asserts both that aU unrighteousness
is sin, 5, 17, and also 3, 4, that every one that doeth sin doeth also
lawlessness. And he adds 'and sin is lawlessness,' where 'avopia
evidently signifies a heightening of sin: the conscious rejection of
law on principle, or antinomianism.' The fact that the hnmor
ahty opposed is practiced on this principle of false emancipation,
appears in all the numerous passages concerning unrighteousness
and lack of love. These are not warnings against sins of the
readers due, in the view of earher commentators, to declension
in faith and to flagging love. Wurm, p. 88, has coUected the pas
sages in which the Apostle attests the high standard of theh Chris
tian hfe; and as he states, we can hardly cite a Pauline church to
which its founder pays so great a tribute of recognition. The
warnings against unrighteousness must therefore be directed
against the false prophets whose denials of Jesus as the Christ are
accompanied with rejection of the moral teachings of the Gospel,
manifested in theh unrighteousness of life which they claim as the
privUege of theh gift of freedom.
R. Law in discussing, Chap. XI, the Tests of Righteousness in
the section 2, 29-3, 10, finds that the clear implication of 'Little
chUdren let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is
righteous' and of the related passages, is 'that there were persons
who taught the contrary doctrine: that one may be tmly righteous
apart from doing of righteous deeds, and that on the other hand,
reference to sins of impurity. Westcott holds that 'teaching of the Epistle
turns upon the Person of Christ. The false teaching with which it deals is
Docetic and specifically Cerinthian.' In his introduction, p. xxxvii, he evi
dently regards the moral injunctions not as occasioned by false christology,
but by the delusion that intellectual assent apart from conduct, is sufficient.

344 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the mere doing of sinful acts is no disproof of inward spirituality,
nor incompatible with the status of divine sonship,' p. 219.
Against theh claims to be born of God, to know God, to have
fehowship with him, to abide in him, to have his Sphit, and also
that for them law does not obtain, the writer asserts that God who
begets is righteous, is pure, is hght, is love. He therefore that
is born of God, doth not sin, 3, 9, because his seed abideth in him;
and in contradiction to the errorists ' claim, ' cannot sin,' cp. Law,
pp. 225-228, but walks in the hght as he is in the hght, walks as
Christ the righteous walked, purifieth himseh as he is pure, doeth
righteousness as he is righteous. Hereby we know that we know
him, if we keep his commandments, in antithesis to the errorists'
claim to freedom and perfection in their gnosis, which is refuted in
the opening discussion, 1, 5-2, 6.
Such a system, lacking the inspiration of the love of God revealed
in Christ's incarnation and death, cp. Rom. 5, 5-11, rejecting too
the claims of obedience to any external authority, even to the
moral teachings of the Gospel, boasting of perfection apart from
conformity to any commands of righteousness and love, would
obviously break down the barriers against all forms of hnmorahty.
Hence there is a vahd presumption that it would lead to sensual
sins of libertinism, which have been found to be characteristic of
similar errorists in the earher Epistles. This presumption never
theless, as already stated, is very generally opposed; and princi
paUy on the ground that no direct statements in regard to sins of
impurity are made. Yet this is not decisive, in view of the Epistle's
general method of recurring emphasis on a few controlling prin
ciples and characteristics. There are, moreover, two passages in
which allusion to sensual sins have been found. In 2, 15-17, as
recognized by Liitgert, Wurm and others, a reference is made to
errorists in contrast to the faithful children of vss. 12-14. They
have not the love of the Father but of the world. And specifically
this love of the things that are in the world, includes the lust of the
flesh, the lust of the eyes and the vaunting of earthly possessions.
The interpretation of this threefold description ranges from a
general view, as by Westcott, that it covers the whole ground of
worldhness and would not therefore specially characterize the
false teachers nor emphasize their sensual sins, to the view of a
concrete threefold reference, as by Holtzmann, to lewdness,

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 345
to pleasure in immoral exhibitions, referring to TertuUian de
spectaculis 7, and to ostentatious display of wealth. Holtzmann
also further generahzes these references as the most repulsive
degree of sin, as cultus of the beautiful rather than rehgion, and as
the hfe of Ulusion.
Liitgert, p. 34, interprets them concretely and also applies them
to the errorists: to their libertinism, to their attendance at theat
rical and similar enticing exhibitions, and to their vaunting of
worldly possessions on the ground of their freedom in the enjoy
ment of nature, art and wealth. But whatever specific interpreta
tion may be adopted of the last two in the series, it seems clear
that lust of the flesh refers to sensual sins of the errorists. It can
not simply sum up in general the sins of the unregenerate man,63
since it is distinguished from, and not analyzed into, other
forms of fleshly sin. It is a special form of the sin of those who
'went out from us' into the world; who are of the world; who love
the things in the world, of which the lust of the flesh, in view of the
constant New Testament denunciations of the prevailing con
temporary impurity, naturally refers to their sensual sins. The
closing words 'guard yourselves from idols, ' point to the same con
clusion. They involve more than a mere warning against idolatry,
towards which the Christian readers surely had no tendency.
They are on the contrary a solemn injunction against the practice
of the false teachers claiming freedom to attend the heathen feasts
and to indulge in the sensuality connected with them, as Paul had
warned his readers in I Cor. 10, 6-14.
One other marked feature of the errorists was their disregard of
the Christian fellowship. Their system was essentially disruptive.
They had indeed already 'gone out from us'; and this departure
and their continued propagation from without of their christologi
cal and ethical errors, involved a repudiation of the authority of
the Gospel tradition and of its Apostolic ministry in the f eUowship
83 Wurm's construction of the errorists as retrograding secularized Jewish
Christians, compels him to deny that they were antinomian libertines. He
therefore develops, pp. 116-121, the view which Wendt, Die Begriffe Fleisch
und Geist, p. 68, considers more probable: that the lust of the flesh refers not
to specific sensual sins, but generally to desires of the unspiritual man as
belonging to the earthly sphere; and further, with Wendt, that this lust is
the higher concept under which are subsumed desires for worldly recognition
and possessions and the boastful display of them.

346 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
of behevers. Hence the initial emphasis, 1, 3-7, on feUowship with
those who preach the Gospel of the incarnation and the moral
walk in light. For in this feUowship is feUowship with the Father
and the Son, based upon the propitiation of Jesus Christ for the
sins of the whole world, in contrast to the exclusiveness of the
false teachers. And all through the Epistle this feUowship is
manifested in the love of the brethren. The interest of the writer
to counteract the divisive influence arising from the several denials
of the system of error, is to be seen in the fact that feUowship is the
unifying topic of the Epistle. FoUowing Moffatt, Introd., p. 584,
who regards its plan as unstudied, as variations on one or two
simple themes, we notice that Christian feUowship is the subject,
whose definition is given in 1, 1 ff. Its conditions are outlined in
the antitheses of hght and darkness, as a sense of sin and forgive
ness and as obedience to the law of brotherly love, 1, 5 ff. The
dangers which threaten the existence of any feUowship with God
or man, are shown to inhere in the heretical view of Christ's
person, 2, 18 ff . The characteristics of feUowship as sinlessness and
brotherly love are developed in 3, 1-5, 12; and the epilogue, 5,
13 ff. 'speciaUy notes the danger of lapsing and the treatment of
the lapsi' i. e., from the Christian feUowship.
'While the Christian society is everywhere contemplated in its
definite spiritual completeness, nothing is said on any detail of
ritual or organization,' Westcott, p. xxxviii. In the face of
teachings subversive of fellowship with God in one human brother
hood in which is ministered the Apostolic faith, hope and moral
hfe of love, the writer is intent on the estabhshment of the faithful
in these fundamental principles of Christian feUowship and in their
manifestation in the Christian life of purity and united devotion of
love to God, to their brethren and to the world whose propitiation
and Saviour is the incarnate Christ.
The errorists indeed, whUe repudiating the Apostohc feUowship,
claim for themselves 1, 6, a direct, exclusive feUowship with the
Father and a walk in hght. In the constantly recurring references
to 'knowing,' in the rebuttals of positions introduced by 'if we
say,' 'he who says' and in the tests and assurances of truth and
hfe, we note that both this claim of divine feUowship and their
denials of the Apostohc teachings are assailed as resting on a false
system of an exclusive gnosis. Their perversions of the faith in the

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 347
revelation of God in Christ as he is preached in the Church's
Gospel, cp. II Cor. 4, 3-6, are based on the claim to know God
directly, 2, 3-6. Rejection of the Christian hope of seeing Christ
as he is, when he shall be manifested; of our being then like him
with glorified bodies, as in Phihppians 3, 21; as weU as their false
security in denials of a day of judgment, is the outcome of their
boasts of already seeing God in their visions and revelations, 3, 6;
4, 12.20. Immorality and unrighteousness cloaked under the
assertions that they have no sin and are walking in the light,
is an antinomianism which claims the possession of the Spirit
as their sole authority for conduct. And similarly, repudia
tion of Christian fellowship is justified by them in their op
posing boasts of feUowship with God, of birth from God
and of abiding in God through their gift of his indweUing
Spirit. And therefore these outstanding characteristics of the system
are denounced throughout the Epistle as the issues of a spurious
gnosis. As regards the finality of the revelation of God in Christ,
its teaching is error, a lie, is not of the truth; and instead of being
inspired by God's Spirit, it makes him a liar and rejects the wit
ness he has given concerning his Son, 5, 10 f. Its rejection of
Christian eschatology, because of its present visions, revelations
and sight of God, is in truth, like their hatred of the brethren,
blindness not sight, 2, 11; and bhndness 'as a complete ignorance
of the way and end of lif e ' : he knoweth not whither he goeth. The
immoral walk in this darkness is exposed repeatedly as occasioned
by spurious claims of gnosis by teachers and false prophets who in
4, 1 ff. are in reahty not illuminated by the Spirit of God, but by
the spirit of error. The manifestations of that spirit reveal there
fore that instead of being in feUowship with God, they are
sons of the devil, are of the world, are not of the Father and
of the truth; and hence are without brotherly love towards his
chUdren; and 'hear not us,' the preachers of the Apostolic Gos
pel, whose feUowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus
Christ. The system is met, as in earlier Epistles, not only by the method
of exposure and of confident appeal to the unchanging validity and
power of the primitive Gospel, but also by emphasis on the posses
sion and development of true gnosis of the divine revelation, in

348 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
the Christian lhe.64 The readers 'know' that they are born of
God, abide in him and he in them; and they know this by the
Spirit he has given them, 3, 24. For the seed which abides in
them, 3, 9, is with Holtzmann and Westcott, the germ of a new
life by the creative power of the Spirit through the word of God,
cp. 2, 14. In 2, 20.27 with this ght of the Spirit is an anointing,
xpiapa, a principle of illumination as in Ephes. 1, 17 ff., as the
characteristic endowment of all Christians; a gift from Christ the
Holy One, whom God anointed with the Holy Spirit and power,
Acts 10, 38. While the errorists, 2, 23 ,in their denial of the Son
have not the Father and are therefore without the true illumination
of his anointing, the readers on the contrary need not that any,
especially the errorists, teach them, since the anointing teaches
them concerning aU things.
Among other passages, 4, 13 ff. renews the teaching of the
earlier Epistles regarding the development of faith in Jesus as Son
of God and Saviour of the world, in gnosis of God's love mani
fested in a life of obedience and brotherly love, as the condition of
our abiding in God, of our perfecting and therefore of our boldness
in the day of Judgment. We have also two threefold summaries of
the 'fundamental features of this true gnosis,' Holtzmann. In
5, 18 f. the specific moral character and purpose of the revelation of
redemption is expressed in the statement that we know that he
that is begotten of God sinneth not; keepeth himself, as Holtz
mann, Law, Windisch, etc., interpret; or with Westcott, that
Christ who was begotten of God keepeth him. In either case the
evil one toucheth him not. Next we know in this life of moral
obedience that we are born of God, in contrast to the world which
is opposed to the Christian society and which 'is in the domain and
under the influence of the evil one.' And these two features of
knowledge, vss. 18 and 19, of direct certainty of life in God and
of God in us, are based in vs. 20 upon our knowledge, personal
experience and faith that the Son of God is come, and upon his
spiritual gift of 'an understanding that we may know him that is
84 Moffatt, Introd., p. 587. 'The evident care and caution in rejecting these
semi-gnostic views is thrown into relief by the fact that he and his fellow-
Christians were themselves breathing and enjoying an atmosphere of such
mystical conceptions. Christianity involves the historical Jesus, but none
the less is it a gnosis.'

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 349
true; and we are in him that is true even in his Son Jesus
Christ. We have also in 2, 12 f. a similar description of a true gnostic.
The 'little children, ' vs. 14, have known the Father; and in the
parallel vs. 12 this gnosis is primarily their direct certainty of
salvation: the Father's love is manifested in the forgiveness of
their sins for his name's sake, 'the fundamental principle of
development of the Christian life.' Among these children, the
fathers have known him who is from the beginning: have stood
firm in faith and gnosis of Jesus Christ as Son of God, 1, 1-4,
repeUing the false christology of the errorists. The young men are
strong, both because the word of God preached by its Apostohc
witnesses abides in them as the source of their strength, and also
because, 4, 5 f., greater is he, the Spirit of truth that is in them
than the spirit of error. Their strength is seen in theh over
coming the evil one attacking them in the immoral teachings and
doctrinal errors of the antichrists. Both of these descriptions are
especially concerned with the relation of true gnosis to faith in
Christ and to keeping his commandment of love fulfilling all law;
and as has appeared in the preceding references, this relation in
volves also the connection of gnosis with the Christian hope, 2,
28 ff . ; 4, 16, as the animation of the moral life of love of behevers
united in brotherhood and fellowship with the witnesses of the
Apostohc Gospel, 1, 6-8; 4, 6.7.
In this construction of the general features of the system op
posed in I John, we can thus mark that the method of exposing
and refuting it is precisely sinular to the defense and polemic
against the errorists in earher Epistles. We can also recognize
with Liitgert, p. 47 f.,that the characteristic features of the errorists
in I John have appeared with increasing distinctness in the New
Testament Epistles from I Thess. onwards: docetic christology,
leading to denials of an incarnation and a redemptive death; to
rejection also of the Christian eschatology, along with the claim
of present possession of the eschatological blessings, in theh ghts
of the Spirit; a resulting antinomian emancipation from the
authority of the moral teachings of the Gospel; and a spirit of
division, exclusiveness, unbrotherly contempt and rejection of
feUowship with the Apostohc Church, as the outcome of boasts of
superior individual gifts of gnosis, visions and revelations.

350 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Owing to its method of constant repetition and interweaving of a
few dominating themes, and in part to its definite practical aims,
the Epistle does not enable us to determine whether some special
features found in earher New Testament references to the gnostic
movement, were also found in the teaching it opposed. The
absence of aUusion to the asceticism which is found along with
hbertinism in several previous Epistles, points most naturaUy
as suggested in connection with Jude and II Peter, to the sup
position that this type of the varied forms of gnosticism was not
then propagated in the Apostle's circle. Angehc or other series of
gnostic mediators receive no mention. But this silence is not
conclusive as to presence of this element in the system combatted.
It would be a characteristic of the method of the writer, simply to
set aside such a teaching by emphasizing, cp. 5, 10-12, the sole
mediation of Christ in revelation and redemption as the word of
hfe, the propitiation and the Saviour of the world; and as in 1, 3
to affirm our direct feUowship with the Father and his Son. It
is conceivable therefore that this speculation, which is found
before and after I John, was also a part of gnostic theory of that
period. There are, further, as Wurm shows, pp. 1-8, not sufficient
data in the Epistle to indicate a special duahstic doctrine of God
in relation to creation. Whether the errorists, as in Corinth, were
from some Jewish syncretistic group, does not appear from this
Epistle; although it might not unreasonably be so concluded from
the references in the Revelation of John, which next claims our
study. THE REVELATION OF JOHN
Among the divergent views concerning the hterary criticism
and interpretation of the Revelation of John, there is agreement
in general that its aim is to establish its readers in the hope of the
consummation of the Kingdom at the coming in glory of the vic
torious Christ; and that its occasion was the persecution of the
Church by the opposing world empire of Rome. Along with this
external danger, there is also recognized the danger within the
Church from the presence of the errorists denounced in the Seven
Epistles of chapters 2 and 3. As held by Hoennicke, Jud. Christm,
p. 135, and as Bousset states, Kommentar, p. 278,»their activity in
Ephesus, Pergamum and Thyatira seems to point to a single

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 351
movement: 'by the false prophets of 2, 2, the Nicolaitans of 2,
8, 15, the didache of Balaam, 2, 14, the prophetess Jezebel, 2, 14,
who hkewise teaches and deceives Christ's servants to commit
fornication and to eat things sacrificed to idols, the same class is
probably intended.' In his view, however, these false teachers are
not only not representatives of the later, developed gnostic sys
tems, but are also not concerned with speculation, as the errorists
in Jude and II Peter. • To him, on the contrary, they are leaders of a
libertine movement of heathen converts associating with, and
conforming to, the conduct of the surrounding heathen society.
Hoennicke, p. 136, refers theh views and conduct to syncretistic
influences, and holds definitely that they had nothing to do with
the errors with whom Paul had earher been in conflict. v
We hold, however, with Bacon, Introd., p. 241 f., that 'the heret
ical antagonists are of the same type as those antagonized by
Paul in the same region, Jewish, theosophical, antinomian, but
now clearly differentiated and named. John confronts the same
heresies with the same figures.' As Bacon states that John too
antagonized an ascetic theosophy, we understood from his refer
ence to Col. 2, 8-23 that he views the opponents in the Revelation
as also maintaining christological errors. Moffatt on the other
hand considers that the errorists of Rev. 2 and 3 ' show no definitely
christological traits,' Introd., p. 588; and McGiffert too states,
Apos. Age, p. 625, 'that there is no hint that they were also docetic
in their view; their error seems to have been only practical.'
But we do not find that this restriction of theh activity to error
in morahty is supported by the data of the Seven Letters or by the
structure of the Book as a whole. The christological tenets of the
false teachers and definitely docetism are not in fact presented;
and this because no direct delineation of their system is given. It
can nevertheless be recognized in its essential outlines, from its
connection with the framework, interests and contents of the
Letters expressly concerned with the errorists. ' All the Letters are
dominated by a christological and eschatological interest; and in
the three Epistles in which the errorists appear, theh works are
specifically contrasted with the works of the faithful members of
the Churches; their false-apostolic teaching and ministry, their
didache and their false prophecy are likewise opposed to the
Church's Apostohc tradition, didache and prophecy. Their

352 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
attitude to the christological and eschatological affirmations with
which the Letters open and close, is further Uluminated by the
character and aims of the features of the salutation and Christoph-
any in the opening chapter, from which the seh-descriptions of
Christ in the Seven Epistles are taken. '
Upon our separate examination of the three Letters in which
the errorists appear, we shall find that theh works issue from a
definite system of teaching. For, first, the propagators of the
movement in Ephesus claim to be apostles. The title expresses
theh profession of authority to present the Gospel in its general
character and doctrines. In the statement that they are found to
be hars is expressed the decision that theh gospel was in opposition
to the historic witness of the Gospel in the Apostohc preaching and
ministry concerning the person and work of Christ. The same
decision appears in the polemic of II Cor. 11: 'those superlative
apostles, fashioning themselves into apostles of Christ, preach,
vs. 4, another Jesus whom we did not preach; and ye are receiving a
different spirit, which ye did not receive or a different gospel which
ye did not accept,' cp. Plummer in loco. Next we may notice
that the Ephesians' 'testing' of their claims is not simply in regard
to their immorality. That, in 2, 2 a, they are not able to bear.
But the 'test' vs. 2 b, is as in II Cor. 13, 5: 'whether ye are in the
faith'; and as in I John 4, 1-6, again in connection with the person
of Christ: 'hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that
confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God.' It was
as the result of this testing that the false apostles were found hars.
This term in I John is apphed to false teaching, and not only to
claims of gnosis of God, disproved by not keeping his command
ments, 2, 4, and to claims to love God, disproved by hatred of the
brother; but also to the fundamental he in I John 2, 21-27, of
which hnmorahty and hatred are the outcomes: 'who is the liar
but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ,' which is apphed to
the many antichrists, 2, 18 f ., who have separated from the Church.
Further, the opposition of the false apostles to the Church's
christology is reflected in the reference to theh works, which
Christ hates, in contrast to his commendation of the Ephesians
for their works, labor and patience. Bousset regards these Ephe
sian works as subdivided into the labor of opposing the errorists
and into patience under persecution. But as he and most of the

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 353
commentators notice the parallel with I Thess. 1, 3, we may
rather find in the threefold description a reference to theh Chris
tian faith and life in general, as in the other four Letters where
'knowing theh works' is mentioned. Here then 'works' is used
not simply in reference to the moral activities of the Ephesians,
but it describes as in the Letter to Thyatira, their Christian char
acter and life as expressed in works of faith, labor of love and
patience of hope; and the contrasted hated works of the false
apostles can therefore be judged to be the outward manifestation
of their opposition to these fundamental elements of the life of
faith in Christ.
* In the Letter to Pergamum, these Nicolaitan false apostles are
found to have a definite system of teaching: the didache of Balaam.
Its characterizing feature is the practical hnmorahty of eating
heathen sacrificial food and fornication; and very generally, as
stated, this is regarded as laxity due to heathen association, and
not as a freedom based on speculative principles. The prominence
given in the Letters to Pergamum and Thyatira to this feature of
immorality is not however sufficient to justify the view that the
Nicolaitans were simply libertines.- The injunction, I John 5, 21,
to 'guard yourselves from idols,' was found to point to a similar
association with the hnmorahty connected with heathen feasts;
and as being the concluding injunction of that Epistle, it also
emphasized such association as a characteristic of the errorists
denounced in I John for their denials of the Church's christology
and moral teaching. ' In Jude 4 and II Pet. 2, 1 f . hbertinism is
hkewise asserted as a characterizing mark of the errorists; but it is
there linked with their denial of the Lord who bought them, and
definitely as in Pergamum that they followed the error of Balaam.-
When moreover as by Bousset these Seven Epistles are dated later
than the succeeding chapters and therefore represent a later
development, it is to be recalled that whatever their date they
repeat Paul's description of gnosticizing errorists as typified by the
idolatry and fornication into which Balaam led Israel in the
wilderness, I Cor. 10, 6-8. When further theh teaching is entitled
a didache, with which may be compared in II Pet. 2, 15 the 6S6s of
Balaam opposed to the ebdela bSbs, we note that this term in
II John refers to the general content of Christian instruction. For
the many deceivers and antichrists of vs. 7 who have not the

354 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
didache of Christ, vss. 9, 10, are those who confess not that Jesus
Christ cometh in the flesh, and those whose evU works, vs. 11, are
in vss. 4-6 in disobedience to the commandment of love, heard
from the beginning. And in I John 2, 27 the anointing from Christ
which 'teaches you concerning aU things' is contrasted with the
teaching and he of the deceivers and antichrists of 2, 18 ff .
In the Letter to Pergamum, as a contrasting introduction to
the didache of Balaam, is given a description of the teaching re
ceived by the faithful, and it is in general doctrinal terms: they
hold fast ' my name,' and even under persecution have not denied
'my faith.' Another indication of the general range of the false
didache is that Christ wih war against it with the sword of his
mouth, 2, 16.12, the word of God, 19, 13-15, the whole revelation
of God in Christ's person, teaching and work. The concluding
promise to the victor is recognized to be directly related to the
didache of the errorists, in so far as there appears to be an allusion
to the contrast between idol food and the hidden manna.65 The
weU-known obscurity of the second part of the promised blessing
seems to be best iUuminated by the theory advocated by Bousset
and Swete, of a simUar antithetical reference to a gnostic charm
or amulet with a potent magical formula. In this case, with
Swete, 'the white stone is the pledge of the Divine favour which
carries with it such intimate knowledge of God and Christ as only
the possessor can comprehend.' It would thus, as I Cor. 13, 12
and paraUels, be the promise of knowing as we are known of God;
of vision face to face. Where this interpretation is adopted, the
didache of the Nicolaitans is seen finaUy to be not merely immoral
teaching permitting heathen laxity of conduct, but a hbertinism
on antinomian principles of freedom by gnosis.
In the Letter to Thyatira the preceding indications of the defi
nite system of error opposed, receive additional support. Along
with the false apostles of Ephesus rejecting the Church's tradition
and feUowship, and with the libertine didache at Pergamum
86 Swete's interpretation of the hidden manna as 'the life-sustaining
power of the Sacred Humanity now "hid with Christ in God" of which the
faithful find a foretaste in the Eucharist,' recalls suggestively Paul's polemic
against the pneumatics of Corinth, I Cor. 10, 14 ff., in which he contrasts
communion with demons in the heathen sacrifices, vs. 20, with communion
with the body and blood of Christ in vs. 16.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 355
probably boasting in vs. 18 of a spurious gnosis, are found here in
Thyatira the false prophets of the system. The conspicuous rep
resentative from the class of women converts of gnostic intruders
which were found in the Pauline Epistles, is appropriately styled
Jezebel. As a prophetess she of course claims special gifts of
gnosis and revelation; of power and of independence, in her in
dividual gifts, of aU objective forms of authority. Her didache
is described in the same terms as that of the Nicolaitans: fornica
tion and eating of heathen sacrifice food; and its basis on a general
doctrinal system appears in vs. 24. There, the boast of knowing
the depths of Satan is not as Bousset holds, in seeking to mini
mize its significance, a mere excuse in justification of association
with heathen hnmorahty. It was a claim of gnosis of the deep
things, and presumably as in I Cor. 2, 10 of the deep things of
God. This in I Cor. 2, 6-16 includes gnosis of the fundamental
truth of God revealing himseh, his eternal purpose and his method
of salvation in his incarnate and redeeming Son. And in an
tithesis to it, the Nicolaitan false prophecy is denounced as being
in reahty a gnosis of the deep things not of God but of Satan.
We might also regard the promise in 2, 27 of rule over the op
posing nations to be, as perhaps all the promises to the victors,
in antithesis to the boast of the opponents; and here, of theh
boast of already reigning in a kingdom already present without a
Parousia of the heavenly Christ. The faithful on the contrary
are assured of the coming fulfillment of this reign with Christ in
his messianic Kingdom, cp. Psalm 2, 8 f., when as Bede interprets,
Christ appears to them as the star of dawning of the eternal Day.
Without discussing the possibihty of further allusions to these error
ists in the remaining Letters,66 we may recall that the references
to the false apostles with the didache of Balaam as false prophets
with satanic gnosis, are to be read in aU the Seven Churches.
These references, moreover, have been found to involve far more
than immoraUty due to heathen associations. And theh indica
tion of a definite system of hbertinism based on false gnosis,
prophecy and claims of apostohc authority would in general, as
u To Bousset, p. 279, 'it seems that in Sardis this movement although not
named, had attained great influence.' If this conclusion is justified as ac
counting for the conditions in Sardis, it could equally account for the situation
in Laodicea; cp. Lightfoot, Colossians, p. 44.

356 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
in I John, point also to opposition not only to Apostolic moral
teaching and feUowship, but also to the Apostolic witness to the
Person, Work and Parousia of Christ.
This general presentation finds support in various features of
the structure of the Seven Letters and in their relation to the
structure of the whole Apocalypse. In aU the Letters emphasis
on christology and eschatology is an integral feature. Each be
gins with an affirmation concerning the Person of Christ; and
each concludes with a promise of blessing at his Parousia. The
obvious suggestion that these promises are the natural encourage
ments in a situation of external persecution, does not account
for all the facts. In possibly one-half of the Letters, there is no
reference to external persecution. And in the three Letters in
which the errorists are denounced, the eschatological promises
are related to the internal dangers of their propaganda. To the
Nicolaitan feeding on heathen sacrificial food is opposed in the
Letter to Ephesus, the final blessing of feeding on the Tree of
Life, and in the Letter to Pergamum, feeding on the Hidden
Manna. Against the false prophecy in Thyatira boasting, as
may be concluded from other New Testament descriptions of it,
that by its gnosis it already enjoys the spiritual perfecting and
power which Apostolic Christians awaited at the parousia, and
that it was thereby superior to the didache and to the hope of a
consummated Kingdom, I Cor. 4, 8 ff., is likewise emphasized the
assurance of a still future victory and reign of the saints in the
messianic Kingdom of glory. Thus intimately related to the
principles of the errorists, the aim of the concluding promises in
these three Letters and in the others as well, and of the whole
revelation, would be the establishment of the readers in the
Christian hope, both on the occasion of their need of it as a support
in external trials, and also of denials of it in the internal false
teachings. On the view of the structure of the three Letters as unified by
the central topic of internal dangers, the opening description of
the glorified Christ would also be related to Nicolaitan perversions
or denials of the primitive Apostolic christology. In Pergamum
Christ will war against the Nicolaitans with the sword of his
mouth, as whose possessor he describes himself in the opening
statement. The judgments on Jezebel and her followers in Thya-

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 357
tira proceed from the Christ with the flaming eyes and feet of his
self-description. In both cases the emphasis on his coming judg
ments is the appropriate warning against those whose hnmorahty
and didache rests on a prophetic gnosis which denies the primitive
revelation, Parousia and judgment. To the Church of Ephesus
the self -description of Christ is an assurance for the faithful of his
immediate presence, rule and protection. And in connection
with the succeeding interwoven references to Nicolaitan false
apostles, it would serve to guard against any form of false christol
ogy denying his sole mediatorship and the unity of aU believers
in a common direct fellowship with their exalted Lord. Christolog
ical denials are also indicated in the body of the several Letters,
when in contrast to the teaching of the errorists, the faithful are
commended for holding and keeping my name, my word; not
denying my name, my faith; keeping my word of patience, having
patience and enduring because of my name: his self -revelation
in his person, teaching and whole work of redemption.
Special features of this self-revelation dhectly related to the
Church's situation amid dangers from without and within, serve
as introductions to the several Letters. Since, however, they are
selections from the presentation of Christ in the salutation and
Christophany of the first chapter, we can there find the fuU positive
christological affirmations, which whether so intended or not,
do in fact confute the perverted christology of the gnosticizing
errorists, which has been found emerging with increasing distinct
ness in the earlier New Testament writings. It is unquestionably
true that in the opening chapter we have the constant Apostolic
christology, with which any special situation could be met. It
is the abiding word of God and the testimony of Jesus, 1, 3. The
readers are to hold fast what they already have, 3, 11. But the
employment of separate features of it in the several Letters to
controvert opposing teaching or conduct issuing from it, suggests
the same intention in the formulation, special emphases and
amplifications in this presentation of Christ in the introductory
chapter and vision.
In the salutation of grace from the Father, he is presented in a
form of the Jehovah name, not only as 'he who is and was,' but
also as 'he that cometh.' And that this is not intended as an
equivalent of 'he that shall be,' is seen in 11, 17 f. where it is re-

358 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
produced as a coming to consummate the Kingdom with judg
ments and with rewards to his servants. In addition to this
significant emphasis on eschatology, the opening salutation in
cludes for the only time in the New Testament, grace from the
sevenfold Spirit, whose gifts of the spirit of life, illumination and
power are thus to be enjoyed by the whole body of the faithful.
The interest of this addition could be related to its significance in
the similar threefold closing exhortation at the conclusion of
Paul's polemic against the pneumatics in Corinth, II Cor. 13,
13. The usual 'grace from Jesus Christ' is also amplified. In II John
3, the addition to it of 'the Son of the Father in truth and love'
is evidently in view of the denials by the antichrists in vss. 4-11.
The same interest would be served by the development of the
formula in Rev. 1. For with Hort and others, the threefold de
scription in vs. 5a reaffirms Christ as the faithful witness, the
complete and abiding revelation of God, in his earthly ministry;
his resurrection as the first born of the dead; and the lordship of
his heavenly exaltation over the kings of the earth. To this
threefold description of the Christ, human and divine, corresponds
the doxology for our experience of redemption by him, who in his
earthly life, as the Witness in his revelation of the Father, loved
us.67 This is also John's concluding summary of Christ's minis
try in the Gospel, 13, 1: Jesus knowing that his hour was come
that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having
loved his own that were in the world, he loved them unto the
end. Next, as the first born from the dead, 5 a, he washed us from
our sins; and 'by his blood,' as repeatedly in the Apocalypse, re
calling the emphasis in I John upon Christ's redemptive death,
in the polemic against the errorists. Lastly, in Christ's heavenly
lordship, 5 a, cp. Ephes. 1, 21.22, he has made us 'a kingdom,
priests unto God': 'the Church redeemed by the blood of Christ
constituted a holy nation, a new theocracy, ' Swete, cp. I Pet. 2,
5 ff. and paraUels. To these two threefold affirmations of Jesus
87 This reading kyairriaavri of P, Primasius, etc., is supported by the aorist
forms in the coordinate statements. Swete's preference for the present par
ticiple is based on his view that 'loosed,' etc., is subordinate as a crucial com
pleted instance of the abiding love, and also on his interpretation of the wit
ness of 5a as that given in the Apocalypse.

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 359
Christ's68 revelation, redemption, lordship in the Church as a
royal priesthood, is added the assurance: behold he cometh with
the clouds, to judgment.
In the succeeding introductory vision of the heavenly Christ,
1, 12 ff., the christological and eschatological emphases in the
salutation appear in the forms of apocalyptical symbolism, and
as controUed by the primary interest in the coming of vs. 7. We
have Christ's direct union with his Church and his hfe within it
in the vision of his presence in the midst of the seven lampstands;
and his protecting and guiding of the seven stars, the church-
angels, held in his right hand. He himseh is beheld in the heavenly
transfiguration of his real humanity: as 'hke unto a son of man.' M
His heavenly priesthood is symbolized in his garment; his lord
ship, majesty, purity and power flashes from the head and hair
white as wool and as snow, and from his face and countenance
88 Since this title appears only here in the Apocalypse, Swete observes that
as elsewhere the title Jesus stands alone, 'it may be the purpose of the writer
to emphasize in this way the humanity of the glorified Christ and his identity
with the historical Person who hved and suffered.'
8* The possibihty that this 'likeness' is not a mere form of hterary descrip
tion but a significant doctrinal phrase is suggested by two facts. "0/iOtos in
ordinary description is always used in the Apocalypse with the dative; but
here and in 14, 14 alone, where it is used with the accusative, it is in the same
phrase Spoiov vlbv kvdpuirov. Swete suggests that the ungrammatical form
is due to the translation of Dan. 7, 13 which the writer employed. This could
be a primitive collection of Old Testament messianic Testimonia, among
which, as in Mtw. 24, 30 and parallels, this Daniel passage would be included.
The other fact is that allusions to this phrase are found in several passages
defending the reahty of the incarnation and passion of Christ, and from the
contexts presumably against docetic denials. In Hbws, 2, 14 ff. he shared
with men blood and flesh and death, because, vs. 17, it behooved him Kara
iravra rots kSeXtpols bpoiudrjvai. The recapitulation of this in 4, 15 speaks
of his temptation in all points Kad' bpoibrnra without sins, where with many
commentators from Chrysostom to A. Seeberg, Hb. bf., p. 50, cp. Westcott
in loco, the likeness is not between our temptation and that of Christ, but is
the likeness of Christ without sin, to ourselves. The incarnation and re
demptive death are again expressed in Rom. 8, 3 in terms of 'likeness': God
sent his own Son in bpoiupan aapKbs kpaprias Kai irepl kpaprias;
and similarly, Phihppians 2, 8, he became iv bpoiupan kvdpuiruv, and
became obedient to the death of the cross when he was found in axtpari
us avdpuwos.

360 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
shining as the sun in his strength. But most definitely he appears
as the coming Judge of vs. 7. 'The terribleness of the voice is
that with which he wiU rebuke his foes within the Church and
without,' Trench, p. 60. The flaming eyes penetrate in judgment,
the feet glowing like metal in the crucible, wiU execute the judg
ment, 19, 15, whose principles are the word of God proceeding
like a sword out of his mouth.
* In his own first words are bound together the topics of both the
salutation and the Christophany. The divine nature of Jesus
the Christ is expressed in the assertions, I am the first and the
last, and the Living One. The real humanity, death and resurrec
tion of this eternal Living one involves the reality of his abiding
union with Jesus incarnate, dying and rising again, and points
to the redeeming power of such a death and resurrection. His
possession of the keys of death and Hades symbolizes succinctly
his sovereignty in the coming judgment. And through the Spirit
in his Apostle he reveals the mystery of the lampstands and
stars to be his abiding presence and support of his Church amid
the dangers from without and from within. v
To this presentation of the Person and office of the Christ, the
Seven Churches are recalled for encouragement, guidance and
warning by the introductory seh-descriptions in each Letter, of
the heavenly Lord. Similarly in each Letter, the concluding
promises of the blessings to be imparted at his Parousia are as
sured to the victors in the succeeding visions of the conflicts and
triumphs of the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ until its
consummation is realized in the final vision. While these promises
are a direct encouragement of hope to sustain the readers amid
external dangers, both the promises of the Letters and their
prophetic revelation of the glorified Christ would also establish
the faithful against the internal danger of denials of the Apostolic
Gospel by the intruding errorists.
- A special feature of error in the church circles addressed is often
found in 19, 10 and 22, 8 f ., where both Bousset and Swete observe
a tendency to angel worship, as in Col. 2, 18. In such case, any
related theory of special angelic revelation higher than that of the
Gospel and prophecy of the Church is repelled by the angel's
repeated rejection of worship and by his repeated assurance that he
is but fellow servant with the New Testament prophets and with

THE INTRUDING GNOSTIC TEACHINGS 361
the brethren possessing in the witness of Jesus, the ght of the
Spirits Any possible errors concerning angehc mediators is met
throughout the Revelation by the constant representations of
angehc subjection to Christ and his service, and also by the dox
ologies, in which angels join in 5, 11, for the sole lordship of Christ
and his mediation in revelation and redemption. If besides, any
duahstic theories of creation were taught by the errorists, they
too are repeUed, whether intentionaUy or not, both by the
direct ascription of creation to God, e. g., 4, 11; 10, 6, and
also by the abiding relation of creation with God, if with Swete
the symbolism of the four living creatures in the midst of the
throne 4, 6, etc., represent creation and divine immanence in
nature. Apart however from these two possible special references, we
have found as the basis for the establishment of the readers of the
Revelation, an exceptionally fuU statement of eschatological hope
resting on the historic faith in the finality and completeness of the
divine revelation in the work of Christ reaUy united with the
human Jesus throughout his life, ministry, redemptive death,
resurrection and exaltation. It is a hope and faith buUt up in the
Christian life of feUowship in the Kingdom, of whose assured
inheritance the universal gift of the Spirit is a foretaste and
earnest. * Further in the three Epistles in which the errorists are
mentioned, these christological re-affirmations are so interwoven
with the denunciations of the false teachers as to justify the con
clusion that their claim to possess prophetic gifts of the Spirit
and antinomian emancipation, and to be apostles with a revelation
superior to the Apostohc Gospel and with an authority of pseudo-
gnosis disrupting the feUowship of Christ's Church, involved
also their denial of its fundamental christology, which is re
asserted in the introductory chapter and brought into special re
lation to the conditions and dangers of each of the Seven Churches.
This result, that the outstanding features of the Nicolaitan error
are practicaUy identical with those we have recognized in the
gnosticizing system opposed in other New Testament Books,
would accord with either of the dates assigned to the Revelation. '
On the now usually accepted date under Domitian, the false
teachers in the Apocalypse are recognized to be of the same move
ment as that denounced in I and II John, of the same period. If an

362 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
earher date is assigned, e. g., 68 or 75 a. d., as still finds some advo
cates, we have found in these studies, cp. also Liitgert op. cit.
p. 47, the activity of such a propaganda as in I John and Revela
tion, in the Pauline Epistles before these dates and in other
Epistles frequently assigned to the eighth decade.

CHAPTER IX
THE ATTACK AND REPULSE OF THE GNOSTIC MOVEMENT IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT
• From the preceding studies in separate Epistles or in groups of
them, of a gnosticizing movement/ we reach the conclusion that
the results converge to the proof of the activity of that movement
beginning in the Pauline churches from about 50 a. d. onwards.
Briefly summarizing the recurring general features of it, so far as
we have been able to determine them, we submit that although its
speculative bases were only graduaUy recognized and exposed, it
began with a claim of a superior prophetic ght of gnosis, illumina
tion and power. The direct and earhest outcome of this claim of
gnosis, which was united with a speculative theory of the essential
evU of the material universe, was a denial of Christian eschatology:
the Parousia of Christ, general resurrection and judgment, and a
consummation of the Kingdom. On the contrary, without a
Parousia, the errorists had aheady entered on the resurrection hfe;
for them the Day of the Lord was already come, the resurrection
already has taken place; and in theh possession of the Spirit and
his ghts, they were already ' satisfied in the enjoyment of the con
summate Messianic blessedness. '
The assertion of such claim of superior pneumatic hfe and the
resulting denial of the hope which dominated the Christian life,
inevitably involved divisions subversive of the Christian feUowship
and of the unity of the Church. • These divisions were fostered by
another characteristic craim of gnosis: the gift of freedom emanci
pating them from all external authority.- In the sphere of morals
this freedom was manifested in antinomian hbertinism. In social
relations it involved them in disparagement or repudiation of the
institution of marriage; and it would also tend to raise them above
the institutions and authority of the State. In any case their
antinomian freedom would cause the name, the word, the doctrine
of God and the way of truth to be blasphemed. Within the
Church, their perversion of freedom was seen in theh repudiation
of Apostolic authority and Church disciphne; and most important,

364 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
in the accompanying independence of the Apostohc tradition
of the Gospel. This involved not only rejection of the hope of the
Parousia and its blessings, but a perversion of the Church's
faith in Christ himself. Their teaching concerning him, in oppo
sition to the Church's tradition, was a tradition of men, a philos
ophy which was empty deceit ' opposed to the word of truth of the
Gospel and to the treasures of wisdom and gnosis hid in Christ, ' <
Abbott on Col. 2, 8; and corresponding to the gnosis falsely so
called, in I Tim. 6, 20.
According to the New Testament method of polemic agamst it,
the speculative basis of this system is nowhere presented and dis
cussed in its principles. - We have however recognized from the
warnings which are concerned with its consequences for Christian
doctrine that it included the theory of duahstic opposition of
spirit and created matter; and on this principle, had to explain
away by docetic theories the reahty of the incarnation of the
heavenly Christ, of his passion and of his resurrection as a first-
fruits of a general resurrection in glorified bodies. On such a
theory there was no place for the doctrine of redemption through
the death of Christ. Its own theory of redemption is, again, not
presented formally in its principles and method, but only as a
contradiction of the accepted Gospel that Christ died for our sins,
and of the direct immediate consciousness and personal experience
of redemption in his death and resurrection. In general the al
lusions to the opposing system of redemption indicate that it was
by means of gnosis, possession of the Spirit and his gifts of visions
and revelations, and by ascent to perfection through angehc media
tors.1 In all these points of fundamental faith and hope of a hfe in
love fulfilling all moral law, and of fellowship and brotherhood, the
system of error was totally subversive of the Gospel of Christ. v
Its repulse was therefore one of the most vital tasks of the Apos
tolic Age; and with the polemic and defense against it, we have
1 Bousset, op. cit, p. 276, concludes his chapter of discussion of the form of
the gnostic Redeemer with the statement: "The redemption myth or myths
of the gnostic rehgion are not first derived from the circle of ideas of the
Christian rehgion, but were previously existent and were only artificially
combined with this circle of ideas; and in gnosticism, alien mythical figures
of a redeemer were identified with the figure of Christ in the way of a supple
ment and artificially.'

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 365
found the New Testament Epistles to be concerned in larger
measure than is ordinarily recognized. ' There is still a general
disposition to restrict its propaganda to the close of the Apostolic
Age; or to interpret its earlier appearances as due to local influ
ences, and as exhibiting only a semi-gnosticizing teaching which
was to be developed into the great gnostic systems of the second
century.2 • Among the reasons for this attitude was at first the fact
that the Tubingen criticism emphasizing the gnostic references in
several Epistles, argued that these references were to second-
century systems, and thus assigned the same date for such Epis
tles. The usual line of defense of their genuineness was therefore
to minimize the gnostic features and to show that the remaining
features do not correspond to any definite second-century system,
and especially not to the speculative constructions of any of them.
• Another objection to the presence of a gnostic movement within
the Pauline churches from 50 a. d. onwards, is that these churches
were only founded in the sixth decade, and therefore the five to ten
years between their founding and the Epistles addressed to them
was too short a period for the appearance among them of so defi
nite and widespread a perversion of the Gospel as we have found to
be indicated in these Epistles.' This objection loses its force,
when it is recalled that the error opposed is not viewed as the false
development of Christian hfe and teaching from within the Church,
but as propaganda of perversion intruding from without. This
view definitely involves the activity of one or more groups of
syncretistic gnostic teachers who have in some way been at
tracted to the Gospel. The existence of such gnostic movements
before the Pauline mission is now fully recognized.3 'And the
! E. De Faye, Introduction a V Etude du Gnosticisme, p. 140: Le gnosticisme
fermente dejd, dans l'ombre, au siecle apostolique. C'est la periode obscure
ou s'eiaborent les diverses tendances qui donneront naissance aux grandes
ecoles du IP siecle.
aW. Kohler, Die Gnosis, p. 12: 'The existence of pre-Christian gnostic
congregations, i. e., rehgious communities in which gnosis was the central
idea, cannot be contested.' Cp. Bousset, Hauptprobleme der Gnosis, p. 5 ff.
Lake, Earlier Epistles of St Paul, p. 46: 'Gnostic ideas are earher, not later,
than Christianity.' Knopf, Die Briefe Petri und Judd, p. 339: 'Gnosis was a
great danger for the churches in the second generation; on certain points al
ready in the first generation.' Similarly Moffatt, Introd., p. 153 f., as quoted
on p. 290.

366 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
present interest in investigation both of the beginnings of gnosti
cism and of the great systems of the second century promise to
contribute materiaUy to our understanding of the character,
methods and influence of the movement in its relations with
Christianity in the Apostohc Age. We have, however, restricted
our attention to the evidence from the New Testament for its
activity within the Church; and wiU proceed to consider the
possible lines of its approach and of its intrusion into the Church
at the early period, and the Apostohc method of meeting it, which
wiU at the same time reflect the method of its propaganda.
1. ITS PROVENANCE AND ADVANCE INTO THE CHURCH
' We found in the Pauline Epistles that the intruders were Jews,
but not Judaizers. » They boast in Corinth of their Jewish descent
and privileges, inculcate some Jewish ceremonial practices in
Colossse, and in the Pastorals they employ Jewish myths. But
theh continued successful propaganda among GentUe Christians
would inevitably lead to the prevailingly GentUe character of the
later gnosticism; yet as Liitgert repeats from Zahn, the older the
gnosis, the more Jewish it is.4 Such a Jewish movement in the
New Testament age posits of course the existence of other Jewish
sects in addition to the famihar divisions of Judaism by Josephus
into the parties of Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes. And as this
is fully recognized it wUl be sufficient for our purpose to refer to the
conclusions of a few special investigations as to the existence and
definite character of such a Jewish sect as we have found implied in
the New Testament Epistles.
Hoennicke, Jud. Christm., p. 33 ff., conveniently summarizes the
occasion of the rise and the character of these Jewish sectaries
» Already in Tit. 1, 10 'they of the circumcision' are only a special portion
of the intruders. In the Johannine Epistles the provenance of the false
teachers is not indicated. It is a possibihty that in the Revelation they who
claim to be Jews but are of the synagogue of Satan, 2, 9; 3, 11, may be related
to the errorists there opposed. In Ignatius, M agues. 8.10 and PhUad. 6, the
use of ' Joudaismos ' in connection with errorists, as Liitgert states, Ami u.
Geist, p. 162, is the more conceivable if the opposing movement originated with
Jewish teachers. Yet as he shows, the term is not here used of the rehgion of
Israel or nomism, but is the denial of the Son of God and his resurrection, as
by unbelieving Jews so by errorists who although uncircumcised teach 'Jou
daismos.'

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 367
whose activity he recognizes in the first century. He assigns as the
sources of the manifold currents of thought among the Jewish
people, both the many sided developments of Old Testament ideas
and also the influences of heathenism upon Judaism when it too
was drawn into the syncretistic movement. . By syncretism he
understands a mixture of the most various views in manifold
circles of culture. Philosophical speculations, cosmological views,
religious myths were utihzed to answer the profoundest questions:
concerning God and the world, spirit and matter, the absolute and
the finite, world-development and world-goal. Redemption from
all that is material was striven after. Answers were sought to the
questions of the origin of evU, the way of salvation, the rescue of
man from the powers of death and unto immortality. The funda
mental tendency of the movement is this: man as regards his
spirit belongs to a higher world; his development, his perfecting is
the problem.
The two leading forms of this syncretism are the Oriental,
especiaUy Babylonian-Persian, and the HeUenistic. While Hoen-
nicke realizes that it is difficult to determine to what extent they
were present in the Judaism of the first century and by what proc
ess they related themselves with Jewish thought, he yet recog
nizes that this syncretism has essentiaUy contributed to the variety
of the thought-world of the Jews which appears both in the lists of
sects in Judaism given by the Church Fathers and also in PhUo's
reference to a radical rehgious party of the Jews who freed them
selves from the precepts of the Old Testament and neglected the
observance of the Law,' de miqr. Abhm. M.1.450. As to the influ
ence of this movement on Christianity, he concludes, p. 240, that
in Palestine and Syria Jewish Christianity, including judaistic
Christianity, appropriated many syncretistic features. But in
regard to the western Diaspora he limits hhnself to the statement
that 'we only know from such writings as Colossians and the
Pastorals that Christian circles of Jewish origin favored syncretis
tic views.' When he adds, 'we must further say that Jewish
Christian syncretism was a not unimportant factor in the rise of
gnosticism,' i. e., of the second century; and that 'gnosticism is
closely related with the formation of Jewish sects,' we can appro
priate his admissions of the existence of a syncretistic Jewish sect
in the Apostohc Age, of its influence upon Christian circles and of

368 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
its essential relation to later gnostic systems, as supporting our
own conclusions as to the activity and character of such a gnosti
cizing Jewish movement in the Apostohc churches from the middle
of the first century onwards.
Referring to Jewish scholars, we find that among them Blau,
Jew. Encyc. 5, 612, also concludes that there was a Jewish gnos
ticism and that it antedated Christianity. He also agrees with
those Jewish scholars who hold that in rabbinical writings the title
Minim is often applied to these early Jewish gnostics. And to
Blau 'it is highly probable that a not inconsiderable part of the
earliest Jewish gnosis is still extant, though in somewhat modified
form, in mystical small midrashim and in the mediaeval produc
tions of the Jewish Cabbala. ' In the view of J. Abelson likewise,
although the Zohar first appeared in Spain in the 13th century,
'many an idea and doctrine certainly goes as far back' as the
second century, 'and further too.'5 He too holds that 'Philo,
Josephus and older portions of the Tahnuds, sources belonging to
the first two or three Christian centuries, contain allusions to cer
tain sects who differed in their mode of hfe from the general body
of the Jews and who were in possession of certain esoteric teach
ings.' And he infers in particular from scattered rabbinic re
marks, that there existed in the early Christian centuries a small
sect of Jewish mystics with an esoteric science of the Merkabah :
the lore of the heavenly Throne-chariot of Ezekiel, 1, 4 ff.
Besides the above conclusions of these rabbinical scholars as to
the existence in, or prior to, the Apostolic Age of syncretistic
Jewish sects devoted in general to speculative mysticism, Honig 6
argues from Jewish and Christian sources that Jews were the first
gnostics, and one of their earliest sects were the Ophites. He
6 J. Abelson, Jewish Mysticism, p. 118 f., 35. He rejects, however, the
theory of Reitzenstein, who in Poimandres regards the cabbalistic work
Yetsirah as a Hebrew production of the second century, b. c. Lightfoot,
Colossians, p. 93, while not using the Cabbala as a development of Jewish
thought illustrating the Colossian heresy, e. g., the 'thrones' of 1, 16 and the
'tradition' of 2, 8, because of the impossibility of separating and dating the
ancient elements, points out that 'the cabbalistic doctrine however will
serve to show to what extent Judaism may be developed in the direction of
speculative mysticism.'
8 A. Henig, Die Ophiten, Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des jlidischen Gnosti-
cismus, 1889.

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 369
maintains, more definitely, that the Ophites belonged originally to
Judaism; and in contrast to the results of more recent investigators,
insists also that "they derived all the material for the construction
of their new systern from Judaism; even Demiurgism, the most
hostile enemy of Judaism, could nevertheless arise in Judaism
alone. It was excogitated to preserve the appearance of monothe
ism when the question 'unde mala' entered the foreground of Jew
ish reflection and imperiously demanded an answer." He dates
the origin of the Ophite movement at the latest in the time of PhUo
in Alexandria and in the days of Jochanan ben Sakkai in Pales
tine in the last third of the first century. Pfleiderer, Urchristm.
II pp. 81-99, in his reconstruction of the Ophite system from
Irenaeus' account, alsc\ assigns it to a pre-Christian origin; but
among the Jews of the eastern Dispersion who combined in it
Babylonian theogonic and cosmogonic myths with legendary
constructions of the Old Testament primitive history of man.
Upon its contact with Christianity, a new syncretism arose
in view of the many related features, especially the antilegalism
of the Pauline doctrine of redemption, and the doctrine of a
redeemer and divine Son descending from heaven and as
cending thither as conqueror of all powers below or above the
earth. In addition to the general recognition of a syncretistic element
of speculative mysticism in Judaism in the Apostolic Age, and
besides the specific theories that the system of the Ophite gnostics
and their allied groups was originally Jewish and pre-Christian,
M. Friedlander has more definitely advocated in various publica
tions an antinomian gnosticism in Alexandrian Judaism contempo
rary with Philo or earlier.7 Holding with Harnack that gnosti
cism is older than Christianity 8 he maintains from Philo the exist
ence in the Diaspora of a radical allegorizing Jewish sect which
7 His construction of the movement may be found most fully in Der Vor-
christliche j'udische Gnosticismus, 1898, and in Geschichte derjudischen Apologe
tik, 1903, chap. VIII, Die Polemik nach innen.
8 Harnack, Gesch. d. altchrist Litteratur, I, 144. 'It is undubitable that
there existed a Jewish gnosticism before a Christian and Jewish Christian
gnosticism. Since the second century b. c. as the Apocalypses themselves
prove, it was in the blood of Judaism, which had appropriated Babylonian
and Syrian doctrines. But perhaps the relation of this Jewish gnosticism to
the Christian can never be made clear.'

370 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
PhUo opposes.9 Its followers are sophistical advocates of an im
pious antinomianism in which they boldly profess to have been
excellently instructed under the guidance and doctrine of Cain.
They are men who think themselves wise, wit lout knowing true
wisdom: SoKnaiao(poi, rb irpbs akndeiav aoihbv obK elSbres. Their
laws are the various forms of lawlessness and uncontrolled desires.
Friedlander further argues that this antinomianism rests on a
theosophy and speculative cosmogony opposed in Tahnudic
passages which he assigns to the first century. And he asserts that
the Minim denounced in these passages are not Christians, but
speculative gnostics. Hoennicke, I. c. p. 36, follows the Jewish
scholars who deny that these positions have been established. In
his view the statements of PhUo point only to individual Jews of
phUosophical culture who neglected the observance of the external
form of the legal prescriptions. He grants, however, that 'what is
certain is only that syncretism strongly swept against Judaism, but
could not weaken the monotheistic basis. '
We believe nevertheless with Pfleiderer, Urchr., II, 53, that 'this
polemic of Philo is directed against the Jewish gnostic sect of the
Cainites, which sought by sophistical arts to win adherents for its
antinomistic doctrine and practice, among the Jews of the Dias
pora, and to influence the election of the leaders of the orthodox
congregations. Since the Cainites belonged to the widely spread
Ophite gnostics, there is found in Philo's polemic the clear proof for
the existence of the beginnings of that gnosis aheady in the pre-
Christian Judaism of the Diaspora.' He adds that 'it arose not
from Alexandrian Judaism alone, but from that mixture of Babylo
nian, Jewish and Hellenistic rehgion in which the various Christian
gnostic sects have their common sources. ' For our purpose it has
been enough to recognize the presence of elements in contemporary
or earlier Judaism and especially in Alexandrianism, which make
conceivable the Jewish provenance of the errorists of the New
Testament Epistles.
„ While the determination of the original point of contact of this
Jewish speculative movement with Christianity still remains
obscure, the variety of conjectures concerning it points to the
•He quotes from four Genesis treatises of Philo: De Sacrificio Abelis et
Caini, M., I, 163; Quod deterius poliori insidiari soleat, I, 191.197; De Posteri-
tate Caini sibi visi sapientis, I, 232.235; De Migrations Abrahami, I, 450.

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 371
possibilities of many avenues of its approach to the Church. With
such a movement already active both in the eastern and western
Diaspora, the Christian propaganda must naturally have come
into contact in its early stages. ' Whether or not phases of this
speculation are to be found in the contemporary Judaism of
Jerusalem and Palestine, there is no suggestion in the New Testa
ment that it intruded into the Christian churches of Jerusalem and
Judea. In Acts the first attempt of the system to intrude into the
Church is made by Simon Magus with the first step in the church
expansion beyond the Jewish national borders. He is there de
scribed as the representative of the current mingling of oriental
theosophy and some form of Judaism; as attracted to Christianity
both by the miracles of Philip, which were clearly of an order dis
tinct from, and greater than, his sorceries, and also by the gifts of
the Spirit through the Apostles; as ambitious to exercise the same
powers; and at the same time he is denounced, 8, 23, for his moral
depravity. Though no further reference is made to him in the New
Testament, Pfleiderer is inclined to interpret conjecturally the
later patristic view of him as the arch heretic, as pointing to the
possibility either of a historical connection of Simon with some
Cainite or Ophite sect, or of its adoption of his name as its leader
and prophet.10 The first incident which Luke records in Paul's
first missionary journey is the Apostle's conflict with another
Jewish magus and false prophet in Cyprus. He is denounced, not
indeed for attempted intrusion into the Church, but for his op
position to the Apostles and for seeking to turn aside the Pro
consul from the faith. While he thus represents the forms of
Jewish syncretism which maintained an attitude of rivalry with
Christianity, it is suggestive as to the essential character of his
opposing teaching that he is denounced, 13, 11, in the terms which
the Apostle later apphes to the gnostic errorists in his Epistles.
It is therefore not strange that in the period of the Epistles
beginning some five years later, references should appear to Jewish
gnostic intrusion in Macedon, Corinth, Ephesus, Proconsular
Asia and Crete; in all which localities the Jewish element would
invite propaganda not only by Christian missionaries but by
Jewish gnostic teachers as well. We know, however, only of their
10 For the system of Simon and the Simonians see the references in Bousset,
op. cit., and Montgomery, Samaritans, p. 265 ff.

372 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
intrusion into the churches, and as professed Christians, and or
dinarily with letters commendatory. Whence they thus came is
unknown, in our ignorance of the history of the churches founded
in the expansion of Christianity from Jerusalem to Palestine,
Syria, Cyprus, Asia Minor and probably Alexandria, in the period
of at least fifteen years between the death of Stephen and the
Letters to Thessalonica.11 We can next only conjecture the lines
of approach of these syncretistic Jews to Christianity. The sug
gestion that they were converts to some advanced development of
Christian teaching by the freer spirit of the scattered and unre
strained sympathizers with Stephen, does not accord with the fact
that there is no trace of speculative mysticism in Stephen's teach
ing. Both he and Philip were concerned with the universalism of
the Gospel, which would naturally be developed along the lines of
the subsequent Pauline teaching, as indicated in Acts 11, 25 ff.
The work of their Cyprian and Cyrenian associates is moreover
expressly approved by Barnabas, who had been sent from the
Jerusalem church to inquire into the new development of the
propaganda by the followers of the Seven. Nicolaus, however, is
one of the Seven; and scholars are still divided in opinion as to
whether he was the founder of the libertine gnostic party of the
Nicolaitans. In addition to the defense of him by Clement of
Alexandria, Strom. 3.4.25 f., we note also Luke's commendation of
him as possessing the qualifications demanded of the Seven.
Since the gnostic movement is recognized to have been active
within the Church at 63 a. d., approximately Harnack's date for
Acts, Luke could not have so written if Nicolaus was the founder
of a gnostic sect. There would be even greater improbability of
Luke's commendation, if he wrote in 85 according to Zahn, or a
decade later in the view of many liberal critics. Should it be sug
gested that Nicolaus became heretical after 63 a. d., then he was
not the founder but a follower of the movement that was active in
Greece a decade earlier. Nor could he have been a leader suffi
ciently prominent to give his name to the false teaching, since in
Corinth and elsewhere its leaders, unlike this proselyte from
11 If the statement II Cor. 11, 22: 'Are they Hebrews' means that they
spoke Aramaic, as Plummer holds, cp. also Trench Synonyms, § xxxix, and
Lightfoot on Php. 3, 5, the next words 'So am I ' from a Jew of Tarsus reminds
us that such speakers need not be Palestinians.

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 373
Antioch, could boast of their pure Jewish descent as the seed of
Abraham. Nor is it probable, as Zahn is inclined to believe,
Introd., Ill, p. 323,331, that the gnostic movement originated in
some School of the Baptist and intruded thence into the Church.
It could conceivably intrude independently into, and pervert the
teachings of, such isolated groups as readily as it intruded into the
organized churches. But since its system was libertine and anti-
eschatological, it could not develop directly from the Baptist's
practice and teaching. Apollos who knew only the baptism of
John was not a gnostic teacher, but enjoyed the complete sympathy
of Paul. In Acts 19, those who had John's baptism knew nothing
of the Spirit, which was the characteristic boast of the gnostics.
The asceticism of certain gnostic sects would not indicate their
relation to, or origination from the disciples of the Baptist. With
him, fasting was a penitential preparation for a judgment which
gnostics denied. It was not like theirs, abstinence from specific
foods and drink on account of their inherent evil, but a fasting on
certain days, Lk. 5, 33, the limit of whose frequency would seem to
be within that of the extreme boast of the Pharisee, Lk. 18, 12, who
fasted twice in the week.
• In view therefore of the untenableness of these suggestions that
the Jewish syncretistic teachers intruded into the Pauline churches
around the ^Egean from groups of assumed perverted foUowers of
Stephen, Nicolaus or John the Baptist, we are thrown back upon
the possibihty of their advent from some church to which they had
been admitted in Palestine, outside of Judea, or in Syria, or in
Cilicia whose metropolis, Tarsus, was the meeting point of the orien
tal and western world, or in Cyprus. Alexandria, however, in view
of the interest of some of its Jewish sects in speculative mysticism
and even antinomianism, would be the most probable starting
point of intruders into the churches of the iEgean, if we had any
evidence of early evangelization of its great Jewish population by
Palestinian Christians or by such men of Cyprus and Cyrene as
evangelized even Greeks in Antioch; or by Barnabas and Mark,
unless they concluded their second missionary journey at Paphos
in Cyprus, with Alexandria and its great opportunity facing them
in the direct line of travel.12 But from whatever church the
12 Swete, Expositor, V, 6, 1897, p. 275 and Zahn, Skizzen, a. d. Leben d.
Alien Kirche, p. 343, favor the tradition of the evangehzation of Alexandria

374 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
errorists came into Greece, the case of Simon Magus proves that
suc'i men found it possible to gain admission into it by professing
some form of faith in Christ, in order to be baptized; and with
their characteristic guUe in reserved and adroit presentation of
theh system, they must have maintained a sufficient standing in
the church of their baptism to secure the usual commendatory
letters upon their departure. *
In accounting for theh membership in such churches and for
their original approach to Christianity, we can recaU first the
dissemination in many forms of Jewish gnosticism dhectly in the
track of the Gospel mission, which made possible its early contact
with Christian communities. Its constant spirit of assimilation
would next find a special attraction in the Gospel as an impres
sive new development of Judaism. In the prominent features of
the Christian preaching, gnosticizing Jews could recognize ele
ments closely related to their own system. For here was a new
form of revelation in the Christ from heaven; a new teaching
of redemption in the revelation of this Christ and in his conquest
of aU the opposing powers of evil and darkness; a new principle
of freedom from an external legahsm. It offered, and in the evi
dent experience of its converts it secured, direct communion and
access to God, with the resulting indwelling of the Spirit of the
heavenly Christ and the accompanying gnosis, Ulumination and
manifold gifts of the Spirit.
How they were able to meet the conditions of baptismal pro
fession for admission to the Church, is to be understood from the
New Testament declarations that theh hves and teachings re
vealed the insincerity of their professions, their real denials of the
fundamental faith and theh destruction of the fellowship into
which they had intruded. Simon Magus, in spite of the necessary
baptismal profession of repentance, was still in the bond of in
iquity; stiU needed to repent of his wickedness; his heart was not
right before God. So too in Rom. 6, Paul has to combat the im
morality of errorists who ignored the renunciation of sin which
was involved in theh baptism, in contrast to his recognition of
his readers' moral obedience, and 'from the heart,' to the form
by Mark; Swete also thinking it likely that he proceeded thither from Cyprus.
Moffatt too, Paul and Paidinism, p. 24, states that while Paul was at Ephesus
'Egypt apparently was already being evangelized by other Christians.'

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 375
of the didache dehvered to them at their baptism, cp. also I Pet.
3, 21. Similarly their confession of Jesus as Lord and Christ is
indicated in various passages as having been qualified with the
reservation of a merely docetic association of the human Jesus and
the heavenly Christ; and their profession of the hope of resurrection
was hkewise qualified by their interpretation of it as already fulfilled
in a spiritual resurrection in baptism. Once thus admitted into the
Church, they found especially in the Pauline churches a soil pre
pared for the spread of their perverted fusion of Gospel principles
and their gnostic speculations. And in the measure of theh success
was involved further, a repudiation of unity and fellowship in the
Church with its Gospel tradition and ministry. The local clergy
seem to have been unable to control the influence of theh ac
knowledged ghts of eloquent persuasion and their boasted ghts
of the Spirit in revelations, visions and power which both freed
them from, and also exalted them above, the authority of the
Apostohc ministry and its Gospel. Hence, instead of unity arose
the divisions; and primarily the divisions by them of the disciples
into a class of the merely psychics, because stUl adhering to the
imperfect Gospel of the Apostles who themselves had no sufficiency
in the gnosis, powers and freedom of the Sphit; and into the class
of the pneumatics consisting of themselves and theh followers.
Among these would naturally be found such women and slaves
as were specially excited by the radical form of the intruders'
presentation of the emancipation essentially inhering in the
Gospel teaching. These adherents and their leaders still re
mained in the fellowship, the activities and worship of the Church;
yet formed within it, inner groups, conventicles and separate
agapae, which were the foci of their propaganda. For initiation
and instruction in such groups, money payment was demanded;
and there and not in the general meeting, I Cor. 14, 23.26, we can
conclude were imparted the esoteric doctrines in which theh
syncretistic mystical speculations and visions were combined with
perversions of the Gospel teachings by means of allegorical treat
ment of the early chapters of Genesis, since the allusions in the
Epistles to these chapters are usually made in corrective sections
of polemic against the errorists.
With this view of the probable construction of such data as we
possess, to account for the presence of this movement in Pauline

376 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
churches in their earhest period; and with this summary of its
general principles, tendencies, methods and issues, we may in
conclusion proceed to review in connection with our earher dis
cussions, the New Testament method of establishment of the
disciples in the bebaiosis of theh faith by apology and by polemic
against the intruding gnostic leaders.
2. EXPOSURE AND DISCIPLINE OF THE ERRORISTS
This Apostolic defense and attack was not, however, conducted,
as we might have conjectured, by the method of direct personal
controversy with the errorists. This we shaU find was imprac
ticable both by reason of the stealthy tactics of the wily opponents
and also of the profitlessness of argument with those who, whUe
professing Christian principles, rejected in fact the fundamental
bases of Christian truth and life." For in the first place they in
truded into the Pauline churches in the Apostle's absence, as in
II Cor. 11; and yet adroitly exploited his absence as proof of his
fear to meet them and defend his teaching and authority by a
proof of Christ speaking in him, II Cor. 13, 3. Already in I
Thess., he has to meet some complaint of his failure to visit the
readers in person, cp. 2, 17; 3, 6.10, with the extended assurances,
explanations and prayers of 2, 17-3, 11, and with his deputation
of Timothy to estabUsh them. WhUe we cannot in this passage
determine the source and animus of the complaint, these are
clear in I and II Cor. Timothy is again sent as his delegate,
I Cor. 4, 17; yet in the next verse he has to ward off the charge of
his enemies that his own absence is a confession of lack of ability
to cope with them personally, since his bodily presence is weak
and his discourse is of no account. He then definitely engages to
come shortly to Corinth and to know not the word of them that
are puffed up but the power.13 But from no Epistle does Paul
appear to have met any of them dhectly, until in I Tim. he names
Hymenaeus and Alexander. Even then we hear nothing of ar
gument or persuasion, but only of a pronouncement of their
shipwreck concerning faith and morals and of the Apostle's ex
communication of them, along with a delivery unto Satan, yet
still with a disciplinary purpose.
Until then he seems to know of them and their system by re-
13 1 Cor. 4, 18-21; II Cor. 1, 12-24; 10, 1 ff.; 13, 1-10.

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 377
ports, and to have dealt with them through the churches by his
Letters or through his delegates. In considering the references
to his method of treatment of them as leaders of the movement,
we notice at once that it is sharply distinguished from his method,
which will be discussed later, of estabhshment of converts exposed
to, or yielding to their influence. This is clear from the fact that
from his earhest acquaintance with theh subtle activities and
concealed aims, he refused to recognize theh Christian standing.
In II Thess. 3, 2, as he prays that he and his converts may be de
hvered from the unreasonable and wicked men, he indicates also
that they are not of the faith. The same position is taken in
I Cor. 11, 19, where he asserts the necessity of divisions, atp&rets,
that the approved, ot SbKipoi, may be made manifest among you;
which involves as I John 2, 19, that the errorists 'may be made
manifest that they all are not of us.' In I Cor. 12, 3 ; 16, 22, the
ground of this repudiation of them may be judged to be his in
creasing recognition that they do not maintain the fundamental
Christian behef in Jesus and in his Parousia. After the visits of
Timothy and Titus to Corinth, the defense and developing at
tack of I Cor. and the assurance of the Apostle's approaching
visit, the errorists are forced into open opposition. And now in
II Cor., after the nine chapters concerned with establishing the
Corinthian disciples renewing their allegiance to Paul, the closing
four chapters of polemic agamst the false teachers are based upon
his direct exposure of them: that instead of being apostles of
Christ they are in fact ministers of Satan, and that their work is
not for th«e upbuilding but for the demohtion of Christian faith
and hfe.
With this refusal to recognize their teaching as based on Chris
tian principles is related both the absence of exphcit formulations
of the opposing theories and of the arguments by which they were
maintained, and also the standing rule in the Pastorals forbidding
the Evangehsts to enter into discussion with the errorists.14 Their
empty, vain, foolish, ignorant talking; theh questions of con
troversy and strife about words, are profitable for nothing; are
for the subversion of them that hear, rather than for the steward
ship of God in faith; are profane and old wives' myths, opposed
to the words of faith and the good doctrine. Hence, the Evangelists
" I Tim. 1, 4; 4, 7; 6, 20; II Tim. 2, 14.16.23 f.; Titus 1, 11; 3, 9.

378 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
are not to engage in controversial discussion with such teachers,
but to command them not to teach this 'different doctrine'; to
stop theh mouths; to have nothing to do with theh profane
myths and controversies; to shun and turn away from theh pro
fane babblings and falsely called gnosis. • There could be discussion
at Athens with GentUes, based on some elementary common
principles of rehgious phUosophy. In the synagogues, the Chris
tian missionary could reason with Jews from the common ground
of behef in the Old Testament Scriptures. We have New Testa
ment records of controversy with Judaizers, with whom Paul
could reason from accepted beliefs in the Old Testament, the
Gospel and the spiritual facts of Christian experience. But argu
ment and appeal could serve no conceivable purpose with men,
who with full knowledge of the Gospel and with profession of
belief in it, deliberately rejected its fundamental principles. There
could, therefore, be only direct denunciation of theh repudiation
of the common bases of the Christian life, of theh perversion of
the truth of the Gospel, and of theh destructive influence sub
verting the unity and growth of the Christian brotherhood. ¦
And this denunciation is pronounced in the exercise of the
Church's discipline of such professors of Christianity, as appears
in passages aUuding to direct personal relations with them as
claiming membership in the Church. Although as stated there
is no certainty from the Epistles before the Pastorals that Paul
himseh came into personal collision with them, there are some
intimations of the method of disciphne he would adopt, if he met
them directly. In I Cor. 4, 19, he warns that on his visit he will
learn not the word of them that are puffed up but the power;
and that his discipline of them and their followers may be with
a rod rather than in love and a spirit of gentleness. The form of
this discipline with a rod may be reflected in the concluding au
tograph anathema of 16, 22. The severity of his disciphne in
person on his visit to Corinth is announced in II Cor. 10, 2-6 : it
is to be with weapons of warfare mighty to the casting down of
the opposing movement exalting itself against the gnosis of God,
and which in 11, 3; 13-15, is denounced as Satanic. Further in
10, 6 he is in readiness to avenge all disobedience, when the obedi
ence of the Corinthians shaU be made full: where he appears to
distinguish between his discipline of the Corinthians and of the

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 379
false teachers to whom he is referring in the passage. In the
Pastorals, however, the two Evangelists are in dhect relations
with the errorists whose activities are now more open and whose
system had become more fuUy exposed. Titus must also have
met them in Corinth; and Timothy, who may also have met
them there and in Thessalonica and elsewhere, is associated in the
writing of aU the earher Epistles concerned with the false teach
ing. Both would, therefore, know the mind of the Apostle as to
theh discipline. Timothy is besides definitely reminded of the
discipline of excommunication inflicted by Paul upon Hymenaeus
and Alexander.
We have, moreover, two disciplinary rules in the Pastorals,
pointing to the expulsion of such errorists, the grounds for it and
the controlling purpose of it. Titus, 3, 10, is to reject an atpertKos
man. The rejection is obviously from the communion of the
Church. Such a punishment reveals that the man is more than
'factious,' which was not an uncommon sin and which would not
as here be the only sin mentioned as leading to exclusion. In the
immediate context, vs. 9, it is the sin of men who cause divisions
and separations based on acceptance of theh false teachings and
immoral practices. Besides refusal to discuss theh tenets with
them, and prohibition of theh teaching in the Church, there is to
be administered the discipline of vovdeaia: direct warning in
struction of their error and sin. Upon refusal to return to the
truth of the Gospel, they receive a second and final warning; and
upon rejection of it, wUl foUow theh expulsion. The ground of
this action is the dhect knowledge that such a one is ii-iaTpairrai:
is completely perverted from the Christian faith and life. The
term occurs again in the Greek Bible only in Dt. 32, 20, from
which it may have been taken. There it describes apostatizing
Israel as 'a very perverse generation,' and is paraUeled with
'children in whom is no faithfulness,' and is foUowed by the
divine discipline of judgments in vss. 21 ff.15 The accompanying
ground of his exclusion is that his persisting subversion of the
truth is a sin in which he is self-condemned. This condemnation
15 The probability that Dt. 32 was used in the primitive collection of Testi
monia appears from its frequent citation: Mtw. 17, 17 and parallel, Lk. 9, 41;
Acts 2, 40; Rom. 10, 19; 15, 10; I Cor. 10, 20.22; Ph. 2, 15; probably in Acts
13, 10; 20, 30; and also Hbws. 10, 30 as apphed to the errorists.

380 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
goes beyond the Evangehst's rejection of him from the church
fellowship. That is 7rat5«ia, disciplinary correction which may
lead to a change of mind and life. But as in Hebrews 2, 3, his sin
is 'neglect of so great salvation;' and in 10, 20 f., is wUlful sin after
receiving the knowledge of the truth; a treading under foot the
Son of God, counting the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing,
doing despite unto the Spirit of grace; for which there remains
no more a sacrifice for sins. Rejecting the salvation of the
Gospel, he condemns himself to the judgment from which it alone
dehvers. This view of the rule in Titus is supported by the rule in II
Tim. 2, 25. Towards all, including here those influenced by the
errorists, the Evangelist, vs. 24, is to observe the standing rule
which was already in force in I Thess. 5, 14. He is to be gentle
towards aU, ready and skilled to teach, forbearing. Then follows
a special rule concerning the errorists who are distinguished from
the general classes of vs. 24. As they reject the church teaching
and the admonitions prescribed in Titus, there remains only
7rai8eta: the disciplinary correction of exclusion. Their self-con
demnation to this expulsion is reflected in the description of them
as being aheady in the snare of the devil; as his captives and doing
his wUl. No further ministry of the Church can effect their es
cape from that snare and service, since they reject its message
and means of salvation. The only possible ministry to them is
the Church's standing witness of theh actual separation from it,
by its discipline of exclusion. This is not exercised in bitterness
but 'in meekness,' cp. II Cor. 10, 1; not in assurance of their
absolute rejection, but in the hope that through the Church's
discipline or some divine influence, God may" grant them repent
ance unto knowledge of the truth and a return unto a sound mind,
II Tim. 2, 25.
Outside the Pauline Epistles we meet with the same attitude
and the same method of treatment of them. In Hebrews the
warnings against 'neglect of so great salvation' increase in def-
initeness from 'how shall we escape,' and 'let us fear lest haply
any one of you should seem to have come short of the promise of
entering into his rest;' and 'it is impossible to renew again unto
repentance those who were once enlightened and fell away, seeing
they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, though in

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 381
6, 9 the readers are assured that they are not viewed as being in
this class; to the climax in 9, 29 ff. : the sorer punishment of which
he shall be judged worthy, who has rejected the Son of God, the
blood of the Covenant, the Spirit of grace. No further threat of
the rejected Church discipline is made, but the solemn warning is
given of judgment at the hands of the hving God. And yet there
is still added, 12, 14 ff., the conviction of the Church's duty of all
possible ministry to them: of looking carefully, e7rt<TK07roOj'res,
lest there be any man that falleth back from the grace of God;
lest there be any fornicator or profane person as Esau who sold
his own birthright, who was rejected from inheritance of the
blessing. Jude renews the most solemn warnings of divine judgments
awaiting the errorists. Yet he too renews, vss. 22.23, the Church's
duty of any possible ministry. Unfortunately the text is so un
certain that commentators cannot decide positively concerning
the reference to the false teachers in this closing exhortation.
Though Westcott and Hort have remarked that the triple division
adopted by Tischendorf and Tregelles from A and the Sinaitic,
gives no satisfactory sense, it is still retained by Mayor. He con
siders that Jude does not here touch upon the case of the heretical
leaders. To him the three classes are first the doubters or the
disputers of vs. 9, who are to be reproved and convinced, reading
iXeyx^e in vs. 22; next, those in more imminent danger, who are
to be snatched from the fire; the third class, those who seem to be
beyond human help, who are to be treated with trembhng com
passion, yet with shrinking from personal communication. Ap
parently this last class has fully identified itseh with the heretical
leaders, who would, therefore, be objects of the same 'compassion
in fear.' But it is far more probable that only two classes are
referred to, as in the text adopted by W. H., Ws. and von Soden.
In this case the first reference could be to the errorists, though
iXeare does not accord with the preceding denunciations. We
may, however, as W. H. suggests regard it as intrusive, being
mechanically inserted from the second clause; or better, adopt
with Mayor the frequent reading ekeyxere. As elsewhere in the
New Testament the errorists are to be disciphned by being ex
posed, convicted of error. And the appended Old Testament
quotation echoes the warnings of the Epistle and expresses the

382 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
aim of the Church's discipline of them: to save them by snatching
them from the fire of judgment they have incurred; just as in
Zech. 3, 2 in the judgment scene of Satan rebuked, Israel in its
representative high priest Joshua with Satan as his adversary,
is a brand by God's grace plucked from the fire, cp. Mayor: of
captivity which was the punishment of national sin.
The distinct ministry of ' compassion with fear ' in 23 b, naturaUy
points to the distinct class of those influenced by the heretical
leaders. Again an Old Testament quotation is appended, pre
sumably suggested by the filthy garments of Joshua in the fore
going passage of Zechariah. Here it expresses the sensual hn
morahty into which the false teaching led its foUowers. The
'compassion with fear' is the standing church rule of discipline
' in meekness ' with which we have met frequently. Its statement
in Gal. 6, 1, wiU best Ulustrate this verse in Jude: restore in the
spirit of meekness, looking to thyself lest thou also be tempted.
The fear of Jude, vs. 23, is, therefore, not, as often stated, the
fear of contamination, for which the facts of Christian rescue
work afford no justification. But 'hating even the garment
spotted by the flesh' expresses rather the Christian's own ideal
purity and animates him as in Jas. 5, 19 f. to compassion and
rescue of the erring brother.
Although in I John the errorists have at this period gone out
of the Church and in II John are denied admission into Christian
circles, the same method of treatment is indicated as in previous
Epistles: no discussion of the principles or arguments of their
system; exposure of their denials of the Gospel: denunciation
of theh conduct. We may note also the same distinction as
before in the treatment of disciples exposed to theh influence.
WhUe the Epistle aims to guard its readers from yielding to this
influence by every ministry of witness, exhortation and prayer,
the separated apostates from the Church's faith in Christ, as in
the view of numerous scholars, are regarded as sinning unto
death. For their forgiveness John does not bid the churches to
intercessory prayer with the 'boldness that if we ask anything
according to God's wiU, he heareth us.' Persistent continuance
in hnmorahty and willful rejection of the divine propitiation of
the incarnate Son of God makes forgiveness inconceivable, since
aU its necessary conditions are refused. Such sinners ' shut their

GNOSTICISM AND TIIE NEW TESTAMENT 383
hearts to tho only power that could save them.' 19 Yet even in
this oase there is no absolute, final despair concerning them.
Though it is not possible to pray for thoir forgiveness while im-
ponitont, it is still possible to pray for their repentance in order
to thoir forgivonosH and restoration. Nevertheless since the
Church has exhausted every ministry to lead them to repentance,
there remains only as in II Tim. 2, 25 some form of direct divine
correction by which peradventure he may give them repentance
unto the knowledge of the truth and escape from the judgment
impending on their continuance in sin unto death.
Suoh a possible divine method of their restoration appears too
in the references to the Nicolaitans in tho Apocalypse. Ephesus
could not bear tho company of these evil men ; had tested them,
pronounced them to bo false apostles and had, like her Lord, hated
thoir ovil deeds. Evidently they had been excluded from that
church. But in Pergamum there are found those who hold at
loast their immoral teachings. The church itself is called to
repentance for this sin of somo of its members, while they them
selves aro warned of Christ's coining to war against them with
the punitive sword of his mouth, cp. Hebws. 4, 12 f. Next at
Thyratira wo meet with a leader of the errorists, 'a person or
party in whoso doings the writer saw a resemblance to Jezebel,'
Ahab's wife: introducing false propheoy, teaching of error, im
morality. To Jezebol was given time to repent, but she wills not
to repent. Whereupon follows the divine correction. The leader
Jezebel is to be cast upon a bod of pain and, following Swete, the
members of the Church who wore led by her teaching into pagan
vices and spiritual adultery, are to be oast into great tribulation
unless they repent of her works. This suggests that her divine
ohastisement also is in the divine purpose to lead her to repent
ance. Yet that her sin, while she is impenitent, is unto death,
appears in vs. 23: her children, 'her spiritual progeny as distin
guished from those misled for a time' shall be killed with death.
A similar principle of direot divine chastisement as a disciphne
that might lead men to repentance, appears in 9, 20 f. and in
16, 9.11, though in both cases they repented not. Yet the possi-
»« Bethune-Baker on I John 5, 10 in H. D. B., II, 58a, 'To one who thus
sins the way of forgiveness is closed; at least it is not to be opened through
the intercession of his brethren, which in other oases would avail.'

384 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
bility of divine punishment leading to penitence is expressed in
11, 13, where after the second woe the rest of men became af
frighted and gave glory to the God of heaven, which Swete inter
prets as a confession of sin induced by fear or despair.
The polemic against the intruders is thus restricted to their
denunciation and disciphne, without a direct presentation and
discussion of their system. The controUing aim of the New Testa
ment references to it is the establishment of disciples in stedfast
ness of faith and in the worthy walk which are endangered by
its attack. Such allusions, therefore, to its principles and issues
as we have able to recognize are made from this standpoint.
3. METHODS OF ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FAITHFUL
From the earliest to the latest Epistles we meet with the same
general method of estabhshment of the faithful against the sub
versive movement. It consists as we have seen first and negatively
of the exposure of the intruding system as a direct denial of the
Gospel which the readers have received and wherein they stand;
next and positively of a call to be stedfast and immovable, to hold
fast and to abide in the primitive tradition of the Gospel with its
manifold witness issuing in that of personal experience of salva
tion in a direct access to God through Christ in one Spirit. There
is no renewal of the primitive apologia, cp. Hebws, 5, 12; 6, 1,
but a confident appeal to its vahdity in their experience of salva
tion and spiritual growth, in antithesis to the emptiness of the
opposing system and the impending shipwreck of its followers.
An appeal to the primitive Gospel and to the original experience
of those accepting it, is of course a general means of establishment
on any occasion of flagging zeal, laxity or lowered tone of rehgious
life. But it is definitely made in the polemical sections of the
Epistles as the essential means of establishing behevers by re
calling the Apostohc Gospel and the bebaiosis of faith both as a
criterion and counteraction of the error and also as the basis and
principle of their spiritual growth. What Moffatt, Introd., p. 346,
has remarked concerning the polemic in Jude, apphes to other
New Testament writers as well: 'Religious conservatism is its
keynote. The pretensions of the impious men are contrasted
with the fixed and final tradition.' It is not, however, a con
servatism opposing development, progress and growth from

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 385
Christian principles to the goal of the fullness of Christ; but is a
conservation of the fundamental realities and principles of Chris
tian faith and hope, of the moral ideals and of the unity of the
Body of Christ, as these were delivered and accepted in the
original Gospel of the unchanging revelation of God in Christ.
The use of this method of appeal to primitive preaching and
belief in establishing believers against the false teaching could
be traced in detail from I Thess. to the Johannine Epistles.17 The
constancy and confidence of this method obviously points to the
general recognition of the validity and finality of the revelation
of Christ. For lack of conformity to it as the criterion, the com
peting system is exposed and denounced. But the persistence
and evident measure of success of the opposing movement, which
is seen in any case by its long maintenance of connection with the
Church, points also to its skill in evading the issue of conformity,
and in parrying the charge of subverting the fundamental faith.
The evasion appears to have been made by denial of a valid
tradition of the Gospel by the Apostolic ministry. Paul seems to
have been charged with preaching only a Christ and a resurrec
tion ' after the flesh ' : and this because of the insufficiency of his
gift of gnosis of the revelation in Christ. In his emphatic in
sistence on the sole vahdity of his Gospel preaching, he was ex
ercising an unwarranted claim of authority over the faith of
disciples, cp. II Cor. 1, 24; I Cor. 7, 35. This evasion was met, as
we find, by basing the validity of the Apostles' tradition of the
Gospel on their personal discipleship to Christ and on their wit
ness of his resurrection; on their divine commission and steward
ship, with the accompanying divine witness in their effectual
preaching, as manifested in the spiritual experience of forgive
ness and of a new life in the Spirit by those who received the
Apostolic message as the word of God. While contrariwise, the
alleged Gospel of the errorists is not a witness of a divine revela
tion, but is a philosophy and tradition of men which is a vain
deceit; its teachers have no commission, but are false apostles
and antichrists; and it issues not in salvation but in perdition.
" Cp. I Thess. 1-3; 4, 1 ff.; 5, 1 ff.; II Thess. 2, 5 f. 15.; 3, 6 f.; I Cor. 2, 1 ff.;
4, 17; 11, 2; 15, 1 ff.; Col. 1, 23; 2, 4 f.; I Tim. 1, 10 f.; 4, 6; 6, 3.12 f. 20; II
Tim. 1, 13 f.; 3, 10.14; Hbws. 2, 1-4; 3, 14; 5, 11-6, 12; 10, 23; 13, 7; I Pet. 1,
12.23-25; Jude 4.17; II Pet. 1, 12 f.; 3, 1 ff.; I John 1, 1 ff.; 2, 7.24; 3, 23.

386 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
One other mode of parrying this charge of perverting the Gospel
was still available: The claim that their teaching was a develop
ment of the elementary beginnings of the Apostolic tradition by
theh superior revelations, visions, gnosis and prophecy, as a
means of advancing understanding of the original revelation of
Christ. It is in the last period of the New Testament age that we
meet with the most concrete allusion to this claim of progress and
advance. The description of the false teachers in II John, 9 is,
' every one that advances, irpokyuv, and abides not in the didache
of Christ.' In this contrasted statement the term does not mean
'taketh the lead' as in RVM, i., e., with Afford, as teacher; nor is
it iUustrated in III John 9 by <j>i\oirpurebuv; but as in the text
of RV it means ' goeth onward, i. e., from the original didache of
Christ,' or with Windisch, 'going beyond the Canon of the Truth'.
It is further iUustrated in I John 2, 7.8, where in contrast to the
errorists he writes no new commandment, but the old command
ment ye had from the beginning, the word ye hear, which is yet
ever new.
The various earher calls to hold fast to the original teaching hke
wise reveal that their occasion was a new teaching which could only
hope for a hearing on the ground that it was not supplanting the
gospel but was an advance and spiritual development of it. The
Pastorals seem to treat such progress as the watchword of the
gnosticizing teachers. Three times in II Tim. reference is made to
theh advance, irpoKbirreiv. First it is denounced as such a devel
opment, 2, 16, as will advance to greater measures of ungodliness.
Its logos will spread as does gangrene. Next, 3, 9, it wUl not ad
vance further, because of its exposure as folly. And in 3, 13, its
advance shaU be towards the worse, deceiving and being deceived.
The parallelism to II John 2, 9, extends besides to the antithesis of
this vaunted development to abiding in the primitive teaching.
The advance in 2, 16 is contrasted, vs. 17, with the firm foundation
of God; in 3, 9, with Timothy's following the Apostle's teaching,
faith and hfe, vs. 10; in 3, 13, with the call to Timothy to abide in
the things he learned and has been assured of, which wiU be the
base of the Evangehst's true 7rpoK07r^, I Tim. 4, 14: an advance that
will be manifest to all. We could, moreover, recognize this boast of
an alleged development of the gospel, from the general earlier
references to the errorists' disparagements of Paul as insufficient,

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 387
weak in the freedom and power of the Sphit, and therefore
as being only able to feed his converts with milk and not with
meat. This claim of a spiritual development was met on every occasion
by the exposure of the false teaching as being in no sense a pro
gressive growth from Christian principles or an advancing structure
upon a Christian foundation, but as a subversal of that foundation
and as a development from principles contrary to the Christian
faith. Gnosticism in the New Testament age could indeed meet all
the famihar seven notes of a genuine development, as formulated
by Newman, Development of Christian Doctrine, ch. 5. But it was
a development and advance of pre-Christian Jewish gnosticism,
not of the primitive Gospel.18 In the place, therefore, of such a
spurious development there is found a positive presentation of the
true basis, principle and means of growth and upbuilding of
Christian hfe and truth. Its one unchanging foundation is Christ,
in whom the final and complete revelation has been given once
for all. In believers, however, there is to be an increasing ap
propriation and apphcations of this one revelation by growth in
the knowledge and experience of it in all the relations of hfe; and
specifically as a means of estabhshment in the primary bebaiosis
of faith on occasions of attack upon it.19 Hence in the polemic
sections of the Epistles we meet with a dhect interest in the
18 Bousset, op. cit., p. 7, following Gruppe, denies that gnosticism was a
developing force either in the general history of human culture or specifically
n the history of Christianity. 'Gnosticism is not a mighty intellectual
phenomenon pressing onwards, but rather one that lags behind, a reaction of
the ancient syncretism against the upwards aspiring universal Rehgion. And
the outstanding leaders of the system in later time, even with the illumination
of the Greek spirit, are not men of the future but people of the past, who
sought to maintain a lost cause by toilsome and even by not intellectually
inconsiderable compromises.'
19 Westcott, Hebrews, pp. 4 and 7: 'The revelation in Christ the Son is per
fect both in substance and form. The Incarnation and the Ascension include
absolutely all that is wrought out slowly and appropriated little by little in
the experience of later life. All later experience is the appointed method by
which the teaching of the Incarnation is progressively mastered iroXvpepus
/cat 7roXurp6ircos. This contrast between the absolute aspect of Christ's
work and its progressive appropriation by men occurs throughout Scripture.'
For the relation of development to the faith once dehvered, see J. B. Mayor,
St. Jude and II St. Peter, pp. 65-69.

388 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
development of faith and Christian hfe on the foundation of the
Apostohc Gospel. The call to stand stedfast and immovable
against attacks is accompanied by the call to growth and to
abound in the work of the Lord.
This advance is expressed in a variety of familiar figures resting
ultimately on the teachings of Christ: upbuilding of a spiritual
house upon an immovable foundation; growth and fruitfulness
from a divinely implanted seed, or as branches of a living vine;
growth and maturity from a new birth as members of the living
body of which Christ is the head. As the basis of the Christian
life is divine, so in all these figures the principle of its growth is a
divine communion in which faith grows exceedingly, love and hope
abound, and fellowship is growing up in all things unto the fuU-
ness of Christ. In controversial sections especially, one of the
means of establishment by such growth is the possession of a
true gnosis and of the principle of its development and consum
mation, given in the Gospel and in the spiritual life believers
have received upon theh acceptance of it.
The character and function of this Christian gnosis is presented
in works on New Testament theology; 20 and in recent years the
understanding of the topic has been advanced by the discussions
concerning the relation of Christianity to the Hellenistic mystery
religions with theh characteristic feature of gnosis.21 Reitzen
stein, while recognizing Z. N.T. W., p. 21, at least an indirect in
fluence by Greek philosophy upon the formation of Paul's con
cepts and thoughts, advocates most definitely the thesis that the
Apostle adopted essentially the language of the mystery religions,
and that in the New Testament references to gnosis and allied
terms, they are used in the same mystical sense as in the contem
porary syncretism. 'Paul was not the first, yet the greatest
20 Feine, p. 443 ff., 604 ff., Holtzmann, I, 476 ff., Gnosis in the New Testa
ment; the relation of N. T. teachings to the controlling features of the move
ment here characterized being developed in special sections of vol. II. Sim
ilarly in Pfleiderer's Vrchristenthum, Syncretism and Gnosticism, II, p. 73 ff.,
is followed by discussion of gnosis in the N. T. Writings regarded by him as
post-Pauline. The mystical element in gnosis in earher Pauline Epistles is
briefly treated in I, 279 ff. Weinel, §§ 74; 80, 4; 103. B. Weiss, §§ 92 b; 102;
149. "Feine, op. cit., pp. 7-15, and the bibliography prefixed to chap. 7 of
Schweitzer's Paid and his Interpreters.

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 389
gnostic,' p. 56.22 It has been further claimed, not indeed by
Reitzenstein but by various writers, cp. Feine, p. 7 ff., that Chris
tianity is itseh one of the mystery religions, a synthesis of the
oriental rehgions of redemption, due to Paul, either upon the
Gospel and the mysticism of the contact of the Antiochene
mission with religious movements in Asia Minor or Greece, or
even earlier owing to his previous acquaintance with these re
ligions and their literature.
The many points of similarity between Pauline and syncretistic
mysticism are capable, however, of a different construction of
the relation of the competing rehgious movements. Lake's state
ments, concerned primarily with the historical facts of the propa
ganda of the Gospel, are especially suggestive: in Earlier Epistles
of St. Paul, p. 215, 'Christianity has not borrowed from the
mystery rehgions, because it was at least in Europe a mystery
rehgion itseh.' Yet, p. 92, in the matter of eschatology 'there
was originally a fundamental difference between Christianity
and the mystery rehgions.' The Thessalonians 'had accepted
Christianity as something different from the mystery religions.
But in this respect they offer a contrast to some of the Corinthian
Christians,' who, pp. 215-219, advocated the views of future hfe
associated with the mystery rehgions, and who yet, p. 219, ' do not
understand the true nature of the Christian mystery.' These
statements help us to recognize both an essential mystical element
in Christianity and its distinction from the mysticism and myster
ies of hellenistic rehgions; and more definitely that the occasion
of emphasizing the true character of the Christian mystery was
the opposition of Jewish gnostic Christians in Corinth, who were
attempting to assimilate their syncretism of Judaism and hellen
istic mysticism with the Gospel of Christ.
In dhect discussion of Reitzenstein's view of the correspondence
of Pauline and hellenistic mysticism and gnosis, we have on the
one hand Schweitzer's opposition on the ground that the Apostle's
teaching was fundamentally eschatological and distinct from
many essential features of the mystery rehgions; 23 and on the
22 R. Reitzenstein, Die Hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, 1910, pp. 43 and
112 ff.
'* A. Schweitzer, Paul and his Interpreters chap. 7, Paulinism and com
parative rehgions, to which chapter Wernle, Theolog. Litztg., 1914, 516 f.,

390 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
other hand such general criticisms as those of Feine, Kennedy
and Krebs.24 Accepting the results of Reitzenstein, supple
mented by Norden and others, that the long recognized employ
ment in the New Testament of numerous terms and ideas
connected with gnosis, is based not on purely hellenic but on heUen-
istic and syncretistic usage, and that numerous threads of rela
tion connect hellenistic and Pauhne concepts and terminology,
they yet maintain that in the New Testament these terms are
used with a distinct content, and at essential points with a totally
different content; and, therefore, that statements made by Paul
and John in such terms, do not prove their adoption of the gnostic
mystical conceptions expressed in similar terms.
It is conceivable as these writers state that the Gospel preachers,
in an age when syncretistic religious terms were current, would
use them to introduce, or to secure an understanding of, the
Gospel by means of these terms specially denned. But in fact
there are no indications of such a method in the references in the
Acts to propaganda among the heathen. At Lystra the heathen
addressed are interested in the hellenic gods, at Athens they are
representatives of Greek philosophy; and in both cases are ap
proached on the lines of the usual Jewish propaganda preaching.
There is no suggestion of the use of mystery terms in the primi
tive preaching in the references to it in I Thess. and Rom. 1, 18 f.
Such terms become especially prominent in Epistles or sections
of them marked by polemic against gnosticizing errorists. And
we conclude from the foregoing studies that the occasion of their
use was, negatively, the need of denying the possession by Jewish
gnostic Christians of the gnosis, wisdom, illumination, power,
freedom and perfection which they falsely claimed. And posi
tively, these familiar terms, which in many cases were closely
related to fundamental rehgious terms and concepts of the Old
Testament and to Gospel teaching based upon it, would obviously
be also used with any necessary specifications to express the true
assigns a real and very serious importance. Reitzenstein replied to this
chapter in Z. N. T. W., 1912, p. 1 f: Religionsgeschichte und Eschatologie.
24 P. Feine, Theologie des N. Ts., pp. 15.247.291.313.559. H. A. A. Ken
nedy, St. Paul and the Mystery-Religions, 'chaps. 4 ff. E. Krebs, Das rel.
geschichtliche Problem des Vrchristenthums, chaps. 5, 6, 8. See also C. Clemen
Der Einfluss d. Mysterien-^digionen auf d. alteste Christenthum.

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 391
gnosis, mystery and mystical elements of the Gospel, in and by
which readers influenced by the false teachers were to be estab
lished. In this positive establishment, therefore, we find the con
stant emphasis on the initial preaching and experience as a
revelation of the true mystery of God, as a real redemption re
ceived in a mystical certainty of faith and effecting a direct union
with God.
The term most intimately related to this bebaiosis of faith, and
probably antedating collision with the errorists, is ' epignosis of the
truth.' This statement involves of course the rejection of the
famihar view that epignosis is used in the relevant New Testa
ment passages as a higher stage of knowledge by which the Chris
tian gnosis excels that of the false teachers, or as a higher spiritual
knowledge surpassing their assumed inteUectualism. We have
aheady seen that this was not the New Testament method: a
false gnosis was not confuted by a higher gnosis, but by a real
gnosis. Further, the traditional view though maintained by
Lightfoot, that epignosis means ' an advance on gnosis, ' as being
larger, more thorough and complete, or as being perfection of knowl
edge, has been shown by Robinson, Ephesians, 248 ff., to be un
tenable. His conclusion is that gnosis is the wider word and ex
presses knowledge in the fullest sense that can be given to the word ;
and that epignosis is knowledge directed towards a particular ob
ject, perceiving, discerning, recognizing.25 It may be added that it
is therefore not used in the New Testament to express a knowledge
fuller or more advanced than gnosis. Rom. 1 , 28 does not view the
26 Mayor, St Jude and II St Peter, pp. 171-174, agrees with Robinson's
distinction, but still thinks Lightfoot is justified in claiming an intensive
force, 'a closeness and intimacy of knowledge.' But in the New Testament
this is the result of its relation to faith and not to gnosis, as being an advance
upon it. In the only place, I Cor. 13, 12, where the two terms seem to be con
trasted as to degree, Robinson points out that yivuaKU could, as in Gal. 4,
9 and I Cor. 8, 3, be used in both clauses; and that the thought of fuller knowl
edge is expressed not by ixiyivuaKU but by the contrast with e/c pipovs and
the defining Kadus clause. Less satisfactory is his admission that the full
sounding word has been chosen to heighten the effect at the close. It would
rather seem that like the use of aurvpia both for the initial salvation and also
for its actual final consummation, so here iwiyvuaopai refers to the initial
epignosis as finally perfected by growth in faith, hope and love through in
creasing gnosis until we see face to face even as we have been known by God.

392 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
heathen as not approving to have God in advanced knowledge, but
states then when the gnosis of vs. 18 ff. was manifested to them,
they refused to recognize, acknowledge and appropriate it. The
references in the Pastorals and Hebrews to epignosis of the truth 26
are concerned not with advanced gnosis, but with the initial
recognition, acknowledgment and profession of the Gospel and
with the inner experiences of the truth of its promises of forgive
ness and of divine communion in the new hfe in the Spirit com
municated at baptism.
Dibehus, whose special view will be stated later, understands the
phrase to refer 'to becoming or being a Christian. ' And he agrees
that it is a technical term referring to instruction for baptism as
both A. Seeberg and Windisch state in their comment on Hbws.
10, 26.27 In favor of this view that it was a technical primitive
term for the initial instruction and spiritual experience of converts,
is the fact that it and varied equivalent expressions appear in
direct sequence and in relation to the initial faith in the preaching
of the Gospel.28 It would seem also that various other passages in
the Epistles where epignosis and its verb are used, reflect familiar
ity with the phrase ' epignosis of the truth, ' the initial instruction
and conviction of faith, as the occasion of their formulation. It is
therefore clear that such initial epignosis was not an advance upon,
or completion of, the false gnosis; and that as being initial knowl-
28 1 Tim. 2, 4; 4, 3; II Tim. 2, 25; 3, 7; Tit. 1, 1; Hbws. 10, 26.
27 M. Dibehus, N. T. Studien f. g. Heinrici, 1914, p. 177 ff.: 'Eiriyvuais
&X?J0eias. A. Seeberg, Hb. bf, 117, 'The complete knowledge of truth
took place in baptism in which the Christian made profession of the Christian
doctrine.' In his Katechismus, p. 261 n., he adds that 'the truth' probably
refers not merely to the formula of faith, but to the entire content of the
catechism. 28 1 Tim. 2, 4.7; 4, 3; Tit. 1, 1; Ephes. 4, 13; cp. 1, 13 ff. and 4, 20-24; Col.
1, 5-10; Phm. 6; Hbws. 10, 22-26; II Pet. 1, 3-8; cp. II Cor. 13, 5. Similarly in
the Apostolic Fathers: in Clement 59, 2.3, the initial call from darkness to light
is explained as being from agnosia to epignosis of the glory of God's name;
and is followed by the prayer for hearts thus illuminated ets rb yivuaKeiv
God. Polycarp, Mar. 14, 1, prays to the Lord through whose Son ' we received
riiv irepl aov iiriyvuaiv. In Hermas, Sim. 9.16, 7 the dead to whom the
Apostles preached the name of the Son of God and who were baptized by
them 'were made alive and iiriyvuaav the name of the Son of God.' Cp.
also Diognetus, 10, 1-3.

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 393
edge, we should anticipate its growth by means of a developing
gnosis. We have already recognized in discussing bebaiosis, the mystical
element in such epignosis of the truth, although the phrase was not
originally framed in rivalry to the gnosis of the mystery religions.
For the faith which issued in epignosis was a response to a divine
Ulumination effecting a direct certainty of the truth of the Gospel
and an access with all the saints to the Father through the in
dwelling Christ in one Spirit. In principle and potentially this
mystical union was assured in the initial epignosis, of full fruition :
the witness of Christ, I Cor. 1, 6-9, was confirmed, iBeBaiudv
in them so that they came behind in no gift, waiting for the revela
tion of Christ at the end. God who called them into the fellowship
of his Son is faithful and will also confirm them unreprovable in
the day of the Lord. As the epignosis is the recognition and
appropriation of salvation, it too like aurr\pia has stUl to be
wrought out and consummated.29 As the work and gift of the
Spirit, it is the earnest of perfected salvation and union, sight face
to face, in which the epignosis at conversion will have become
knowledge of God as we have been known of him. This relation
between the initial and final stages of salvation and epignosis is
illustrated by statements of Caird in his discussion of rehgious
hfe.30 It is of its very essence that the Infinite has ceased to be
merely a far off vision of spiritual attainment, and has become a
spiritual reality. In that act which constitutes the beginning of
the rehgious hfe, call it faith, or trust or self-surrender, there is
29 Weinel, p. 399, retains the view that epignosis is used in the later Epistles
to express the believers' conception of Christianity as the true and full gnosis.
Less positively, B. Weiss, 128.d.n.8; in II Peter 'perhaps in allusion to this
germinating error, as similarly in the Pastorals, Christianity is conceived
preferably as epignosis.' On the other hand, Dibehus, op. cit., pp. 186, 189,
regarding Ephes. and Pastorals as post-Pauline, and eliminating references
to epignosis in the introductions to Pauline Epistles as belonging to the
schematic formulation, considers it as a leveling down and popularization
of the mystic terminology of Paul, to protect the Church against the dangers
of a one-sided mysticism and the related divorce between rehgion and moral
ity; and at the same time to preserve the union between mystic individualists
and the beheving congregations. To him epignosis of the truth is therefore
knowledge proceeding from sound doctrine and apphed in life.
so John Caird, Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, 1880, pp. 294-
299.

394 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
involved the identification of the finite with a hfe which is eternally
reahzed. It is the elevation of the sphit into a region where hope
passes into certitude, struggle into conquest, interminable effort
and endeavor into peace and rest. It is true that religious hfe is
progressive; but it is not progress towards but within the sphere of
the Infinite. It is the endeavor, by the constant exercise of spirit
ual activity, to appropriate that infinite inheritance of which we
are aheady in possession. The whole future of the religious hfe
is given in its beginning, but it is given implicitly as a principle
which has yet to unfold its hidden riches and its all subduing
power. Evil, error, imperfection are already virtually as they
will be actuaUy suppressed and annuUed, and in the very
process of being annuUed they become the means of spiritual
progress. This initial mystical knowledge and union is therefore to be
developed, and by gnosis, in the growth of the whole personahty
amid the experiences of a life of faith in all human relationships,
unto the fullness of Christ. Reitzenstein's statements, p. 38, con
cerning hellenistic gnosis will enable us to note the similarities of
syncretistic and Christian views of it, and the occasion for the dis
criminations and polemic of the New Testament writers: 'The
supreme sight, dia, of God which renders us divine and gives sal
vation is called yvuvai debv. Gnosis is a direct living experience, a
grace-gift, xb-pi-apa, of God. It Uluminates the man and at the
same time transforms his substance. It exalts him through the
body up into the world of the supersensual. It is a kind of a new
hfe, the highest perfection of the soul, the emancipation from the
body, the path to heaven, the means of salvation, the true worship
of God and piety, as agnosia of God is always love for the body and
sin. He who has gnosis is aheady as man, dews'.
First recalhng that the New Testament references are not to a
dhect conflict with any of the mystery rehgions but to errorists'
attempts to assimilate these ideas with the Gospel, we find that
whatever similarities may appear between the character and goal
of the mystery gnosis and the initial and perfected Christian
epignosis, the Christian writers distinctly emphasize their essen
tial contrasts. While syncretistic gnosis professes to offer a revela
tion in the cult, symbols and mysteries of the dying and rising
nature Gods, or in the visions and revelations of the Lord to the

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 395
errorists, II Cor. 12, 1, Christians possess a revelation of God's
eternal purpose of redemption and consummation in the historic
life and work and heavenly ministry of Christ, which is proclaimed
and taught to every man in all wisdom. It is not dia, sightof God,
but is illumination proceeding from the gnosis of the glory of God
in the face of Jesus Christ, the image of God, II Cor. 4, 6.4. This
illumination of gnosis is not a theosophical knowledge attained in
ecstatic vision divorced from our cognitive activities, but is coin
cident with the renewal of the irvevpa rod vobs and with the
illumination of the voripara and of the eyes of the heart. Neither is
it divorced from ethical tasks and duties in our individual and
corporate life. Hence it is not, as in the rival systems, the basis of
claims of perfection. The Christian has still to work out his salva
tion, yet with God continuously energizing in him to wUl and to do
in furtherance of his redemptive purpose. Gnosis is hkewise, as
with the errorists and in the mystery rehgions, an assurance of
immortality; yet not as a present possession and as an attained
goal, but as the fuU assurance of hope that Christians whose life is
now hid with God in Christ, wUl, when he shaU be manifested, also
with him be manifested in glory.
Correlative therefore to this selection of fundamental contrasts,
is the distinct function of gnosis in the Apostohc teaching as to the
development of the initial epignosis to its full consummation. The
objects to which gnosis is directed are the whole contents of revela
tion appropriated by faith. It is the developing ' penetration into
the deeper grounds and the wider consequences of the great Chris
tian redemptive facts, and a stUl farther apphcation of the truth of
redemption to the practical hfe with the varied wealth of its con
crete relations,' Weiss, N. T. Theology, 102, d. As such, it is how
ever not simply intehectual, but is an activity of the whole person
ahty; and much more, of this personahty in communion with God,
Uluminating, inspiring, invigorating the renewed man whose hfe
is in Christ and in the Spirit. Thus growth in such gnosis has a
mystical character as being deepening union of all the activities of
our personahty with the indwelling Christ of God. The result of
this indwelling, Ephes. 3, 16 ff. is that we may know the love of
Christ which passes knowledge and be filled unto all the fullness
of God; and in Philippians 3, 10 ff. this fuller and developing ap
prehension is by knowing the dying and risen Christ in deepening

396 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
personal experience, communion and conformation to his death in
order to attain unto the resurrection.31
Hence this increasing personal apprehension of the revealed
mysteries of the divine love and grace is a means of development of
a 'faith which groweth exceedingly.' While the mystery of God,
Rom. 16, 25 f ., Ephes. 3, 3, has been completely revealed by Christ
in whom are all the treasures of sophia and gnosis, hidden; and
while in the Apostolic Gospel the whole counsel of God has been
delivered to faith, there is still to be a growing and deeper recog
nition of it both in sophia and gnosis. The distinction between
these ghts is presented in divergent forms in the commentaries.32
But a comparison of the passages where they appear together
supports the view of B. Weiss, N. T. Theology, 92, c; 102 that
sophia in this combination refers to increasing recognition of the
fullness of the revelation in Christ given in apocalypses and special
forms of prophecy; while gnosis expresses the developing appre
hension of the relations, signification and practical apphcations of
all the revealed mysteries of the divine hfe, will and purpose.33 An
31 B. Weiss, The Religion of the N. T., chap. 16.1; N. T. Theology, 102.d;
116.C. Weinel, op. dt, p. 363. Feine, op. cit, p. 443: 'Knowledge, inasmuch
as its real nature is not of a theoretical but of a practically rehgious character,
an energizing and effectual experience of God and Christ, is essentially the
same as faith. Yet it is more definitely a deeper penetration into the activi
ties, revelations and mysteries included in Christian faith. Its task is to
educe and develop the content of faith, and to determine it more definitely
according to its essential character, against attacks and false tendencies.' In
the Prison Letters when opposing false Christological doctrine, the need also
of full intellectual understanding is recognized. ' Yet Paul does not commit
the mistake of desiring to convince by an intehectual method, but places the
emphasis on the experience of what they have enjoyed in union with Christ,
and of what redemptive facts God has accomplished in Christ. At this
stage, union of life with Christ desires also a fully corresponding knowledge
of Christ; the right connection with him does not exist without appropriation
of the truth, which also is mediated spiritually.' On p. 418 he can agree with
Reitzenstein, pp. 39,126 that in I Cor. 14, 6, gnosis is used in the technical
mystical significance of intuitive knowledge effected through the self-disclosure
of God, with which, however, is joined sophia, regarded by Feine as clear
knowledge of the understanding contrasted with intuitive mystical knowledge.
32 A brief summary and discussion of them is given by J. Gloel, Der Heilige
Geist i. d. HeilsverkUndigung des Paulus, pp. 331-334.
33 Comparison of all the passages in the Epistles where sophia is used shows
its usual connection on the one hand with the revelation of the mystery of
God in Christ, including the eschatological consummation; and on the other

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 397
illustration of the development of faith by means of this sophia
and gnosis is found in Ephes. 3, 3 ff. : the mystery, the unsearchable
riches of Christ, the manifold wisdom of God, is made known to
Paul by revelation. His own understanding of it, abveais, can be
perceived by what he has in brief written in chaps. 2 and 3 : the
developed doctrine of Christ's person and work and of his relation
to the Church. On this basis is his prayer, 14 ff ., that the readers
may be filled unto all the fullness of God, and this through the in
dwelling of Christ by faith enabling their apprehension and gnosis
of the revealed mystery of the knowledge-surpassing love of God
in Christ, cp. 1, 8 f. The doctrinal sections of the other Epistles
likewise teach theh readers in all wisdom and gnosis concerning
the mysteries of faith, thereby leading to its establishment and
growth. Moffatt, Introd., p. 443, so speaks of Hebrews : it is a word
of gnosis, more on the lines of Paul's gnosis, I Cor. 12, 8, 'intended
to meet the special practical needs of the church by furnishing the
readers with conceptions of christology which will brace them
against apostasy and discouragement. '
Deepening apprehension of the mysteries of faith in communion
with God in Christ is essentially a growth of knowledge of the
divine love awaking our returning love. In contrast to antinomian
freedom based on false gnosis, this union of reciprocated love in
volves conformity to his will for our consecration in a moral life of
love fulfilling all law. And the love in which we are rooted and
grounded is still to abound in its original epignosis by aiadwais,
perception, and moral discernment. 'As wise,' especially by
revelation of the last things, we are 'to know and understand'
what the will of the Lord is; to approve the good, the acceptable
and perfect will of God, until, Col. 4, 12, we stand perfect and fully
assured in it. Such perfection in all the will of God, 1, 9, is to walk
worthily of the Lord unto all pleasing, is a fruitfulness in every
good work, an increasing in the original epignosis of his wUl, and
definitely in all wisdom and spiritual understanding.34
hand with gnosis or the phases of it expressed in abveais, spiritual avveais,
(ppbvna is. A compressed phrase in Revelation indicates the same relation of
the terms: 'the nous having sophia' can understand the revealed mystery of
the Beast or Babylon.
34 Gloel, op. cit, p. 296, 'The gnosis effected by the Spirit has for its object
primarily and predominatingly the salvation that has appeared in Christ

398 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
It is by gnosis too that we are ' to abound in hope in the power of
the Holy Ghost. ' The gift, Ephes. 1 , 17, of the spirit of sophia and
apocalypsis in our epignosis is for the illumination of our hearts
'to know' the hope of God's calling, the wealth of his glory and
the might of his power to us-wards. Though eye hath not seen the
things prepared for those who love God, he has made a ' revelation'
of them by the Sphit. They who have received the Sphit which is
from God may know these xaptffSevra, which are the blessings of
the messianic Kingdom already appropriated in hope; may speak
them in words of wisdom taught by the Sphit; and may know
them avvKpivovres and kvaKpivovres, because having as well the
vods of Christ.
Christian fellowship also is developed by this gnosis, which is a
spiritual gift, I Cor. 12 ff ., for the profit and upbuilding of the whole
body of Christ. Opposing the exclusiveness and individualism of
the errorists, the goal of unity and of a perfected humanity which
is revealed in the faith and initial epignosis of the Son of God,
Ephes. 4, 13, is apprehended, known and increasingly realized by
understanding of the mystery of Christ in fellowship with all
saints in all individual and corporate relations. It is a gnosis which
is advanced in mutual love, service and worship: and definitely in
the teachings, exhortations and admonitions in the church service
and ministry, as well as by the discernment and testing of the
prophetic gifts of wisdom and gnosis exercised in the Church's
worship. In I John too in evident opposition to a false knowledge, the
function of true Christian gnosis appears interwoven throughout
all the discussions of the Epistle. Here also it is a spiritual gift
enjoyed in mystical union with God. As we are in him that is
true, he has given us an understanding, Sikvoia, that we may know
him that is true. It is found in the Epistle to be a gnosis, a spiritual
perception and gift of the Spirit developing the whole personahty
that is born of, abides in and loves God. By means of it those
who have accepted in faith the message of the word of hfe, know
the Father and the Son; and are enabled to walk in the hght to
and the eternal counsel of God realized in him; yet the spiritual knowledge
of the divine truth is at the same time the true basis of the concrete spiritual
tasks and for discernment concerning all that confronts the Christian in the
world.'

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 399
walk as Christ walked, and be thereby perfected in the love of
God. Theh Christian hope is assured by knowing that now are
they children of God and shall be hke him, and may have boldness
in the day of Judgment. And throughout, the Christian feUow
ship in brotherly love and service is grounded on the knowledge
of God and of his love manifested in the incarnation, 4, 7, and
declared by the Apostohc witness, 1, 1-4, and caU to enter their
feUowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.
The claims to the possession of mysteries, wisdom and gnosis,
and theh perverted use, in the system of the errorists, were thus
repudiated in the positive presentation of the function of true
Christian wisdom and knowledge. But in addition, since the
gnosticizing system was a destructive influence upon Christian
faith and hfe as a whole, behevers had stiU to be guarded in the
Epistles directed against the movement, by the apphcation of the
general principles and means of estabhshment in the faith. Hence,
we have found in all the New Testament writings a confident
appeal to the initial faith of the readers in the Apostohc Gospel.
And in the enlarging and varied experiences of their developing
Christian life, they were estabhshed in this faith both by being
recaUed to the primary direct conviction of theh union with God
and also by being strengthened in this bebaiosis through the
increasing apprehension of the fullness of the divine revelation in
Christ by means of the word of wisdom and the iUumination of
gnosis, through the prophetic exhortations to a moral walk ful
filling all law as summed up in love, and above all through the
deepening hfe of divine communion in personal devotion, in cor
porate worship and mutual brotherly service in the fellowship of
believers severally members of the one body of the indwelling
Christ. This constant method of estabhshment could be Ulustrated in
almost any one of the Epistles, but it appears with special con
ciseness in the compressed formulations of Jude. His aim in the
call to contend for the faith once dehvered, is establishment
against gnostic perversion of the Christian doctrine and hfe; and
the method is that of the other New Testament writers. There is
first, negatively an exposure of the errorists' teachings, life and
doom. But with vs. 17 is, positively, a call to remember the
primitive preaching: the words of the Apostles of Christ. The

400 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
words here recalled are, with Mayor and Windisch, from the
general oral tradition of the Gospel, which was dehvered in the
preaching, the initial instruction and in the subsequent didaskalia
in the Church services, cp. I Cor. 6, 9; 15, 1; Gal. 5, 21; I Thess.
3, 3; 4, 1; II Thess. 2, 5; Col. 1, 5-7; Ephes. 4, 20. Whether or
how far this constant appeal to primitive teaching in the inter
est of establishing the readers of the Epistles in theh special
situations, affected the principle of selection of Christ's words and
deeds in the composition of our Gospels, is involved with too many
other critical questions to permit of its discussion here. Such
a relation between I John and the Fourth Gospel is recognized in
varying degrees; but the divergence of opinion as to the dates
and destinations of the Synoptic Gospels, and therefore as to
the situations of their readers, prevents agreement as to the
Evangehsts' special aims and methods of selection, in establishing
those readers. Yet throughout the period from 62 to 100 a. d.,
to which the Gospels are variously assigned, their definite selec
tions of the evangehcal material, their special emphases and
details would serve to recall to such behevers as possessed them,
the word of truth of the Gospel of Christ's hfe and teachings to
which the Epistles appealed against the tradition and philosophy
of men; and this, not only in the general presentation of Jesus as
the Christ and Son of God, as in Mark; but in addition, by their
record of his Virgin Birth, of his moral, universahstic and eschato
logical teachings, of the reahty of his resurrection, of the mission
of his Apostolic Church, as in Luke and Matthew : all in contrast
to the current denials of these fundamental Christian principles.35
36 Von Soden, Theolog. Abhandgn Weizsacker gewidmet: The Interest of the
Apostolic Age in the Evangelic History, pp. 161-165, emphasizes the pressing
interests at the time of the composition of the Gospels, as a normative in
fluence on the formulation of the Evangehcal traditions. Maintaining that
the two dominating themes in Matthew's five Discourses were the animation
of the eschatological hope and the need of direction for right behavior in order
to attain it, he finds that the shadow of the errorists of the later Epistles
moves through these Discourses: chaps. 24 and 25 reflecting anxiety con
cerning the spreading errors of denial of the Parousia and its accompaniments;
and the other Discourses guarding against the libertine antinomians of Pas
torals, Jas. Jude, II Peter, writings which stand in closest connection with
Mtw. B. Weiss, Introd., § 35, n. 2, and Quellen d. Luk. evglms., p. 257, also
holds that Mtw. in 7, 22; 13, 41; 24, 12, combats the antinomians of his period
It is however to be recalled both that these errors appear in the earhest Epistles

GNOSTICISM AND THE NEW TESTAMENT 401
The confident reminder in Jude 17 f. of the faith preached is,
moreover, conjoined as throughout the New Testament, with
the reference to the readers' reception of the Apostohc witness:
to ' their most holy faith,' to the spiritual experiences, the bebaiosis,
the epignosis of the grace of God in truth, resting upon then-
acceptance of the faith once dehvered. It is 'most holy' both in
view of its divine source and consecrating efficacy, and also
as contrasted with the impious and impure perversions of it by
the opponents of vs. 4. Their destructive influence is to be
counteracted by positive development, advance, growth, upbuUd-
ing of this faith. As an 'upbuUding' the life of faith is viewed as
a participation in a corporate life growing up unto the fullgrown
man, cp. B. Weiss, N. T. Theology, 92.b and n.6; 106 .a. In II Cor.
13, 13, the perfecting of the Christian hfe, vs. 11, is in the grace
of Christ, the love of God and the feUowship of the Holy Spirit;
so here, faith's upbuUding is by means of this threefold relation
with God in the threefold fellowship, love and hope; and it is
further viewed in our vss. 20.21 as a counterpart to the threefold
reference to the errorists of vss. 18.19 as mockers of the Parousia,
walking in impious lusts and as causing separations, not having
the Spirit.
The upbuUding of faith by prayer in the Holy Spirit is, there
fore, seen to have a wider reference than the usual interpretation
of the words as individual prayer prompted by the Spirit. As in
Ephes. 6, 18, cp. 4, 1 ff., the reference is to the corporate hfe of
worship in the feUowship of the Spirit. We learn in I Cor. 12-14
and Ephes. 4, 1-16, that when 'the whole Church is assembled
together,' the one body animated by the one Spirit and giving
diligence to keep the unity of the Sphit, is buUt up and established
by the Spirit's ghts of wisdom, gnosis, prophetic exhortation and
admonition, didache and didaskalia, as weU as by the corporate
devotion of prayer, praise and thanksgiving in the Spirit; and
and also that they are there met by appeal to the still earher primitive Gospel
preaching, didache and didaskalia. In view of the fact of the relation of the
structure and contents of our Gospels to the leading topics and contents of
the primitive preaching and teaching to which behevers were recalled in the
Epistles for their establishment against errorists, it is evident that this special
interest could continue to be served, in connection with the general aims
of the Gospels, by the selection of relevant material from the primitive preach
ing and instruction.

402 APOLOGY AND POLEMIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
further, that this united worship, ministry and instruction is for
the profit and edification both of the Body of Christ and of its
members severaUy.
Estabhshment and upbuUding in this corporate hfe in the
Spirit is next to be advanced by 'keeping yourselves in the love
of God.' Again in this compressed and possibly hturgical formu
lation the contrast to the preceding walk in lusts by the ungodly,
points to sphitual advance in the moral walk in love. With
Windisch, 'the phrase unites as in Phihppians 2, 14 the divine
and human activity in rehgious hfe'; and with Bigg, whUe the
love of God means here the love of God for man, yet 'they are to
keep themselves safe within the Covenant by obedience.' So
too we find in II John 6 : this is love, that we walk in his command
ments; and even more definitely in I John 2, 5.6 echoing John 15,
9 f . : if ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love.
The inspiration for upbuUding of faith by this fulfillment of the
divine law of love is, as we have constantly found, the hope of the
mercy, grace and glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a hope
hving and abounding in the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit
as the earnest of our inheritance of the Kingdom; a hope that
works out stedfastness under all trials and as well, animates us
to ministry for the restoration of the erring and of those that
oppose themselves. Thus increasingly established and buUt up
in faith, love, hope and unity of the Spirit are the 'Christians of
the Apostohc Age and of aU succeeding ages confidently sum
moned to contend for the faith which was once for aU dehvered
unto the saints.' And Jude's closing doxology to the God of
hope, mighty to guard us from stumbling and to place us before
his glory blameless and in exceeding joy, includes the Church's
assurance of the direct divine ministry in her preaching of the
everlasting Gospel in the power of the Spirit; of his bebaiosis and
confirmation of faith in the epignosis of the grace of God in truth
by those who accept her witness; and of his sterigmos, estabhsh
ment and upbuUding of this faith in all her abiding witness and
apphcation of it to the new tasks of the developing history and
life of humanity. Inspiring this her faith is the Spirit-born con
viction: Faithful is God, who also will confirm you blameless unto
the end, in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

INDEX OF SELECTED BIBLICAL CITATIONS

Matthew PAGE
3, 13 ff  15
11, 2ff  15
11, 11  206
c. 12 ff  46
12, 22 ff  35, 38
12, 38 ff  31, 44
c. 13  51
16, Iff  42
16, 13 ff  21
22, 31  120
c. 23  31
24,30  43
27, 11 ff  164
28, 19  ...79, 104, 110
Mare
1, 16 ff  1, 6, 17
2,1-3,6  31
3, 22 ff  35
7, Iff  46
8, 11 ff  31, 38, 41
8,29  20
8,30  52
10,45  53
12,26  120
12, 38 ff  31
16, 15 f  79
Luke
1,4  107
7, 18 ff  15
11, 14 ff  35, 38
11,29  40
11,30  44
11, 33 ff  46
13,29  79
17, 20 f  42
23,2.14.22  163
24,19  75
24,27  79
24,44  54
24,47  79
John
1, 41 ff  20
cc.2-5  18

PAGE
3, Iff  29
3, 16 ff  30
4,25  66
c. 5  30
5,36  25
6,68  24
6,69  20
c. 6  39
cc. 7ff  47
7,46  24
8, 41  149
cc. 9ff  49
12,49  24
14,10  25
15,27  22
16,29  54
16,30  20
18, 36 ff  161
18,38  165
18, 31 ff  53
19, 11  161
20, 21 ff  79
20, 31  29
Acts
1, 1  109
l,6ff  64
1,8  79
c. 2  57
2,22  112
2,24  60
2, 29 ff  61
2,36  103
2, 38 ff  76
2,38  62, 78
2, 42 ff  113
2,42  110, 121
c.3  63
3, 19 ff  76
4,5  65
4,13  22
5 17  65
5, 30 ff  65
c!8  66
8,35  105, 113
8,37  120
9, 15 ff  HI
9,15.27  82

404 INDEX OF SELECTED BIBLICAL CITATIONS

PAGE
10, 34 ff  67
10,35  88
10, 37 f  14
10,36  112
10,38  132
10,48  122
11, 17f. ..-.  :  69
11,20  81, 189
13, 7ff  90
13, 23 ff  14, 71
13,27.34  71
13, 30 ff  60
13, 38 ff  154
14, 9ff  91
14,22  121, 134, 140
c. 15  189
15, 1  186
15, 36.41  135
16,20  82
16, 20 f  91
16, 31  113
16,33  Ill
17, 2 f  71
17, 6  159
17, 16 ff  92
18, 6  155
18, 12 ff  167
18, 24-19, 7  203
18,25  109
18, 25 f  106
18,26  105
18, 26 ff  122
20, 7 ff  141
20,28  251
20,35  145
22, 10  109
22, 21  82
22,16  78
23, 11  76
23,29  171
24, Iff  159
24, 14 ff  171
)24,24ff  96
25,3.11.26  172
26,8  120
26, 16 ff  126
26,17  82
26,18  96
26,22  71
26,23  120
28,23  66
28, 33 ff  75
Romans
1, 11  140
1, 9ff  138

PAGE
1,16  79
1, 18 ff  87, 98, 195
2, Iff  87
2, 5ff  121
2,18  106
3,30  120
5, 12 ff  255
6,17  110
c. 8  256
8, 16  127
8,24  133
8,26  121
cc. 9-11  157
10, 9ff  119, 120
11,36  239
12, Iff  259
12,2  120
cc. 14-15  261
15,8  79, 133
15,13  133
15, 14 ff  138
15, 15  139
15,19!  131
16, 17 ff  110, 248
16, 25 f  396
I Corinthians
1,5  246
1, 6  133
1, 6ff  137, 393 „
1, 8f  137
1, 12 ff  229
1, 18 ff  132
2, Iff  132
4, 17  122
4, 19  378
5, 3f  140
6, 9ff  110
6, 12-20  243
8, 2f  127
8,6  239
10, 15 ff  244
11,9  377
11, 23 ff  144
12,3  241
12,8  246
c. 13  246
cc. 13 ff  398 -
13,12  127
14,19  107, 122
14,23  .' 141
14, 23 ff  103
15,1  74
15, Iff  114
15, 3 f  67; 71
15,4  237

INDEX OF SELECTED BIBLICAL CITATIONS 405

.» . ~ PAGE
15, 5ff  72
"'«ff  145
Jf. 31  120
15,34  247
15, 45 ff  240
16,23  242
II Corinthians
1, 15ff.23  138
2,13.17  130
4,1-6  240
4, 4ff  100
4,6  269, 395
5, 18 ff  130
10, 2ff  378
11,22  286
12, 1  395
Galatians
1,15  74
2, Iff  190
2, 11 ff  198
4,9  127
5,5  134
6,6  104, 122, 107
Ephesians
1, 9  269
1,12  79
1, 13.14  132
1, 17  398
1, 18 ff  120
1, 20 ff  279
2, 1 ff.11-22  279
3, 3ff  396
3, 6ff  279
3, 16 ff  395
3,117  136
4, Iff  401
4, 1-16  279
4/11 f  138
4, "13  398
4,*16  136
4, 17  127
4, 17 ff  99, 110
4, 25 ff  281
4,30  132
5, 2  100
5, 25 ff  282
6, 18 f  121, 401
Philippians
1,6  137
1,7  2, 77, 124

PAGE
1,16  2, 77
1, 25 ff  '138
1,27  137
2, Iff  283
c 3  284
3, 10 ff  395
Colossians
1,5  146
1, 9ff  99, 267
1,12-2,3  270
1,29  131
2,2  269
2, 4-3, 4  272
2, 6f  110
2,7  127
2, 18  274
2, 20-23  275
3, 1-4, 6  277
3, 14  267
4, 12  396
I Thessalonians
1,5  102
1, 9f  90, 100
1, 19 f  98
2, 13  7, 103, 130
2, 17 ff  138
3, 3f  121
3, 7ff  144
3, 10  138
4, 1  120
4, Iff  118
4, 11 ff  144
4, 13 ff  118, 216, 219
5, 1.10  120
5, 11 ff  144
5, 12 ff  121
5, 14  145, 220
5, 17  120
5, 19 ff  218
5,24  137
II Thessalonians
1, 6ff  120
1, 7ff  65
2, 1 ff  224
2, 2ff  217
2, 13 f  109
3,2  214, 317, 377
3,6  221
I Timothy ¦*
1,3  292
1, 7f  291

406 INDEX OF SELECTED BIBLICAL CITATIONS

PAGE
2,2  177
2,5  298
2, 15  299
3, 15  121
4, 2  295
4,6  292
4,10  299
4, 13 ff  141
6, 12 f  298
6,20  293
II Timothy
2,8  298
2,9  179
2, 10  299
2,18  296
2,25  380
3, 6f  302
3,10  169
4,2  141, 145
Titus
1,3  100
1,4  99
1, 9-16  222
1,10  291
1, 15  100
1, 15 f  293
1,16  295
2, 11 ff  99, 300
3,3  177
3, 3ff  99
3, 4ff  299
3, 9f  379
Hebrews
cc. 1-4  308
2, 3f  130
4, 12 f  131
5, 11 ff  313
5,12  122, 146, 313
5, 12 ff  110
5, 22 ff  104
6, 1  107, 122
6, Iff  118, 126
6, 11.16 f  133
6, 18 f  127
10, 19  144
10, 19 ff  118
10, 20 f  380
10, 22 ff  314
10,25  315
10,26  392
11,6  83, 120
cc. 12-13  314

PAGE
12,2  137
12, 14 ff  380
13, 9ff  141, 317
I Peter
1, 3ff  33
1, 18 f  324
2, 2 f  136
2, 4-10  327
2, 13 ff  325
3, 13 ff  324
3,15  1
4, 7ff  327
4, 13  179
5, 10  136
5, 12  139
II Peter
1, 1  329
1, 3ff.9  332
1,12  57
1, 16ff.l9ff  333
2, 1  333
2, 12  331
2, 13 ff  330
2, 18  331
2, 18 ff  335
c. 3  334
3, 1 f .17 f  146
I John
c. 1-2, 17  339
1, 1-4  399
1,3.5  56
1,6  346
2, 12 f  349
2, 15 ff  344
2, 19  377
2,22  340
2,24  146
2, 28 ff  341
2, 29 ff  343
3,4  343
4, Iff  340
4,7  399
4, 7ff  340
4, 13 ff  348
5, 6f  341
5, 17  343
5, 18  348
II John
9  286

INDEX OF SELECTED BIBLICAL CITATIONS 407

Jude PAGE
3  332
4  331, 333
8  336
11  337
17  399
12 ff  245, 330
20 f  130
22 ff  381

Revelation

c. 1 . . .
cc. 2-3
14, 6 f

357350 97

Genesis
cc.1-3  296, 313
Deutebonomy
6,4  120
32,20  379

Psalms page
2  72
16  60
68, 11  61
110  61
Isaiah
52, 13 ff  64
53, 10 ff  53
Daniel
7,13  21, 359

19,10  360
22, 8 f  360 3,1.

Malachi

71

I Clement, cc. 35-36  83
 42, 3  124
Didache, 6, 3; 7, 1; 9, 1  109
 7, 1  106
Irenaeus, C. Haer, iv. 24  88
Justin, J Apology, 61.65  106
 67  142
Tertullian, Apology, 2  160
 Scorpiace, 10  160

GENERAL INDEX

lia, 56
Agrippa I, persecution by, 153 f .
Agrippa, II, 172.
angels, doctrine of, 308 f., 310 f.
Antinomianism, condemnation of,
178 ff.
Antioch, Church at, 189 ff.
Apollos, 203 f .
apologetic, history of, 5 f .
apologia, 1, 77, 124 ff.
to the pagans, 161 ff.
apology in New Testament, 1 ff.
Apostles, as witnesses, 22.
establishment in faith by Resur
rection, 54 f .
faith of, 13 ff.
their discipline in faith, 20 ff.
their establishment in faith, 50 ff.
apostolic tradition, validity of, 385 ff
apostolic witness, 147.
asphaleia, 108 ff.
Balaam, teaching of, 353 ff.
Baptism, 62 f ., 69, 105 ff., 132.
preparation for, 105 f., Ill ff.,
113 f., 115 ff.
seal of, 132.
bebaiosis, 7, 78, 123 ff., 304, 387 ff.,
393.
Beelzebul controversy, 35 ff .
blood, abstinence from, 196.
Cainites, sect of, 370 f .
Carpocratian systems, 338.
catechesis, primitive, 104 ff., 119 ff.
in Epistles, 118 ff.
catechetical forms, 119 ff.
Caesar versus Christ, 183 f .
Christ, redemption in, 324.
Christ party, at Corinth, 252.
at Rome, 228 ff.
Christian life, development of, 144,
246 f.
Christology, primitive defense of,
9 ff., 10.
Church, authority of, 279 ff., 282 ff.,
318 f .
authority of, versus Gnosticism,
219 ff., 243, 315 f .
feUowship in, 121, 137.

.Church, unity of, versus Gnostics,
345 f.
unity in, 261, 279 ff., 282 ff.
concision, the, 286.
controversial element, 1 ff.
conversion, phenomena connected
with, 111.
Corinthian parties, 228 ff.
Cornehus, 67 ff., 188 f .
Council at Jerusalem, 190 f .
Creed, primitive, 115 ff., 146.
Cross, gnostic attitude toward, 239.
Jewish attitude toward, 149 ff.,
155 ff.
scandal of, 55, 59, 63.
Cypriote-Cyrenian propaganda, 80.
Death of Jesus, 52.
demonstration of the Spirit, 77,
101 ff., 128, 132.
didache, 110 ff., 122 ff.
Didache, 105 ff., 110, 115 f., 195,
197.
discipline of errorists, 378 ff.
docetism, 257, 332, 340 f .
epignosis, 267, 268, 293, 391 ff.
Epistles, relation to primitive Gospel,
146 ff .
establishment, against Gnostics, 384.
in the faith, 134 ff.
Ethiopian Eunuch, conversion, 67.
Eucharist, 118 f., 140 ff., 316 ff.
maintained against Gnostics, 244 ff.
evildoers, suffering as, 180 f .
exaltation of Jesus, 61, 63 f ., 72.
faith, primitive Christian, 7.
process of, 123.
certitude of, 128 ff.
establishment in, 134 ff.
Felix, 96 f., 170 f.
fellowship in Gnosis, 398.
'form of teaching,' 110.
Gallio, action before, 167 f .
Gamaliel's position, 152.
Gentiles, admission of, 188 ff .
evangelization of, 78 ff., 81 ff.,
82 ff., 92 ff.

410

GENERAL INDEX

Gentiles, opposition of, 82 ff., 91
gnosis, 246 ff., 260, 266 ff., 274, 278 f .,
288, 293 ff., 331 ff., 348 f.,
388ff.,390f.,395ff.
Gnosticism, antithesis to Gospel,
273 ff.
doctrines, systems, 212, 216 ff.,
239, 294, 352 ff.
early appearances of conflict with,
209 ff., 213 ff., 227, 270, 290 ff.
Gnostics, antinomianism and denial
of authority, 218, 238, 243, 255,
276 f., 281 f., 291 ff., 301 ff., 315,
319, 324 f., 335, 336, 342, 347.
as pneumatics, 375, 386.
asceticism, 275 f ., 295 ff.
claim of gnosis, 246, 331 ff.
claim of spiritual gifts, 217 f., 234 f .,
245 f., 311 f.
denial of redemption in Christ,
271 ff., 298, 324, 333.
denial of resurrection, 217, 219,
233 ff., 237 f., 258 f., 274, 297,
332
description of, 214, 220 ff., 284 ff.,
330 f ., 376 ff .
divisive character, 229, 252, 259 f.,
280, 314, 330 ff.
doctrine of perfectionism, 268, 288.
errors, summary of their, 363.
eschatology, their attitude to, 217,
221 322
Jewish origin of, 234, 290, 307, 338,
351, 360, 364 ff.
moral character of, 214 ff., 220 ff.,
281 f., 315.
polemic against, 233 ff., 284.
propaganda, 265 ff.
Godfearers, 80 f .
Gospel as word of God, 129 f .
"Gospel of Christ," 56.
Gospels, apologetic character of, 3 ff.
as sources, 9 ff.
polemic in, 27 ff.
written for establishment in faith,
202.
Hellenists, 181, 189.
humiliation of Jesus, 240 f., 283.
illumination, Christian, 394 ff.
Incarnation, the, in conflict with the
age, 2.
interpretation of Scriptures, 311.
Israel, election of, 157 ff .
Jesus, as Lord, 112, 241 ff., 271 ff.,
279, 298, 308 ff ., 309, 336, 358.
birth of, 149.

Jesus, controversy with opponents,
28, 31, 33, 37.
death of, 52.
his appeal to the Old Testament,
52 f.
his faith in his Messiahship, 16, 18.
power of his personality, 19 ff.
the Christ, 51 f., 59.
the name, 241.
Jews, evangelization of, 8 ff., 57 ff.,
79.
polemic against Christianity,
149 ff., 153.
Jewish propaganda, 80 ff., 114 ff.
syncretism, 366 ff.
Jezebel the prophetess, 354 f ., 356 f .
John Baptist, school of, 203 ff., 372.
witness of, 3 f ., 14 ff.
John, Gospel of, 47 ff.
as witness, 17 ff-,25.
Jonah, sign of, 43 ff .
Judaizers in Church, 189 ff., 199 ff.
katecheo, 107 f ., 122.
Kingdom, the, 51, 160 f .
Law, Christ's attitude to, 149.
relation of Gospel to, 186 ff.
liturgical elements in Epistles, 137,
140, 142.
forms, 140.
Love, law of, 120, 246 f., 260 f.
Mark as a teacher, 122.
Messiah, Jesus as, 16 f., 18 f., 70 f.,
157 ff.
Messianic claims of Jesus, 41 ff.,
51 ff.
hope in instruction, 117, 120.
signs, 40 f.
teaching, 156.
Messianism, 72 ff.
ministry, for refuting errorists, 300 f .
of the Church, 138 ff.
of the word, 130 ff.
moral rules, 194 ff.
mystery, 268 ff.
mysteries, of faith, 394 ff., 397.
mystical union with Christ, 256 ff.
mysticism, Christian, 389 f., 394.
myths, Jewish, 296.
Name, persecution for the, 175 ff.,
179 f.
Nero, charges against Christians,
174 f., 180.
New Testament as apology, 1 ff.
Nicolaitans, 353 ff., 356, 372.
Nicolaus, 372 f .

GENERAL INDEX

411

Oral Gospel, its contents, 56 ff ., 70 ff.
Palestinian Church, loyalty to Juda
ism, 152 ff.
Parousia, 334 ff., 340.
doctrine versus Gnosticism, 217 ff.,
223 ff., 228 ff., 238.
Paul, at Athens, 92 ff.
his knowledge of Jesus' earthly
life, 73 ff.
his preachmg, 60 ff .
preaching to Gentiles, 82 ff., 98 ff.
his propaganda, 70 ff., 76.
relation to Jewish propaganda,
83 f., 87 ff.
relation to Stephen, 153.
Pentecost, gifts at, 61 f.
persecutions, counsel concerning.
192 ff.
attitude towards, 182.
Peter, at Antioch, 198.
his preaching, 57 ff.
sermon at Pentecost, 60 ff.
Pharisees, controversies with Jesus,
28 ff., 46 ff.
Jesus' denunciation of, 49 ff .
Philip, 65 ff.
pleroma, 273.
plerophoria, 102, 127 ff ., 133 f .
Pliny's testimony, 142 f .
polemic with Jews, 185 ff.
prayer of corporate Church, 401.
Priscilla and Aquila as teachers, 122.
propaganda, Christian versus Jewish,
87 ff., 100 ff.
prophecy, witness to Jesus, 60 ff., 67,
72 ff.
Quiet in the Land, 27.
¦\
Resurrection, 150 ff.
Jesus', 52, 55, 60, 64, 72, 94.
as a sign, 45, 60 ff., 72.
as subject, 151.
gnostic attitude toward and po-
lemic against 237 ff., 240 ff., 245,
255 296.
Revelation, Book of, persecutions,
184.
Rome, conflict with, 159 ff., 166.
conduct of Church toward, 176 ff .

Rome, legal process against Chris
tians, 174 ff.
loyalty to, 177.
Sadducees, attitude to Jesus, 27 f .
attitude to Church, 152 ff.
Sergius Paulus, preaching to, 90.
sign, demand for a, 38 ff.
signs, as proof of the Gospel, 130 ff.
Silas as a teacher, 122.
Simon Magus, 371.
Son of God, 21, 23.
Son of Man, 20 ff., 359.
Spirit, fruits of, 133.
gift of, 69, 133.
Stephen, 187.
death of, 80.
his defense, 157, 187.
sterizein, establish, 134.
strangled, things, 193 ff.
sufferings of Christ, 64.
summaries of Christian life, 117.
supernatural elements in Apostohc
preaching, 111.
Synoptics, ordei of controversies,
32 ff.
Tacitus, testimony concerning Chris
tians, 175.
teachers, 122.
Tertullus' charge against Paul, 170 f .
Timothy as a teacher, 122.
testimonies, collections of, 59.
Theophilus, 108 f.
Tubingen School, 187, 209.
Two Ways, the, 100, 114 f., 116.
universahsm of Gospel, 78 ff., 185 ff.,
186.
visitations of Churches, 138 f .
witness, of the Father, 22 ff.
of Jesus' words, 24.
of Jesus' works, 24, 37.
to Christ, 25.
women, gnostic doctrines, 296, 302,
326.
worship of Church, as corporate act,
401 f.
Zealots, attitude to Jesus, 28.

3 9002 02455 9461