YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY THE LIBRARY OF THE DIVINITY SCHOOL THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS THEIR ORIGIN AND EARLY HISTORY THE CROALL LECTURES FOR 1911-12 J&» MACMILLAN AND CO., Limited LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA MELBOURNE THE MACMILLAN COMPANY NEW YORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO DALLAS SAN FRANCISCO THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd. TORONTO THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS THEIR ORIGIN AND EARLY HISTORY GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. .PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AND BIBLICAL CRITICISM IN THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW typpiev be tov dyjcavpov tovtov iv do'TpaKlvoti CKeOeo'w WITH TWELVE FACSIMILES MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED ST MARTIN'S STREET, LONDON 1913 ALMAE MATRI ABERD0NENSI1 SACRUM- PREFACE The following Lectures were delivered in Edinburgh on the Croall Foundation in the end of the year 191 1. And the time that has since elapsed has given me the opportunity of revising them carefully, and of adding a number of notes, which may prove useful to those who desire to carry the study further. In attempting to cover so wide a field in the course of six lectures, I have naturally been obliged to indicate., rather than to discuss, many of the problems that emerge, while not a few points to which I would gladly have drawn attention have been omitted altogether. I trust, however, that enough has been said to show how fascinating are the questions suggested by the making of our New Testament, and, above all, how impossible it is fully to understand the varied documents of which it is composed, unless they are studied in con nexion with their origin and early history. The very outward form of the autographs, on which recent discoveries have thrown so much welcome light, has its value from this point of view. And the story of the gradual process, by which writings in themselves so occasional and fragmentary were viii PREFACE at length brought together in one sacred volume, so far from obscuring, tends rather to emphasize the Divine power that has been operative in them all along. It remains only to record my grateful thanks to the Croall Trustees for the honour they did me in appointing me to the Lectureship, and to the many friends who have assisted me with valuable suggestions in the discharge of its duties. Nor can I forget the officials and readers of the Glasgow University Press, whose constant courtesy and care have materially lightened the work of revision. G. M. The University, Glasgow, January 17, 1913. CONTENTS LECTURE I THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT PAGE Introductory 3 I. The rise of Christian writings- 4 Disappearance of the New Testament autographs 6 II. Outward form of the original manuscripts 7 i. The material on which they were written 8 2. History and manufacture of papyrus 9 3. Other writing materials 16 4. Sealing and addressing of rolls 17 5. Preservation of rolls 20 III. The manner in which the books of the New Testament were written 1. Dictation 21 Autographic conclusions 24 Character of the handwriting ¦ 25 The amount of liberty left to the scribes 26 2. General results from the use of dictation (1) Vividness of language 27 (2) Quotations embodied from correspondents' letters - 27 (3) Differences of style 3° IV. Delivery of the New Testament writings 30 Use of private messengers - 3] The permanent value of the New Testament writings - 32 x CONTENTS LECTURE II THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS PAGE I. The linguistic conditions of Palestine - 35 Wide-spread use of Aramaic 36 Use of Greek by the New Testament writers 37 Reasons for their preference for Greek - 39 II. The character of New Testament Greek 1. Use of the common Greek of the day - 43 New light on this Greek 44 General uniformity of the Koivjj - 48 2. Influences affecting the Greek of the New Testament (1) Hebraisms - 5° (2) Certain literary tendencies 55 (3) The transforming power of Christianity - 58 III. Recent Gains to our knowledge of the Greek New Testa ment 1. Direct additions to our New Testament texts 60 2. Indirect gains as affecting (1) Orthography and Accidence 62 Morphology - 63 (2) Syntax Examples of laxer usage in the case of pre positions - 65 and in the construction of Ivo. 67 Grammatical niceties in the New Testament Tense construction 68 Case construction 68 (3) Vocabulary (a) Reduction in the number of ' Biblical ' words 70 (b) Confirmation of traditional meanings 72 (c) Choice of meanings - 74 (d) Suggestion of new meanings 75 (e) Fresh life and reality imparted to familiar phraseology 77 The ultimate aim of New Testament study - 80 CONTENTS xi LECTURE III THE LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS— THE EPISTLES AND THE APOCALYPSE PAGE The earliest books of the New Testament were epistles - 83 I. The Pauline Epistles Their authenticity - - 84 1. The epistolary form Antiquity of letters 85 Classical collections of letters 86 Letters in the Old Testament and the Apocrypha 86 2. The adoption of the epistolary form by St. Paul - 87 (1) The personal side of the Pauline Epistles illustrated from contemporary papyrus letters 88 (2) The literary side of the Pauline Epistles 94 3. The style of the Pauline Epistles 95 4. Some general points regarding the Pauline Epistles (1) Their speech -character 103 (2) Their artistic and rhetorical structure 104 (3) Their relation to Jewish literature 104 II. The other Epistles of the New Testament 107 Their general and yet personal character 108 The Epistle to the Hebrews 109 The Epistle of St. James in The First Epistle of St. Peter 112 The pseudonymous character of 2 Peter 113 The Johannine Epistles 115 III. The Apocalypse 117 Its Hebraic and its Hellenic sides 118 Its barbarous Greek 119 Its structure - 121 Bearing of language and date on the question of authorship - - I23 The religious significance of the Apocalypse 126 xii CONTENTS LECTURE IV THE LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS— THE GOSPELS AND ACTS PAGE Oral teaching 129 The earliest Christian records 130 The ' Gospel ' name and form - - 1 30 I. The Synoptic Gospels (1) The character and complexity of the Synoptic Problem 132 The Two-Document Hypothesis- 133 The Original Mark . - 134 Reconstruction of Q 136 Special Lucan Source 138 (2) The literary evolution of the Synoptic Gospels 139 (3) The conditions under which the Evangelists wrote 141 General aim of the Evangelists - 142 (4) Characteristics of the individual Gospels {a) St. Mark - 143 (b) St. Matthew . - I46 (c) St. Luke - 149 General unity of the Synoptists 152 II. The Fourth Gospel - 153 Language and style 154 (1) Its relation to the Synoptic Gospels 155 (2) Its unity Tcy (3) Its authorship .^ I eg III. The Acts of the Apostles Relation to the Third Gospel 161 The sources of Acts • 262 The writer's literary skill and historical accuracy 165 The double-texts of Acts . jgg General conclusion jg^ CONTENTS xiii LECTURE V THE CIRCULATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS PAGE Summary'of previous lectures - 171 The dates of the New Testament autographs 172 I. The circulation of the New Testament writings in roll- form 1. The multiplication of copies due to practical needs 173 and the facilities for intercourse amongst the first Christian communities 175 2. The danger of textual corruption arising from (1) the material on which the autographs were written 1 76 (2) the employment of non-professional scribes 177 (3) the literary ideas of the time 178 3. Bearing of the roll-form on questions of structure connected with (1) the Epistle to the Hebrews 181 (2) the end of St. Mark's Gospel - 182 (3) the closing chapters of Romans 182 (4) the composition of 2 Corinthians 184 (5) the arrangement of the Fourth Gospel 186 4. Marginal additions 187 II. Change from the papyrus roll to the papyrus codex 188 1. Early use of papyrus codices - 189 (1) Fragmentary New Testament texts- 189 (2) The 'Sayings of Jesus' 190 2. Handwriting of the papyrus codices- 190 'Poor Men's Bibles' 191 III. Parchment Codices 1. Manufacture of parchment 191 2. Use of parchment in connexion with Christian literature 192 xiv CONTENTS PAGE 3. Construction of a parchment codex 194 Character of the handwriting - - 195 4. Suitability of the codex-form for collection of writings 195 Pocket Bibles - 196 General trustworthiness of the New Testament text - 197 LECTURE VI THE COLLECTION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS The circulation of the New Testament writings - 203 Light in which these writings were at first regarded - 204 Supremacy of the Old Testament 205 I. Influences leading to the collection of the New Testament writings 1. The existence of the Old Testament Canon - 206 The Greek Old Testament 206 Collections of Testimonia 207 2. The contents and character of the New Testament writings The words of Jesus - 208 The Apostolic teaching- - - 209 3. The use of the new documents in public worship - 210 The Epistles » 211 The Gospels 212 Apocryphal books 213 4. The part they played in controversy 214 II. History of the Collection and Authorization of the New Testament writings 1. From the time of writing to a.d. 200 (1) The Corpus Pauli?ium 215 Traces of the knowledge of Pauline Epistles in Christian literature 216 Canon of Marcion 217 CONTENTS xv PAGE (2) The Corpus Evangelicum Witness of the Didache of Clement of Rome, and of others 217 The Diatessaron 218 Irenaeus — Clement of Alexandria — Tertullian 219 The Muratorian Canon - - - 222 2. From A.D. 200-400 Determination of the limits of the New Testament collection - 222 Origen — Eusebius 223 General attitude of the Church illustrated in the case of the Apocalypse 223 and the Epistle to the Hebrews 225 Other Christian writings - 226 III. General remarks 1. The collection of the New Testament writings was a gradual process 226 2. It was largely informal and unofficial - 227 3. It included, on the whole, all that was best worth preserving in early Christian literature 228 4. The unique character of the completed New Testament 229 APPENDIX OF ADDITIONAL NOTES A Some Books for the Study of the Greek Papyri 233 B The Titles and Subscriptions of the New Testament writings - 237 C Dictation and Shorthand - 241 D New Testament Texts on Papyrus 248 E Greek Papyrus Letters - 255 F Dionysius of Alexandria on the Authorship of the Apocalypse 262 xvi CONTENTS PAGE G The Oxyrhynchus ' Sayings of Jesus ' 266 H Papias and Irenaeus on the Origin of the Gospels - 269 I Alternative Endings of St. Mark's Gospel 274 J The Gospel according to Peter- 281 K The Muratorian Fragment on the Canon 286 L The Order of the New Testament Writings 292 M Extracts from Festal Letter XXXIX. of Athanasius, A.D. 367 - 297 N Recent Literature on the Canon of the New Testament - 301 INDEXES I. Subjects - 307 II. Authors 310 III. References 1. Biblical 314 2. Ancient Texts and Writings 318 IV. Greek Words 321 PLATES I. Papyrus Roll of the First Century, showing part of Thucydides iv. 36-41 in non-literary hand 1 1 II. Papyrus leaf containing part of St. Matthew i., Third Century (fP*) - 61 III. Papyrus letter, Second Century A.D. 92 IV. New ' Sayings of Jesus,' Third Century - 131 V. St. John dictating to Prochorus, Fourteenth Century 161 VI. Alternative ending of St. Mark from the Freer (Washington) manuscript, Fourth to Fifth Century 182 VII. Codex Sinaiticus, Fourth Century- 195 VIII. Apocalypse iii. 19-iv. 1 from a pocket edition, Fourth Century 196 IX. . ¦The Gospel according to Peter, Second Century 213 X. XI. Canon of Muratori, end of Second Century - 222 XII. Waxen Tablet with Tachygraphic Symbols, probably Third Century A.D. 245 LECTURE I. THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 01 6eo~Trecrioi ko.1 <; OeoTrpewets, 4'VliLi ^ T°^ X/dicttov Tois a7roo"TdAoi)S, rov filov a/cpios KeKO.dapp.evoi, kuX apery iraaTj rde\6v>-jv, ov 6.irk\enrov ev TpipdSi, Trapd. K.dpiro}, epyopevoepe, Kal Tci f$tf3kia, udkicrra ras p.ep./3pdvas. 2 Tim. iv. 13. The New Testament consists of twenty-seven introductory. writings, generally ascribed to ten different authors, and in themselves of very varying characters and dates. There are four Gospel narratives, a History, twenty-one Epistles, and an Apocalypse, while their composition must have extended over a period of not less than two generations. So unique and authoritative is the place which these writings now occupy in the Christian Church, that it is not easy to realize that the Church had already been in existence for a considerable number of years before the earliest of them in their present form appeared. Our Lord Himself wrote nothing, nor did He lay any charge on His disciples to write. It was as living witnesses to Him and to 4 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS His truth that He sent them forth.1 And they in their turn recognized that their primary duty was to produce not epistles written with pen and ink, but living epistles2 — men and women who by their lives and conversation should bear witness to an unseen but ever-present Lord, until He Himself should return and set up His Kingdom in their midst. Apart indeed from everything else, this anxiously expected Parousia of the Lord could not fail to tell in the disciples' minds against any thought of pro viding for future wants that might never arise. What need to write regarding Jesus when any day might see His appearance in glory, or to lay down rules for the guidance of His Church on earth, when in the new ' fulness of the times ' all things, both in heaven and on earth, were about to be gathered up ' in the Christ ' ? 3 i. The rise of I. While, however, considerations such as these writings. would inevitably tell against the production of a definite Christian literature, there is a strong pre sumption that from the very beginning of Christian history its principal events would be recorded in some form. Evidence is multiplying from many quarters as to the widespread habit of writing amongst all classes of the population at the time. And it is impossible to doubt that the leading facts of Christ's life and ministry, which had so pro foundly stirred the hearts of many, were written down and circulated almost as soon as they took 1 Matt, xxviii. 19 f. 2Cf. 2 Cor. iii. 2. sEph. i. 10. THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 5 place, even though at first it might be in a very fragmentary and rude form. Sir William M. Ramsay goes the length of saying that ' so far as antecedent probability goes, founded on the general character of preceding and contemporary Greek or Graeco- Asiatic society, the first Christian account of the circumstances connected with the death of Jesus must be presumed to have been written in the year when Jesus died.'1 And as time passed and Chris tian communities arose and spread in different parts of the Empire, the necessity of supplying the scattered converts with authentic records of their new faith could not fail to assert itself in a very pressing and practical way. St. Paul, for example, on whom was laid as a daily burden, ' anxiety for all the Churches,' 2 would quickly find that he could only keep in touch with the communities he had founded by means of letters or epistles. And there can be little doubt that those writings of his which have come down to us are only part of a large correspondence which he carried on in order to confirm and develop the work that had been begun in the course of his missionary journeys.3 The same would be true in varying degrees of the other Apostles. 1 The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia (London, 1904), p-sf- 2 2 Cor. xi. 28. 3Cf. 2 Thess. iii. 17, 1 Cor. v. 9, 2 Cor. x. 10, Col. iv. 16, and 'On the probability that many of St. Paul's Epistles have been lost,' see Jowett, The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, 6 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS In some such way as this, then, on practical rather than on literary grounds, a number of Christian writings gradually came into existence, out of which, in time, by a process of selection there came to be formed what we are accustomed to describe as the New Testament Canon, or, more briefly, the New Testament. Upon the manner in which this was brought about, and the scattered writings, so occasional in origin and purpose, were transformed into a single and authoritative book, I shall have something to say later.1 Meanwhile we are concerned with these writings only in their earliest form, long before either their writers or recipients had any idea of the future in store for them. Disappearance Of the original autographs themselves there is of the New . fe i Testament indeed no longer any trace. They must all have autographs. J J , perished at a very early date, if not in the per secutions that befell the early Church, then simply through ordinary tear and wear, and the compara tive neglect which would befall writings, not at first supposed to be invested with any specially sacred character.2 But while we are thus no longer in the Galatians, Romans'1 (London, 1859), i. p. 195 ff. That a different view existed in the early Church seems to be implied in Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 24. 4, vi. 25. 7. 1 See Lecture VI. 2 By the ' ipsae authenticae literae ' of the Apostles to which Tertullian (c. a.d. 200) refers as read in certain Churches (de Praescriptione Haereticorum, c. 36), we must understand, from the general usage of ' authenticae ' at the time, the autographs, THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 7 possession of the original of a single New Testa ment book, we are able, thanks to the marvellous discoveries of contemporary documents in Egypt during recent years, to form a wonderfully clear idea of what its outward form and appearance must have been.1 1 1. It may seem, perhaps, in view of the absorbing 11. outward r , " , , , form of the importance of the contents, that such external original features are of comparatively little moment. We do not, as a rule, linger over the casket in which the precious jewel is enclosed. And the ' earthen vessels ' in which the treasure of God's revelation is contained are in themselves, as one of their artificers and not simply genuine copies of the originals, but the rhetorical character of the whole passage prevents our attaching much importance to the statement. On the supposed autograph copies of St. Matthew's Gospel found in the grave of Barnabas in Cyprus, and of St. Mark's Gospel in Venice, see Nestle, Textual Criticism of the New Testament (London, 1901), p. 30. In the present connexion, the daring attempt of Constantine Simonides to palm off certain falsifications as original parts of the New Testament may also be recalled : see his Facsimiles of certain portions of the Gospel of St. Matthew, and of the Epistles of St. James and of St.Jude, written on papyrus of the first century, London, 1862. 1 For a brief account of these discoveries I may be allowed to refer to the Introduction to my Selections from the Greek Papyri2, Cambridge University Press, 191 2. Fuller details with many valu able bibliographical references will be found in Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, London, 1910,. being the English transla tion of the second edition of Licht vom Osten, Tubingen, 1909. See also Additional Note A, ' Some Books for the Study of the Greek Papyri.' were written. 8 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS has pointed out, a constant reminder of the weak ness of human effort as compared with ' the exceeding greatness ' of the Divine power.1 At the same time, everything that bears on the history of writings that have now the supreme place in the world's literature cannot fail to be of interest. And, as a matter of fact, we shall have frequent occasion to notice that even the outward aspects of our New Testament writings have a closer bearing on many vexed questions of text and interpretation than may at first sight appear likely. i. The i. Turning to these outward aspects, we begin material on ,. • i i ¦ i i • 1 i which they naturally with the material on which they were written. There can be little doubt that that was papyrus, the ordinary writing material or paper of the day. The Old Testament Scriptures were apparently as a rule preserved on specially pre pared skins, for which afterwards vellum was substituted.2 But any such material would be beyond the scanty means of the New Testament writers, as well as inconsistent with the occasional character which they themselves ascribed to their writings. And we may take it that not only was 1 Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 7. 2 In the Old Testament itself skins are not directly mentioned as a writing material, but in the letter of the Pseudo-Aristeas it is expressly stated that the copy of the Law sent from Jerusalem to Egypt was written on 8idepais (Aristeae ad Philocratem Epistula, ed. Wendland, Leipzig, 1900, § 176). See further Kenyon, art. ' Writing ' in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, iv. p. 945, and the full discussion in Blau, Studien zum althebraischen Buchwesen (Strassburg i. E, 1902), i. p. 12 ff. THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 9 papyrus the material used for the original autographs, but that for a period of more than two hundred years, copies would be made and circulated on papyrus.1 2. In itself, papyrus as a writing material was 2. History . . ,, _ r . . and manu- originally an Egyptian manufacture, and at the facture of beginning of the Christian era had already a longpapyr history behind it. The earliest extant papyrus is one found at Sakkara in 1893, containing accounts dated in the reign of Assa b.c. 3580-36. And from this period down to the ninth century after Christ, countless papyrus documents have been recovered in Egypt, where they owe their preservation to the singularly dry character of the climate. The origin of the word papyrus is somewhat un certain, but it is probably derived from the Egyptian pa-p-y6r, ' the (product) of the river,' ' the river- plant,' a name given to a tall reed-plant which at one time grew in great abundance in the Nile, though it is now confined to the upper part of its course.2 From this plant {Cyperus papyrus, L.) the papyrus 1 Cf. 2 John 12, ttoXXo. eyuiv vp.lv ypdetv ovk e/3ovXrj6T]v Sta \dprov Kal p.eXavos, and 3 John 13, oi GeXto 81a peXavos ietv, where by ydprov we must understand a sheet of papyrus, and by KaXdp.ov the reed-pen used for writing on it (cf. p. 17). For the meaning of 2 Tim. iv. 13, see p. 19 f. 2Lagarde [Mittheilungen, ii. p. 260) suggests that the word may be derived from Bura on Lake Menzaleh, where it was first manu factured, the opening syllable being the Egyptian article. If so, there is the more reason for pronouncing the ' y ' long as ancient writers did (Juv. iv. 24, Mart. iii. 2, Catull. xxxv. 2) : see Nestle, Text. Crit. of the Greek Testament, p. 42. 10 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS material was derived by a process of which the elder Pliny has left a classical account.1 The pith (/3J/3Xo?) of the stem was first cut into long strips (cty/oVc), which were laid down vertically to form an outward or lower layer. Over this a corresponding number of strips were placed hori zontally, and the two layers were then pressed together to form a single sheet (/co'XX^/xa), the process being assisted by a preparation of glue moistened, when possible, with the turbid water of the Nile, which was supposed to add strength to it. After being dried in the sun, and rubbed down with ivory or a smooth shell to remove any roughness, the sheet was ready for use.2 1 Nat. Hist. xiii. n-13. Cf. Birt, Das antike Buchwesen (Berlin, 1882), p. 223 ff. ; Dziatzko, Untersuchungen iiber ausgewahlte Kapitel des antiken Buchwesens (Leipzig, 1900), p. 49 ff. ; Gardthausen, Das Buchwesen im Altertum und im Byzantinischen Mittelalter, being Griechische Palaeographie 2 (Leipzig, 191 1), i. p. 45 ff., and most recently Wilcken in Grundziige und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde, edd. Mitteis and Wilcken (Leipzig, 191 2), I. i. p. xxviii ff. 2 An unused sheet was known as x°LPrrls (charta), but after it had been written upon, it was generally described by ftvfiXos or /3l[1Xos (liber) from the material out of which it was made. From this came the diminutive /3i/?At'ov, at first applied to any short writing such as a letter, but later used practically synonymously with f3l/3Xo*s. Hence its plural to /3t,/3Xla, meaning originally a collection of books or rolls, as in the Prologue of Ecclesiasticus (c. B.C. 130), when transliterated into Latin was adopted as a convenient designation for the Holy Scriptures, and eventually came to be regarded no longer as a neuter plural, but a feminine singular, biblia, ' the Bible.' Plate L . M*r .%-^-- ft rrtM tnf? ^^rtrr ... fei1 ,- j£*jr^ i /**>'"*** * ""' '" ,mTC 5mwmr part OF THUCYDIDES IV. 36-41 IN NON-LITERARY HAND Now in the Museum of Science and Art, University _of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. By permission of the Egypt Exploration Fund. THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS n The size of the sheets thus formed would obviously size of the vary according to the quality of the papyrus and the uses to which they were to be put, but Sir F. G. Kenyon has shown that for non-literary documents a very common size was from 5 to $yi inches in width, and 9 to 1 1 inches in height, the height being always greater than the breadth, when the sheet was held in the way in which it was meant to be used.1 For a brief note, like the Second Epistle of St. Papyrus roils John, a single sheet would therefore suffice ; but, when more space was required, it was easily pro curable by fastening a number of sheets together into a roll. For selling purposes, a roll seems fre quently to have consisted of twenty sheets,2 but this could easily be cut up into smaller dimensions to suit the purchaser's convenience, or, if desired, extended almost indefinitely by the addition of extra sheets. The beginning (irpuiTOKoWov) and the end (ea-yaTo- koXXiov') of the roll, as the parts most handled, were sometimes strengthened by attaching additional strips of papyrus at the back, while, in the case of more literary documents, the inner edge of the TrpwTOKoXXov was often glued to a wooden roller (6fj.(pa.X6s) , to the ends of which knobs or horns (KepaTa) were attached. Hence, according to a common interpretation, the KetpaXh /3t/3\lov referred to by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews in c. x. 7 (from Psalm xl. 7) may perhaps denote originally 'the little head of the book,' or the end of 1 The Palaeography of Greek Papyri (Oxford, 1899), p. 16 f. 2 Wilcken, Grundzuge, I. i. p. xxix. 12 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS the stick round which the roll was wound, and thence by a natural synecdoche the roll itself.1 Price. The price would naturally vary with the size and quality of the papyrus sheet, as when in Roman times we find one sheet valued at i drachma 3 obols, or a little over a shilling of our money, another at 2 obols, or about 3d., and yet another at 3 obols, or about 4^d.2 But in no case does papyrus seem to have been a very cheap material, the result being that the poorer classes of the population had often difficulty in procuring it, or made use of the backs of old documents, from which the original contents had been either washed or crossed out.3 For the same reason the despatch of a letter was often the opportunity for sending greetings from a large number of different friends — a practice which finds an interesting Christian parallel in the extended greetings at the close of several of the Pauline Epistles.4 1 Cf. Ezek. ii. 9, ISov X6LP eKrerapevrj v-phs p.e, Kal ev airy KecfaaXls /3if3X[ov, and KeaXiatX6vrjs or 4>eX6vt]s. For its use as a book-wrap, see Hesychius' Lexicon, where it is defined as elXrjrdpiov fxep.ppd'C(v)ov fj yXioo-o-oKop.ov, and cf. Birt, Das antike Buchwesen, p. 63. 2 Cf. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ed. Hunt, viii. p. 254, No. ii533C (i/A.D ) : \e]Kop,io-dp.rjv Sta. 'HpaKXdros rots KLaras [crw] rois f3t,/3Xiois. 8 See further, p. 173 f. 4 ' Die darin vereinigten Rollen bildeten ein o-vvray/j.a, corpus u.s.w. Manche irrige Zuweisung einer Schrift an einen falschen Autor mag in ihrer Zusammenstellung mit inhaltlich verwandten Schriften in der gleichen capsa ihren Grund haben.' Dziatzko, art. 'Buch' in Pauly-Wissowa, iii. p. 970. THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 21 III. From the outward appearance and form of in. The man- «.!, TVT t> 1 -i ner m which tne i\ ew I estament autographs, we pass to consider the books of the manner in which they were written. And Testament 1 1 r , r . . r . , were written. in lack 01 any definite information as to the circumstances under which they were composed — information which, if it were available, would go far to set at rest many vexed questions of Biblical criticism — we are ' again led to fall back on the ordinary practice of the time. In accordance with this, and in agreement with various hints thrown out in the New Testament books themselves, there is every reason to believe that they were in many instances^ at any rate originally written to dictation. 1. In support of this conclusion appeal is some- 1. Dictation. times made to the note appended to countless papyrus documents and letters to the effect that they were written by so-and-so on behalf of so-and-so, 'seeing that he does not know letters.'1 But of even the most 'unlettered' 2 of the New Testament writers that could hardly be said. And it is better rather to think of the instances where the services of a scribe are requisitioned, owing to the fact that the original author could himself only write slowly or with difficulty. A good example is afforded by a marriage contract of the early second century dis- 1 E.g. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, ii. p. 262 ff., No. 27543 ( = Selections, No. 20) (a.d. 66) : ZuiXos . . . eypaxpa virep avrov prj ISoros ypdpfxa.ro.. 2 The adjective dypdp.p.aros in Acts iv. 13 (cf. xxvi. 24, John vii. 15) is probably = ' unacquainted with literature or Rabbinic teaching.' 22 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS covered at Oxyrhynchus, where, with reference to one of the signatories at the end, it is stated, ' I write on his behalf seeing that he writes slowly ' (eypa^a virep avrov fipaSea ypdJXIkoi? ifjiv ypdfjfxamv eypa-^a ru ifxt] XelPL) °' Gal. vi. n being taken as pointing back to what had preceded. If so, may we not suppose that in this so severe letter St. Paul, with his exquisite tact, may have preferred to make use of no inter mediary between himself and those whom he was obliged to warn in such strong terms ? On the other hand, if the ' how great letters ' refer rather to what follows, then they may be understood either of the large, irregular handwriting of the man who wrote but little, as compared with the more flowing hand of his practised amanuensis, or as by their size intended to draw special attention to the importance of the contents. Auto- In any case, we have abundant evidence of auto- conciusions. graphic conclusions both in the literature of the day,1 and, what is more to the point in the present con nexion, in the non-literary Egyptian papyri, where the signature is frequently in a different hand from the body of the document, and serves to confirm and authenticate the whole. When, for example, in the year a.d. 50 the Egyptian olive-planter Mystarion writes to commend his messenger Blastus to Stotoetis, a chief priest, the change of handwriting in the closing salutation eppwo-o, ' Farewell,' seems to indi cate that it was written by Mystarion himself.2 And 1 Cf. e.g. the letter of Pompey, of which Cicero, ad Attic. viii. 1. 1, speaks 'in extremo ipsius manu.' 2 Berliner Griechische Urkunden, i. p. 52 (cf. p. 353), No. 37s. For facsimile see Deissmann, Lightfrom the Ancient East, p. 1 5 7, Fig. 20. THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 25 the same practice is expressly vouched for in an Oxyrhynchus letter of a.d. 95, where the original sender authenticates the contents, which were doubt less written by one of his clerks, by adding at the end fH|OciKX(a?) o-eo-r](fxela)fjai), ' I, Heraclas, have signed.'1 Before leaving the question of handwriting- it is of character • 1 tn.t t, ofthehand- lmportance to point out that, as the New Testamentwriting. amanuenses would not be professional scribes, but educated friends or companions of the authors, the writing would be of the ordinary non-literary char acter, though doubtless more than the usual care would be taken in view of the importance of the writings' contents.2 The words would as a rule be closely joined together, though occasionally in doubt ful instances they might be separated by dots. Contractions, especially in the leaving out the last syllables of familiar words, would be frequent, while accents and breathings would be very sparingly employed. And there would be no punctuation, unless it might be the occasional insertion of a dot above the line to divide words, or a slight space to mark an important break in the sense. These paragraphs were also divided from one another by a short horizontal line (irapdypacpos) below the line in which the pause occurs.3 1 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, i. p. 101 ff, No. 4518- 2 See especially Kenyon, Palaeography of the Greek Papyri, p. 9 ff. for the distinction between the book hand and the common hand, and Plate I. for the probable character of the handwriting of the New Testament autographs. 3Cf. Kenyon Palaeography of the Greek Papyri, p. 27. 26 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS The task of punctuating the New Testament manuscripts fell accordingly for the most part to the later copyists and editors, with the result that there is often a wide difference of opinion as to how particular words are to be connected, or as to whether a sentence is to be understood interro gatively or indicatively.1 The amount of Another inquiry of great interest with regard to tteNew our New Testament autographs is the amount of Testament ,.. ..... . 1r . . scribes. liberty which their authors left to their amanuenses. What, for example, was St. Paul's practice ? Did he dictate his letters word for word, his scribe perhaps taking them down in some form of short hand, and then rewriting them ? 2 Or was he content to supply a rough draft of what he wished to be said, leaving the scribe free to throw it into more formal and complete shape ? It is true that to these questions no definite answer can be given. In all probability the Apostle's practice varied with the special circum stances of the case, or the particular scribe whom at the time he was employing. More might be left to XA good example of the former difficulty is afforded by the famous text Rom. ix. 5, where at least three of the principal inter pretations are dependent on the particular punctation adopted. 2 On the practice of shorthand amongst the ancients, see Additional Note C, where reference is made to the contract, belonging to the year a.d. 155, in which an ex-cosmetes of Oxyrhynchus apprentices his slave to a shorthand writer (0-17/uo- ypdtu) for two years to be taught to read and write shorthand (npos pdO-qo-iv o-r]pe'mv) (The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell- Hunt, iv. p. 204 f., No. 724). THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 27 the discretion of a Timothy than of a Tertius. And if in one case the Epistle as dictated underwent a close revision and correction at the Apostle's own hands, at another he might allow it to go out practically unchanged. 2. All this is, however, matter of conjecture, and 2. General J results from we are on surer ground in pointing out that the mere the use of 1 r -i dictation. fact of the employment of a scribe would help to impart to St. Paul's Epistles some of that vividness and directness of language by which they are dis- (1) vividness 0 ° J J of language. tinguished. In dictating the Apostle would have clearly before his mind's eye the actual persons and circumstances of those to whom he was writing, and the broken constructions and sudden changes of subject prove how often the eager rush of his words overmastered the grammatical and orderly sequence of his thought. Nor can we marvel that even in the same Epistle there are often sudden changes in tone and ex pression, when we remember that it was in the spare moments of a laborious life that St. Paul's Epistles were written, and that the work of dictation must have been often interrupted by some unfore seen and pressing call, demanding the Apostle's immediate attention. There are still other ways in which the practice (2) Quotations r embodied of dictation may have affected the outward form of from con-e- t- • i t>i t- ¦ 1 spondents' the Pauline Epistles. These Epistles, as we know, letters. were frequently written to answer questions which had been addressed to the Apostle by Churches he had founded. What more natural, then, than that 28 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS St. Paul, when dictating his answer, should have held in his hand the communications that had been addressed to him, and embodied quotations from them in his reply! In the absence of any method of distinguishing these quotations in the early manu scripts corresponding to our modern use of inverted commas, these can only be guessed at now from the general meaning and context. But there can be no doubt that the interpretation of many passages is made clearer by recognizing that not infrequently the Apostle throws back, as it were, their own words at those whom he is addressing. A notable example of this has been found in i Thessalonians, where, on the strength of such a practice, Dr. Rendel Harris has ingeniously recon structed the epistle from Thessalonica to which it was an answer.1 And the same treatment can be applied with even greater success to i Corinthians, when the Apostle is avowedly dealing with a long series of questions addressed to him by the Corin thian Church, and naturally marks the different stages in his reply by pointed references to the Corinthians' own words. This comes out very clearly, as Dr. Lock has shown,2 in the section 'Concerning things sacrificed to idols' (c. viii. 1-9), where the Apostle quotes, only to refute, the Corin thians' plea, ' We know that we have all knowledge,' and also sets aside their emphatic claim for liberty, 1 The Expositor, V. viii. p. 161 ff, 'A Study in Letter-writing.' 2 The Expositor, V. vi. p. 65 ff, '1 Corinthians viii. 1-9. A Suggestion.' THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 29 ' But meat will not commend us to God ; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse, nor, if we eat, are we the better,' on the ground that, while theoretically true, such an argument must not be allowed to interfere with their duty towards the weak. And so, again, in the very personal Second Epistle to the same Church, such phrases as ' I who in your presence am lowly among you, but being absent am of good courage toward you,'1 and 'being crafty, I caug-ht you with guile,'2 may well recall the actual taunts which his Jewish Christian opponents in Corinth had hurled against the Apostle.3 Or, once more, to appeal to what many regard as St. Paul's latest Epistle, when he writes to the Philippians, ' But I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy shortly unto you, that I also may be of good comfort, when I know your state' (c. ii. 19), is not the ' also ' due to the fact that St. Paul wishes the Philippians to know that he is as anxious to hear good news of them, as they had already pro fessed themselves to be, to hear good news of him ? Or when in c. iv. 10 he writes, ' But I rejoice in the Lord greatly, that now at length you have revived your thought for me ; wherein you did indeed take thought, but you lacked opportunity,' have we not the fine courtesy which accepts, even while it 1c. x. 1. 2c. xii. 16. 3 ' Such phrases are wholly unintelligible unless we hear in the catchwords the language of the enemy ' (Weizsacker, The Apostolic Age, Eng. Tr. by Millar, ii. p. 102 f.). 30 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS dismisses the need of, the apology with which the Philippians had admitted a certain remissness in attending to his wants ? 3. Differences 3. Similar considerations apply in the case of the other New Testament writings. The form which 1 Peter took, and the many Pauline echoes it con tains, may be due to the fact that Peter employed as his scribe Silvanus, who had already acted in a similar capacity for Paul. And though it will hardly be accepted as an adequate explanation of the phenomena of the so-called Second Epistle of St. Peter, it is worth noting that, so far back as St. Jerome, the differences between it and i Peter were explained by the employment of different interpreters or scribes.1 And it is at least possible that in the dictation and revision of the Fourth Gospel we may have a partial key to some of the vexed questions that have arisen regarding its authorship.2 iv. Delivery IV. The only other point that concerns us is the of the New . 1 • i 1 m t^ Testament manner in which the New I estament writings would be delivered to their first readers. Con sidering the elaborate organization of the Roman Empire, it may seem somewhat surprising that nothing in the form of a general postal system had as yet been thought of. An Imperial post, based 1 ' Denique et duae epistolae quae feruntur Petri stilo inter se et charactere discrepant structuraque verborum. Ex quo intelle- gimus, pro necessitate rerum diversis eum usum interpretibus.' (Ep. ad Hedibiam, 120, Quaest. xi.) 2 See p. 159 ff. writings. THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS 31 apparently on the Persian model,1 had indeed been instituted by Augustus, but its use was strictly limited to State purposes, and ordinary correspond ence had to be carried by the favour of some friend or passing traveller.2 Even had it been otherwise, use of i • 1 i a 1 • • private it is obvious that the Apostolic communications messengers. could only be entrusted with safety to Christian messengers in full sympathy with their object, who would be able to reinforce and supplement the message they contained. Thus, Titus would seem to have played an important part in connexion with the correspondence with the Church at Corinth,3 while in the case of the Epistle to the Ephesians, the lack of personal references may be explained, not only by the Epistle's circular character, but also by the fact that St. Paul had charged his messenger Tychicus to supply orally all needed information, and to comfort his readers' hearts.4 xThe institution of the State post in Persia is ascribed to King Darius, and in keeping with this is the belief that his wife Atossa invented the form of the letter. 2Cic. ad Attic, i. 9. 1; Pliny, Epist. vii. 12; Mart. iii. 100, and cf. Friedlander, Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Romss (Leipzig, 1 9 10), I. ii. p. 19 ff. 3Cf. 2 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 6, 13 f. 4Cf. Eph. vi. 21 f. An interesting example of a similar practice is afforded by a letter of B.C. 103, in which the writer enjoins his messengers to 'greet kindly' (do-Trdo-eo-Qai i,\op6v<0s) those to whom he was writing. (An Alexandrian Erotic Fragment, and other Greek Papyri chiefly Ptolemaic, ed. Grenfell, p. 59 f. No. 30.) 32 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS The per manent value of the New Testament writings. Here then, in the meantime, we must leave our New Testament autographs.. The details with which we have been engaged may in themselves, as I have already hinted, seem very trivial as com pared with the absorbing interest of their contents, and the influence which they have exerted in the world. And yet they will not have been without their use, if they have succeeded in bringing home to us the fact that we are dealing with real docu ments, born amidst ' the toil and moil ' of life, and for the most part intended in the first instance to meet only immediate and local needs. For the more clearly we realize this, the more certain does it become that ' that which was in origin most casual became in effect most permanent by the presence of a divine energy,' and that ' the most striking marvel in the scattered writings of the New Testament is the perfect fitness which they exhibit for fulfilling an office of which their authors appear themselves to have had no conception.'1 1 Westcott, An Introduction to the Study of the Gospels* (London, 38i), p. 167. LECTURE II. THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS. 'Nam si quis minorem gloriae fructum putat ex Graecis versibus percipi quam ex Latinis, vehementer errat, propterea quod Graeca leguntur in omnibus fere gentibus, Latina suis finibus, exigue sane, continentur.' Cicero, Pro Archia, 23. II. THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS. Kat o ttoXvs 6'xAos rjKOvev avrov r)8es. Mark xii. 37. Ta prfp.ara a eyu> XeXdXrjKa vpiv irvevfid krrrw Kal ^onj eo~riv. John vi. 63. Oi ypdp.p.aros dXXo. 7rvevp.aros' rb yap ypdp.p,a diroKreivei, rb Se wvevp.a f(uo7rotet. 2 Cor. iii. 6. I. We have seen that the original manuscripts ofi. Theiin- the New Testament were written on papyrus sheets fonditions of or rolls, and that in the actual work of transcription their authors largely availed themselves of the assistance of trusted friends, who were practised in the art of writing. We have now to consider the language that was made use of. And when we remember that, with the exception of St. Luke, the New Testament writers were all Jews, and that through the influence of the Old Testament Scriptures Hebrew was regarded as essentially the sacred language, we might naturally have expected that recourse would again have been had to it. Various circumstances, however, prevented this. 36 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS To have employed the sacred language of Judaism for the new records might have seemed to the disciples to invest these with an authority to which at first at any rate they laid no claim. Nor must we forget that Hebrew by this time had largely passed out of general knowledge and use, and given place to the more popular Aramaic.1 wide-spread We are not specially concerned at present with Aramaic. the history of Aramaic, but it may be well to guard against the common error which looks upon it as a mere dialect of Hebrew, and not as an independent, though allied, language which, as Zahn has shown, had spread gradually throughout Western Asia during the five hundred years preceding the advent of Christianity.2 How widely, indeed, it was known is shown by the fact that Josephus expressly states that he wrote his History of the Jewish War originally in Aramaic in order that it might be understood by the Asiatics, the Parthians, the Babylonians, and the Arabs.3 Certain portions of the Old Testament itself were written in Aramaic,4 and, though this is not univer sally admitted, there can be little doubt that in their ordinary teaching both our Lord and His disciples iThe 'Ef3paio-ri in which the title on the Cross was written (John xix. 20) and the 'E/3pais SidXeKros of St. Paul's speech at Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 40) refer to Aramaic and not to Hebrew. 2 Introduction to the New Testament, Engl. Trans., Edinburgh, 1909, i. p. 4 ff. 8 Bellum Judaicum, proem. 1 f. 4 Ezra iv. 8-vi. 18, vii. 12-26, Dan. ii. 4— vii. 28. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 37 employed the same language. For proofs of this we are generally referred to the existence in our Gospels of certain Aramaic words and expressions, directly attributed to Christ Himself, like the cry on the Cross, 'EXw/ 'EXau \a/j.d a-afiaxQdvel, ' My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me ? ' (Mark xv. 34), or such phrases " as TaXeiOd kov/j, ' Damsel, arise ' (Mark v. 41), and 'Ecptpadd', < Be opened' (Mark vii. 34), though it must not be forgotten that their retention in this form can also be explained on the ground that they were exceptional. On the whole, however, in view of the generally Aramaic background of the Gospels, on which Dalman r and Wellhausen 2 amongst others have recently laid such stress, combined with the inherent probabilities of the case, we may take it that Jesus, while able on occasion, as in His interview with Pilate, to speak Greek, as a rule employed the more indigenous and familiar Aramaic.3 There would have been nothing astonishing, then, use of Greek if the New Testament books which appeared in Testament Palestine had been written in Aramaic, and, as a matter of fact, our first three Gospels are in part at least based on earlier Aramaic documents (see further, p. 139). But no one of them in its present 1 Die Worte Jesu, i., Leipzig, 1898 j Engl. Trans, by Kay, Edinburgh, 1902. 2 Einleitung in die drei ersten Evangelien2, Berlin, 1911. 3 The opposite view is maintained by Roberts, Discussions on the Gospels, London, 1862, and A Short Proof that Greek was the Language of Christ, Paisley and London, 1893. 38 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS form is a direct translation from Aramaic.1 And there is again practical unanimity amongst scholars that the New Testament Epistles have all come down to us in the language in which they were first written. Attempts indeed have been made to revive the view held both by Clement of Alexandria and St. Jerome that our present Epistle to the Hebrews is a translation from Hebrew or Aramaic,2 but the purity and elegance of the language, to say nothing of the fact that the quotations in the Epistle are taken from the Septuagint, and not from the Hebrew text, point conclusively to a Greek original.3 And the same holds true of the Epistle of St. James. That an Epistle emanating from such a source should contain Aramaisms is only what we should expect, but, regarded as a whole, it exhibits none of the ordinary signs of a trans lation, and ' is written in strong, simple Greek, used with no slight rhetorical skill by one who has 1 On the view to be taken of Papias' statement that ' Matthew composed the Logia in the Hebraic dialect,' see p. 137 f. As regards the Second Gospel, Allen suggested so far back as 1902, that St. Mark wrote it in Aramaic (The Expository Times, xiii. p. 328 ff.), and in a more recent study he again emphasizes its Aramaic background (Studies in the Synoptic Problem, Oxford, 191 1), x. p. 298. Wellhausen has also declared strongly for an original Aramaic document, based on oral tradition (Einleitung2, P- 38)- 2 E.g. by Biesenthal, Das Trostschreiben des Apostels Paulus an die Hebraer (Leipzig, 1878), p. 43 ff. 3 See further the present writer's Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Edinburgh, 1899), p. 16 f. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 39 something of his own to say, and says it with perfect freedom.'1 Nor need this preference for Greek over Aramaic Reasons for on the part of the New Testament writers cause usferencefor Greek any surprise. Largely through the conquests of Alexander the Great, Greek had come into ever- increasing use throughout the East. It would be the one language generally understood by the dif ferent bodies of soldiers of which his armies were composed, and in which alone the administrative work of his widely spread Empire could be carried on. This would apply with even greater force to the state of things under the Diadochi. And when eventually the Romans united East and West in one great Empire, it was naturally in Greek that they continued to rule their Eastern subjects. We need not wonder then that even in Palestine, notwithstanding the national prejudices which ex cluded everything un-Jewish from education, Greek speedily gained a strong footing.2 The cities of 1J. B. Mayor, The Epistle of St. James'1' (London, 1897), p. ccxxxiv. See further, p. 1 1 1 of the present volume. 2 The fact that Josephus found it necessary to translate his History of the Jewish War from Aramaic (cf. p. 36) into Greek is alone proof of this, especially when combined with the fact that his Antiquities of the Jews were originally composed in the latter language. Any deficiencies that it might exhibit in Greek learning he is careful to put down to the fact that his own nation did nothing to encourage those who learned the language of many nations (nap' ffp.iv yap ouk eKtivovs diroSexovrat rovs iroXXmv eOvSiv SidXeKTov eKfiadovras, Antt. Jud. xx. 264, ed. Niese). 40 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Pella and Dion in Eastern Palestine with their Macedonian names were probably founded by Alexander's soldiers, and when we come down to Roman times we are at once met with the Decapolis, a League of Greek cities specially formed perhaps to oppose ' the various Semitic influences east and west of Jordan, from which Rome had freed them.'1 One thing is certain, that the religion of the Decapolis, as distinguished from that of the sur rounding district, was thoroughly Hellenic. And Principal George Adam Smith has drawn a striking picture of the influence which this Greek life in Palestine could not fail to have on the beginnings of Christianity. 'The Decapolis,' he writes, 'was flourishing in the time of Christ's ministry. Gadara, with her temples and her amphitheatres, with her art, her games and her literature, overhung the Lake of Galilee, and the voyages of its fishermen. A leading Epicuraean of the previous generation, the founder of the Greek anthology, some of the famous wits of the day, the reigning emperor's tutor, had all been bred within sight of the homes of the writers of the New Testament. Philodemus, Meleager, Menippus, Theodorus, were names of which the one end of the Lake of Galilee was proud, when Matthew, Peter, James and John, were working at the other end. The temples of Zeus, Pallas, and Astarte crowned a height opposite to that which gave its name to the 1 G. A. Smith, The Historical Geography of the Holy Land (London, 1897), p. 596. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 41 Sermon on the Mount. . . . We cannot believe that the two worlds, which this one landscape embraced, did not break into each other.'1 Similar influences were everywhere at work, and may be said to have reached their height in the reign of Herod the Great, who, as Josephus records, was in the habit of boasting that he was more nearly related to the Greeks than to the Jews.2 And when we add to this, that under the Roman system of rule by Procurators residing at Caesarea, Greek became the recognized official language, as the only language intelligible alike to the governors and the governed, its increasing hold upon all classes of the population becomes at once intelligible. Nor in estimating the place which Greek had come to occupy in Palestine, must we forget the influence exercised by the Jews of the Dispersion. From long residence abroad they had ceased to use their native language to any extent, and for the old Hebrew Scriptures had substituted the Greek trans lation which we know as the Septuagint. They continued, however, to attend the great feasts at Jerusalem, 'the metropolis of Judaism the world over,' where for convenience they had their own synagogues (Acts vi. 9), and where eventually not a few finally settled, perhaps from a wish to end their days and be buried in the Holy Land (cf. Acts ii. 5). 1 Ibid. p. 607 f. 2 Antt. Jud. xix. 329, ed. Niese : "EaA^o-j vXeov rj 'lovSaiois oiKeiws «Xetv ofioXoyovpevos. 42 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS However vigorously, therefore, Palestinian Jewish teachers might combat the Greek spirit as a menace to orthodox Judaism, they would be powerless to prevent the spread of the Greek tongue. It was the language of government, of the army, of business, and even of religion, in the case of a large and influential section of the population. While, as showing how far it had penetrated amongst all classes, it is sufficient to point to the striking scene in Acts xxi. 40 ff., where it is obvious that the Jerusalem mob whom St. Paul addressed from the stairs of Antonia expected that he would have addressed them in Greek, and that it was his falling back on their native Hebrew or Aramaic that led to their being ' the more quiet.' 1 How long this bilingual state of things continued in Palestine it is not easy to determine, but it would certainly be well over the period covered by our New Testament writings. And enough, I trust, has been said to show that during that period even the native Jews might very naturally fall back upon Greek for religious purposes.2 And when we pass 1 Dr. T. K. Abbott quotes an interesting parallel from a bi lingual district of Ireland, where at a public discussion between a Protestant and a Roman Catholic champion any approach to a disturbance was at once quelled by a few words in Irish. ' The people were listening to English speeches, but the Irish touched their hearts more nearly ' (Essays chiefly on the Original Texts of the Old and New Testaments (London, 1891), p. 164). 2Schurer, while holding that 'Aramaic was in the time of Christ the sole popular language of Palestine,' nevertheless admits ' that a slight acquaintance with Greek was pretty widely diffused, LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 43 outside of Palestine and think of St. Paul and other of the Apostles addressing their letters to scattered communities throughout the Graeco-Roman world, it is obvious that Greek was the one language in which they could hope to be understood. We are even met with the apparent paradox that an Epistle intended specially for ' Hebrews,' readers who, whatever their exact habitat, were certainly Jewish Christians, was written not in Hebrew but in Greek, and by one who made use of the Greek version of the Old Testament Scriptures. II. This raises the question, What was the char- 11. The r . . ^-. , ., character acter of this Greek r of New T T , , . . . . r Testament 1. Here let me say at once that the discussion 01 Greek. the real character of the Greek of the New Testa- l'0^0°ithe ment has in recent years entered on an entirely new G phase. The old controversy between the ' Purists,' who endeavoured to bring all its peculiarities under the strict rules of Attic usage, and the ' Hebraists,' who magnified these peculiarities in the interests of a distinctively ' Biblical Greek,' or even 'language of the Holy Ghost,' is now completely a thing of the past.1 And there is wide-spread agreement that the New Testament writers made use of the ordinary and that the more educated classes used it without difficulty' (Geschichte des Judischen Volkes im Zeit alter Jesu Christ* (Leipzig, 1898), ii. pp. 19, 63 f. : cf. Engl. Trans. II. i. pp. 9, 48). 1 For the literature of this controversy, see Winer-Schmiedel, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms (Gottingen, 1894- ), p.4ff- commonGreek of the day. 44 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Greek of their own time, and that, too, in its more vulgar or colloquial form. New light on The confidence with which this conclusion is held this Greek. is largely due to the new light which recent dis coveries have thrown upon the true character of this Greek. For our knowledge of it in the past we were - dependent upon its literary memorials, which betray a constant tendency, both conscious and unconscious, on the part of their writers to imitate the great Attic models of the classical period. But there have now come into our hands a large number of more popular or vernacular texts in the form of inscriptions, and especially of ostraca and papyri recovered from the sands of Egypt, in which we can see Greek, as it were, in undress, as it was spoken and written by the men and women of the day, with no thought of their words ever reaching the eyes of others than those to whom they were originally addressed. And the striking fact for our present purpose is, as I have just indicated, that these non- literary texts prove incon- testably that it was in this same colloquial Greek, the Kowrj or common tongue of their day — to limit for convenience a term that is sometimes applied to Hellenistic Greek as a whole1 — that the writers of the New Testament for the most part composed their books. Themselves sprung from the common people, the disciples of One whom the common people heard gladly, they in their turn wrote in 1 See J. H. Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, i. Prolegomena 3 (Edinburgh, 1908), p. 2 f. This book is hereafter cited simply as Prolegomena?'. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 45 that common tongue to be ' understanded of the people.' The wonder, indeed, is not that this fact is now so generally admitted, as that it has been so long in being recognized. For while we gratefully acknow ledge, and we can hardly do so with sufficient emphasis, the giant strides which the study of Papyrology has made in recent years through the almost phenomenal labours of Dr. Grenfell and Dr. Hunt in this country, to say nothing of their foreign compeers, we must not forget that for the earliest papyrus discoveries in Egypt we have to go back as far as the. year 1778. It is true that for a time the finds were comparatively few and unimportant, but by the middle of the following century quite a num ber of documents had been made available in connexion with the collections in Turin, London, Leyden, and Paris.1 And yet full of varied signifi cance as many of these documents humains were, they evoked comparatively little interest even amongst palaeographers and historians, while their bearing upon the Greek of the Biblical writings passed practically unnoticed. The earliest hint in this direction that I have been able to discover is afforded by a passage in Peyron's Introduction to his edition of the Turin papyri in 1826, in which he states that in order to understand the meaning of some of their unusual words, he had consulted ' the contemporary writers, especially the translators of 1 The Turin Papyri were published in 1826-27, tne London (by Forshall) in 1839, the Leyden in 1843-85, and the Paris in 1865. 46 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS the lxx, the writers of the New Testament, Poly- bius, and Aristeas.'1 But no one seems to have thought of reversing the process, and of examining the papyri for illustrations of lxx or New Testa ment Greek. One can hardly help wondering what they might have yielded in this direction in the hands of Dr. Hort, who included Peyron's book in his library, but there is no evidence that he had ever thought of examining it in this connexion. Nor does it seem to have been different in the case of either of the other two members of the great Cambridge trium virate, though a striking prophecy attributed to Bishop Lightfoot in 1863 shows how keenly alive he was to the importance of such evidence, should it ever present itself — as indeed it had already done. Speaking of some New Testament word which had its only classical authority in Herodotus, he is re ported to have said : ' You are not to suppose that the word had fallen out of use in the interval, only that it had not been used in the books which remain to us : probably it had been part of the common speech all along. I will go further, and say that if we could only recover letters that ordinary people 1 ' Nee praetermittendum est, Papyros puram putamque dia- lectum referre, quae per ora vulgi volitabat Maior difficultas oritur a potestate verborum, quae quandoque Graecis prorsus inaudita, propria erat Aegyptiorum. Quare consului affines scrip tores, praesertim lxx Interpretes, Scriptores Novi Testamenti, Polybium, atque Aristeam ' (Papyri Graeci Regii Taurinensis Musei Aegyptii (Turin, 1826), i. p. 21). LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 47 wrote to each other without any thought of being literary, we should have the greatest possible help for the understanding of the language of the New Testament generally.' * Twenty-one years later, an admission to the same effect, based this time on actual evidence, was made by Dean Far rar, and his words deserve to be recalled, as probably the first direct recognition in this country of the value of the papyri for New Testament study. In a note to the chapter on the ' Form of the New Testament Epistles,' in his volume on The Messages of the Books,2 Dr. Farrar remarks with reference to the general identity of structure in the Pauline Epistles : ' It is an interesting subject of inquiry to what extent there was at this period an ordinary form of correspondence which (as among ourselves) was to some extent fixed. In the papyrus rolls of the British Museum (edited for the trustees by J. Forshall [in 1839]) there are forms and phrases which constantly remind us of St. Paul' (p. 151). But he does not seem to have pursued the inquiry further, and it was left to Adolf Deissmann, now Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the University of Berlin, to write as a Privatdocent at Marburg, and to publish as a pastor at Herborn, the Bibelshidien first issued in 1895, an<^ followed by the Neue Bibel- studien in 1897, which were virtually to inaugurate 1From notes of Bishop Lightfoot's lectures supplied by the Rev. J. Pulliblank to Dr. J. H. Moulton : see Prolegomena 3, p. 242. 2 London, 1884. 48 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS a new movement in the linguistic study of our Greek Bible.1 For, whatever judgment may be passed on some of the conclusions arrived at by Deissmann and his subsequent fellow-workers, this at least is certain, that they have succeeded in lifting the so-called Biblical Greek completely out of the isolation in which hitherto it had been believed to stand, and exhibiting it as 'neither an example of "Jewish- Greek " (which is nowhere demonstrable) nor of a specific " Christian Greek," but rather a monument of the Koine as a whole — the first earnest and really magnificent attempt to employ the spoken language of the time for literary purposes.' 2 General It is no part of my present purpose to discuss in of the detail the proofs which Deissmann and Thumb in Germany, and J. H. Moulton in England, have brought forward to establish this conclusion. Nor is it possible at present to attempt any philological discussion of the exact nature of this Kow?, or common Greek. It must be enough that though it is frequently spoken of as debased, or even as bad, Greek, in itself it marks a distinct stage in the 1 The two volumes are combined in the English translation by the Rev. A. Grieve under the title Bible Studies. Contributions chiefly from Papyri and Inscriptions to the History of the Language, the Literature, and the Religion of Hellenistic Judaism and Primi tive Christianity, 2nd edit., Edinburgh, 1903. See further for Deissmann's works, Additional Note A, ' Some Books for the Study of the Greek Papyri.' 2 A. Thumb, art. 'Hellenistic and Biblical Greek' in A Standard Bible Dictionary (London, 1909), p. 331. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 49 history of the language. Standing midway in point of time between classical and modern Greek, it presents all the marks of a living tongue, which, while wanting in many of the niceties by which classical Greek was distinguished, was nevertheless governed by regular laws of its own. Its main basis was Attic, with an intermingling of not a few Ionic elements. And though in its spoken form this common speech would naturally exhibit other dialectic differences in view of the wide area over which it was used, these differences disappear to a surprising extent in the written texts. And the consequence is, that we are able to appeal with confidence to documents emanating from different countries and different circumstances in support and illustration of each other on the linguistic side. An Egyptian papyrus letter and a New Testament Epistle may be widely separated alike by the nationality and habitat of their writers, and by their own inherent characters and aims, but both are written in substantially the same Greek. 2. On the richness of the field of illustration thus 2. influences opened up in New Testament lexicography, I shall Greek of have something to say directly ; but meanwhile it Testament. seems necessary to safeguard and limit the con clusions thus reached in one or two directions. In the not unnatural recoil from the old position of treating the Greek of the New Testament as an isolated language, a tendency has shown itself in various quarters to lose sight of certain distinctive features by which it is none the less marked, and 50 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS which, notwithstanding all the linguistic and stylistic parallels that have been discovered, impart a character of its own to the language of our New Testament writings. (i) Hebraisms. (i) This applies, in the first place, to the over- eagerness which many advocates of the new light display in getting rid of the 'Hebraisms' or ' Semitisms,' which have hitherto been regarded as a distinguishing feature of the Greek New Testament. That the number of these has been greatly exaggerated in the past, and that there is now ample evidence for looking on many of them as 'true Greek,' I should be amongst the first to admit. When, for example, in a letter of a.d. 41, a man counsels a friend who was in money difficulties, /3XeVe o-arov airo twv 'lovSaloov, ' Beware of the Jews,' apparently as money-lenders, and if so, probably the first reference to them in that character,1 there is no longer any need of finding a Hebraistic construction in our Lord's warning, Mark xii. 38, ^XeVere dirb rS>v ypa/jfjareoov, ' Beware of the scribes,' or again, of regarding the use of ev in such a passage as 1 Cor. iv. 21, ev pd(38v, 'of the less reputable class' (Edd.).1 Nor need we any longer appeal to the Hebrew 7$$ as determining the New Testament meaning of ' ask ' for epwrdw, when we find the word constantly so used in the ordinary Greek of the time, as, for example, in the second century letter in which a certain Antonius epwra, ' invites,' a friend to dine with him, 'at the table of the lord Serapis.'2 Apart from its lexical interest, this last document is very significant as giving an actual instance of those banquets held in honour of a god and in his temple, against which St. Paul pointedly warns the Corinthian Christians in 1 Cor. x. 2 1 : ' You cannot drink the cup of the roiroypap,p.arews o-vv olXXols TrXelocri. ev jua^atoais Trap\a\yivop,ivov els rffv KUfxr/v, ' Marres the topogrammateus is in the habit of coming to the village with numerous others armed with swords.' 1 FayUm Towns and their Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt-Hogarth, p. 103 ff. No. i26f- (c. B.C. 103). For numerous examples from the inscriptions, see Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 88, 194, and add from the Inschriften von Priene, ed. H. von Gaertringen (Berlin, 1906), No. 115s (i/B.c), dvao-rpe6fxevos ev izao-w §iX\av- Qptoiruis] — a good parallel to Heb. xiii. 18, ev ttS.o-iv koXws OeXovres dvao-rpeeo-0ai.. 2 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, iii. p, 260, No. 523 ( = Selections from the Greek Papyri2, No. 39). 52 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Lord, and the cup of demons ; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord, and of the table of demons.' Even after, however, we have disposed of these and a number of similar instances, it still remains true that it is impossible to remove genuine ' Semit- isms ' from the New Testament altogether, or to the extent that is sometimes demanded. Why, in deed, should there be any undue anxiety to do so ? The presence of a few ' Semitisms ' more or less does not prevent our recognizing that the general language of the document in which they occur is Greek, any more than the Scotticisms, into which a North Briton shows himself so ready to fall, exclude the possibility that all the time he is doing his best to talk English. And it is surely wiser to attribute these Semitic-seeming words and constructions at once to their natural source, the more especially when they occur in circumstances which make their presence not only explicable but inevitable. The mother-tongue of almost all the New Testa ment writers was Aramaic, and although, in keeping with the general practice of the time, they had learned to use Greek freely as a subsidiary language, their native upbringing would constantly assert itself in the choice of particular words and phrases. In the case of the Evangelists this tendency would be still further encouraged by the fact that not merely Aramaic traditions, but Aramaic documents, lay at the basis of their writings ; while even St. Paul, to whom Greek had been all along a second LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 53 language, constantly shows signs of his Jewish upbringing in the arrangement and construction of his sentences.1 This was due, doubtless, in no small degree to the influence which the translation-Greek of the Septua- gint had come to exercise over him. Whatever may have been the case in his earlier years, the Greek Old Testament was undoubtedly the Bible of St. Paul's manhood and ministry, and not only its thoughts but its actual phraseology had passed in sucum et sanguinem. What more natural, then, than that when he himself came to write on cognate themes, he should almost unconsciously fall into the same mode of speech, much as a modern preacher or devotional writer is tempted to imitate the archaic English of the Authorized Version. It is quite possible that too much has been made in the past of the translation-Greek of the Septuagint, and that its writers by no means betray throughout the literal, almost slavish, following of the Hebrew original that is sometimes alleged against them. Still the fact remains that the Septuagint is a translation which bears, though in varying degrees in its different parts, the marks of its source, 1 ' Ebensowenig als die Septuaginta darf das Neue Testament sprachlich isoliert werden. Wir treffen auch hier die Umgangs- sprache der Zeit. Sie ist stark mit Semitismen versetzt, wo der aramaische Originale zugrunde liegen oder die Septuaginta nach- wirkt. Aber z.B. Paulus hat zwar in der Wortfugung manchmal, dagegen im Wortschatz sehr wenig hebraisiert ' (Wackernagel, 'Die Griechische Sprache,' p. 309, in Die Kultur der Gegenwarl2, L viii. Berlin, 1907). 54 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS and which therefore in its turn could not fail to influence the Greek of those who were nurtured upon it.1 It is not so easy to determine the exact limits of another consideration which must be kept in view in estimating the ' Semitisms ' of the New Testament. We have seen that many of these are disposed of on the ground that they can be paralleled from the Greek papyri found in Egypt. But what, per tinently ask Dr. Swete and others, if these parallels are themselves due to Semitic influence ? We know that from an early date there were large numbers of Jewish settlers in Egypt, and these may easily have affected the Greek of the surrounding population.2 To this it is generally answered that in many instances we can support the papyri by evidence drawn from vernacular inscriptions found in widely distant regions, where it is impossible always to postulate an influential Ghetto, and that even in Egypt, outside the larger cities, there is no evidence of a Jewish element strong enough to affect the 1 Cf. Thackeray, A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge, 1909), i. p. 29: 'Notwithstanding that certain so- called " Hebraisms " have been removed from that category or that their claim to the title has become open to question, it is impossible to deny the existence of a strong Semitic influence in the Greek of the lxx.' As bearing this out, it is interesting to find that Psichari's important Essai sur le Grec de la Septante (Extrait de la Revue des Etudes juives, Avril, 1 908) turns round the two points 'hebra'ismes a ecarter, hebrai'smes a reconnaitre' (cf. p. 207). 2 Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, p. cxx. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 55 local speech to the extent demanded.1 The answer may well seem to be conclusive. At the same time, without fuller information than is at present available regarding the position and power of these Jewish colonies, it would be unwise to deny altogether the possibility of some such influence, more particularly as exercised on a language which was neither the Jews' nor the Egyptians' native speech, but a medium of communication adopted by both alike, and on that very account more open to modification at the hands of all who used it.2 (2) A second feature of our New Testament (?) certain writings which is apt to be ignored, or at any rate tendencies. under-estimated, in view of the generally popular Greek in which they are written, is their literary character. I do not of course for a moment mean that any part of the New Testament is ' Kunstprosa ' in the ordinary sense of that term, or that the literary character of its different books stands on the same footing throughout. At the same time, leaving out of sight meanwhile the Gospels, where the question is complicated by the writers' relation to their sources, we cannot deny to the historian of the Acts of the Apostles, to St. Paul, and to the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, a command over the Greek language, and a power in using it, which 1 E.g. J. H. Moulton, Cambridge Biblical Essays (London, 1909), p. 468 f. 2 This point is well stated by G. C. Richards in the Journal for Theological Studies, x. p. 289 f. 56 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS entitle them to rank amongst the greatest writers as well as the greatest teachers. In the case of St. Luke we are prepared for this not only by the instinct for style, which would belong to him in virtue of his Greek birth, but also by his medical training, which enriched his vocabulary with many scientific and quasi-scientific terms : 1 while, whatever the view taken of the relation of the different factors which combined to form the Lucan account of the Pauline speeches in the Book of Acts, none can fail to recognize with Professor Percy Gardner in his recent study of them, that ' as a man of letters' their compiler is 'highly gifted,' and brings to his difficult task extraordinary versatility and literary skill.2 The same holds true mutatis mutandis of St. Paul, to whom from the circumstances of his birth and upbringing Greek was virtually a second mother- tongue.8 That he was imbued with its culture and literature to the extent that some of his modern biographers would have us believe may well seem doubtful : it is at least not borne out by his vocabu lary, which is in the main thoroughly popular and in 1 These can still be most conveniently studied in Dr. Hobart's well-known Essay on The Medical Language of St. Luke, Dublin and London, 1882. See also Knowling, ' The Medical Language of St. Luke and Recent Criticism ' in Messianic Interpretation and other Studies (London, 1910), p. 113 ff. 2 Cambridge Biblical Essays, pp. 387, 394. 3 On the probability that St. Paul was able also to speak Latin, see the interesting paper by Professor A. Souter, The Expositor, VIII. i. p. 337 ff- LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 57 accord with the living speech of his day.1 At the same time, it is undeniable that the Apostle could, when necessary, fall back on the philosophic language of the day, and employ it in such a way as would be appreciated by thinking and educated men. Obvious examples are his use of airapKeia in its subjective sense of ' self-sufficiency,' and of a-welS^o-is, which, though not unknown in the Jewish Apocrypha, first gains its full introspective moral importance in the teaching of the Stoics.2 The same ri^yy is seen still more markedly, I need hardly say, in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Even those who are most anxious to emphasize the generally ' popular ' character of the New Testament writings admit that we have here an exception.8 1 ' P. spricht nicht anders als die lebendige Sprache seiner Zeit' Nageli, Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulas (Gottingen, 1905), p. 42 — an important contribution to the study of the Pauline vocabulary (in so far as it falls under the first five letters of the alphabet), more particularly in its relation to the Kotvrj. 2 Upon the necessity of the study of such writers as Musonius and Epictetus for a complete insight into the language and style of St. Paul, see J. Weiss, Die Aufgaben der Neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft in der Gegenwart (Gottingen, 1908), p. 10 f. Cf. also R. Bultmann, Der Stil der paulinischen Predigt und die Kynisch- stoische Diatribe (Gottingen, 19 10), A. Bonhoffer, Epiktet und das Neue Testament (Giessen, 191 1), and the articles by these two writers in the Zeitschrift fur die neutesiamentliche Wissenschaft for 1912. 3 Deissmann describes the Epistle to the Hebrews as ' historically the earliest example of Christian artistic literature,' and again as ' like an intruder among the New Testament company of popular books' (Lightfrom the Ancient East, pp. 237, 243). 58 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS And Prefer to it now only for the purpose of again emphasizing that even if it stood alone in this matter of artistic force, and we have seen already that it does not, we should still have to admit that with all its ' splendid simplicity and homeliness,' the New Testament contains elements of a distinctively literary character — that it is itself literature. (3) The trans- (3) There is still a third consideration that must forming power . , . , r . . . . , of Christianity, not be lost sight of in estimating the true character of the New Testament vocabulary, and that is the deepening and enriching which it has received through Christian influences. The common language of the time has been ' bap tized ' into new conditions ; and only by a frank recognition of these conditions can we hope to fix the full connotation of many of our most character istic New Testament words and phrases. The point has been well put by Sir William M. Ramsay : ' Even though the same words were used by the pagans, it may be the case — I would go so far as to say it certainly was so — that there were some, per haps many, which acquired a special and distinct meaning to the Christians, as suited to express certain ideas of the Christian religious thought, and which thus immediately became characteristic and almost positive marks of Christian writing.'1 A familiar instance is afforded by the word dydirrf. It would be going too far to say that the word has been actually ' born within the bosom of revealed religion,' though it is somewhat remarkable that no 1 The Expositor, VII. vii. p. 6. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 59 absolutely clear instance of its use in profane Greek has been discovered ; J at the same time, it is so char acteristic of the Biblical writings that it may be regarded as peculiar to them in the full sense which they have taught us to ascribe to it. The use of dSeXcpol, again, to describe the members of a guild, or the 'fellows' of the Serapeum at Memphis, may prepare us for, but does not exhaust, its definite Christian significance. And the same may be said of -wapova-ia, which our new authorities .exhibit as a kind of terminus technicus to describe the visit of a king or great man.2 Very suggestive, too, is the light which these throw upon the original associations of such words as aiwvios, diroo-ToXos, e-iri- o-kottos, Bprfo-Kela, TrpetrfivTepos and o-a>Tr)p, to name a few almost at random,3 but it is certainly not light of a character that enables us to dispense with the light derivable from within the New Testament itself. 1 The nearest approach of which I am aware is in a Pagan inscription of the Imperial period from Tefeny in Pisidia, giving the mantic significance of various throws of the dice : Trevif-ei 8' els dyd\yrj^v o-e po8eirri (Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, ii. 57, cited by Hatch, Journal of Biblical Literature, xxvii. 2 (1908), p. 134 ff). 2 On these two words, see my edition of St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians, pp. 21, 145 f. 3 For a discussion of these and many similar terms reference may be made to the ' Lexical Notes from the Papyri ' contributed by Professor Moulton and the writer to The Expositor, VII. v. • — It is hoped soon to republish a first instalment of these ' Notes ' in an enlarged and revised form. 60 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS It may seem, perhaps, as if all this tends to dis parage somewhat the aid we are likely to receive in the work of interpretation from our new sources. But this is very far indeed from being my intention. All that I wish to insist upon is, that in using these sources we must not lose sight of other evidence which has at least an equal right to be heard, and that loss rather than gain will result from calling them in to decide questions which lie outside their distinct province. Within that province, however, their value is undoubted, and will, I am confident, be increasingly recognized as their contents become more generally known and studied. m. Recent III. Let me indicate a few of the directions in knowiedgeof which these spoils from the ancient East have already Testament. ew thrown light on the text and diction of our New Testament writings. i. Direct i. In the matter of text, it may be a disappoint- our n°w ° ment to some that hitherto comparatively few Biblical textSamen texts of any importance have been recovered. This doubtless arises from the fact that while casual letters and papers that were no longer required were thrown out on the village dustheaps, there to be preserved by the kindly protection of the desert sand for the instruction of future generations, the more valued texts and documents continued to be treasured and used, ^until gradually through the frailty of the papyrus leaves they crumbled away.1 1 Birt calculates that if a papyrus roll reached the age of a hun dred years it did well, seeing that even the lying in a chest Plate II. 4 Ml ..AK^^-^W->,/;' •**"->wf^'- 't%, •¦ *' ^>i WV.kr^V<^-»* h tv LEAF FROM A PAPYRUS BOOK, CONTAINING PART OF ST. MATTHEW i. Third Century. Discovered at Oxyrhynchus, and now in the Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. By permission of the Egypt Exploration Fund. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 61 The probability, therefore, of finding any large number of Biblical manuscripts of great antiquity on papyrus may be at once discounted, though it is impossible to say what treasures may still be lurking in some unrifled tomb or sealed jar. And yet, even as it is, we cannot forget that, apart from many important manuscripts of parts of the Greek Old Testament, we owe to the sands of Egypt the oldest original manuscripts of the Greek New Testament in existence, namely, fragments of the Gospels of St. Matthew and of St. John, belonging to the third century, as well as a fourth century manuscript of nearly one-third of the Epistle to the Hebrews. We shall return to these and similar documents in connexion with the transmission of our New Testament writings.1 In the meantime they are only mentioned as examples of the additions which recent discoveries have made to our textual authorities. 2. But valuable as the papyri are in this direction, 2. indirect the indirect aid which they afford to the New fmfcting Testament student is still more significant. It may well seem absurd that these fragmentary leaves, in themselves often of the most trivial and occa sional character, should have anything to teach us regarding the language and meaning of the most significant Greek writings in the world. But so it injured it : see Die BuchroUe in der Kunst, p. 24, and cf. the same writer's Das antike Buchwesen, p. 364 ff. 1 See p. 189, and cf. Additional Note D, ' New Testament Texts on Papyrus.' 62 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS is, and in the remainder of this lecture I shall try to show you how. (i)Onho- (i) We may begin with Orthography and Acci- graphy and , accidence. QenCC In these particulars the New Testament writings have not yet been subjected to the same searching comparison with the new evidence which Helbing and Thackeray have already accomplished in the case of the Greek Old Testament,1 but enough has already been done by Blass,2 Schmiedel,3 Moulton,4 and Deissmann,6 following on the notable work already done in this direction by Westcott and Hort,6 to show that we are in a better position to-day for recovering the ipsissima verba of the New Testament autographs than many modern textual critics are ready to admit. Thus, when we remember the constant tendency on the part of the later copyists to improve on the ' vulgarisms ' or ' colloquialisms ' of the original, it cannot but help us to determine what is due to this 1 Helbing, Grammatik der Septuaginta, Laut- und Wortlehre, Gottingen, 1907; Thackeray, A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek, i. Introduction, Orthography and Accidence, Cambridge, 1909. 2 Grammatik des Neutestamentlichen Griechisch 2 (Gottingen, 1902), pp. 1-74; Eng. Trans, by Thackeray (London, 1905), pp. 1-7 1. 3 Winer's Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms neu bearbeitet (Gottingen, 1894- ), pp. 31-144. i Prolegomena3, p. 42 ff. ° Bible Studies, pp. 181-193. 6 Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek 2 (London, 1896), p. 302 ff, and Appendix, p. 148 ff. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 63 refining process when we have such abundant evidence now in our hands as to how the common people of the time actually wrote and spelt. The form yivt]fj.a, for example, which Westcott and Hort prefer for the five occurrences of this word in the New Testament (Matt. xxvi. 29, Mark xiv. 25, Luke xii. 18, xxii. 18, 2 Cor. ix. 10), as against the yewy/ma of the Textus Receptus (except in Luke xii. 18), is now fully established on the evidence both of the Ptolemaic papyri, and of those belonging to the first four centuries after Christ, and the aspirated o-cpvpU for o-irupU (Matt. xv. 37, xvi. 10, Mark viii. 8, 20, Acts ix. 25) is again amply, though not uni versally, attested in the vernacular documents. The very indifference, indeed, of the writers of these documents to symmetrical forms or to unified spelling may in itself be taken as a warning against the almost feverish haste with which a 'redactor,' or later author, is sometimes brought in to explain similar phenomena in the different parts of a New Testament book. In the same way, when we pass to morphology, it Morphology. is again to discover that many verbal forms with which our best New Testament texts have made us familiar can again be illustrated. One of the com monest of these is the attaching 1st aorist forms to the 2nd aorist, as when in Matt. x. 13 we read eXOaTw for eXQeTw, and in Mark iii. 8 rjXQav for rjXQov — a practice abundantly confirmed by the papyri, as well as by late Hellenistic writers generally, while the yeyovav for yeyovacri which Westcott and Hort 64 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS read in Rom. xvi. 7 in accordance with B X A receives frequent corroboration, as, for example, from an almost contemporary papyrus letter from the Fayum.1 An interesting form, which may cause trouble if it is not watched, is the substitution of edv for av after 6'?, Sttov, etc., which the same editors have faithfully reproduced from the leading manuscripts in such passages as Matt. xii. 32, o? edv etirn, and Mark xiv. 9, oirov edv KtfpvyOfl. Professor J. H. Moulton has carefully examined the evidence of the papyri on this point, and has found that in the first and second centuries of the Christian era edv greatly predomi nated, but that, as a form of av, it had almost died out in ordinary usage before the great Uncials were written. The fact, therefore, that their scribes pre served edv may be taken as showing that they ' faithfully reproduce originals written under condi tions long since obsolete.' 2 One other example, which has an important bearing on the interpretation of a famous passage, must suffice. In John i. 14, the reading ttX^c (-TrX-ifpyf D) y_dpiTo$ Kal aXt]6elao is practically certain, and the question arises with what does irXripm agree. Treating it as a nominative, Bishop Westcott3 connects it directly with the principal subject of the sentence 6 Xoyo's, making the words Kal e6eao-d/j.e9a Tr\v So^av avTOv, So^av w? /xovoyevovs irapd TraTpoi a parenthesis (as in a. v., R.v), and this undoubtedly 1 Berliner Griechische Urkunden, ii. p. 241, No. 59719 (a.d. 75). 2 Prolegomena*, p. 42 f. 3 The Gospel according to St. John (edit. 1908), i. p. 18 f. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 65 yields good sense. But when we remember that in the papyri from the first century after Christ onwards ttX^j;? is treated as indeclinable,1 and that this usage is confirmed on the evidence of the Septuagint, and of many good manuscripts on its various occurrences in the New Testament,2 the probability is that -irXriprfs is to be similarly treated in the passage before us, as in reality an accusative referring to §6£av. It will then be the 'glory,' or the self-revelation, of the Word, that is 'full of grace and truth.' (2) This last example may fittingly introduce us (2) syntax. to the field of Syntax, and to Dr. Moulton's brilliant Prolegomena, where at every turn the evidence of the newly discovered vernacular documents is called in to decide corresponding usages in the New Testament writings. One or two examples will show how rich and suggestive that evidence is. Take, for instance, the prepositions, and an im- Examples of partial survey can hardly fail to lead us to the inThVcasftf conclusion that the laxer usage which is everywhere prepos"°"' observable in later Greek hardly justifies many of the 1 Only one instance B.C. has as yet been found, Mapo-etiretov irXrfprfs ( = TrXrjpes) in Papyri Graeci Musei Antiquarii Publici Lugduni-Balavi, ed. Leemans, i. p. 118, C col. 214 (b.c. 160). « 2For the Septuagint evidence, cf. Thackeray i. p. 176 f., and for tfie^Tew Testament, see especially Mark iv. 28, where Hort (Notes on Select Readings91, p. 24) thinks that an original irX-qprfs o-irov best explains the confusion of readings, and Acts vi. 5, where the best manuscripts (except B) read avBpa irX-qprfs irlo-rews. See further, Blass, Grammar, p. 81 ; Moulton, Prolegomena3, p. 50, and two notes by C. H. Turner, The Journal of Theological Studies, i. pp. 120 ff, 561 f. 66 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS overniceties of interpretation in which New Testa ment expositors have been apt to indulge. The free interchange of ek and ev is a case in point. This may be carried back to the fact that both words are originally forms of the same root ; but what we are specially concerned with is that they are largely interchanged in ordinary usage, as when in a letter of a.d. 22 the writer tells us that when he came to Alexandria (e-n-l tu> yeyovevai ev 'AXe^avSpla), he learnt so and so from certain fishermen at Alexandria (ek 'AXe^dvSpilav]).1 When, then, in commenting on John i. 1 8, 6 cov ek tov koXttov tov irarpos, Bishop Westcott speaks of the phrase as implying ' the combination (as it were) of rest and motion, of a continuous relation, with a realization of it,' 2 is he not pressing the phraseology further than contemporary evidence warrants, however doctrinally true the deduction may be ? Nor, similarly, can those who advocate the rendering ' immersing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit ' for the baptismal formula in Matt, xxviii. 19, do so on the ground that the more familiar rendering is philologically inaccurate. Without entering on the question as to the exact shade of meaning under lying ftaTTTifyvTec, it is clear that ek to ovo/xa may be understood as practically equivalent to iv r£ ovo/iart, the new light thus joining hands with, and lending 1 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, ii. p. 294 ff, No. 294s and6 ( = Selections from the Greek Papyri2, No. 13). 2 The Gospel of St. John, i. p. 28. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 67 support to, the almost unanimous tradition of the Western Church.1 A corresponding caution must be observed in and in the ... . - ,, _. . , construction of connexion with the construction of wa. Classical im. Greek has taught us to expect that 'Iva construed with the subjunctive must denote purpose, but in Hellenistic Greek this has been extended to include a consecutive usage, and sometimes, as in modern Greek, a simple statement of fact. When, therefore, in John xvii. 3, the Fourth Evangelist writes : ' And this is life eternal, that they should know Thee (iVa yivwarKooo-l o-e) the only true God, and Him whom Thou didst send, Jesus Christ,' it is of course possible that by the latter clause he means us to understand our Lord as pointing to the knowledge of God as the aim and end of eternal life. But it is equally permissible, and more in accord with con temporary usage, to interpret the words as defining the contents of the life eternal : this life is a life consisting in, and maintained by, the knowledge of God, and of Him whom God had sent. It may seem, perhaps, from these and similar Grammatical ...... . i-i niceties in instances that the niceties 01 construction which we the New , 1 1 r • /-< 1 • Testament. are accustomed to look for in Greek writers are wanting in the' New Testament, but this is far from being the case. And many passages, especially in the more literary parts of the New Testament, can 1 See the interesting discussion between Bishop Chase and Dean Armitage Robinson in The Journal of Theological Studies, vi. p. 481 ff, vii. p. 186 ff, and viii. p. 161 ff, and on the phrase generally, cf. Heitmiiller, Im Namenjesu, Gottingen, 1903. 68 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Tense construction. Caseconstruction. be adduced where only by a close observance of the distinctions of tense and case construction can the writers' full meaning be grasped. In i Cor. xv., for example, the whole force of the argument rests on the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ who died and was buried is now risen, and continues unchangeably the same. And accordingly, after using aorists to denote the two former acts, d-weOavev and eTatprf, St. Paul in v. 4 changes to the perfect eyr/yepTai in speaking of the resurrection. Christ not merely 'rose again,' as in the rendering of the Authorized Version, but ' hath been raised,' and con sequently, by implication, lives for ever, the earnest of His people's resurrection. Changes in case construction are often equally suggestive. When in Heb. vi. the verb ' taste ' is construed with the genitive in v. 4, yevo-a/mevovs Te t^? Swpeds tw e-wovpavlov, ' as touching those who tasted of the heavenly gift,' and in the following verse with the accusative, KaXov yevo-aixevovs Oeov prjfxa, ' tasted the word of God that it is good,' this can hardly be explained in the case of so careful a writer as the author of this Epistle as an example of the well- known encroachment of the accusative on the geni tive in late Greek, but as due rather to the fact that in the first instance the verb is simply a verb of sense (cf. c. ii. 9), whereas in the second the thought of experience is added — those spoken of had not merely tasted, but recognized, the goodness of the word of God. Still more exegetically important are the different LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 69 constructions of the verb mo-Tewo ' believe, ' the simple dative giving place to ek with the accusative, when it is desired to bring out the deliberate effort of faith, by which one man, as it were, puts himself into another's power, and surrenders his 'self to him. It is this attitude which is predicated of the ' many ' in John viii. 30, 7toXXoj e-wlo-Tevo-av ek avrov, 'many believed on Him,' in distinction from the Jews of the follow ing verse, whom Jesus can only address as tow Treirio-TevKOTas auroo, ' those who have believed Him.' These last are as yet only on the way — the perfect tense is again significant — to the higher faith, but, as Jesus proceeds at once to remind them, if they continue to abide in His word, that word will gradually exercise its power over them, until they too become His disciples in truth (dXt]65>i). It would carry us altogether beyond our imme diate object if I were to go on multiplying examples in this direction, but I have thought it right to bring these before you to make perfectly clear that while the syntax of the New Testament is not modelled on strictly classical rules, many of its writers were by no means wanting in literary skill, and had the means at their disposal of drawing the suggestive, and sometimes subtle, distinctions which were de manded by the character of the new thoughts and ideas they desired to express. (3) In passing to the vocabulary of the New (3)Vocabu- Testament, the same thing meets us. With all its native simplicity and directness, the New Testament exhibits a wonderfully rich and 70 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS varied vocabulary, and many of its words, occurring as they do at a late stage in the development of the Greek language, have a very interesting history behind them. To trace that history, and to show the chano-es that time and circumstances have wrought upon their meaning, will be the task of the next New Testament lexicographer. And it is good news, therefore, to learn that one who possesses such outstanding qualifications as Professor Deiss mann is already engaged on this all-important task. In his hands, we may be sure, the new Lexicon ' will bring out once more ' — to borrow his own description of what such a work should be — ' the simplicity, inwardness, and force of the utterances of evangelists and apostles,' and ' will meet with that best of all rewards, far exceeding all scholarly recognition, the reward of exerting an influence in real life.' 1 (a) Reduction (a) This result will be brought about by a large of 'Biblical' reduction in the number of so-called 'Biblical' words — words, that is, which have hitherto been regarded as the special property of the Biblical writers, seeing that no evidence of their use has hitherto been pro curable from profane sources. Thayer, at the end of his edition of Grimm's Lexicon, gives a long list of these dVa^ Xeyd/xeva, with the result that they help largely to confirm that feeling of the isolation or peculiar character of the New Testament writings to which reference has already been made. The list is unnecessarily long 1 Lightfrom the Ancient East, p. 418. words. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 71 even from Thayer's point of view, as it includes not a few words for which in the body of his book he himself supplies references from pagan sources, which, though sometimes later in point of time than the New Testament itself, nevertheless show unmistak ably that the words belong to the ordinary stock of the time. And now the new evidence comes in to extend these references in so many directions that Deissmann is able to reduce the number of words peculiar to the New Testament writers to something like fifty, or about one per cent, of the whole vocabulary.1 This will become clearer if we take two special instances. In what are probably the earliest writings of the New Testament as it has come down to us, the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, there are in all 460 different words, of which twenty-seven are generally reckoned as dVa£ Xeyo/xeva. But if we exclude from this number the words which are found in the Septuagint, or in other late Greek writings, including the papyri, the twenty-seven can be reduced to two, 6eo$lSaKTos and o-vnepvXeTr^, both of which St. Paul himself may very well have formed on the analogy of similar compounds.2 Or to turn to the latest book in the New Testament Canon, the so-called Second Epistle of St. Peter, the peculiarities of whose style have led to its being 1 Lightfrom the Ancient East, p. 73. 2 For further particulars, see the writer's edition of St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians (London, 1908), p. Hi. f. 72 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS (*) Confir mation of traditionalmeanings. described as ' Baboo Greek,'1 we are here confronted with the long list of fifty-six aval* Xey6/j.eva. The process of reducing this list has not been so successful as in the case of the Thessalonian Epistles, as there are still twenty words which have not as yet been found anywhere else ; but, after all, that is little more than one-third of the earlier calculation, and any day a newly discovered inscription or papyrus letter may reduce the proportion still further. (b) Nor do our new sources only thus reduce the number of words hitherto regarded as peculiar to /the New Testament writings, they also confirm the /meanings that have been traditionally assigned to 'others, sometimes on somewhat slender grounds. A familiar example is the Pauline word Xoyela. According to Grimm-Thayer, the word is 'not found in profane authors,' but for its meaning in i Cor. xvi. i f., the only places where it occurs in the New Testament, the translation ' a collection ' is suggested. Such a translation is in harmony with the context, and is now conclusively established by the fact that from the second century B.C. the word is found in the papyri in this sense. It is sufficient to refer to a curious letter from Tebtunis, in which a tax-gatherer, after naively describing his unprincipled efforts to defeat a rival in the collection of a certain tax, adds, ' I bid you urge on Nicon regarding the collection (trepl t>J? Xoye^CyasS.' 2 1 E. A. Abbott, From Letter to Spirit (London, 1903), 1 121-1 135. 2 The Tebtunis Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt-Smyly, i. p. 168 ff., No. 58s5 (b.c. in). LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 73 Along with Xoyeta, although derived from a different root, may be mentioned the verb eXXoydw, which St. Paul uses with such effect in the Epistle to Philemon, when he bids Philemon put down to his account (v. 18, tovto i/j.ol eXXoya) any loss he may have suffered at the hands of Onesimus. For this usage Thayer can only supply two parallels from the inscriptions ; but the verb, at any rate in the form eXXoyeco, is now proved to have been the regular terminus technictis in this sense, as when in a Strass- burg papyrus a man is called upon to render his account 'Iva ovtw<; avTw evXoytfOrj, ' that so a reckoning may be made with him,' 1 or as when provision is made in hiring certain dancing-girls for a village festival that they are to receive so much ' as earnest money to be reckoned in the price (iirep dpapwvos [tj? T~\ifJ.r] eXXoyov/xevYolu).' 2 Or, to take a wholly different example, when in the letter already referred to (p. 50) his friend counsels a man in money difficulties to plead with one of his creditors m 'Iva dvao-TaTwo-ys rffja?, ' do not unsettle us, ' that is, 'drive us out from hearth and home,'3 he little 1 Griechische Papyrus der Kaiserlichen Universitdts- und Landes- bibliothek zu Strassburg im Elsass, ed. Preisigke (Strassburg im Elsass, 1907), i. p. 119 f., No. 3210 (a.d. 261). 2 Greek Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, ii. p. 101 ff, No. 67m- ( = Selections from the Greek Papyri2, No. 45). It may be noted that the use of dp\_p~\af3(s>v in the above quotation shows that in 2 Cor. i. 22, v. 5, Eph. i. 14, the word is to be understood not as a ' pledge,' but an ' earnest,' a part given in advance of what will be fully bestowed afterwards. ^Berliner Griechische Urkunden, iv. p. 123 f., No. 107920 (a.d. 41). meanings. 74 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS thought that he would supply future students of the New Testament with an apt parallel for the meta phorical use of the same verb in Gal. v. 12, where St. Paul expresses the hope that oi dvao-TaTovvTes, ' those who are unsettling ' his Galatian converts, ' would even mutilate themselves,' any more than the naughty boy's admission from Oxyrhynchus that his mother complains 'that he is upsetting me' (Sti dvao-TaToi /je)1 throws light upon the description of the Brethren at Thessalonica by their Jewish opponents, 'These that have turned the world upside down (oi t>iv oiKov/jevifv dvao-TaTcbcravTes) have come hither also ' (Acts xvii. 6). (c) choice of (c) Similar aid is given in the choice of meaning, where more than one rendering is possible. In Matt. vi. 27, for example, both the Authorized and Revised Versions agree in rendering fiXucla by ' stature,' ' And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit unto his stature ? ' but the margin of the Revised Version has 'age,' and if we are to follow the almost unanimous testimony of the papyri, this latter sense should be adopted throughout the New Testament occurrences of the word, except in Luke xix. 3, where the context makes it impossible. Thus in the important verse, Luke ii. 52, Kal 'L/a-ovs ¦wpoeKo-TTTev tii o-ocpla ko.1 r/XiKia, the meaning is not that Jesus 'advanced in wisdom and stature,' that is 'in height and comeliness ' (as Grimm-Thayer), but ' in wisdom and age,' a description to wnich it may be 1The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, z&&. Grenfell-Hunt,i.p. i85f.,No. 11910 ( = Selections from the Greek Papyri2, No. 42). LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 75 noted in passing a striking parallel is now afforded by a first century inscription, in which a certain Aristagoras is praised as yXikla ttpokotttoov Kal irpoayo- fj-evos ek to Oeoo-efteiv.1 Or, to turn to a much discussed passage, though I tried elsewhere,2 a number of years ago, to defend the translation of SiaOrJKrf by 'covenant' in Heb. ix. 16, 17, I now recognize that it is impossible any longer to confine the word to that sense. Its regular use for ' will ' in the ordinary documents of the day makes it practically certain that it would be so understood by the first readers of the Epistle, and that it is only by admitting a play on the word that the meaning of ' covenant ' can be imported into the passage at all. In the same way, if we take account of contem porary usage, it seems practically certain that d-waTtf in its New Testament occurrences (e.g. Matt. xiii. 22, 2 Pet. ii. 13) can only have the popular Hellenistic meaning of 'pleasure,' and that dpyr\y67w eo-Tiv irpwTt] T>?? fjepiSo? Ma/ceoWa?, the reading fjeplSos was objected to by Dr. Hort, on the ground that /j-epk never denotes simply a region or province, and he proposed accordingly to read HieplSos in its stead, ' a chief city of Pierian Macedonia.'3 But while it is true that /j-epk in the sense of a geographical division does not occur in classical writers, it is regularly so 1 The First Epistle of St. Peter, i. i-ii. 1 7 (London, 1898), p. 41 f. 2 Bible Studies, p. 2 5 9 ff. 3 Notes on Select Readings 2, p. 96 f. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 77 used in documents of the Apostolic Age, so that the rendering 'district' in the Revised Version, however arrived at, need no longer raise any qualms. (e) It is, however, especially by imparting a fresh («) Fresh life life and reality to many of our most ordinary New imparted to ™ t , .... familiar i estament terms that the new authorities render phraseology. their most signal service. We know how our very familiarity with Scriptural language is apt to blind us to its full significance. But when we find words and phrases, which we have hitherto associated only with a religious mean ing, in common, everyday use, and employed in circumstances where their meaning can raise no question, we make a fresh start with them, and get a clearer insight into their deeper application. The ' sincere milk ' by which our Authorized Version renders the dSoXov ydXa of 1 Pet. ii. 2 may be taken as an example. Every one supposes that he knows what is meant by that, but if he were closely pressed, his explanation might be somewhat hazy.1 Nor can it be said that the Revisers have helped him much with their literal etymological translation, ' milk which is without guile.' But when in scores of papyrus documents we find the adjective 1 It ought to be noted that this ambiguity would not exist when the Authorized Version was made, as ' sincere ' was then used in the sense of ' unmixed,' ' pure,' as when the translators of the Rhemish New Testament tell us in their Preface : ' We translate that text which is most sincere, and in our opinion, and as we have proved, incorrupt' (p. 16). But we are dealing with the impression the phrase conveys to the ordinary student of to-day. 78 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS applied to corn in the sense of ' pure,' ' unadulterated,' we see that this is exactly what is intended with reference to the ' spiritual milk ' of the Petrine passage. Unlike the falsified teaching renounced by St. Paul in 2 Cor. iv. 2, /jfjSe SoXovvTeo tov Xoyov tov Qeov, ' nor adulterating the word of God,' it is unmixed with any strange or foreign elements, and comes directly from God Himself. The use of direyw, again, in connexion with receipts on countless ostraca and papyri lends fresh point to St. Paul's assurance to the Philippians, aireyw 8e rrdvTa Kal Trepiercreuo) (c. iv. 1 8), that is not merely, ' I have all things and abound,' but almost ' I am prepared to give you a receipt for all things ' (as showing how completely your bounty has repaid all that you owed me), and may even, as Deissmann has suggested, impart a pungent irony to our Lord's condemnation of the hypocrites who disfigure their faces that they may be seen of men to fast : ' I tell you, they can sign the receipt of their reward (aTreyovo-iv tov fxio-Qov avTwv) ' (Matt. vi. 1 6) — ' their right to receive their reward is realised, precisely as if they had already given a receipt for it.'1 And similarly, when we find those who ' checked ' or ' verified ' an account using the term eirriKoXovOrjKa to describe the result, much as we should write ' Found correct,' we can understand that more than at once meets the eye underlies such a passage as [Mark] xvi. 20, tov Kvplov . . . tov Xoyov fiefiaiovvTOS Sid twv ewaKoXovOovvTcov o-y]fxelwv : the signs did not merely 1 Bible Studies, p. 229. LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 79 accompany or follow, they acted as a kind of authenticating signature to the word.1 How vividly, too, Bishop Lightfoot's translation of Trpoeypdr]o~iv, fiapeiai Kal Icrxvpai, rj 8e irapovo-la tov o-(op.aros do-&evr)s Kal 6 Xoyos e^ovdevqp,evos. 2 Cor. a. 10. KaOios Kal 6 dyairrjrbs rffiuiv d8eXcf>bs IIai5A.os Kara rrjv 8o6elo~av avrip o~olXovs, Upbs rovs iv M.vriXyvy iXo- o-6ovs e-n-io-roXrj : see Usener, Epicurea, Leipzig, 1887, p. 135 f. 3 The Greek text of this letter, edited by H. St. John Thackeray, will be found as an Appendix to Swete's Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, Cambridge, 1900. The same editor supplied an English translation to the Jewish Quarterly Review, April, 1903, which has since been separately reprinted, London, Mac- millan, 1904. See also Wendland's Teubner edition, Aristeae ad Philocratem Epistula, Leipzig, 1900, with its valuable collection of Testimonia and useful lexical and grammatical Indices. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 87 parting knowledge is traceable within the Old Testament itself. The first letter mentioned there is the letter which David addressed to Joab with reference to Uriah (2 Sam. xi. 14 f.), a purely per sonal communication, but this is followed by the open letter of Sennacherib to Hezekiah (2 Kings xix. 14) and by Jeremiah's letter to the captives at Babylon (Jerem. xxix.), in which the prophet has definitely in view their religious instruction. And with this last there may be compared the Epistle of Jeremy appended to the apocryphal book of Baruch, and the Epistles at the beginning of 2 Maccabees.1 2. The way was thus prepared for the use of the 2. The epistle or letter for the purposes of edification in the epistolary form first Christian age, and we can readily understand how gladly St. Paul would avail himself of a form of composition so admirably adapted in its simplicity and directness to the immediate and practical ends he had in view, and yet capable of being employed as a vehicle for the conveyance of the deepest and most far-reaching truths.2 And only as we keep in view both purposes, personal and homiletic, can we understand the form which his Epistles assumed in the Apostle's hands. 1 Renan, Saint Paul, Paris, 1869, p. 229 n2, compares the communications which passed between Jewish synagogues with reference to debated points of doctrine and practice ; but he gives no references. 2Cf. Renan, op. cit. p. 230: 'L'epitre fut ainsi la forme de la litterature chretienne primitive, forme admirable, parfaitement appropriee a l'etat du temps et aux aptitudes naturelles de Paul.' 88 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS (i) The per- (i) Thus, to look at them first of all from their sonal side . . , . r . . . . . of the Pauline more personal side, the fact that they were intended illustrated to serve as a substitute for St. Paul's own presence, from contem- . . . . , , i i i n i porary papyrus and to say in writing what he would gladly have said by word of mouth, prepares us for the fact that in their general structure and tone they constantly recall the ordinary letters of the day. Such a com parison has been rendered possible by the stores of private letters of all kinds recently recovered from the sands of Egypt, from which, according to Pro fessor Deissmann, the Pauline letters differ ' not as letters, but only as the letters of Paul' J And though, as we shall see later, the comparison may easily be pushed too far, especially in view of the great variety in character and aim by which the Pauline corre spondence is marked, it certainly helps to bring but the direct and living nature of the Apostle's methods. The best way to show this is by giving a few specimens of these letters. Acommen. We may begin with a first-century letter, in which datory letter. . . Theon writes to his brother Heraclides to introduce the bearer Hermophilus. The letter thus belongs to the class of commendatory letters (emo-ToXal o-vo-TaTiKai) to which St. Paul refers in 2 Cor. iii. 1. It runs as follows in the translation of Dr. Grenfell and Dr. Hunt : 2 ' Theon to Heraclides his brother, many greetings and wishes for good health. 1 Bible Studies, p. 44. 2 For the Greek text of this and the following letters, see Additional Note E, ' Greek Papyrus Letters.' LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 89 Hermophilus the bearer of this letter is (the friend or relative) of . . erius, and asked me to write to you. Hermophilus declares that he has business at Kerke- mounis. Please therefore further him in this matter, as is just. For the rest take care of yourself that you may remain in good health.Good-bye. The 3rd year of Tiberius Caesar Augustus, Phaophi 3 ( = September 30).' The letter is addressed on the back : ' To Heraclides, basilicogrammateus of the Oxyrhyn- chite and Cynopolite nomes.' This gives us a Greek private letter in its simplest An official form, and as showing how readily the same form was extended even to official communications, we may take next a document in which Phanias and two other inspectors report to the authorities the cession of certain arourae of corn land by a sister to her brother (?). The document is dated in the month of August, a.d. 95, according to our mode of reckoning. I give it again in the original editors' rendering. ' Phanias, Heraclas, and Diogenes also called Her- maeus, officials employed in land distribution, to the agoranomi, greeting. Diogenes, son of Ptolemaeus, has had ceded to him by Tapotamon, the daughter of Ptolemaeus, son of Kolylis, acting with her guardian who is her grandson Plutarchus, son of Plutarchus, son of Plutarchus, in accordance with the terms of a con tract executed this day, a square piece of allotment corn land ready for sowing, the property of Tapotamon, situated near the village of Korobis and forming part 90 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS of the lot of Menoetius, in size i + j + i + tV arourae. We therefore write to inform you. Farewell.' The date follows, and the letter is then endorsed by Heraclas, one of the senders, in his own hand : ' I Heraclas have signed ' with a twice-repeated note regarding the amount of land concerned, first in ordinary script and then in the contracted symbols of the time, and a statement to the effect that the signature is of the same date as the rest of the document. Family letters. More interesting in themselves, and still more significant for our purpose, are the large number of family letters which have been recovered. The very artlessness of their contents marks them out as obviously never intended for other eyes than the eyes of those to whom they were first addressed, while their frank expression of personal feeling recalls the self-revealing glimpses which even the most impersonal of the Pauline Epistles give into the depth of the writer's longings for the welfare of his readers. heffather61 10 ^e f°M°wmg> f°r example, is a letter addressed by a daughter to her father, rejoicing over the tidings of his escape, apparently from some serious danger, and concluding, after certain messages of a purely personal character, with those greetings from others, which bulk so largely in the Pauline cor respondence. The letter is very illiterate, the original Greek abounding in false concords. It belongs to the second century of the Christian era. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 91 ' Ammonous to her sweetest father, greeting. When I received your letter, and recognized that by the will of the gods you were preserved, I rejoiced greatly. And as at the same time an opportunity has presented itself, I am writing you this letter, being very anxious to pay my respects to you. Attend as quickly as possible to the matters that are pressing. Whatever the little one asks shall be done. If the bearer of this letter hands over a small basket to you, it is I who send it. All your friends greet you by name. Celer greets you and all who are with him. I pray for your health.' A somewhat similar example from the recently a slave to her published volume of Giessen papyri bears striking testimony to a slave's affection for her master. The mention of ' dying ' because she cannot see him 'daily,' and the longing to 'fly' that she might reach him as quickly as possible are speci ally noteworthy. Like the foregoing, the letter belongs to the second century, probably to the time of Hadrian. It runs as follows : ' Tays to the lord Apollonius, many greetings. Above all I greet you, master, and am praying always for your health. I was distressed, lord, in no small measure, to hear that you were sick ; but thanks be to all the gods that they are keeping you from all harm. I beseech you, lord, if you think it right, to send to us; if not, we die, because we do not see you daily. Would that we could fly and come and pay our reverence to you. For we are distressed . . . Wherefore be reconciled to us, and send to us. Goodbye, lord . . . All is going well with us. Epeiph 24 ( = July 18).' 92 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS The letter is addressed on the back: ' To Apollonius, strategus.' a prodigal son An even deeper note is struck in the well-known to his mother. , 1 • 1 i i • i • i . letter which about the same time a prodigal son writes to his mother asking her forgiveness. As the accompanying facsimile (Plate IV.) shows, the concluding part of the original letter has been much mutilated. But it is not difficult for us to fill up the blanks for ourselves, though perhaps the broken lines testify even more forcibly than if they were complete to the depth of the writer's emotion. ' Antonis Longus to Nilus his mother, heartiest greetings. Continually I pray for your health. Supplication on y6ur behalf I direct each day to the lord Serapis. I wish you to know that I had no hope that you would come up to the metro polis. On this account neither did I enter into the city. But I was ashamed to come to Karanis, because I am going about in rags. I wrote you that I am naked. I beseech you, mother, be reconciled to me. But I know what I have brought upon myself. Punished I have been in any case. I know that I have sinned. I heard from Postumus who met you in the Arsinoite nome, and unseasonably related all to you. Do you not know that I would rather be a cripple than be conscious that I am owing anyone an obolus . . . Come yourself ... I have heard that . . . I beseech you ... I almost ... I beseech you . . . I will . . . not . . . otherwise . . .' On the back is the address: ' To ... his mother from Antonius Longus her son.' Plate II] \\< -phu /\ tww- ¦ K^axor-n ^H'vrncW!-* -*>-h :v-j ' . s^3^)es;i^tM >~: i'-i . ' ? -^- 1 ''- -f 7~C-i y-^V IpF.r LETTER FROM A PRODIGAL SON TO HIS MOTHER. From the Fayum. Second Century a.d. Now in the Berlin Museum. By permission of the Directors of the Royal Museums. To face p. 92. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 93 Nothing would be easier than to multiply similar examples, but these must suffice to illustrate the light which the ordinary letters of the time throw upon the outward form of the Pauline Epistles. All are constructed, it will be noticed, on a general model which, at least in the case of the longer letters, embraces Opening Address or Greeting, Thanksgiving and Prayer, Special Contents, Clos ing Salutations and Valediction — just the features, that is, which in a more elaborate form are found in the Apostle's writings. Nor is this all, but it will be also apparent how frequently St. Paul avails himself of the current epistolary phraseology of the day in the more formal parts of his Epistles. Obviously that phraseology as amongst ourselves had become stereotyped, and writing as he did with a definite class of readers clearly in view in the first instance, the Apostle naturally fell back upon it, even when he read into it a new and deeper meaning. The point did not escape the notice of the older commentators as when, with reference to the opening of St. Paul's First Epistle to the Thessalonians, Theodore of Mopsuestia remarks: 'As we are accustomed to place xaiPew ("Greeting" or "Rejoice") in the forefront of our letters, so he [St. Paul] places X<*pL$ Vf-"IV ("Grace to you"), adding ev 6ew iraTpl (" in God the Father "), just as we write ev Kvpiw ("in the Lord")'.1 1 Theodori Episcopi Mopsuesteni in Epistolas B. Pauli Com- mentarii, ed. Swete, Cambridge, 1882, ii. p. 2. 94 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS (2) Theiiterary (2) But while this is so, and we are thus reminded side of the . . . ~ r , . , Pauline in a most significant way of the personal character of the Pauline writings, as distinguished from the literary essay or the theological treatise, we must not forget that in other respects these writings are widely separated from an ordinary letter. The short Epistle to Philemon may approach very nearly to this,1 though even in it the ' Church ' in Philemon's house is included in the address, and the Apostle is careful throughout to base his request on the loftiest and most far-reaching grounds, but in other instances the Epistles, however occasional in origin and in the circumstances with which they deal, bear traces of much anxious preparation and thought, while some of them, such as the Epistles to the Romans and to the Ephesians, may well have been written from the first with a view to wider circles than those to which they were originally addressed.2 The fact is that Deissmann, in his eagerness to rescue the Pauline writings from the category of literature, and to emphasize the definite, historical surroundings in which they first arose, has carried his thesis too far, and has insisted on the distinctive 1 In this connexion it is interesting to compare the private letter which Papa Kaor addresses to the Roman prefect Abinnaeus regarding a run-a-way soldier, Paulus : see British Museum Papyrus 417, ed. Kenyon, ii. p. 299 f. ( = Selections from the Greek Papyri2, No. 51). 2 Cf. Tertullian, c. Marcionem, v. 17: ' Cum ad omnes apos tolus scripserit, dum ad quosdam.' LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 95 letter or epistle in a way which in the present con nexion can hardly be made good.1 The letters of St. Paul may not be epistles, if by that we are to understand literary compositions written without any thought of a particular body of readers. At the same time, in view of the tone of authority adopted by their author, and the general principles with which they deal, they are equally far removed from the unstudied expression of personal feeling, which we associate with the idea of a true letter. And if we are to describe them as letters at all, it is well to define the term still further by the addition of some such distinguishing epithet as ' missionary ' or 'pastoral.' It is not merely St. Paul the man, but St. Paul the spiritual teacher and guide who speaks in them throughout. 3. Passing from the general form of the Pauline 3- The style of . . ° the Pauline writings, we are prepared from what has just been Epistles. ° ' -r r J Variety of style said to find that, as regards manner and style, according to 0 J address and St. Paul stands midway between the literary and circumstances. non-literary writers of his day, and further that the special circumstances under which the different Epistles were written largely determined their several characters. The Epistles addressed to individuals stand in a different category from those to Churches,2 while in the case of the Churches he himself had 1 Bible Studies, p. 3 ff. ; Light from the Ancient East, p. 217 ff. ; Paulus, Eine kultur- und religionsgeschichtliche Skizze, Tubingen, i9ir, p. 4 ff. (Engl. Trans, p. 9ff.). 2 Cf. Cicero, ad Fam. xv. 2r. 4 : ' Aliter enim scribimus quod eos solos quibus mittimus, aliter quod multos lecturos putamus.' onians. 96 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS founded the Apostle naturally adopts a warmer and more direct tone than when writing to those whom he knows only by report. It is no part of my present purpose to discuss the Pauline Epistles in detail, but a few remarks of a general character may help to bring out the variety in style and manner which exists amongst them. Thessai- The Epistles to the Thessalonians, which are very ,c 1 'J generally reckoned as the earliest Epistles that have come down to us, may be taken as specimens of St. Paul's normal mode of writing. In them he conveys his message to his friends at Thessalonica simply and directly, in for the most part smooth and well-ordered sentences, which, however, never fail to let us feel the affectionate man behind, to whom his converts were in very truth his greater 'self.'1 Galatians. But when we pass to the great controversial Epistles we are in a wholly different atmosphere. In the first of these, the Epistle to the Galatians, the Apostle has been stirred to the quick by the dangers confronting his beloved converts, whether these dangers be due to their own laxity, or to the insidious attacks of false teachers. And the result is that his words dart forth 'flames,'2 while the depth of his emotion leads to those broken con structions and sudden changes of subject, which often make it so hard to follow the exact course of the argument. 1 Cf. 1 Thess. iii. 8 : 6Y<, vvv (ptp.ev edv v/iels o-ryKere ev Kvpiy. 2 Luther, in Gal. i. : ' Paulus meras flammas loquitur tamque vehementer ardet ut incipiat etiam quasi Angelis maledicere.' LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 97 The same features appear, though with a differ- Romans. ence, in the Epistle to the Romans. By this time the storm has spent itself, or rather there is nothing in the circumstances of the Roman Church to arouse the more combative elements in St. Paul's nature. He writes, therefore, still with deep earnestness, but more dispassionately and calmly, and takes advan tage of the general and cosmopolitan character of the address to develop and extend the arguments of the earlier Epistles, so that we have now ' the finished statue,' of which the Epistle to the Galatians was ' the rough model.' x It is vain indeed — let it be said once more — to attempt to understand this or any Pauline Epistle, without the constant effort to picture to ourselves the person and the feelings of the writer — the eager and impulsive Paul, overflowing with love and tenderness, as he conjures up the needs of those to whom he is writing, and yet so bold and resolute, as he presses home upon others with relentless logic and keen irony the convictions that have completely mastered himself. Both these aspects of the Apostle's character 1,2. corin- appear very clearly in the Epistles to the Corinthians. Written in the main to answer inquiries which had been addressed to him by the Corinthian brethren, the First Epistle is perhaps the finest example we possess of St. Paul's tact and argumentative skill, while in such passages as the glorious Hymn in praise of Love (c. xiii.) it touches the heights of 1Lightfoot, Saint Paul's Epistle to the Galatians1®, London, 1892, p. 49. 98 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS rhythmical beauty. But in the Second Epistle we are once more back in the region of keen feeling, as, in view of the calumnies with which he has been assailed, ' the Apostle of Christ Jesus through the will of God ' (2 Cor. i. 1) pens the Apologia pro Vita Sua, and in words of mingled humility and boldness lays bare the inmost secrets of his mind and heart, not so much for his own defence, as for the sake of the cause to which his whole life was pledged. Ephesians. Similar considerations must weigh with us when we pass to the Epistles of the Captivity. That these differ greatly in style from many of the earlier writings must be obvious to every careful reader. Take, for example, the Epistle to the Ephesians, in which perhaps this appears most noticeably. The words peculiar to the Epistle need not detain us, for they are neither so numerous nor so important as many of those who attack the Epistle's authenticity would like to make out.1 But the style as a whole is certainly very different from what we have been accustomed to in the earlier Pauline writings. The old, crisp sentences have given place to long, involved paragraphs, in which clause follows clause, and thought is drawn out of thought, as if the writer did not know how to come to an end.2 1 Cf. Nageli, Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus, p. 85 : ' Im ganzen scheint mir der Wortschatz dieses Briefes . . . eher eine Instanz fur als gegen die Echtheit zu sein.' 2 The whole of the opening Thanksgiving— c. i. 3-14 — is really one sentence, and with it may be compared the involved structure of the succeeding vv. 15-23, and of c. iii. 1-13. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 99 The change, as we have already seen, may be partly due to the employment of a different amanu ensis,1 but also arises very naturally from the sur roundings in which St. Paul was writing, and the new themes that were occupying his thoughts. He is now far advanced in years and experience ; the old controversies are for the time being forgotten or left out of sight, and in the solitude of his Roman prison the great Apostle is wrapped up ' in the heavenlies ' and in all their far-reaching applications to our present and future destinies.2 The very magnitude of his themes appears for the moment to crush him, and to prevent his finding suitable language in which to express his thoughts. Hence the involved and laboured sentences, the constant going off at a word, as if in the attempt to make the meaning clearer — in a word, a general diffusiveness 1 See p. 26 f., and cf. Sanday, Inspiration, p. 342 : ' I have sometimes asked myself whether this [the relation of Ephesians to some of the other Epistles] may not be due to the degree of expertness attained by the scribe in the art of shorthand. We know that this art was very largely practised ; and St. Paul's amanuenses may have had recourse to it somewhat unequally. One might take down the Apostle's words verbatim ; then we should get a vivid, broken, natural style like that of Romans and 1, 2 Corinthians. Another might not succeed in getting down the exact words ; and then when he came to work up his notes into a fair copy, the structure of the sentences would be his own, and it might naturally seem more laboured.' See also Additional Note C, ' Dictation and Shorthand.' 2 The expression ev rols ewovpaviois occurs five times in this Epistle (i. 3, 20; ii. 6; iii. 10; vi. 12), and nowhere else in this exact form. andColossians. ioo THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS of style far removed from the eager rush of the earlier writings. It is often, no doubt, very perplexing, and makes the interpretation of many parts of the Epistle exceedingly difficult. But after all, it is a phenomenon by no means unknown in the case of other writers, and in itself, unless supported by other and far stronger arguments, cannot be allowed to turn the scale against the Epistle's authenticity. Theiiterary 1 1 is unnecessary to refer to the other Epistles of Ephesians the Captivity separately, but, before we leave them, attention may be drawn to the interesting literary problem that has been raised by the close verbal affinity between the Epistle to the Ephesians and the Epistle to the Colossians. Various theories have been advanced as to how this could have happened, the most elaborate of which has been worked out with great elaborateness by Holtzmann.1 Starting with Colossians, he has argued that even that Epistle does not exist now in the form in which it originally left its author's hand. There was a brief Pauline Epistle, which formed the founda tion on which the writer of the Ephesian Epistle based his work. And then this writer — not St. Paul — turned back to the original Colossian Epistle, and enlarged it to the form in which we have it now. The only genuine Pauline writing was thus the shorter Colossian Epistle, from which a later hand developed both Colossians and Ephesians in their present form. But the very complexity of this theory is against 1 Kritik der Epheser- und Colosserbriefe, Leipzig, 1872. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 101 it. And, after all, why resort to elaborate and subtle explanations when none are required? Is there any real reason why the same writer dealing with strictly cognate subjects at a very short interval of time — ' probably in the same week ' 1 — should not repeat himself to a large extent, especially if we can think of him as reading over an abstract or copy of the earlier letter to the Colossians, before com mencing his letter to the Ephesians ? And when we add to this that in dealing with new and great themes St. Paul, in common with all the early Christian writers, would have constant difficulty in finding adequate expression for his thoughts, what more likely, as Dr. Sanday has suggested, than that he should show a readiness to fall back on expressions which he had once reached, and which were again suitable for his purpose ? 'It was not poverty of mind — far from it — but only a natural expedient to relieve an unwonted strain.'2 The case of the Pastoral Epistles suggests ques- The Pastoral tions of a more complicated kind. We have seen already the difficulties which many feel regarding 1 A. Souter, The Expositor, VIII. ii. p. 136 ff. where interesting textual evidence is adduced against the 'secondary' or 'sub- Pauline' character of the Ephesians, as against Moffatt, Intro duction to the Literature of the New Testament, p. 375 ff. See Moffatt's reply to the same magazine, p. 193 ff, with Souter's rejoinder, p. 321 ff. 2 Art. ' Colossians, Epistle to the,' in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible2, London, 1893, i. p. 630. See also Paley's remarks, dis tinguished by his usual robust commonsense, Horae Paulinae, ch. vi. 102 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS their direct Pauline authorship, but it is right to notice here that they have recently found a warm advocate in Sir William M. Ramsay, who, to refer at present only to the linguistic argument, has pointed out that ' the marked change of language and the number of new words ' which these Epistles exhibit is due to the fact that St. Paul had to ' create ' a new terminology to correspond with the new ecclesiastical situation with which he found himself confronted. ' Many of his new words are the brief expression of something which in his earlier letters he describes as a process, but which had now become so common a phenomenon in the practical management of a congregation that it demanded a special name.' And he instances by way of illustra tion the very first peculiar word that occurs in them, eTepoSiSao-KaXeiv, ' to teach a different doctrine ' (i Tim. i. 3), whose occurrence to describe a danger that had become very pressing in the early Church, he regards as ' not only not un-Pauline,' but as ' thoroughly true to Paul's mind and character.' 1 Whether this explanation will cover the whole of the peculiarities in the Epistles' diction may be questioned, but taken in conjunction with the marked variations of language which even the earlier and acknowledged Epistles exhibit, and the possibility that in the case of the Pastorals the Apostle's amanuensis may have been a man of wider culture,2 1 The Expositor, VII. vii. p. 488 ff. 2Nageli, Wortschatz, p. 88, regards the vocabulary peculiar to the Pastorals as pointing to a larger acquaintance with profane LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 103 and have been left a freer hand than usual,1 it certainly helps to support the positive arguments which can be brought forward from other sources in favour of the Pauline authorship of these Epistles. 4. Before leaving the Pauline Epistles, there are 4- some general points one or two points of a more general character that regarding the , . . ° Pauline demand attention. Epistles. (1) The first is that, as these Epistles were (*) Their SDGfich- originally written to dictation, and always with a character. definite audience before the composer's eye, they may, from this point of view, be regarded as speeches almost as much as letters. And just as the speech of a great orator becomes the more vivid and real when we hear it read aloud, or read it aloud to ourselves, so in the very act of reading aloud the Pauline Epistles, we often see more clearly where the true emphasis is to be laid, or catch some of the subtler distinctions that their speech-form carries with it. literature than we are accustomed to ascribe to St. Paul, and similarly Wendland, Die Urchristlichen Literaturformen2, (in Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, I. iii.), Tubingen 191 2, p. 364, n5, describes it as drawn ' fast durchweg aus der literarischen Oberschicht der Sprache.' 1 ' The Pastorals leave us wondering how much St. Paul actually dictated . . . and how far he may have given his amanuensis general directions ' (J. Armitage Robinson in a paper on ' Pauline Thought,' read before the Church Congress at Swansea in 1907, Official Report, p. 319). On the possibility that they may have been written by friends and disciples of the Apostle, who adopted his name ' without any fraudulent intent,' see some good remarks in Simcox, The Writers of the New Testament, London, 1890, p. 38. (2) Their artistic and rhetoricalcharacter. (3) Their relation to Jewishliterature. 104 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS (2) And this leads us to ask how far this speech-form may have been moulded by the ordinary methods of contemporary rhetoric. Blass has probably found few followers in the theory that in this respect St. Paul was not above making use of ' Asianic rhythm ' for the embellish ment of some of his most eloquent passages,1 and even the stylistic and rhetorical parallels which Johannes Weiss is so fond of discovering may easily be carried too far.2 But the very fact that such suggestions have been made, and made too in such influential quarters, is in itself a proof of the literary tact and skill that the Pauline writings undoubtedly display. The art may be Teyyrf aTeyyos, as Heinrici well describes it,3 but it is nevertheless Teyyri, and forms a fitting frame for the wisdom and grandeur of the Apostle's thoughts.4 (3) Nor must these traces of Hellenic training in 1 Die Rhythmen der asianischen und rbmischen Kunstprosa, Leipzig, 1905. For a detailed criticism of Blass's hypothesis, see Deissmann in the Theologische Literaturzeitung, 31 (1906), cols. 231 ff. 2 Beitrdge zur Paulinischen Rhetorik (reprinted from Theolo gische Studien D. B. Weiss gewidmet), Gottingen, 1897 ; Die Aufgaben der Neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft in der Gegenwart, Gottingen, 1908, p. n ff. 3 Der litterarische Charakter der neutestamentlichen Schriften, Leipzig, 1908, p. 69. 4 For an elaborate attempt to trace the Greek influences of Tarsus on St. Paul, see Bohlig, Die Geisteskuliur von Tarsos im augusteischen Zeitalter mit Beriicksichtigung der paulinischen Schriften, Gottingen, 1913. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 105 St. Paul lead us to forget how still more markedly he is influenced by Jewish methods of expression and reasoning. Whatever the Greek atmosphere in which so much of his life was passed did for the Apostle, it never obliterated the Jew that was in him. All through his life, he was ' Jew ' not only in nationality and education, but in language and tradition. And we are not surprised therefore to find him, more particularly in his controversies with his Jewish opponents, constantly falling back upon their methods, and meeting their arguments with their own weapons. An obvious instance is afforded by Gal. iii. 16, where St. Paul seeks to draw a Messianic reference out of a well-known verse in Genesis from the fact that the word ' seed ' is there employed in the singular : ' To Abraham were the promises spoken and to his seed (tw o-Trep/jaTi avrov) ; he saith not, And to seeds (tois o-KepiJ.aaiv), as of many, but as of one, And to thy seed (tw o-rrepnaTL o-ov), which is Christ.' But as a matter of fact, in ordinary usage, the plural neither of the Greek word o-Kepfxa, nor of the Hebrew SHT which it represents, could be used of human progeny, and, consequently, on strict grammatical grounds, the Apostle's argument loses its force. Only when we interpret it more Rabbinico, and from a singular form draw a singular sense, irrespective of all other considerations, can we see how the Apostle's reasoning would appeal to his Jewish readers.1 1 Deissmann discovers a very early Christian protest against St. Paul's insistence on the singular o-irepp,a in the substitution of o-n-opd 106 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS The same may be said of the manner in which St. Paul constantly clothes his thought in figures drawn from the later Jewish literature, which has been made so accessible to English readers by the labours of Dr. R. H. Charles and others.1 But interesting though the parallels suggested un doubtedly are, care must be taken not to exaggerate their importance, at any rate to the extent of losing sight of the far more significant debt which the Apostle owes to the canonical books of the Greek Old Testament. The Septuagint, as we have had occasion to notice before, was St. Paul's Bible, and the number of his quotations from it, and still more the ever-recurring and almost unconscious reminis cences of its language and imagery show how largely it had taken possession of him.2 or! inaiit ^ ^n^ yet wlt^ a^ tms> tne nna^ impression which the Pauline writings leave upon us is that of their outstanding originality. Nothing exactly like them had appeared before, or has appeared since. And when, to meet the special circumstances in which he found himself, St. Paul struck out this happy combination of the letter with the epistle, of for o-weppa in a recently discovered parchment fragment of the fifth century, containing a Greek translation of Gen. xxvi. 3, 4 (Light from the Ancient East, p. 35, n4). 1 Special reference may be made to H. St. John Thackeray's interesting Essay, The Relation of St. Paul to Contemporary Jezvish Thought, London, 1900. 2 Cf. H. Vollmer, Die Alttestamentlichen Citate bei Paulus, Frei burg i. B., 1895. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 107 the frankly personal message with the most far- reaching exposition of Christian truth, he invented a form of composition which in its every line bears witness to the commanding personality and genius of its author.1 II. In all these circumstances it is not to be 11. The other Epistles of the New Testament. wondered at that the Pauline method should theNew° furnish a model for subsequent writers. It is indeed probably going too far to say that, left to themselves, these last would hardly have thought of adopting the epistolary form at all, when we remember the prevalence of that form for literary purposes at the beginning of the Christian era.2 1 Cf. U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, Die griechische Literatur des Altertums, p. 159 (in Die Kultur der Gegenwart2, i. 8, Berlin, 1907): ' Als'einen Ersatz seiner personlichen Wirkung schreibt er seine Briefe. Dieser Briefstil ist Paulus, niemand als Paulus; es ist nicht Privatbrief und doch nicht Literatur, ein unnachahm- liches, wenn auch immer wieder nachgeahmtes Mittelding'; and Wendland, Die Urchristlichen Liter aturformen*, p. 358: 'Der Stil ist so original wie die Personlichkeit. Und der personliche Gehalt hat den Briefeh eine literarische Wirkung gesichert, wie sie dem professionellen Literatentum, das sich an ein Allerwelts- publikum wendet, versagt zu sein pflegt.' 2 To what is said in this connexion on p. 85 ff., may be added the words of Norden: 'The epistolary literature, even in its artless forms, had a far greater right to exist, according to the ideas of the age, than we can understand at the present day. The epistle gradually became a literary form into which any material, even of a scientific nature, could be thrown in a free and easy fashion ' (Antike Kunstprosa2, ii. p. 492). 108 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Their general, At the same time it is impossible to doubt that in and yet personal, character. personal, seeking the fittest expression for their own teaching they would be much influenced by the example of the great Apostle. And this all the more, because notwithstanding the more general character of their contents, the later Epistles of the New Testament are never wholly wanting in the personal note. The Epistle to the Hebrews, for example, while describing itself as a ' word of exhortation ' (c. xiii. 22) or a homily, shows by the direct tone of praise and blame adopted throughout (cc. v. 12, vi. 9, x. 32, xii. 4), no less than by the closing saluta tions (c. xiii. 22-25), tnat its author has in view a definite circle or community of readers.1 Similarly the carefully arranged list of the Provinces of Asia Minor with which the First Epistle of St. Peter opens enables us to follow the bearer step by step on his journey, as he carries the Apostolic message to the different Christian communities north of Taurus, and thereby lends local colouring and warmth to the otherwise markedly catholic nature of the Epistle. Even the First Epistle of St. John is very insufficiently described as an encyclical or manifesto addressed to Christendom as a whole. Though ' it 1 This comes out very clearly if we can think of the Epistle as addressed originally, not to any general body of Hebrew Christians, either at Jerusalem or elsewhere, but to a small community of Jewish believers, almost a 'Church in the house,' at Rome: see the critical introduction to my Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 34 ff. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 109 does not contain a single proper name (except our Lord's), nor a single definite allusion, personal, geographical, or historical,' it is still, as one of the ablest of its recent expositors has pointed out, a true letter. ' From beginning to end the writer shows himself in close contact with the special position and immediate needs of his readers. The absence of explicit reference to either only indicates how intimate was the relation between them.' l Passing from the general character of these The Epistie to ,-. . 1 i-i 11 1 tne Hebrews. c-pistles to their language and style, and turning its language first of all to the Epistle to the Hebrews, we are immediately struck by the excellence of the Greek in which it is written, and the care that has been bestowed upon its composition. It is an aspect of the Epistle which from the time of Origen2 has occupied the attention of critics, and recently has led Blass, with greater excuse than in the case of the Pauline letters, to discover a rhythmical principle running throughout it.3 1 Law, The Tests of Life2, Edinburgh, 1909, pp. 39, 41. 2 Apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 25. n ff. 3 Brief an die Hebraer, Text mit Angabe der Rhythmen, Gottin gen, 1903 : cf. Grammatik des Neutestamentlichen Griechisch2, p. 304 f. It is worth noting that the text of the two recently discovered papyrus fragments of Hebrews, belonging to the fourth century, published by Grenfell and Hunt in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, iv. p. 36 ff. No. 657, and vii. p. n f. No. 1078, is divided by means of double dots into a series of o-rixoi, which frequently coincide with Blass's arrangement. no THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Apart, however, from its over-artificial character, it is obvious that such a theory may easily be pressed to the serious loss of the writer's meaning, as when in the very opening verse the omission of the definite article before viu>, 'Son,' is traced to metrical con siderations, instead of to the writer's desire to lay stress on the nature or character rather than on the personality of the Son. It is in 'a Son,' 'one that is Son,' that God is speaking to us as distinguished from 'the prophets,' in whom He spoke to the fathers. This, however, is far from denying that the Epistle does show more signs of artistic structure than any other writing of the New Testament. Every sen tence is carefully finished, every period exactly balanced. And the orderly plan of the whole, the springing of each step from what immediately pre cedes, and the use of such aids to style as full- sounding phrases, rhetorical questions, explanatory parentheses, and vivid, pictorial images, sometimes condensed into a single word, all betray the conscious stylist, who in the interests of his theme does not neglect any advantage that attention to phraseology and order can bring.1 Bearing of That all this has an important bearing on the these _ . r 1 ..... __, considerations vexed question of authorship is obvious. For one on authorship. 1 . . thing it practically excludes St. Paul, even if he were not excluded on other grounds. And if we are to conjecture at all, our choice must fall on some such 1 For particulars, see Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 20 f. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES in man as Joseph, whose surname Barnabas was popu larly identified with exhortation or comfort,1 or the ' eloquent' Apollos, if not, as Harnack has sug gested,2 on an authoress Prisca who, according to the description in Acts xviii. 26, was able, along with her husband Aquila, to expound the word of God aKpif3eo-Tepov, that is, ' with marked accuracy and precision.' The general excellence of the Greek in which it The Epistie of ... . . . r r . St. James. is written is again a distinguishing feature of the its language Epistle of St. James. And so varied is its vocabu lary, and so forcible and epigrammatic its style, that many scholars have found it difficult to ascribe it to its traditional Palestinian author. But in view of the wide-spread diffusion of Greek in Palestine at the time, and the impossibility of determining the extent of St. James's proficiency in it, there is nothing actually to prevent his having written it. Nor can we forget that, apart from its Greek and form. dress, the form and atmosphere of the Epistle are thoroughly Hebraic, much of its teaching being cast in the gnomic or aphoristic utterances, so character istic of the wisdom -literature of the Jews. Spitta indeed has gone the length of describing it as originally a Jewish, possibly pre-Christian document, 1 Acts iv. 36. For the true etymology of Barnabas = ' son of Nebo,' see Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 307 ff, and G. B. Gray in The Expository Times, x. p. 233 f. 2 Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, i. (1900) p. 16 ff. The name of Aquila had already found favour with Bleek, Der Brief an die Hebrder, Berlin, 1828-40, i. p. 421 f. 112 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS into which a Christian admirer inserted the name of Christ in cc. i. i, ii. i, in order that the Epistle might be admitted into the New Testament.1 But if so, it is hardly likely that such an interpolator would have contented himself with inserting so little; while Harnack's view that it is made up of a collec tion of fragments and discourses, which as late as the end of the second century were combined by an unknown hand into their present form,2 fails to account for the unity of language and thought by which the Epistle as a whole is distinguished. More might be said on general grounds for Pro fessor J. H. Moulton's interesting suggestion that James of Jerusalem composed the Epistle for the benefit of Jews rather than of Christians, and conse quently avoided specific reference to Christ and to His Cross in order to avoid giving unnecessary offence,3 were it not for the difficulty of imagining a Christian teacher of James's position suppressing his distinctive beliefs under any circumstances what soever. Besides, what comes on this showing of the important passage, c. ii. 14-26, where faith — -obviously Christian faith — is assumed as the starting-point of justification (v. 24, ovk e/c Trio-Tews fxovov) ? itsPautn'orshi Reference has already been made to the important part which Silvanus played in the production of the 1 ' Der Brief des Jacobus,' in Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Urchristentums, Gottingen, 1896, ii. p. 1 ff. 2 Die Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur, Leipzig, 1897, i. p. 487 f. 3 The Expositor, VII. iv. p. 45 ff. LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 113 First Epistle of St. Peter.1 And if, as is most probable, this Silvanus is to be identified with Silas, the friend and companion of St. Paul, we have an additional ground for the many affinities of language and thought between the Epistle and certain Pauline writings, notably the Epistles to the Romans and the Ephesians. The writer's vocabulary is a large one, including and literary character. not a few classical words, as well as words for which there is little or no attestation elsewhere. And his style, while simple, is marked by close attention to grammatical rules, and by a suggestive order and balance in the arrangement of his words. His dependence on the Septuagint is very marked, as in the case of the other New Testament writers.2 The so-called Second Epistle of St. Peter raises The 1 11 its- r ¦ 111 pseudonymous a wholly different set of questions, and whether we character of look to its language, which shows a tendency, unob- servable elsewhere, of imitating the great Attic models,3 or to its dependence upon the Epistle of 1 See p. 22, and cf. Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, Engl. Tr., ii. p. 150: 'It purports to be a letter of Peter's; and such it is, except that Peter left its composition to Silvanus, because he regarded him as better fitted than himself, indeed as better fitted than any one else, to express in an intelligible and effective manner the thoughts and feelings which Peter entertained toward the Gentile Christians of Asia Minor.' 2 On these and similar points, see Bishop Chase's classical article, ' Peter, First Epistle of,' in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, iii. p. 779 ff. 3 Cf. Moulton, Prolegomena 3, p. 97, Cambridge Biblical Essays, p. 484. 114 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS St. Jude,1 we are led to think of it not as an original work of the Apostle whose name it bears, but rather as a pseudepigraph written in the second century by an unknown author, who desired to gain credit for his work by issuing it under the great name of St. Peter. In itself there was nothing unusual in this, nor anything contrary to the literary canons of the time. The later Jewish Apocalypses were almost all pseud- epigropha, issued as the work of some Old Testa ment lawgiver or prophet, and receiving thereby the authority of his name. And in thus adopting the name of St. Peter, the author of our Epistle had no intention of deceiving, but desired simply to express his own sense of personal indebtedness to the Apostle, and to extend the influence of his teaching.2 That in the judgment of the Early Church he succeeded in this may be taken as proved by the eventual inclusion of his book in the Sacred Canon. 1 See J. B. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, London, 1907, p. i ff., where the priority of Jude is maintained against Spitta, Zahn, and Bigg. 2 Other pseudonymous works associated with the name of the same Apostle are the Preaching, the Gospel (see p. 281 ff), and the Apocalypse of Peter, the last of which stands in such close literary relationship to the Second Epistle as to suggest a common author ship. Even Zahn, who stoutly maintains the Apostolic authorship of the Epistle, nevertheless admits that it is ' entirely comprehen sible that the name of the chief of the apostles should be misused in the writing of a spurious letter,' and that ' the mere occurrence of Peter's name in an ancient writing is no proof of authorship ' (Introd. to the New Testament, Engl. Tr., ii. p. 270 f.). LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 115 There remain still the three Epistles attributed The johannine to St. John, and without entering at present into 1 John. ' 1 , . . . . Authorship the vexed question as to whom we are to understand by this John, we may take it as practically certain that he is to be identified with the author of the Fourth Gospel. In the case of the First Epistle, in particular, this comes out very clearly. And whether we think of the Epistle as written at the same time as the Gospel, to serve as a kind of covering-letter to it, as Bishop Lightfoot suggests,1 or some time later, as an appeal to the Church to abide by the spiritual teaching of the Gospel, as its latest commentator the Rev. A. E. Brooke prefers,2 the close association between the two books in language and thought bears unmistakeably the impress of one mind. Of the distinctive features of the writer's Greek, and Hebraic • n • 1 • 11/ colouring. it will again be more convenient to speak later (see p. 154 f.), but before leaving his First Epistle it may be well, as in the case of the Epistle of St. James, to draw attention to its markedly Hebraic colouring. ' One has only to read the Epistle,' says Professor Law, ' with an attentive ear to perceive that, though using another language, the writer had in his own ear, all the time, the swing and the cadences of Old Testament verse. With the exception of the Pro logue and a few other periodic passages, the majority of sentences divide naturally into two or three or 1 Biblical Essays, London, 1893, pp. 63, 99, 198. 2 The Johannine Epistles (in the International Critical Com mentary), Edinburgh, 19 12, p. xix ff. 116 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS four o-Tt'xot.' 'It is not suggested,' he continues, after illustrating these particulars, ' that there is in the Epistle a conscious imitation of Hebraic forms ; but it is evident, I think, that no one could have written as our author does, whose whole style of thought and expression had not been unconsciously formed upon Old Testament models.'1 And, further on, he describes St. John's ' mode of thinking and writing ' in this Epistle as ' spiral. The course of thought does not move from point to point in a straight line. It is like a winding staircase — always revolving around the same centre, always recurring to the same topics, but at a higher level.'2 That is excellently said, and affords a valuable clue for tracing the progress of the Apostle's thought with the constant appearance and reappearance of the same leading themes. ^,3 John. The two shorter Epistles need not detain us. One of them, which we know as the Third Epistle of St. John, is obviously a private letter, addressed to the writer's friend Gaius, in order to commend to his good services certain travelling missionaries who were about to visit the Church of which he was a member. But the destination of the Second Epistle is not so clear. In view of the fact that Kvpla (see v. i) is a common form of address in the ordinary letters of the time, many think that the Epistle was originally sent to an individual lady, Electa.3 But 1 The Tests of Life2, pp. 2, 4. 2 Op. at. p. 5. 3Cf. e.g. a papyrus letter of B.C. 1 which Hilarion addresses Bepovri ry Kvpia p,ov, 'to my dear Berous' (The Oxyrhynchus LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLES 117 the contents of the Epistle are against this view, and the probability is that the author was addressing a Church,1 very likely the Church of which the Gaius of the Third Epistle was a member (cf. 3 John 9). As to where this Church was situated, we have no means of determining : it may have been in Rome, or, as others think with more reason, in Asia, perhaps at Pergamum or Thyatira. But whatever the exact locale, the writer is evidently in anxiety regarding certain new movements which had been asserting themselves, and accordingly writes with all the authority belonging to him as ' the Elder ' to encourage his readers to continue ' walking in truth,' if they are to enjoy ' a full reward ' of the work he has ' wrought ' amongst them (vv. 4, 8). III. There remains still one writing of the New in. The Testament, which may be considered in the present poc } connexion if only because of its epistolary address (c. i. 4) and conclusion (c. xxii. 21), and because of the Seven Letters to the Seven Churches in Asia Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, iv. p. 243 f., No. 7 44 = Selections from the Greek Papyri2, No. 12). In an article in The Expositor, VI. iii. p. 194 ff, on 'The Problem of the Address in the Second Epistle of John,' Dr. Rendel Harris argues with customary ingenuity that St. John's 'dear' friend was a Gentile proselyte of the tribe of Ruth, and like Ruth a widow ! 1 Cf. I Pet. v. 13, r\ ev BafivXmvi o-vveKXeKrif. 118 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS with which it opens. It is not, however, these Letters which have given its ordinary title to the book as a whole, nor even the writer's own account of it as a 'prophecy' (cc. i. 3, xxii. 7, 10, 18 f.), but rather the fact that he directly ascribes its contents to an 'apocalypse' or 'revelation,' given by Jesus Christ to His servant (c. i. 1). In this way the book is at once linked with a widely-spread form of writing of the time. In the books of the earlier Old Testament prophets we have frequent traces of apocalyptic writing; and outside the Canon we are in possession of a large number of Jewish apocalypses, which both in general aim and literary form exhibit certain well-marked characteristics which reappear in the book before us. In one important particular, however, they differ from it. They are pseudonymous, written in the name and under the shelter of some great figure in the past, such as Enoch, Moses, Isaiah, Baruch, whereas the writer of the New Testament Apoca lypse names himself in such a way as to suggest that he was its real author, and was contemporary with the events he records.1 its Hebraic Leaving aside in the meantime the question of the exact identity of this 'John,' and turning to some of the more external features of his book, we are at once struck by the extent of its dependence on the Jewish Scriptures. Not indeed that its writer ever directly quotes them, or, except in rare instances, 1 Cf. Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, London, 1906, p. clxx f. LITERARY CHARACTER OF APOCALYPSE 119 employs the ipsissima verba of the Old Testament. It is rather that his whole mind is so steeped in its vocabulary that almost unconsciously he makes use of it as the best means for the conveyance of his own message.1 But along with this Hebraic background the Apo- and its calypse possesses also a distinctly Greek side, as Hellemc Sldes- shown by the facts that not only is it ' linguistically deep-rooted in the most popular colloquial language'2 of the day, but that many of its allusions and figures are clearly due to a close first-hand acquaintance with the customs and beliefs of the Greek East.3 This latter consideration only makes the more its barbarous astonishing the character of the writer's language and grammar. Genders, numbers, and cases are frequently at fault; different tenses and moods are joined by a copula without any obvious reason for the changes; adjectives and verbs are made to govern unusual cases.4 The phenomena are unique, so far as the New Testament writings are concerned, unique, we may 1 According to the convenient list appended to Westcott and Hort's edition of the Greek New Testament, the Apocalyptist is influenced by Old Testament writings in 278 out of the 404 verses, into which his work is now divided. 2 Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 63. 3 Cf. W. M. Ramsay, The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia, London, 1904, where the suggestive illustrations in the text are specially selected with the view of showing that the Apocalypse ' was written to be understood by the Graeco- Asiatic public ' (p. viii f.). 4 Particulars will be found in Swete, Apocalypse, p. cxviii f. 120 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS say, in literature. Can any explanation of them be offered? due to its being Some, no doubt, may be set down as Semitisms, written in an , . . . , acquired or Aramaisms, due to the writer s nationality and his close dependence on the Old Testament Scriptures already referred to. And in the same connexion it is not out of place to point out that if Greek was a secondary language to the author, it is not to be wondered at that he should not always hit upon the right constructions. His vocabulary might not cause him much difficulty, but when it came to framing sentences in an acquired tongue, governed by different grammatical rules, he may well be pardoned if occasionally he stumbles. On the other hand, some of the lapses are of such a character as to suggest intention rather than ignorance. When, for example, in his opening greeting to the Churches in Asia, the seer construes the preposition cnro with the nominative 6 wv Kal 6 nv Kal 6 epydfjevos, ' He Who is and Who was and Who is to come ' (c. i. 4), this cannot have been because he did not know that awo was regularly followed by the genitive, but because for the moment he regarded the whole phrase as an indeclinable noun; just as later in the same sentence he treats the threefold description of Jesus Christ as 6 fxdpTvs 6 ¦klo-to's, 6 rrpwTOTOKOs tcov veKpoov Kal 6 dpywv tcov (SacriXeoov t>/? ytjs, ' the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth,' as a kind of parenthetical addition, and consequently is not afraid LITERARY CHARACTER OF APOCALYPSE 121 to leave it in the nominative, though strictly it is in apposition with the genitive 'hjo-ov Xpio-Tov.1 And in these whole circumstances it may well be and in an asked whether apocalyptic writing is to be judged on style. the rules of strict grammar, or whether it may not claim a character and licence of its own. For the time being the seer is, as it were, lifted out of him self, and in his eagerness to find expression for the thoughts and longings by which his whole being is dominated, he does not stop to weigh his words, but pours them forth as they come. His grammatical lapses thus become, as Dr. Moulton remarks from a somewhat different standpoint, ' the sign-manual of a writer far too much concerned with his message to be conscious of the fact that he is writing literature which after ages will read with a critical eye.'2 A similar consideration, arising from the general The structure character of apocalyptic writing, may help us when Apocalypse. we pass from the language to the structure of the Apocalypse. Ever since, in 1886, Vischer suggested that the peculiar character of the Apocalypse was to be explained by the fact that it was fundamentally a Jewish writing worked over by a Christian hand,3 1 For a further attempt to reduce the number of grammatical peculiarities in the Apocalypse by the theory that the Seer frequently interjected comments or explanations, which would now find their place in footnotes or marginal abstracts, see Archbishop Benson, The Apocalypse, Essay. V. ' A Grammar of Ungrammar,' p. 1318". 2 Cambridge Biblical Essays, p. 490. 3 Texte und Untersuchungen, ii. 3, Die Offenbarung Johannis, eifiefiidische Apocalypse in christlicher Bearbeitung. Mit Nachwort von Adolf Harnack. Cf. now Harnack, Chronologic, i. p. 675, n1. 122 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Use of older apocalyptic material, but essential unity. source-theories of the most varying kinds have been brought forward. The very number of these theories is against them, nor as yet has any of them succeeded in winning general acceptance. But one service at least they have performed. They have drawn atten tion to the large amount of material common to the general apocalyptic thought of the time. And with out attempting to follow those who have tried to trace this material back to Babylonian or Persian sources,1 we can at least notice how natural it was for the New Testament seer to avail himself of it for his own purposes, as in his description of the first wild Beast (cc. xiii.-xx.), or how in certain cases (e.g. cc. vii. 4-8, xi. 1-13, and xii.) he may even have taken over whole passages from the Jewish apocalypses of his day, which seemed to him capable of a Christian interpretation.2 Notwithstanding, however, this use of earlier sources, the Apocalypse must be clearly recognized as no mere literary conglomerate, no ' compound of shreds and patches,' but a compact unity. Only a real author, as distinguished from a compiler or editor, could have so stamped the impress of his personality upon the book as a whole. And the longer it is studied, the closer is found to be the in terrelation between its different parts, and the more xE.g. Gunkel, Schbpfung und Chaos, Gottingen, 1895; Bousset, Der Antichrist in der Uberlieferung des Judentums, des Neuen Testaments und der alten Kirche, Gottingen, 1895 (Eng. Tr., London, 1S96). 2 See further ' The Biblical Doctrine of Antichrist ' in my edition of St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians, p. 1 58 ff. LITERARY CHARACTER OF APOCALYPSE 123 clearly does ' the presence of the same creative mind ' make itself felt throughout.1 In asking in which particular ' John ' this ' creative Bearing of . , , . , . , . language and mind is to be found, we at once raise a question 01 date on the 1 . , i-i 1 it question of deep interest, but one which cannot adequately be authorship. discussed without entering on historical and theo logical inquiries which lie altogether outside our present scope. This only can be said, that if the question is to be settled on literary grounds alone, the Apocalypse can hardly be put down to the same hand that wrote the Fourth Gospel. The difficulty was felt as early as the middle of the third century by Dionysius of Alexandria (f a.d. 265), and is stated by him in a passage to which recent research has been able to add little or nothing. After showing that the Gospel and the First Epistle of John present marks of agreement which suggest a common authorship, he goes on to argue that the Apocalypse differs widely from both in its ideas and in its way of expressing them, and more particularly in its diction. ' For they [the Gospel and First Epistle] were written not only without error as regards the Greek language, but also most artisti cally in their expressions, in their reasonings, and in the arrangements of their explanations ' : whereas the ' dialect and language ' of the Apocalypse ' are not accurate Greek,' but disfigured by ' barbarous idioms, and, in some places, solecisms.'2 1 Swete, Apocalypse, p. 1; cf. W. Milligan, Discussions on the Apocalypse, London, 1893, ii. 'The Unity of the Apocalypse.' 3 Apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vii. 25. See further p. 262 ff. 124 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS With this position the latest English commentator on the Apocalypse, Professor Swete, is in substantial agreement when he writes that in the matter of style the Evangelist ' stands at the opposite pole to the eccentricities, the roughnesses, the audacities ' of the Apocalyptist.1 And in a subsequent section dealing directly with the question of authorship, he is even more emphatic. ' It is incredible that the writer of the Gospel could have written the Apocalypse without a conscious effort savouring of literary artifice. . . . The writer of the Apocalypse may not have been either more or less of a Greek scholar than the writer of the Gospel ; but in their general attitude towards the use of language they differ fundamentally. The difference is due to personal character rather than to relative familiarity with Greek.' 2 These are strong words, especially as coming from one who has made so close a study of the book before us on its linguistic side, and ' the relative familiarity with Greek ' which Professor Swete here mentions as an explanation of the difference between the books, only to set it aside, is rendered still more unlikely by the change of attitude in recent years with regard to the date of the Apocalypse. So long as it was dated in the reign of Nero, the interval that elapsed before the appearance of the Gospel might have counted for something in the improve ment of the writer's Greek. But the return to the 1 The Apocalypse of St. John, p. cxxiv. 2 Ibid. p. clxxviii. LITERARY CHARACTER OF APOCALYPSE 125 traditional date under Domitian, which is now so generally accepted, no longer allows a sufficient interval of time for this.1 And if we are to continue to regard the Fourth Gospel as the work of the Apostle, there seems nothing for it from the point of view of language except to assign the Apocalypse to some other John. No sooner, however, has this been said than one begins to fear that one is wrong, and that the deep seated doctrinal harmony between the two books,2 combined with the strong external evidence, can only be adequately explained by unity of author ship. Beyond this indecisive position, I frankly confess that I am unable to advance in the meantime. And in asking to be allowed to keep an open mind on the question I am thankful that I can shelter myself under the example of so high an authority as Professor Swete. ' We cannot yet,' so he writes 1 On the close relation between date and authorship Hort, who himself advocates the earlier date, is very clear : ' It is, however, true that without the long lapse of time and the change made by the Fall of Jerusalem the transition [from the Apocalypse to the Gospel] cannot be accounted for. ... It would be easier to believe that the Apocalypse was written by an unknown John than that both books belong alike to St. John's extreme old age' (The Apocalypse of St. John, i.-iii., London, 1908, p. xl). On the evidence for the Domitianic date, see W. Milligan, Discussions, p. 75ff. ; W. M. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire*, London, 1897, p. 295 ff, and Swete, Apocalypse, p. xcvff. 2 Cf. W. Milligan, Discussions, v. ' The Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel.' 126 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS in concluding the section on ' authorship ' in the Prolegomena to his great edition of the Apocalypse, ' with safety go far beyond the dictum of Dionysius : oti fxev ovv 'looavvrfS ecrTiv o TavTa ypa(bwv, avT(p XeyovTi TTicrTevTeoV iroloo Se ovtos, dSrjXov ' — ' But that he who wrote these things was called John must be believed, as he says it ; but who he was does not appear.' Religious significance of the Apocalypse. In these circumstances it is well to keep in mind that all this is a matter of literary, rather than of religious or theological, interest. In whatever way the question of authorship is finally settled, nothing can rob us of the significance of the contents of this marvellous book, which was described by Milton long ago as ' the majestic image of a high and stately tragedy, shutting up and intermingling her solemn scenes and acts with a sevenfold chorus of hallelujahs and harping symphonies,' 1 and which finds its final interpretation in the triumphant assur ance : ' The kingdom of the world is become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ : and He shall reign for ever and ever (c. xi. 1 5).' 1 The Reason of Church Government urged against Prelaly, Bk. ii. proem. LECTURE IV. THE LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS— THE GOSPELS AND ACTS. Ti's yap 6p6C)s 8b8ax8els Kal Aoyui irpocrfaXrjs yevtjOels oiK eTn^rfrei crac^ws paOetv ra 8ia Aoyoi; SeixGevra (pavepios padrjrals ; Ep. ad Diognetum, xi. 2. ' Quam scripturam [Acta Apostolorum] qui non recipiunt, nee spiritus sancti esse possunt, qui necdum spiritum sanctum possint agnoscere discentibus missum ; sed nee ecclesiam se dicant defendere, qui, quando et quibus in- cunabulis institutum est hoc corpus, probare non habent.' TERTULLIAN, De Praescriptione Haereticorum. c. 22. IV. THE LITERARY CHARACTER OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS— THE GOSPELS AND ACTS. UTretSrjirep ttoXXoI eirexeipyo-av dvard£ao~6ai Siyyyo'LV wepl rZv TreirXypo^opypevaiv ev yp.LV irpaypdrwv, Kaduis TrapeSoaav yp.lv oi aw dpxys airoirrai ko.1 viryperai yevop-evoi rov Xoyov, e8o£e Kap,ol TrapyKoXovdyKori avtaOev irao-iv aK/ot/Jws Ka6e£ys croi ypaipai, Kpario-re QeotpiXe, iva eiriyvi^s irepl &v KaryxyO~ys Xoycois Tr/v do-;'jl" j f ' :, i '.;:,'"' ,/'. ',^i^tTf.^*!,-?i Ik^'^j >": :lrl^>rTrH^^^** | j,. ';'/ S "** ,ff<>te j°4 **^Ufc. WV«i ii • NEW "SAYINGS OK JESUS." Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus, belonging' to the Third Century a.d. Now in the British Museum. By permission of the Egypt Exploration Fund. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 131 of forgiveness and comfort to a sinful and sorrowing world.1 And as the name was thus new, the form was new and form. also. A certain prototype for the Gospels may no doubt be found in the narratives already referred to and in the collections of Logia, or Sayings, ascribed to Jesus, which we know to have been in existence at a very early date (see Plate IV.).2 But at most these only supplied the rough materials which the Evangelists afterwards incorporated in their finished work, and, so far as our present evidence goes, the Gospels stand alone — a product of the Christian Church.3 The questions of language and composition, accordingly, that here meet us are principally con cerned with the inter-relations of the Gospels 1 For the history of the words ewyyeA.toi', eiayyeXi^opiai, see my edition of St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians, Additional Note E, p. 141 ff. 2 According to Professor Flinders Petrie, who draws special attention to the recently discovered Logia in this connexion, ' Between the logia and a gospel there is a difference like that between a note-book and a treatise ' ( The Growth of the Gospels, London, 1910, p. 3 f.). On the Logia, see further Additional Note G, 'The Oxyrhynchus "Sayings of Jesus."' 3 Norden in emphasizing the newness of the Gospels, regarded simply as literary works, can find no nearer analogy to them than the eight books which in the beginning of the third century Philostratus wrote els rbv Tvavea 'AttoXXloviov, ' In Honour of Apollonius of Tyana,' in which he doubtless incorporated the earlier aTrop.vypovevp.ara of Moiragenes (Die Antike Kunstprosa2, Leipzig, 1909, ii. p. 480 f. : cf. Reitzenstein, Hellenistische W under erzahlungen, Leipzig, 1906, p. 40 ff). 132 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS amongst themselves, and refer to the sources that lie behind our present Gospels, to the methods their writers followed in the use of these, and to the special characteristics of the individual Evangelists. No one can pretend that these are matters merely of speculative interest. They have obviously a very close bearing on the principles of interpretation that are to be applied to the Gospels, and the extent of the authority that is to be ascribed to them. Only by being satisfied that a writer has sufficient evi dence at his disposal for the framing of his narrative are we prepared to lend credence to it, while any disadvantages under which he may have laboured, and to which the errors into which he has fallen are clearly due, so far from detracting from, in reality heighten, our sense of the general trustworthiness of the whole. i. The I. (i) We begin with the first three Gospels, and G^peis0 here the very name that is commonly given to character and them, the Synoptic Gospels — Gospels, that is, whose the'synoptic0 contents are capable of being viewed together in a tabular form — shows how close is the relation exist ing amongst them.1 Of that relation it must be sufficient to recall generally that it consists, on the 1 Apparently the earliest use of the word ' Synopsis ' in this connexion occurs in the Synopsis historiae Jes. Christi quemad- modum Matthaeus, Marcus, Lucas, descripsere informa tabulae proposita, by Georgius Sigelius, Noribergae, 1585 (see Farrar, The Messages of the Books, p. 10, n2). But the real beginning of a scientific presentation of the evidence is to be found in J. J. Griesbach, Synopsis Evangeliorum, first published in 1774. Problem. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 133 one hand, of resemblances of the most marked kind, as shown in their selection to a large extent of the same incidents out of the many other things which Jesus s,aid and did, in their manner of presenting and grouping these incidents, and, notably, in their close and often exact verbal coincidences. And, on the other hand, of differences of the most marked kind in these same particulars. Neither of these features in itself would have surprised us. Had we found the resemblances alone, we would naturally have thought of their writers as copying from each other, or from some common source. Nor again would there have been anything surprising in three independent narratives emanating from three independent writers showing marked dissimilarities both as to subject-matter and as to form. It is the combination of these qualities, this extraordinary mixture of likeness and of unlike- ness, which constitutes what is known as the Synoptic Problem — a problem which has led to so much anxious investigation and to so many and varying solutions. The very number, indeed, of these proposed solu- The Two- tions has often led to a feeling of despair as to the HypoThesis. possibility of discovering the solution. At the same time there have been not a few signs in recent years of a marked advance towards this, and critics of all schools are now very generally agreed that the earliest of our present Gospels is St. Mark, and that from his Gospel, probably in a slightly modified form, and another document, largely made up of Mark. 134 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Sayings and Discourses, which is best described by the non-committal symbol Q from the first letter of the German Quelle, or Source, the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke are mainly derived. The name that is commonly given to this theory is the ' Two-Document Hypothesis,' and though taken by itself it cannot account for all the complex features which the Gospels exhibit, it certainly forms a con venient starting-point for all further investigation of them. The original Regarding the reconstruction of the first of these two sources we have the less difficulty, because, as has just been stated, it lies before us substantially in the canonical Gospel of St. Mark. And how closely it was followed by the later Evangelists is shown by the fact that all but at most some 50 of its 661 verses are incorporated in their Gospels.1 At the same time the large number of passages that have been collected occurring in all three Evangelists in which St. Matthew and St. Luke, instead of agreeing with their common source St. Mark, rather agree with each other as against him,2 shows that it cannot have been St. Mark exactly in 1 Studies in the Synoptic Problem, by Members of the University of Oxford, edited by W. Sanday, D.D., Oxford, 19 n, p. 3. To this volume, referred to in future as Synoptic Studies, I desire to express my great indebtedness in all that relates to the Synoptic Problem in the present Lecture. 2 Abbott, in The Corrections of Mark adopted by Matthew and Luke (being Diatessarica — Part IL), London, 1901, p. 307 ff., enumerates 230 of these passages. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 135 its present form that they had before them. And this has led to the theory of an Ur-Marcus or primitive Mark, known to these Evangelists, out of which the canonical Mark was afterwards developed.1 But Dr. Sanday has recently shown that the char acter of the greater number of these coincidences of St. Matthew and St. Luke as against St. Mark points to a later rather than to an earlier form of text. And consequently he prefers to think not of an Ur-Marcus, or older form of the Gospel, but of a recension of the text of the original St. Mark, differ ing from that from which all the extant manuscripts of the Gospel are descended. This recension was evidently the work of a person of literary tastes who did not hesitate ' to improve the text before him and make it more correct and classical ' ; and its complete disappearance in a separate form is due to the fact that after St. Matthew and St. Luke came to be written with its help, it itself fell into comparative disuse owing to the greater value attached to the longer Gospels.2 1 The designation UrMarcus is also applied sometimes not to an earlier form of our Second Gospel, but to the earlier sources out of which it was composed. The question of these earlier sources cannot be dealt with here, but for the efforts of various modern scholars such as Loisy, Wendling, and Bacon to dis entangle them, see two papers by Professor Menzies in the Review of Theology and Philosophy, iv. p. 757 ff, v. p. 1 ff. 2 Synoptic Studies,*). 21 ff. Cf. the brilliant discussion of the literary originality of St. Mark by F. C. Burkitt, The Gospel History and its Transmission, Edinburgh, 1906, p. 33 ff. 136 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Reconstruction The reconstruction or, as it is sometimes called in mathematical language, the evaluation of our second source is a more difficult matter, seeing that we have no longer an extant document, as was the case with St. Mark, to guide us. But confining ourselves meanwhile to the matter common to St. Matthew and St. Luke, but not found in St. Mark, that may be said for our present purpose to include 191 verses in St. Matthew's Gospel, and 181 verses in St. Luke's Gospel, or rather more than one-sixth of the former, and rather less than one-sixth of the latter.1 Included in these verses is a certain amount of narrative-matter, dealing with the preaching of John the Baptist, the Temptation of Jesus, and various incidents in the Public Ministry, such as the Healing of the Centurion's servant, and the Message of John from prison, but in the main, as has been stated, they are made up of a series of Sayings or Dis courses — what the Germans call the Lehrstoff — of Jesus in their more primitive form.2 That the lost source originally contained more than this, it is of course impossible to deny. Why 1See Hawkins, Horae Synopticae2, Oxford, 1909, p. no. In Synoptic ¦ Studies (p. in), the same writer gives a somewhat longer list of passages by including every exclusively Matthaeo- Lucan parallel, without reference to the probability of their having had a common written origin. 2 For various attempted reconstructions of Q, see Moffatt, Lntro- duction to the Literature of the New Testament, p. 197 ff, and cf. Streeter and Allen in Synoptic Studies, pp. 185 ff. and 235 ff. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 137 should not St. Matthew have drawn from it material which suited his purpose in writing, but which fell outside St. Luke's scope, and was therefore dis carded by him, or why should not St. Luke, in his turn, have acted in a similar way ? Or why again may there not have been in it, that is in Q, material of which neither Evangelist availed himself, perhaps because he had it already before him in some other form ? But whatever the answer given to these questions, everything points to this source as hav ing been written at a very early date, if not during the lifetime of our Lord Himself,1 then at latest within a generation after His death.2 . Can we go a step further, and identify it with ' the logia ' which, as Papias tells us in a well-known passage, ' Matthew composed in the Hebrew (i.e. Aramaic) dialect, and each one interpreted them as he was able' ?3 That this description can be applied to our present First Gospel is now generally ad mitted to be impossible, if only because, as we have seen, it draws its material from two main sources, of which St. Mark was one. But why should not this Papias-document be the other? It is just such 1 W. M. Ramsay, Luke the Physician, London 1908, p. 89. 2 Kirsopp Lake, The Expositor, VII. vii. p. 507 : ' It is probably not too much to say that every year after 50 a.d. is increasingly improbable for the production of Q.' 3 Apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 39. 16: MarOalos pev oSi/ 'E/fyaiSi 8iaXeKr

6os (c. dat). 1 Hippocrates (b.c. 460-357) begins his treatise Hepl dpx<*»;s larpiKys, okoo~ol e7rexelpyo-av rrepl lyrpiKys Xeyeiv y ypdetv, while at a later date Galen (a.d. 130-200) dedicates one of his works to Piso in the terms, Kal rovrov 0-01 rbv irepl rrjs OypiaKys Xdyoi', aKpifiuis i£erdo-as diravra, dpio-re TLlo-iov OTrouSaicos eiroiyo-a. On the whole subject of St. Luke's medical knowledge, see further Hobart's Essay already referred to, p. 56 n1. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 151 editor's Hellenistic setting: but the whole forms an harmonious picture, in which the Evangelist, whom early tradition associates not only with science but with art,1 has depicted for all time that particular aspect of the Lord which appealed most to himself, and seemed most likely to attract the allegiance of others. For beyond either of. the other Synoptists, St. object of the Luke writes with a definite aim in view. To him reflected in the Jesus is above all else the Saviour, the Healer of soul and body, not for the Jews only, but for the world. And the form which his Gospel takes down to the minutest particulars is determined by the effort to keep this conception of the Lord constantly before the minds of his readers. Let me take two illustrations, one from the Gospel's opening, the other from its close. Thus, while generally faithful to the historical frontispiece sequence of events in accordance with his own expressed resolve to write ' in order ' (KaOe^, c. i. 3), St. Luke does not hesitate to place in the very fore front of his' Gospel a scene belonging to a later date, the appearance of Jesus in the Synagogue at Nazareth, apparently because, with its announce ment of a Gospel to the poor and a present Deliverer to the oppressed, it seems to him to strike the key note of the whole of Christ's ministry (c. iv. 16-30). 1 Plummer, The Gospel according to St. Luke (in the Inter national Critical Commentary), Edinburgh, 1896, p. xxif., carries the legend that St. Luke was originally a painter as far back as the sixth century. 152 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS and narrative of the Passion. General unity of the Synoptists. While, at the other end of the story, in his narra tive of the Passion, St. Luke shows so many variations from St. Mark's order of events, as com pared with St. Matthew who adheres to it closely, that recourse has been had to the theory that he here follows a different non-Marcan source. Professor Burkitt has suggested that this source may have been a fragment of Q ; and if so we are met with the interesting fact that the original Q contained not only discourses but also an account of the Passion.1 But there is not a little to be said for another view that has recently found favour in various quarters, namely, that in this all-important section of his work St. Luke was largely influenced by memories of the public teaching of St. Paul.2 As St. Paul's friend and fellow-worker in his later years, St. Luke must have become thoroughly familiar with the Pauline method of depicting ' Christ cru cified.' What more natural than that when he came to narrate in his Gospel the same stupendous fact, he should do so in the manner of his great ' illuminator ' ! 3 It is impossible to carry our discussion of the Synoptic writers further, but before leaving them, let me say that from whatever point of view we regard them, whether we think of their sameness in diversity; or of their diversity in sameness, the 1 The Gospel History and its Transmission, p. 134 f. 2 Cf. Hawkins, Synoptic Studies, p. 76 ff. ; Moulton, The Expositor, VIII. ii. p. i6ff 3Tertullian, adv. Marc. iv. 2. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 153 general impression which their Gospels leave upon our minds is that of an harmonious whole, especially in so far as relates to their Central Figure. ' Verse after verse, Saying after saying,' and here I gladly avail myself of the words of so independent a critic as Professor Burkitt, ' might be quoted to you from the three Synoptic Gospels, and, unless you happened to have special knowledge or had given special attention to such matters, you would be unable to say to which Gospel they really belonged. Morally, ethically, spiritually, they are all on the same plane. We cannot doubt that the common impression which they present of the way in which our Lord spoke, the style of His utterance, the manner of His dis course to rich and poor, to learned and unlearned, is based on true historical reminiscence.'1 II. In passing to the Fourth Gospel, we are met n. The Fourth with a problem which has been truly described as ' still the most unsettled, the most living, the most sensitive in all the field of Introduction.'2 And in the present divided attitude of critics, he would be a bold man who would venture to offer a decided opinion upon many of the questions that have been raised.3 No such attempt at anyrate will be made 1 The Gospel History and its Transmission, p. 216 f. 2 B. W. Bacon, An Introduction to the New Testament, New York and London, 1900, p. 252. 3 Useful statements regarding many of these will be found in H. L. Jackson, The Fourth Gospel and some recent German Criticism, Cambridge, 1906, and A. V. Green, Tlie Ephesian Canonical Writings, London, 19 10. 154 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS here, and I shall content myself with drawing your attention to one or two points regarding the Fourth Gospel as a whole, which must be reckoned with in all discussions on its origin and composition. its style. Before however passing to those, it is right to notice the new light which recent research claims to throw on the style of the Fourth Evangelist. That style, as is well known, is marked by an extreme simplicity as regards both the vocabulary and the form and combination of the sentences. The same words are used again and again, and the different clauses are co-ordinated, instead of being subordi nated, by means of the most direct of all connecting particles Kal, ' and.' This has usually been put down to Semitism : and it cannot be denied that it does remind us very forcibly of the methods of Hebraic construction. At the same time it is interesting to notice that Deissmann has been able to produce examples of similar paratactic sentences from sources where no Semitic influence can be predicated.1 The most striking of these, perhaps, is a curious parallel to the account of the healing of the blind man in John ix. it, inscribed on a marble tablet some time after a.d. 138, probably at the temple of Asclepius in Rome. After recounting the making of the eye- salve, and the anointing of the eyes of the sufferer, the inscription concludes : ' And he received his sight, and came and gave thanks publicly to the god.'2 1 Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 129 ff. 2 Cited from Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscripiionum Graecarum2, LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 155 And in the same connexion the Berlin Professor draws attention to the resemblance between St. John's solemn use of the first personal pronoun in our Lord's discourses, where as a rule it draws emphatic attention to the nature and personality of the Speaker, and the sacral use of the same pro noun in certain statements of non-Christian deities regarding themselves : as when I sis is represented as saying : ' I am Isis, the mistress of every land. ... I divided the earth from the heaven. I showed the paths of the stars. I ordered the course of the sun and moon. I devised business in the sea. I made strong the right. . . .' 1 Many will doubtless feel that even in the matter of style — and it is with it alone that we are at pre sent concerned — these comparisons do not carry us very far ; but they at least show how easy it must have been 'for Hellenistic Judaism and Christianity to adopt the remarkable and simple style of expres sion in the first person singular.' 2 But not to dwell on this, let us turn to the more certain general considerations to which I have referred. considerations. (1) The first of these is concerned with its author's (1) its relation attitude towards the Synoptic Evangelists. synoptic . .... . Gospels. It is customary to represent this simply as a rela tion of contrast, and it is certain that he differs Leipzig, 1900, No. 8o717f': Kal avef3Xe\pev Kal iXyXvOev Kal y)ixa~ puTTrfo-ev 8yp.oaia t<3 Oew. 1 From an inscription at Ios written in the second or third century of the Christian era, but with pre-Christian contents. 2 Deissmann, ut supra, p. 138. 156 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS widely from them in the impression which he con veys as to the scene and the form of the Lord's ministry. On the other hand, it must be kept in view that his general aim and intention are the same as theirs. His too is a 'gospel,' a message of glad tidings for a sinful world in the revelation of the Word made flesh. And if the earliest of the Evan gelists heads his work : ' The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ [the Son of God]' (Mark i. i), the last is careful to announce as his story draws to a close : ' These things are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God ; and that believing you may have life in His name ' (John xx. 31). its own This is of course very far from denying that what character. we may call the interpretative element, to which these last words bear witness, has not a prominence in the Fourth Gospel, to which the Synoptists offer little or no analogy. While they are content for the most part with a bare chronicle of events, leaving them to work their own effect, the Fourth Evangelist deliberately sets himself to indicate the meaning and bearing of his facts, with the result that his Gospel is a study, rather than in the strict sense of the word a history, of the life of Christ.1 1 The same distinction underlies Clement of Alexandria's well- known contrast between the ' spiritual ' and the ' bodily ' Gospels (apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 14. 7). Cf. most recently Streeter, Foundations, London, 1912, p. 83, where the Gospel is regarded as primarily ' an inspired meditation on the life of Christ,' with due emphasis on the word ' inspired as well as on the word ' medi tation.' LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 157 So prominent indeed is this feature, that it has led in certain quarters to the view that the Gospel is nothing but a thorough-going allegory, in which its writer deliberately invented situations and composed speeches in order to bring home to men's minds more fully the ideal conception of the Christ that had taken possession of him. But what then are we to make of his constant appeals to ' witness,' which is sometimes described as eye-witness (i. 15, 32, iii. 11, xix. 35, xxi. 24, cf. v. 36, x. 25), to say nothing of the impossibility of finding any one able to con ceive and carry through successfully a portraiture so harmonious, so self-revealing down to its minutest particulars, so raised above the ordinary conceptions and ideals of the day ? Only as springing from and growing out of the soil of historic fact, does the Johannine conception of the Christ become for a moment possible, judged even from a human standpoint. While, as further evidence of its writer's historicity, it is of interest to notice that in certain particulars where he differs from the Synoptists, as in the case of the date of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion, it is apparently they who require to be corrected by him, and not he by them. (2) This alone should prepare us for the further (2) its unity. fact that the Fourth Gospel as a whole is stamped with a sense of unity, that we do not find in its predecessors. The Synoptic Gospels, as we have just been seeing, were largely compilations from exist ing materials, and their writers appear accordingly 158 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS as skilful editors rather than as original authors. But the Fourth Gospel is dominated throughout by a great personality, who has so meditated on the facts and truths he announces that they have, as it were, been recast in his own experience, and bear traces everywhere of his genius. Attempts indeed have been made in increasing numbers in recent years to break up the homo geneity of the Fourth Gospel by means of elaborate theories of partition and revision. But without entering into a detailed examination of these,1 it may fairly be asked whether, even if the evidence were stronger than it is, it would warrant the conclusions that are based upon it. There are few, if any books, however certainly the work of one man, which could bear the test of such microscopic scrutiny as has been applied to the Fourth Gospel. And the 'solid and compact unity' which, as a whole, its contents exhibit, may well lead us to exhaust all other means of explaining its so-called tautologies and inco herences before consenting to rend 'the seamless coat ' in which its author has clothed it.2 (3) its author- (3) It is a wholly different question, who this author really was. And it would be altogether 1 Cf. the full statement in Moffatt, Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament, p. 551 ff, and for the value and defects of such criticism see A. E. Brooke, Cambridge Biblical Essays, p. 322 ff. 2 Cf. Strauss, Gesammelte Schriften, 1877, vii. p. 556: 'This Gospel is itself the seamless coat of which it tells, and though men may cast lots for it, they cannot rend it.' ship. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 159 beyond our present scope to discuss the arguments, strong and weighty, that can be brought forward in support of the traditional view that he is to be identified with John, the son of Zebedee, or the arguments, not lightly to be set aside, that have led many modern scholars to think of some other John altogether.1 This only let me say, as bearing upon the literary character of the book, that many of the difficulties that have been raised against ascribing it to the Palestinian John, in view of the purity of its Greek, and the general form in which it is cast, may be lightened, if we can think of St. John as receiving assistance in the work of transcription and com position. Nor are we left here wholly to conjecture. In the oldest account we possess of the collection of our New Testament writings into their -present form — the Canon Muratori (c. a.d. 200) — after mention of the Gospel of St. Luke, we have the following in teresting account of the origin of St. John's Gospel : ' The fourth of the Gospels [was written by] John, one of the disciples. When exhorted by 1 The latter arguments have in recent years been reinforced by the stress laid on the statement attributed to Papias that John, the son of Zebedee, instead of dying peacefully at Ephesus at an advanced age, as the tradition of his authorship of the Fourth Gospel requires, in reality suffered martyrdom at the hands of the Jews along with his brother James ; but see Dean Armitage Robinson, The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel, London, 1908, p. 64 ff, on the insufficiency of the evidence for this statement. 160 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS his fellow-disciples and bishops, he said, " Fast with me this day for three days ; and what may be revealed to any of us, let us relate it to one another." The same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John was to write all things in his own name, and they were all to certify (recogniscentibus cuntis).' : And recently Professor Burkitt has drawn atten tion to a somewhat similar statement in the curious Prologue of the Codex Toletanus, a tenth-century manuscript of the Vulgate, now at Madrid. After stating that St. John wrote last of all and at the request of the bishops of Asia Minor, the Prologue goes on to say : ' This Gospel therefore it is manifest was written after the Apocalypse, and was given to the churches in Asia by John while he was yet in the body, as one Papias by name, bishop of Hierapolis, a disciple of John and dear to him, in his Exoterica, i.e. in the end of the Five Books, related, he who wrote his Gospel at John's dictation (Iohanne subdictante).' ~ Too much stress must not of course be attached to statements such as these, or to the legend that finds expression in so many of the mediaeval manuscripts 1 The passage is reproduced in the facsimile page of the Codex Muratori, Plate XI. Cf. also p. 286 ff. 2 Two Lectures on the Gospels, London, 1901, p. 68 ff. The Latin text will be found, ibid., p. 90 f., or in Wordsworth and White, Nouum Testamentum Latine, i. p. 490. Plate V. ST. JOHN DICTATING TO PROCHORUS. Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 22739. Fourteenth Century. By permission of the Museum Authorities. To /ace p. 161. LITERARY CHARACTER OF GOSPELS 161 of the Gospels that one Prochorus acted as a scribe to St. John (see Plate V.). At the same time it is difficult to understand how they could have arisen at all, unless they had a certain foundation in fact. And though I am quite ready to admit that this dictation-theory may seem a somewhat lame and unsatisfactory conclusion at which to arrive on a question which naturally arouses such keenness of feeling, it has at least the merit of offering a natural explanation of the more Hellenic or Hellenistic side of the Fourth Gospel, while leaving practically un disturbed the real authorship of a book which in its delineation of ' the heart of Jesus' comes so naturally from the disciple 'whom Jesus loved' (John xxi. 7). III. The only book of the New Testament which in. The Acts remains unnoticed is the Acts of the Apostles. And Aposttes. our consideration of it is much simplified by the theVhkd0 growing consensus on the part of critics that, like the ospe ' Third Gospel, it is the genuine work of St. Luke. Of that Gospel, according to the writer's own state ment, it is the direct sequel, in which, starting from the close of the earthly ministry, he traces the history of the Glorified Redeemer still at work in His Church, and through His Spirit leading it ever on ward on its triumphal and world-wide progress.1 1 From this general point of view the Book of Acts had no successor till the great Historia Ecclesiastica of Eusebius in the fourth century, though, as the ' Acts ' of individual Apostles, it quickly found many imitators. These last can be conveniently L sources. 162 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS The writer's From the somewhat abrupt way in which the narrative breaks off with the account of St. Paul's imprisonment, it has been thought that the writer contemplated a third book or volume, in which the remaining events of St. Paul's life and his final martyrdom would be recounted.1 But, whether this was so or not, the plan of St. Paul's narrative — in the form in which we have it — is so comprehensive that it must have taxed his utmost skill as a writer. Dealing as he does with the history of the Apostolic Church during the most critical period of its history, and referring constantly to events of which he him self cannot possibly have had any personal know ledge, St. Luke would find himself obliged to depend on many and varying sources of information. That he would learn much from oral testimony may be taken for granted, but there can be no doubt that he would also be thrown back, as in the case of his Gospel, upon written documents. And without attempting to limit the number of these, or to define the numerous theories of construction to which they have given rise, we may take it that there were two read in Bernard Pick's volume, The Apocryphal Acts of Paul, Peter, John, Andrew and Thomas, Chicago, 1909. For fragments of the original Greek text of the Acts of Peter and of John that have been discovered in Egypt, see The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, vi. p. 6 ff. Nos. 849 and 850. 1 W. M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen9; London, 1897, pp. 23, 309. On the little stress that can be laid on irpdrov (not irporepov) Xoyov in this connexion, see Moulton, Prolegomena3, p. 79. LITERARY CHARACTER OF ACTS 163 which largely affected the general character of his work.1 Thus in the earlier, the more Jewish, section of his Ajewjsh- narrative, St. Luke would seem to have drawn from source. an Aramaic source, more particularly with reference to certain episodes in which St. Peter played the lead ing part. And in these circumstances there is not a little to be said for Blass's idea that this source may be ascribed to John Mark who wrote it as a sequel to his Gospel, in order to describe the first actions of the Risen Christ, and what the same Christ did afterwards by means of His Apostles.2 But at best this is a conjecture, and we are safer to content our selves with thinking generally of a Jewish-Christian document, dealing with the growth of the Church at Jerusalem. With regard to the second, the more Hellenic, half The of the Acts, we can go further. Imbedded in it are certain paragraphs which, from the fact that the writer changes suddenly in them to the use of the first person plural, have come to be known as the ' We Sections.' All are occupied with the journey- ings of St. Paul (cc. xvi. 10-17, xx. 5-15, xxi. 1-18, xxvii. i-xxviii. 16) and are most readily explained 1 On the source-criticism of Acts, see again Moffatt, Introduc tion to the Literature of the New Testament, p. 286 ff 2 Philology of the Gospels, London, 1898, pp. 141 f., 193. Harnack, while opposed generally to the idea of written sources underlying the first half of Acts, is willing to admit the use of an Aramaic source in the Petrine episodes, translated by St. Luke himself (Luke the Physician, p. 1 16 ff). 164 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS as extracts from a travel-diary kept by one of his companions. Timothy, Silas, and Titus have all been proposed as possible authors of this diary. But much greater probability attaches to the belief that we have here notes made by St. Luke himself in the course of his wanderings with St. Paul, which he was able afterwards to utilize when he came to write the connected narrative of Acts.1 In this way not only are the remarkable similarities of vocabulary and style between these sections and the rest of the book fully accounted for,2 but we can also under stand how the use of the first person was allowed to remain in them unchanged. Had St. Luke borrowed the sections from another, it is almost inconceivable that a writer of his care should not have changed the first person into the third in order to lend smoothness and unity to his narrative. Whereas, if he were only using his own words over again, he might very well retain the first person in order to make perfectly clear that he was actually present in person at the scenes described.3 1 As a partial parallel, we may compare the manner in which Philostratus utilized the travel-notes of Apollonius's companion Damis in his book In Honour of Apollonius of Tyana (Eng. Tr. by Phillimore, i. p. 6). 2Cf. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae2, p. 182 ff. ; Harnack, Luke the Physician, pp. 67 ff, 81 ff. 3 Cf. Peake, A Critical Introduction to the Nezv Testament, p. 126. For an ancient travel-narrative, told in the first person plural, Deissmann (St. Paul, p. 25 n2) compares the account by King Ptolemy Euergetes I. of his voyage to Cilicia and Syria in theFlinders Petrie Papyri, edd. Mahaffy-Smyly, II. No. 45 and III. No. 144. LITERARY CHARACTER OF ACTS 165 From these then, and doubtless other sources, St. st. Luke's Luke drew in the composition of his book. And the skill with which he has blended his varied materials into an harmonious whole is again a striking proof of his literary powers. But this is not all. These powers are still more convincingly displayed in the manner in which he varies his style ' in obedience to the feeling of the moment and the changes of scene.' No one has brought this out more clearly than Sir W. M. Ramsay, as he contrasts ' the intensity of the Hebraistic tinge'that marks St. Luke's style in dealing with the history of the Church in its Jerusalem days with ' the sweep and rush ' of the later narrative, as it follows Paul's fortunes from point to point, from country to country.1 The same qualities may be seen in St. Luke's treatment of the speeches which he records. The materials for these would probably be drawn princi pally from oral tradition, and they would necessarily require to be recast to a considerable extent by their editor. And here again we are struck with the artistic way in which, in each case, ' the special aim and character of the original speech ' is retained. The narrator's fine dramatic sense enables him to throw himself, as it were, into the position of the 1 Luke the Physician, pp. 50, 48 : cf. Harnack, The Acts of the Apostles, p. xxxvii : ' Very gradually he [Luke] passes over to a freer and at the same time more classical type of narrative. The style becomes, so to say, more profane, and even thereby more cosmopolitan, yet without detracting from the dignity of the nar rative.' 166 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS and historical accuracy. The double- texts of Acts. successive speakers in such a way that he is able to reproduce not only the substance of what they said, but their manner of saying it.1 From other points of view the Book of Acts has been subjected to the closest scrutiny, and the general result of recent archaeological discovery has been to confirm its historical accuracy to a remarkable extent.2 That occasional flaws and inconsistencies should be discovered in it is only what we should expect when we remember the circumstances under which it was written : the real wonder is that they should be few. And even they might have dis appeared if we could accept the suggestion that the work never received the final revision which St. Luke intended to give it.3 In any case, it is a curious fact that the Book of Acts should have come down to us in two distinct 1 Professor Percy Gardner, while attributing to St. Luke very considerable freedom in his reports of the Pauline speeches, adds that ' by being what he is, and working according to the dictates of his own genius, Luke has probably succeeded better in portray ing for us the manner of Paul's speech than if he had striven for a realism which is unknown in ancient art, whether plastic or literary' (Cambridge Biblical Essays, p. 416). 2 The importance of Sir W. M. Ramsay's work in this direction is familiar to all. Reference may also be made to an article by Bishop Lightfoot published so far back as May, 1878, in The Contemporary Review, entitled, ' Discoveries illustrating the Acts of the Apostles.' It has since been reprinted in Essays on Super natural Religion, p. 291 ff. See also Vigoroux, Le Nouveau Testa ment et les Decouvertes Archiologiques modernes2 (Paris, 1896), p. 195 ff. 3 Ramsay, Luke the Physician, p. 24. LITERARY CHARACTER OF ACTS 167 forms of text, one, the ordinarily received text, the other, a so-called ' Western ' recension. The exact relation of these two forms of text is still a matter of eager discussion amongst critics. Blass would have it that the ' Western ' text follows more closely the first draft of St. Luke's work, which he afterwards re-issued in the form known to us, while others reverse this order, and maintain that it is the ' Western ' which is really secondary.1 But the very fact that such divergent recensions were current within a short period of the book's composition may be taken as but one proof out of many of the uncer tainties which from the first attended the publication of our New Testament documents, and of the diffi culties we still encounter in the attempt to get back to the ipsissima verba of their original writers. So far, however, from these difficulties in con- General nexion either with this, or any New Testament book, " being a source of discouragement to us, they are rather the divinely appointed means for urging us on to ever-increased efforts that we may ' learn the cer tainty' of the things wherein we have been instructed.2 1 See the full discussion in Knowling's Introduction to his Com mentary on the Acts of the Apostles in the Expositor's Greek Testament, ii. p. 41 ff., where attention is drawn to the fact that Bishop Lightfoot had already conjectured that St. Luke himself might have issued two separate editions of both Gospel and Acts (On a Fresh Revision of the New Testament3, London, 1891, p: 32). 2 See Lake, The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, p. 48 ff, for the removal of the difficulties attending the Apostolic Decree of Acts xv. 28, by the adoption of the 'Western' reading, in so far as it omits all reference to ' things strangled,' and independently to the 168 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS While, as regards ' the power of the Spirit of Jesus in the Apostles manifested in history,' which it is the aim of the whole book to illustrate,1 it is enough to recall the triumphant passage in which Clement of Alexandria re-echoes its closing word : ' As for our teaching, from its first proclamation kings and despots and rulers in divers countries, and governors with all their armies — yea, with men innumerable, forbid it, making war against us, and endeavouring themselves with all their might to cut us off. Howbeit it blossoms the more ; it dies not, as though it were a human teaching, nor, as though it were a gift without strength, does it fade away; for no gift of God is without strength : nay, though prophecy saith of it that it shall be persecuted even unto the end, it abideth as that which cannot be forbidden — /xevei aKwXvTos. ' 2 same effect, Wilson, The Origin and Aim of the Acts of the Apostles, London, 191 2, p. 46 ff. 1 Harnack, The Acts of the Apostles, London, 1909, p. xviii. 2 Stromata, vi. 18: cf. Acts xxviii. 31: 8i8do-KvXyv Kal yXwo~crav Kal Xaov. Rev. xiv. 6. In previous lectures we have been engaged in summary of tracing the rise of the New Testament writings, Lectures. and in trying to form some idea of their general literary characteristics. We have seen that for the most part they were occasional writings, intended to meet certain immediate practical needs, and sent forth with little or no idea of the great future that awaited them. And we have seen, further, that if St. Paul and other of the Apostolic writers in 'their correspond ence with the Churches adopted the ordinary letter- form of the day, with such adaptations as were necessary for their special purposes, the Evangelists had recourse to a form of composition which was practically new, and which owed its origin to the nature of the facts it embodied and the purpose it was intended to serve. 172 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS The dates Nothing has been said as to the dates of the New of the New . . . . Testament I estament writings, nor is it necessary here to enter into any lengthened examination of them from that point of view. It is enough that in this respect there has been a marked return in recent years on the part even of advanced critics towards the older, traditional position, and that, with the probable ex ception of 2 Peter, all our New Testament writings may now be placed within the first century. The most striking evidence perhaps in this con nexion is the result reached by Professor Harnack in his investigations into The Date of the Acts and of the Synoptic Gospels?- Starting from the identity of the author of the 'We' sections of the Acts of the Apostles with the author of the rest of the book, Harnack has shown that this author is the Evan gelist Luke, and that it is ' in the highest degree probable that the work was written at a time when St. Paul's trial in Rome had not yet come to an end ' (p. 99). If this be so, Acts must have been written about a.d. 62, and the Third Gospel, which preceded it, about a.d. 60 ; St. Mark's Gospel, on which St. Luke was dependent, cannot then have been later than a.d. 50-60 ; while St. Matthew's Gospel, in its present shape, probably belongs to the years immediately after the Fall of Jerusalem in a.d. 70, though it is conceivable that it may have been com posed before the catastrophe. It is true, of course, that these dates are not universally accepted by critics, but the very fact that they should have been 1 Eng. Tr. by Wilkinson, London, 191 1. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 173 suggested by a scholar of Harnack's repute, and as the result of a free and independent investigation of the documents themselves, shows how far we have receded from the second century dates, to which for so long the Tubingen school lent the whole weight of their authority. I. But not to dwell further upon this, the point with 1. Tnedrcu- i-i . •,, 1-1 lation of the which at present we are specially concerned is the New Testa- circulation of the different New Testament writings iTroiuformf5 during the three hundred years that were still to elapse before they were finally gathered together into the New Testament. For, from the first, the books of which we have been thinking, notwith standing their often limited address and occasional character, possessed an undoubted vitality and power of growth. And long before the original documents had disappeared, the demand for copies must have arisen. 1. Nor is it difficult to understand how this came 1. Themuiti- about. We have seen already that in the case of copfes'Tue to the Pauline Epistles, the autographs, after being needs',0* publicly read, would be carefully preserved in the archives of the communities to which they were addressed (cf. p. 20), and, though there is no direct evidence to this effect in the New Testament itself,1 1 When in 1 Tim. iv. 13 St. Paul exhorted Timothy to give heed to ' the reading ' (ry dvayvwo-ei), he was referring to the public reading of the law and prophets, which had been continued from the Synagogue in the Christian Church. Cf. Acts xiii. 15, 2 Cor. iii. 14, and see p. 210. 174 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS it is impossible to doubt that they would be produced from time to time, and re-read at meetings of the congregation. Nor would their use stop there. The encyclical character of so many of the Epistles in itself rendered necessary a multiplication of copies, in order that each of the Churches in the address might possess a copy of its own.1 And may we not also be sure that those Churches, which had become the possessors of Epistles or Gospels, would not fail in readiness to share their treasures with other Churches less happily situated ? Even private per sons might be permitted to make copies or extracts for their own use of those parts that specially inter ested them.2 This is of course very far from saying that any thing like a general circulation of the New Testa ment writings took place at this early period. The difficulty and expense of multiplying copies would alone render this impossible,3 to say nothing of the 1See especially Eph. i. i, where the blank space after tois ayioLs rocs o3o-iv caused by the omission of the words iv 'E<£eo-(j> from the true text would be filled up in each case by the name of the particular congregation for which a copy was made. Cf. also Gal. i. 2, 2 Cor. i. i, i Pet. i. i. 2 On the private use of Holy Scripture during the period with which we are dealing, see especially Harnack, Bible Reading in the Early Church, Eng. Tr. by Wilkinson, London, 191 2. 3 Comparisons with the cost of production of the literary works of the time do not carry us very far, the circumstances were too different, but it may be mentioned that the poet Martial complains that a little book of his was charged at four sestertii (about eight- pence in the money value of that time, or between two and three CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 175 fact that the early Christians had not come to regard these books in such a light as would make the reading of them an incumbent religious duty. Nevertheless, as time passed, and the prestige of the Apostles grew, copies of the new writings could not fail to be more and more widely sought, until before the middle of the second century the four Gospels at any rate appear to have been known in a very large number of the Churches throughout the Empire.1 The ease with which this result was brought about and the . . 1111 facilities for — let me say in passing — was largely due to the intercourse r .,. . r ii- 11 • , amongst the facilities for travel and intercourse that then existed first christian .,., . t • 1 • 1 i> communities. within the Roman Fmpire. ' It is the simple truth, writes Sir William M. Ramsay, ' that travelling, whether for business or for pleasure, was contem plated and performed under the Empire with an indifference, confidence, and, above all, certainty, which were unknown in after centuries until the introduction of steamers and the consequent increase in ease and sureness of communication.'2 And as a shillings in the money value of to-day), when it might have been produced at the half, and still left a profit to the bookseller (Epigr. xiii. 3). See further Birt, Die BuchroUe in der Kunst, Leipzig, 1907, p. 29 f. 1 Cf. Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries2; Eng. Tr. by Moffatt (London, 1908), i. p. 374. 2 Art. 'Roads and Travel (in N.T.)' in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, Extra Volume, p. 396. Cf. also Harnack's Mission and Expansion of Christianity2, i. p. 369 ff, and Miss Skeel's interest ing Essay, Travel in the First Century after Christ, Cambridge, 1901. 176 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS concrete example of this, the case of a merchant may be recalled, who boasts in an inscription on a tomb at Hierapolis in Phrygia that he voyaged from Asia to Rome seventy-two times (C.I.G. 3920). There would be nothing therefore to prevent the first Christian teachers and missionaries passing freely from one place to another in the interests of their work, and in so doing they would naturally carry with them copies of the principal Apostolic writings.1 2. The danger 2. These copies would in the main be faithful tran- of textual cor- _ - . . . ruption arising scripts of the originals. At the same time there from r & were not a few causes which would lead to textual corruption at an early date. (1) the material One such cause arose very readily from the on which the t J _ autographs nature of the material on which the originals were were written, . i ¦ 1 1 • 1 1 written, and on which the copies themselves were made. That material, as we have seen, was papyrus, and papyrus, while in itself very durable when not exposed to damp, is, on the other hand, very brittle in its composition.2 And we can therefore under stand how readily through constant handling lacunae or breaks would occur in the New Testament texts.3 1 For the later interchange of letters of a non- Apostolic character, cf. Polycarp, ad Philipp. c. xiii., also Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 36, v. 25. 2 It was obviously to guard against this danger that the papyrus, on the back of which our new text of the Epistle to the Hebrews was written (see p. 61), was first patched and strengthened by strips from other papyrus documents. 3Cf. the lacunae in the texts reproduced in Plates I. -IV., VIII. of the present volume. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 177 Letters, words, sometimes even lines and sentences would be dropped out, and in the restoration of these a door would at once be opened for numerous, though often, insignificant textual changes at the hands of transcribers. Instances of these are probably to be found in several difficult passages in St. Mark's Gospel. If, as we shall see directly, all our copies of St. Mark are derived from a single manuscript mutilated at the end, this mutilation may well have taken place at other points in the body of the document, and led to readings other than those which the original author intended.1 And in the same way Dr. Hort has suggested that some of the harshnesses which mark our present text of the Epistle to the Colos sians may be due to primitive corruption, arising from the Epistle's having been badly preserved in ancient times.2 The danger of textual corruption would be still (2) the empioy- 111 • 1 • 1 r ment °f non" further increased by the manner in which many of professional these copies were made. In the case of copies, 1 Burkitt finds instances of such corruption in c. iii. 17, viii. 10, and xii. 4, where the difficult reading eKecpaXloio-av may be nothing more than a palaeographical blunder for eKoXdio-av (American Journal of Theology, April, 1911, p. 173 ff). 2 Notes2; p. 127. These harshnesses centre in the two difficult phrases of C. ii. 18, OeXwv iv raTreivotypoavvy and a eopaKev epf3a- rev . . , „. . the roll-form 1 estament books were written may help us. Their on questions ot • . 1 11 r iii- • structure con- onginal roll-form must also be taken into account in nected with considering various points of structure that have for long engaged the attention of students. Thus, when we remember that the tear and wear (1) the.Epistie of a papyrus roll would naturally show itself most at Hebrews, the beginning and at the end (cf. p. 11), we are prepared for the conjecture of the possible dis appearance of an opening leaf to the Epistle to the Hebrews, which, had it been preserved, would have shown the true epistolary character of the writing, and perhaps set at rest the vexed questions of authorship and destination.1 But it must be at once admitted that there is absolutely no direct evidence for the existence of any such introduction. The Epistle opens, if somewhat abruptly, at least quite naturally, with words which point forward clearly to its main theme, the finality of the revelation that has been given us in Christ : ' God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in a Son' (c. i. 1). And we may turn, therefore, at once to another case of supposed loss, for which a better case can be made out. 1 E.g. Barth, Einleitung in das Neue Testament2 (Gutersloh, 191 1 ), p. 114. On Overbeck's theory (Zur Geschichte des Kanons, Chemnitz, 1880, p. 12 ff.) of the deliberate amputation of the opening paragraph of Hebrews, see Sanday's Inspiration, p. 24, n1. 18a THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS (2) the end of The closing verses of St. Mark's Gospel from St. Mark's . & • 11 1 • Gospel, c. xvi. 9 onwards are, as is well known, wanting in our two most important manuscripts, the Vatican and Sinaitic codices, both of which end the Gospel with the unfinished Greek sentence E$OBOYNTO TAP, 'for they were afraid' (see Plate VII.). And their evidence is now confirmed by the very important Old Syriac Gospels, in which the Gospel of St. Mark is again ended at c. xvi. 8, and this time in a manner which clearly suggests that its scribe cannot have been aware of any further passage that was wanting. In view, then, of this documentary evidence, com bined with the internal evidence of difference of authorship which the extant endings exhibit, we may not unreasonably conjecture that the last leaf of the original manuscript was lost at a very early date, and that the additional twelve verses with which we are familiar in our ordinary version, and the shorter ending which other authorities offer as an alternative, as well as the expanded account of the newly discovered Freer manuscript, were all added later at different times and by different hands to round off the mutilated Marcan account of the Resurrection.1 (3) the closing In the Epistle to the Romans, on the other hand, Romans,0 a possible addition to the original writing meets us. Both on the ground of textual phenomena and on internal evidence, the authenticity of the last two 1 See further Additional Note I, ' Alternative Endings of St. Mark's Gospel.' Plate VI. .... t rtl fTr,'A fVJ'CJ'J &ef*A/Uhpfr<; 'nptkH/nape yra*.*Ct- ivrry-frASTJ F*aj mi •A.nfiK&***retA n+ims-Am* rvftfa: tretc *i * j r a i/'-AK/erfirrnF?'CAM yc , <•> jJaA * . ¦' : •' t-t-jeitc-rcjrrf; cj>jtjr?7.Cx,7-i7li^AF-r^o*.rrw iriv fcAJ.n fgS - ¦ .' ¦ t-a!>«w aTtrie-rr^tij ' • ¦ . . - , , ;i/7Wf f Jjoyv/A r'"7;'0?r" ' B**jWA' '*/ f-Mtt+t? ic/* f^;7ju » YfA.l-1 tm fltJtKf+H feA Ifff* *J-rr-ICAJ>< ¦-MMfi.^'f''-""^'-''-'- ^***/-*«i'/Aj X*AA"'V'>' > • ¦ '¦ • » -> , ;A.i lA-J-t'tAJtCf-tpy: fiti'^rrfAMMPA, ... . . . ,-¦-'¦, .v- , cJ'^CKAiBA^jrrrc-G :¦--.. >j r .-, A^KB-iroicmi' rc-yrAr/*-r-rA.y~rsffAj'A. t-ca-\oy*>wreiet-i-roti(i^ioiAA?r~*KittY ST. -MARK xvi. 12-17, fl airGiv . . ovo/mri [j.ov. From the Freer (Washington) Manuscript. Fourth to Fiftli Century. By permission of the J. C Hinrichs'sche Ruchhandlung, Leipzig. 7> y^c/? /. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 183 chapters has been attacked. And though in c. xv, this attack seems to be more than met by the positive arguments in favour of genuineness, there is much in c. xvi. which makes it difficult to accept it as an integral part of the original Epistle. For one thing, the personal greetings in c. xvi., with their detailed references, are suspiciously numerous in the case of a Church which St. Paul had never visited, and for another, great confusion exists in our authorities regarding the position of the various benedictions and doxologies towards the close of the Epistle. A full discussion of the bearing of these points must be left to the critics, but confining ourselves to what we may learn from external form, there is nothing impossible, to say the least, in the idea, which has found wide favour, that in c. xvi. 1-20, or according to another view, 1-23, we have an independent miniature Epistle of St. Paul, addressed perhaps to the Ephesian Church, with which the Apostle stood in such close relation,1 which at some early date was attached to the larger roll of the Roman Epistle, perhaps for convenience of preservation, JThe positive evidence in favour of Ephesus is contained in the mention of Epaenetus (ver. 5), and especially of Prisca and Aquila (ver. 3), who, according to other testimony (Acts xviii. 18, 1 Cor. xvi. 19, 2 Tim. iv. 19), would seem to have taken up their abode at Ephesus. Recent evidence from the inscriptions has also shown conclusively that other names mentioned in the greetings are by no means so characteristic of Rome as was at one time imagined : see especially, J. Rouffiac, Recherches sur les characferes du Grec dans le Nouveau Testament d'apres les inscriptions de Priine (Paris, 191 1), p. 87 ff. thians, 184 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS and so in time came to be regarded as an integral part of it.1 (4) the com. A more complicated problem is suggested by the smdCorin- Second Epistle to the Corinthians, which modern criticism represents not as one Epistle, but as a combination of several Epistles or parts of Epistles. Hausrath,2 for example, has found many supporters for the suggestion that the last four chapters were in reality written before the first nine, and contain the substance of the severe letter to which St. Paul refers in 2 Cor. vii. 8 : ' For though I made you sorry with my Epistle, I do not regret it, though I did regret ; for I see that that Epistle made you sorry, though but for a season.' It is certain, at least, that these chapters with their troubled and anxious language, contrast very strangely with the overflowing joy of the earlier portion of the Epistle, and that the historical circumstances, so far as we can now reconstruct them, would be well met if we *On Bishop Lightfoot's theory, according to which St. Paul himself deliberately omitted the last two chapters of the original Epistle, along with the words iv lFupy in i. 7, 1 5, in order to give it a more general character, and added the doxology at the end to round it off: see his Biblical Essays (London, 1893), P- 285 ff. Dr. Hort's criticism of the theory is reprinted in the same volume, p. 321 ff. For a different, and in many ways attractive, theory that the short recension was the original form of the Epistle, and was afterwards added to by St. Paul to adapt it to the needs of the Roman Church, see Kirsopp Lake, The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul (London, 191 1), p. 325 ff. 2 Der Vier-Capitel Brief des Paulus an die Corinther, Heidel berg, 1870. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 185 could imagine the sequence of St. Paul's relations with the Corinthian Church to be : — the Epistle which we describe as First Corinthians, preceded, however, as we learn from that Epistle itself (1 Cor. v. 9), by one still earlier; then the severe letter, 2 Cor. x.-xiii., which the Apostle was led to write on hearing that his previous communications had failed in their effect ; and finally, yet another Epistle, practically identical with 2 Cor. i.-ix., in which he gave expres sion to his satisfaction that at length his Corinthian brethren had listened to his appeals, and harmony had once more been restored between him and them. Nor is this all, but it is possible that even this last letter may itself be composite. It has often been remarked that c. vi. 14-vii. 1 interrupts the progress of thought, while c. vii. 2 connects itself very readily with c. vi. 13. May it be, that in this paragraph we have yet another fragment of St. Paul's correspond ence with Corinth — a portion, perhaps, of that earliest letter of all to which reference has just been made, which either by accident or by editorial handling, came afterwards to be inserted in the later Epistle ? As to how far all this can be substantiated, I am not prepared at present to offer any definite opinion. Whatever may be said for an apparent disarrange ment of the contents on internal grounds, we cannot lose sight of the fact that this is not corroborated by any trace of unsettlement of text in the external evidence, as was the case with Rom. xvi. And, on the whole, it is probably wise to content ourselves with pointing out that, should other circumstances 186 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS demand it, there is nothing in the methods of book- production at the time to prevent separate Epistles, or fragments of Epistles, addressed by St. Paul to the same community, being combined and handed down as if they had formed a single Epistle from the first.1 (5) the arrange- An even greater caution must be observed in Fourth Gospel, dealing with the displacements that have been alleged in the case of the Fourth Gospel. In an Essay published in 1893 Friedrich Spitta held that in certain sections of the Gospel, notably in cc. xiii-xvii, a serious disarrangement of the text had taken place.2 And now we find Mr. Warburton Lewis, in a recent Essay,3 following the German scholar and arguing that not a fewof the chronological and other difficulties which the Gospel presents are best met on the sup position that its contents are no longer arranged in the order which their author intended. And the most likely explanation he can offer is, that through some mischance the separate papyrus leaves on which the Gospel was written were put together in a wrong order when they were fastened together in a roll. But if this happened to the original manuscript, we 1 Cf. Kirsopp Lake, The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul (London, 1 911), p. 144 ff, where an interesting parallel is cited from Cicero's letters in the combination of two drafts of Ad Fam. v. 8, in a single letter. It is right, however, to note that the most recent commentators on 2 Corinthians, Lietzmann, Bachmann, and Menzies, all agree in upholding its integrity. 2 Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Urchristentums, i. p. 15511., ' Unordnungen im Texte des 4. Evangeliums.' 3 Disarrangements in the Fourth Gospel, Cambridge, 1910. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 187 are at once led to ask how a writer who shows such anxious and loving care in the composition of his book could have allowed it to go forth to others in this confused form. Or, if it was a later copy that was at fault, we are met with the curious state of things that all the correct copies of the Gospel have wholly disappeared, and that it is from an exemplar thus carelessly constructed that the subsequent copies in use in the Church have been made.1 The difficulties, in fact, surrounding any such theory are in themselves greater than any pecu liarities of construction which the Gospel in its present form is supposed to exhibit, and surely do not warrant the arbitrary rearrangement of its con tents that is here suggested.2 4. The marginal additions which in other instances 4. Marginal have been thought to have found their way into our a present New Testament texts stand on a somewhat different footing. I have pointed out already that the general structure of a papyrus roll with its narrow columns following closely on each other does not, as a rule, leave much space for these additions (see p. 14). At the same time, it is impossible to ignore the possibility that many addi tional facts and comments which came to the knowledge of the New Testament scribes, and were 1 Cf. Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, iii. p. 348. 2 It may be noted that, according to Mr. Lewis, the re-arranged Gospel stands thus: c. i.-ii. 12; iii. 22-30; ii. 13— iii. 21 + 31-36; iv.; vi.; v.+vii. 15-24 + viii. 12-20; vii. 1-14+ 25-52 +viii. 21-59; ix.-xii.; xiii. 1-32; xv.-xvi.; xiii. 33-xiv.; xvii.; xviii.-xx.; xxi. 188 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS at first treated by them as marginalia, would after wards be incorporated in the body of the text. A familiar example is afforded by the well-known pericope John vii. 53— viii. 11, the incident of the woman taken in adultery, which is now generally admitted not to belong to the original text of the Fourth Gospel. And the probability is that it repre sents a genuine tradition, derived perhaps from the Gospel according to the Hebrews or from Papias's Exposition of the Lords Oracles, which, on account of the intrinsic beauty of the story, had been noted by some scribe at the end of his copy of the Gospel, and was transferred by a later copyist to what seemed to him a suitable place for it at the end of c. vii. 52. 11. change II. We have been thinking hitherto of the circula- from the . r iw t> • • • i papyrus roil to tion of our IN ew i estament writings in the papyrus codex. roll-form, but it must not be lost sight of that from a very early date they also took the form of papyrus codices. The original meaning of the word codex was the trunk of a tree (caudex), and hence it came to be applied to the pile of wooden tablets (pugillares) smeared over with wax, which were commonly used both by the Greeks and Romans for ordinary writing purposes, as when a ledger was called codex accepti et expensi. And from this again the word was extended to denote any collection of papyrus or parchment sheets, in which the sheets were not rolled within one another, but laid over one another, as in a modern book. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 189 1 . The use of papyrus in this manner has not always 1. Early use of been recognized. The older authorities sometimes codices. speak as if the introduction of the codex marked the close of the papyrus period. But more recently evidence has been accumulating to show that the papyrus codex was in such use in Egypt for theo logical purposes in the third century, that by that time it must already have had a considerable history behind it.1 Thus it is interesting to notice that the oldest New (1) Fragment- Testament text recovered from the sands of Egypt, Testament texts. and, indeed the oldest original manuscript of any part of the New Testament at present known, is the sheet of a papyrus codex, containing most of the first chapter of St. Matthew (Plate II.), which cannot be later than the beginning of the fourth century, and is assigned by its discoverers, Dr. Grenfell and Dr. Hunt, with ' greater probability ' to' the third.2 And from the same period we have another sheet with fragments of the first and twentieth chapters of St. John's Gospel. As this must have formed very nearly the outermost sheet of a large quire, the same authorities calculate that the codex, when com plete, consisted of a single quire of twenty-five sheets, of which the first was probably blank, or contained only the title.8 1 Cf. Grenfell and Hunt, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii. p. 2 f. 2 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, i. p. 4 ff, No. 2. 3 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, ii. p. 1 ff, No. 208. 190 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS (2) The ' Sayings of Jesus. ' 2. Hand writing of the papyrus codices. Yet another fragment belonging to the third century has recently been published by Dr. Hunt amongst the Rylands Papyri, consisting of part of a leaf out of a papyrus book, the recto of which originally contained Titus i. 11-15, and the verso c. ii. 3-8 from the same Epistle.1 Unfortunately the leaf is now so mutilated as to be of little value textually, but it preserves, as its editor points out, one interesting reading d(p6oviav for dcpdopiav in c. ii. 7 ' which is recorded as a variant in two ninth century manuscripts, but has apparently not previously been found in any actual text' To return, however, to our immediate subject, when to these New Testament texts we add the third century leaf discovered at Oxyrhynchus in 1897, containing the so-called Aoyia 'lyo-ov, or 'Sayings of Jesus,' to which reference has already been made (see 'p. 131), we have another direct proof of the early prevalence of the papyrus codex-, as compared with the papyrus roll-, form. 2. Nor is this all, but these fragments have for us this further interest, that in their script we can see what has been called ' the prototype ' of the hand writing of our great Biblical codices.2 That hand writing, with its thick and heavy strokes, has usually been regarded as possible only in the case of a strong substance such as parchment, but its beginnings are clearly traceable in these papyrus codices. 1 Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester, Manchester, 191 1, i. p. 10 f., No. 5. 2 Grenfell and Hunt, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii. p. 3. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 191 And further, if, as appears likely from their general ¦ Po6r;Men's character and size, these fragments of which we have been speaking formed parts of books intended originally for private rather than for general use, they offer an emphatic and independent testimony to the growing reverence that was being paid to the written word, as well as to the increasing hold it was gaining upon all classes of the population. As the earliest specimens we possess of ' Poor Men's Bibles,' they have in their own way as deep a significance for the student of our New Testament writings, as the splendid parchment codices which mark the next stage of their history. III. Anything like a detailed description of these in. Parch- , . . . . r . , , ment codices. parchment codices would carry us far beyond the limits of our present inquiry.1 But it may be well to note a few points of a general character, more parti cularly in view of the significance of the parchment codex for the final collection of our scattered writings into a single volume. 1. In doing so, we have to guard at the outset 1. Manu- -, . 1 . . facture of against the common error that, because parchment is parchment. now first heard of in connexion with our Biblical manuscripts, it was previously unknown as a writing- 1 Full particulars will be found in such well-known works as Nestle's Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the Greek New Testament, London, 1901 (a third and enlarged German edition appeared in 1909); Gregory's Canon and Text of the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1907; and Kenyon's Handbook to the Textual Criticism of Die New Testament, of which a new and revised edition appeared in 19 12. 192 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS material. So far was this from being the case that in a rough form it would seem to have been in common use even before papyrus, while its. improve ment and consequent adoption for literary purposes may be dated from the reign of Eumenes II. at Pergamum, B.C. 197-158. According to the story related by Varro,1 Eumenes, desiring to found a library of his own which should rival the library at Alexandria, found his efforts frustrated by the refusal of Ptolemy Epiphanes to permit the ex portation of papyrus from Egypt, and accordingly he had to fall back on the use of skins, after submitting them to a special preparation. From the place where this was done, the new material came to be known as Trepya/jyvy, pergamena, parch ment.2 The name of vellum (vitulinum), which is now used as practically synonymous, was at first confined to a fine variety manufactured from the skins of very young calves. 2. use of 2. The story has been called in question, but without in connexion sufficient cause,3 though it is undoubtedly remarkable with Christian , , . , .. . . . literature. that, during the succeeding three centuries, there should be so little evidence of any general use of parchment for literary purposes.4 But with the lApud Pliny, Nat. Hist. xiii. 11. 2 The actual name pergamena charta does not occur before an edict of Diocletian, a.d. 301. 3 See Birt, Das antike Buchwesen, p. 50 ff, and, on the other side, Gardthausen, Das Buchwesen, p. 93. * Amongst the most notable remains of classical writings pre served on parchment during this period are a leaf of the other- CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 193 beginning of the fourth century, and the ever- increasing demand for copies of the new Christian writings, the advantages of parchment or vellum over papyrus began to assert themselves. For one thing, parchment could be manufactured in any country, and not merely in a limited area like papyrus, and for another, owing to its greater strength and flexibility, it lent itself more readily to the convenient codex-form, which we have already found coming into use during the papyrus period. We are not astonished, therefore, to learn that when in a.d. 331 Constantine ordered fifty copies of the Scriptures for his new capital, he gave special in structions that they should be written in a legible manner, 'on prepared skins,'1 or that about twenty years later the two priests, Acacius and Euzoius, when rewriting the damaged volumes of Pamphilus' library at Caesarea, substituted parchment codices for the original papyrus rolls.2 wise unknown Cretans of Euripides, and some small fragments of Demosthenes. For the more ordinary use of parchment for note books, or for the rough drafts of literary works, cf. Cicero, ad Attic, xiii. 24 ; Horace, Serm. ii. 3. 1 f. ; Quintilian, Inst. Orat. x. 3- 31- 1 Eusebius, De vita Constantini, iv. 36, ed. Heikel : irevryKovra o-wp.dria ev 8i6epais iyKarao-Kevo is. The Codex Sinaiticus, which Tischendorf believed to have been one of these fifty Bibles, is written on fairly thin parchment, made, according to the same authority, from antelope skins. 2 Hieronymus, Epist. cxli. : ' Quam [bibliothecam Caesareae urbis] ex parte corruptam Acacius dehinc et Euzoius, eiusdem ecclesiae sacerdotes, in membranis instaurare conati sunt.' N 194 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS 3. Construc tion of a parchment codex. The practice quickly spread, and mainly through the influence of the Christian Church, parchment came to supersede papyrus as the medium for con veying to the world the contents not only of its own sacred books but of literature generally.1 3. A few words are still required as to the con struction of a parchment codex, and the character of the handwriting employed upon it. The two sides of parchment naturally varied, according as they represented the hair or the flesh side of the skin. And in making up a codex, great care was taken that hair-side should always face hair- side, and flesh-side flesh-side. This was secured by folding the quire in sheets, and as the ordinary quire consisted of four sheets (rerpaSiov, quatemus), a single folding made eight leaves or sixteen pages. As a rule, both sides of the parchment were used for writing purposes, and while, in the case of papyrus, no ruling was necessary, the fibres of the plant affording sufficient guidance to the scribe (cf. p. 13), parchment offered no such natural aid, and lines were ruled by a /j6Xi@8os or disc of lead, kept straight by a Kavwv or ruler.2 The ruling was, how ever, generally confined to the hair-side of the skin, 1 It is noteworthy that in an inventory of Church property of the fifth or sixth century, twenty-one parchment books are men tioned as compared with only three on papyrus — f2i(3Xia 8ep- pAn(va) ko!, opoi(ms) x.i(.i. pM M r-lMtJlorj-ei' WiM Nt ,"• I -i I . KOH KWH MCNl i'JCM 7P)CAg:; a.i -(mj-.-ykh w-k; :<,W E£ 1 oi^e'.ept~»A.Y T'xic tfTfMJJOM ¦¦ r.-f- a r x.'. ¦ }.i i ^lOv'lU'Y1^ en«fxci*i k3sw4.au>- ¦|W>.CGWWHrHCIM i [erntuN neriAj i pXpOfHMtH'UN mliMiNnrxrMW- (O.OU nrxr> HM I NOi>.r (Vjxncxr 'lonTAiKXiynHfe TAirrwoneMocPY . xoroyexoTcKXHoi n\rM;i£0/vOry<3HK-Tt XNCUGCNl LWTIWA* Kf <- I R.CUpKA©e3£HC CO I f :| A-j XI KP ATM f ; I (CI l-OMKX-)^IXJt-r1- ¦ i .-.-.¦ ereM^tocrN T> i - MMei'.j'-Mfj) OM3H' I '- " i?XI=cJ-> H M C f 1 ACK&I X. • , ] j , I W,i . K ;¦•' . .. ¦ - ¦¦ M ---I T~oy3Y>v. ireyoMe. eN'IQWICKmMKW CDMXC1 NTOYS~i"X Men i vpii kxio^oT >-^TOIC"|. KNONrOf rniHNH':xi.-u ~aj, r cretp i--mxmJ.m *TCf£lirVFt)RGKHKO» -ii ci N-lwrHwcrw- A"j"l iPMMfKN i i -e wctto Aj^ewrti is PA' re-yet N AN" P3 N i " I i ¦-, x-i;r i | i tce w eipv ' 1 ON KlKt^WTOYKY ' KAM lANTOMAHOCV HNToyxxoynrnoT xom c- wow*, /.uhvinr y>r ro yt>YM ikmxI" (ixbuHxexyTuiw i- aoc KyecnuJcenA' -xi'.ow^roY«3Yt~iA'i« r i o Y'ro-^'e y mi>^>> TOO K>v|tT7>J,JOr>j< Ar i ac jaId w KAl n*rYTON ts 1 ¦ *i. ¦< I ¦; TCtC iqf-fAAY - !¦ . , ¦ ?- ,5 " c i .' i. • : • ¦. ii -¦• r> .¦¦ v-j ' -¦¦:!- I ¦ ¦ ¦ \Qlt : :: I 'HVHGCO , I [j ; ¦ , t=C'JAII * | i. I\r, M'i>n«"H I | : mhi inn wTnjo* »-¦» rrriUHC0H'>- rXN T1CI--KOI M ' -'¦ 1 111) ¦ Ay*: crl i .11 IC •¦*>) IJO-Ok'lX.. ¦,. ¦ ._: CODKX SINAITICUS. FOURTH CKNTURY. The page shown contains Mark xvi. 2— Luke i. 18, the last twelve verses of St. Mark beinij omitted. To face fi. 195. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 195 the pressure of the disc causing the lines to show also on the reverse side. The handwriting employed, with its square, up- character right uncials, was, as has been previously noted, a handwriting. development of the best hands of the papyrus codices of the second and third centuries (see p. 190), and in the principal exemplars, such as the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus, was marked by great distinction and beauty. While, too, as a rule, in Greek manuscripts where the lines are of uniform length there are only two columns to the page, these codices show three and four columns respectively, possibly a reminiscence of the narrow columns of the papyri from which they were copied. In the remarkable Graeco- Latin manuscript, Codex Bezae, on the other hand, where the lines are divided in KwXa or short clauses according to the sense, there is only a single column to each page. 4. The fact that both sides of the parchment were 4- suitability 1t n . -ofthecodex- wntten upon naturally secured a great saving of form for space, and rendered possible the combining of a writings. larger number of documents in a single codex than was convenient in the case of a papyrus roll without extending it to an altogether undue length. We shall see afterwards the importance of this considera tion in the determination of the New Testament canon, but meanwhile it must be kept in view that for long it was only in exceptional instances, such as the magnificent Vatican and Sinaitic codices, that anything like a general collection of the scattered writings took place. As a rule they continued to be 196 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS circulated either singly or in small groups of Gospels and Epistles, and that, too, even after the general employment of a more running hand of script had still further diminished the size of the codices in which they could be included.1 Pocket Bibles. How great indeed must have been the desire from early times to have copies of the new writings in modest dimensions has been recently illustrated in an interesting manner by the recovery at Oxy rhynchus of a leaf from a fourth century codex of the Apocalypse. Though written in fair-sized uncials, the book, when complete, must have been of such miniature proportions as virtually to form a pocket edition (see Plate VIII.),2 while the leaf of an uncanonical gospel, found in same place, is so small that ' the written surface only slightly exceeds two inches square.' 3 1 The employment in literary documents of this smaller or minuscule hand for uncial or majuscule writing is usually assigned to the eighth or ninth century. But in view of constant mis apprehension it is perhaps not superfluous to recall that alongside of the literary uncial hand a non-literary cursive hand had been in regular use for ordinary purposes as far back as we have any specimens of Greek writing extant, and that it was from this non- literary cursive hand that the literary minuscule hand was after wards developed. 2 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ed. Hunt, viii. p. r4ff, No. 1080. Textual students will recall Dr. Hort's ingenious reconstruction of a ' small portable ' manuscript of this same book from the text of the Apocalypse preserved in Codex Ephraemi (Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek2, p. 268). 3 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ed. Grenfell-Hunt, v. p. 1, No. 840. J ™H ° YpA^KAfeic*A*>* * VAJ^T°t:AYroNKA{AFi l£! ~ H ^^AYtsYXAJAY ^^^L^rAK^ ;^4-ariNlAA6^]f Plate VIII. A! I I APOCALYPSE 111. 19 — IV. I. A leaf from a pocket edition in vellum, belonging to the Fourth Century. From Oxyrhynchus. By permission of the Kgypt Exploration Fund. To face p. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 197 In dealing with the circulation of the New Testa- General trust- ... . r .-,. . . • t i worthiness of ment writings in the first Christian centuries, 1 have the New 1 .. . . , .11 1 Testament had occasion to refer somewhat pointedly to the text. dangers to which the transmission of the true text was exposed. And it is possible that the impression has been left upon some minds that the state of our New Testament text is one of great uncertainty and confusion. This is very far, however, from being the case. Without seeking to minimise the possible sources of corruption, which, indeed, are placed beyond dispute by the enormous mass of variant readings that have arisen,1 we must not forget that as regards both the number and antiquity of our manuscripts, we are in a far better position for getting back to the original words of a New Testa ment writing than in the case of any other ancient book. Thus it is by no means generally realized how few in number are the manuscripts on which we are dependent for our knowledge of the great classical writings of Greece and Rome, and by what a long period of time they are generally separated from the original writers. For our knowledge of Sophocles, for example, we are mainly dependent on a single manuscript written about fourteen hundred years after the poet's death, and though in the case of Vergil we are fortunate in possessing one nearly 1 When Mill issued his edition of the Greek New Testament in 1707, he included a critical apparatus of about 30,000 various readings. The number now must be four or five times as many — ' almost more variants than words ' (Nestle, Textual Criticism of the Greek Testament, p. 15). 198 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS complete manuscript belonging to the fourth century, the total number of Vergilian manuscripts can be numbered only by hundreds as compared with thousands in the case of the New Testament writers. And yet if neither in the case of Sophocles or Vergil we have any serious doubt as to our being in pos session of what is substantially a true text, why should we refuse to show a proportionately higher confidence in our New Testament text, when our principal direct witnesses to it are not separated by more than two hundred and fifty or three hundred years from the autographs, and in certain portions are confirmed by evidence that carries us nearly a century further back ? I am thinking here not of the early versions, which in themselves supply most important aid for the determination of the true New Testament text, but of those third century Greek texts, to which reference has already been made more than once, which, however fragmentary, con firm, so far as they go, the general type of text found in the Vatican and Sinaitic codices. While, then, there are still many grave textual problems awaiting solution, before we can be sure that we have ' the New Testament in the Original Greek ' in our hands, we may take it that in all substantial particulars the words of the autographs 1 See further Kenyon, Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, p. 3. Reference may also be made to two articles by Bishop Welldon, 'The Authenticity of Ancient Literature, Secular and Sacred,' in The Nineteenth Century and After, vol. 62 (1907), pp. 560 ff, 830 ff. CIRCULATION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 199 have been recovered. The great English scholars, Dr. Westcott and Dr. Hort, to whom so much of this result is due, were accustomed to weigh their words, and this is what they say : ' The books of the New Testament as preserved in extant documents assuredly speak to us in every important respect in language identical with that in which they spoke to those for whom they were originally written.'1 1 Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek 2, p. 284. Cf. Souter, The Text and Canon of the New Testament, London, 1913, p. 138: 'It appears to the present writer that a great advance upon the text of Westcott and Hort in the direction of the original autographs is highly improbable, at least in our generation. If they have not said the last word, they have at least laid foundations which make it comparatively simple to fit later discoveries into their scheme.' LECTURE VI. THE COLLECTION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS. EiVa 6/3os vop.ov d8erai Kal 7rpor)riJ)V X™/3'5 yivwo-Kerai Kai eiayyeXimv Tricrris 'i8pvrai ko.1 a7roo~rdAvXoxro-erai Kal iKKXyo-ias Xa/°" o-Kipr^.. Ep. ad Diognetum, xi. 6. ' Uerum scriptura omnis in duo testamenta diuisa est . . . sed tamen diuersa non sunt quia nouum ueteris adimpletio est et in utroque idem testator est Christus.' Lactantius, Instil, iv. 20, ed. Brandt. VI. THE COLLECTION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS. Ej Se y SiaKovia rov davdrov iv ypdp.p,ao~iv ivrervTro>p.evy Xidois eyevyOiQ ev 86£y, S>crre p.y 8vvao~dai drevicrai rovs viovs 'Io-payX els rb irpoo-unrov M.tovo-ea>s Sid ryv 86£av rov Trpoo-mwov airov ryv Karapyovp,ev7]v, irZs oixl pdXXov y SiaKovia rov irvevparos ecrrai iv 86£y ; 2 Cor. iii. 7. We have seen how, by the substitution of the codex- The circulation form for the roll, the collection of the different New Testament Testament writings into one volume was rendered possible. This, however, is very far from saying that any such collection on a complete or final scale took place at once. For long, even after their joint- authority was recognized, the books of the New Testament still continued to be circulated separately or in small groups.1 At the same time, the very fact that they could, when necessity arose, be thus brought together, formed a distinct step in that process of collection, and eventually of canonization, which we have now to trace. At present it is possible to do so only in the 1 At least four-fifths of our uncial manuscripts of the Gospels contain the Gospels only. 204 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS barest outline. To tell the story at any length would lead us into many questions with which we are not immediately concerned. But any inquiry into the rise and growth of the New Testament writings would be very incomplete, unless I at least tried to indicate how, as the result of a long and largely informal process, the scattered writings of which we have been thinking were united to form the New Testament, which henceforth took its place along with the Old Testament, as the Holy Scrip tures of the Christian Church. Light in Of such a future for their writings the original which these . . 111 • i -t'1 writings were writers do not seem to have had any idea. I hey regarded. wrote for the most part, as we have had frequent occasion to notice, in order to meet immediate and pressing needs, and no ulterior purpose of laying the foundations of a new sacred book appears on the surface of their writings. In the canonical books of the Old Testament both they and their readers possessed a Bible already. Jesus Himself had used no other. It was to the Old Testament that, both before and after His Resurrection, He appealed as pointing forward to the ' all things ' which had at length been fulfilled in Himself.1 And in this atti tude He was followed by the first Christian teachers. 'Beginning from this Scripture' — the great prophecy of Isaiah regarding the Suffering Servant — Philip ' preached Jesus' to the Ethiopian eunuch : 'by the Scriptures ' Apollos ' powerfully confuted the Jews ' at Ephesus, and showed 'that Jesus was the Christ.'2 1Luke xxiv. 44 f., 25. 2 Acts viii. 35, xviii. 28. COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 205 How unique was the position which the Old Supremacy Testament occupied in the mind of the early Church Testament. is sufficiently proved by the simple fact that the words ypay Xeyei, ii. 4). 206 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS I. Influences leading to the collection of the New Testament writings. I. The existence of the Old TestamentCanon. The Greek OldTestament. embraced the larger part of those which now make up our New Testament. I. Of the evidence on which this statement rests, I shall have something to say later. Meanwhile it may be well to notice certain influences at work in the Apostolic and sub-Apostolic Church which helped to bring about this result. i. Amongst these may be mentioned, in the first place, the existence of the Old Testament Canon. The formation of that Canon was itself the result of a long and gradual process, which was only com pleted at the beginning of the Christian era.1 And though, as we have just seen, in one way its exist ence rendered unnecessary at first the thought of further sacred writings, in another, it supplied a model which, in process of time, the Christian Church could hardly fail to follow. And this was rendered easier by the fact that the Old Testament then in general use was in Greek, and not in Hebrew. The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament Scriptures, had been adopted not only by the Jews of the Dispersion, but by large numbers of Jews within the confines of 1 Cf. Ryle, The Canon of the Old Testament (London, 1892), p. ixf. : 'The measure of the completeness of the Canon had scarcely been reached, when "the fulness of the time came." The close of the Hebrew Canon brings us to the threshold of the Christian Church. The history of the Canon, like the teaching of its inspired contents, leads us into the very presence of Him in Whom alone we have the fulfilment and the interpretation of the Old Testament, and the one perfect sanction of its use.' COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 207 Palestine. And, to judge from the language of their citations, as well as from innumerable unconscious reminiscences of phraseology, it was upon it that the New Testament writers themselves had been prin cipally nurtured. We are not perhaps going too far when we say, that, with the exception of the peculiar parts of St. Matthew's Gospel, there is nothing in their writings which actually necessitates a know ledge of the original Hebrew.1 No considerations of language, therefore, inter- collections of posed any barrier to the addition of a Greek New Testament to the Greek Old Testament already in use. And the way would be still further prepared for such a result by the collections of excerpts from the Old Testament which were used from an early period for the purposes of Christian teaching and propaganda.2 Occasionally, no doubt, these Testi- monia, to adopt the name given to similar collections later, such as Cyprian's Testimonia, may have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic, but as a rule they were in Greek, and so familiarized the minds of their 1 That the early Church regarded the Septuagint as not merely the translation of an inspired original, but as in itself inspired, is shown by the stories of the miraculous circumstances accompanying its production, as that the translators all finished their work at the same moment, and that the seventy-two copies were found to be in complete agreement. See the collection of Testimonia appended to Wendland's edition of Aristeae ad Philocratem Epistula (Leipzig, 1900), p. 85 ff. 2 E.g. the Eclogae of Melito (c. a.d. 180), to which Eusebius refers, Hist. Pedes, iv. 26. 12. 208 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS 2. The contents and character of the New Testament writings. The words of Jesus. readers with the thought of an authoritative Christian tradition in that tongue.1 2. An even stronger influence leading to the col lection of the New Testament writings lay in the contents and character of the writings themselves. No mention has as yet been made of the fact that, in the oldest Christian communities, there was another authority which had taken its place along side of the Hebrew Scriptures, and that was the words of Jesus, as they were handed down in the current oral tradition of the time. It is to such words, for example, that St. Paul appeals so con fidently on various occasions to enforce some lesson (Acts xx. 35), or to settle some difficulty (1 Thess. iv. 15, 1 Cor. vii. 10), or to confirm some rite (1 Cor. xi. 23), and whose remembrance, as St. John recalls, the Lord Himself assured by His promised gift of the Holy Spirit : ' But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you' (John xiv. 26). The significance attached to these words lay at first, it will be noted, in the fact that they were 1 On the general character of these Testimonies, see Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford, 1889), p. 203 ff, and Rendel Harris, ' The Use of Testimonies in the Early Christian Church',' in the Expositor, VII. ii. p. 385 ff. Cf. Burkitt, The Gospel History and its Transmission (Edinburgh, 1906), p. 127 : 'To collect and apply the Oracles of the Old Testament in the light of the New Dispensation was the first literary task of the Christian Church.' COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 209 directly attributed to Jesus Himself, and not in their inclusion in any sacred book. And even towards the middle of the second century Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, is found declaring in the Preface to the five books which he devoted to the interpretation of similar Xoyia KvpiaKa, that for his knowledge of these he preferred to rely on oral reports of what Andrew, or Peter, or other disciples of the Lord had said, 'for,' as he significantly adds, ' I did not think that what I could derive from the books would profit me as much as what came from the living and abiding voice.'1 At the same time, as these living witnesses died out, and men had perforce to content them selves with the written documents in which the most ;' important of the Lord's words had come to be re corded, it is obvious that the words would inevitably i impart some of their own sacred character to these documents, and consequently that the germs of their J future Scriptural authority were in our Gospels from ' the first. The same thing applies, though in a lesser degree, The Apostolic to the writings of the Apostles. As the personal followers of Jesus, and consequently the immediate 1 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 39. 4 : oi yap rd eK rwv f3if3Xi<»v roaovrov p.e 0)eXeiv VTreXdfijiavov Scrov ret irapd £o~ys v 7rpocf>yru>v. 3 Ibid. 66 : ev diropvypovevfiao-iv, a KaXelrai eiayyeXia. 4Cf. e.g. Dial. c. 103, where, with reference to the incident recorded in the received text of Luke xxii. 44, Justin refers to the Memoirs, ' which I say were composed by the Apostles and those who followed them ' (a ^Vl11 ^7ro ™v <"r°o-n>Ao>i/ avrov Kal rS>v eKeivois TrapaKoXovOyo-dvrmv o-vvreraxdai) — a description which covers exactly the traditional authorship of St. Matthew and St. John, and of St. Mark and St. Luke. Plate IX. ¦W^>f *C WHroyc. j^fOF £v^vrr-» rfrt*> >rr -CV*4 -A^KCTO WT^^-VtO AjrHtT*! C^^f -' ' ! ^t^6"^ ^ ' thTgOSPEL ACCORDING TO PETER 1X-X. Kar*e6™ ««^- Kron, the KayCn. Second Century. By permission of M. Ernest Lerous of Paris. Co face /. 213. Plate X. » •aS,^ - •- *™\ z^" ¦-£"/' ,Z vJt . .*¦ •;, ;-> " ','¦¦' T" •- ' >Jy - .¦¦Jiy.'. • .¦'¦'-¦?:. ¦: ¦;'>.•* 'i»jl' Jifi-r. ¦','-¦ '¦• '¦yJ&Wffl't'/'' <• • ' ' ,' ^for<- ' ^-T" f-'^^^^r^r^T1^'1'^ °t° ^VA^-CC'wU.-^ • "K-St-A fiKCQ^H^ ^J^tvc-tv &yv o-5r€A7-i;io<3T^vV--fV > < " ' . -* ¦' ¦ . f- ' ¦ ~HvC Vx\\ -~VOw-C \a-~p I -M-^ H v*-K>-^ n * \J^ ^H-ft\-***Vkv THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO PETER X.-XI. koX kv$o.vi evayyeXlw), I do not believe it,' we seem to have an instance of 'Gospel,' used collectively for a body of documents. Papias again, as we have seen, shows undoubted acquaintance with the documents lying at the base of our First and Second Gospels ;3 and when we come to Justin Martyr the knowledge of all our four Gospels in their present form is clearly established. I need not repeat the evidence that has already been adduced to this effect, but rather pass on to point out how Justin's evidence is confirmed by the Diatessaron of his pupil Tatian. The manner in which the true character of this work has been discovered forms one of the most striking stories in recent Biblical research;4 but the only point 1 The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford, 1905), p. 24 ff. The most likely reference is in c. viii. 2, where the Lord's Prayer may be quoted from Math. vi. 9 ff. 2 Ibid. p. 61. 3See p. 137 f. Cf. also p. 269 ff. 4 Cf. Hemphill, The Diatessaron of Tatian, Dublin and London, 1 888; J. Hamlyn Hill, The Earliest Life of Christ, being the COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 219 that we need recall at present is, that the Dia- tessaron, as its name denotes, was a Harmony of the Four Gospels, introduced by Tatian into the Syriac Church, and used by it in preference to the Evangelion Da-Mepharreshe, that is ' the Gospel according to the Separated (Evangelists),' until the beginning of the fifth century.1 It is thus a witness to the fact that by the begin ning of the third quarter of the second century there were already four records of Gospel history, which stood on such a different footing from all similar documents, that from them, and apparently from them alone, this one harmonized Gospel-narrative was formed.2 The same testimony underlies the traditions of irenaeus. Asia Minor, Egypt, and North Africa during the next few decades. To I renaeus (c. a. d. i 80- 1 90), who had been trained in Asia Minor under Polycarp, and from him had learned what St. John and other eye-witnesses had to tell 'concerning the Lord, and concerning His Diatessaron of Tatian, Edinburgh, 1894, new edit. 1910. The work has been translated with an Introduction in the Additional Volume of the Ante-Nicene Christian Library (Edinburgh, 1897), P- 35 ff- 1 See Burkitt, S. Ephraim's Quotations from the Gospel in Texts and Studies, vii. 2 (Cambridge, 1901), and Evangelion Da-Meph- arreshi (Cambridge, 1904), ii. pp. 101 ff., 180 ff. 2 For an ingenious attempt to reconstruct the Diatessaron, see Zahn, Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons, i. p. 112 ff., and cf. Geschichte d. Neut. Kanons, ii. p. 530 ff. 220 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS Clement of Alexandria. Tertullian. miracles and His teaching,'1 it seemed that the Gospel could only be given ' under a four-fold form, but held together by one Spirit.' 2 And though the reasoning by which he reached this conclusion may well seem to us now very fanciful, with its appeal to the four regions of the world, and the four several winds, it is at least decisive as to the supreme place of the four Gospels in Irenaeus' thoughts. The evidence of Clement of Alexandria is less clear, and is marked by the general tendency of his school to extend the limits of the new sacred writings, as when he quotes from the apocryphal Gospel accord ing to the Hebrews3 At the same time, from the manner in which he elsewhere refers to the four canonical gospels, Clement evidently regarded them as occupying a place by themselves.4 In this he was followed with still greater emphasis by the North African Tertullian. After defending the Gospel of St. Luke against Marcion on the 1 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. v. 20. 6. 2 Adv. Haer. iii. n. 8, ed. Harvey: o rZv airdvrwv rexvirys A.6yos, . . . 4>avepu>dels rols dvOpioirois, IStoicei' ypiv rerpdpopfpov rb evayyeXiov, evl 8e Tvvevpari o-vvexop-evov. For the whole passage, see Additional Note H. 3 Strom, ii. 9. 45, ed. Stahlin : ?/ k&v toi ko6' "E/fyatovs eiayyeXi.ii> '0 davp.do-as (3ao-iXevo-ei, yeypairrai, Kal 6 j3aaiXevaas dvairayo-erai. i Ibid. vii. 16. 94-7 : at Kvpiaiai. According to Professor Nicol, The Four Gospels iti the Earliest Church History (Edin burgh, 1908), p. 47: 'We may confidently assume from the clear and explicit references which we find in his [Clement's] works that his Gospel canon was exactly that which we ourselves acknowledge.' COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 221 authority of the Churches of the Apostles, Tertullian goes on to show that the same authority ' will uphold the other Gospels which we have in due succession through them and according to their usage, I mean those of [the Apostles] Matthew and John : although that which was published by Mark may also be maintained to be Peter's, whose interpreter Mark was : for the narrative of Luke also is generally ascribed to Paul : [since] it is allowable that that which scholars publish should be regarded as their master's work.' \ And then he concludes : ' These are for the most part the summary arguments which we employ when we argue about the Gospels against heretics, maintaining both the order of time which sets aside the later works of forgers (fosteritati falsariorum praescribenti), and the authority of Churches which upholds the tradition of the Apostles; because truth necessarily precedes forgery, and proceeds from them to whom it has been delivered.' l These last words of Tertullian show that the ultimate ground for admitting any Gospel to a place in the primary rank of accepted writings was the fact that it was written or vouched for by an Apostle. And the same consideration determined the judg ment of the Church with reference to various other writings which by this time had come to be associ ated with the Epistles of St. Paul as parts of the rapidly forming New Testament Canon. 1 Adv. Marc. iv. 5. The translation is taken from Westcott, On the Canon, p. 345 f. 222 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS The Thus according to the so-called Muratorian Frag- Canon. ment, a Latin catalogue of the books of the New Testament, discovered by Muratori in the Ambrosian Library in Milan (see Plate XI.),1 the Roman Church possessed about a.d. 200, rather a decade earlier than later, a collection which included St. Matthew (though the section relating to this gospel is now wanting), St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of St. Paul, the Epistle of St. Jude, two Epistles of St. John, and the Apoca lypse of St. John. The only books therefore omitted which now belong to our New Testament Canon are the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of St. James, an Epistle of St. Jqhn, and the two Epistles of St. Peter, the omission of 1 Peter being possibly acci dental ; while the book known as the Apocalypse of Peter is added, ' though some of our brethren will not have it read in their churches.' Such a book again as the Shepherd of Hermas may be used privately, but is not admitted to the public reading of the Church either among the Prophets or among the Apostles, while various heretical works are rejected, 'for it is not fitting that gall should be mingled with honey.' 2. From 2. The principle of a New Testament collection DeIter2m?nltion being thus by this time definitely established, all of the new5 that now remained was to determine its precise limits, both with regard to books that had already been included and with regard to others whose claims had not yet been fully recognized. 1 For the full text, see Additional Note K. Plate XI. quiftU6T*cne>jlNTeBpuioUiLlC^iv, JL uc*.s ls«Trem&d ic us poSTaJce^s uo> x pi CumeopAuLus quASiuqnuRiss-rudiosum Secusiiuoi «*dsiim sisservume rvisuo eAOPivio)veco>fCRiseT OAjrotacoeM weclpse ^uiO»TliMCAK^e G.'ndepRcJAseauipoT-ij.i'r- l* Cuuf uep ueRix tteu eL^«m a^ructkikv, fjOBiseivNARRemus 67AdemMoc«re Reue V*Tuon A^dneAeex-^poSToLis vntecoc^is ceiwnBus cun«hsIo)>a^)v|S suoiuorrxive r-ui\js,nvdiscRiBen.e-r GTideo L-icrTieTatiiT:peR.T CRedeN ti vim p'^rde i cu.or» uno ac pri^/ciuaLi sf»« &e tatb ^epAssto^e 6snesii-RRecTioNG- OecoNuesA-nove cucnieciputis suis Acdecemi woeius Adueynu pRlf«o(wf)Urr»iLiia«Te dlSpeCTUS tj iao 6 •-•• .:: '.- s ecun oum aoTes*»Te Rec*Li pRe cLARumQuoftpoTUR.iifr)esT. cjuiieKco CDIR.UOO S»loJiA^/7>f es TamCOvSTAKTeR sivc uL-AeTiA Iwe piSTuLissuispROp«R4«r 6iceNslwsec»»©ipaLi qu^oi^l"'iASOCuLls ^JOSTRIC C-tAURIBUSAuOlUICOUS eTWANUS WOSTHAP oAfpAUenilNT UeCSCRipSI IV THE CANON OF MURATORI, SHOWING THE PASSAGE RELATING TO THE ORIGIN OF ST. JOHN'S GOSPEL. End of Second Century. To face p. 222. COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 223 The great name that meets us here is that ofongen. Origen, who, while' giving a list of books ' uncontro- verted' in the Church like the four Gospels, or 'generally acknowledged' like the First Epistle of St. Peter,1 elsewhere quotes from others, such as the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude, in a way that shows that doubts had been raised regarding them.2 And in this attitude he was followed by the his- Eusebius. torian Eusebius (a.d. 270-340), with his well-known division into (1) the acknowledged, (2) the disputed, and (3) the heretical books, the two former classes being regarded as canonical and the last as un- canonical.3 It would take too long to examine in detail the General lists either of Origen or of Eusebius, but it may the church illustrate the general attitude of the Church during the case of" this period if we notice briefly the varying fortunes that for a time attended two books which eventually gained an assured place in our New -Testament Canon. In view of its close relation to Jewish prophecy the and the authoritative claims made by its author poca3pse with reference to it,4 it is not surprising that the Apocalypse should from early times have been regarded with special honour, and should at first 1 Apud Eusebium, Hist. Eccles. vi. 25. 2 Comm. in Joann. T. xix. 6 : u>s iv ry cf>epop.ei>y 'laKu>(3ov iTrio-roXy dveyvayfiev. Comm. in Matt. T. xvii. 30: el 8e Kal ryv 'JovSa Trpoo-oiro Tts iTTiaroXyjV. 'Hist. Eccles. iii. 25. 4 Rev. i. 3, xxii. 7 ; cf. Deut. iv. 1 o. 224 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS have received nearly unanimous recognition both in the West and in Egypt.1 But in the course of the third century a strong reaction took place, largely owing to the difficulty on linguistic grounds of ascribing it to the same author as the Fourth Gospel. And though Diony sius of Alexandria, who was the first, as we have seen (see p. 123), to raise these difficulties in a truly critical manner, was willing to accept the book as canonical while denying its Apostolic authority, others in the East took varying attitudes. Cyril of Jerusalem (a.d. 315-386) rejected it; Athanasius (f a.d. 373) regarded it, along with the other writings of our New Testament, as one of 'the springs of salvation ' ; Chrysostom (f a.d. 407) was evidently acquainted with it, but never, so far as we can gather from his voluminous writings, appealed to it as Scripture. Nor did it find any place in the Peshitta of the Syriac Church. In the West, on the other hand, the Apocalypse was generally received as one of the twenty-seven books which went finally to form the collected Canon.2 1 Leipoldt, Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons (Leipzig, 1907), i. 3311"., claims for the Apocalypses a foremost place in the early history of the New Testament Canon. And as showing how long this state of things continued, in certain quarters at any rate, it may be noted that the list of canonical books appended to the sixth century Graeco-Latin Codex Claromontanus of St. Paul (D2) includes the Apocalypse of John, the Apocalypse of Peter, and the Shepherd of Hermas. 2 It is perhaps significant of the difficulty which the Apocalypse had later in maintaining its place in the Canon that amidst the COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 225 In the case of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the and the attitude of the Churches ran a different course, the Hebrews. The Western Church as a whole, both in Rome and Africa, by declaring itself against the Pauline authorship, refused the Epistle the place generally assigned by this time to a genuine Apostolic writing.1 The Eastern Church, on the other hand, began by accepting the Epistle as the work of St. Paul. And though later it was sometimes understood to be his only in a secondary sense, in the main it continued to be assigned to the Apostle, without any serious attempt to determine the exact nature of his con nexion with it. Gradually this view spread to the West until, largely through the influence of Augus tine and Jerome, its place in the Canon alongside of the thirteen Epistles of St. Paul was assured. The desire for uniformity, which had led the East to accept the Apocalypse in accordance with the general tradition of the West, was now rewarded by the West in its turn accepting the Epistle to the Hebrews in accordance with the general tradition of the East. variations in the order of the other parts of the New Testament, it practically always occupies the last place, though we cannot ignore that it was peculiarly suited for this place in view of the character of its contents. See further Additional Note L, 'The Order of the New Testament Writings.' 1 That, however, the Epistle was well-known at Rome from a very early date is proved by the traces of its use in the letter written by Clement of Rome to the Corinthians between a.d. 93 and 97. 226 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS OtherChristianwritings. The want of a trustworthy Apostolic title, on the other hand, served to rule out many Christian writings which had hitherto been regarded with great favour, such as the Epistle of Clement. And the general result was the collection of the twenty- seven attested works of Apostles and Apostolic men, which we know as the New Testament.1 Its different parts might not all be regarded as equally inspired. Doubts might continue to be expressed regarding the authorship or the authority of this or that book. But, from this time onwards, there was no longer any serious attempt to add to the collection. The New Testament, in the extent in which we now know it, formed an inseparable whole, ready to take its place along with the Old Testament as the Divine Scriptures of the Christian Church.2 III. General remarks. i. The collection of the New Testamentwritings was a gradual process. III. Looking back on this somewhat complicated historical resume, four remarks of a general character suggest themselves. i. This collection of the New Testament writings was a gradual process. There is a widely prevalent popular idea that the New Testament sprang into existence all at once 1 See Additional Note M, ' Extracts from Festal Letter xxxix of Athanasius, a.d. 367.' 2 Cf. Harnack, History of Dogma, Eng. Tr. by Buchanan, London, 1896, ii. p. 62 n1 : 'No greater creative act can be men tioned in the whole history of the Church than the formation of the apostolic collection and the assigning to it of a position of equal rank with the Old Testament.' COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 227 and as a completed whole, and that all its different parts were forthwith accepted by the Christian Church as the divinely inspired record of God's new revelation of Himself to man. But, as we have just seen, this was far from being the case. The writings of which the New Testament is now made up were in the first instance independent, occasional writings, called forth at different times and under different circumstances to meet immediate and prac tical needs. And though from the nature of the case — from the character of their writers and of the truths with which they dealt — they were quickly invested with an ever-increasing sacredness and authority, it was not until something like three hundred years had elapsed that these scattered writings were definitely and finally combined into the New Testament as we have it now. 2. This, again, was not due in the first instance to 2. it was ... , r . largely in- any authoritative pronouncement on the part of the formal and „,..„., unofficial. Christian Church. It was not until the year a.d. 397 that the Third Council of Carthage, in dealing with the subject of the Scriptures, formally enumerated the contents of the New Testament, as at present received, while it was three hundred years later, a.d. 691, before this Canon was synodically determined for the Church of East and West by the Quini-sextine Council. And consequently for the earlier stages in the history of the canon we are led to look to the divinely guided instinct of the whole Christian community. Not by the judgments of Church rulers and theologians, 228 THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS 3. It included, on the whole, all that was best worth preserving. but by the appeal they made to the heart and conscience of the early believers, were the New Testa ment writings separated from the other Christian writings of the day. And the supreme religious value that was then ascribed to them has been fully endorsed and justified by the whole course of their later history. 3. For no one will deny that the New Testament has preserved for us all that was best worth pre serving in early Christian literature. It is no doubt true that all its contents do not stand on the same level of certainty and authority. The Gospels come to us more fully attested than some of the Epistles : the teaching of 2 Peter cannot be put on the same footing as the teaching of the Epistle to the Romans, to say nothing of the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount. But we have only to compare our New Testament books as a whole with other literature of the kind to realize how wide is the gulf which separates them from it. The uncanonical gospels, it is often said, are in reality the best evidence for the canonical. And whatever the final decision regard ing the weight to be attached to the newly discovered ' Sayings of Jesus,' no one can pretend that, intensely interesting as some of them are, they add anything of importance to the sayings of the Gospels. The very fact that no serious effort has been ever made to reinstate the books which were once read in the Church, but were afterwards classed as COLLECTION OF THE N.T. WRITINGS 229 uncanonical, is in itself a proof that the Church acted rightly in drawing the line where it did. 4. With the utmost confidence and thankfulness, 4- The unique character of then, we may acknowledge the unique position of *e completed our completed New Testament. Testament. The writings which it embodies are the title-deeds of our Christian faith and life. The truth which they teach is the truth as it is in Jesus. ' For me,' says Ignatius in a famous passage (ad Philad. viii.), 1 the archives are Jesus Christ : the inviolable archives are His Cross and death, and His Resurrection and the faith that is through Him.' And it is just because of the manner in which in their turn both Gospels and Epistles bear witness to these same great saving truths, that they continue to exercise an authority over the mind and heart of the Church to which no other writings, however venerable, can lay claim. Merciful Lord, we beseech Thee to cast Thy bright beams of light upon Thy Church, that it being enlightened by the doctrine of Thy blessed Apostles and Evangelists may so walk in the light of Thy truth, that it may at length attain to the light of everlasting life ; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. [Xeyei 'Iy(o-ov)s' jxy Travordo-00} 6 <^[tcui> eios av evpy Kal orav evpy \6apf3ydyo-erai Kal da/x- f3y6els f3acriXevo-ei Ka[t f3ao-iXevo-as dvaira- WeTal* New 'Saying of Jesus.' APPENDIX OF ADDITIONAL NOTES NOTE A. SOME BOOKS FOR THE STUDY OF THE GREEK PAPYRI. In view of the number of references in this volume to the Greek Papyri, and to the increasing sense of their value for New Testament study generally, the following note of certain books dealing with them may prove of use. The original texts can probably be most conveniently Texts. studied in the annual volumes edited for the Graeco- Roman Branch of the Egypt Exploration Fund by Dr. Grenfell and Dr. Hunt. Vol. I. was published in 1898, and of The Oxyrhynchus Papyri alone nine volumes have already appeared. An annual subscription of one guinea to the Branch (payable at the Offices of the Fund, 37 Great Russell Street, London, W.C.) entitles subscribers to the annual volume, and also to the annual Archaeo logical Report. Amongst other papyrus texts published in this country, mention may be made of The Flinders Petrie Papyri, edited by Dr. Mahaffy and Professor Smyly (in the Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy — ' Cunningham Memoirs,' Nos. viii., ix., xi., Dublin, 1891, 1893); of the Greek Papyri in the British Museum, edited by Sir F. G. Kenyon and Dr. H. I. Bell, 3 vols. (London, 1893, 1898, 1 907) ; and of the Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester, edited by Dr. A. S. 234 APPENDIX Hunt, of which Vol. I. appeared in 191 1 (Manchester: at the University Press). Many collections of texts are also in course of publica tion on the continent, of which the principal is Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Koeniglichen Museen zu Berlin : Griechische Urkunden. Of these, four volumes, comprising 1209 texts, have now been published (Berlin, 1895, I898, 1903, 1912). Selected texts. A large selection of leading documents from the above and other sources, accompanied by valuable historical and legal introductions, will be found in GrundzUge und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde by L. Mitteis and U. Wilcken (4 half-volumes, Leipzig, 191 2, 40s.). Smaller collections are provided by H. Lietzmann, Greek Papyri (eleven texts with brief notes, Deighton, Bell & Co., Cambridge, 6d.), A. "Laudien, Griechische Papyri aus Oxyrhynchos (Texts with brief notes in German for school use, Berlin, 1 9 1 2, is. 6d.), S. Witkowski, Epistulae Privatae Graecae 2 (a collection of private letters of the Ptolemaic period with a Latin commentary, Leipzig, 1 9 1 1 , 3s. 3d.), and G. Milligan, Selections from, the Greek Papyri (fifty-five representative Greek texts with English transla tions and notes, Cambridge University Press, new edition, 191 2, 5s. net). Christian texts. In Les plus anciens Monuments du Christianisme (being Patrologia Orientalis, iv. 2, Paris, 1907, about 6s.), C. Wessely has edited the most important early Christian documents written on papyrus, with French translations and commentaries, and in Aus den Papyrus der Kbnig- lichen Museen (Berlin, 1 899, about 4s.), A. Erman and F. Krebs have issued German translations of a number of the papyri in the Berlin Museum. General Discussions on many points raised by the new dis coveries, which have proved epoch-making by the interest they have awakened in the subject, will be found in Deissmann's Bible Studies (1901, 9s.), New Light on the discussions. NOTE A 235 New Testament (1907, 3s.), The Philology of the Greek Bible (1908, 3s. net), and Light from the Ancient East (19 10, 1 6s. net). At present Professor Deissmann is engaged on a new Language. Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, in which the evi dence of the papyri and inscriptions will be fully utilized. Meanwhile reference may be made to H. van Herwerden, Lexicon Graecum suppletorium et dialecticum (new edition, Leyden, 1910, 48s.), and to the Lexical Notes from the Papyri contributed by Professor J. H. Moulton and the present writer to the Expositor from 1908 onwards. The authors hope to republish these last with much additional material as a first attempt at the systematic lexical illus tration of the New Testament vocabulary from contem porary sources. The history of the Greek language at this period has been traced by A. Thumb, Die Griechische Sprache in Zeitalter des Hellenismus (Strassburg, 1901). See also the article ' Hellenistic and Biblical Greek ' by the same writer in the Standard Bible Dictionary (London and New York, 1 909), Deissmann's article on ' Hellenistisches Griechisch (mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung der griech- ischen Bibel) ' in the Realencyklopddie fur protestantische Theologie und Kirche3, ed. Hauck, and J. H. Moulton, ' New Testament Greek in the light of modern discovery ' (in Cambridge Biblical Essays, London, 1909, 12s.). On the grammar of later Greek, see A. Jannaris, An Grammar. Historical Greek Grammar (London, 1897), and with special reference to Biblical Greek, J. H. Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. i. Prolegomena (3rd edit, 1908, 8s. net), and H. St. John Thackeray, A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint, Vol. i. Introduction, Orthography, and Acci dence (Cambridge, 1909, 8s. net). Reference may also be made to L. Radermacher, Neutestamentliche Grammatik, being Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, I. i. (Tubingen, 236 APPENDIX 191 1), and to R. Helbing, Grammatik der Septuaginta: Laut- und Wortlehre (Gottingen, 1907, 6s.). Palaeography. For the palaeographical importance of the papyri in relation to the autographs of the New Testament writings, see F. G. Kenyon, The Palaeography of Greek Papyri (Oxford, 1899, 1 os. 6d.) and Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, Chap. II. (new edition, London, 19 12, 5s. net). See also Sir E. M. Thompson's Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography, Oxford, 191 2, with its splendid collection of facsimiles, of which forty-two are taken from the papyri. Value for The value of the papyri in elucidating the orthography ,fiLls' and meaning of our New Testament texts is fully recog nized in most of the recent commentaries, as in the volumes on Ephesians by J. Armitage Robinson and Thessalonians by G. Milligan in Macmillan's Standard Series, on Matthew by W. C. Allen, / Corinthians by A. Robertson and A. Plummer, Thessalonians by J. E. Frame, and The Johannine Epistles by A. E. Brooke in the Inter national Critical Commentary, and in the commentaries by various leading German scholars in the useful Hand- buch zum Neuen Testament (Tubingen, various dates). Other books and dissertations dealing with special points are noted by Milligan, Selections from the Greek Papyri, p. xv ff., while full bibliographies and many articles indispensable to the serious student of papyrology appear from time to time in the Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung; edited by U. Wilcken, Leipzig, 1901 and subsequent years. NOTE B. THE TITLES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS. It has been pointed out (p. 19) that the titles or Titles. addresses of the New Testament autographs would in all probability be of the shortest. And it is certain at any rate that the full designations to which we have become accustomed in our English Bibles were added at a so much later date, as to lie altogether outside the period with which at present we are specially concerned. At the same time it may be convenient to indicate generally the character of the evidence afforded by the Greek manuscripts in this direction, more especially in view of the light which it throws upon the manner in which the New Testament writings had been collected into different classes or groups, as described in Lecture VI. Full particulars will be found in von Soden, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, I. i. (Berlin, 1902), p. 294 ff., on whose lists the following account is based. The exact dates of the manuscripts are not given, but it must be kept in view throughout that many of those referred to do not by any means belong to an early period. As regards the Gospels, the oldest separate designations Gospels. we meet with are simply KaTa MaTOatov, KaTa MdpKov etc., the four books being included under the general title to evayyeXiov. 238 APPENDIX Acts. Catholic Epistles. Pauline Epistles. Apocalypse. Afterwards the general title comes to be applied to each of the four parts, evayyeXiov /caret M.aTdaiov etc., or more precisely to evayyeXiov k. Mot0., while the character of the books is frequently emphasized by the addition of dyiov — to dyiov evayyeXiov ktX. The book of the Acts is generally headed by the familiar title, irpd^eig tow (dylwv) dirocrToXwv, but in some cases its author is directly mentioned by name, as Aom evayyeXio-Tov TrpaPeis twv airoo-ToXwv. The Catholic Epistles appear to have been rarely introduced by a general title, such as at tWa eirurroXai, but the designation KaQoXiKy is applied to individual members of the group, e.g. eirio-ToXri (tov dyiov) ILeTpov KaQoXiKy a', ' The First Epistle General of (the holy) Peter.' As interesting peculiarities in this class von Soden mentions the following : emaToXy KaQoXiKy tov dyiov airoo~ToXov 'laKa>f3ov tov dSeXchov Qeov [a 457]. ypdfxfia irpo<; 'E/3j0a/ouc 'IaKwf3ov dSeXcpov Qeov [055 5]. tov dyiov 'Iwavvov tov QeoXoyov eiriaToXy KaQoXiKy irpwTy [a 457]. As in the case of the Gospels, the Pauline Epistles form a definite class, introduced by some such general title as eirio-ToXal (tov dyiov) HavXov (tov aTrocrToXov), while the individual Epistles are known simply as 7rj0oc 'Pw/wa/ovy, irpw TLoptvQiovs a' etc. Gradually, however, these individual titles are enlarged to emo-ToXy HavXov irpos ktX., such further designations as tov (dyiov or dyiov Kai Travevcpy/Jiov) airoo-ToXov being of frequent occurrence. Sometimes the Epistles are numbered throughout : hence such a title as HavXov eirio-ToXy SevTepa, a' Se irpos KopivQiov?, ' The Second Epistle of S. Paul, but the First to the Corinthians.' For the Apocalypse, von Soden mentions three titles, NOTE B 239 all of which are interesting in connexion with the tra ditional Johannine authorship : diroKaXv^is (rov dyiov) 'Iwdvvov tov QeoXoyov. airoKaXvYK tov evayyeXiarTov irapQevov /cat QeoXoyov 'Iwavvov. diroKaXv^ri? I. t. Q., fjv ev H.aTfj.u> Tfl vyo-w eQedo-aTO. The subscriptions to the Gospels are often wanting Subscriptions. altogether, or consist simply in the repetition of the title, ospe s" (to) KaTa M.aTQaiov (evayyeXiov). Sometimes we find, reXos tov KaTa . . . evayyeXiov, or TeXo? e'tXytpev to kotu . . . evayyeXiov. On the other hand, the subscriptions not infrequently give the scribes an opportunity of adding various par ticulars regarding the supposed date, place of origin, or language of the originals. Thus, such an inscription as e^eSoQy to KaTa . . . evayyeXiov fxeTa erry . . . Trjs tov 'Kp'10-Tov dvaX^ewg may be further enlarged in the case of Matthew by the notes ev 'lepoo-oXv/xot? and efipai'crTi, or of Mark, ev Pcoyujj and poofxaio-ri. One or two examples of a more special character may also be noted : to KaTa M.aTQaiov evayyeXiov Ty eftpalSi SiaXeKTO) ypadfev e^eSoQy vir avTOv ev 'lepovcraXyfJi. /xeTCt Xpovovs oktw Trjs XjOtaTOt/ dvaXyi^eeos' ep/myveveTai Se vrrb 'laKatfiov tov aTroo-ToXov tov aSeXcpov tov Kvpiov tov KaTa erao/ca eirio-Korrov ovtos Kai inro twv dyioov aTroo-ToXwv yeipoTovyQevTOS. to KaTa M.dpKOV dyiov evayyeXiov inryyopevQy viro UeTpov tov airoo-ToXov ev Pai/xj; fxeTa -^povovs SeKa t?? tov ^LpiaTOV dvaXy^ews /cat erreSoQy Mao/cw Tie evayyeXio-Tn Kai 'eKypvyQy ev ' Kke^av- Spe'ia /caJ irao-ft Ttj irepeyfopw avTy ayiw bpet airoKeifievoov. The subscriptions to the Acts and Catholic Epistles contain as a rule little of interest. But the Pauline Epistles leave scope for many notes. Two must suffice by way of illustration : (Romans) eypdcpy cWo ~K.op'ivQov Sid <&oi/3ys (t/;?) Sta- Kovicro-ys (Smkovov Tys ev JS.ey%peais eKKXyala<;). (Titus) irpoo Titov T/yc KpyTcov eKKXyo~ias irpunov eir'i- o-kottov, eypddiy drrb NiKOiroXea)? Tyi Ma/cec^ow'ay. The Epistle to the Hebrews, again, eypdipy dirb (t/J?) 'iTaXtay Sia Ti/uoQeov. The subscriptions to the Apocalypse call for no remark, unless the following may be taken as intended to confirm its canonical character in the face of opposition : 'Icoavvov tov QeoXoyov y KavoviKy a7ro/ca\u\jny. The early versions contain much interesting evidence bearing on the subject of this Note, but as we are here concerned primarily with the existing Greek manuscripts, I have thought it better not to attempt to refer to it at length. It may, however, be noted that as the Latins kept CATA in the titles of the Gospels down to about the middle of the fourth century A.D., it is probable that titles were exactly reproduced by the early translators. Compare also the subscription to Mark in the early Sahidic (ed. Horner, 191 1). The further fact that in the title of Acts some at least of the Syriacs took irpa^eio- (written irpa£io-) as if it were irpagio- (singular), is of interest as showing that they understood the word in the abstract, the ' method ' of the Apostles. NOTE C. DICTATION AND SHORTHAND. IN his Canon and Text of the New Testament, p. 300, Dictation in Professor C. R. Gregory writes in connexion with the the ' ' composition of the Pauline Epistles : ' Here we must observe how strangely history repeats itself in varying forms. The older men of to-day grew up at a time at which most men wrote for themselves what they wished to entrust to paper. To-day, however, everyone is eager to have a stenographer with a writing- machine, or to tell his thoughts to a gramophone, and hand that over to his type-writing clerk. At Paul's day, much as is the case to-day in the East and in the South, even men who could write were in the habit of having scribes to do the drudgery of writing for them. If a man were not rich, he might have a young friend or a pupil who was ready to wield the pen for him. It comports less with the dignity of age in the East to write. The old man strokes his beard and dictates his words to the scribe. That is what Paul did, although I do not know whether or not he had the beard which Christian art gives him. . . . Let us turn to the Epistle to the Romans. For our purpose one Epistle is as good as another, and which one could be better than this chief Epistle? It was Tertius who wrote it if the sixteenth chapter belongs to it. Timothy and Lucius, Jason, and Sosipater were probably all sitting around Paul and Tertius at Q 242 APPENDIX Shorthand. Greek • tachygraphy. Corinth or at Cenchrea when Tertius wrote their greetings in 1621, and he added his own before he went on to name Gaius.' The details of the foregoing picture may be somewhat elaborated, and a too great air of modernity imparted to the ancient practice ; but the passage at least serves to draw pointed attention to an aspect of the composition of the New Testament writings which is apt to be overlooked. We have, as we have just heard, the testimony of the Pauline Epistles themselves, that the Apostle made use of the assistance of scribes or friends in the transcription of certain of them. Nor can there be any doubt that other New Testament writers would do the same. And though we have no direct evidence that these amanuenses fell back upon any system of shorthand to assist them in their work, it is a by no means unreasonable conjecture that they would do so in accordance with what seems to have been an established custom in similar circumstances. It is true, indeed, that references to this practice are not so numerous as we might have expected, and also that there is considerable dubiety as to the nature of the short hand employed. But there is at least sufficient evidence to show that certain forms of shortened or contracted writing were in vogue, tending to greater ease and rapidity in the recording of a spoken or dictated message. And as the subject is rarely even referred to in books o« New Testament Introduction, it may be of interest to illustrate it briefly. For the first example of Greek tachygraphy, or shorthand, we are usually referred to an inscription discovered at Athens in 1884, belonging to the fourth century before Christ, which describes how certain vowels and consonants could be expressed by strokes placed in various positions. If this can be accepted as a true instance of tachygraphic writing, in which signs or symbols take the place of words, it carries us back to a very early date for the practice. NOTE C 243 But it is possible that nothing more than a contracted form of writing is intended.1 Unfortunately too the passage from Diogenes Laertius, which was formerly relied upon in the same connexion, does not help us much. For when Xenophon is described as vn-ocryfj.eiwo-dfj.evo's the lectures of Socrates, the usage of the word elsewhere leads us to think of ' making notes or memoranda ' of them, rather than of actually ' taking them down in shorthand.' 2 Nor does even the mention in Galen (irepl twv iSiwv fiifiXiwv ypacpy) of a copy made by one who was able to write swiftly in signs (Sid o-y/xelaiv ety Ta^oy ypdcpeiv) necessarily imply shorthand in the modern sense of the word, though something of the sort is evidently implied.3 It is fortunate, therefore, that we can supplement this Evidence of scanty evidence both directly and indirectly from the l e papyr1, Greek papyri. We have had occasion more than once to notice that both official documents and private letters are constantly written in one hand and signed in another, pointing to a widespread use of dictation (see p. 23 ff.). And now amongst the Oxyrhynchus papyri Dr. Grenfell and Dr. Hunt have published a very interesting contract which 1 It may be noted that in the LXX version of Ps. xiv. 1, ' the pen of the ready writer ' is rendered by /cdXtmos ypaix/iar^us 6£vypdaaiv airio-TeCKai irepl ruv i/iariup oft-e Sih ypairroS oflre 5iot i . .i £• ¦ / •> -Jr. fc-v T -^:|W..J 7 fV ^'* ^ t t — / K ) £*•€ •x ; ^-p|^OM ,y ;7^ lVl WAXEN TABLET (BRIT. MU.S. ADD. Ms. 33270) INSCk I HKD WITH TACHVC.R APH1C SYMBOLS. I'robably Third Century a.d. liy permission of the Council of the Hellenic Society. (Sliglilly induced in si7e.) To fao- />. J45. NOTE C 245 tachygraphic signs,1 and a few papyri in the Rainer Collection at Vienna.2 Our principal witness, however, is a third century waxed Waxed book. book in the British Museum, consisting of seven wooden tablets, covered over with symbols (see Plate XII.). The key to their interpretation has not yet been dis covered, but from the manner in which the same symbols are repeated, it evidently formed the exercise-book of a shorthand scribe or pupil.3 What we have thus learned from Greek sources is Latin strongly confirmed by the corresponding practice among ac ygrap y' the Latins. It is well known that wealthy Romans were in the habit of keeping slaves or freedmen, for the purpose of writing their letters, or of making extracts, who were known as ab epistulis, or ad manum, and later by the familiar title amanuenses. And we have also evidence of a class who from their proficiency in some sort of shorthand were known as notarii} Thus the younger Pliny tells us that when his uncle, the elder Pliny, went on a journey he had always a shorthand writer by his side with note-books and tablets, ready to take down any thoughts that occurred to him.5 And a more detailed account of the art is given by Plutarch in his description of the speech of Cato on the punishment of the Cati- linarian conspirators : ' This only of all Cato's speeches, it 1 Cf. Gardthausen, Griechische Palaeographie, Leipzig, 1879, P- 2I9' 2 Wessely, iizVz System altgriechischer Tachygraphie (in Denkschriften d. Kaiser I. Akademie d. Wissenschaften, xii v.), Vienna, 1896. 3 For a description of this book, see Foat, ' On Old Greek Tachy graphy,' in Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxi. (1901), p. 252 ft". 4Marquardt, Das Privatleben der Rb'mer, Leipzig, 1879, p. 802 f. Notarii were known later as Exceptores (Dig. xix. 2. 19 in fine). 5 Ep. iii. 5. 14 : ' In itinere. . . ad latus notarius cum libro et pugil- laribus': cf. ib. ix. 36. 2: 'Notarium voco, et die admisso, quae formaveram dicto.' 246 APPENDIX is said, was preserved ; for Cicero, the consul, had disposed, in various parts of the senate-house, several of the most expert and rapid writers (tow SiacpepovTas 6£vTyTi twv ypacpewv), whom he had taught to make figures (cryfieia) comprising numerous words in a few short strokes (ev fxiKpois Kal [3pd-)(eo-i tvttois ttoXXuiv ypafj.fj.drwv eyovTa Suvafj.iv) ; as up to that time they had not used those we call shorthand writers (o-yfj.eioypdJy ecrrt Ka\ e/c ryg yij? XaXei are wanting. NOTE E. GREEK PAPYRUS LETTERS. The following are the Greek texts of the Papyrus Letters quoted on pp. 88-92, with some additional notes. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, iv. p. 246, Acommen- No. 746. A.D. 1 6. datory letter. Oewv UpaKXelSyi rcoi aSeXdjm TrXeio-ra \aipeiv Kai vyiaiveiv. 'EpyUo^tXoy (ft} diro8[i]Sov$ aoi ryv emaroXyv [e]crr[i] ¦[••]¦ k[. .]/x . [-]ypi 5 [.Jeptou, Kai ypoxryo-ev fxe ypaijsai aoi. [ir^podjeperai e'xetv irpay/j-driov [ev ryi\ Ke/o/ce/xoui//. tovto ovv eav croi (j>a\i\vyrai o-irovSao-eis Kara ro Sikoiov. rd 6" raXXa o-eavrov eirifxeXov 10 Iv vyiaivy?. eppwcro. (eVouy) y Ti(3eptov Kattrapoy Heftao-Tov <&ai y. (Addressed)'UpaKXelSyi /3a(o-iXiKU)i) yp(afj.fj.arei) 'O^v(pvyxirov) Kwo7t(oXjtou). The Editors conjecture that Theon is perhaps the same as the writer of a similar letter of introduction, published 256 APPENDIX in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii. p. 292, No. 292 ( = Selections from the Greek Papyri 2, No. 1 4), of date c. A.D. 25. For a Christian example of an emo-roXy avo-rariKy, see the fourth century letter of the presbyter Leon, commend ing a brother-Christian to the priests and deacons of a local church, in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, viii. p. 266, No. 1 162. The concluding formula of pagan letters kppaxro is there expanded into eppwo-Qai vfj.a$ [ejt/^o/xe ( = at) ev K(vp'i)u> \Q~\(e)w, ' I pray for your health in the Lord God.' It is also interesting to notice that this signature is witnessed by a certain Emmanuel — 'Efj.fj.(avovy)X fj.dpr(vs ?). An official The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edd. Grenfell-Hunt, i. p. 101 ff., letter. >TNo. 45. A.D. 95. <&avias /cat 'Hpa/cXa[y] Kal Atoyevy? 6 /cat 'EjO,u(atoy) 01 ao-xoXovfj(evoi) roi/o KaTaXox(io-/J.ovg) roh ayopavo(/j.oi$) Xaipeiv. Aioyevovs rov UroXe/ualov TrapaKexwpypievov irapa Ta7T0Ta- 5 fjLuivos T/?y UroXe/xaiov rov KoXuXtc5(oy), fj-era Kvp'iov rov QvyarpiSovs UXovrdpxiov) rov UXovrapxov rov UXovrapxov, KaQ' 6fj.o(Xoyiav) yeyovvlav ry eveo-rwo-rj yfJ-ipa ryv vwapxovo-av ai'Tjf irepl Kcopiyv T£opa)/3(iv ?) 10 e/c TOt? M.evoiTiov KXypov KUTOlKlKy? y/Jy o-eiroipopov o-woplfjov e£ 6pQoyu>(viov) apovpav fxiav y/nio-v rpirov SwSe- kotov, Sio ypadjofxev vfj.eiv W eiSyre. 'eppoi(o-Qe). After the date there follows in a different hand the signature of one of the senders of the letter, the body of the document having been written doubtless by a clerk, HjOazcX(ay) o-eo-y(fj.eiajfj.ai). NOTE E 257 With this official letter may be compared a document registering certain cattle, which is reproduced from The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii. p. 195, No. 246, by Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 159 ff. The facsimile with which it is accompanied shows very clearly the difference in handwriting between the document itself and the signatures of the attesting officials. Berliner Griechische Urkunden, ii. p. 267, No. 6 1 5 . Family letters. Second century A.D. fotrtlS, ' h.fj.fj.mvov's TO) yXvKvrdrip irarpi x0"'/06'"' Ko/xtcra/uei/oy o-ov to eirio-roXiov Kai emyvovo-a, Sri QeHov QeXov- 5 toov Sieo-a>Qy$, exapyv 7roXXa' Kai avrye copay aipopfxyv evpwv eypayp-a croi ravovra ra ypd/nfj.a- ra o-irovSa^ovara Tcpoo-Kvvy- cre crai' raxvrepov ra eir'iyovra 10 epya (ppovrl^ere' edv y fxiKpa ri 'iirrj, ecrTe' eav croi eveKy /ca- XaQiv 6 KOfxi^ofJievos 0-01 to emo-ToXeiov, irefj.\yr\ui' ao-7rd£ov- re o-e 01 0-01 7rai/T[e]y kot bvofia, 15 do—7ra£ere o~e KeXe/j /cat oi avrov ¦wavrao. 'Eppai[o-]Qe 0-01 e[v]xo/u.ai. The surprising concords, which this and so many of the more illiterate documents of the time exhibit, have been appealed to as illustrating the peculiarities of the Greek of the writer of the Apocalypse. ' Apart from places,' says Professor Moulton, ' where he may be definitely translating a Semitic document, there is no reason to believe that his grammar would have been R 258 APPENDIX materially different had he been a native of Oxyrhynchus, assuming the extent of Greek education the same ' (Prolegomena?, p. 9). And to much the same effect Dean Armitage Robinson writes with reference to the writer's disregard of the primary rules of grammar : ' This is not ignorance in the ordinary sense : it is familiarity with a relaxed standard of speech, such as we find often enough in the professional letter-writers who indited the petitions and private correspondence of the Fayum ' (Journal of Theological Studies, x. p. I o). For Kar' bvofxa in the closing greetings of the above letter, obviously in the sense of ' individually,' ' one by one,' cf. 3 John 1 5 : ao-n-dXpv rove cpiXovs Kar bvofxa. A slave to Griechische Papyri im Museum des Oberhessischen Geschichtsvereins zu Giessen, edd. Kornemann-Meyer, i. No. 17. Time of Hadrian. Tayo 'A7r[oXX]eoi>/&>£ rwi KVpicol irXeio-ra Xaipeiv. Upb tow SXwv do-!rd£ofj.ai ere, Seo-irora, Kal evxofiai irdvrore irepl rys uytetay o-ov. 5 Hyeoi/tacra, Kvpie, ov fierpiooi, 'iva aKOvaw on evu>Qpevo~as, aXXa xaPl? Tofy 0eoiy Tracrt on ere 8ia »7/uay, et Se fxy, airoGvyaKOfiev 10 oVt ov fSXeirofxev ere /car)' y/uepav. "QipeXov el eSvva/xeQa werao-Qai Kai eXQeiv /cat irpoo-- Kvvyo-ai ere* dyccviuifjiev yap fxe[. .] eirov- erat ere. 'ficrTe SiaXXdyyQi ypieiv /ca[t x]e/i- ijsov e

aivovre$, ip-evSeo-Qai re ryv eiriypaqbyv. 'Iwdvvov yap ovk eivai 1 ' I do not think there is any other piece of pure criticism in the early Fathers to compare with it for style and manner' (Westcott, On the Canon of the New Testament'', p. 367, nl). NOTE F 263 Xeyovariv. . . . eyw Se aQeryo-at fj.ev ovk av roXfj.yo-aifj.1 to /3t/3Xiov, iroXXwv avrb Sia o-irovSijc exbvrwv a8eX5>v . . . Kai eivai ryv ypadjyv 'Icoavvov ravryv, ovk avrepco. ayiov fiev yap eivai nvos Kai Qeoirvevcrrov o-vvaivw, ov fxyv paSioos av 0-vvQoifJ.yv tovtov etvai tov airoo-roXov, rov viov ZefteSatov, rov dSeXqbov Ta/cco/3of, ov ro evayyeXiov to Kara 'Iwdvvyv eiriyeypafJ.jj.evov Kal y eiricrToXy y KaQoXiKy. reKfj.aipofJ.ai yap e/c re rod yQovs eKarepoov Kal rod rwv Xoycov e'lSovg /cat t/J? tov /3i/3Xiov Sie^ayioyijc Xeyop.evyi fxy rov avrov eivai Rat a7ro voyfxarwv Se Kai airo rwv py/maroov Kai T//y crwTa^ecoy avroov et'/coTtoy eTepoy ovtos 7rap' eKeivov viroXyot>Qyo-eTat. o-vvaSovcri fxev yap aXXyXots to evayyeXiov Kai y eirio-roXy, o/xotcoy re apxovrai. to p.ev yo~iv' Ey apxy V" 0 Xdyoy' y Se '0 yv air apx^y- • ¦ • e'xerai avrov, Kal rwv irpoQecrewv ovk aobio-rarai, Sia Se rSiv avrwv KedjaXaiwv Kai ovofxaroov irdvra Sie^epxeraC wv riva fiev yfieio m/vrojwos virofivy- 0-0/J.ev. o Se irpoaexSi'S evrvyxavwv evpyo-ei ev eKarepcp iroXXyv ryv £ooyv, iroXv to c/ieoy, dirorpoiryv rov cncoTOi/y, crwex>7 ryv aXyQeiav, ryv xaPlv> Trlv XaPav> Ttlv o~apKa Kai ro dlfia rov Kvpiov .... /cat oXcoy <5ta iravroov XapaKrypi^ovra? eva Kai tov avrov crvvopav rov re evayyeXiov Kai ry? eirio-roXyo xpwra irpoKeirai. aXXoio- rary Se Kal £evy irapa ravTa y airoKaXvyp-is, fxyre €pacrecoy ryv Siadjopav eari reKfiypao-Qai rov evayyeXiov Kai T/}y eTrto-ToXJyy 7rpoy T^y airoKaXv^siv. rd fiev yap ov /uovov airraio-T(os Kara ryv HjXXjjvcov vyv, dXXa Kai Xoyidorara Ta?y Xe^eo-i, ToFy cri/XXoytcr/jtoty, Taty o-vvraieo-i rys ep/jyveia? yeypairrai. iroXXov ye Sei J3ap/3apov riva pao-tv eiXydjevai Kai vpoqbereiav ovk 264 APPENDIX avrepS)' SiaXeKrov fxevroi Kai yXwo-aav ovk a/cpt/3co? eXXyvi^ovo-av avrov ftXeirw, dXX' ISicafiao-iv re (SapfSapiKols Xpwfievov, Kai irov Kai o-oXoiKi^ovra. direp ovk dvayKaiov vvv e/cXeyeti/' ovtJe yap eirio-Kwirrcov, fiy ns vofiio-rj, ravra elirov, aXXa fxovov ryv dvofioioryra SievQvvaiv rwv ypa(j>wv. ' Some before us have set aside and rejected the book [the Apocalypse of John] altogether, criticizing it chapter by chapter, and pronouncing it without sense or argument, and maintaining that the title is fraudulent. For they say that it is not the work of John. . . . But I could not venture to reject the book, as many brethren hold it in high esteem. . . . And that this book is the work of one John, I will not deny. For I fully admit that it is the work of a holy and inspired man. But I should- not readily admit that he was the Apostle, the son of Zebedee, the brother of James, by whom the Gospel of John and the Catholic Epistle were written. For I con clude from the character of both [writings], and the form of the language, and the general construction of the book [of the Revelation] that [the John there mentioned] is not the same. . . . And from the thoughts too, and from the words and their colloca tion, it may be reasonably conjectured that this one is different from that one [i.e. the writer of the Apocalypse is different from the writer of the Gospel and the Epistle]. For the Gospel and the Epistle agree with each other, and begin in like manner. The one says, " In the beginning was the Word " ; the other, " That which was from the beginning." ... He is consistent with himself, and does not depart from his purposes, but discusses everything under the same heads and names ; some of which we will briefly recall. Any one who examines carefully will find the phrases, " the life," NOTE F 265 " the light," " turning from darkness," frequently occurring in both ; also continually, " truth," " grace," " joy," " the flesh and blood of the Lord." . . . In fact, it is plainly to be seen that one and the same character marks the Gospel and the Epistle throughout. But the Apocalypse is different from these writings and foreign to them ; not touching, nor in the least bordering upon them ; almost, so to speak, without even a syllable in common with them. . . . Moreover, it can also be shown that the diction of the Gospel and of the Epistle differs from that of the Apocalypse. For they were written not only without error as regards the Greek language, but also most artistically in their expressions, in their reasonings, and in the arrangements of explanations. They are far indeed from betraying any barbarism or solecism, or any vulgarism whatever. For the writer had, as it seems, both the requisites of dis course, — that is, the gift of knowledge and the gift of expression — as the Lord had bestowed them both upon him. I do not deny that the other writer saw a revelation and received knowledge and prophecy. I perceive, however, that his dialect and language are not accurate Greek, but that he uses barbarous idioms, and, in some places, solecisms. It is un necessary to point these out here, for I would not have any one think that I have said these things in a spirit of ridicule — let no man think it — but only with the purpose of showing clearly the difference between the writings.' NOTE G. THE OXYRHYNCHUS 'SAYINGS OF JESUS.' The 'Sayings In i 897, when Dr. Grenfell and Dr. Hunt began exca- o jesus. yating at Oxyrhynchus, they discovered in a mound amongst a number of other Greek Papyri, the leaf of a papyrus codex, containing what purported to be eight Sayings of Jesus. The idea of new Sayings of Jesus was not in itself strange. It is suggested by various state ments in the Gospels, such as Luke i. 1-4, John xx. 30 f., as well as by the existence in early Christian literature and tradition of a member of so-called Agrapha.1 But here there was tangible evidence of a Collection of these Sayings, which, as the leaf could not be dated later than the beginning of the third century, probably ran back to the middle of the second century, and possibly even to the first century. All manner of questions were at once raised as to the source and consequent authority of the Sayings, and interest in them was still further quickened by a fresh discovery of a similar character at Oxyrhynchus in 1903. Unlike the earlier collection, however, which, as we have seen, formed the leaf of a papyrus book, the five new Sayings were written on the back of a survey list of various pieces of land, and were prefaced by an Intro duction or Heading to this effect: ' These are the (wonder- 1 For a convenient collection of these, see C. G. Griffinhoofe, The Unwritten Sayings of Christ, Cambridge and London, 1903. NOTE G 267 ful ?) words which Jesus the living (lord) spake to J . . . and Thomas . . .' It is impossible to enter here into any discussion on the true character of these two sets of Sayings, which may well have formed originally parts of one collection, but there seems to be no good reason to doubt that, while they show traces of the sub- Apostolic environment out of which they sprang, they contain a distinct residuum of the Lord's teaching, rescued from the floating tradition of the time. The deep interest, in any case, of the Sayings will appear from the Editors' reconstruction and translation of the two first of the new Sayings (see Plate IV.). ' Jesus saith, Let not him who seeks . . . cease until he finds, and when he finds he shall be aston ished ; astonished he shall reach the kingdom, and having reached the kingdom he shall rest. ' Jesus saith, (Ye ask ? who are those) that draw us (to the kingdom, if) the kingdom is in Heaven ? . . . the fowls of the air, and all beasts that are under the earth or upon the earth, and the fishes of the sea, (these are they which draw) you, and the King dom of Heaven is within you ; and whosoever shall know himself shall find it. (Strive therefore?) to know yourselves, and ye shall be aware that ye are the sons of the (almighty?) Father; (and?) ye shall know that ye are in (the city of God ?), and ye are (the city ?).' The two collections of Sayings have been edited by the Literature. discoverers as separate publications for the Graeco- Roman Branch of the Egyptian Exploration Fund under the titles AOriA IHZOY (Sayings of our Lord), 2s. nett or 6d. nett, and New Sayings of fesus and Fragment of a Lost Gospel from Oxyrhynchus, is. nett, both at the Oxford University Press. They also appeared in Oxyrhynchus Papyri, i. p. 1 ff. and iv. p. 1 ff. 268 APPENDIX ' Of the literature to which they have given rise in this country it is sufficient to notice, Two Lectures on the ' Sayings offesus,' by Professors W. Lock and W. Sanday (Oxford, 1897, is. 6d. nett) with a useful Bibliography, an important article on the interpretation of the New- Sayings by Professor H. B. Swete in The Expository Times, xv. p. 488 ff, and two publications by Dr. Charles Taylor, The Oxyrhynchus Logia and the Apocryphal Gospels (Ox ford, 1899, is. 6d. nett) and The Oxyrhynchus Sayings of fesus (Oxford, 1905, 2s. nett). A pamphlet by Professor Harnack, Uber die fiingst entdeckten Spriiche fesu (Freiburg, i. B., 1897), was trans lated in The Expositor, V. vi. pp. 321 ff, 401 ff. Those who desire to see the use to which the Sayings may be turned for homiletic purposes may consult such books as fesus Saith, by J. Warschauer (London, no date), and The Newly-found Words of fesus, by W. Garrett Horder (London, 1904). NOTE H. PAPIAS AND IRENAEUS ON THE ORIGIN OF THE GOSPELS. The testimony of Papias as to the origin of the Gospels Papias of St. Mark and St. Matthew is very familiar, but in view c' A'D' I3°' of its great importance and the references made to it in the Lectures, it may be well to give the passage in full, as it has been preserved for us in Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History. Kat otXXay Se ry ISia ypaoros eKreQeirai Sid rovrwv Kal rovQ' b irpeo-/3urepos e'Xeye' Map/coy fiev epfiy- vevrys Herpov yevofievos, ocra efivyfjovevo-ev, aKpi/3ws eypw^jsev, ov fxevroi ra^ei, rd iiiro rov Kvpiov y XeyQevra y irpaxQevra. ovre yap yKOvcrev rov Kvpiov ovre irapyKO- XovQycrev avnp, iicrrepov Se, toy eyv, LTeVpco' oy 7rpoy Tay x/°eia? eiroieiro ras SiSacrKaXias, dXX' ovx ioo-irep avvra^iv rwv KvpiaKwv iroiov/xevos Xoyicov,1 ware ovSev yfxaprev Map/coy ovtws evia ypd\fras toy direfj.vyfxovevcrev. evos yap eiroiyo-aro irpovoiav, rov fxySev &v yKovae irapaXiireiv y \[revo-ao-Qai n ev avrois- 1 v.l. \byuv. 270 APPENDIX ravra fiev ovv io-ropyrai rus Hairta irepi rov Map/coi/ •Kepi Se rov M.arQaiov ravr elpyrai M.arQaios fiev oSv E/3pai'<5t SiaXeKTip ra Xoyia crvve- ra^saro, ypfxyvevcrev S' avra toy yv Svvaros e/cacrToy. ' Papias also gives in his own work other accounts of the words of the Lord on the authority of Aristion who has been mentioned above, and traditions of the Presbyter John. To these we refer those who are fond of learning, but for our present purpose we must add to the words of his, which have already been quoted, a tradition which he sets forth regarding Mark who wrote the Gospel. It is in the following terms — And the Presbyter said this also : Mark having once acted as interpreter (or catechist) of Peter 1 wrote down accurately, though not indeed in order,2 all that he re membered of what was either spoken or done by the Lord. For he neither heard the Lord, nor followed Him, but afterwards, as I said, [attached himself to] Peter, who used to adapt his instructions to the needs [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord's oracles.3 Mark then fell into no error, while he thus wrote down some things just as he recalled them to mind : for he made it his one care, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, or to state anything falsely in [his narrative of] them. 'That yev6/j.evos refers to an office or relationship that was past is rendered very probable by the regular usage of the term in the papyri, e.g. Oxy. Pap. i. p. 82, No. 38 ut (a.d. 49-50) ( = Selections, p. 53)j ^ T°v yevop.ivov tov co/toO arpaTTfyov Jlacriavos, 'before Pasion, who was ex-strategus of the nome.' 2 For an interesting attempt to find in -rd£« the thought not so much of chronological, as of 'rhetorical order, that ordering which will produce a satisfactory and readable work,' see F. H. Colson in the fournal of Theological Studies, xiv. p. 62 ff. 3 Or, discourses (\67wc). NOTE H 271 These then are the things narrated by Papias regarding Mark. And regarding Matthew these things are said — ' So then Matthew composed the oracles in the Hebrew tongue, and each one interpreted them as he was able.' The question as to the exact identity of the Presbyter identity of the John, to whom Papias refers as his authority for the Prest>yter- foregoing statements regarding Mark and Matthew, is a very intricate one. But there is not a little to be said for the view that there was only one John at Ephesus who was both Apostle and Presbyter.1 Whether, however, this be so or not, it will be at once recognized how much added interest is given to the state ments, if we can refer them in the last instance to the author of the Fourth Gospel. On this point Dr. Sanday writes as follows in the article ' Bible ' in Hastings' Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, ii. (Edinburgh, 1909), p. 576 : ' The present writer fully believes that the two im portant extracts from the work of Papias preserved by Eusebius relate, the one to our extant Gospel of St. Mark, and the other to the second document dis closed by criticism which in the extract is referred to the Apostle St. Matthew. He believes that the authority quoted for these statements is none other than the writer of the Fourth Gospel, the John who played such a leading part at Ephesus towards the end of the first century A.D. He would observe that the statements made bear a great stamp of verisimilitude, just because they are so little obvious and not at all such as could be inferred from a superficial study of the Gospels. The statement about St. Mark in particular points to criticisms upon that Gospel (especially as to its want of completeness and chronological order) that we can understand being made at an early stage in the history 1 Cf. most recently Dom Chapman, John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel, Oxford, 191 1. 272 APPENDIX of the Gospel, and by no means so well later. It is interesting to note the calm matter-of-fact way in which the Fourth Evangelist (if it were really he) speaks of his predecessors' work ; and we believe that it throws a welcome light upon the composition of his own Gospel.' irenaeus The evidence of Irenaeus, so far as it refers to St. 11 °- Mark and St. Matthew, is obviously based on Papias; but it raises new points of interest with reference to the other two Gospels, as well as to the early recognition of the four Gospels as a whole. The following extracts are taken from Harvey's edition of Irenaeus' great work Adversus Haereses ; but one or two emendations in the Greek text suggested by Hort have been introduced. For these last see Souter, Text and Canon of the New Testament, p. 1 70 ff. Adv. Haer. '~EnreiSy yap reo-o-apa KXifiara rov Koo-fiov ev w eo-fiev, Kal reo-o-apa KaQoXiKa irvevfiara, Kareo-iraprai Se y e/c/cX^ena eiri iraarys rys yi?y, o-rvXos re Kai o-rypiy/xa e/e/cXj/cnay ro evayyeXiov Kal irvevfia feo/yy' et/coy Teercrapay exeiv avryv o-TvXovs, iravraxoQev irveovras rys av avepov on b rcov dirdvrwv rexv'irys Ao'yoy, 6 KaQy/ievos eirl rwv x€pov/3lfi /cat avvex^v rd iravra, (pavepcoQeis rots avQpcinrois, eSaiKev yfiiv rerpafiopipov ro evayyeXiov, evt Se irvev/xan o-vveyofxevov. ' For since there are four quarters of the world in which we live, and four universal winds, and the Church is scattered over all the earth, and the Gospel is the pillar and ground of the Church and the breath of life, it is likely that it should have four pillars, breath ing immortality from all sides, and kindling afresh the life of men. Whence it is evident that the Word, the artificer of all things, Who sitteth upon the Cherubim and holdeth all things together, having been made manifest to men, gave us the Gospel under a four-fold form, but held together by one Spirit.' in. n. 11. NOTE H 273 o fiev Sy MarQaios ev tois 'E/3pa/o/y ry ISta SiaXeKrw Adv. Haer. avToov Kat yparoy rys avo/nias Kai rys airio-nas viro rov oaravdv eo-nv, b fiy ecoc ra viro rwv irvevfidrwv aKaQapra ryv aXyQetav rov Qeov KaraXafteo-Qat Svvafiiv. Sia rovro airoKaXv\Jsov o-ov ryv SiKaioarv- vyv ySy. eKeivoi eXeyov ru> Xptcrrco. Kai o XpterToy eKeivois irpoo-eXeyev' on ireirXypw- rai b opos rwv ercov rys efovertay rov oarava, dXXa eyyi^ei dXXa Siva [sc. Seiva], Kai v- irep 3>v eyto dfiapryo-avTwv irapeSoQyv el els Qavarov, iva viroo-rpe\jsaio-iv els ryv dXyQeiav Kal fiyKeri dfiapryo-ooo-iv' 'iva ryv ev ra> ovpavte irvevfiariKyv Kai a- ipQaprov rys SiKaioo-vvys S6£av KXypovofiyo-wo~iv. aXXa iropevQev- res ktX. ' And they defended themselves, saying : " This world of lawlessness and of unbelief is under Satan, which does not suffer those unclean things that are under the dominion of spirits to comprehend the true power of God. On this account reveal Thy righteousness now." They said (these things) to Christ. And Christ replied to them : " There has been fulfilled the term of years of the authority of Satan, but other dreadful things are drawing nigh, even (to those) for the sake of whom as sinners I was delivered up to death, in order that they might return to the truth and sin no more ; in order that they might inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness which is in heaven " [Mark xvi. 15]. But go . . .' 280 APPENDIX General character of the new ending. Into the different questions which this ending raises, we are unable to enter at present. It must be enough to say that there is no better reason for regarding it as authentic, in the sense of its having formed part of the original Marcan Gospel, than was the case with the longer and shorter endings previously noted. Rather from the natural way in which the new words fit in between vv. 14 and 15, they would seem to have formed part of a still longer recension, and for some unknown reason to have been excised from the ending in general use. Bibliography. Till the completion of the facsimile edition, those who desire further information regarding the manuscripts as a whole may be referred to the articles by Sanders in the Biblical World (Chicago), Feb. 1908 and May, 1909, both with plates, and in the American fournal of Archaeology , xii. (1908) p. 49 ff. and xiii. (1909) p. 130 ff, both again with plates ; to the articles by E. J. Goodspeed in the Biblical World, March, 1908, and in the American fournat of Theology, xiii. (1909) p. 597 ff; to the notices by Harnack and Schmidt in the Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1908, p. 168 ff. and p. 359 ff; and to the accounts by Jacquier, Histoire des Livres du Nouveau Testament, iii. (Paris, 1908) p. 338 ff., and by Oesterley, Our Bible Text, London, 1909, p. 32 ff. The text of the new Marcan ending can be very con veniently studied in Two New Gospel Fragments, ed. H. B. Swete (Cambridge : Deighton, Bell and Co., 1908, price 6d.), p. 9 ff, being the English edition of Lietzmann's Kleine Texte fiir Theologische Vorlesungen und Ubungen, No. 31. NOTE J. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO PETER. THOUGH the Akhmim fragment was discovered in the Gospel of winter of 1886-87, it was not till November, 1892, that Peter' the text was first published by M. Bouriant in the Memoires publies par les membres de la Mission Archeo- logique Francaise au Caire, IX. i. (Paris : E. Leroux). Almost immediately afterwards, a tentatively corrected text was issued in this country by Professor Swete, which, after revision, was reprinted along with a valuable Intro duction and Notes in The Akhmim Fragment of the Apocryphal Gospel of St. Peter (London, 1893). From this edition, with Dr. Swete's kind consent, I have taken the following transcription and translation of the passage shown in the facsimile, Plates IX., X. IX. Ty Se wkti y eireU)o-Kev y KvpiaKy, vXao-o-ovrcov rwv o-rpanwrwv dva Svo Svo Kara (ppovpav, fieyaXy cf>wvy eyevero ev ru> ovpavco Kai eiSov avoixQevras rovs ovpavovs Kal Svo dvSpas] KareXQovras eKeiQev, iroXv obeyyos e'xovras, Kai eyyio-avras Tip ra. 0 Se XiQos eKeivos b fSefSXyfievos eiri ry Qvpa a eavrov KvXicrQeis eirexu>pio-e irapa fiepos, Kai b Tac/>oy yvolyy Kai afiipbrepoi oi veavio-Koi elo-yXQov. ISovres ovv oi o-rpanwrai eKeivoi e£virvio-av tov Kevrvpiwva Kal rovs irpearfivrepovs, irapyo-av yap /cat avrol (pvXdo-- o-ovres' Kal i^yyov/ieveov avroov a elSov, iraXiv bpwo-iv e£eXQ6vras airo rod raqbov rpeis dvSpas,1 Kal rovs Svo tov JCf. Dan. iii. 24 f . . 282 APPENDIX eva viropQovvras, Kai aravpov aKoXovQovvra avrois' Kai rwv fiev Svo ryv KeipaXyv xwP°^wvys yKovov e/c twv ovpavwv Xeyovays '^Kypv^as rois Koificofievois'1 Kai viraKoy yKOvero airo rov oravpov [6]Tt Nat.2 X. Hvveo-KeirrovTO oSv aXXyXois eKeivoi aireXQeiv Kai evipavlo-ai ravra rip UeiXanp. Kai en Siavoov/iievwv avriiov aivovrai iraXiv avoixQevres oi ovpavoi Kai avQpooiros ns KareXQoov Kal elaeXQwv els ro fivyfia- ravra ISovres oi irepi rov Kevrvpioova vvktos eo—wevo-av irpos netXctTOJ>, aao-iv, yfj-iv 6v lovSaiwv Kai XiQaaQyvai. e/ce- Xevo-ev ovv o LTetXaYoy rip Kevrvploovi Kai rois o-rparivyrais fiySev eiireiv. XI. 'OpQpov Se rys KvpiaKys3 M.apia/x y M.aySaXyvy, fiaQyrpia i rov Kvpiov ((j>o(3ovfievy Sia rovs 'lovSaiovs, eireiSy eobXeyovro \yirb rys bpyys, ovk eiroiycrev eirl rip fivy/nan rov Kvpiov a elu>Qeo-av iroieiv ai yvvawes eirl rois airoQvyo-Kovo-i /cat Toty aya7rco,uei/oty avrais), Xaftovo-a fieQ' eavrys ras c/>tXay yXQe eiri ro fivyfieiov birov yv reQeis- IX. Now on the night when the Lord's Day was drawing on, as the soldiers kept guard by two and two in a watch, there was a great voice in heaven, 1 Cf. i Pet. iii. 18. 2 Cf. 2 Cor. i. 20. 3 Cf. Rev. i. 10. * Cf. Acts ix. 36. NOTE J 283 and they saw the heavens opened, and two men] descend from thence with much light and draw nigh unto the tomb. And the stone which had been cast at the door rolled away of itself and made way in part, and the tomb was opened, and both the young men entered in. The soldiers, therefore, when they saw it, awakened the centurion and the elders (for they were also there keeping watch) ; and as they told the things that they had seen, again they see three men coming forth from the tomb, two of them supporting the other, and a cross following them ; and the head of the two reached to heaven, but that of Him who was led by them overpassed the heavens. And they heard a voice from the heavens, saying, Thou didst preach to them that sleep ; and a response was heard from the cross, Yea. X. They took counsel therefore with one another to go and shew these things unto Pilate. And while they yet thought on this, the heavens again appeared to open, and a man descended and entered into the sepulchre. When they saw this, they of the cen turion's company hastened by night to Pilate, leaving the tomb which they were guarding, and told all that they had seen, greatly distressed and saying, Truly He was the Son of God. Pilate answered and said, I am clean from the blood of the Son of God, but this was your pleasure. Then they all came near and besought him, and entreated him to command the centurion and the soldiers to say nothing as to the things which they had seen ; for it is expedient for us (they said) to be guilty of a very great sin before God, and not to fall into the hands of the Jews and be stoned. Pilate therefore commanded the centurion and the soldiers to say nothing. 284 APPENDIX XI. Now at dawn on the Lord's Day Mary Magdalene, a female disciple of the Lord — afraid by reason of the Jews, forasmuch as they were inflamed [with wrath, she had not done at the sepulchre of the Lord what women are wont to do for those who die and who are dear to them — took with her her female friends, and came to the sepulchre where He was laid. It is impossible here to discuss the many questions which the Gospel according to Peter suggests. But as illustrating its peculiarities, attention may be drawn in c. ix. to the mention of the three men of supernatural height who issued from the tomb, the most majestic being supported by the other two ; to the personification of the cross ; and to the preaching in Hades : in c. x. to the writer's marked desire to free Pilate from blame, in order to emphasize the guilt of the Jews : and, in c. xi., to the ascribing to fear the delay in the women's visit to the tomb. Elsewhere the docetic character of the Gospel, to which Serapion refers in its criticism of it (Eus. H.E. vi. 1 2) comes out very clearly, notably in the loud cry attributed to the Lord upon the cross, 'H Svvafiis fiov, y Svvafiis fiov, KareXei^fds fie, ' My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me ' (c. v.). The Divine Christ, that is, was ' taken up,' while the Human Christ remained upon the cross. The exact date of the Gospel is uncertain, but it may be placed about A.D. 150. Literature. For further information regarding the Gospel, the English student may be referred to The Gospel according to Peter, and the Revelation of Peter, by J. Armitage Robinson1 and Montague Rhodes James (London, 1892), 1 A revised edition of Dean Armitage Robinson's translation of the Gospel fragment has since appeared in the Additional Volume of the Ante-Nicene Christian Library (Edinburgh, 1897), p. "ji. NOTE J 285 and to A popular account of the newly -recovered Gospel of S. Peter, by J. Rendel Harris (London, 1893), as well as to articles by J. O. F. Murray in The Expositor, VII. iv. p. 50 ff, and by V. H. Stanton in The fournal of Theo logical Studies, ii. (1901), p. iff. Amongst the most important studies of the Gospel by foreign scholars are Evangelii secundum Petrum et Petri Apocalypseos quae supersunt . . . , by A. Lods, Paris, 1892 ; Bruchstucke des Evangeliums und der Apokalypse des Petrus (being Texte u. Untersuchungen, ix. 2) by A. Harnack, Leipzig, 1893 j Das Evangelium des Pefrus, by Theodor Zahn, Erlangen u. Leipzig, 1893 ; and L'Avangile de Pierre et les F\vangiles Canoniques, by A. Sabatier, Paris, 1893. NOTE K. THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT ON THE CANON. Muratorian This fragment of a Roman second century canon was first published by its discoverer Muratori in his Antiqui- tates Italicae Medii Aevi (Milan, 1740), iii. p. 851 ff., and has since been frequently revised and reprinted. Full information regarding it will be found in S. P. Tregelles, Canon Muratorianus, Oxford, 1867; in Westcott, On the Canon 5, Appendix C ; and in Zahn, Geschichte des Neutest. Kanons, ii. p. iff, and Grundriss2, p. ^6ff. The results of a new examination of the Codex made by the Rev. Ji. S. .Buchanan jn 1906 will be found in the fournal of Theological Studies, viii. (1907),, p. 537 ff. I am indebted to Professor Zahn for the Latin text of the Canon printed below, and to Professor Gwatkin for the accompanying translation from his Selections from Early Writers (London, 1905), p. 83 ff. quibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit tertio euangelii librum secundo lucan lucas iste medicus post ascensum [XPi] cum eo paulus quasi ut iuris studiosum S secundum adsumsisset numeni suo ex opinione conscribset dhrn tamen nee ipse uidit in came et ide prout asequi potuit ita et ad nativitate iohannis incipet dicere quarti euangeliorum iohannis ex decipolis NOTE K 287 10 cohortantibus condescipulis et eps suis dixit conieiunate mihi odie triduo et quid cuique fuerit reuelatum alterutrum nobis ennarremus eadem nocte reue latum andreae ex apostolis ut recognis 15 centibus cuntis iohannis suo nomine cuncta discriberet et ideo licit uaria sin culis euangeliorum libris principia doceantur nihil tamen differt creden tium fidei cum uno ac principali spu de 20 clarata sint in omnibus omnia de natiui tate de passione de ressurrectione de conuersatione cum decipulis suis ac de gemino eius aduentu primo in humilitate dispectus quod fo 25 it secundum potestate regali . . . pre clarum quod foturum est quid ergo mirum si iohannes tarn constanter sincula etia. in epistulis suis proferam dicens in semeipsu quae uidimus oculis 3° nostris et auribus audiuimus et manus nostrae palpauerunt haec scripsimus uobis sic enim non solum uisurem sed et auditorem. sed et scriptore omnium mirabiliu dhi per ordi nem profetetur acta aute omniu apostolorum 35 sub uno libro scribta sunt lucas obtime theofi le conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passione petri euidenter declarat sed et profectione pauli ab ur be ad spania. proficiscentis epistulae autem 4° pauli quae a quo loco uel qua ex causa directe sint volentibus intellegere ipse declarant primfi omnium corintheis scysmae heresis in terdicens deinceps b callactis circumcisione romanis aute ordine scripturarum sed et 45 principium earum . . . esse XPm intimans 288 APPENDIX prolexius scripsit de quibus sincolis neces se est ad nobis desputari cum ipse beatus apostolus paulus sequens prodecessoris sui iohannis ordine non nisi nomenatl sempte 5° ecclesiis scribat ordine tali a corenthios prima, ad efesius seconda ad philippinses ter tia ad colosensis quarta ad calatas quin ta ad tensaolenecinsis sexta ad romanos septima uerum corintheis et thesaolecen 55 sibus licet pro correbtione iteretur una tamen per omnem orbem terrae ecclesia deffusa esse denoscitur et iohannis eni in a pocalebsy licet septe eccleseis scribat tamen omnibus dicit veru ad fllemonem una 6o et at titu una et ad tymotheu duas pro affec to et dilectione in honore tamen eclesiae ca tholice in ordinatione eclesiastice discepline scificate sunt, fertur etiam ad laudecenses alia ad alexandrinos pauli no 65 mine fincte ad heresem marcionis et alia plu ra quae in catholicam eclesiam recepi non potest fel enim cum melle misceri non con cruit epistola sane iude et superscrictio iohannis duas in catholica habentur et sapi 7° entia ab amicis salomonis in honore -ipsius scripta apocalapse. etiam iohanis et pe tri tantum recipimus quam quidam ex nos tris legi in eclesia nolunt pastorem uero nuperrim e temporibus nostris in urbe 75 roma herma conscripsit sedente cathe tra urbis romae aeclesiae pio spe fratre eius et ideo legi eum quide oportet se pu plicare vero in eclesia populo neqe inter profetas completum numero neqe inter 8o apostolos in fine temporum potest arsinoi autem seu ualentini uel mitiadis NOTE K 289 nihil in totum recipemus qui etiam nouu psalmorum librum marcioni conscripse runt una cum basilide assianom catafry 85 cum constitutorem. Fragment of Muratori on the Canon. '. . . but at some he was present, and so he set them down. - The third book of jthe Gospel, that according to Luke, was compiled in his own name in order by Luke the physician, _when after Christ's ascension j Paul had taken 5 him to be with him like a student of law. Yet neither did he see the Lord in the flesh ; and he too, as he was able to ascertain [events, so set them down]. So he began his story from the birth of John. The fourth of the Gospels [was written by] John, one of the disciples. When exhorted by his fellow-disciples 10 and bishops, he said, ' Fast with me this day for three days ; and what may be revealed to any of us, let us relate it to one another.' The same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John was to write all things in his own name, and they were all to certify. 15 And therefore, though various elements are taught in the several books of the Gospels, yet it makes no difference to the faith of believers, since by one guiding Spirit all things are declared in all of them concerning the Nativity, 20 the Passion, the Resurrection, the conversation with his disciples and his two comings, the first in lowliness and contempt, which has come to pass, the second glorious with royal power, which is to come. 25 What marvel therefore if John so firmly sets forth each statement in his Epistle too, saying of himself, ' What we have seen with our eyes and heard with our ears and our 30 hands have handled, these things we have written to you ' ? For so he declares himself not an eyewitness and 290 APPENDIX a hearer only, but a writer of all the marvels of the Lord in order.The Acts however of all the Apostles are written in 35 one book. Luke puts it shortly to the most excellent Theophilus, that the several things were done in his own presence, as he also plainly shows by leaving out the passion of Peter, and also the departure of Paul from town on his journey to Spain. The Epistles however of Paul themselves make plain to those who wish to understand it, what Epistles were 40 sent by him, and from what place, and for what cause. He wrote at some length first of all to the Corinthians, forbidding schisms and heresies ; next to the Galatians, forbidding circumcision ; then to the Romans, impressing 45 on them the plan of the Scriptures, and also that Christ is the first principle of them, concerning which severally it is [not] necessary for us to discuss, since the blessed Apostle Paul himself, following the order of his predecessor John, writes only by name to seven churches in the fol- 5° lowing order — to the Corinthians a first, to the Ephesians a second, to the Philippians a third, to the Colossians a fourth, to the Galatians a fifth, to the Thessalonians a sixth, to the Romans a seventh ; whereas, although for the sake of admonition there is a second to the Corinthians 55 and to the Thessalonians, yet one Church is recognized as being spread over the entire world. For John too in the Apocalypse, though he writes to seven churches, yet speaks to all. Howbeit to Philemon one, to Titus_ one, 60 and to Timothy, two were put in writing from personal inclination and attachment, to be in honour however with the Catholic Church for the ordering of the ecclesiastical mode of life. There is- current also one to the Laodicenes, another to the Alexandrians, [both] forged in Paul's name 65 to suit the heresy of Marcion, and several others, which cannot be received into the Catholic Church ; for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. NOTE K 291 The Epistle of Jude no doubt, and the couple bearing the name of John, are accepted in the Catholic [Church] ; and the Wisdom written by the friends of Solomon in his 7° honour. /The T^pocalypse^lso of John^ancV"of Peter .[one Epistle, which] only we receive; [therePis also a second] which some of our friends will not have read in the Church^J But the Shepherd was written quite lately in our times by Hermas, while his brother Pius, the bishop, was sitting in the chair of the church of the city of Rome ; 75 and therefore it ought indeed to be read, but it cannot to the end of time be publicly read in the Church to the people, either among the prophets, who are complete in number, or among the Apostles. 80 But of Valentinus the Arsinoite and his friends we receive nothing at all ; who have also composed a long new book of Psalms ; together with Basilides and the Asiatic founder of the Montanists.' NOTE L. THE ORDER OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS. Earliest n.t. We have seen that during the greater part of the period of which we have been treating the different New Testa ment writings were circulated either singly or in small groups (cf. p. 204). Of these last the most important were EYATTEAION, 'the Gospel,' and AnOSTOAOS, ' the Apostle,' the separate books in these collections being provided not only with their own titles, but also frequently with individual prefaces or prologues.1 Gradually, however, the practice began of combining the scattered groups into one or more volumes. And in such a process it was inevitable that the order in which these groups and their constituent members were arranged should vary greatly. No good purpose would be served by reproducing here the elaborate tables or lists of these varying orders which have been drawn up. The curious reader will find full particulars in the literature mentioned below. But it may be of interest to indicate very generally a few of the principal facts, especially in so far as they bear upon the order of books to which we are accustomed in our English New Testament. 'The very interesting Latin Marcionite Prologues to St. Paul's Epistles can now be conveniently studied in Souter, Text and Canon of the New Testament, p. 205 ff. : cf. also the later editions of Burkitt's Gospel History and its Transmission. NOTE L 293 1. We begin with the main groups or sections into 1. Order of which our New Testament writings as a whole fall. And o^n.t™"^ here the Gospels are almost invariably placed first, owing Q"slpnefss' to the nature of their contents and the honour paid to their authors. Any change in this position, as when Chrysostom places them after the Pauline Epistles, was doubtless due to liturgical reasons. The desire to keep the historical books together ensured Acts. that as a rule the book of the Acts of the Apostles followed the Gospels, though in one of our oldest and most important codices, the Codex Sinaiticus, it is placed after the Pauline Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews.1 Contrary to the order to which we are accustomed in Catholic our English version, the Catholic Epistles are found pis immediately after the Book of Acts and before the Pauline Epistles in almost all our Greek manuscripts, partly, doubtless, as the writings of the principal Apostles, and partly because of their encyclical or general character.2 And this place, as is well known, continues to be assigned to them in many recent critical editions of the Greek New Testament, such as those of Tischendorf or of Westcott and Hort. Then come the Pauline Epistles, and finally the Apoca- Pauline lypse, whose place would be determined by the difficulty Apocalypse. 1 It may be noted that Acts occupies the same place in the earliest printed Greek Testament, A.D. 15 14. This Testament formed part of the great Complutensian Polyglott of Cardinal Ximenes, and was not actually published till the completion of that work in 1520, four years after the issue of Erasmus's edition of the Greek New Testament (Basle, 1 5 16). z 3 John is the only one of the seven which does not fall under this last category, and it is quite possible -that had it not been for the habit of inscribing it along with its companion 2 John on one roll with the rest of the group, these two short Epistles might have been lost to us altogether. 294 APPENDIX 2. Order of individual writings in groups. Gospels. it had found in winning acceptance in certain quarters, as well as by its own inherent character.1 2. When we pass to the individual constituents of these different groups, the orders in which they are found are almost bewildering in their variety, nor in many cases is it possible any longer to discover the principles on which the scribes acted. But here again the order of the Gospels to which we are accustomed — Matthew, Mark, Luke, John — is the prevailing one in nearly all the Greek and Syriac manu scripts, and rests apparently on various early traditions regarding their origin and authorship.2 Of other arrangements, perhaps the most interesting is that of Codex Bezae and certain Old Latin manuscripts, where Matthew and John come before Luke and Mark, apparently on the ground that the Gospels of Apostles should precede the Gospels of followers of Apostles.3 The precedence assigned to Luke's Gospel over Mark's may be due simply to its greater length. On the other hand, in a Canon of unknown date, bound up in the sixth century Codex Claromontanus of St. Paul's Epistles, Mark comes before Luke. 1 Cf. p. 223 f. In the so-called Decretum Gelasianum, the Apocalypse comes after the Pauline and before the Catholic Epistles, but this Decree, instead of' belonging to the end of the fourth century as was formerly believed, is now assigned to the sixth century : see E. von Dobschutz, Das Decretum Gelasianum de Libris Recipiendis et Non Recipiendis (Leipzig, 1912), cited by Souter, Text and Canon, pp. 218, 229 f. 2Cf. e.g. Irenaeus, adv. Haer. iii. 1. 2 (as in Additional Note H), and the views of Origen, as stated in Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. vi. 25. 3-6, who says that he has learned by tradition (ev irapaSoo-ei) that Matthew wrote first, then Mark as Peter instructed him (is n^rpos v-qy1io pyQyfiev KaQws irapeSoarav rois irarpaaiv oi air' upxys avroirrai Kai viryperai yevofievoi rod Xoyov, e'So£e Kafiol irporpa- irevn irapa yvyaiwv aSeXfpwv Kai fiaQovn dvwQev, e£ys eKQeo-Qai ra Kavovi^ofieva Kai irapaSoQevra irio-revQevra re Qeia eivai f3ij3Xia, 'iva eKaaros, el fiev yiraryQy, Karayvw rwv irXavyo-dvrwv, b Se KaQapos Siafieivas XaLPV toAiv viro fit fivyo-KOfievos- ' Eo-Tt rolvvv T^y fiev iraXaias SiaQyKys /3i/3Xta ru> apiQfiw ra irdvra eiKoeriSvo JCf. Luke i. 1-4. 298 APPENDIX Td Se rys Kaivys iraXiv ovk OKvyreov eiireiv. ecrri Se ravra' EvayyeXia reo-o-apa Kara M.arQaiov, Kara M.dpKOv, Kara AovKav, Kara 'licdvvyv. EZVa fiera ravra Updgeis diroo-rbXwv Kai 'E7rto-ToXat KaQoXiKat koXov- fievai rwv dirocrrbXiov eirra ovrcos' Ta/cto/3oi/ fiev fiia, Herpov Se Svo, elra 'lwdvvov rpeis Kai fiera ravras 'lovSa fiia. Hpos rovrois HavXov airoo-roXov eiaiv eiriorroXal SeKarecro-apes, ry rd£ei ypa6p.evai ovroos' irpcory irpos Piofiaiovs, elra irpos KopivQiovs Svo, Kai fiera ravra irpos TaXaras fiia, irpos 'T£ Leipzig, 1906. An English translation of the second edition of this book by Miss Janet P. Ward appeared in 1 904. For the more traditional views, Salmon's Historical Introduction to the Study of the Books of the New Testament"1 (London, 1 894) should still be consulted. The most comprehensive work in English, however, is Bishop Westcott's General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, first published London, 1855. The seventh edition appeared in 1896. The substance of this book in simpler form, for the use of general readers, was issued under the title, The Bible in the Church : a popular account of the Collection and Reception of the Holy Scriptures in the Christian Churches, in 1864, and has since been revised and reprinted at various dates. Much material of the highest importance for the study of the Canon will also be found in Bishop Lightfoot's Essays on the Work entitled Supernatural Religion (London, 1889), and in Dr. Sanday 's Bampton Lectures on Inspira tion, first published in 1893. With these last may be compared the same writer's art. ' Bible (B) New Testament 1 . Canon', contributed to the eleventh edition of the Encyclo paedia Britannica, Cambridge, 1910. In his Canonicity, Edinburgh, 1 880, based on Kirchhofer's Quellensammlung, Professor Charteris has brought together a very complete collection of early testimonies to the canonical books of the New Testament. For a more general statement, reference may be made to his Croall Lecture, The New Testament Scriptures: their Claims, History, and Authority , London, 1882. The case as regards the Gospels is fully stated by Professor Nicol of Aberdeen in the Baird Lecture for 1907, The Four Gospels in the Earliest Church History, Edinburgh and London, 1 908. The Canon forms the first part of Professor C. R. Gregory's volume in the ' International Theological Library,' Canon and Text of the New Testament (Edinburgh, 1907), a 304 APPENDIX volume which has appeared in a revised form in German, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, Leipzig, 1909. In Professor Souter's The Text and Canon of the New Testament, which has just appeared in Duckworth's series of 'Studies in Theology,' London, 191 3, the order of treatment is reversed. And though the size of the book does not admit of lengthened discussions, all the leading questions are fully noted, while room is found for a number of useful ' Selected Documents,' edited with great exactness and skill. With these two books may be mentioned the attractively written volumes by the Abbe Jacquier on Le Nouveau Testament dans VEglise Chretienne, the first of which has for its subject, ' Preparation, formation et definition du Canon du Nouveau Testament' (Paris, 191 1). The New Testament in the Christian Church (New York, 1 904) is the title given to eight lectures by Professor E. C. Moore of Harvard University, in which the Canon of the New Testament is related to the Organization of the Church for Government, and the Rule of Faith. Of a more popular character are two other books also hailing from America: The Formation of the New Testament, by G. H. Ferris, and Our New Testament, How did we get it? by H. C. Vedder, both published at Philadelphia without date. As introductory to the main points at issue, The Rise of the New Testament, by D. S. Muzzey, New York, 1904, and Faith and the New Testament (lectures to a Church Reading Society), by A. W. F. Blunt, Edinburgh, 19 12, may also be mentioned. The article on the New Testament Canon in the Encyclopaedia Biblica is by Dean Armitage Robinson, and in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, by Professor V. H. Stanton. A paper on the subject by Dr. Sanday will be found in Oxford House Papers, Third Series, London, 1897, p. 105 ff, and a lecture by Bishop Chase in the St. NOTE N 305 Margaret's Lectures on Criticism of the New Testament, London, 1902, p. 96 ff. Much of importance relating to the Canon will also be found in Dr. C. H. Turner's valuable series of papers entitled ' Historical Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament ' in the fournal of Theological Studies for 1909-10. INDEXES. I. SUBJECTS. Accidence, 62 f. Acts of the Apostles, 161 ff. Addresses of N.T. writings, 17 ff. Agrapha, 266. Apocalypse of St. John, 117 ff., 223 1, 257 f., 262 ff. Apocryphal books, 213. Aramaic, 36 f. Autographic conclusions, 24 f . Autographs, New Testament, 6 f . ' Biblical ' words, 70 ff . Canon, New Testament : forma tion of, 206 ff. ; recent litera ture on, 301 ff. Catholic Epistles, 107 fiE . Christian vocabulary, 58 f. Circulation of the N.T. writings, 173 ff- Codex form, 188 ff. Collection of the N.T. writings, 203 ff. Colossians, Epistle to the, 100 f., 177. Commendatory letters, 88 f ., 255 f. Contractions in MSS., 25, 247. Corinthians, Epistles to the, 97 f. 2 Corinthians, integrity of, 184 ff. Corpus Evangelicum, 217 ff.; PauU num, 215 ff. Dates of N.T. documents, 172 f. Delivery of N.T. writings, 30 ff. Diatessaron, 218 f. Dictation, 21 ff., 27 ff., 99, 241 f. Didache, 217 f. Ephesians, Epistle to the, 85, 98 ff., 174. Epistolary form, 85 ff., 107 ; phraseology, 93, 260 , plural, 259- Evangelion Da-MepharreshS, 219. Freedom of literary reproduction, 178 ff. Galatians, Epistle to the, 96. Gospel name and form, 130 f. Greek : use of Greek in Palestine, 37 ff. ; character of N.T. Greek, 43 ff. ; uniformity of the Koii'7), 48 f . ; influences affecting N.T. Greek, 49 ff. Handwriting of N.T. texts, 25 f., 190, 195. Hebraisms, 50 ff. Hebrews, Epistle to the, 108 ff., 181, 225, 252, 296. Heretics, use of N.T. by, 214 f. U2 308 INDEXES James, Epistle of, 38 f., in f. John, Epistles of, 115 ff. John, Gospel of, 153 ff., 186 f. Laodiceans, Epistle to the, 85. Letters, early use of, 86 f. Literary tendencies in N.T., 55 ff. Logia of Papias, 137 f., 269 ff. Logia, The Oxyrhynchus, 131, 266 ff. Lucan source, special, 138 f. Luke, Gospel of, 149 ff. Marginalia, 14, 187 f. Mark, Gospel of, 38, 134 f., 143 ff., 177 ; endings of, 182, 274 ff. Morphology, 63 ff. Muratorian Canon, 222, 286 ff. New Testament Documents : rise of, 4 ff. ; outward form of, 7 ff. ; writing of, 21 ff. ; de livery of, 30 f. ; language of, 35 ff. ; literary character of, 83 ff. ; circulation of, 171 ff. ; collection of, 203 ff. ; per manent value of, 32, 80, 228 f. Notae Tironianae, 246. Old Testament, early supremacy of, 205 f . ; Canon of, 206 f. Oral teaching, 3 f., 129. Order of N.T. Writings, 292 ff. Orthography, 62 f. Papyri, study of Greek, 233 ff. Papyrus : manufacture of, 9 ff. ; ordinary letters on, 255 ff. ; N.T. texts on, 248 ff. Paragraphs, 25. Parchment : manufacture of, 191 f. ; Christian documents on, 192 f. ; codices on, 194 ff. Pastoral Epistles, 85, 101 ff. Pauline Epistles : authenticity of, 84 f. ; form of, 87 ff. ; plan of, 93 ; literary character of, 94, 104 ; speech, character of, 103 ; relation of, -to Jewish literature, 104 ff. ; originality of, 106 f. Peter, Gospel according to, 213, 281 ff. Peter, Epistles of, 112 ff. Pocket Bibles, 196. ' Poor Men's Bibles,' 191. Prepositions, lax use of, 65 ff. Preservation of rolls, 20. Pseudepigrapha, 114. Public Worship, use of N.T. in, 210 ff. Punctuation, 25 f. Q (as Gospel source), 136 f., 152. Quotations in Pauline Epistles, 27 ff. ¦¦- 77 S- Recto and Verso, 13. Romans, Epistle to the, 97 ; end ing of, 182 ff. ' Sayings of Jesus,' 190, 266 ff. Scilitan martyrs, 211 f. Sealing, 17 ff. Semitisms, see Hebraisms. Septuagint, 53 f., 106, 206 f. Shorthand, 26, 242 ff. Signature, authenticating, 23. Subscriptions of the N.T. writings, 237 ff. Synoptic Gospels : name of, 132 ; sources of, 133 ff. ; evolution of, 139 ff. ; conditions of writing, 141 f. ; aim of, 142 f. ; unity of, 152 f. Syntax, 65 ff. Testimonia, 207 f. Text of the NT., 60 f., 176 ff., 197 ff. Thessalonians, Epistles to the, 84, 96. Titles of the N.T. writings, 237 ff. Travel-diary, 163 f. Two-Document Hypothesis, 133 ff I. SUBJECTS Ur-Marcus, 135. 309 Vocabulary, N.T., 69 ff. Writing, early use of, 4 f . Writing materials, 8 ff. II. AUTHORS. Abbott, E. A., 72, 134. Abbott, T. K., 42. Allen, W. C, 38, 136, 236. Allon, T. W., 247. Bachmann, 186. Bacon, 135, 153. Barth, 181. Bartlet, 139, 217. Baur, 84. Bell, H. I , 79, 234. Benson, 121. Berger, 296. Biesenthal, 38. Bigg, 114- Birt, 10, 15, 16, 20, 60, 175, 192. Blass, 62, 65, 104, 109, 163, 167, 252. Blau, 8, 19. Bleek, in. Blunt, A. W. F., 304. Bohlig, 104. Bonhoffer, 57. Bouriant, 281. Bousset, 122. Brooke, A. E., 115, 158, 236. Buchanan, E. S., 286. Buckley, 145. Bultmann, 57. Burgon, 275. Burkitt, F. C, 135, 152, 153, 160, 177, 208, 219, 292. Chapman, 271. Charles, R. H., 106. Charteris, 303. Chase, F. H., 67, 113, 168, 304. Clement, 179. Colson, F. H., 270. Conybeare, F. C, 276. Dalman, 37. Deissmann, 7, 18, 24, 47, 48, 51 57, 62, 70, 71, 76, 78, 79, 86, 88, 95, 104, 105, 106, in, 119, 154, 155, 164, 234 f., 251. 257, 260. Dittenberger, 16, 75, 154. Dobschiitz, von, 84, 294. D'Orville, 243. Dziatzko, 10, 14, 20, 179. Erasmus, 293. Erman, 234. Ewald, P., 302. Farrar, 47, 132. Ferris, G. H., 304. Feltoe, 262. Foat, 245. Frame, J. E., 84, 236. Friedlander, 31. Gaertringen, H. von, 51. Gardner, P., 56, 166. Gardthausen, 10, 12, 192, 245. II. AUTHORS 3" Gerhard, 260. Goodspeed, E. J., 18, 280. Gray, G. B., 111. Green, A. V., 153. Gregory, C. R., 191, 241 1, 248, 250, 278, 295, 296, 303. Grenfell, B. P., 31. See also Gren fell-Hunt. Grenfell-Hunt, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26, 50, 51, 66, 72, 73, 74, 79, 109, 117, 162, 189, 190, 194, 196, 233, 244, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 255, 256, 266 f., 270. Griesbach, 132. Griffenhoofe, 266. Grimm-Thayer, 70, 72, 74. Grotius, 13. Gunkel, 122. Gwatkin, 286. Harnack, 84, 85, 111, 112, 121, 149, 163, 164, 165, 168, 172, 174, 175, 226, 268, 280, 285, 301. Harris, Rendel, 28, 117, 208, 252, 276, 285. Hatch, E., 208. Hatch, W. H. P., 59. Hausrath, 184. Hawkins, 136, 148, 152, 164. Heinrici, 104. Heitmuller, 67. Helbing, 62, 236 Hemphill, 218. Herwerden, van, 235. Hicks, 17. Hill, Hamlyn, 218. Hobart, 56, 150. Hogarth. 51. Holtzmann, 100, 302. Horder, 268. Hort, 46, 65, 76, 85, 125, 177, 184, 196, 272, 277. See also West cott and Hort. Hunt, A. S., 20, 23, 190, 196, 233, 252, 253, 254. See also Gren fell-Hunt. Jackson, H. L., 153. Jacquier, 280, 296, 304. James, M. R., 284. Jannaris, 235. Jowett, 5. Keim, 144. Kenyon, F. G., 8, 11, 13, 14, 25, 79. 94. i9i. 198, 234, 236, 244, 248. Knowling, 56, 84, 167. Krebs, 234. Kriiger, G., 302. Lagarde, 9. Lake, Kirsopp, 137, 167, 184, 186, 296. Laudien, 234. Laurent, 14. Law, 109, 115 f. Leemans, 65, 244. Leipoldt, 224, 301 f. Lewis, F. W., 186 f. Lewis, Mrs., 275. Lietzmann, 186, 234, 280, 302. Lightfoot, J. B., 22, 46, 79, 97, 115, 166, 167, 184, 209, 216, 3°3- Lock, 28, 268. Lods, A., 285. Loisy, 135. Luther, 96, 302. Mahaffy, 143, 233. Marquardt, 245. Mayor, J. B., 39, 114. M'Giffert, 262. Menzies, A., 135, 186. Mill, 197. Milligan, W., 123, 125. Mitteis, 10, 234. 312 INDEXES Moellendorf, 107. Moffatt, 84, 101, 136, 145, 146, 158, 163, 175, 296. Moore, E. C, 304. Moulton, J. H., 44, 48, 55, 59, 62, 64, 65, 112, 113, 121, 149, 152, 162, 235, 257. Murray, J. O. F., 285. Muzzey, D. S., 304. Nageli, 57, 98, 102. Nestle, 7, 9, 13, 191, 197, 276. Nicol, 220, 303. Nicole, J., 12. Niese, 41. Norden, 107, 131, 149. Oesterley, 280. Overbeck, 181. Paley, 101. Peake, 164. Peter, H., 261. Petrie, Flinders, 131. Peyron, 45. Phillimore, 164, 243. Pick, Bernard, 162. Pistelli, 249. Plummer, 151, 236. Preisigke, 73. Preuschen, E., 300. Psichari, 54. Putnam, H., 178, 179. Radermacher, 235. Ramsay, W. M., 5, 58, 102, 119, 125, 137, 162, 165, 166, 175. Reitzenstein, 131. Renan, 87, 149. Richards, G. C, 55. Roberts, A., 236. Robinson, J. Armitage, 67, 85, 103, 159, 212, 217, 236, 258, 260, 284, 304. Ropes, J. H., 149. Roufliac, 183. Ryle, H. E., 206. Sabatier, A., 285. Salmon, 142, 303. Sanday, 15, 99. 101, 134. *35> 139. 141, 145, 146, 181, 268, 271 f., 3°3. 3°4- Sanders, 277 f., 280. Scheil, F. V., 249. Schmidt, 250, 280. Schmiedel, 42, 62. Schubart, 12, 13, 259. Schiirer, 42. Simcox, 103. Simonides, C, 7. Skeel, 175. Smith, G. A., 40 f. Smith, W. Robertson, 180. Smyly, 72, 79. Soden, von, 237 ff., 248 ff. Souter, A., 56, 101, 194, 199, 272, 276, 292, 294, 296, 304. Spitta, 111, 114, 186. Stanton, V. H., 285, 304. Strauss, 158. Streeter, 136, 139 ff., 145, 146, 156. Swete, 16, 54, 86, 93, 118, 119, 123, 124, 125, 147, 268, 276, 277, 280, 281 ff. Taylor, C., 177, 268. Thackeray, H. St. John, 54, 62, 65, 86, 106, 235. Thayer, see Grimm-Thayer. Thompson, E. M., 236. Thumb, A., 48, 235. Tischendorf, 293. Traube, 247. Tregelles, S. P., 286. Turner, C. H., 65, 305. Usener, 86. Vedder, H. C, 304. Vigoroux, 166. II. AUTHORS 313 Vischer, 121. Vitelli, 79, 254. Vollmer, 106. Wackernagel, 53. Ward, J. P., 303. Warschauer, 268. Weiss, J., 57, 104. Weizsacker, 29. Welldon, 198. Wellhausen, 37, 38, 144. Wendland, 86, 103, 107, 207, 260. Wendling, 135. Wessely, 234, 245, 248, 249. Westcott, 32, 64, 66, 83, 194, 221, 262, 286, 293, 296, 303. See also Westcott and Hort. Westcott and Hort, 19, 62, 63, 119, 199, 293. Wilcken, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 234, 236, 244. Wilson, J. M., 168. Winer-Schmiedel, 43, 62. Witkowski, S., 234. Wordsworth and White, 160. Wright, A., 296. Ximenes, Cardinal, 293. Zahn, 13, 15, 36, H3. "4. l87> 217, 219, 285, 286, 296, 297 f., 301. Ziemann, 260. III. REFERENCES. i. BIBLICAL. Deuteronomy. iv. 10 2 Samuel. xi. 14 f 2 Kings. xix. 14 Ezra. iv. 8ff. vii. 12 ff. xl. 7 xiv. 1 liv. 1 Psalms. Isaiah. Jeremiah. Ezekiel. u. 9 iii. 1 ff. Daniel. ii. 4ff. PAGE St. Matthew. PAGE 223 i. 139 i. 1-9, 12, 14-20 249 ii. 139 87 v.-vii. vi. 1-18 147 I48 vi. 16 7» vi. 27 74 87 vii. 28 148 viii.-ix. 148 ix. 13 205 36 x. 13 63 36 x. 32-xi. 5 254 xi. 147 xi. 1 148 II 243 xii. 32 xiii. xiii. 22 64 147 75 xiii. 52 147 xiii. 53 148 205 xv. 37 63 xvi. 10 63 xix. 1 148 87 xxiii. 14S xxv. 12-15 20-23 254 xxvi. 1 148 xxvi. 29 - 63 12 xx viii. 19 - 4, 66 12 St. Mark. i. 1 156 36 iii. 8 63 III. REFERENCES 315 iv. 28 - - 65 vii. 53- viii. 11 - 188 v. 41 37 viii. 30 69 vii. 34 - 37 viii. 56 259 viii. 8, 20 63 ix. 11 - 154 xii. 37 35 X. 25 157 xii. 38 50 xi. 45 250 xiii. - - - 145 f- xiv. 26 208 xiv. 9 64 xvii. 3- - 67 xiv. 25 63 xix. 20 36 xv. 15 79 xx. 11-17, 19-25 - 250 XV. 34 37 xx. 30 f. - 266 xvi. 9ff- 182, 274 ff. XX. 3i 156 xvi. 20 St Luke. 78 xxi.xxi. 7 - 24 Acts. 161 157 i. 139 i. i-4 - 129, 1 30, 266, 297 ii. 5 41 i. 3 151 iii. 15 75 i. 74-80 249 iv. 13 21 ii. 139 iv.iv. 31-3736 250 111 ii. 52 74 if. v. 2-9 250 iv. - 250 iv. 16 ff. 151, 210 v. 31 75 3-8 vi. 1-6, 8-15 250 v. 249 vi. 5 65 • 30-vi. 4 - 249 vii. 18 ff. 249 vi. 9 41 vii. 36-45 249 viii. 35 204 X. xii. 38-42 18 249 63 ix.ix. xiii. 25 36 15 63 282 173, 210 xv. 13 79 xvi. 10-17 l63 xix. 3 74 xxii. 18 63 xyi. xvii. 12 6 7674 - 183 xxiv. 25. 44 f. 204 xviii. 18 xviii. 26 111 St John. xviii. 28 204 i. 14 64 xx. 5. 15 - 163 i. 15. 32 157 XX. 35 208 i. 18 66 xxi. 1-18 163 iii. 11 157 xxi. 8 139 iii. 14-17. 17 i-. 3i f. 254 xxi. 40 ff. - 36,42 v. 36 157 xxvi. 24 21 vi. 63 - 35 xxvii. 1 ff. 163 vii. 15 21 xxviii. 3i - 168 3i6 INDEXES Romans. PAGE iv. 2 PAGE 78 i. r-7 251 3,8 iv. 7 ii. ix. xv. xvi I4-I5 5 14 26 - 182 ff. v. vii. 56, 13 f. 7331 184 vii. 8 - xvi. 5 2l6 63 ix. 10 xvi. 7 64 X. 1 29 xvi. 19 14 X. 10 5,63 xvi. 22 23 185 x.-xiii. xi. 28 5 1 Corinthians. xii. 16 29 i. 17-20 251 i. 25-27 252 Galatians. ii. 6-8 252 i. ¦*. 174 iii. 8-10, 20 252 iii. 1 79 iv. 21 50 iii. 16 105 v. 9 5.185 v. 12 - 74 vi. 13-18 251 vi. 11 24 vii. 3, 4. 10-14 251 vii. 10 208 Ephesians. vii. 18- viii. 4 252 i. 1 - 85. 174 viii. 1-9 28 i. 3-14- 98 X. 21 51 f- i. 3, 20 99 xi. 23 208 i. 10 4 xiii. 97 i. 14 73 xv. 31 259 i- 15-23 98 XV. 32 216 ii. 6 99 xvi. 1 f. 72 iii. 1-1 3 - 98 xvi. 8, 19 216 iii. 10 99 xvi. 19 183 vi. 12 99 xvi. 21 2 Corinthians. 23 vi. 21 f. - Philippians. 31 i. 1 98, 174 ii. 19 29 i. 8f. 216 iii. 9-1 7 and iv. 2-8 252 i. 20 282 iv. 2-8 252 i. 22 73 iv. 10 - 29 i.-ix - 185 iv. 18 - - 78 ii. 13 31 iii. 1 18, 88 Colossians. iii. 2 4 ii. 14 - - 16 iii. 6 35 iv. 14 150 iii. 7 203 iv. 16 - 5.85 , 211 iii. 14 173 iv. 18 - - 23 III. REFERENCES 317 1 Thessalonians. PAGE xii. t- PAGE 108 i. 1 - 93 iii. 8 iv. 15 - 96 208 xni. xiii. 1822-25 51 108 v. 27 211 James. 2 Thessalonians. i. 1 112 i- 3 . 76 ii. 2 - 211 ii. 1 112 iii. 1 171 ii. 14- 26 112 iii. 17 5. 23 , 211 iii. 18 23 ii. ig- ii. 9 254 1 Timothy. i. 1 1 Peter. !74 i- 3 102 i- 7 76 iv. 13 173 iv. 19 2 Timothy. 183 ii. 2 iii. 18 v. 12 - 77 282 22 iv. 9-22 - 85 v. 13 117 iv. 13 3. 9, igf. 183 2 Peter. iv. 19 - ii. 13 - - 75 Titus. iii. 15 f. - 83 i. 11-15 - 253 iii. 16 - 205 ii. 3-8 - 253 1 John. Philemon. iv. 11- 12, 14-17 250 Ver. 1 ff. - 94 ., 18 73 Ver. 1 2 John. 116,259 Hebrews. .. 4. 8 117 i. 1- 18] , 251 .. 12 9 ii. 9- - 68 ii. 10 75 3 John. ii. 14-v. 5 252 Ver. 9 - "7 v. 12 108 ,, 13 - 9, 16, 17 vi. 4 68 „ 15 - - 258 vi. 9 108 ix. 12- 19 253 Revelation. ix. 16, 17 - 75 1 - 118 x. 7- 11 3 -83 118, 223 x. 8-xi. 13 - - 252 4 - 117, 120 x. 32 - 108 4-7 - 253 xi. 28-xii. '7 - 252 10 - 282 xii. 2- - 75 iii' 5 16 3i8 INDEXES Revelation- -Cont. PAGE xii. iii. 14 ff. 85 xiii.-xx v. 1 13. 17 xiv. 6 vi. 14 16 xxii. 7 vii. 4-8 122 xxii. 10 xi. 1-13 xi. is - 122126 xxii. xxii. 18 21 PAGE 122122171 Il8, 223 Il8 Il8II7 2. ANCIENT TEXTS AND WRITINGS. Apollonius of Tyana, i. 18- 243 Aristeas, § 176 8 Athanasius, Festal Letter xxxix. - - 297 ff. Aulus Gellius, Noct. Att. xvii 9 246 Catullus, xxxv. 2 9 Cicero, ad Attic, i. 9. 1 31 ,, „ iv. 4. 1 19 ,, viii. 1. 1 24 ,, ,, xiii. 24 193 „ xiii. 32. 3 246 ,, ad Fam. v. 8- - 186 ,, „ xv. 21. 4 95 ,, pro Archia, 23 34 1 Clement . 216, 225 2 Clement 205 Clement, Alex., Strom, ii. 9. 45 220 Clement, Alex., Strom. vi. 18 - 168 Clement, Alex., Strom, vii. 16. 94 ff. 220 Decretum Gelasianum 294 Diatessaron 218 f. Didache 217 f. Diogenes Laertius, ii. 48 243 Diognetus, Epistle to, xi 2 128 ,, ,. xi 6 202 Dionysius of Alexandria 123, 262 ff. Doctrine of Addai 299 f. 243 193 26 223 176 170 209 Eunapius, p. 138 Eusebius : De vita Constantini, iv. 36 Hist. Eccles. iii. 24. 3 „ iii. 24. 4 iii- 25. iii- 36. iii. 37. 2 iii. 39. 4 hi. 39- 14 ff- 137- M5. 269 f. „ iv. 23. 11 213 ,, iv. 23. 12 179 v. 20. 6 220 „ v. 25. 176 ,, vi. 12. 213, 284 vi. 14. 6f. - 145 vi. 14. 7 156 vi. 25. 223, 294 ,, vi. 25. 7 6 vi. 25. 11 ff. 109 Freer MS. of the Gospels 279 Galen 150, 243 Hieronymus, ad Hedibiam, 120 - 30 III. REFERENCES 319 PAGE PAGE Hieronymus, Dial. c. Pelag. Marcion 217 292 ii. 15 278 Martial, iii. 2 9 Hieronymus, Epist. cxli. 193 ,. iii. 100 31 Hippocrates 150 .. xiii. 3 175 Horace, Serm. ii. 3. 1 193 ,, xiv. 208 Melito, Eclogae 246207 Ignatius, Ephes. xii. - 2l6 Muratorian Fragment 222, 286 ff. „ Philad. viii. - 229 „ Rom. x. - 22 Inscriptions : Origen 223 American School at Athens, Papers of the, Papyri : ii- 57 59 Amherst Papyri, Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci No. 3 251 Inscriptiones Selectae : No. 218- 16 Berliner Griechische Ur Dittenberger, Sylloge In- kunden, scriptionum Graecarum2 . No. 37 1 3, 24 No. 325- 75 597 64 439- 16 601 12 807- ^55 615 91 257 Ios, inscription from 155 846 92 259 Priene, Inschriften von, 1079 50, 73 H5 51 British Museum Papyri Irenaeus, adv. Haer. iii. 1. No. 121 13 244 2 273 ,294 417 94 Irenaeus, adv. Haer. iii. 11. 1213 79 8 220 Irenaeus, adv. Haer. iii. 11. Cairo Papyri, 11 272 No. 8 18 Isidore, Orig. i. 22 246 Fayum Papyri, Josephus, Antt. Jud. xix. No. 12 51 329 41 Flinders Petrie Papyri, Josephus, Antt. Jud. xx. Nos. 45, 144 164 264 39 Florentine Papyri, Josephus, Bellum Jud., Nos. 61, 99 79 proem. 36 Justin, Apol. i. 66. 67 212 Geneva Papyri, „ Dial. 103 212 No. 52 12 Juvenal, iv. 24 9 Giessen Papyri, No. 17 91 258 Lactantius, Instit. iv. 20 202 Greek and Latin Papyri, Lucian, imag. 8 16 Nos. 1, 3 254 320 INDEXES Papyri : Papyri : Grenfell Papyri, PAGE Rylands Papyri, PAGE No. 30 31 No. 4 253 67 73 5 190 253 m 194 Strassburg Papyri, Leyden Papyri, C 65 No. 32 Tebtunis Papyri, 73 N 244 Nos. 16, 41 58 5072 Oxyrhynchus Papyri, No. 2 189, 248 100 316 7922 38 270 Passio Sanct. Scilitanorum 212 45 25, 89 f., 256 Peter, Gospel according to 106 17 213, 281 ff. 119 74 Pliny maj., Nat. Hist. xiii. 208 189, 249 f. 11 ff. 10 , 192 209 251 Pliny min., Epist. iii. 5. 14 245 275 21 „ ,, vii. 12 31 292 18 „ „ ix. 36. 2 245 293 244 Plutarch, Cato min. xxiii. - 245 f. 294 66 Polycarp, ad Philipp. xiii. - 176 301. 381 19 Proclus, de forma epist. 82 402 250 497 22 Quintilian, Inst. Or at. x. 3. 523 51 3i 193 654 267 Quintilian, Inst. Orat. xi. 2. 657 109, 252 25 247 724 26, 244 744 18, 116 Seneca 246 746 88 f., 255 f. Strabo, xiii. 1. 54 178 840 196 Suetonius, Tit. 3 247 849, 850 162 1008, 1009 - 252 f. Tertullian, adv. Marc. iv. 2 295 1067 23 iv. 5 221 1078 109, 253 Tertullian, de praescr. hae- 1079 253 I- ret. 22 128 1080 196 Tertullian, de praescr. hae- H53 20 ret. 36 6 1170, 1171 254 Theodore of Mopsuestia 93 IV. GREEK WORDS. oVyttirT], 58. d'ypdp.p.ovTos, 21. d8eX.4>ds, 59. dSoXos, 77. aiuvtos, 59. aKpiBeo-Tepov, III. aKwXvTUS, 168. dvd-yvwo-is, 173. avooTOTdu, 73. dvao-Tpeo}>opcuJ 51. airdn], 75. air^xci, 78. dlTO0VT|O-KW, 259. diro|ivT||jiovEV|iaTa, 131, 212. dirda-ToXos, 59, 292. dppdBwv, 73. »PX17°s, 75- do-ird£ojj.cu, 23, 31. d9ov(a, 190. BiBXCov, 10, 14, 20, 194. BCBXos, 10. BXeiro dird, 50. BpaSe'as, 22. BvBXos, 10. Yeyovav, 63. yeypairrai, 205. 7^VT)(lO, 63. 7ev6|i.€vos, 270. ¦yevopcu, 68. VpaqS^j, 205. 8ld, 22. 8ia(KJKi], 75. 8i8e'pa, 8. Sokijjuos, 76. lav (for fiv), 64. 'ESpa'torC, 36. h", 155- eis and ev, 66. eXXoydw, 73. epBaTcvci), 177. "Ep.p.avour|\, 256. ev (instrumental), 50. e|aX«£(pw, 16. iiraKoXovSea), 78. Iiuo-koitos, 59. eirio-ToXal o-vo-Ta.Ti.Ka£, 88, 254!. eirovpdvios, 99. epptoo-o, 24, 256. epwrdu), 51. eo-xaroKoXXtov, 11. erepoSiSao-KaXeiv, 102. evOYY«'Xtov, 130, 292. TJXlKltt, 74- 8eo8C8aKTos, 71. flpt)o-Ke£o, 59. 322 INDEXES tvo, 67, 259. irXTJpr|S, 64. irpecrpiJTtpos, 59. Kai, 154. Trpo-ypd4>op.ai, 79. KaXajios, 9, 17. TrpoKdirrw, 74. Kavuv, 194. irpaiTOKoXXov, II. Kevtp.Ba.Tevu>, 177. irpwTOS, 162. Ktpas, II. Kea\i.da>, 177. creXts, 14. KecpaXCs, II. o-r||i.ei,OYpd, 25, 256. KoXa£gc>, 177. cHXXvBos, 19. KoXXr|p.a, 10. o-irepiia, 105. KoXoBoSaKTvXos, 144. enropd, 105. Kvpios (as title of address), 116, 259. 0-up.X)XcTT)S, 71- oT)ve£8T|o-is, 57. Xo-yeCa, 72. o-uo-TariKos, 18. Xdyia, Td, 131, 137. cr4>pa-y£g, 17. ctpvpCs, 63. p.ao-Ti7eiv, 243. reTpdSiov, 194. dpcpaXos, II. Toptos, 15. 6'vop.a, Kar', 258. 6^Ypd