YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE LIBRARY OF THE
DIVINITY SCHOOL

INTERNATIONAL HANDBOOKS TO THE
NEW TESTAMENT.
Edited by Orello Cone, D.D. To be completed in four
volumes. I. The Synoptic Gospels. By George L. Cary.
II. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Thes
salonians, etc. By James Drummond.
III. Hebrews, Colossians, Ephesians, etc. By Orello
Cone.
IV. The Fourth Gospel, Acts, etc. By Henry P.
Forbes. In preparation.

INTERNATIONAL HANDBOOKS
TO THE
NEW TESTAMENT
By ORELLO CONE, D.D., Editor, GEORGE L. CARY, L.H.D.
JAMES DRUMMOND, LL.D., and HENRY P. FORBES, D.D.

THE EPISTLES TO THE
HEBREWS, COLOSSIANS, EPHESIANS, AND PHILEMON
THE PASTORAL EPISTLES, THE EPISTLES
OF JAMES, PETER, AND JUDE
TOGETHER WITH
A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE CANON
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

BY
ORELLO CONE, D.D.
Professor of Biblical Theology in the Canton Theological School ; author of
" Gospel Criticism and Historical Christianity," " The Gospel and
its Earliest Interpretations," " Paul : The Man, the
Missionary, and the Teacher," etc.

r TntwiuidiFB Reference Libr..! y)

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS
NEW YORK & LONDON
3be Tknicfterbocfter fl.r_8S
1901

Cl5Se

Copyright, iqoi
by
ORELLO CONE

ttbe l?nicherbocher press, mew tyorR

GENERAL PREFACE TO THE SERIES.
THESE Handbooks constitute an exegetical series cover
ing the entire New Testament and constructed on a
plan which admits of greater freedom of treatment than is
usual in commentaries proper. The space generally devoted
in commentaries to a minute examination of the grammatical
construction of passages of minor importance is occupied
with the discussion of those of a special interest from a doc
trinal and practical point of view. Questions of the authorship
and date of the several books are treated in carefully-prepared
Introductions, and numerous Dissertations are inserted eluci
dating matters of graver moment.
The books of the New Testament are treated as a literature
which in order to be understood must be explained, like all
other ancient literatures, in accordance with the accepted
principles of the grammatical and historical interpretation.
The aim of the writers has been to ascertain and clearly
set forth the meaning of the authors of these books by
the application of this method in freedom from dogmatic
prepossessions. The purpose has been constantly kept in view to furnish a
series of Handbooks to the New Testament which should
meet the wants of the general reader, and at the same time
present the results of the latest scholarship and of the most
thorough critical investigation.

vi General Preface to the Series
Accordingly, more prominence has been given to the state
ment ofthe results of the critical processes than to the presen
tation of the details of these processes by means of extended
discussions of questions of Greek grammar, philology, and
exegesis. Hence, while the advanced student will find much
to interest him in these volumes, it is believed that ministers
who have not the time to occupy themselves with the refine
ments of minute hermeneutics, superintendents and teachers
of Sunday-schools, and Bible-students in general will find
them suited to their needs. The text used is that of the Re
vised Version, although for the purpose of saving space the
text has not been printed, and the passages explained have
been indicated in part by references only and in part by
references together with a few initial words.
The; Editor.

CONTENTS.

PAGE
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.
Introduction  . . . i
Exposition  . . . io
The Doctrinal Teachings oe the Epistle .... 79
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.
Introduction  85
Exposition  91
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
Introduction  123
Exposition  133
Some Doctrinal Features oe Colossians and Ephesians 178
THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.
Introduction  183.
Exposition  185
THE PASTORAL EPISTLES.
Introduction  189
Exposition oe First Timothy  199
Exposition of Second Timothy  235
Exposition of Titus  253
Some Doctrinal Points of View in the Pastoral Epistles 263
THE EPISTLE OF JAMES
Introduction  267
Exposition  273
vii

viii CONTENTS
PAGE
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER.
Introduction  297
Exposition  303
THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER.
Introduction  325
Exposition  329
THE EPISTLE OF JUDE.
Introduction  343
Exposition  347
A Sketch of the History of the New Testament Canon 353

THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.

INTRODUCTION.
THE argument of the Epistle is constructed somewhat
loosely, but is fairly clear. The writer declares in the
first section of the Epistle (i.-iv. 13) the superiority of
Christianity to the religion of the Old Testament, proceeding
upon the assumption of a revelation through Christ from
God, who had formerly spoken " in the prophets." The
proof of the exaltation of Christ above the "angels" is
drawn from various passages in the Psalms, which are made
to serve the author's purpose by means of a method of inter
pretation current in his time among Christian writers. The
latter part of this section contains exhortations to the readers
to beware of hardness of heart and unbelief, lest they come
short of entering into the " rest " prepared for the faithful
and obedient (iii. 12-iv. 13). The second division (iv.
14-x. 18) contains the doctrinal theme of the Epistle, which,
as a special application of the general principle of the greater
excellence of the new dispensation in comparison with the
old, consists in the teaching that Christ is the true high-
priest, who, appointed by God, perfected through suffering,
and exalted to heaven, has become the author of ' ' everlast
ing salvation." In a digression (v. 10-vi. 20) the writer
expresses the regret that his readers are " dull of hearing "
and " babes" in respect to spiritual things, " having need
of milk " and not of " solid food," since his doctrine of the

2 INTRODUCTION
high-priesthood of Christ contains matters ' ' hard of inter
pretation "; and he exhorts them to leave " the first prin
ciples of Christ and press on to perfection," not founding on
" the teaching of baptisms and of laying on of hands and of
resurrection ofthe dead and of eternal judgment," lest they
be guilty of apostasy, from which " it is impossible to renew
them again unto repentance. " But he is persuaded of better
things for them, and desires that they be diligent and " imi
tators of them who through faith and patience inherit the
promises." They have, indeed, by reason of the "oath"
of God a hope which is " as an anchor of the soul, both sure
and stedfast and entering into that which is within the veil ;
whither as a forerunner Jesus entered in for us, having be
come a high-priest forever after the order of Melchisedeck."
This high-priest, the writer now proceeds to show (vii.-x.),
is superior to the priesthood under the law, which must
have many priests because of their mortality. He is ' ' holy,
guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher
than the heavens." He does not need, " like those high-
priests," to " offer up sacrifices daily first for his own sins
and then for the sins of the people," but he " abideth for
ever," " hath an unchangeable priesthood," and " is able to
save to the uttermost." He entered not into an earthly
tabernacle, but " into heaven itself, now to appear before the
face of God for us," and his priesthood was not " through
the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood,"
whereby he has "obtained eternal redemption." In the
third and concluding part of the Epistle (x. 19-xiii. 21)
the readers are admonished to be faithful, to hold fast the
confession of their hope, for if they sin wilfully after having
had a knowledge of the truth, " there remaineth no more a
sacrifice for sins." Faith, which is declared to be "the
assurance of things hoped for, the proving of things not
seen," is illustrated by examples from the Old Testament,
and the readers are exhorted to stand firm in their tribula-

HEBREWS 3
tions, which are to be regarded as chastenings whereby the
heavenly Father seals them as His children.
The Epistle had a scanty and somewhat doubtful recogni
tion in the early Church. Clement of Rome, who wrote at
the end of the first century or the beginning of the second,
makes a liberal use of its ideas and expressions, without,
however, making mention of it. It had no standing in the
earliest use of New Testament writings as an authority, only
traces of it are found in Justin Martyr,' but none in the
existing writings of Irenaeus, and Tertullian evidently did
not regard it as having apostolical authority. Marcion did
not recognise it, and it is not accepted in the Canon of Mur-
atori, a list of received New Testament books made by an
unknown writer toward the end of the second century. It
was not until the time of Jerome and Augustine that it came
gradually to be recognised as canonical, — that is, as con
stituting a part of the sacred writings called the New Testa
ment. It fared better, however, in the eastern Church,
where we find Clement of Alexandria at the end of the
second century quoting it as a work of Paul's, and appealing
to the authority of his teacher Pantaenus. But both find it
difficult to account for the absence of the words, ' ' Paul, the
apostle," etc., at the beginning of the Epistle. Origen re
garded the contents as Pauline, but the form as that of some
disciple of the apostle's. " Who really wrote it," he says,
" God only knows." In the Syriac translation ofthe New
Testament, known as the Peshito, it stands after the thirteen
Epistles ascribed to Paul. Eusebius wavers as to the stand
ing of the Epistle, now mentioning it as disputed and again
as canonical. The opinion of the eastern Church finally
prevailed in the west, though Jerome and Augustine were
cognisant of the fact that some disputed its genuineness.
The reformers generally rejected it, and the consensus of
modern scholarship is almost unanimously against its Pauline
1 About a.d. 150.

4 INTRODUCTION
authorship. It is in opposition to this consensus that the
revised version of the New Testament entitles it, ' ' The
Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews " ! With respect to the re
lation of the Epistle to other New Testament writings, it
does not appear that the author was at all influenced by the
four Gospels. He may have been acquainted with Acts, and
certainly was familiar with a considerable number of Paul's
Epistles, notably with Romans, i Corinthians, and Galatians.
The Epistle is without address, and who the original read
ers were is accordingly a matter of conjecture. The super
scription, " To the Hebrews," has no significance in this
relation, since we do not know by whom it was prefixed.
That it was not intended to be a general Epistle either to
Jews or others is apparent from the references to individual
and local circumstances in such passages as v. n, 12, and
x. 25, 32-36. Against the supposition that it was addressed
to the Jewish-Christian community in Jerusalem it has been
urged that the Epistle, which is not a translation from the
Hebrew, is written in very good Greek ; that its arguments
based on the Old Testament are drawn from the Greek
translation known as the Septuagint, while the passages so
quoted often denote a wide departure from the original ; and
that a Church which is historically known to have been an
object of charity cannot have been said to have ministered
and still to be ministering to the saints (ii. 3). The writing
may have been addressed to Jewish Christians in Alexandria
or to the mixed Jewish and gentile Christian community in
Rome. The reference to persecutions fits the latter place
rather than either of the others, and iii. 12 can hardly have
been applicable to Jewish Christians in any locality. It is
evident that no exact determination of the address of the
Epistle is possible. Its object is involved in the obscurity
which surrounds the address. It is clear that the writer's
object in general was to warn his readers against apostasy
from the Christian faith. But it is uncertain into what

HEBREWS 5
former condition he conceived the lapse to be. Those who
think the Epistle was addressed to Jewish-Christian readers
read in it a warning against an apostasy from Christianity
to Judaism. The writer's attempt to show the superiority
of Christianity to the Jewish religion appears to favour this
view, but the admonition in reference to " falling away from
the living God " is appropriate only to a lapse into heathen
ism. The exhortation to leave, as the first principles of
Christian instruction, faith in God, the teaching of the
resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment (vi. 1-3),
is inapplicable to Jewish Christians to whom these Jewish
doctrines were familiar before their conversion to Christian
ity, but addressed to converts from heathenism it is intel
ligible and fitting.
The traditional Pauline authorship is entirely without
support in the Epistle itself, and it has already been shown
not to have historical evidence in its favour. The apostle
who claimed to have his gospel without the testimony of
men ' could not have written Heb. ii. 3. The Greek style
is not that of Paul, and it was on the recognition of this
fact, noted by Clement of Alexandria and Origen, that the
supposition of a translation from a Hebrew original was
founded. The writer's manner of quoting from the Old
Testament is different from that of Paul. He quotes accu
rately from the Septuagint, while Paul generally quotes from
memory. He appears to have been ignorant of Hebrew,
with which Paul was acquainted, and bases some of his
arguments upon inaccuracies in the Septuagint translation.2
The doctrinal teaching of the Epistle is not that of Paul.
While the writer has some points of contact with the
apostle's teachings, his deviations from them are marked,
and his point of view is quite different from that of his great
predecessor. The Pauline conceptions of the law, of faith,
1 Gal. i. 1, 11, 12, 15, 16, ii. 6 ; 1 Cor. ix. 11, 23.
8 See x. 5-7, compared with Ps. xl. 67.

6 INTRODUCTION
and of the atonement of Christ are apparently foreign to
him. To the resurrection of Christ, which was the funda
mental doctrine of the apostle, he barely alludes, and he
seems to have no comprehension of Paul's mystic thought of
justification by faith. He manifests no interest in Paul's
great teaching that the gospel was destined for the gentiles
as well as for the Jews. He goes far beyond the apostle in
the unwarrantable typical and allegorical interpretation of
the Old Testament. Various conjectures as to the author
ship have been made by different investigators, but no con
vincing reasons can be urged in support of any one of them.
That of Luther in favour of Apollos has been accepted by
many. Whoever the author may have been, he was cer
tainly a man of intellectual force and originality. While he
was acquainted with Paul's thought and influenced by it,
he was not an imitator of the great apostle. His fine Greek
style, his disregard if not ignorance of the Hebrew Old
Testament, and his ignorance of the affairs of the temple
and the priesthood indicate that he was not a resident of
Palestine. In education and sympathy he appears to have
been closely in touch with the Alexandrian philosophy and
familiar with the thought of Philo.1
There can be no doubt that the Epistle belongs to a period
later than the so-called apostolic age. The writer's acquaint
ance with the Epistles of Paul presupposes their existence
in a collection and their use in the churches for religious
¦Harnack (Zeitschrift fur die neu test. Wissenschaft, 1900, Heft 1)
has presented under the title, " Probabilia iiber die Addresse und den
Verfasser des Hebraerbriefs," an ingenious defence of the hypothesis
that the Epistle was produced by the joint authorship of Aquila and
Priscilla, with the latter in the leading part. Our space does not
admit of a discussion of this conjecture, the support of which must
necessarily be very slender. "Probabilia" is rather too strong a
word to apply to that part of the article that treats of the authorship
of the Epistle, which is a work too strongly theological to be the pro
duction of a woman.

HEBREWS 7
instruction — a state of things which could not have been
possible until a considerable time after the death of the
apostle. The reference to persecutions already undergone
by the readers (x. 32, 33) finds its most probable explana
tion in the barbarities suffered under Nero, and the present
tribulations (xii. 1-10) may be those of the time of Domitian.
The use of the present tense in reference to the temple and
its services does not necessarily imply that it was still in
existence, as is shown by the usage of writers unquestion
ably later. The precise time of the composition of the Epistle
is indeterminable, but it was probably between a.d. 80
and 90.
The Epistle shows in many respects the contact of the
writer with the Alexandrian philosophy represented in the
works of Philo, although evidence is wanting of an intimate
and extended acquaintance on his part with the writings of
this philosopher. The ' ' spiritual atmosphere ' ' of the two
is, however, to a considerable degree the same. The allegori
cal interpretation of the Old Testament in the Epistle is
essentially that of Philo, particularly in reference to Mel
chizedek.1 Philo regards this personage as a type of the
Logos, and the author of Hebrews sees in him a type of
Christ, developing the parallel in almost the very words
employed by the former. The reference to the daily sacri
fice of the high-priest * and to his entering into the holy of
Holies once every year,3 which is not in accordance with the
Old Testament ritual, corresponds with statements in Philo.
In x. 3 the very words of Philo are employed, " remem
brance of sins," in reference to sacrifices in general. Philo,
however, had in mind the sacrifices of the impious and pro
fane. In the passage referring to the oath of God ' the
writer follows Philo very closely, quoting the same passage
that he quotes from the Old Testament and expressing the
same idea regarding the necessity of God's swearing by
1 vii. 1-3. 2 vii. 27. a ix. 7. 4 vi. 13, 14.

8 INTRODUCTION
Himself, since there was nothing greater by which He could
swear. That the writer entertained Philo's extreme idea of
the inspiration of the Old Testament is evident from his fol
lowing him in his manner of quoting from that literature.
Like Philo he finds in every passage in the Old Testament
the veritable word of God, even when in the original the
writer is speaking about God.1 In this respect he differs
from Paul. Moreover, he shows unmistakably the influence
of the Alexandrian conception ofthe metaphysical opposition
of idea and appearance or phenomenon, the heavenly and the
earthly, type and antitype. The whole creation is conceived
as composed of the invisible world of heavenly types " and
a visible world,3 the two corresponding to Philo's world of
ideas and sensible world. Accordingly, the earthly sanctu
ary ' and all that pertains to it is regarded as an antitype
of the heavenly model.6 To the upper, ideal world alone
belongs permanence. Although the writer does not apply
the term Logos to Christ, his Christology is manifestly based
upon the Philonic doctrine of the Logos. Like Philo' s Logos,
Christ is the preexistent agent of creation and the supporter
of the world.6 We evidently have here the transition in
the development of New Testament Christology from Paulin
ism to the doctrine ofthe fourth Gospel.'
One cannot attentively consider the argument of the
Epistle without becoming aware of the chasm which sepa
rates the religious conceptions of the writer from the enlight
ened Christian thought of the present time. His ideas of
Christ and his manner of proving the superiority of Christian
salvation to Judaism are altogether foreign to our religious
philosophy. His remoteness from us is due to the influence
1 i. 7, iv. 4, 7, vii. 21, x. 30. " ix. 1.
2 viii. 5, ix. 23. s ix. 24.
3 xl- 3- 6 i. 2, 10, iii. 3.
1 See The Gospel and its Earliest Interpretations, by the author
of this volume.

HEBREWS 9
upon his thinking exerted by Jewish theology, ritual, and
legend. An advance beyond his point of view is possible
only to those who have thrown aside these encumbrances.
The paradox of the progress beyond the singular conceptions
of this Epistle is that it is a return to the simplicity of Jesus.

THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.

EXPOSITION.
The first section (i.-iv. 13) is of the nature of an introduction lead
ing up to the discussion of the chief theme of the Epistle, and con
sists of two principal parts : (1) An announcement of the revelation
through Christ and a declaration of his exalted work with proofs
from the Old Testament and an application by way of exhortation
(i.-ii. 4) ; (2) Further elaboration of the proposition of the exalta
tion of Christ and a statement of the theme, his high-priesthopd
(ii. 5-18), together with an elaboration of its significance (iii.-iv. 13).
The declaration that God spoke to the fathers in the prophets
(i. 1) is grounded upon the doctrine current among the Jews
and early Christians that the Old Testament writers were
immediately inspired by God, or that God " spoke " through
them to men. It is characteristic of our author that in
quoting from the Old Testament he employs the formula,
" He saith," instead of Paul's expression "it is written "
or " the Scripture saith." ] After the manner of Philo, the
prophets represent all the writers of the Old Testament. By
divers portions means at different times, and in divers manners
expresses the diversity of the contents and form of the com
munications. At the end of these days (i. 2) is an expression for the time
immediately preceding the Messianic age, that is, the present
seon as contrasted with the aeon to come, and involves the
conception current in the early Church of two great world-
1 See i. 6, 7, iv. 3, 4, viii. 8.

12

HEBREWS i. 2.

periods — the pre-Messianic and the Messianic.1 The Christ
ians at the time of the writer lived in expectation of the
second coming of Christ in glory and power (the Parousia)
to establish his kingdom on the earth. The time before that
event, the period in which they were then living, was called
" the present age," while " the age to come " designated the
period to be introduced by the second advent of the Messiah.
See ix. 26 and 1 Cor. x. 11; Luke xviii. 30, xx. 35. The
word for " age " 2 is sometimes translated " world."
Hath spoken to us in His Son (i. 2), literally, a Son. But
the writer is not satisfied with this simple designation which
he employs also elsewhere (iii. 6, v. 8, vii. 28), and amplifies
with the epithet " of God " in iv. 14, vi. 6, vii. 3, x. 29. He
proceeds in a way impossible to a Jewish Christian and sur
passing the boldest flights of Paul to exalt Jesus as the pre-
existent agent of creation, the " effulgence " of the divine
glory, the very " image " of God, and the upholder of all
things (v. 3). In speaking of Jesus as Son he evidently
employs the word in a sense which he would not regard as
y applicable to men, whose sonship in relation to God is im
plied in xii. 7-1 1. The declaration that Christ was appointed
heir of all things probably refers to him as the preexistent Son
who according to Paul was clothed with divine glory and
splendour prior to his appearance on the earth.3 Appointed
does not refer, as some suppose, to the rank assigned to
Jesus at the end of his earthly career, his resurrection, but
to the position of dignity and glory which was decreed to
him as the preexistent Son. As heir of all things he is
designated as the future possessor and ruler of the world in
the creation of which he was the agent of God. The idea
of the preexistence of Christ is Pauline,* but the form of
1 6 cdmv our oS, this age ; at gov fieXXoov, the age to come. Weber,
Jud. Theol., p. 371. 5 aioov. s p^n. y 6
4 1 Cor. viii. 6, x. 4, xv. 47; 2 Cor. viii. 9; Phil. ii. 6; cf. Col. i.
15 ff.

i.2,3- HEBREWS

13

expression has been influenced by Philo's speculations
concerning the Logos.
By whom also He made the worlds (i. 2), literally " the
ages," that is, all things existing in time. This is a stronger
expression than that of Paul, " through whom are all
things." l The influence of Philo's speculations upon the
author is manifest here. Philo taught that the world was
made through the Logos, the first born Son of God. In
Hebrews are observable the first steps in the process of
transferring to the person Jesus Philo's idea ofthe Logos as
an intermediary between God and the world, " the shadow
of God, whom using as an organ, He made the world."
The conception is fully developed in the fourth Gospel.
The effulgence of His glory and the very image of His sub
stance (i. 3). — The word rendered "effulgence" means a
reflected splendour. In Christ, a derived being separate
from God, the divine glory is manifested to a degree which
renders him essentially like the Deity. ' ' Refulgence ' ' is
probably a better rendering. In other words, he is " the very
image of His substance," or person, that is, partakes of the
divine nature, which has been stamped upon him, as a seal
impresses wax. That this is a purely speculative opinion of
the writer's is evident when we consider that in the really
historical records of the sayings of Jesus, the first three
Gospels, the great Teacher, the Son of Man, nowhere gives
such an idea of his person. The terms rendered " reful
gence " and "image" are derived from the Alexandrian
writers, and are not elsewhere found in the New Testament.
The fourth evangelist's notion of the Logos as God and his
words attributed to Jesus that he that had seen him had seen
the Father are a further development of the same doctrine.
All things (i. 3) means all created things, the things which
were made through the Son. All-sustaining or almighty
power is here ascribed to Jesus with reference probably to
1 1 Cor. viii. 6.

14

HEBREWS i. 4. 5-

his preexistent state and his state of exaltation, when, having
made purification of sins, he sat down on the right hand of the
Majesty on high. After his earthly atoning work he assumes
the position of the highest honour and a participation in the
government of the world * which belonged to him as the
" appointed," preexistent " heir."
In i. 4-14, the writer lays down and attempts to support the
thesis that Christ became so much better than the angels as he had
inherited a more excellent name than they.
He became so much better than the angels (i. 4) by reason of
his completion of the work of redemption and his exaltation
to the right hand of God. During his earthly life the author
conceives that he was " for a little while " (ii. 9) made lower
than the angels. That he believed Jesus in his preexistent
state to have been superior to the angels is evident from the
reference to his " more excellent name," that is, Son of God.
It should be noted here that the writer's entire speculation
about the relation of Jesus to angels has no other basis than
the notion of the Hebrew mythology and cosmology respect
ing these super-mundane beings who were fancied to occupy
a region above the earth called heaven. He now proceeds
to furnish a proof of his thesis by quotations from the Old
Testament. The first passage quoted
Thou art my Son (i. 5), etc., is from Ps. ii. 7, and refers in
the original to an Israelitish king, perhaps Solomon. This
day have I begotten thee undoubtedly refers to the generation
of the Son before the beginning of time, since Christ existed
before the creation according to the writer's conception, and
by him God " made the worlds." The word ar)fxspov^ to
day, is also used by Philo in reference to time antedating the
creation or to eternity (see the discussion of doctrine at the
end of the Commentary on the Epistle). The reference of
the words to Jesus is unwarranted, and the writer adopts a
1 See Ps. ex. 1 .

i.6-12. HEBREWS 15
method of interpreting the Old Testament current in the
early Church,1 and unhappily followed by too many in
modern times. The second passage, I will be to him a Father,
etc., is from 2 Sam. vii. 14, and refers to Solomon. In order
to show from the Old Testament that the angels are required
to worship Jesus, the writer quotes from Ps. xcvii. 7/ which
reads in the Septuagint, or Greek translation, Worship him,
all ye his angels. But the being whom the angels according
to this version are called upon to worship is Jehovah. The
reference to Jesus is a gross perversion of the original mean
ing ofthe passage, which has no relation to Christ's coming
into the world.
Bringeth the first-born into the world (i. 6). — Probably
again bringeth into the world refers to the second coming of
Christ in glory.
Again must be construed with bringeth into. The in
feriority of the angels to Christ is shown by a citation from
Ps. civ. 4 (i. 7). They are only servants, and are changeable
and perishable, while the Son remains forever.
Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever (i. 8, 9). — This
passage is from Ps. xiv. 6, 7, which is a wedding-song com
posed with reference to a king who is extravagantly ad
dressed as " god," according to the oriental conception of
kings as sons of God. The reference of the epithet to Christ
is in accord with the exalted idea of him entertained by the
writer of the Epistle. Philo also regarded the Logos as God
in the sense that he was a divine energy or instrument.
Above thy fellows (i. 9) refers in the Psalm to fellow-kings.
It is doubtful whom the writer had in mind in referring the
passage to Christ, unless it were the angels.
Thou, Lord, in the beginning (i. 10-12). — This quotation
is from Ps. cii. 25-27, probably a post-exilic composition in
which God is addressed in a strain of lamentation. Our
author, who quoted from the Septuagint, found " Lord,"
1 Acts xiii. 33. ! See also Deut. xxxii. 43.

16 HEBREWS i. 13-". 2.
which is not in the Hebrew, and as this was a term applied
by the Christians to Jesus, he was led to refer the passage to
him in accordance with verse 2.
Sit thou on my right hand (i. 13, 14). — From Ps. ex. i, an
ode addressed to a king by an unknown writer. This Psalm •
passes in the first three Gospels as David's, and the passage
in question as referring to Christ.1 It was interpreted as
Messianic by many of the Jewish scholars. Our author in
his use of it followed the tradition current in his time, which
was based upon an error as to the authorship of the Psalm
and a false method of interpreting the Old Testament.
Ministring spirits sent forth (i. 14). — All the angels are
conceived as ministring/cr the sake of those who shall inherit
salvation, that is, the everlasting salvation of the Messianic
kingdom. Mere ' ' deliverance from evil ' ' is too weak, and
is not in accord with apostolic doctrine.
In ii. 1-4, the writer makes an application of the teaching of
chapter i. to the spiritual needs of his readers, exhorting them to
give earnest heed to the things that were heard.
Since, he concludes, Christ, a being so exalted above the
angels and holding the rank of the Son of God, has com
municated to us this gospel of the new dispensation, we
ought so much the more to give earnest heed to the things
that we have heard, that is, to the saving truth taught by
Jesus and his disciples. For it is only through the constant^
holding of our minds to these things that we can escape the
peril of drifting away from them. This is the first expres
sion of the writer's solicitude about the apostasy of the
church or churches to which the Epistle was addressed, and
in the exhortation with which this chapter opens appears
his chief object in writing to them.
For if the word spoken through angels (ii. 2). — By the argu
ment from the less to the greater the writer proceeds to
1 Matt. xxii. 44 ; Mark xii. 36 ; Luke xx. 42.

ii. 3-5- HEBREWS 17
establish the preceding warning and exhortation. If dis
obedience to the requirements of the word given through
angels, who have already been shown to be inferior to
Christ, was visited with punishment, how much more will it
be perilous to neglect the greater salvation offered in the
New Covenant ! The idea that the law was given through
angels has no other foundation than a Jewish tradition.
There is a hint of it in the Septuagint version of Deut. xxxiii.
2, which is an erroneous translation of the Hebrew text.
Paul and the writer of Acts have given currency to this
tradition,1 but it is of no importance for our instruction.
The salvation announced through the Lord (ii. 3), that is,
Christ, for whom " Lord " was a current designation in the
early Church, was confirmed to the writer and his readers by
those who had heard Jesus. This acknowledgment of second
hand information could not have been made by Paul.2
God also bearing witness (ii. 4). — The writer evidently be
lieved with his contemporaries that the spiritual phenomena
of the apostolic age were attributable to a special divine
intervention manifested in so-called gifts of the Holy Spirit
and by signs and wonders and miracle-working powers.
The worth of his testimony depends, of course, upon the
sources of his information, of which we know nothing, upon
the answer to the question whether or no he had ever given
the phenomena a careful critical investigation, and upon his
point of view respecting nature and the supernatural. Our
ignorance of these matters renders it hazardous for us to
accept his judgment as decisive in the case.
Throughout the remainder of this chapter (ii. 5-18) the writer
continues the discussion of the thesis that Christ was superior to
the angels, shows the necessity of his death, and reaches finally the
central theme of the Epistle, his high-priesthood.
The superiority in question is shown in the fact that the
world to come (ii. 5), that is, the Messianic age, the time-
1 Gal. iii. 19 ; Acts vii. 53. 9 Gal. i. 12.

1 8 HEBREWS ii. 7, 8.
period after the second coming of Christ including its
economy, was not subjected to angels but to Christ. This
proposition the writer undertakes after his manner to estab
lish by a passage from Ps. viii. 4-6. The supposed proof
from Scripture is, however, entirely invalid, since the Psalm
has reference only to man in general and not at all to any
particular person. The writer was probably misled in his
interpretation by the term " son of man " in the passage,
which is Jesus' self-designation in the first three Gospels.
The contention of Dean Alford and others that the author
of the Epistle did not interpret this " non-Messianic Psalm "
in a "Messianic sense," but referred the passage to man
under the new dispensation, is futile, for the entire argument
is pointless if it does not relate to the preeminence of Christ
in contrast with the angels. Paul is chargeable with a
similar misinterpretation in 1 Cor. xv. 27.
In the words, thou crownedst him with glory and honour,
etc. (ii. 7), the writer continues his misinterpretation of the
Old Testament passage in understanding man in general to
refer to Christ, misled by the term ' ' son of man ' ' in verse
6. Only for a little while was Christ made lower than the
angels, that is, during the time of his incarnation. The
author follows the Septuagint, which renders the original
Hebrew, " a little less than God," by " a little lower than
the angels"; but he changes the "little," which in the
Septuagint evidently expresses degree, into "for a short
time "—a sense which his argument plainly requires.
But now we see not yet all things subjected to him (ii. 8). —
The fact that the subjection of all things to Christ is not yet
accomplished does not contradict the immediately preceding
general declaration ; for the complete subjection will take
place only in the age to come, when he shall have returned
in glory according to the ardent expectation of the time.
Christ is, however, the writer conceives, already, as if
preparatory to this dominion, crowned with glory and honour

ii. 9, 10. HEBREWS 19
(ii. 9), that is, exalted to the right hand of God (i. 3) because
ofthe suffering of death. The dutiful fulfilment of his earthly
mission is regarded as a reason for the exaltation of Jesus.
This hardly accords, however, with his having been origin
ally the brightness of the divine glory and the express image
of the divine substance, the appointed heir of all things (i. 2,
3). Perhaps the writer conceived that the lowly service of
Jesus could add ' ' glory and honour ' ' even to so exalted a
being as the preexistent Son. Yet there is an incongruity
in the idea that such a one should be " made perfect through
sufferings," as if he lacked something which could be ac
quired by a human experience.
Made a little lower than the angels (ii. 9). — The correct
rendering is " a little while lower." The idea of time, not
of degree, was in the writer's mind, though the latter was
that of the psalmist quoted. The subordination was, of
course, during his abode upon the earth, and is contrasted
with his supposed preexistent state.
That by the grace of God he should taste of death for every
man (ii. 9). — The mission of Christ for the salvation ofthe
world is conceived as due to the grace of God, that is, His
good-will and merciful kindness. This clause is probably
to be connected with the words " the suffering of death."
In declaring that Christ's death was "for" (in behalf of)
every man the writer expresses the Pauline doctrine of the
universality of the Saviour's mission. It does not appear,
however, that he adopted in detail the apostle's teaching re
garding Jesus' relation to the salvation of men, although,
like Paul, he does not regard a universal atonement as im
plying universal salvation.
Perfect through sufferings (ii. 10). — It was fitting in God
to make Jesus what he should be for the accomplishment of
his mission by subjecting him to suffering. This cannot
refer to the crowning with glory and honour (v. 9), where re
ward is the prominent thought, but to an inner ethical per-

20

HEBREWS ii. 11-14.

fection, as in chapter v. 8 : " Learned obedience by what he
suffered." Christ partook of human nature, and endured
the sufferings incident to his mission in this condition
because both He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified
(ii. Il) are of one origin, or from God, and are brethren.
The proofs from Scripture (ii. 12, 13) are from Ps. xxii. 22
in which the psalmist is speaking of himself, and from Is.
viii. 17, 18, according to the Septuagint, where the prophet
also refers to himself. On the assumption that the words
from Isaiah are spoken by Christ, the writer finds in the
expression of trust in God an evidence of the humanity of
Jesus, and an intimation of the same in I and the children,
that is, children of God, or other men. This may be re
garded as the author's philosophy of the " incarnation," his
rationale of Jesus' assumption of human nature. The argu
ment would be as effective in favour of the entire humanity
of Jesus as it is for his thesis. His proofs from the Old
Testament are as usual groundless and unusually far-fetched.
If he was Apollos, he here justifies the opinion, formed, of
course, from the point of view of his age regarding inter
pretation, that he was " mighty in the Scriptures." *
The argument is carried on to the effect that Jesus must
assume flesh and blood, become mortal, in order that he
might die for the redemption of men.
In like manner partook of flesh and blood (ii. 14). — This
goes beyond Paul, who could bring himself to say only that
Christ was made " in the likeness of sinful flesh," 2 and who
was too logical to declare that the preexistent glorious Son
of God partook of flesh and blood in the same way as men.
But our author is carried away by the impetus of his argu
ment in making this declaration and in saying in the imme
diate connection (v. 17) that Jesus was made in all things
like unto his brethren. How he would have reconciled this
radical humanitarianism with his doctrine that Christ was
1 Acts xviii. 24. 2 Rom. viii. 3.

ii. 14. HEBREWS 21
" the very image " of the divine person we can only con
jecture. The argument reaches its culmination in the teaching that
through death Jesus brought to naught him that hath the
power of death, that is, the devil (ii. 14). The author evi
dently held the doctrine of Paul that sin entails death, the
great terror of which was not the dissolution of the body,
but the deprivation of the resurrection at the coming of
Christ and the hopeless tarrying in the underworld of all
who while living did not receive him through faith. Since
in the popular mythology the devil was supposed to be
seducer of men to sin, he is conceived to have " the power
of death." The writer of the Epistle does not, however,
apprehend the death of Christ after the manner of Paul as
the bearing of the curse ofthe law and the deliverance of men
from it, but as the destruction of the devil. But we miss here
what we find in Paul, an attempt at least to show how this
result is conceived to be effected.
The manner in which the writer speaks ofthe entrance of Jesus into
the world reminds us of Rom. i. 3, viii. 3. Like the apostle, how
ever, he manifests little interest in the events of the earthly life of
Jesus, and does not appear to have been familiar with the Gospel
history. It is altogether a remarkable fact that the epistolary litera
ture of the New Testament shows little contact with or regard for the
events recorded in the Gospels. In Paul's letters the death and resur
rection are almost the only facts of Jesus' career that are mentioned,
and here it is the latter that lends significance to the former. The
apostle's interest in the Founder of Christianity was chiefly dogmatic,
and relates to the appearance on the earth in order to prepare the way
for the Messianic kingdom, to the agony and the subsequent triumph
and to the exaltation to heaven whence will be a. speedy, glorious
coming for the definite establishment of this kingdom. For all that
lies between the birth " of the seed of David according to the flesh "
andthe celestial existence in glory, along with the two events that con
ditioned it, little interest is shown. Whatever acquaintance he may
have had with the life of Jesus,1 it is evident that the details that he
1 1 Cor. xv. 5, 7, xi. 23 f.

22

HEBREWS ii. 16,17.

knew had no importance for him with respect to Christian faith, and
that he laid no stress upon the example of his Master apart from the
few conspicuous events previously mentioned. The man Jesus has
almost no place in his thought, while the ofiicial designations, "Lord,"
"Christ," "Jesus Christ," "Lord Jesus Christ," and "Christ Jesus"
perpetually occur. Although Hebrews was written at a time when at
least the earliest of the first three Gospels was in existence, its atti
tude toward the historical Jesus is similar to that of Paul. The
writer's designation ofthe person of Jesus differs from Paul's, " Lord "
alone occurring only once against the latter's use of it 130 times, and
"Christ" alone 3 times against 180 times in Paul's Epistles, while
"Jesus " is most frequently used. But the personality chiefly in view
is the exalted heavenly high-priest, who was on earth only that he
might be qualified for this celestial function. The declarations re
garding the sinlessness of Jesus are dogmatically conceived rather
than referred to as biographical data,1 and the descent from Juda
(vii. 14) is referred to Num. xxiv. 27, rather than to the Gospel his
tory. See on this subject von Soden's article in Theologische Ab-
handlungen Carl von Weizsacker gewidmet, 1892.
In saying that the work of Jesus does not take hold of
angels (ii. 16) the writer is in conflict with the author of
Colossians (see i. 20 of that Epistle). He appears to have
reasoned that as the Saviour of angelic beings Jesus would
not have needed to become mortal.
But he taketh hold of the seed of Abraham (ii. 16). — Paul-
could not have expressed this limitation of the work of
Christ. If in ii. 10 the writer's real conviction is declared
in the words " taste death for every man," he must here
have written " seed of Abraham " by inadvertence or have
employed the species for the genus.
The theme of the Epistle is now announced for the first
time in the words, that he might be a merciful and faithful
high-priest in things pertaining to God to make propitiation
for the sins of the people (ii. 17).— The further development
ofthe idea proceeds from iv. 14. To make propitiation is to
render God gracious, to placate Him by the offering of a
1 iv. 15, vii. 26, ix. 14. 1

ii. i8-iii. 2. HEBREWS

23

sacrifice in satisfaction for sin, the life of the victim for that
of the people.
Suffered being tempted (ii. 18). — Christ's ability to succour
the tempted is derived from his own suffering of temptation.
Nothing could be more remote than this idea from the
thought of Paul, who never recognised Jesus as undergoing
temptation. The conception of the saving work of Christ as
dependent upon or derived from his participation in a human
struggle with sinful tendencies or an attainment of perfection
by means of suffering (ii. 10, iv. 15) would have been unthink
able to the apostle from the point of view of his Christology.
The theme is here abandoned for a time, and the writer proceeds
to show the superiority of Christ to Moses. Practical' conclusions
and exhortations are added (iii. i.-iv. 13).
Wherefore, that is, on account of the preceding delineation
of the character of Christ. Pay-takers of a heavenly calling
(iii. 1). The readers, spiritual " brethren " of the writer,
are addressed as persons who by reason of their Christian
belief are of those " called " by Christ to be partakers of the
Messianic kingdom when he shall establish it at his second
coming. This call is designated as heavenly because sup
posed to come from heaven, where Christ was believed to
be " at the right hand of God." The Pauline term " elec
tion " (exkoyrf) is not used in the Epistle, but " calling " is
its equivalent.
Apostle and high-priest of our confession (iii. 1). — One sent
as high-priest to be the central object of our confession of
faith.1 Faithful to Him who appointed him (iii. 2). — Probably
" made," that is, created him in the sense of being the
Author of his being, is more correct than appointed to the
office of high-priest.
' This distinctive feature of the Christology of the Epistle is foreign
to Paul, just as his " second Adam " is to our author.

24 HEBREWS iii. 3-1 1.
As Moses was faithful va. all God's house,1 so was Christ,
whose superiority to Moses is declared in the affirmation that
he who established (preferable to built) the house is greater
than a servant in it (iii. 3-6). The house of God, that is,
the religious economy of the Old Testament, in which Moses
was only a servant, is conceived as " established " by Christ
in his preexistent activity, just as he was the agent of the
creation (i. 2). So Philo regarded the Logos as the organ
through whom the world was " established " or prepared.
Afterward to be spoken (iii. 5), that is, the law.
As a Son over His house, whose house are we (iii. 6). — The
superiority of Christ over Moses is indicated by Son as con
trasted with servant and by over as opposed to in. This
house of God is represented as still existing in the Christian
dispensation and as composed of the believers in Christ who
hold fast their joyful confidence in his sure coming again in
his kingdom.
Wherefore, even as the Holy Ghost saith (iii. 7). — Because
you are God's house, or because you have so great a high-
priest. The admonition which follows is based on Ps. xcv.
7-1 1, which is quoted as the word of the Holy Ghost. The
expression, " the Holy Ghost says," is again employed in
x. 15, but not elsewhere in the New Testament. It is a
designation of the prophetic Spirit of God who, in the
Jewish and Christian belief of the time, was regarded as
the inspirer of the Old Testament writers.
So I sware in my wrath (iii. 11). — God's oath ! Compare
Jesus' injunction, " Swear not at all." In ascribing wrath
to God the writer is in accord with other New Testament
writers. In the Gospels, it is an evil to be fled from. In the
Pauline theology it is expressed in the remorseless operation
of the law, and it is Christ who. saves men from it, so far as
through faith they are justified by his blood.2
The readers are now admonished to beware lest they fall
1 Num. xii. 7. » 1 Thess. i. 10 ; Rom. v. 9.

iii. 12-iv. I. HEBREWS

25

away through an evil heart of 'unbelief 'as did the Israelites in
the wilderness (iii. 12). The precise character of the apo
stasy referred to is not indicated, and is in fact not determin
able by any data that we have. Whether the falling away
was conceived as into Judaism or heathenism depends upon
the address of the Epistle, which we have found to be un
certain (see Introduction).
As long as it is called to-day (iii. 13). — To-day includes
" the present age," or the time from the advent of Christ to
his second coming which would usher in " the age to come,"
the to-morrow, the second great world-period.
Accordingly, the condition of being partakers of Christ is
conceived to be the holding fast of confidence firm unto the end
(iii. 14). — The writer had no hope that he or his readers
would share in the joy and glory of the Messianic kingdom
to be set up by Christ at his second coming, unless they re
mained faithful until the time of that coming, that is, unto
the end.
The following section (iii. 15-19) must be read as a whole
without close dependence on the preceding. The sense
probably is : When it is said, To-day if ye shall hear, etc.,
who (I ask) when they heard did provoke, etc. As the Israel
ites were not permitted because of unbelief to enter the
promised land, so we, if we are unfaithful, shall have no
part in the rest and peace of the Messianic kingdom soon to
come. The admonition to the readers is continued to beware, the pro
mise still holding good that they may partake of the Messianic
rest, lest they come short of the offered salvation through the apo
stasy to which he sees them to be inclined (iv. 1-13).
A promise being left (iv. 1). — The promise is regarded as
holding until the time of its fulfilment, that is, until the
second coming of Christ to establish his glorious kingdom.
Those who should be faithful to their Christian profession

26 HEBREWS iv. 2-9.
until that time would enter into the joy and rest of the
Messianic reign ; and if the author may be supposed to have
been in accord with Paul, this fortune would also be that of
those who, not living until that time, should die " in Christ,"
for they would share in the resurrection with " spiritual
bodies." A gospel or good tidings has indeed been preached to us,
says the writer, as well as to them ; but the word heard did
not profit them because " not mixed with faith in them that
heard it." This rendering of King James' version is prefer
able to that of the revised which reads because they were not
united by faith with them that heard (iv. 2).1
Belief is necessary to the profitable hearing of the word of
truth, for we enter into that rest as believers, according to
the Psalm previously quoted to show that unbelievers in
former times were excluded from the promised land (iv. 3).
Although the works (iv. 3). — This is said in order to show
that the " rest " was already long since prepared. The rest
in question is simply analogous to that which in the Hebrew
tradition of the creation, naively accepted by the writer, God
was supposed to have enjoyed at the end of the work of
making the heavens and the earth.
Yet after so long a time (iv. 7), God says, To-day if ye will
hear. In David, that is, the person through whom, accord
ing to the writer's idea of the inspiration of the Scripture
writers, God spoke iu the Psalm (xcv.), which is not Davidic,
although ascribed to David in the Septuagint, from which
the quotation was made.
For if Joshua (iv. 8). — This is said in confirmation of verse
7. He would not have sppken. The subject here is God.
There remaineth therefore a sabbath-rest (iv. 9) ; not a lit
eral rest on the sabbath, but the term is employed as a
type of blessedness. The people of God are those who are
believing and obedient. Apostates would have no part in
1 This translation is based upon the reading, 6vyHSHpa6ixivoVi.

iv. 10-14. HEBREWS 27
the blessed Messianic kingdom which was conceived as
about to come.
For he that is entered (iv. 10). — The analogy above referred
to is here indicated, and labour is enjoined, lest any man
fall after the same example of unbelief .
For the word of God is living (iv. 12). — This "word"
doubtless includes the entire message of God to man de
livered both in the Old Testament and in the teaching of
Jesus. No New Testament as an authoritative book con
taining ' ' the word of God ' ' was of course known to the
writer. The epithet " living " means having in itself vital
power and hence " active." The two terms relate, accord
ing to the connection, to the retributive power of God exer
cised upon those who are unbelieving and disobedient. This
idea is forcibly presented in the words, sharper than any two-
edged sword, which divides those things that we think of as
indivisible — the "soul," the vital principle, and the " spirit "
the immaterial, rational principle. Philo speaks in a similar
manner of the Logos as the one who divides all things, the
atoms even in the sensible sphere and in the supersensible
the soul, speech, and perception. In the flaming sword
(Gen. iii. 24) he finds a symbol of the Logos. The employ
ment of this figure probably indicates the writer's Alexan
drian culture.1
Quick to discern the thoughts (iv. 12). — This is probably
intended to indicate God's discernment of the moral quality
of the intentions of men or His function as a judge.
In iv. 14-v. 10, the writer proceeds to establish the doctrine of
the high-priesthood of Christ laid down in ii. 17 and iii. 1, to which
" therefore " looks back.
A great high-priest (iv. 14). — So Philo characterises the
Logos.1 Through the heavens relates to Christ's exaltation
1 The epithet ro/ioovspoi "sounds like an echo of Philo's doctrine
concerning the cutting or dividing function of the Logos." — Bruce,
Ep. to Heb., p. 167. 2 dpteyai dpxiepevS.

28 HEBREWS iv. 15.
to the right hand of God already mentioned (i. 3), and is to
be understood literally from the cosmological point of view
of the writer to whom " the heavens," designated as a local
ity through which the glorified Jesus is supposed to have
" passed " in order to reach the throne of God, are the celes
tial, upper regions. See " higher than the heavens" (vii.
26) and ' ' far above all the heavens ' ' (Eph. iv. 10). The
greatness and exaltation of the New Testament high-priest
are thus indicated (Bleek). This " great high-priest " is no
other than Jesus the Son of God — an epithet whereby his
dignity is distinctively marked. Since such an exalted high-
priest is ours, reasons the writer, let us holdfast our confession,
that is, the confession of the Christian faith in general, which
is spoken of here and in iii. 1 as if in the writer's time (the
post-apostolic age) it had crystallised into a formula. But
the exalted rank of Christ is not the only reason why in the
opinion of our author the Christians should hold fast their
confession. Another motive is added in the declaration that we have
not a high-priest that cannot be touched with a feeling of our
infirmities (iv. 15). — Jesus having been " made in all re
spects " as we are is a sympathetic high-priest, having car
ried into his exalted heavenly state a remembrance of his
experiences in the flesh. He accordingly regards with
tenderness and compassion the weaknesses and infirmities
which afflict men in their sinful earthly estate, and is able to
represent them sympathetically before God, the judge.
In all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin (iv. 15).
— This positive assertion is set over against the negative of
the preceding clause. We meet here the problem suggested
by ii. 10 — how the writer's conception of the preexistent
Christ as a divine being endowed with almighty power is
reconcilable with that of him as subject to temptation like
men and hence exposed to the possibility of sinning. Per
haps the problem did not present itself to him at all, and if

iv. 16-v. 2. HEBREWS

29

it did, we have no means of knowing how he would have
solved it. Paul nowhere speaks of Jesus as tempted by sin,
yet our author surpasses the apostle in his exaltation of
Christ in his preexistent state. The declaration that he was
without sin reminds us of a similar idea of Philo's regarding
the Logos. The Jewish doctrine of the Messiah also assumed
that he would be sinless.
The throne of grace (iv. 16). — Because the merciful and
compassionate high-priest now sits at the right hand of God,
where according to vii. 25 he " makes intercession " for those
who approach " through him," the throne of God is char
acterised as the throne of grace. Since the high-priest has
' ' passed through the heavens ' ' after his work of ' ' propitia
tion," the old order of strict retribution is conceived as no
longer prevailing, but as superseded by the dispensation of
" grace." This is the doctrine of Paul, with whom it
originated, but it is not definitely expressed in the teaching
of Jesus.
A further elaboration of the theme of the high-priesthood of Christ
is now made by showing that he possesses certain qualities which
belong to high-priests qualified to minister under the law (v. 1-10).
The argument with which this section opens is closely
connected with the declaration in iv. 15. Every high-priest
is appointed for the sake of men, in order that by offering
gifts and sacrifices he may mediate between God and men.
The high- priest must be one who can bear gently with the
ignorant and erring for that he himself also is compassed with
infirmity (v. 2). — The high-priest might offer atonement for
sins committed through ignorance.1 The word rendered
bear gently means to observe a due moderation in sympathy.
Infirmity must be understood in a moral sense, and of course
does not imply the sinlessness of the subject. The author
has, however, forestalled the pressing of this analogy too far
1 Num. xv. 22-31.

30 HEBREWS v. 4-7.
by the preceding declaration that Jesus was " without sin."
It must be conceded that his argument here is somewhat
unskilful. It appears to support the absolute humanity of
Jesus, though this is manifestly not his purpose.
No man taketh the honour to himself "(v. 4). — Thus the com
parison between Jesus and the Jewish high-priest is carried
further, and related to the call to the office. Just as Aaron
was called of God, so also was Christ, who did not glorify
himself, but was glorified by God who appointed him, and
who not only signified the high honour which He conferred
upon him by calling him His Son, but also designated him
as a high-priest forever after the order of Melchizedek (v. 6).
In Ps. ex. 4 these words are represented by the psalmist as
addressed to a Hebrew king. They no more refer to Christ
than any of the other passages interpreted by the writer as
having such a reference (i. 5-13, ii. 6-8). The argument is
that since Christ was not descended from Aaron, all of whose
descendants were regarded as ' ' called ' ' in him, it might be
maintained that he had assumed the rank of high-priest, to
which he was not entitled. In that case he could not make
a true atonement. But he was called or appointed to be a
high-priest by the same authority by which he was assigned
to his unique position of eminence as the Son of God, that is,
by a divine authority. It is uncertain whether rank or suc
cession is intended by order of Melchizedek.
Who [Christ] in the days of his flesh (v. 7). — The reference
is to the agony of Jesus, and the writer had in mind perhaps
the struggle in Gethsemane, with the account of which in
the synoptic Gospels he may have been acquainted.
Him that was able to save him from death, and having been
heard for his godly fear (v. 7).— The interpretation of this
passage depends upon the sense in which the word rendered
" godly fear " (evXafieia) is understood. If it is taken as
" reverence toward God " (" godly fear ") the rendering of
the revised version is correct, and the passage means that

v. 8, 9. HEBREWS 31
Jesus was heard, when he prayed for deliverance from death,
on account of this pious disposition. Those who understand
the word in question to mean " fear" (of death), read the
passage to mean " heard and delivered from this fear," and
refer this deliverance to the angel who comforted Jesus,
according to Luke xxii. 43, or, taking fear to stand for its
object, death, to his resurrection. The word rendered
" for" (and) in the revised version may mean " on account
of" or " from." Against the latter interpretation it is urged
that the writer must have meant that Jesus was delivered
from that from which he prayed to be delivered, which was
death, and not the fear of death. From this point of view
he is regarded as having been " heard " in accordance with
his prayer, which expressed submission to the divine will.
This idea is somewhat far-fetched, and one cannot be certain
that it was in the mind of the writer. The passage is
undoubtedly obscure, and the best interpreters are divided
as to its meaning.
Though he was a Son, learned obedience by what he suffered
(v. 8). — The problem previously mentioned here recurs for
the third time : How could he who preexisted as the Son, a
divine being, learn obedience for the first time in his earthly
life ? The explanation that he had before his passion the
disposition of obedience which required, in order to prove its
existence, to be confirmed by the act, is futile, for it is
gratuitous to affirm that he did not actually obey until this
great crisis. The author certainly implies his belief in the
subordination of the Son in his preexistent state to the
Father, when he speaks of him as an ' ' apostle ' ' or one sent
on a mission and as being for a time " made lower than the
angels." The acceptance of these lowly fortunes implies
obedience prior to his earthly sufferings.
And having been made perfect he became (v. 9). — The idea
is that Jesus was not fitted to be the Saviour of men until he
had the experience of suffering in his earthly estate. But

32

HEBREWS v. II, 12.

after having been " compassed with infirmity " (v. 2), and
been " in all points tempted like as we are " (iv. 15), he was
qualified to appear in heaven as a merciful and compassionate
high-priest. — Unto all them that obey, that is all without
regard to nationality, Jews and gentiles alike.
The section v. 1 i-vi. 20 proceeds, after a digression on the ina
bility of the readers to understand the " things hard of interpreta
tion " which the writer has to say, with an exhortation to " press
on to perfection," with a warning against apostasy on account of
the impossibility of renewal to repentance, and with a reminder of
the promise made to Abraham.
Of whom we have many things to say (v. II). — The refer
ence is not to Melchizedek, but to Christ who, as " a high-
priest after the order of Melchizedek, " is the chief topic of
the Epistle. The writer anticipates difficulty in making
himself intelligible to his readers, because they have become
dull of hearing, that is, in contrast with a previous condition
of greater spiritual susceptibility to such doctrinal discus
sions and expositions.
For whom by reason of the time (v. 12). — The readers had
been so long a time Christians that the writer thinks they
ought to be qualified to become teachers of Christianity.
This is a local colour which shows that the Epistle was not
general, but was addressed to persons with whose circum
stances the writer was acquainted. These words do not sup
port a very early date for the Epistle. The readers had been
instructed by hearers of Christ (ii. 3), some of their leaders
or rulers had died (xiii. 3), and indifference and a tendency
to apostasy had crept in among them. They must have be
longed to the second or third generation of Christians.
The rudiments of the first principles ofthe oracles of God (v.
12), the most elementary principles of the revelation of God
through Christ. The term "oracles of God" sometimes
refers in early Christian writers to the Old Testament,1 and
' Acts vii. 38 ; Rom. iii. 2.

v. 12-vi. I. HEBREWS 33
again to utterances of Christian teachers.1 The context
clearly determines the meaning here.
And are become such as have need of milk (v. 12), that is,
elementary instruction in Christianity, in which the writer
evidently did not regard his doctrine of Christ as " a high-
priest after the order of Melchizedek " as belonging.
Without experience (v. 13).- — Since righteousness denotes
the essential contents of Christianity, inexperienced in the
word of righteousness means undeveloped and crude as
Christians. Have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil (v.
14). — The senses as physical organs of perception cannot, of
course, be meant. A better rendering were " faculties of
judgment." 2
Wherefore let us cease to speak of the first principles of Christ
(vi. I). — Wherefore refers to the preceding, and the connec
tion is : since you are yet babes in Christian doctrine, and
the condition of perfection still lies before you. The trans
lation, " let us cease to speak," rests upon the judgment
that the writer meant to say : " Let me cease to talk of the
first principles," etc. But the connection acquires the inter
pretation : " Do you, therefore, leave the first principles of
Christ, and press on to perfection," the author including
himself with his readers and saying, " let us press on."
The old version is here preferable to the revised. The con
trast is between the condition of babes occupied with the first
principles of Christian instruction and that of " full-grown "
1 1 Pet. iv. 11.
2 at6BrjTrjpia, a word not elsewhere used in the New Testament.
It occurs in the Septuagint, Jer. iv. 19, -<_ ai<5Qr;Tr/pia. rrji ipvxtfS fiov.
Galen is quoted as saying that he who has his ai6Qr/r?}piov well exer
cised may be the best judge or interpreter, api6roi — yveo/toov. The
reference of the word to the inner sense, the power of apprehending
spiritual things, may be regarded as well supported. Verses 12-14
show a dependence on 1 Cor. iii. 1-3. See Jiilicher, Einleii, 1901,
p. 122.

34 HEBREWS vi. 2-4.
or " perfect " men, and " perfection " refers to a condition
to be attained by the readers, and not to a teaching to be
presented by the writer. Since they are exhorted to leave
the first principles of Christianity and press to higher themes
of doctrine, the writer enjoins upon them not to lay anew the
foundations of repentance from dead works and of faith toward
God. l He does not counsel them to reject these elements, but
urges them to pass beyond them. Repentance from dead,
that is, unfruitful, sinful works and faifh in God as the one
whose will and love are revealed through Christ were among
the elementary doctrines of Christianity. It is not probable
that the author had in mind " the works ofthe law," with
reference to which repentance would be inappropriate.
Of the teaching of baptisms, etc. (vi. 2). — "Baptisms"
(plural), with reference probably to the Christian rite in
comparison with the various washings practised among the
ceremonies of other religions (ix. 10). The laying on of
hands was, however, a specifically Christian ceremony, and
was performed in connection with baptism.2 In the early
Church baptism was connected with repentance and faith,
and the latter with the resurrection of the dead.3 The resur
rection of the dead and eternal judgment were doctrines both
of Judaism and primitive Christianity. They were believed
to be events of the Messianic reign which in the latter sys
tem was conceived as about to begin at the second coming
of Christ.
For, as touching those who were once enlightened (vi. 4). —
1 In placing "faith toward God" (_ri(.rz. t%l rov Beov) among the
rudiments which are to be left behind, the writer appears to have no
such conception of faith as a condition of righteousness as obtains in
the theology of Paul, where it is set over against "works" : re. 8i
fiV ipyat,op.£vw, tci6tevovti Si ... . Xoyi^erai xitinS avro-v eti
SiMaiotiivnv (Rom. iv. 5). He rather regards it as simple confidence
in God's promises.
2 Acts viii. 16, 17, xix. 5, 6.
3 Acts ii. 38, xvii. 31, xxiv. 14, 15, xxvi. 8.

vi. 5, 6. HEBREWS 35
For relates to the exhortation in verse 3, " this let us do "
(which is the meaning instead of " this we will do," accord
ing to a well-supported reading of the Greek text). The
urgent appeal to the readers that they should advance toward
higher attainments in the Christian life is now strengthened
by a warning of the danger of apostasy. Enlightened are
those who have received the truth of the gospel of Jesus.1
And tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of
the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost was regarded as a gift in
the primitive Church,2 and the two expressions perhaps have
essentially the same meaning. The early Christians at
tributed their religious experiences to a " heavenly" and
supernatural source.
Tasted the good word of God (vi. 5), the gospel, as that
spoken by God (i. 2). The repetition of " tasted " is awk
ward. And the powers of the age to come, the Messianic age
to be introduced by the expected second coming of Christ
(ii. 5). The powers of that age are conceived to be the
wonderful operations of the Holy Spirit, which had already
begun, and been " tasted " in the then present age.
It is impossible to renew them again unto repentance (vi.
6). — Impossible (advvarov) is here used in the absolute
sense, and it is unwarrantable to soften it into " extremely
difficult " or any analogous expression.
In the manner in which the writer of the Epistle here speaks of a
sin for which repentance is impossible and in the terms employed he
stands alone among the New Testament writers. The sin in question
is not the so-called blasphemy against the Holy Ghost,3 which con
sisted in charging Jesus with having an unclean spirit. If it was a
sin against Jesus, as that called "unto death" in 1 John v. 16 is
according to the connection, it might be forgiven (and in forgiveness
repentance is, of course, implied),4 as he himself declares. But the
sin is simply and only that of falling away or apostasy from the con-
1 2 Cor. iv. 4, 6 ; 1 Pet. ii. 9. 3 Matt. xii. 31 ; Mark iii. 29.
8 Acts xi. 17. 4 Matt. xii. 32.

36 HEBREWS vi. 10-13.
fession of Christ after having enjoyed the blessings and privileges of
a Christian experience. According to the illustration which follows
(vv. 7-9), it is unfruitfulness, the bearing of "thorns and thistles"
where "herbs meet for them for whose sake it [the land] is also
tilled " might be expected. The harsh judgment of the author is not
supported by the cases of Peter and Judas,1 by any known psychologi
cal law, or by any facts of human experience. On the other hand it
would appear according to the doctrine of the author himself that
Christ, as the great high-priest who on the cross prayed for the for
giveness of his enemies, would take a more hopeful and sympathetic
view of the case of those who crucify him ' ' afresh ' ' in that they ' ' fall
away." Paul appears never to have despaired of the ultimate salva
tion of believers. Even the spirit of the incestuous man was to be
" saved in the day of the Lord," although he was delivered over to
Satan.2 For God is not unrighteous to forget (vi. 10). — The writer
hopes ' ' better things ' ' of his readers than the desperate
fortunes depicted in verse 6, and represents their preserva
tion from it as due to God's remembrance of their former
charities, as if a hopeless apostasy were not dependent upon
their own volition and action, but upon the disposition of
God toward them on account of their treatment of the
" saints." It is not clear whether he means that God would
shield them from apostasy, or, in case they should apostatise,
would not treat them as apostates. In either case the doctrine
appears to be that former good works may in some way save
men from falling into a condition from which it is " impos
sible to renew them to repentance," and that they are not
left to themselves to induce by " an irreversible natural law ' '
a " permanent fixedness of character." The idea that their
hope lies in antecedent " works " accords with the teaching
of Jesus rather than with Paul's doctrine of "justification
by faith."
For when God made promise to Abraham (vi. 13). — For
connects the following with the last clause of verse 12, and
1 Matt. xxvi. 75, xxvii. 3. 2 1 Cor. v. 5.

vi. I3-I9- HEBREWS 37
the teaching is that perseverance in faith and patience secures
the enjoyment of the " promises " of God. The illustration
is drawn from the story of Abraham.1
Swear by Himself . . . interposed with an oath (vi. 13
and 17). — The naive Jewish and primitive-Christian concep
tion of God is here expressed, according to which He is rep
resented as acting after the manner of men even to the taking
of an oath for solemn confirmation. Philo also remarks on
the circumstance that God swore " not by another, but by
Himself who is the best of all." In the Old Testament God
is sometimes represented as swearing in anger."
That by two immutable things (vi. 1 8), that is, the promise,
or perhaps its supposed fulfilment in the gospel, and the
oath. The words, that . . . we may have a strong en
couragement, etc., imply, according to the writer's method
of interpreting the Old Testament wherever possible with
reference to the Christian economy, that he regarded the
promise to Abraham as made in view of the believers of
primitive-Christian times. It is ungrammatical to interpret,
" so that we have," etc. Interpretations similar to that in
verse 18 abound in the writers of the early Church. The
Old Testament was their only written authority, and they
allegorised it (made it say something else than it really said)
whenever it suited their purpose to do so.3
As an anchor (vi. 19), a means of safety in the storm and
stress of earthly trial.
Both sure and stedfast and entering into that which is
within the veil (vi. 19). — It is unnecessary to supply "a
hope " here, as is done in the revised version. The figure
of the anchor is carried out to the end of the clause. The
veil refers to the curtain hung in the tabernacle before the
holy of holies, and entering within the veil is a figure for
extending into heaven, whither as a forerunner Jesus entered
1 Gen. xxii. 16-19.
2 Num. xxxii. 10 ; Deut. i. 34. 3 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10.

38 HEBREWS vi. 20-vii. 3.
for us (vi. 20), according to iv. 14 (see ix. 12, 24). The
writer now returns to the theme mentioned in v. 10.
The author now goes to work in earnest to develop and establish
his theme of the high-priesthood of Christ after the order of Mel
chizedek (vii. 1-28). In proceeding to show first what it means to
be such a high-priest, he devotes a little space to a consideration of
the man Melchizedek (vv. 1-10).
King of Salem, priest of God Most High (vii. l).1-r-The
author follows the story in Genesis of the meeting of Abra
ham and Melchizedek, in which the latter is designated as a
' ' priest of the Most High God. ' ' The author of this portion
of Genesis doubtless adopted the tradition that Jerusalem,
near which Salem probably was,2 if it was not a name
for Jerusalem itself,3 was always the seat of the worship of
the Hebrew supreme God, El. Accordingly, in saying that
Melchizedek was a priest of the Most High God, he had
in mind the national divinity, Yahweh.
King of righteousness . . . King of peace (vii. 2), that
is, by interpretation of the Hebrew names, ' ' Melchizedek ' '
and " Salem." 4 It is noteworthy that Philo had previously
given a similar interpretation. The appropriateness of the
ideas of ' ' righteousness ' ' and ' ' peace ' ' to Jesus may have
influenced the writer's conception of a parallel between him
and Melchizedek. The fancy of the allegoriser was quick
to seize upon such verbal analogies.
Without father, without mother (vii. 3).— Since no mention
of Melchizedek' s parents is made in Genesis, the writer arbi
trarily concludes according to the allegorising of Philo,
" from the silence of the Scriptures," that he had none !
This idea accords with his purpose, which is to show that
Melchizedek, a " type " of Christ, was superior to the leviti
cal priests, who did not enjoy the distinction of having come
1 See Gen. xiv. 18-20. 3 See Ps. Ixxvi. 2.
2 John iii. 23. 4 Josephus, fewish Wars, vi. 10.

vii. 3-10. HEBREWS. 39
into the world without fathers and mothers. Probably he
did not intend to press his interpretation by types so far as
to draw the inference that Jesus, in his earthly existence at
least, was without parents, for in verse 14 he says that " it
is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah."
Having neither beginning of days nor end of life (vii. 3). —
This is an inference from the fact that in Genesis there is no
mention of the beginning or end of Melchizedek.
But made like unto the Son of God (vii. 3). — According to
the writer's method of interpretation Melchizedek was a
' ' type ' ' of Christ. The resemblances which his fancy seizes
upon are found in the name and residence — " righteousness "
and "peace" — and in the absence of "genealogy," alle
gorical ly read into the Old Testament account, and doubtless
applied to the preexistent being of Christ, despite the fact
that he calls him the Son of God.
Abideth a priest continually (vii. 3). — The subject is Mel
chizedek (v. 1). Continually here means " forever," as in
x. 12, 14. The perpetuity of Melchizedek's priesthood is
inferred from the fact that no end of it is mentioned in
Genesis, because it suited the author's fancy that he was a
type of Christ. He now proceeds to argue (vv. 4-10) the
superiority of Melchizedek to the levitical priests from the
fact that to ' ' this great man ' ' Abraham gave tithes. Now
the sons of Levi receive tithes, though they are descendants
of Abraham. But Melchizedek, who was not one of the
offspring of Levi, received tithes of Abraham. Therefore
Levi, who was yet unborn when these tithes were paid, in
fact, paid tithes to Melchizedek ! The conclusion is obvious
that, according to this method of reasoning, Melchizedek as
a priest outranks the levitical priesthood, so that Christ, of
whom " this great man " was a type, is a high-priest superior
to the priests under the law. Melchizedek was greater than
Abraham, for it is the greater who gives the blessing. Be
sides, Melchizedek was not mortal like the levitical priests

40 HEBREWS vii. 11-17.
who take tithes, because it is witnessed that he liveth (v. 8),
that is, by ' ' the silence of the Scriptures ' ' about his death.
The argument now proceeds to show that the levitical priest
hood, having together with the Mosaic law become invalid, has been
superseded by a better (vv. 11-17).
If there was perfection by the levitical priesthood (vii. II). —
A conditional clause implying a negative. Since the levitical
priesthood was imperfect, that is, incapable of making a per
fect atonement, there was need that another priest should
arise after the order of Melchizedek. Since, then, under the
levitical priesthood the people received the law, a change of
the former rendered necessary a change of the latter (v. 12).
The expression is mild and cautious, but more than a
" change " is evidently meant, as is apparent from verse 18,
in which the author, grown bolder, employs a term which
expresses nothing short of the abrogation of the law. This
Pauline idea is not, however, expressed in Pauline terms.
For he of whom those things are said (vii. 13). — The levitical
priesthood and the law of Moses here become invalid, because
the new high-priest, Christ, sprang from another tribe than
that of Levi, from a tribe which had furnished no priest.
For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah (vii.
14). — The writer speaks of this physical descent of Jesus as
a well known and undisputed fact. He appears, like Paul
and the other authors of the canonical Epistles, to have
known nothing of the story of the miraculous conception of
the mother of Jesus, or at least not to have accepted it. De
scent from Judah thus unqualifiedly expressed can mean
nothing else than paternity through that line.
And what we say is yet more abundantly evident (vii. 15-
17)- — Another proof is presented of the disuse of the old
priesthood and the Mosaic law in the contention that the new
high-priest " after the order of Melchizedek " was not made
according to the external and perishable law regarding the

vii. 18-22. HEBREWS

41

levitical priesthood, but after the power of an endless life, that
is, he is not a mortal high-priest, but one who " abideth
forever" (v. 24), as is " witnessed" by the passage from
the Psalm before quoted.
The significance of the establishment of this new high-
priesthood is now declared to be nothing short of the dis
annulling of a foregoing commandment (vii. 18, 19), because
it was inadequate as a means of atonement. The command
ment, the entire levitical legislation, was weak and unprofit
able, and a better hope is furnished in this new high-priesthood,
a hope through which we draw nigh unto God.1 The ample
atonement of the great high-priest and his heavenly office as
intercessor are the foundation of a hope which brings men
into closer relations with God. The author here expresses
a practical vital principle of Christianity as he understood it.
Never tiring of quoting from the Old Testament, the writer
now strengthens his argument, as he supposes, by recurring
to the " oath " of God respecting the perpetuity of the
priesthood in question (vii. 2l). See note on v. 6 and vi.
13-20. Since the old priesthood was instituted without an
oath of God, His oath in this case makes Christ the surety
of a better covenant (vii. 22).
Another reason for the superiority of the high-priest Christ over
the levitical priesthood is found in the fact that the latter was com
posed of mortal beings who were hindered by death from continuing
perpetually in office (vii. 23), while the former abideth forever, and
has an unchangeable priesthood (vii. 24).
1 The writer's depreciation of the law is quite unqualified. He does
not even accord to the Mosaic economy an historical place and worth
in the education of mankind. Paul, while arraigning it on other
grounds than our author's, could still recognise it as given "unto
life," as "holy, just, and good " (Rom. vii. 10, 12), and as a "school
master unto Christ " (Gal. iii. 24) ; but here there are no such epithets
to .soften the harshness of the judgment upon the old dispensa
tion. It is bluntly declared to be dtfOsveS ual dvaxpsXe?, weak and
unprofitable — a law of a carnal commandment, tvToXrjS dapxivqS.
According to Paul, it is thefiesh that is weak (dddey^i.)

42 HEBREWS vii. 25-27.
Wherefore he is able to save to the uttermost, etc. (vii. 25),
that is, to save most completely, perfectly to deliver from
sin and its consequences and also without doubt to give a
place in his kingdom about to come upon the earth.
Them that draw near to God through him he can save,
since he is the mediator between God and men who, having
"passed through the heavens" and been "seated on the
right of God, ' ' ever liveth to make intercession for them. The
idea that Christ in his exalted state makes " intercession "
for men is expressed by Paul,1 and the writer of 1 John (ii. 1)
speaks of an " Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the
righteous." But neither of those writers enters upon the
question how it is conceivable that God as ' ' the Father ' '
should need or could tolerate in His presence an advocate
or intercessor in behalf of His own children. The doctrine
can logically carry only the implication of a deficiency in
His wisdom or His love. Philo ascribes this function to the
Logos. Finally, Christ is shown to be a more excellent high-priest
than those of the levitical order, because the latter were sin
ful men who must daily offer sacrifices for their own sins and
then for the sins of the people, while he was holy, guileless,
undefiled (vii. 26, 27). Besides, having been made higher
than the heavens, ' he is forever before God in behalf of men
(see verse 25) and is separated from sinners.
Who needeth not daily (vii. 27). — This is not strictly ac
curate. The Jewish high-priest did not officiate " daily."
The writer has probably confused the office of this function
ary with the usual daily sacrifices offered by the priests.
Once for all, when he offered himself '(vii. 27), that is, one
time for all times. The one sacrifice of Christ sufficed for a
full atonement or satisfaction for the sins of men. Accord
ingly, he is not alone the high-priest of the new covenant,
who is superior to the levitical priests in that he needed only
1 Rom. viii. 34. 2 See iv. 14 and Eph. iv. 10.

vii. 27. HEBREWS 43
once to make an offering, but he is also in his own person
the offering itself which, by so much as he is great, is better
than all the sacrifices presented by the old priesthood (viii.
3, ix. 12, 14, 25, x. 10, 12, 14).
The doctrine of the high-priesthood of Christ, the credit for the
first elaborate presentation of which belongs to the author of Hebrews,
is an inheritance of Christianity from Judaism, or, more strictly
speaking, it is a product of Hellenistic Christianity, or the Christian
ity of a Judaism affected by Greek culture and ideas. It may be
traced to the high-priesthood of the Logos in Philo of Alexandria, by
whose writings the author of the Epistle was doubtless considerably
influenced. Philo applied the title " high- priest " to the Logos, con
ceived by him as a supersensible entity without participation in
human earthly fortunes. Our author does not, like the writer ofthe
fourth Gospel, specifically apply the term "Logos " to Christ, but he
represents a type of theology which was well advanced toward this
Johannine idea. It is not entirely clear whether or no he regarded
Christ in his preexistent state as the high-priest of the new covenant.
The words in vii. 3 seem to favour this hypothesis, where he says
that Melchizedek who was "without genealogy" was "made Hke
unto the Son of God " and " abideth a priest continually."
But the idea of a high-priesthood is not here necessarily connected
with the Son of God, who is evidently referred to as in i. 2, 3, with
reference to conditions antedating his appearance in the flesh, in
which he is not conceived as "without genealogy" (vii. 14). On
the other hand, the writer appears to regard Jesus' earthly life as a
preparation for the high-priesthood. He conceives the true and fitting
high-priest for men to be one who can be " touched with the feeling
of our infirmities," and who has been " tempted in all points as we
are" (iv. 14, 15), and does not regard Jesus in his capacity of high-
priest as " the author of eternal salvation," until he had in his human
life "learned obedience" through suffering and been "made perfect,"
that is, perfectly fitted for his work as Saviour (ii. 17). The real, per
fect high-priest, however, is not recognised by the author in the Jesus
of earthly experience, the suffering and tempted one, but only in the
exalted Son of God who had "passed through the heavens " (iv. 14,
v. 9), where he "abideth forever " in an " unchangeable priesthood "
(vii. 24). "If he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all"
(viii. 4), but as the true high-priest he did not enter into a holy place

44 HEBREWS viii. i.
made with hands, . . . but into heaven itself (ix. 24). His sacri
fice on the cross provided the means of atonement by virtue of which
he appears as the heavenly high-priest " before the face of God for
us." "The things in the heavens " must be " cleansed with better
sacrifices " than their "copies " on the earth (ix. 23), and it is as an
intercessor for men "before the face of God," where he is entitled to
stand by reason of his suffering, that he is conceived to be the real
high-priest ofthe new and better covenant.
This idea ofthe earthly life of Jesus as a preparation for the heavenly
high-priesthood denotes a departure from Philo possible only to a
christianised Alexandrian, to whom the person Jesus and not the
supersensible Logos was the central figure. Philo's high-priest after
the order of Melchizedek "no longer hovers forever in remote heights,
but he has assumed flesh and blood, is tempted, and has suffered like
men (ii. 14, 18, iv. 15, v. 7), and his earthly suffering has first made
him capable of serving men as a high-priest. Thereby is the chasm,
which yawned with Philo between the world above and the earth,
bridged over. Life has come into the unchangeable inflexibility of
that world of ideas. Theosophy is changed into religion." But this
divine, preexistent Son of God, apparently next to Deity Himself
the most exalted being in the universe, is supposed to have needed
this school of human life in order to "learn" that which should
qualify him for his office. If the author conceived him to have
"emptied himself" of his divinity,1 the problem still remains how he
could have thought him to be the same being as before.
Our interest in this subject, the high-priesthood of Christ, is chiefly
historical. It is an idea conceived by the author of the Epistle, is
without foundation in the teaching of Jesus, and is based upon an
erroneous interpretation of passages from the Old Testament. The
fact that it appears in a writing which has been received into the New
Testament canon does not give it the importance of a doctrine of
Christianity. The next step in the argument of the Epistle is to show that the
sanctuary in which Christ as high-priest officiates is superior to the
levitical, for it is heavenly and not made with hands. The service
which he performs is as much above the old priestly function as the
covenant under which he ministers is better than the former (viii.
1-13). Sat down on the right hand (viii. 1). — See i. 3, ii. 9, iv. 14,
1 Phil. ii. 7.

viii. 2-5. HEBREWS 45
vii. 26. Having been thus exalted, the ministry of this great
high-priest is that of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle
which God pitched, not man (viii. 2). It is not a ministry of
the earthly tabernacle, but is in heaven " before the face of
God." There exists the true tabernacle, the original type,
of which the tabernacle of the levitical priesthood is only a
' ' copy " or a " shadow. ' ' In expressing this idea the author
shows his dependence upon the Alexandrian thought. The
Alexandrian Book of Wisdom contains a similar conception
respecting the altar as an imitation of that prepared by God
from the beginning. Which the Lord pitched, that is God.
' ' Lord ' ' is elsewhere used of God in the Epistle only in cita
tions from the Old Testament.
Have somewhat to offer (viii. 3).— This does not mean that
in his function in the heavenly tabernacle, Christ actually
" offers " his body as a sacrifice, but that he appears there for
atonement, by reason of having offered it in his earthly
passion. Now if he were on the earth he would not be a priest at all
(viii. 4). — On the earth he would have no priestly function.
Only two kinds of priests are known to the author — those
on the earth, the levitical priests, and the one high-
priest in heaven, who does not offer gifts according to
the law, but under the new covenant ministers in " the true
tabernacle." The former serve that which is a copy and shadow of the
heavenly things (viii. 5) — an indication of the inferiority and
imperfection of the earthly sanctuary as contrasted with the
heavenly. The Platonic doctrine of Ideas appears here by
way of the Alexandrian school in a Christian writer of the
first century.
According to the pattern shown to thee in the mount (viii.
5)-1 — The writer supposes Moses to have seen by way of
divine revelation the original type or pattern of the Jewish
1 See Ex. xxv. 40.

46 HEBREWS viii. 6-ix. i.
tabernacle (or as Plato would say the Idea of it), when he
was on Sinai.
The mediator of a better covenant (viii. 6).1 — Christ is con
ceived as intervening between God and men in order to turn
aside by his atonement the consequences of sin. Paul does
not call Jesus a " mediator," but following Philo he applies
the term to Moses.2
The writer now declares again the imperfection of the old
covenant, and proceeds to give proof from Scripture of the
establishment of a new and better one (vv. 7-12) ¦ The
" new covenant," however, of which mention is made in
the quotation from Jeremiah xxxi. 31-34, relates historically
to the restoration of the Jews, and is a covenant promised with
the people of the northern and southern kingdoms or Israel
and Judah (v. 9). The writer of the Epistle, in accordance
with his allegorical method of interpretation, understands it
to mean the new covenant of the Christian dispensation.
This appears from verse 13, in which he speaks of the old
covenant, or the Old Testament economy, as aged and nigh
unto vanishing away.
The author now proceeds (ix. i-x. 18) to an exposition of the
work of the great high-priest, Christ, and introduces the subject
with an account of the arrangements of the old sanctuary, which he
regards as showing in their character its temporary and perishable
nature. A worldly sanctuary (ix. 1). — This is accusative coordinate
with " ordinances of divine service." The adjective noa-
/xihov, from xoctjaos, can have no other meaning than worldly
or pertaining to the world, mundanus. A contrast is thus
indicated between the sanctuary of the Old Covenant and
that of the New, the worldly in opposition to the heavenly
(i.Ttovpaviov).% 1 See ix. 15, xii. 24 ; 1 Tim. ii. 5. 2 Gal. iii. 19, 20.
3 Cf. uazd. . . . rijv xo6fiiKrjv didra&v, Plutarch, De Consolat.

ix. 4-1 1. HEBREWS 47
Having a golden censer, etc. (ix. 4). — The proper render
ing of the word is " altar of incense," and the writer has
committed an " archaeological error " in saying that it was
in the most holy place. The statement of the contents of
the ark of the covenant is not according to 1 Kings viii. 9. —
Once in the year (ix. 7) is not strictly accurate. " One day
in the year" would have been correct, for the high-priest
entered more than once in the performance of his functions.
In all the arrangements and regulations described in the
foregoing (ix. 1-7) the author regards the Holy Ghost, that
is, the Spirit of God, who from his point of view established
the levitical institution, as signifying this which follows :
that the way into the holy place hath not yet been made manifest,
while as [during the time that] the first tabernacle is yet stand
ing (ix. 8), that is, the entrance of the high-priest once a
year into the holy of holies (for which the " I10I5- place " here
stands) does not manifest the true way into it, or the way
adequate to the needs of men, which is shown only by the
perpetual appearance of Christ, the great high-priest, on
their behalf " before the face of God."
Which is a parable for the time now present (ix. 9). — Which
refers to ' ' the first tabernacle ' ' that is regarded as a symbol
with reference to the present time, in other words, is a type
of the new dispensation and the greater high-priesthood.
According to which [the first tabernacle] are offered, that is,
in accordance with the law governing the first tabernacle
certain gifts and sacrifices are offered.
That cannot as touching the conscience make the worshipper
perfect (ix. 9), that is, cannot enable him to attain a state of
perfection satisfactory to his conscience.
Until a time of reformation (ix. 10), the time ofthe coming
of Christ, the true high-priest, who will fulfil his function
perfectly, and become the " author of everlasting salvation."
A high-priest of the good things to come (ix. 1 1), the good
things of the " everlasting salvation " of which Christ was

48 HEBREWS ix. II, 12.
the " author." These are called future because conceived
as to be realised in the Messianic age, which the second
coming of Christ was expected to introduce (ii. 5, vi. 5).
The connection in vv. II and 12 is : Christ having come
. entered in once for all into the holy place through the
greater and more perfect tabernacle . . . through his own
blood, having obtained eternal redemption. His entrance into
the holy place, that is, the heavenly sanctuary or holy of
holies, is conceived as being through the heavenly tabernacle.
The matter is a little confused, since the writer appears to
distinguish between the tabernacle (v. n) and the holy place
(v. 12), while in viii. 2 he seems to make them identical. If
they are interpreted as separate, the greater and more perfect,
that is, the heavenly, tabernacle is probably conceived as
" the lower parts of the heavens " contrasted with the high
est heavens where the throne of God was supposed to be.
See " passed through the heavens " (iv. 14).
Through his own blood (ix. 12), by means of his own blood,
or because of his sacrifice on the cross. Having obtained
eternal redemption. Eternal corresponds to once for all, that
is, all time. The redemption is regarded as permanently
effective and needing no renewal, and means ransom, de
liverance from the guilt and penalty of sin. It is here con
ceived as effected through the atoning death of Christ
according to verse 22, " apart from the shedding of blood
there is no remission."
The word here rendered redemption (Xvrpa>6iS), together with the
corresponding verb, is confined in the New Testament to Luke, He
brews, 1 Peter, and the Epistle to Titus. It is not, accordingly, em
ployed by Paul, although the idea is substantially his, and is expressed
by a word which literally means " buy off." ' In the Hebrew system
certain sins might be atoned for, the penalty " bought off" or averted
by the offering of sacrifices.5 The New Testament writers who give
1 eZayopaZco, Gal. iii. 13, iv. 5. But see a_roA_Yp<_i__s, 1 Cor. i. 30.
2 Levit. iv. v. vi. ; Job i. 5, xlii. 8.

ix. 12. HEBREWS

49

expression to the idea of ransom or redemption apply it to sin in
general without discriminating between sins for which atonement
could be made and others. The conception of redemption in the
sense in which it is employed here came into apostolic Christianity
from Judaism. It does not accord with the general teaching of Jesus
respecting the relation of man to God.
The relation of the doctrine of Hebrews that Christ in his death
offered a sacrifice for sin on behalf of men to the Pauline conception
of his atonement has long been in dispute. Some expositors of Paul
deny, and others affirm that he conceived of the death of Christ as a
sacrifice. It must be conceded that some obscurity attaches to his
teaching on this point. In Rom. iii. 25, 26 Paul declares that Christ
was set forth as a propitiation to declare God's righteousness for the
remission of sins that are past, which by reason of the divine " forbear
ance " had not been adequately punished. The idea is that in the
representative death of Christ as the head of the race the proof was
furnished that the penalty for sin which the divine righteousness re
quires was inflicted. The benefits of this substitution accrue to those
who by faith avail themselves of it.1 These, "justified by the blood "
of Christ, are " saved from the wrath of God," 2 that is, they will
enter into the eternal life ofthe Messianic kingdom when Christ shall
come again. Through the intervention of this great "race-man," the
" man from heaven," through his having been " made sin for us who
knew no sin," 3 free scope is conceived as given to the divine grace,
and God no longer reckons their trespasses against 4 men who accept
the offered favour, since by the great "propitiation" His attitude
toward them has been changed. It can hardly be denied that the idea
of sacrifice is contained in this scheme. It was "in the blood" of
Christ that the propitiation was made. He " redeemed " us, the be
lievers, from the curse of the law, that is, by his sacrifice "bought us
off" from it, having been himself "made a curse for us " in his death,4
for all men as sinners were "under the curse " through not having
kept the law," and could be delivered only by this great offering. In
treating Christ as a sinner God laid upon him the consequences ofthe
sins of others, who through faith may " become the righteousness of
God in him." Christ stands iu the place of men over against the jus
tice of God, and they receive the benefits of this substitution in that
through faith his righteousness is "reckoned" to them. If, as is
' Rom. iii. 26. 3 2 Cor. v. 21. 6 Gal. iii. 13.
2 Ibid., v. 9. 4 Ibid., v. 19. 6 Ibid., iii. 10.

5o HEBREWS ix. 14.
probable, the conception of sacrifice in later Judaism involved the
idea that the blood of the victim was given for the life of the guilty
person, this circumstance is favourable to the contention that the Paul
ine atonement should be construed as sacrificial. The question cannot,
however, be regarded as closed.
How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the
eternal Spirit offered himself unto God (ix. 14). — The expres
sion through the eternal Spirit presents some difficulty, espe
cially when the article is inserted as in the revised and King
James' versions. The rendering of Noyes is better :
" through his eternal spirit." But the original contains
neither article nor pronoun, and " through eternal spirit "
means through the spiritual power by means of which he
did and does his work for men. The epithet eternal charac
terises the efficacy of his high-priesthood as perpetual in
contrast with that of the levitical priests which was tempo
rary and perishable.'
Without blemish (ix. 14), that is, fulfilling the conditions
of a perfect offering and hence acceptable (see iv. 15).
Cleanse your conscience from dead works, purify the inner
man from sinful works and fit the soul for the service of the
living God (ix. 14).
And for this cause he is the mediator of a new covenant (ix.
1 The late Dr. Bruce, whose work on the Epistle comes to the au
thor's hand as this book is going through the press, remarks on the
word "eternal" (aimviov): "The epithet 'eternal' suggests the
thought : the act performed by Jesus in offering himself may, as an
historical event, become old with the lapse of ages ; but the spirit in
which the act was done can never become a thing of the past. The
blood shed was corruptible ; but the spirit which found expression in
Christ's self-sacrifice is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever, and in
its eternal self-identity lends to the priestly deed imperishable merit
and signifiance." — The Epistle to the Hebrews : the first Apology for
Christianity, 1899, p. 339. So Holtzmann: "Blood and flesh are
thought of as only transient bases of the eternal spirit." — Neutest.
Theol. ii. p. 289.

ix. 15, HEBREWS ¦ 51
15). — This cause relates to the thought expressed in vv. 1 1-14.
The central idea of the new covenant in contrast with the
old is, according to this author, the atoning sacrifice of
Christ, who offered himself, and became an everlasting high-
priest, over against the inferior offerings and the temporary
priesthood of the levitical institution.
That a death having taken place (ix. 15). — The occurrence
of a [sacrificial] death is regarded as a condition of the estab
lishment of a covenant. The death here referred to is that
of Christ (see vv. 16, 17).
For the redemption of the transgressions that were under the
first covenant (yx.. 15). — The idea is that notwithstanding the
offerings made under the old covenant, the transgressions
which were committed during its existence were not ade
quately atoned for.
They that have been called may receive the promise of the
eternal inheritance (ix. 15). — The " called " are in the Pauline
usages those who are foreordained to accept the invitation
extended to them in the gospel. But the connection here
forbids the exclusive application of the word to those living
under the Christian dispensation. Besides, the use of the
perfect participle appears to indicate a reference to those
called in a former time and to those still called in the pre
sent. How he conceived the invitation of the gospel to
have been extended to the Jews who lived prior to the time
of Christ is not clear. Perhaps he thought of the gospel as
retroactive through the Old Testament which he regarded
as filled with allusions and prophecies respecting it. But
Christianity would thus hardly be placed before men in such
a manner that some could be said to accept and others to re
ject it, so that the former might be designated as " the
called." Perhaps again he thought " the called " to be the
pious Israelites, and he might have extended the designation
to those among all nations who-had dutifully lived according
to such light as they had. ' In any case it is evident that he

52 .HEBREWS ix. 15-20.
regarded the effectiveness of the gospel as retroactive (see
verse 26 and xi. 39, 40). He does not appear to have been
concerned about the fate of those persons not included
among " the called."
Eternal inheritance (ix. 15). — The "inheritance" (k\tj-
povofAiai) denotes the participation in the Messianic kingdom
to be ushered in by Jesus at his second coming. It origin
ally meant the possession of the promised land (uXr/poroj^ia
rrj? yr/s) by the seed of Abraham. Just as the Messianic
kingdom conferred upon its heirs ' ' eternal life " and ' ' eternal
salvation " (v. 9), so it is here called an " eternal (aioovi'ov)
inheritance." For where a testament is there must of necessity be the death
of him that made il (ix. 16). — The word translated " testa
ment " in verses 16 and 17 is the same one in the original
that is rendered " covenant " in the foregoing. It is mani
fest that a " death " has nothing to do with the establishment
of a covenant ; but since the same word has both meanings,
the writer was plainly led into a logical error in his zeal to
find occasion for bringing the death of Christ into his argu
ment. These two verses denote a departure from the course
of thought of the Epistle, and the reader will do well to
disregard them entirely. The conclusion drawn in verse 18
is of course pointless.
He took the blood of the calves and the goats with water and
scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and
all the people (ix. 19). — The passage which lies at the basis
of this account is found in Exodus xxiv. 3-8, but it contains
no mention of the blood of calves and goats, of water and
scarlet wool and hyssop and of the sprinkling of the book.
The writer has evidently confused other ceremonial observ
ances with the ratification of the covenant.
The blood of the testament (ix. 20). — See x. 29, xiii. 20.
The employment of this expression with reference to the
shedding ofthe blood of Jesus perhaps indicates the influence

ix. 21, 22. HEBREWS 53
on the writer of the words of the Master recorded in Matt.
xxvi. 28; Mark xiv. '24; Luke xxii. 20. This cannot, how
ever, be positively affirmed, since the words occur in the
Septuagint version of Ex. xxiv. 8, and may have been cur
rent in the religious speech and ritual of the time of the
writer. In like manner, the " redemption" in verse 12 is
an Old Testament idea, and need not be referred to Mark x.
45. " Shepherd of the sheep " (xiii. 20) is used only once
in the Epistle, and occurs in the Septuagint version of Isa.
lxiii. 10. The influence of Mark vi. 34, xiv. 27, and Matt.
ii. 6 is not, however, necessarily excluded. Yet the refer
ence of " heir of all things " (i. 2) to Mark xii. 7 by von
Soden is forced.
Moreover the tabernacle (ix. 2l). — Another error is com
mitted in this statement, since the tabernacle was not yet
constructed when the ceremony of confirming the covenant
occurred to which the writer here refers. Moreover, when
the tabernacle was consecrated it was not ordered that it be
sprinkled with blood, but that it be anointed with oil.1 The
vessels are of course not mentioned in the account which the
writer reproduces with amplifications, and where they are
mentioned in Exodus they are said, like the tabernacle, to
have been anointed with oil. In view of these considerations
the qualifying expression, / may almost say (ix. 22) is very
properly inserted.
Without the shedding of blood there is no remission (ix. 22).
— This is said with reference to the so-called " Mosaic law."
In the Hebrew sacrificial system certain sins might be atoned
for by the offering of animal life. But the author wishes to
have it understood that the " new covenant " is not different
from the old so far as the shedding of blood is concerned. The
superiority of the former lies in the rank and dignity of the
propitiator, who makes atonement with " his own blood,"
and makes it once for all time. 1 Ex. xl. 9.

54

HEBREWS ix. 23-26.

It was necessary, therefore, that the copies of the things in the
heavens should be cleansed with these (ix. 23). — The appoint
ments of the levitical sacrificial rites, which are only copies
of the true heavenly tabernacles, may be purified with such
material things as were used for that purpose ; but the
heavenly things, the place not made with hands, into which
Christ entered as the ' ' high-priest forever after the order of
Melchizedek," must be cleansed with better sacrifices than
these, that is, with the sacrifice of Christ himself who appears
there as an intercessor to plead the offering which he made
on the cross.
Now to appear before the face of God for us (ix. 24). — Christ,
the great high-priest, might come into the very presence of
God, on whom no man could look and live.1 For us, that
is, to " make intercession " (vii. 25).
Else must he often have suffered since the foundation ofthe
world (ix. 26). — The writer proves his doctrine that Christ
suffered once for all time by showing the contrary to be
absurd. Since men have always sinned, it would be neces
sary, he reasons, if Christ did not suffer once for all time,
that his sacrifice should have been made often.'' He wisely
refrains from venturing upon a determination of the period
of time which he conceives a single sacrifice to cover.
But now at the end of the ages hath he been manifested to
put away sin (ix. 26). — The time of the coming of Jesus in
the flesh is designated as the end of the ages, that is, the end
of the world-period sometimes called " the present age " in
contradiction to " the age to come," or the age of the second
coming of Christ to establish the Messianic kingdom (see
note on i. 1). To put away sin by his sacrifice. This is the
proper rendering rather than " the sacrifice of himself."
1 Ex. xxxiii. 20 ; but see Ex. xxiv. io, n.
2 The idea that Christ's death was " once for all " is Pauline : " In
that he died, he died unto sin once " (Rom. vi. io). See vii. 27, ix. 12,
x. 12.

ix. 27, 28. HEBREWS 55
The suffering of Christ is regarded as effective for the de
struction of sin in the sense that his blood may " cleanse the
conscience from dead works " (verse 14). The words must
also mean the "disannulling " (vii. 18, where the same Greek
word is used) of sin in the sense of rendering its penal con
sequences void, according to the analogy of the Jewish sacri
fices adopted by the author.
And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and
after this cometh judgment (ix. 27). — Here once is intended to
carry out the idea in verse 26 that Christ was manifested
" once." The judgment is regarded, in accordance with the
prevailing primitive-Christian doctrine, as taking place after
death. Probably the word rendered appointed in the first
clause should be supplied in the second, so that the latter
would read, " and after this is appointed judgment." The
writer speaks vaguely of judgment, and it is uncertain
whether he thought of it as taking place immediately after
death or after the resurrection, which according to Paul was
to occur at the second coming of Christ.1 In 1 Cor. iv. 4,
5 Paul places the judgment at this time. See also 1 Thess.
v. 3-
So Christ also . . . shall appear a second time, apart
from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation (ix. 28)'. —
This is a distinct announcement of the belief of the apostolic
and post-apostolic age in the second coming of Christ. Apart
from sin is said with reference to the expression immediately
preceding, " to bear the sins of many," 2 and means that in
1 1 Thess. iv. 16.
2 Here is indicated the tendency which early appeared in the Christ
ian Church to dogmatise on the death of Jesus. A Messiah shame
fully put to death was an intolerable conception. The death of Jesus
must, accordingly, have had a profound significance. Isa. liii. readily
lent itself to au interpretation in the interest of a substitutional atone
ment. See Matt. viii. 16, 17 ; 1 Pet. ii. 21 ff. The doctrine of the
Jewish theology that the sufferings of the righteous may atone for the
sins of others appears to have influenced primitive-Christian thought.

56 HEBREWS x. 1-4.
his second coming he will not act in this capacity, but will
come for the salvation of the believers or them that wait for
him. The subject of Christ's work as high-priest is continued in xi.
18, and the writer undertakes to show that after all the repeated
offerings under the law, sin still remains, for it is impossible that
such offerings should effect its removal.
For the law having a shadow of the good things to come, etc.
(x. I). — The good things are the blessings of the " everlast
ing salvation ' ' of which Christ is regarded as the author.
They are spoken of as future because their full realisation is
conceived as belonging to " the age to come," or the time
when Christ shall have returned in glory " unto salvation "
for " them that wait for him " (ix. 28). The law has not
the very image of this redemption because of its imperfections
already pointed out, its frequent sacrifices, its changeable
priesthood, and its inability effectually to ' ' put away sin ' '
(ix. 26), so that they [the levitical priests] cannot with all
their numerous offerings make perfect them that draw nigh.
Else would they not have ceased to be offered (x. 2)? — If the
sacrifices could have cleansed the worshippers so that they
would have had no more conscience of sins they would have
ceased, or, in other words, would not be continued year by
year (v. 3).
Take away sins (x. 4). — The doctrine laid down in the
preceding verses is thus sententiously confirmed. The
blood of the animals mentioned was offered on the day of
atonement by the high-priest in the holy of holies.1 It is
See Weber, fud. Theol. , chap. xx. The Jewish theological ideas must
have been current long before their literary embodiment, and that
Jewish-Christian writers of New Testament books should give expres
sion to them is quite natural.
1 To take away sins (dqjaipsiv d/xapriai) is an intense expression
for dvaqjepsiv d/iapriai in ix. 28. Cf. xepisXsiv dyiapriaS (x. n),
and dQerediS d/iapriaS (ix. 26). — " Conscience of sins." 6vveidij6i<5

x. 5-7- HEBREWS 57
significant that " cleansing " takes the place of the Pauline
" justification " — a post-Pauline soteriological point of view.
Wherefore, when he [Jesus] cometh into the world (x. 5). —
The writer offers a proof ofthe proposition contained in verse
4 by the citation of a passage from the Old Testament, ¦ in
which he supposes Christ to have spoken about his coming
into the world to make an offering for sin. The portion of
the Psalm from which the quotation is taken is an expres
sion of thanksgiving by the psalmist for help in time of need,
and no part of the composition has a " Messianic " reference.
The passage on which the entire argument rests, " But a
body didst Thou prepare for me" (that is, a "body" in
order that an offering might be made by death), is a mis
translation of the Hebrew, which appears in the Septuagint
translation followed by the author. Accordingly, the entire
quotation is invalidated for his purpose, even if his method
of interpretation, which reads into it a reference to Christ,
were admissible. In the original Hebrew there is nothing
said about a " body," but the psalmist says of himself that
God has opened his ears, that is, has made a revelation to
him! In the roll of the book it is written of me (x. 7). — This is
also a mistranslation of the Hebrew which the writer of
the Epistle found in the Septuagint. The psalmist says
that he comes before God with the book written in his heart,
that is, with the contents of the law written (figuratively) in
him. If the writer of the Epistle had been acquainted with
Hebrew, and had not depended on a bad translation of the
with the genitive meaus consciousness of an object. See 6vvsi8rj6iS
tov Beov, I Pet. ii. 19. The writers appear to assume that believers,
"cleansed " by the great sacrifice of Christ, would become " perfect,"
and sin no more. So Paul in his doctrine of atonement makes no
provision for sins committed by those who have once been "justified."
Theoretically they are saved " once for all."-
1 Ps. xl. 6-8.

5 8 HEBREWS x. 9, 10.
Old Testament, he could not have made such a mistake. Be
sides, if he had taken the trouble to read a little farther in
his Septuagint translation of the Psalm, he would have seen
the inappropriateness of his reference of the writing to Christ,
according to his own idea of his sinlessness. For in verse
12 we read as spoken by the same person whose words are
given in vv. 6-8 : " Mine iniquities have taken hold of me
so that I am not able to look up ; they are more than the
hairs of my head."
He taketh away the first that he may establish the second (x.
9). — This verse is parenthetical, and means that the first, or
the offering of sacrifices, etc., is taken away in order that the
second, or the doing of God's will, may be established. The
doing of God's will is conceived by the writer as effected by
the sacrifice of Christ. This is his interpretation of the pas
sage (Ps. xl. 6-8).
By which will we have been sanctified through the offering of
the body of Jesus Christ once for all (x. 10). — Because Christ's
offering of his body was in accordance with and a fulfilment
of the will of God, it is by or in His will that the sanctifica
tion of the Christian believers has been effected.1 This
sanctification is regarded as once for all time," so that there
is no need of other offerings of atonement than that through
which it has been obtained.
The doctrine that the sanctification (ayiadfids) of believers was
effected " through the offering ofthe body of Jesus Christ " is closely
related to Paulinism. According to the apostle, Jesus by reason of
his atoning sacrifice " was made to us righteousness and sanctification
and redemption" (1 Cor. i. 30). An ethical basis, an attainment of
holiness by moral struggle and self-conquest, is not implied, but the
holy, the saints (ayioi) are the believers, the " called," to whom
righteousness has been " imputed " for faith. Hence the Corinthians
are called " sanctified " and " holy," although the apostle lays not a
1 So Paul teaches that the purpose of sending Christ in the flesh was
that he might make an atoning sacrifice (Gal. iv. 4, 5).

x. II-I4- HEBREWS 59
few moral delinquencies to their charge, and declares that they are
"carnal," and walk as men. From this point of view the children of
a Christian parent are said to be " holy " regardless of their character.
This "forensic" justification and holiness are represented in our
Epistle, and are evidently regarded as dependent upon the atoning
death of Jesus. Yet while in x. io and 14 this idea is uppermost, in
xii. 14 holiness is represented as an object of pursuit (SiaoMere rov
dyiatifiov), just as Paul, while theoretically regarding the believers
as " saints," finds it necessary to admonish them not to be deficient
in moral endeavour.
Dr. Bruce's contention that iv c_ 0£/b/y_arrz means "that it is God's
will that sanctifies through the offering" is without exegetical sup
port. The writer does not appear to have thought of the doctrine
that Christ's sacrifice possesses sanctifying virtue "because it was a
perfect embodiment of the divine righteousness."
In x. II and 12 we have nothing but a repetition of what
has been said before about the difference between the leviti
cal sacrifices and that of Christ.
From henceforth expecting until his enemies be made the
footstool of his feet (x. 13). — From henceforth indicates the
time from Christ's exaltation " at the right hand of God "
to his second coming. Paul says that Christ " must reign
until he hath put all enemies under his feet" (1 Cor. xv.
25). This is " at his coming " when they who are his shall
be "raised." "Then cometh the end, when he shall de
liver up the kingdom to God." " For he must reign," etc.
The writer of the Epistle is not, then, in accord with Paul
in his doctrine of " the last things," for he places the sub
jection ofthe " enemies" of Christ during the time of his
sitting at the right hand of God, that is, prior to his second
coming. For by one offering, etc. (x. 14). — For connects the clause
with verse 12, and the writer wishes to emphasise the teach
ing that by the one sacrifice of Christ (' ' once for all ' ' time)
the holy or the ' ' called ' ' are perfected forever. Then
follows the citation given in viii. 10 with some verbal

60 HEBREWS x. 17-22.
modifications, concluding with and their sins and their ini
quities will I remember no more (x. 17), in order to bring for
ward again the thought, perfected forever. Accordingly, it
follows that in the offering of himself by the great high-
priest atonement is completed, for where there is remission
of sins, there is no more offering for sin (x. 18). Here ends
the exposition of the work of Christ as high-priest.
At this point the writer resumes the tone of exhortation, and
seeks to incite his readers to adherence to the Christian faith, to
love, to good works, and to diligent attendance on the religious
assemblies (x. 19-25).
Having, therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holy
place by the blood of Jesus (x. 19, 20). — A better rendering
than boldness is " confidence." Because by the blood of
Jesus atonement has been made for their sins, the writer ex
horts his brethren (iii. 1, 12, xiii. 22) to approach God with
confidence " with respect to the entrance [literally] of the
holy place," that is, the heavenly sanctuary where God is
supposed to dwell, by the way which he dedicated [consecrated]
for us, a new and living way. It is a living zvay because it
leads to the " eternal salvation " of the Messianic kingdom.
Through the veil, that is to say, his flesh (x. 20). — A parallel
with the tabernacle, in which a veil hung before the holy of
holies. The flesh of Christ is compared with this veil which
his death is supposed to remove. Perhaps the story of the
rending of the veil at the crucifixion of Jesus ' originated in
this conception, probably current at the time of the composi
tion of the first three Gospels and this Epistle.
Over the house of God (x. 2l), that is, heaven, since Christ
has gone into the heavenly sanctuary.
Our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience (x. 22), that is,
by the blood of Christ.2
1 Matt, xxvii. 51 and parallels.
2 See ix. 4, and compare Ex. xxix. 21.

x. 22-25. HEBREWS 61
And our bodies washed with pure water (x. 22), that is, of
baptism. It does not appear that the writer attached any
inward spiritual importance to the baptismal rite. In vi. 2
he mentions it among those ' ' first principles ' ' which he
exhorts his readers to leave behind them in order that they
" press on to perfection." In the passage at present under
consideration he speaks of baptism as a washing of the body
with pure water, and definitely contrasts it with the inward
sprinkling of the heart from an evil conscience, which, from
the analogy of his teaching, we must regard as effected only
by the sacrifice of Christ (ix. 14). His idea may have been,
as Menegoz supposes, that baptism cleansed the body from
" ritual impurities " described in the Levitical law (see ix.
10, 13). " This purification must have had its importance
on the one hand for the neophyte himself and on the other
for the members of the Jewish-Christian community who
then still lived more or less under the influence of their early
education and of the traditions of Judaism. The Jews at
tached an analogous idea to the baptism of proselytes."
According to this interpretation our author meant by baptism
simply " reception into the church and ritual purification."
For He is faithful who promised (x. 23). — The subject is
God,1 whose fidelity is mentioned as a motive for holding
fast to the profession.
And so much the more, as ye see the day drawing nigh (x.
25). — The reference is to the second coming of Christ, the
Parousia, "the day" by preeminence, the great day of
primitive-Christian hope and expectation, always conceived
as near at hand ; until its long delay caused a lagging faith
to postpone it.2 By what signs the readers " see the day
drawing nigh " the writer does not intimate.
In connection with the neglect of the religious assemblies the
writer now proceeds to admonish his readers against apostasy, and
1 See 1 Cor. i. 9, x. 13 ; 1 Thess. v. 24.
2 See 2 Thess. ii. 1-12 ; 2 Pet. iii. 3-10.

62 HEBREWS x. 26-29.
to point out the grave peril to which those will be exposed who do
not remain loyal to their confession (x. 26-31).
For if we sin wilfully (x. 26). — The truth is that of Christ
ianity, a knowledge of which probably includes more than a
simple apprehension of it. There remaineth no more a sacri
fice for sin. Their sins having once been " taken away"
and the consequences of them disannulled by the atonement
of Christ, there is no escape from the divine " vengeance"
if they fall again into sin, for since Christ died " once for
all" time, he cannot make another propitiation for them,
and his original sacrifice is effective but once.
There remains therefore for the apostate only a certain
fearful expectation of judgment and a fierceness of fire which
shall devour the adversaries (x. 27). — Fierceness of fire or
punitive ardour is an expression intended to convey the
writer's conception of the terrors of the judgment which
would fall upon those for whom there was ' ' no more a sac
rifice for sin," and hence no escape from its penalty. The
judgment is not defined, and we do not know whether the
judge whom he had in mind was God or Christ. The judg
ment is probably, however, that which was expected at the
second coming of Christ. The writer of 2 Thessalonians '
gives a more definite expression of the nature of the Mes
sianic judgment in terms of " flaming fire," " vengeance,"
and " eternal destruction."
A man that hath set at naught Moses1 law (x. 28). — By the
law of Moses the punishment of death was decreed for certain
transgressions.2 The witnesses against an offender must be
" two or three." s ,
The sorer punishment (x. 29), inferred by the argument
from the less to the greater, is not defined. That it was
1 2 Thess. i. 7-10.
2 For details the reader may consult Ex. xxi. 15, xxxi. 14 ; Lev.
xvii. 14 ; Deut. xxii. 22-25. 3 Deut. xvii. 2-7.

x. 29, 30. HEBREWS 63
conceived as something worse than a cruel death is evident.
This section may be interpreted in the light of vi. 4-8, from
which we learn that the condition of the apostate is regarded
as hopeless, since it is "impossible" to "renew" him
" again to repentance."
The word rendered punishment in x. 29 (ritiwpia) is not elsewhere
used in the New Testament. Iu the time of Aristotle it was distin
guished from xoXa6iS as denoting penalty pure and simple, that is,
" with reference to the satisfaction of him who inflicts" and without
regard to the good of the sufferer, while the latter included a disciplin
ary purpose. This distinction must not, however, be pressed, since it
is not uniformly supported by usage.
Trodden underfoot the Son of God (x. 29). — A vivid figure
for scorn and insult.
The blood ofthe covenant (x. 29), that is, Christ's blood of
the New Covenant.
An unholy thing (x. 29). — "Common," not "conse
crated," or " unhallowed " were perhaps better. The blood
of Christ could be so regarded only by one who did not any
fonger believe in his atonement, having once been sanctified
through it.
To do despite unto the Spirit of grace (x. 29) was to treat
with contempt the spiritual manifestations or ' ' gifts ' ' which
were attributed to a special working of the divine Spirit in
the believers.1
Vengeance belongeth to Me and I will recompense (x. 30). —
This is not quoted according to the Septuagint or the
Hebrew, although the idea of the original is substantially
reproduced.2 The citation is so similar to that made by Paul in Romans xii. 19
that some have argued from the resemblance that the writer borrowed
from that Epistle. It cannot, however, be determined whether this
' 1 Cor. xii. 2 Deut. xxxii. 35.

64 HEBREWS x. 30-36.
is the case, or whether both writers borrowed from a Targum which
contains the paraphrase, "I will repay," or whether, finally, the
expression was a current proverb.
The Lord shall judge His people (x. 30). — See Deut. xxxii.
36 and Ps. cxxxv. 14. The sense of these passages in the
original, determined by their connection, is entirely different
from that put upon them here. There they mean that God
will see that justice is done to His people, and the idea of
" vengeance " on evil-doers is not implied.
But call to remembrance the former days (x. 32). — The great
conflict of sufferings endured after they were enlightened
doubtless refers to persecutions undergone by the readers as
Christians, that is, " enlightened." The word rendered
" conflict " (adXtjffis) is not elsewhere used in the New
Testament, but some early-Christian writers employ it with
reference to martyrdom.
A better possession and an abiding one (x. 34), that is, the
spiritual possessions appertaining to Christianity, " the good
things to come " (ix. 11) which the believers were expecting
to enjoy when Christ should come again. The condition of
Messianic blessedness was not conceived as having an end,
hence the term " everlasting "Ms applied to it, and here the
word abiding.''
Cast not away, therefore, your boldness (x. 35.) — " Fearless
confidence "isa better rendering than boldness. Confidence
in Christ would give them courage to make open confession
of him before a scoffing and persecuting world.
Need of patience (x. 36), that is, to persevere in their
fidelity to the Master who would soon come to fulfil the
promise in his kingdom to those who should have done
the will of God. In order to prove this coming of Christ the
writer quotes from Habakkuk ii. 3, 4, prefixing the words,
1 aioovioi.
2 Compare Paul's " ever with the Lord," 1 Thess. iv. 17.

x. 39-xi. 3- HEBREWS 65
" for yet a very little while, " as if they belonged to the
text of the prophecy quoted. He was in part misled by the
Septuagint, but how nearly he reproduced the original may
be seen from the following correct rendering of it by Noyes :
" For the vision is yet for an appointed time,
But it hasteneth to the end ; it shall not deceive ;
If it tarry, wait for it ;
For it shall surely come ; it shall not loug delay.
Behold the soul of him that is puffed up shall not be at ease ;
But the just shall live by his faithfulness."
The expression shrink back into perdition (x. 39), referring
to apostasy, is derived from the incorrect rendering of the
passage from Habakkuk.
But of them that have faith unto the saving of the soul (x.
39), that is, continue in faith until the coming of the Mes
sianic salvation.
Taking his departure from " faith " (x. 39), the writer now pro
ceeds to define it and give examples of its efficacy from the Old
Testament history and legend (xi. 1-40).
It is defined as the assurance of things hoped for, the proving
of things not seen (xi. 1). — The conception is taken from
the point of view of the person who has faith, that is from
the subjective side, and the sense is " inner confidence in the
realisation of the things hoped for." The second part of
the definition means the conviction that the things not seen
really exist, as if seen.
Beginning with the assertion that the elders had witness
borne to them (xi. 2) in the possession of faith, the writer
turns aside from the line of illustrations thus indicated to
say that by faith we understand that the worlds have been
framed by the word of God, etc. (xi. 3), thus leaving the
realm of things hoped for, etc. , as if impelled by a felt neces
sity of exploiting the Bible history from the beginning. His
explanation of the doctrine that the worlds were framed by

66 HEBREWS xi. 4-13.
t
¦the word of God by the words, so that what is seen hath not
been made out of things which do appear, is an expression of a
belief in absolute creation, " creation out of nothing," in
other words, and excludes the idea of the foundation or
development of the universe out of preexisting materials.
By faith Abel offered unto God (xi. 4).— On account of
Abel's faith his sacrifice was more acceptable to God than
Cain's. Through which he obtained. Which refers to faith.
That he had witness borne to him that he was righteous does
not appear in the account of the matter in Genesis (iv. 4, 5).1
Through his faith, he being dead yet speaketh.
The translation of Enoch is regarded as occurring on
account of his " faith " (xi. 5), which the author finds him
to have possessed because he was well-pleasing unto God. He
was not found. These words are adopted from the Septua
gint, and are not in the Hebrew.2 The legend of Enoch's
' ' translation ' ' rests upon the words, ' ' and he was not, for
God took him."
Enoch's " faith," however, appears to have consisted only
in believing that God exists and is the rewarder of them that
diligently seek after Him (xi. 6).
Noah is spoken of as having condemned the world (xi. 7)>
that is, by his example of godly fear and faith. Through
the latter he is regarded as having become an heir of the
righteousness which is according to faith, that is, the righteous
ness which is acquired by means of faith. The writer's con
ception of faith as related to righteousness is not that of Paul,
and he does not employ the Pauline terms in reference to it.
But " righteousness according to faith " is here mentioned as
though it were a doctrine known to the writer and perhaps
to his readers. (See the discussion of the doctrine at the
end of the Commentary on the Epistle.)
The faith of Abraham and Sarah is next cited (xi. 8-13).
The faith of the former looked for the city which hath the
1 See Matt, xxiii. 35 ; 1 John iii. 12. 2 Gen. v. 22-24.

xi. 13-19. HEBREWS 67
foundations (is abiding), whose builder and maker is God, that
is, the heavenly Jerusalem (xii. 22, xiii. 14) which the Jews
believed would descend from heaven at the appearance of the
Messiah. The early Christians adopted this idea, and con
nected the descent of the new Jerusalem with the second
coming of Christ.1 As the stars of heaven in multitude and as
the sand (xi. 12). See Gen. xiii. 16.
These all died in faith (xi. 13). — Because it belongs essen
tially to faith that its possessor must be without the seeing
and enjoyment of " the things hoped for." Strangers and
pilgrims. See Gen. xxiii. 4.
For they that say such things (xi. 14). — The writer reads
his own ideas of the heavenly country into the Old Testa
ment record, and assumes that a patriarch could not declare
himself a sojourner and pilgrim in a land without reference
to a heavenly abode in the future. The reasoning that be
cause they did not return to the country from which they went
out, they must have had a celestial one in mind, is anything
but historical.
For He hath prepared for them a city (xi. 16). — The city in
question is the heavenly Jerusalem (verse 10).
From whence he did also in a parable receive him back (xi.
19). — The interpretation on which this translation as well
as that of the old version rests presupposes that the Greek
expression (iv 7rapaflo\fj) means "ina figure " or " figura
tively " (Noyes). But it is wholly a matter of conjecture
to what the " figure " refers, if this is the correct rendering.
If we suppose the term to mean the opposite of " actually "
in the sense that Abraham did not really receive Isaac back
from death, but only " as it were," it is surprising and quite
improbable that the writer should have employed the words
in question to express this idea. The supposition that the
expression means " as a type," that is, ofthe resurrection,
is exposed to the difficulty that the writer has omitted to
1 Rev. iii. 12, xxi. 2-27.

68 HEBREWS xi. 20-26.
indicate what in his mind the receiving back was a type of.
A writer whose typology is so clearly defined as his would not
be likely to make such an omission. Another objection to
this rendering is that in every other place in the Epistle
where the word rendered ' ' whence ' ' (offer) is used it signi
fies " wherefore." J This is probably the signification here.
Now the word rendered "parable" sometimes means "a
venture," " a risk," " a committing " or " giving up," and
the passage probably means : " Wherefore [on account of
trusting in God who is able to raise the dead] he received
him back even in giving him up."
Even concerning things to come (xi. 20), that is, the coming
fortunes of the sons.
And worshipped leaning upon the top of his staff (xx. 2l). —
See Gen. xlviii. 21 for the account of Jacob's blessing.
These words are added to the text from Genesis xlvii. 31,
where in the Septuagint they are an incorrect rendering of
the Hebrew, which reads, ' ' and Israel bowed himself on the
head ofthe bed."
Accounting the reproaches of Christ (xi. 26). — The meaning
of this passage is doubtful. The writer's fondness for types
favours the interpretation, "typically of Christ," on the
ground that the sufferings of the people of God in Old Testa
ment times foreshadowed, as was supposed, those of Jesus.
But if this be the meaning, the writer has unusually for him
concealed the type. The sense, ' ' for the sake of Christ, ' ' by
reason of his hope in the Messiah, has the simple genitive of
the construction against it. Perhaps the best interpretation
is that the writer conceived Moses to have suffered in his
time such shame as Christ suffered at the hands of his
enemies.2 For he looked unto the recompense of reward (xi. 26). — It
was for the sake of the " reward " that he was faithful in
1 ii. 17, iii. 1, vii. 25, ix. 18. s See xiii. 13 ; 2 Cor. i. 5 ; Col. i. 24.

xi. 27-35. HEBREWS 69
suffering. The reward which the writer had in mind was
that of " eternal salvation," and he ascribes to Moses with
out regard to historical considerations both the motive and
the hope by which he himself was actuated.
As seeing Him who is invisible (xi. 27). — He was steadfast
as if the invisible God were revealed to his inward vision,
and had faith in the " things not seen."
Kept the passover (xi. 28). — Better, " instituted the pass-
over." And the sprinkling of blood, that is, on the door
posts.1 The walls of Jericho fell down (xi. 30). — In the legend of
the fall of Jericho the people of Israel are represented as
having faith in the directions which Jehovah is said to have
given for effecting the overthrow of the city."
By faith Rahab the harlot perished not (xi. 31). — Rahab's
faith appears from the story to have consisted in believing
that the God of the Israelites would give them ' ' the land ' ' s
and accordingly that He was mightier than the opposing
gods. Therefore, she gave protection to the emissaries
whom she supposed to have come from Him, on condition
that she and her household should be protected at the
capture of the city.4 Her protection of the spies, which
was effected by a falsehood, was, according to the story,
duly rewarded.5
Obtained promises (xi. 33). — This may mean simply pro
mises or things promised. Verse 39 is opposed to the latter
sense, if the things promised are other than worldly posses
sions. The idea that " Messianic promises" are meant is
rather far-sought.
Women received their dead by resurrection (xi. 35). — Refer
ence is perhaps had to the stories in 1 Kgs. xvii. 17-22, and
2 Kgs. iv. 17-35.
That they might obtain a better resurrection (xi. 35). — In 2
' See Ex. xii. j, 22. 3 Ibid. ii. 9.
2 Josh. vi. 4 Ibid. ii. 12. 6 Ibid. vi. 22, 23.

7o HEBREWS xi. 37-xii. 2.
Maccabees, vii. 9, 11, 14, 20, 23, Jews are represented as en
during torture and death for their religion in the hope of
resurrection, belief in which was current in later Judaism.
The writer quotes his examples of faith without discrimina
tion from apocryphal as well as canonical books (vv.
36-39)- Stoned and sawn asunder (xi. 37). — See 2 Chron. xxiv.
20-22. According to tradition Isaiah was saw n asunder.
Received not the promise (xi. 40). — The promised blessing
came only in Christianity, the consummation of which was
believed to be the second coming of Christ, or the Messianic
salvation, the " eternal salvation " of " the age to come."
Without us, that is, without our participation. There seems
to be implied here the belief that at the second coming of
Christ the righteous dead of the Old Testament times would
be raised to share in the Messianic blessedness.1
The note or exhortation which had been suspended during this
digression on faith is now resumed, and the readers are urged to
endure with patience the trials to which they are subject, consider
ing the multitude of witnesses who have suffered and triumphed
through faith, and looking especially to Jesus, who after enduring
the cross has sat down at the right hand of God (xii. 1-13).
Witnesses are not to be understood as people looking on,
but as those who have borne testimony. The persons men
tioned in chapter xi. are meant.
Lay aside every weight and the sin (xii. I). — The writer had
in mind the runner in the games, who divested himself of
all that would hinder him in the race. If he had any par
ticular encumbrance or sin in mind he does not specify it.
Jesus, the author and perfeder of our faith (xii. 2), that is,
to whom is due the beginning of our Christian faith, and
who will bring it to completion in us. Who for the joy that
was set before him, that is, the heavenly felicity which would
1 See note on ix. 15.

xii. 3-7. HEBREWS 71
be the reward for his sacrifice. The writer attributes this
hedonistic motive to Jesus from his own ethical point of
view. Gainsaying of sinners against themselves (xii. 3). — The
reading on which the translation " themselves " is based has
some good authorities in its favour, but is to be rejected in
favour of that which gives " himself" in the English trans
lation. Resisted unto blood (xii. 4). — Their conflict against
sin, that is, against the sin of apostasy to which their trials
might tempt them, had not yet required them to shed their
blood as martyrs. The words translated have resisted and
striving against are not elsewhere found in the New Testa
ment, and are probably borrowed from the contests in
boxing.1 And ye have forgotten (xii. 5). — The opinion that this
clause should be punctuated as a question has in its favour
the judgment that as an assertion it has more harshness than
the context requires. The quotation is from Proverbs iii.
11, 12, according to the Septuagint which is slightly different
from the Hebrew.
It is for chastening that ye endure (xii. 7). — The trials which
the readers endure are for their discipline. The idea con
tained in chastening is not that of penalty, but that of " train
ing," " education," intended to result in "an increase of
virtue." It is such treatment as a wise father may give his
children. Hence the remark : God dealeth with you as with
sons. The reading which allows the translation : " If ye
endure chastening, God dealeth with you as sons," is sup
ported by some authorities. From this point of view God's
dealing with men would be conceived to depend on their
patience under affliction. In any case, it is with believers
that the writer represents God as dealing like a father. He
is not speaking of the universal fatherhood of God, and the
1 dvTiuaQitfrp/ii and dvrayoovX,op.ai. See I Cor. ix. 26, Hvktevod,
" so fight [box] I not as one beating the air."

72 HEBREWS xii. 8-17.
" sons " are those who are spiritually such by reason of their
belief in Christ.1
Whereof all have been made partakers (xii. 8). — All refers
to those received as sons (verse 6). The perfect tense (' ' have
been made ") requires some such limitation.
Then are ye bastards, and not sons (xii. 8.) — The fact that
God chastens them, the writer tells his readers, is an evidence
that He recognises them as sons in the sense mentioned.
The implication is that the welfare of spiritual bastards, who,
of course, are such by their own choice, would not so much
concern Him that He would subject them to discipline.
And live (xii. 9), that is, enjoy the " eternal life " of " the
age to come." 2
That which is lame, etc. (xii. 13), that is, the Christian be
liever who limps in his course, and is in danger of apostasy.
Follow after, etc. (xii. 14), endeavour to acquire. Sancti
fication is purification in general ethically regarded. All
are also exhorted to look carefully after the spiritual welfare
of their brethren. Lest any root of bitterness spring up (xii.
15), that is, a man arise among the believers whose unholy
walk and conversation should yield the bitter fruit of defile
ment to the many. See Deut. xxix. 18 ; 1 Mace. i. 10, and
"the peaceable fruit of righteousness" verse n of this
chapter. The peril oi falling short of the grace of God (xii. 15) is
made vivid by citing the case of Esau 3 who was rejected when
he desired to inherit the blessing (xii. 17). — The point of the
warning is in the implication that a believer who should
" fall away " (vi. 6) would be rejected from the Messianic
kingdom of " the age to come," just as Esau was refused
the " blessing."
Like Esau such an one would be able to find no place for
repentance (xii. 17), in accordance with the writer's doctrine
1 See John i. 12 ; Rom. viii. 14 ; Phil. ii. 15.
2 Rom. viii. 13 ; 2 Tim. ii. 11. s Gen. xxvii.

xii. 18-22. HEBREWS 73
that God accepts no second repentance, and that Jesus' sacri
fice for sin avails but once (vi. 4-8, x. 26-31). The objection
to this interpretation that it places the writer in disagree
ment with the Christian doctrine, apparently implied in
Luke xxiii. 39-43, that it is never too late to repent, is
without force, since it is a gratuitous assumption that he
must be in accord with every New Testament teaching. He
is not in agreement with the Old Testament account, which
contains no mention of Esau's seeking repentance " with
tears." Indeed it does not appear from that narrative that
Isaac was unwilling to bless him because he had sold his
birthright.' The interpretation is without warrant which removes from "repent
ance " its ethical significance and applies it to Isaac in the sense of a
change of mind, thus giving the meaning that Isaac could not be in
duced to recall the blessing which he had conferred upon Jacob and
give it to Esau. A writer intending to express this idea would not
have used the words with reference to Esau, "he found no place for
repentance." There is also no ground for referring "it" in the
phrase "he sought it," to "blessing" instead of to "repentance."
These expedients, devised in order to soften the harshness of the
teaching ofthe passage, are without exegetical support. It is also to
read into the passage an unnatural meaning to assume that the writer
refers only to apostasy in the sense of a change of ecclesiastical rela
tions, as, if a Protestant should pass to the Catholic Church and return
to his former communion, he would never lapse again to Catholicism !
For ye are not come unto a mount, etc. (xii. 18). — The word
translated mount is not found in the best Greek manuscripts,
but should probably be supplied on account of " Mount
Zion " (verse 22). The literal rendering is not might be
touched, but simply touched. The writer intends to contrast
this palpable mountain, Sinai, with the spiritual, "heavenly "
Jerusalem. On vv. 19-21 see Exodus xix.
But ye are come unto Mount Zion (xii. 22). — The writer
1 Gen. xxvii. 4.

74 HEBREWS xii. 23-26.
tells his readers that in coming into the Christian faith and
communion they have entered upon relations belonging to a
new dispensation, and have gained a spiritual fellowship, the
supersensible qualities of which he sets forth with great
rhetorical force. The " heavenly Jerusalem " which will be
their abode is called Mount Zion according to Old Testament
usage which represents Zion as the abode of God.1
To the general assembly and Church of the firstborn who are
enrolled in heaven (xii. 23). — The word rendered general as
sembly means a festal or joyous gathering, and by the firstborn
is probably meant the righteous of the Old Testament times
(.xi. 40).
The spirits of just men made perfect (xii. 23). — Spirits prob
ably designates the dead not yet clothed upon with the new
resurrection-body.2 And the writer perhaps had in mind the
Christians who had died, and who, still in the underworld,
might be regarded as constituting a part of the great Christ
ian fellowship.
And to the blood of sprinkling (xii. 24), that is, the atoning
blood of Christ (ix. 13-15; x. 22).
See that ye refuse not Him that speaketh, etc. (xii. 25), that
is, God. The readers are admonished not to reject the divine
word now in the Christian dispensation spoken from heaven,
since Jesus was sent thence, for if those who refused him who
gave the earthly warning through Moses did not escape
retribution, much less will those escape who disregard this
celestial admonition.
Whose voice then shook the earth (xii. 26. )3 — But now hath
He promised. The shaking must, of course, be greater now,
that is, under the New Covenant, since this surpasses the
Old. The reference is probably to the great convulsion
1 Ps. xlviii. 2, 3, 1. 2. According to the Jewish theology the Jerusa
lem which is above (Gal. iv. 26) would in the Messianic age descend
upon the renewed earth. Weber, Jud. Theol., p. 404.
2 1 Pet. iii. 19 ; Luke xxiv. 39. a See Ex. xix. 18.

xii. 27-xiii. 4. HEBREWS 75
which was looked for at the second coming of Christ,1
though the passage quoted 2 relates to the time of rebuilding
the temple.
The writer understands yet once more (xii. 27) to imply
" and not again." Accordingly he thinks that in that great
convulsion the things that are shaken, that is, things made,
will be removed, in accordance with the idea that when
Christ should come in his Messianic kingdom the existing
earth and heavens would give place to ' ' new heavens and a
new earth." 3 That those things that are not shaken may
remain, that is, the blessedness, the life, and the joys of this
kingdom. Wherefore, receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken (xii.
28). — As " heavenly," the kingdom of the "age to come " is
conceived to be permanent and " eternal." It is believed to
be so near and so certain to come that the writer employs
the present participle receiving.
For our God is a consuming fire (xii. 29). — The English
translation does not give the full force of the original, which
is, " For our God is also a consuming fire," that is, He is
not only a God of grace, but also a God of penal justice.4
The Epistle closes with exhortations, admonitions, and greetings
(xiii. 1-25).
Entertained angels unawares (xiii. 2). — What legend con
cerning angels entertained unawares by men the writer had
in mind, is not certain ; perhaps that in Genesis xviii. 19.
The motive presented for hospitality is that of reward.
As bound with them (xiii. 3). — This fine sentiment reminds
us of Paul's teaching in 1 Cor. xii. 26.
God will judge (xiii. 4), that is, probably, will exclude
from the coming Messianic kingdom.8
1 Mark xiii. 25.
2 Hag. ii. 6. 4 x. 30 ; Rom. xii. 19 ; Deut. iv. 24.
3 2 Pet. iii. 12, 13 ; Rev. xxi. 1. 5 1 Cor. vi. 9 ; Rev. xxii. 15.

76 HEBREWS xiii. 5-16.
Be free from the love of money (xiii. 5). There are several
Old Testament expressions similar to the citation, / will in
no wise fail, etc. ; but Philo has precisely the same words,
and they may have been quoted from his writings or they
may have been a current expression known to both.
So that we may boldly say (xiii. 6). — See Ps. cxviii. 6.
Remember them that had the rule over you (xiii. 7).- — The
reference is to former leaders or officers and teachers. The
issue of their lives, probably martyrdom rendered their faith
worthy of imitation.
Jesus Christ is the same, etc. (xiii. 8).- — The connection of
this verse is obscure. If it is closely connected with verse 7
the meaning would appear to be that he in whom the de
parted rulers believed is the same and always will be the
same as an object of faith. If the connection is with verse 9
it prepares the way for the injunction to give place to no
" strange teachings," because Jesus, the great head of all
believers, is forever the same.
The divers and strange teachings (xiii. 9) refer to disputes
about foods, probably to flesh offered in sacrifice.
We have an altar (xiii. 10). — The altar of the Christians
is spoken of in a figure, and the reference is to the sacrifice
of Christ often mentioned in the Epistle. The eating of the
offering made upon this altar is the enjoyment of the advan
tages, which belong to the Christian alone, of the sacrifice in
question. The two following verses (11 and 12) are intended
to show in accordance with the fundamental doctrine of the
Epistle that the New Testament covenant with its great
sacrifice was typified by the Hebrew offering on the day of
atonement. For we have not here an abiding city (xiii. 14). — See xii.
22. — Through him [Christ] let us then, etc.- (xiii. 15). — A
spiritual sacrifice of praise is becoming to Christians who
should have a better offering than Jews.
But to do good and to communicate forget not (xiii. 16). —

xiii. 19, 20. HEBREWS 77
This fine teaching, quite in the spirit of Jesus, that men
ought themselves to make sacrifices for the sake of sweet
charity, furnishes an agreeable relief to a disquisition whose
monotonous refrain is salvation through the sacrifice of the
great high-priest who ' ' entered into the sanctuary with his
own blood." This direct way into the holy of holies, which
men may tread without priestly intervention, was shown by
the great Teacher, to whom the thought of the salvation of
men through the functions of a high-priesthood was as re
mote and foreign as that of their immediate relation to the
Father was inmost and essential.1
That T may be restored to you the sooner (xiii. 19). — An
expression of a belief in the efficacy of prayer with respect
to external results. The passage implies that the writer was
detained at a distance from his readers, whether forcibly or
by circumstances is not apparent. He may have been in
exile. Restoration implies either that he was a member of
the Church to which his readers belonged, or that he had
formerly visited them. That he was free to do so is im
plied in verse 23.
Who brought again from the dead (xiii. 20). — A reference
to the resurrection of Jesus without the Pauline doctrinal
implications.2 Shepherd of the sheep (Matt. xxvi. 31 ; John
x. 11 ; 1 Pet. ii. 25).
With the blood of the eternal covenant (xiii. 20). — The sense
in which the preposition here rendered with (iv) is to be
taken is obscure. Perhaps "in virtue of" or "on the
strength of" may give the author's thought. Jesus was
1 Luke xv. 11-24.
2 It is worthy of note that the Epistle contains only this incidental
mention ofthe resurrection of Jesus, which is one ofthe cardinal doc
trines ofthe Pauline theology. In Paul the earthly atoning work of
Christ is paramount, and his death would have had no significance
without his resurrection (Rom. i. 4), while in Hebrews the emphasis
falls upon his high-priestly function in heaven.

78 HEBREWS xiii. 23, 24.
raised from the dead because, according to the author's gen
eral theory respecting his death, he was to enter ' ' with his
blood into the heavenly sanctuary." This was to the writer
the chief reason for the mission of Christ and his real work.
Hence his resurrection had its ground in his blood, or in the
blood of the eternal covenant.
Timothy (xiii. 23), about whose imprisonment we know
nothing from other sources, having been set at liberty, the
writer informs his readers that with him he will shortly visit
them. They of Italy salute you (xiii. 24), that is, persons from
Italy who were at the time of writing in company with the
author, perhaps Christians who had fled from persecution.

THE DOCTRINAL TEACHINGS OF THE EPISTLE.
The relation of Judaism and Christianity in the thought of the
author is the point of view from which the doctrines of the Epistle
may best be regarded. He sets the two systems of religion in strong
contrast, but not in fundamental opposition. He evidently had not
outgrown Judaism and left it far behind him. He regards the two
" covenants " as grounded upon the same principle, that of sacrifice
for the " putting away " of sin. They differ in the incidental particu
lar that the sacrifices of the one are temporary, perishable, ineffectual,
and earthly, while that of the other is permanent, "once for all"
time, eternal, and heavenly. The one furnishes only a type and
shadow, a ministry sanctifying only to "the cleanness of the flesh"
(ix. 13), the other is a fulfilment in the celestial sanctuary, and its
ministration " cleanses the conscience from dead works." The prin
ciple ofthe high-priesthood is at the basis of both, and the office has
an unbroken continuity passing from a state of imperfection in the
one to divine completeness in the other. The Old Testament is inter
preted as containing in symbol and foreshadowing all that is essential
in Christianity. Even the descent of the high-priesthood of the latter
is traced from the former, Melchizedek, a high-priest forever, being
regarded as a type of Christ.
The doctrine of the Epistle concerning the person of Christ denotes
a marked departure from the earlier writings of the New Testament.
As the Son of God he is " appointed heir of all things," is the one
through whom, by whose agency as a preexistent being, God " made
the ages," or the world in its past, present, and future conditions,
" the effulgence of His glory, and the very image of His substance."
He is omnipotent, "upholding all things by the word of his power"
(i. 2, 3). He is exalted above the angels, who must worship him, and
the epithet "god" is applied to him (i. 6, 8). Paul taught the pre-
existence of Christ, in which state he was the agent of creation,
but he was ever to him in an unique sense human, the "heavenly
man," the "second Adam," "the second man." In the apostle's
79

80 HEBREWS
thought Jesus was never separated from humanity, however exalted
he might be both in his preexistent state and after his resurrection.
His "body of glory," which he was conceived to possess in both con
ditions, was the pattern for that with which the believers would be
clothed when they should rise at his second coming (Phil. iii. 21).
Accordingly he never applies such terms to him as are employed iu
i. 2, 3. The Pauline idea that Christ was the " image of God " ' falls
short in intensity of that of our author, "the very image of His sub
stance." Paul calls Christ " a life-giving spirit " 2 in connection with
his function in salvation as " the last Adam," a representative of the
human race in a saving and spiritual capacity, as the first Adam was
conceived as its representative with respect to the flesh and sin. But
the author of Hebrews attributes to him a participation in the divine
essence, when he declares that he effected an atonement by virtue of
" eternal spirit " which he is assumed to be or to possess (ix. 14). As
a godlike being, "eternal spirit," he "appears before the face of
God " (ix. 24) to make propitiation in the heavenly sanctuary. With
all this exaltation of Christ, however, the writer evidently thought of
him as subordinated to the Deity. It is God who "made the ages "
(worlds), and the Son is only an agent. He from whom and through
whom are all things subjected Jesus to suffering (ii. 10), and made him
" for a little while lower than the angels." The writer's doctrine of
the person of Christ represents a stage in the process of the glorifica
tion of Jesus traceable in primitive Christianity. This process began
with Paul and ended in the fourth Gospel. Hebrews is between the
two, but nearer to the latter than to the former.
The preexistent Christ is conceived as a divine being, but not as
God. If this distinction is not precisely defined, and if no very clear
idea is expressed in " the effulgence of His glory and the very image
of His person," it is evident that such a discrimination is implied in
several passages ofthe Epistle. The writer classes Christ in the pre
existent state as one of certain superior beings who are called his
"fellows" (i. 9), and whom he outranks, having been "anointed
above " them. The monotheism of the Epistle is incontestable, and
its God is the God of the Hebrew theology, the sole Sovereign and
Creator. Christ is not regarded as self-existent, but as derived, gen
erated, dependent, as "better than the angels," as the begotten Son
(i- 2, 4, 5). The words "without father," etc., and "without begin
ning of days " (vii. 3), simply indicate that the writer did not conceive
1 2 Cor. iv. 4. * 1 Cor. xv. 45.

HEBREWS 81
of Christ as having begun to exist when he was born as a man. In
his essential existence he will have no " end of life " (vii. 3, 16). The
rank ofthe Son is accordingly divine. But though he is designated
as "god" in the citation from Ps. xiv., just as Philo regarded the
Logos as a second god, he is subordinated to the Deity, who in the
same passage is called his God, at whose right hand he is elsewhere
represented as seated (i. 3, 13, viii. 1, x. 12, xii. 2) and accordingly as
holding a rank inferior to the " Majesty on high." As a " mediator "
(viii. 6, ix. 15), then, Christ is conceived by our author as _. pre
existent being superior to the angels and less than God. The incar
nation was not an incarnation of Deity, who, according to the
Alexandrian philosophy with which the Epistle is in touch, could not
come into immediate contact with matter. As to the manner of the
birth of the man Jesus there is no indication in the Epistle of the
author's belief in the miraculous conception. From his point of view
that Christ was the preexistent glorious Son, the "very image" of
God, such an idea would be as incongruous as it apparently was to
Paul and the author of the fourth Gospel. In emphasising the earthly
example of Christ the author differs from Paul, and even goes so far
as to teach that the exalted being who was the " effulgence " of the
divine " glory " in his preexistence was made perfect only through
"sufferings" (ii. 10). The teaching, however, which exalts Christ
even beyond the Pauline conception, and constitutes a " preparation
of the Johannine Christology," must be regarded as " the central doc
trine" ofthe Epistle, whose real theme is the superiority of the new
covenant to the old. To this superiority a divine high-priest was
essential. The work of Jesus as a Saviour is inseparably associated in the mind
of the writer with the function of a high-priest in the heavenly sanctu
ary. How he conceived this celestial, divine personality to have as
sumed a human body and to have entered upon conditions in which
he was " tempted " and perfected through suffering, is not apparent ;
and he offers no solution ofthe difficulty which lies in the supposition
that so exalted a being as he assumes Christ to have been in his pre-
existence should have "learned obedience" on earth. That Jesus
should, however, "be made in all respects like unto his brethren"
(ii. 17) so as to be capable of being " touched with a feeling of our in
firmities" (iv. 15), was evidently regarded by the writer as an indis
pensable intermediate stage between his preexistent condition and
that to which he was exalted when he "sat down at the right hand
of God " (i. 3, viii. i, x. 12, xii. 2). This earthly life of temptation

82 HEBREWS
and suffering was deemed a preparation for his function as a high-
priest, which was conceived to be performed not in " a holy place
made with hands," but in " heaven itself" (ix. 24). Essentially it was
to " offer a sacrifice for sins forever " (x. 12), the effect of which was
"remission " of sins (x. 18), or release from the penalty incurred by
the commission of them, without which there "remains" only a
"fearful expectation of judgment and a fierceness of fire which shall
devour the adversaries" (x. 27). In this doctrine of atonement we
have neither the thought nor the terminology of Paul. Instead of
"the man from heaven," the " last Adam" who as the representative
of mankind redeemed them in his death from the " curse ofthe law,"
" became a curse for us," ¦ satisfied the penal demands ofthe law for
all, and so became " the end of the law " (Rom. x. 4.), doing it away
so that it " passeth ' ' with all its glory,2 we have in Hebrews a great
high-priest who with his own blood expiates the sins of men, appear
ing with it before the face of God for them as an intercessor (ix. 11-
15, 24-27, x. 10). The destruction of the devil (ii. 14) takes the place
ofthe abolition of the^aw. Instead of the Pauline "justification" of
those who believe, we have here the ideas of " cleansing " and "mak
ing perfect" (ix. 14, xi. 40, xii. 23). This sacrifice, mad$ "once for
all " time, secures an " eternal redemption " (ix. 12, 25-28). The real
atonement of Christ is not, as with Paul, in the death on the cross,
but in his entrance into the perfect sanctuary above, he having
"passed through the heavens " (iv. 14, ix. n, x. 12).
The writer of the Epistle lays no little stress upon faith, but his
apprehension of it is different from Paul's. The Pauline opposition
of faith and works, the conception of justification by faith, and of
faith as a means of mystic union with Christ are not found in the
Epistle. Unlike Paul, the writer does not give prominence to faith
in Christ, but rather in God, when he does not, as is often the case,
speak quite vaguely of it. Christ is the example of faith, its " author
and perfecter" (xii. 2). The emphasis placed upon faith does not
relate to the individual appropriation ofthe atoning sacrifice of Christ,
but to a continuance in the Christian life. Through the new covenant
free access to God is offered to all who will ' ' draw nigh " (ii. 9, iv. 16,
vii. 19, 25, x. 20). Christ is even the author of eternal salvation to all
who obey him (v. 9), and instead of men being accounted righteous
through faith in the Pauline sense, we have " wrought righteousness
through faith " (xi. 13). Far from being a specifically Christian dis-
1 Gal. iii. 13. » 2 Cor. iii. 11.

HEBREWS 83
position, it is the attitude of mind to which were due the achieve
ments of a long line of Old Testament worthies (xi.). Not only is it
"the assurance of things hoped for " (xi. 1), but it is intimately as
sociated with obedience, fidelity, and patience. In making "the
things not seen " its object the writer reveals the influence of the
Alexandrian conception that all that is real and abiding belongs to
the future world, and will be enjoyed by men only when it is opened
to them. Instead of the Pauline teaching that righteousness is ac
counted to one through faith he teaches that through it one may
have " witness " that he is righteous (xi. 4), and in the case of Abra
ham he goes no farther than to say that he " obeyed " by faith (xi. 8),
and " offered up Isaac " " accounting that God was able to raise him
up" (xi. 17, 19).
" The subjective side of the attainment of salvation, in marked con
trast with the juridical as well as the mystically disposed theory of
Paul, simply takes this form, that the free access procured by the
high-priestly service of Christ accrues to the advantage of all those
who employ the same in order to approach God (iv. 16, vii. 19, 25) and
to serve Him." Apparently without comprehension of, or at least
without interest in, the profound mystical doctrine of faith set forth
by the apostle, the author appears to have " returned to the popular
apprehension of the ethical relations as they prevailed in all Jewish
and gentile circles." It was the fortune of the central ideas of Paul
inism to serve only a temporary purpose, and that in the great
conflict which their author waged with Judaism. The invasion of
Hellenistic ideas pushed aside the " Pharisaic juridical conceptions "
contained in his theology, and " gave it a turn by means of which it
was better capable of finding acceptance and comprehension in the
gentile world." The faith which Hebrews presents and illustrates
has been well characterised as having significance rather for the pro
motion than for the grounding of salvation. It is almost identified
with patience and endurance, and sometimes scarcely distinguished
from obedience and simple fidelity. It is specifically declared to be
the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not
seen — an idea which is " more Philonic than Pauline." It is related
also to the future world, the only real world according to the Alexan
drian philosophy of the author of the Epistle. The central idea of
faith as it is set forth here is belief in God, His existence, and the
certainty of the rewards which He dispenses (vi. 10, xi. 6). It does
not occur to the writer to speak after the manner of Paul of faith in
the grace of God manifested in the death of Christ, but rather in the

84 HEBREWS
spirit of Hebrew piety and in the form of Alexandrian philosophy he
gives expression to the faith through which " we understand that the
worlds were made by the word of God " (xi. 3). Jesus is not so much
the object of faith as its author, its finisher, and its example (xii. 2, 3).
"By faith Abraham being tried offered up Isaac" (xi. 17), but the
Pauline idea that the patriarch's faith was accounted to him for right
eousness1 is foreign to the writer's thought. Paul's "righteousness
which is of faith " (Rom. iv. 13, xi. 30) becomes here the " righteous
ness which is according to faith " (xi. 7). No moral or religious value
is attached to faith in doctrines or in sacraments, and the Eucharist
is not mentioned.
The doctrine of "the last things " or the second coming of Christ
occupies no important place in the Epistle. Mention of it is inci
dental, and very little is said of resurrection and judgment. They
are, indeed, disparaged as " first principles " beyond which the readers
are exhorted to press on (vi. I, 2). But the writer clearly marks the
distinction between the present and future times or periods, between
"this age " and " that which is to come," and regards the hopes of
Christians as directed toward the great consummation of the Messianic
age which he represents as near at hand (x. 25). Those who believe
and remain steadfast will be partakers of the blessedness ofthe king
dom about to be established. For apostates there is no hope, and in
the fortune of those who have not believed no interest is manifested.
There is an intimation that those Jews who in the Old Testament
times were examples of faith might be made perfect along with the
Christians, but the writer expresses no concern about Jews who did
not have faith, much less about the multitudes of other men who had
never heard of Judaism or of Christianity.
1 Rom. iv. 9.

THE EPISTLE TO THE
COLOSSIANS.

INTRODUCTION.
COLOSS_E was a city of Phrygia, a country through
which Paul is reported to have passed twice in his
missionary travels.1 There is no evidence that he had
anything to do with the establishment of the church in
Colossae or, indeed, that he ever visited that city. The
Epistle purporting to have been written by the apostle to
this church proceeds, after the salutation and some hearty
expressions of thanks to God for the faith and love of the
Colossians, directly to an elaboration of the mystery of
the person of Christ (i. 16-20). After referring to his
own appointment as a minister of the gospel, he enters
upon the real purpose of the writing, which was to warn
the readers against certain erroneous doctrines (ii. i-iii.
4). Following this are exhortations to avoid all unclean
ness, anger, malice, and falsehood, and to " put on a heart
of compassion, kindness," etc. (iii. 5-17). Wives are en
joined to be in subjection to their husbands, husbands to
love their wives, and servants to obey their masters (iii. 18-
iv. 6). The conclusion connects the Epistle with that to
Philemon in the mention of Onesimus, who is said to be sent
by the writer to Colossae together with Tychicus.2 Greet-
1 Acts xvi. 6, xviii. 23. s Ibid. xx. 4.
85

86 INTRODUCTION
ings are sent from Aristarchus, Mark, Epaphras, I^uke, and
Demas, as in Philemon, and the readers are asked to cause
that the letter be read to the brethren in Laodicea and to
read the one from that church.
The Epistle, unlike the undisputed writings of Paul, ap
pears to have exerted no influence upon other New Testa
ment writers. Conceptions of the person of Christ closely
related to those contained in it are found in Hebrews, Reve
lation, and the Pastoral Epistles, but there is no evidence
of a literary dependence of the authors of these writings
upon it. The same is substantially true of the fourth Gos
pel. The single exception to the foregoing statement is
furnished in the Epistle to the Ephesians, the relation of
which to Colossians will be considered when we come to
treat of it in due course. No certain trace of it is found in
the apostolic fathers, and in Justin Martyr (about a.d. 150)
two or three expressions appear which may be reminiscences
of it. The heretic Marcion recognised it about the middle
of the second century, and later Irenaeus, Clement of Alex
andria, and Tertullian.
The object of the Epistle, which was addressed to gentile
Christians (i. 21, ii. 11, 13) and to persons not acquainted
with the writer (ii. 1), was to warn the readers against false
teachings presented through " philosophy and vain deceit,
after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world,
and not after Christ " (ii. 8). The question of the author
ship is inseparably bound up with the determination of the
character of these errors. If they were such as might have
existed and been promulgated in Colossae in the time of
Paul, then he may have written the Epistle as we have it, so
far as this matter is concerned. But the allusions to the
heresies mentioned are too vague to enable us to decide be
yond doubt regarding their character and to connect them
certainly with known historical aberrations of doctrine in the
primitive Church. Some of them do not carry us beyond

COLOSSIANS 87
Jewish prescripts regarding food, drink, and festivals. Such
" rudiments of the world " (ii. 8, 20) are mentioned in Gal
atians ' and Romans.2 Others indicate teachings which
cannot be classified with these, and appear to refer to dual-
istic-ascetic tendencies (" severity to the body," ii. 23) ac
cording to which man by reason of his fleshly nature is
unworthy (see " humility," ii. 23) to hold intercourse with
the Deity, and must invoke the intervention of angels, who
thus become objects of worship (ii. 18). Thus they fail to
"hold fast the Head," Christ (ii. 19). There is perhaps a
reference to Gnostic speculations and pride of wisdom in the
declaration that in Christ " are all the treasures of wisdom
and knowledge [Gnosis] hidden" (ii. 3). It appears very
probable that the writer was contending against teachings
which were a combination of Essenism with Gnosticism in
its early stages. But a precise historical determination of
the errors in question is not possible.
The contest against false doctrines is conducted from the
point of view of a doctrine of the person of Christ intended
to counteract them. Accordingly, the section, i. 15-20, may
be regarded as the kernel of the Epistle, furnishing, as it
does, the basis of the argument in refutation of the heresies.
A study of this section will show the close connection of the
writer's thought with that of Hebrews and its wide departure
from the doctrines of Paul as known from his great Epistles-
The ideas appear to be those of the apostle developed in a
mind influenced by the speculations of Philo of Alexandria.
Paul, indeed, calls Christ " the image of God," 3 but here
we have him designated as " the image of the invisible
God" (i. 15), according to Philo's conception of God as
concealed, and made known only by the Logos. Such an
expression used of Christ as " the firstborn of all creation "
is as remote from Paul's " the firstborn among many
brethren " as it is closely related to Philo's idea that the
1 Gal. iv. 3, 9, 10. 'Rom. xiv. 5, 6, 17, 21. 62 Cor. iv. 4.

88 INTRODUCTION
Logos was the firstborn or oldest Son of God. The teach
ing that through Christ and " unto him" were all things
created, " whether thrones or dominions or principalities or
powers," that is, angelic beings (i. 16), is not only quite
unlike what the apostle says in i Corinthians viii. 6, but
appears to be directed against the false teachers who depre
ciated Christ in favour of angel-worship. The saying that
" in him all things consist" (i. 17) reminds us of Hebrews
i. 3, but of nothing that is unquestionably Pauline. Whether
the term " fulness " ' refers to a Gnostic doctrine or no, the
teaching that in Christ ' ' dwelt all the fulness of the God
head bodily" is not only unlike Paul, but is irreconcilable
with his conception of Christ as the typical human personal
ity, " the man from heaven," who preexisted as the arche
type of the human race, in order that in the scheme of
redemption he might, as " the last Adam," be the represent
ative of men. Paul knew of Christ as the Saviour of men
alone, but the author of Colossians extends the redemptive
efficacy of Jesus to " things in the heavens " (i. 20), that is,
to supernal orders of beings. Paul's doctrine of the atone
ment by Christ as the representative of the human race
terminated in the deliverance of man from the curse of the
law through the great sacrifice. Demonic powers have no
place in the scheme. But the author of this Epistle, after
the manner of the writer of Hebrews,2 extends the efficacy
of Christ's death to the overthrow of Satanic agencies.
Through it God " blotted out the bond ' ' of the law that was
" against " men, " nailing it to the cross," and thus " tri
umphed " over the evil powers and made " a show of them
openly," as if they held a " bond " against men, the disso
lution of which by the death of Christ put them to rout by
depriving them of their weapon, or as Hebrews puts the
case, ' ' destroyed him that hath the power of death, that is,
the devil."
1 itXijpaD/*a. 2 Heb. ii. 14.

COLOSSIANS 89
From these considerations and others which will be pre
sented in the course of the exposition of the Epistle it is
probable that Colossians is the work of a writer considerably
later than Paul, a man in whom the Pauline thought had
undergone marked modifications under the influences of the
philosophy of the age, particularly that of Alexandria. It
may seem like ' ' begging the question ' ' to argue against
the Pauline authorship of Colossians on the ground that it
contains ideas foreign or opposed to those of Paul, when the
matter in dispute is whether or no those very ideas were his.
But the argument is not altogether illegitimate, since the
question is whether a given literary production is of such a
character that we may suppose it to be the work of a man to
whom certain writings are ascribed by the general consen
sus of scholars. It is not only proper and logical to compare
a disputed writing with these, but it is the only means of
deciding the question of its genuineness. The style is an
important consideration in such a case, and that of this
Epistle has traits which are both Pauline and unpauline.
The same is true of the thought, not a little of which is en
tirely reconcilable with that of the apostle. These consider
ations have led some to suppose that the writing contains a
genuine Pauline nucleus which was worked over and added
to by the author of Ephesians or someone else. These
matters are too abstruse to be discussed in a handbook in
tended for the general reader, and we must be content with
the remark that portions of the Epistle appear to denote so
wide a departure from the mode of thought and expression
known to be Paul's from his undisputed Epistles, that they
find their most natural explanation in the assumption of
another author writing in and for another age. From this
point of view the Epistle must have received its present form
at the end of the first century or in the first half of the
second.

THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOS
SIANS.

EXPOSITION.
The Epistle opens with a salutation in which the writer asso
ciates Timothy with himself as in 2 Corinthians and Philippians,
following which is an expression of thanks to God for the faith of
the brethren in Colossae and of an earnest wish for their spiritual
prosperity (i. 1-14).
Having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus (i. 4). — There is
no indication in the Epistle of other than a second-hand
knowledge of the persons and circumstances of the church
in Colossae on the part of the writer. This fact is not in
compatible with the Pauline authorship, since there is no
mention in Acts or in the generally accepted Epistles of Paul
of a visit of the apostle in this city.
The hope laid up for you in the heavens (i. 5). — The Christ
ian hope of the primitive Church was preeminently in the
Messianic kingdom which was to be established at the second
coming of Christ. Since he was expected from the heavens,1
their hope was conceived to be there (iii. 3).2
In all the world (i. 6). — A manifest hyperbole (see verse 23;
Rom. i. 8). The grace of God is a designation of the Christian
gospel of which the readers are said to have had a true
knowledge. Epaphras (i. 7) was evidently a teacher of the church in
1 1 Thess. iv. 16. 'Rom. v. 2, viii. 18; Phil. iii. 20 ; 1 Pet. i. 4.
91

92 COLOSSIANS i. 9-12.
Colossse, perhaps its founder (see iv. 12 and Philem. 23), and
is called here a faithful minister of Christ on its behalf. The
Greek word on which the translation " our " ofthe revised
version is based is well attested, but is probably chargeable
to an error of a copyist.
Knowledge of His will (i. 9), that is, what God requires in
conduct (iv. 12).1
Spiritual wisdom and understanding (i. 9). — The wisdom
and understanding which the writer prays that his readers
may possess are characterised as spiritual, a term which
must be interpreted in accordance with the primitive-Christ
ian idea of an immediate influence from the spirit of God,
sometimes called the Spirit, or the Holy Spirit, to which
certain religious experiences and phenomena were attrib
uted.2 Thus "spiritual wisdom" is opposed to "fleshly
wisdom," 3 and is equivalent to " the wisdom that cometh
down from above." *
Unto all pleasing (i. 10), that is, so as to be in all respects
pleasing to Christ.
Strengthened with all power (i. 11). — The translation
" with all power " is not good. "All power " is not meant,
but " every [possible] power," ethically speaking. Noyes'
rendering, " endued with all power " is still more objection
able. Power probably refers to the moral qualities of man in
accordance with the Pauline usage, B and ' ' strengthened in,
or by the quickening of, every moral power ' ' probably ex
presses the writer's thought. That this strengthening is
conceived as coming from God is evident from the words,
according to the -might of His glory, that is, the strength
should correspond to the might of the glory of Him by
whom it is imparted.
Inheritatice ofthe saints in light (i. 12). — In light is to be
1 Rom. ii. 18, xii. 2 ; Eph. v. 17, vi. 6.
2 1 Cor. ii. 13, xii. 8 ; Eph. i. 18. "Jas. iii. 15.
3 2 Cor. i. 12. « x Cor iv _- . _ Tlle-S< j 5

i. 13, 14. COLOSSIANS 93
connected with inheritance. The inheritance in light is the
glorious kingdom which Christ was expected to establish at
his second coming. The Messianic salvation is associated
with ' ' light ' ' in contrast with the condition of sin, which is
"darkness." When Christ should come in this kingdom
he would bring the light in which he is represented as
dwelling.1 Accordingly, the declaration follows that God delivered us
out of the power of darkness, and translated its into the king
dom of the Son of His love (i. 13). — Darkness is personified
and conceived as possessing power with which it rules the
" world " or the unbelievers.2 The kingdom is the coming
reign of Christ at his second appearance. This is the mean
ing of the kingdom of heaven, of God, and of Christ through
out the New Testament.3 The Messianic kingdom is in the *
future, but so certain and so near is it conceived to be that
believers are regarded as already " translated " into it. The
Son of His love is equivalent to " His beloved Son." 4 The
expression is not like Paul, and sounds harsh to one accus
tomed to his terminology. Harsh also and unlike the
apostle's style is the construction of the long sentences com
prising verses 3-8 and 9-18.
In whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins
(i. 14). — We, the believers, are regarded as ransomed or set
free from the penalty of sin in Christ, that is, by means of
his atonement.6 The words, the forgiveness of our sins, are
an explanation of the foregoing phrase in the sense that
he who is forgiven is no longer subject to penalty. Paul
nowhere in his undisputed Epistles uses the word here ren
dered forgiveness. On the other hand, the writer of Colos
sians avoids the Pauline term expressive of the apostle's
1 1 Tim. vi. 16 ; i John i. 7.
2 Rom. xiii. 12 ; Eph. v. 8, vi. 12.
3 Matt. vi. 10 ; 1 Cor. iv. 20, xv. 24 ; Rom. xiv. 17.
4 Matt. iii. 17. * Rom. iii. 24, 25 ; Heb. ix. 15.

94

COLOSSIANS i. 15-

fundamental idea of justification by faith — two facts of no
little importance for the question of authorship.
"Redemption" (ditoXvvpa>6i%) has here the sense in which it is
used by Paul, to whom is due the introduction of the conception into
Christian theology. In Rom. iii. 24 the free "justification " of men
by the grace of God is said to be " through the redemption in Christ
Jesus," that is, "deliverance effected through the death of Christ
from the retributive wrath of a holy God and the merited penalty of
sin " (Thayer's Lexicon, sub voce). The same idea is expressed in
Gal. iii. 13 by i^ayopd^m, to buy off, that is, by paying the penalty
of sin by the death on the cross. In the undisputed Epistles Paul
expresses this doctrine with precision, while in Colossians there is
the vagueness of an imitator, and redemption (buying off) " from the
curse of the law," the imputation of righteousness, and justification
by faith appear to lie outside the writer's range of thought. Dr. T.
K. Abbott's remark that " forgiveness of sins " (dq>f.6iv rmv djuap-
ridov) occurs twice in Paul's, speeches in Acts has no value for Paul's
use ofthe term, since these speeches are doubtless compositions of
the writer of Acts.— "The Epistles to the Eph. and Col." in the
International Critical Commentary.
The mention of Christ as a Saviour leads the writer to an expo
sition of his doctrine of Jesus as a person, of his rank, functions,
and relation to God, with especial reference to the false teachings
current in the Colossian church (i. 15-29).
Who is the image of the invisible God (i. 15), literally, of
God the invisible. Paul does not use the expression in bis
uncontested Epistles, and its occurrence here is favourable
to the supposition that the Epistle was written by one who
was familiar with the ideas and terms of the Alexandrian
philosophy. The use of the present, "is," requires the
reference of the relation to God expressed by image to
Christ's existence at the time, that is, after his resurrection
and exaltation. Whether his preexistent state is included
or no is not certain, but it is probable that it is. He is
called " the image of God " in 2 Corinthians iv. 4 with the
use of the present tense as here. The expression is less

i. 15, 16. COLOSSIANS 95
emphatic than that in Hebrews (i. 3), and does not neces
sarily imply the ascription of a divine nature to Jesus. The
same word is employed in iii. 10 of regenerated men in rela
tion to God (see 1 Cor. xv. 49, where the word is used of the
heavenly body which the risen Christians were expecting to
have in the Messianic kingdom, according to Phil. iii. 21).
Christ was not, however, as the image of God the invisible,
regarded in the early Church as himself invisible, for he was
expected at his second coming in an " appearance " and a
" revelation," albeit with a " body of glory." ¦
The firstborn of all creation (i. 15).- — This is said in opposi
tion to the Gnostic doctrine that Christ was not first in* rank
among the spirits. The translation of the revised version,
which is also that of Noyes, does not accurately express the
author's thought. He does uot mean that Christ was a part
of" creation," but that he was before everything that was
created, and of course before every creature, angels included.
Philo predicates the same relation of the Logos, and our
author represents a conception of Christ well on the way to
the doctrine of the fourth Gospel that " in the beginning
was the word" (Logos). In calling Christ the firstborn,
then, he distinguishes him from created beings, and thinks
of him as not produced in time, but probably as having pro
ceeded out of the Father before time was. So, according
to Philo, the Father brought forth the Logos, or caused him
to rise up.
For in him were all things created (i. 16). — For indicates a
conclusion from the foregoing declaration that Christ was
before every creature. In him 2 means not that he was
merely the agent or instrument through whom the creation
was effected, as in Hebrews i. 2 and 1 Cor. viii. 6, but " the
conditioning ground upon which the creation rests." The
expression does not mean that he was the original ground
1 Phil. iii. 20, 21 ; 2 Thess. i. 7 ; 1 Pet. iv. 13 ; Tit. ii. 13.
" iv avrtS.

96 COLOSSIANS i. 16.
of the creation, which could be thought by the author as no
other than God, but that the work did not proceed without
him, that through his activity in creation the divine idea of
the world was carried out. The words "through him"
at the end of the verse are another expression of this thought.
The word here rendered "created" means in the New
Testament "produced," "made," and not "ordered" or
" arranged." The writer did not think of creation as the
arrangement of preexisting material into a cosmic order.
The things in the heavens (i. 16) must not be understood as
excluding the heavens themselves.
All things (i. 16) are included, the visible and the invisible.
The latter term denotes the angelic beings according to the
Jewish mythology, which passed over into Christian belief.
These are arranged in a hierarchy from the highest to the
lowest, thrones, dominions, principalities, powers, or, perhaps,
".thrones, principalities, powers, dominions." The terms
are somewhat different in Ephesians i. 21. Lightfoot thinks
that the writer shows impatience with this elaborate angel-
°l°gy> Just as iQ ii- J8- But in neither place is there any
clear indication of " impatience." He gives no sign either
that the angelology is distasteful to him or that he does not
accept it as a part of his belief. It is the worship of angels
with which he is impatient. There is certainly no presump
tion in favour of his being in advance of his age respecting
mythological conceptions.
Have been created (i. 16) denotes the result or completed
act. Unto him (i. 16). — Christ is the end of all created
things, which were made with reference to him, and without
him could not realise that for which they were intended.
This is said of God alone in Romans xi. 36, where the idea
is unquestionably Pauline. There is at least a strong prob
ability that the assignment of such a position to Christ de
notes a development of the doctrine of his person beyond the
soberer thought of Paul.

i. 17. COLOSSIANS 97
And in him all things consist (i. 17), that is, in him is the
condition of the coherence and order of the universe. Com
pare " upholding all things by the word of his power." '
In the doctrine of the person of Christ Hebrews and Colos
sians are so much in accord that they may be said to repre
sent one phase of the development of primitive-Christian
speculation on the subject. The doctrine that all things
consist in Christ is purely speculative, and " goes beyond
the scope of a merely religious reflection." Perhaps the
idea of the immanence of Christ in the world is included
here. Essentially equivalent is the saying in Eph. i. 23,
" the fulness of him that filleth all in all." In the Hebrew
prophets and in Paul this all-pervading glory and power are
ascribed to God alone.2 Not only is Christ so highly exalted
in the two Epistles that the functions of God are frequently
ascribed to him, but he is conceived as the centre and pivot
of the entire creation. He is the Johannine Logos in the
germ. The prominence here given to Christ as the creator of all things and
especially of the angels according to the different classes of them is
conceded by Meyer, who maintains the Pauline authorship of the
Epistle, to justify the supposition that the false teachers disparaged
Christ in this respect, and that they at least had the elements of the
Gnostic doctrine of the Demiurge which was later elaborated. There
can be no doubt from the manner in which the matter is treated in
the passages in question that the so-called false teachers in Colossse
denied that Christ was "before all things." That this heresy arose
as early as the time of Paul is questionable. In any case the doctrine
concerning Christ contained in the Epistle appears to have been
called out by the speculative heresy which was current in the church
in Colossse, and it would probably never have been put forth without
this provocation. Have we anything more here than one speculation
set over against another ? Certainly there is nothing in the teaching
of Jesus concerning himself that could suggest the question whether
or no he created the angels ! But the appearance of the doctrine of
1 Heb. i. 3. ' Isa. vi. 3 ; Jer. xxiii. 24 ; 1 Cor. xv. 28.
7

98 COLOSSIANS i. 18, 19.
the Epistle is easily explained historically. It only required the sub
ordination of Christ and " the worship of angels " to incite someone
to come to the defence of the imperilled faith with the teaching that
Christ was " before all things," that he made the angels, and that in
fact he held a cosmic position in the entire order of things.
A7id he is the head of the body, the Church (i. 18). — A special
application of the teaching that Christ is " before all things. ' '
On the Church as his body see Rom. xii. 5, 1 Cor. x. 17, xii.
12-14; Eph. iv. 12, v. 23, 30. He was also the beginning
[of the resurrection], the firstborn from the dead,1 and there
he was in order that in all things he might have preeminence,
contrary to what the false teachers may say about his sub
ordination. For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in him should
all the fulness dwell2 (i. 19). — The writer here reaches the
climax of his exaltation of Christ. The fulness is that ofthe
divine nature (ii. 9). The term pleroma, " fulness," was
employed by the Gnostics of the second century to denote
the totality of the primal powers included in the divine
being. The writer's introduction of it here and in ii. 9 with
out qualification implies that it was familiar to his readers in
Colossse, who must have heard it from their false teachers.
These the writer wishes to refute, and he meets them on
their own ground by employing their standard term and
applying it to Christ, in order to show that he whom he had
1 Yet would the writer have denied that others had been raised ix.
rmv VEHptSv before him ?
2 The translation, " It was the good pleasure of the Father," is open
to question. " Father " is uot in the Greek, and the only word ex
pressed in the clause which can be the subject is TcXrjpaona. The
rendering, then, " All the fulness was pleased to dwell in him," that
is, actually dwelt in him, is grammatically correct, and is supported
by many exegetes. The word rendered " to dwell iu " (uar oixrjtiai)
may denote a permanent residence, and Lightfoot thinks that the
false teachers maintained only a transient connection ofthe nXr/pm/xa
with Jesus.

i. 20. COLOSSIANS 99
already declared to be in all respects preeminent was so also
in this highest sense, that is, in having in himself the whole
pleroma. The doctrine ofthe two Epistles, Ephesians and Colossians, regard
ing Christ (Christology) has some Pauline features, such as the teach
ing that Jesus was the "image" of God.1 "The firstborn of all
creation " 2 can, however, hardly be classified with "the firstfruits
of them that are asleep "3 and "the firstborn among many brethren. " 4
Col. i. 18, however, " the beginning, the firstborn from the dead," is
of tbe same order as the Pauline expressions. The tendency of the
Christology of the two Epistles is toward a metaphysical conception
of Christ and the assignment to him of a cosmic position. He is
farther removed from man than the Christ of Paul, "the second
man," "the man from heaven," and "the second Adam." Paul
went no farther than to represent Christ as the agent ofthe creation,5
and in Colossians we find the same idea (i. 16), but in this verse the
writer declares Christ to be the end of the creation also.
And through him to reconcile all things unto Himself (i. 20).
— The writer conceives it to be " the good pleasure ' ' of God
to reconcile to Himself through Christ all things absolutely,
that is, the things on earth and the things in the heavens. All
things are believed to be in a state of unreconciliation.
Through the primal sin death had come into the world, and
had passed upon all men in that all sinned." The whole
" creation " was in " the bondage of corruption, " ' and was
awaiting deliverance. The angels who had fallen were
" kept in everlasting bonds under darkness unto the judg
ment of the grea,t day." e These primitive-Christian ideas
must be assumed to have been in the mind of the writer.
The reconciliation of " the things in the heavens " refers to
the class of angelic beings as a whole, some of whom must
have been thought to need reconciliation. In Romans viii.
1 Col. i. 15 ; 1 Cor. xi. 7 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4. 6 Rom. v. 12.
2 Col. i. 15. 4 Rom. viii. 29. ' Ibid. viii. 19-21.
3 1 Cor. xv. 20. 5 1 Cor. viii. 6. 8 Jude 6.

ioo COLOSSIANS i. 20-22.
38 " angels, principalities, and powers " are spoken of as if
they might be capable of hostility to the cause of Christ ;
and in 1 Corinthians vi. 3 it is said that the Christians them
selves will "judge angels." The reconciliation is in the
future, and must have been conceived as about to be effected
at the coming of Christ the second time in his kingdom. It
is said to be the ' ' good pleasure ' ' of God to effect it, but the
writer does not declare his conviction of its absolute accom
plishment, and he does not enter into the question whether
bad men and fallen angels would be reconciled to God
regardless of their own choice. The unqualified reconcilia
tion of ' ' all things ' ' to God at the second coming of Christ
does not belong to the primitive-Christian thought. Christ
was to reign until he had put all enemies under his feet.1
He was to be revealed from heaven with the angels of his
power in flaming fire, rendering vengeance to them that
know not God ' ; and in i. 23 of this Epistle the writer has
hope that the believers will then be presented "without
blemish and unreprovable " before him, only on the condi
tion that they "continue in the faith." In Hebrews the
condition of the apostate is regarded as hopeless."
Having made peace through the blood of his cross (i. 20). —
The blood of Christ is regarded as the propitiatory offering
satisfying the demands of the law,' but this writer omits the
Pauline terms "through faith" and "justified by his
blood." Reconciled in the body of his flesh through death (i. 22), that
is, God has reconciled them through the death of Christ. In
the body of Christ through the instrumentality of his death
was the atonement made by which their reconciliation be
came possible. The express mention of the body of Christ
was doubtless made with reference to the false teachers who
in connection with " the worship of angels " probably taught
1 1 Cor. xv. 24. s Heb. vi. 4-6, x. 26.
» 1 Thess. i. 8. * Rom. iii. 25, v. 9.

i. 22-28. COLOSSIANS 101
that these beings, who were supposed to be without bodies of
flesh, had a part in the work of atonement. Thus Christ's
atonement was disparaged.
Present you before him holy and unblamable and unreprov-
able (i. 22), that is, at the time of his second coming or
Parousia. Their presentation before Christ, however, to
share in the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom depended
upon their steadfast adherence to the faith in which they had
been instructed (i. 23).
The writer now proceeds to speak for himself as Paul, or for the
apostle whom he personates, of his calling and sufferings as an
apostle (i. 24-ii. 3).
To fill up on my part that which is lacking of the afflictions
of Christ (i. 24). — The idea is that he had a certain measure
of affliction to bear as a follower and minister of Christ in
behalf of the Church. Many of these sufferings of Christ,
so-called, he had already borne,1 and now he was filling up
what was lacking in them in his own flesh through the
bodily afflictions which he was enduring. He calls his own
sufferings those of Christ in the sense that he is a "par
taker" of them in being similarly afflicted.2
To fulfil the word of God, even the mystery which hath been
hid from all ages and generations (i. 25, 26). — By the word of
God is evidently meant the gospel of Christ, and the fulfil
ment of it is the accomplishment of its ministry.3 This is
called a mystery probably because conceived as formerly
hidden, but now manifested to the saints or believers.
To them God was pleased to make known what is the riches
of the glory of this mystery among the gentiles, which [riches]
is Christ in you, the hope of glory (i. 27). — On the gospel
as a mystery see 1 Cor. ii. 7, iv. 1 ; Rom. xvi. 25, 26.
Present every man perfect in Christ (i. 28), that is, at his
1 2 Cor. i. 5. 2 1 Pet. iv. 13 ; Phil. iii. 10. 3Rom. xv. 19.

102 COLOSSIANS ii. 1-3.
second coming (v. 22). ' The perfection is designated as in
Christ in the sense that it must be Christian.
For them at Laodicea and for as many as have not seen my
face (ii. 1). — It is probable the false teachers were busy at
Laodicea also, and that the writer was solicitous for that
church as well as for the one .in Colossse on that account.
The words, and for as many, include the Colossians and
Laodiceans among those who had not seen the writer.
That they may know the mystery of God, even Christ (ii. 2).
— The Greek text of this passage is doubtful and textual
critics differ as to what is the correct reading. The revised
version translates it as if Christ were in apposition with
mystery. This is a proper rendering of Tischendorf s text
(8th edition). The version of King James is from a text
which reads " of God and of the Father and of Christ."
Noyes following an earlier edition of Tischendorf omits
" Christ." Lachmann's text reads, " the mystery of the
God of Christ," and this reading is favoured by some
scholars of note. That Christ himself should be called " the
mystery of God " is contrary to the analogy of i. 26, 27, and
the passages referred to in the note on that passage. The
mystery of God is the gospel, as in the foregoing passages.
At this point the writer resumes the exposition of his doctrine of
the person of Christ, and adds exhortations with especial reference
to the false teachings (ii. 3— iii. 4).
In whom are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hid
den (ii. 3). — Grammatically the rendering " in which," that
is, the mystery, is admissible, and it is the only probable
one if " Christ " be omitted in the preceding verse. If that
word is retained, however, the reference of the pronoun is
doubtful. The text is too obscure to warrant a positive
conclusion. In any case the writer declares, in opposition
to the false teachers who disparaged Christ, that in Christ or
1 1 Thess. ii. 19, 20 ; 2 Cor. xi. 2.

ii. 4, 5- COLOSSIANS 103
in his gospel, " the mystery of God," lay all the treasures
of the wisdom and knowledge (Gnosis) of which they
boasted. With persuasiveness of speech (ii. 4). — This is said with
reference to the specious reasonings of the false teachers,
which were calculated to mislead. The Greek word thus
rendered is not elsewhere used in the New Testament.1
For though I be absent in the flesh, yet I am with you in the
spirit (ii. 5). — It is open to question whether the Pauline
terminology is here strictly to be interpreted in the Pauline
sense. The apostle generally employs " Spirit " in the sense
of the supernatural divine influence which is alone able to
counteract the tendencies of the flesh, and which is the con
stant support and quickener of the believer's moral-religious
life. From this point of view the writer's presence with the
church in Colossse in the Spirit was a presence in so far as
this divine power, of which he was assumed to be a repre
sentative by preeminence, was effective in them.
Paul's doctrine of the Spirit is involved in no little obscurity. Ac
cording to the analogy of his teaching in general he did not attribute
to man a spirit as a part of his original natural endowment, but
thought him to possess it only when he became a Christian believer,
and as such received it as a supernatural gift. In other words, he did
not regard it as a human faculty coordinate with "mind," " heart,"
and "conscience." When he speaks exactly he denies to the "natural
man" ability to receive "the things of the Spirit of God," which
are "spiritually discerned," while "he that is spiritual," that is, he
who has as a believer been supernaturally endowed with the divine
Spirit, "judgeth all things." From this it would appear that he
regarded the spiritual in man as somewhat superadded to his natural
endowment, somewhat essentially divine. It accords with this concep
tion that he regarded the bodies ofthe believers who would be raised
at the Parousia as "spiritual," like "the body of glory" assumed
by the risen and ascended Jesus,2 and taught that the resurrection
pertained to those in whom dwelt "the Spirit of Him who raised
1 TtiBavoXoyia. 2 Phil. iii. 21.

104

COLOSSIANS ii. 6-8.

up Jesus from the dead."1 Some suppose that by "thespirit of man V
Paul understood "a peculiar higher nature ofthe soul,2 and not a
separate substance alongside it," some that he regarded it as "a mere
organ of the natural human self-consciousness," and others that he
employed the word occasionally in accordance with the popular usage
and without regard to his strictly doctrinal terminology in which the
only concrete thing that belongs under the category of "Spirit" is
the Spirit of God. Rom. viii. 16, I Cor. ii. ii, and 2 Cor. vii. 13 pre
sent exegetical difficulties to the interpretation herein mentioned.
The supposition, however, is perhaps tenable that Paul sometimes
spoke of the spirit of man when he intended to indicate no more than
"the inner man" generally, while technically and doctrinally he
recognised no other spiritual essence in man in the strict sense of the
term than the divine Spirit which was a special endowment of the
believer. As, therefore, ye received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in
him (ii. 6). — This is an expression of the writer's interest
and solicitude with regard to the Colossians in view of the
perils to which their faith was exposed by reason of the
erroneous teachings that were current among them.
Walk in him, rooted and builded up in him (ii. 7). — The
writer was not here attentive to the relation to each other of
the figures employed.
Through his philosophy and vain deceit (ii. 8). — There is
nothing in the original corresponding to his, and the word
is superfluous. The term philosophy may mean any philo
sophy, but here doubtless refers to the speculations of the
false teachers, who probably arrogated the word to them
selves as a designation of their doctrines. It is not used
elsewhere in the New Testament. Vain deceit is another
term for the sort of philosophy which in the writer's judg
ment was employed by the teachers in question.
After the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world,
and not after Christ (ii. 8). — The first expression denotes the
purely human character ofthe " philosophy " in question in
¦Rom. viii. n. ^ipvxij.

ii. 9. COLOSSIANS 105
contrast with the " wisdom not of this world," ' and the
second the rudiments of the religious teachings of men not
Christians.2 In the connection of the third there is a want
of precision, since not after Christ cannot well be joined
either with make spoil of ox with vain deceit.2
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily (ii.
9). — Hence the readers should not be made spoil of by a
philosophy which is opposed to the truth that is in him, that
is, in his gospel. The word rendered ' ' Godhead ' ' does not
mean "divine qualities or attributes," but "the divine
nature." The expression is made as emphatic as possible.
It is not simply the fulness (pleroma) as in i. 19, but the
entire pleroma of the divinity. Dwelleth (ii. 9), "is present, ' '
' ' exists, " is in the present tense, and refers not to Jesus in
his earthly existence, but to the glorified Christ who accord
ing to Hebrews ' ' sat down on the right hand of God. " This
indwelling ofthe divine essence in Christ is conceived to be
bodily, that is, so that it has a bodily manifestation, is clothed
upon with a bodily form. This idea comports with the con
ception of " spiritual bodies" which the risen saints were
expected to have at the second coming of Christ.4 These
' ' celestial bodies, " 6 it was supposed, would resemble Christ's
" body of glory," ° the " bodily" manifestation of the divine
1 1 Cor. ii. 6. 2 Gal. iv. 3.
3The words rendered "the rudiments ofthe world" (rd 6roix&a
rov x66fiov) are susceptible of a different rendering from that given
in the text. They perhaps refer to the "personal elemental spirits,"
to which in the later Judaism certain ruling and guiding functions
were assigned over the stars, the seasons, the months, etc. According
to the Book of Jubilees there were created by God on the first day the
angels of the clouds, of cold, of heat, of hail, of thunder, etc. See
" angel ofthe waters," Rev. xvi. 5 and Euoch lxxxii. 10 f. This in
terpretation is very suitable to the passage under consideration, since
xazd rd dr. is placed over against xatd xpvSrov. See v. Soden in
Handkommentar on the passage, and T. K. Abbott, p. 248.
4 1 Cor. xv. 44. 6 Ibid. xv. 40. 6 Phil, iii., 21.

106 COLOSSIANS ii. io, n.
pleroma. It is impossible not to notice the harshness and
abruptness with which this declaration of the writer's ex
treme doctrine of the person of Christ is introduced in the
connection of the passage. If it is a part of the original
Epistle, it can indicate only that the writer made great haste
to introduce his exalted and high-wrought Christology.
And in him ye are made full (ii. 10). — In fellowship with
Christ the believer is regarded as having those spiritual
charisms or " gifts " ' which were attributed to the divine
Spirit. Who is the head of all principality and power (ii. io). — He
is declared to be superior to the angelic beings of whom he
is said in i. 16 to have been the creator. The motive here is
the same as in the former passage, that is, to show the Colos
sians the folly of the " worship of angels" and the sub
ordination of Christ taught them by the heretics.
In whom ye were also circumcised witk a circumcision not
made with hands (ii. ii). — This refers to the conversion
of the believers which was in Christ causally, and was
figuratively a putting off of the body of the flesh regarded as
the seat of sin,2 so that they are conceived as no longer
" fleshly " or " carnal," " sold under sin." *
In the circumcision of Christ (ii. ll).4 — This is the circum
cision which, figuratively speaking, is effected in them by
means of Christ, that is, by their relation to him as believers.
The putting off of " the body of the sins of the flesh "in verse 1 1 calls
to mind Paul's "body of sin," 5 mortifying "the deeds of the body"
(Rom. viii. 13). "The body of thesins ofthe flesh" is not, however, a
1 1 Cor. xii. 4.
2 Rom. vii. 23, 25 ; Gal. v. 16 ; Eph. ii. 3. 3 Rom. vii. 24.
* A 7tEpirojxri dxEipoxoir/ToS and a TtEpiTOfirj rov xp^drov are un
known to Paul's undisputed Epistles. The apostle recognises an in
ward circumcision, but not in such terms as these. Rom. ii. 28, 29 ;
Phil. iii. 3. « Rom- v;, 6.

COLOSSIANS 107
Pauline expression, and it is doubtful whether the apostle could have
written it. It betrays the hand of an inexpert imitator who made the
awkward combination from Paul's " body of sin " and " flesh." But
if Paul does not say "sins ofthe flesh," he regarded the flesh as the
seatofsin. With it he says we "serve the law of sin."1 Its "mind"
is "enmity against God," and is "death."2 Since it was conceived
as the substance composing the material body, the latter term is some
times employed as synonymous with it, as is also " members," so that
"deeds ofthe body " is equivalent to sinful actions which are prompted
by the flesh, and the "law in the members" is the law of the flesh.
Technically, however, the body is to Paul the form of human exist
ence, whether it be now filled with the flesh as a material organism,
or again with the "glory " or light-substance of the resurrection state
as a " spiritual body." 8 That by " flesh " Paul meant literally flesh,
the substance of the material bodily organism, is evident from his
identification of it with "the body" and the "members," and this
physical substratum is never lost sight of when he mentions some
"works of the flesh" which are not of immediate derivation from
this organism. He never has in mind any such vague idea as "the
weak and creaturely side of our nature" — a definition of" the flesh"
which itself needs defining. The Pauline doctrine of man (anthro
pology) is dominated by the contrast of " flesh " and "Spirit." The
former "lusts against" the latter,4 which is the supernatural divine
principle bestowed upon the believer. The flesh is by its very nature
"corruptible," and is doomed to perish.5 The body, conceived as the
material organism, is compared to a " tabernacle " which is laid aside
at death (2 Cor. v. 1), yet " the body that shall be," 6 the " spiritual
body," the "celestial body,"1 is given of God in the resurrection.
Paul conceived man as capable of existence without " flesh," but not
without a "body." The ipvxn, soul or life-principle of the flesh, is
conceived by him as inseparably connected with it and as sharing
its fortune in so far as it is perishable. The " incorruption " that
is "put on" is regarded as attainable only by means ofthe in
dwelling of the divine Spirit, which is the sole "earnest" ofthe
resurrection at the Parousia, of the swallowing up of mortality by
life.8 "Perishing " and " destruction " are the doom of all who have
1 Rom. vii. 25. 6 I Cor. xv. 36, 42, 53, 54.
2 Ibid. viii. 6, 7. 6 Ibid. xv. 37.
3 1 Cor. xv. 44 ; Phil. iii. 12. ' Ibid. xv. 40.
4 Gal. v. 17. 8 Rom. viii. n ; 2 Cor. v. 5.

108 COLOSSIANS ii. 12, 13.
not this Spirit.1 The resurrection of unbelievers to " in corruption "
and their subsequent punishment is 'not compatible with Paul's an
thropology and his doctrine of the last things (eschatology).
Having been buried with him in baptism, etc. (ii. 12). — In
baptism the believer is supposed to die to sin and be raised
to " newness of life." 2 This is the circumcision " not made
with hands." In this conception of a mystic spiritual union
with Christ is expressed more of the spirit and sentiment of
genuine Paulinism than in the whole of the Epistle to the
Hebrews with which this letter is in many respects very
closely related.
Through faith in the working of God (ii. 12). — The belief
that God raised Christ from the dead is regarded as the in
dispensable condition of the believer's being brought into
that spiritual union with Jesus by which he is able to walk
with him " in newness of life." Only for him who believes
this can the atonement of Christ be efficacious.3 They alone
who have this faith have the assurance that they will be
"raised up" and "presented" before him when he shall
come again in the glory of his kingdom.4
And you being dead through your trespasses and the uncir
cumcision of your flesh (ii. 13). — As sinners, uncircumcised
gentiles, the Colossians are represented as having been sub
ject to death, not merely the physical death which came
upon all men through Adam's sin, B but also the eternal death
which was, in the Pauline thought, the exclusion from the
resurrection at the second coming of Christ and from partici
pation in the blessedness ofthe Messianic kingdom."
1 1 Cor. i. 8 ; 2 Cor. ii. 15 ; 1 Thess. v. 3. s Rom. iv. 24, vi. 8, 9.
2 Rom. vi. 4. 42 Cor. iv. 13. 6Rom. v. 12.
6 It is difficult to think of Paul as using the expression " dead in the
uncircumcision of your flesh" (vexpoS t-q dxpofivtfria ttjZ 6apxoS
¦vfimv). He certainly could not have said of gentiles that they were
"dead" because uncircumcised. Such a conception would be un
thinkable from his point of view. If not unthinkable, it is at least

ii. 13, 14. COLOSSIANS 109
Did He also quicken together with him (ii. 13). — The thought
of this passage is not simply that of an ethical raising up of
the believers, but there is included in it the conception of
their actual resurrection at the Parousia and their participa
tion in " the inheritance of the saints in light," their " trans
lation into the kingdom of the Son" (i. 12, 13). The
expression may well be interpreted in accordance with the
Pauline doctrine that " if the Spirit of Him who raised up
Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He who raised up Christ
Jesus from the dead will also quicken your mortal bodies." '
The idea of the possession of the life in Christ and that of
its fruition in ' ' the age to come ' ' were so closely connected
in the primitive-Christian thought that the former readily
passed over into the latter even without the use of the future
tense (i. 13 ; Eph. ii. 5).
Having forgiven us all our trespasses (ii. 13). — This implies
the acceptance on the part of God of those who through faith
have appropriated the atonement made by Christ in his
death. Having blotted out the bond written in ordinances which was
against us (ii. 14), that is, the handwriting or manuscript
that was conceived to exist in the Mosaic law, and that was
regarded as against men because it threatened them with
penalties. They themselves could not " blot it out " except
by an entire obedience, which was impossible. Neither
could God do it, unless the penalty were paid. This was
done on. the cross, and accordingly He " took it out of the
way, nailing it to the cross." The law which condemned
men is assumed to have lost its penal validity when Christ
highly improbable that he would have employed these words as a
"symbol of alienation from God." How could uncircumcision sym
bolise a sinful condition to him who declares that neither circumcision
nor uncircumcision is anything? The words appear to have been
written by an unskilful imitator who had for the moment forgotten
his rdle. 1 Rom. viii. n.

no COLOSSIANS ii. I5-I7-
by his death "redeemed" (bought off) men from the
" curse " of it.1 The doctrine is Pauline both in this Epistle
and in Hebrews, but in neither has it the distinctive Pauline
expression. Having put off from Himself the principalities and the
powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them
(ii. 15). — The principalities and the powers are the demonic
spirits, " the world-rulers of this darkness." 2 Although
the same words are employed that are used to designate the
good angels in verse io, they here refer to the devilish
angelic hierarchy, " the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the
heavenly places," as they are called in the passage in
Ephesians. By reason of the " bond " against men they are
conceived to have a certain power over the human race
which they would employ for their diabolical purposes of
destruction. Of this power the sacrifice on the cross is re
garded as depriving them, since it "blotted out" the
" bond," and in the cross God " put them off from Him
self," or " disarmed " them (for this the word also means),
and " made a show of them openly, triumphing over them." 3
It is instructive to note how this extravagant delineation of
the results of the atonement of Christ, adopted to refute the
false teachers, floats in the region of mythological concep
tions. In the nature of the case the contest with the false
teachers could only be one in which one mythology was pitted
against another.
Which are a shadow of the things to come (ii. 17). — Tbe
readers are counselled not to permit anyone to judge them
in respect to ritual observances, since these are only a shadow
cast back by the things that are to come, that is, by the
Messianic kingdom of the future age. "Feasts," "new
moons," and " sabbath-days" are only sensuous, transient
1 Gal. iii., 13, iv. 5 ; Heb. ix. 12. 2 Eph. vi. 12.
3 The triumph of the Messiah over Satan was dramatically repre
sented in the Jewish theology. See Weber, Jud. Theol., p. 398.

ii. 17-18. COLOSSIANS m
types of the divine reality of the Parousia, which is their
antitype, since it is the true and perfect theocracy that
already ideally exists in the heavens, and which will come
in glory with the returning Christ. In this thought the
writer is quite in accord with the author of Hebrews.1
Of these things to come the body is Christ's (ii. 17), that is,
his is the substance of the Messianic kingdom of which ritual
observances are only a shadow. This is another way of say
ing that he is the head and ruler of the coming kingdom.
The false teachers, who insist upon regarding the shadow,
miss the substance.
Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility
and a worshipping of the angels (ii. 18). — The prize in the
contest, that is, the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom,
ought to be won by the Colossian Christians themselves, and
they are warned to let no man rob them of it through mis
leading them by false teachings.
By a voluntary humility (ii. 18) is a doubtful translation.
Better is the rendering, wishing lo do it by humility, etc., that
is, by a false humility which the false teachers assumed. It
may have been connected with the " worship of angels" in
the sense that God was too exalted an object of worship for
men. We have the testimony of Irenaeus and Epiphanius
to the worship of angels by Gnostics, and Theodoret speaks
of the practice as existing in Phrygia. The actual worship
of angels as objects of adoration is undoubtedly meant,
and not a worship of God similar to that rendered by
angels. Yet this latter interpretation has strangely had
advocates. Dwelling in the things which he hath seen (ii. 18). — Some
authorities read " not seen." But if the " not " be omitted
the sense is undoubtedly " things seen or professed to be
seen in visions ' ' with reference to the angel- world, so that
the translation of King James' version and of Noyes,
1 Heb. viii. 5, x. 1.

ii2 COLOSSIANS ii. 18.
" intruding into those things which he hath not seen," gives
the writer's meaning.
Puffed up by his fleshly mind (ii. 18), that is, the mind
under the dominion of the tendencies of a man who is of the
" world," and hence unspiritual, or from the point of view
of the writer, unchristian,1 " the mind of the flesh is enmity
against God."
The psychology of the Epistle is essentially Pauline. Paul employs
vovi to designate that endowment of "the inward man" which
corresponds to our " mind " or " the theoretical and practical rea
son." 2 In Rom. vii. 23 it is synonymous with "inward man" in
verse 22, and denotes a disposition to obey the divine law in opposi
tion to the tendencies of fleshly desire. In this sense " the law of
the mind " is set over against " the law of sin " (vv. 23, 25). It desig
nates "the inward man " in its susceptibility to the Divine Spirit, of
which it is the human counterpart. Rom. vii. appears to teach the
inability ofthe " mind" successfully to oppose the " flesh," since the
result ofthe conflict ofthe two powers is that the man is " brought
into captivity to the law of sin " in his " members," and the doctrine
that righteousness or salvation cannot be attained without the inter
vention ofthe divine Spirit is according to the analogy of the general
teaching of the apostle. " They that are in the flesh cannot please
God," but the Christian believers " are not iu the flesh," if " the Spirit
of God dwell in " them.3 Yet it is one of the paradoxes of his teach
ing that in Rom. i. and ii. he declares that men are able by means of
their understanding to know God by " the things that are made," and
without the law to "do by nature the things contained in the law."
With all the mind's susceptibility to moral influences it is represented
on the other hand as capable of such weakness and perversion as to
justify the epithet "reprobate."4 It may become to such a degree
subject to the animal impulses as to deserve to be called "the mind
of the flesh,"5 and "the fleshly mind" as in the verse under con
sideration. There are also "blinded minds"6 and minds that are
"corrupted."7 The moral function assigned to the mind is again
recognised in the idea that it is capable of a "renewing."8 It is
doubtless in this condition of renewal that it is "the mind of Christ,"9
1 Rom. viii. 7. 4 Ibid. i. 28. ' Ibid. xi. 3.
2 1 Cor. xiv. 14. 5 Ibid. viii. 7. 8 Rom. xii. 2.
8 Rom. viii. 8, 9. 6 2 Cor. iii. 14, iv. 4. " 1 Cor. ii. 16.

ii. 19-22. COLOSSIANS 113
that is, a mind in which the divine Spirit abides. The activity of
volition so graphically delineated in Rom. vii. was doubtless conceived
as a function of the " mind " : " For the will is present with me, but
how to perform that which is good I find not " (verse 18). The con
dition described by the term " fleshly mind" is that of "death," by
which Paul designates not only physical dissolution, but also the
state called "everlasting destruction,"1 or death without hope of
the resurrection, " perishing." To this result the preponderance ofthe
flesh must, he conceives, inevitably lead. The law is ineffectual for
deliverance from this condition. The divine Spirit can alone accom
plish salvation under the dispensation of "grace" through the re
demption of Christ appropriated by "faith."
And not holding fast the Head (ii. 19). — On account of their
" worship of the angels " they disregard and subordinate the
Head, Christ. In the next clause the figure, begun in the
preceding, is carried out, and the rendering should be, from
which [the head] all the body, etc. , increaseth with the increase
of God, that is, the increase effected by God. The figure is
ofthe Church in relation to its Head, Christ.
If ye died with Christ from the rudiments of the world (ii.
20). — In becoming Christians the believers are regarded as
having entered into the mystic fellowship of the death of
Christ, that is, as having died with him to all the claims
of ritual, ordinances, etc., abolished by him in his death,
which are rudiments of the world. They ought not then to
act as though living in the world, or in the non-Christian
realm of life, and to subject themselves to those things.
Handle not, nor taste, nor touch (all which things are to
perish with the using) after the precepts and doctrines of men
(ii. 21, 22). — These are some of the " ordinances " referred
to in the preceding verse. They probably all relate to foods
and drinks, though some interpret the first and others the
last according to 1 Corinthians vii. 1. The meaning of the
parenthetical clause is doubtful. Some render it, ' ' all which
things tend to destruction (ethical) when abused." The
1 2 Thess. i. 9.

n4 COLOSSIANS ii. 23-iii. 3-
word translated with the using means also " with the abus
ing " in some connections, and since the word rendered perish
means sometimes " moral destruction," " the loss of salva
tion," the connection itself is ambiguous. The correct ren
dering probably is, all which things tend to perish ' with the
consumption, or using up.
Which things have, indeed, a show of wisdom (ii. 23), that
is, " an unmerited reputation " of wisdom, in will-worship,
or by means of a worship arbitrarily chosen and hence not
commanded by God, probably angel-worship. The writer
appears to have coined the word rather inaccurately rendered
will-worship.'' It is not found in Greek writers.
Not of any value against the indulgence of the flesh (ii. 23).
— The rendering, " not in any honour with respect to the
satisfaction of the flesh," or " for satisfying the flesh," is
probably closer to the original, and proceeds upon the judg
ment that the false teachers arrogated to themselves " hon
our " for their false " humility " and " severity to the body,"
and found in this "unmerited reputation of wisdom" a
satisfaction of their fleshly nature, pride, and the puffing up
of their carnal mind (verse 19). The writer, however, de
clares that these ascetic practices and the accompanying
disposition are not in any honour with regard to the self-indul
gence of their lower nature which they derive from them.
If, then, ye were raised together with Christ, seek the things
that are above (iii. I). — Then refers to ii. 20, and if implies
not doubt but certainty. The things that are above designate
the Messianic salvation which is regarded as in the heavens
with Christ on the right hand of God, whence it will " de
scend " with him at his second coming.
For ye died, and your life is hid with Christ in GodijSS.. 3). —
This is the Pauline doctrine of the ethical death of believers
in Christ. Such is the mystical fellowship of believers with
1 Matt. xv. 17. s iBeXoBprjdxEi'a.

iii. 4-7. COLOSSIANS 115
him that in his death to sin they die with him. " If one
died for all, then all died." 1 The "old man is crucified
with him." The believer is baptised in the death of Christ.2
The sequence is a new life whose consummation will be
effected at the Parousia.
When Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested, then will
you be manifested with him in glory (iii. 4). — This is the
Pauline reigning with Christ and being glorified with him
in the kingdom of God soon to come — the " glory about to
be revealed " in the believers.
The Epistle now proceeds with exhortations grounded on moral
principles deduced from the foregoing section (ii. 4 iii. 4) and
Adapted to individual culture and to the relations of the believers
to one another (iii. 5-iv. 6).
Mortify, therefore, your members which are upon the earth
(iii. 5), that is, " slay," render ineffective for sin your bodily
passions and appetites, "the body of the flesh" (ii. n).
Compare Paul's " mortify the deeds of the body " 3 and " If
thy hand or thy foot causeth thee to stumble cut it off." "
Covetousness which is idolatry, that is, the worship of
Mammon.6 For which things' sake cometh the wrath of God upon the
sons of disobedience (iii. 6). — The reference is to the judgment
at the second coming of Christ in correlation with verse 4.
Compare " the wrath to come," " " wrath in the day of
wrath," ' and " the wrath of the Lamb," " the great day of
their wrath," that is, that of God and the Lamb.8 The sons
of disobedience are those who reject the gospel of Christ."
In the which ye also walked aforetime, when ye lived in
these things (iii. 7). — The sense is somewhat doubtful since
" among whom," that is, the sons of disobedience, is a gram-
1 2 Cor. v. 14. 4 Matt, xviii. 8, 9. ' Rom. ii. 5.
2 Rom. vi. 4, 6. 5 Ib id. vi. 24. 8Rev. vi. 17.
3 Ibid. viii. 13. 6 1 Thess. i. 10. 9 Eph. v. 6.

„6 COLOSSIANS iii. 8-12.
matical rendering which perhaps should have the preference,
provided, of course, the sons of disobedience (verse 6) be re
tained. Tischendorf omits the words notwithstanding the
strong testimony in their favour and the incompleteness of
the thought without them.
Railing (iii. 8). — The word so rendered1 is used of blas
phemy against God. " Evil-speaking " is perhaps a better
translation, in which case the following words should be
rendered " filthy language out of your mouth " (Noyes).
The old man . . . the new man (iii. 9). — The former
designates the pre-Christian mode of life according to the
Pauline figure of the first Adam, the author of sin, and the
latter the Christian disposition and life, or Christ, ' ' the last
Adam," the author of salvation.2
Which is being renewed unto knowledge after the image of
Him that created him (iii. 10). — This new man is not at once
complete, but is in a condition of development " toward a
knowledge after the image of God, a further and fuller
acquaintance with spiritual truths and the principles of a re
ligious life, from which the vices mentioned in verses 8 and
9 are excluded.
Where there cannot be Greek and Jew (iii. 11). — The local
adverb where indicates haste in writing, and is awkward.
" In which condition," that is, that of having put on " the
new man, ' ' is the meaning. External conditions and rela
tions, which separate men according to race and station, dis
appear because disregarded in the life which has put on the
new man,, Christ, who, " in all his believers the all-determin
ing principle of the new life and activity, forms the higher
unity in which those old separations and oppositions become
without significance and as no longer existing."
Put on, therefore, as God's elect (iii. 12). — Elect is the Old
Testament designation of the people of God. Here it means
1 fiXadqjrrjfiia. 2 Rom. vi. 6 ; 1 Cor. xv. 49 ; Eph. iv. 22.
3 2 Cor. iv. 16.

iii. 13-16. COLOSSIANS 117
those who have accepted the gospel of Christ, and are ac
cordingly chosen out of the multitude of unbelievers to be
partakers of the Messianic salvation in the coming kingdom
(Rom. viii. 33; Eph. i. 4).
Even as the Lord forgave you, so also do ye (iii. 13). — Some
authorities read "Christ" instead of "Lord," but the
meaning is the same in both cases. The mutual forgiveness
of sins among men is a Christian requirement, though not
unknown to the Old Testament.1 The divine forgiveness is
made conditional on the subject's forgiveness of offences
committed against him in Mark xi. 25, and this condition is
implied in the Lord's prayer. The forgiveness of sins by
Christ can hardly be called a doctrine of the apostolic age.
In Mark ii. 5 and parallels Jesus is represented as saying
that the Son of Man had power on earth to forgive sins.
The tendency to magnify the person of Jesus and to assign
him a cosmic position, which is manifest in this Epistle and
its related ones, Hebrews and Ephesians, would naturally
lead to attributing this prerogative to him in his exalted
state " on the right hand of God." The doctrine is un
known in the great Pauline Epistles. This single instance
is accordingly instructive. On the contrary in ii. 13 it is
God who forgives, and in Ephesians iv. 32 He grants for
giveness " in Christ."
To the which also ye were called in one body (iii. 15), that
is, in the community of Christian believers, in which Christ
is " all things and in all" (verse n). The conception is
Pauline.2 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom (iii.
16). — Paul says " the word of the Lord" 3 and regarded
Christ as speaking through him.4 But the current expres
sion is " the word of God." The exaltation of the person
1 See Matt, xviii. 22 ; Luke xvii. 3, where repentance is made a
condition. 2Rom. xii. 5 ; 1 Cor. x. 17, xii. 12, 13.
3 1 Thess. i. 8, iv. 15. 4 2 Cor. xiii. 3.

118 COLOSSIANS Hi. 16-17.
of Christ which characterises this Epistle, and which was, as
we have seen, called forth by the situation in Colossae,
doubtless led to the employment of the official term,
" Christ," instead of " Lord."
Teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and
hymns and spiritual songs (iii. 16). — These terms occur in
the New Testament only in Colossians and Ephesians.
They are essentially synonymous, and the slight shades of
difference among them are not easily definable. Their use
here in connection with teaching and admonishing suggests
the phenomena of "speaking with tongues " ' which appears
to have been an ecstatic, indistinct expression of emotions,
needing " interpretation." In the strained and high-strung
spiritual conditions which existed in the early Church it is
probable that teaching and admonition sometimes took a form
that is well expressed by the terms in question. The ex
pression spiritual songs, which means " songs given by the
Spirit," accords with this interpretation, the " Holy Spirit "
being regarded in the primitive Church as the source of the
" gifts "of" tongues," " prophecy," etc.
Singing with grace in your hearts unto God (iii. 16), that
is, as Christians who are such by the grace of God, and who
enjoy the indwelling of the gospel oi grace. " In thank
fulness," is a proper and perhaps a preferable rendering.
Do all in the name of the Lord Jesus (iii. 17). — Name stands
for all that Jesus represented to the Christians, and the prac
tical injunction to the readers is to let all their conduct be in
the mind and spirit of Christ. Compare, " the mind of
Christ." 2
Giving thanks to God the Father through him (iii. 17). —
The Father is regarded as the source of all that for which the
believers as such should be thankful ; but since Jesus by his
atonement is regarded as the mediator through whom the
Christian salvation came, and through whom its Messianic
1 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 26. 2 Ibid. ii. 16 ; Phil. ii. 5.

iii. 18-22. COLOSSIANS 119
consummation will be effected in the future " age," it is
through him, that is, through his benefaction to them, that
they should be thankful.
Wives, be in subjection to your husbands, as is fitting in the
Lord (iii. 18). — Subjection means not only subordination but
also " submission " and " obedience." This teaching is in
accordance with the ideas of the time relative to the relation
of husband and wife. Compare Paul's doctrines and injunc
tions on the subject : " The head of the woman is the
man," ' and " let them [women] be in subjection." 2
As is fitting in the Lord (iii. 18), that is, as is becoming
in those who are Christians.
Servants, obey in all things them that are your masters ac
cording to the flesh (iii. 22). — Servants here means " bond
servants " or " slaves." In the Old Testament slavery was
not only recognised, but regulations were made in order to
control it. Jesus said nothing directly against it, although
the practical result of his teachings must be to do away with
it. It is incompatible with his doctrine of the Fatherhood
of God and with the principle of the so-called Golden Rule.3
Paul is also silent on the subject of the injustice and evil of
slavery, and in addition to this surprising negative attitude
goes so far as positively to affirm that it is indifferent to a
Christian whether he be a free man or a slave, and to advise
the bond-servant who can become free to prefer his bondage.4
" In Christ " there can be neither bond nor free.6 But to
Paul these external conditions were of slight importance in
view of the impending end of the world. It was hardly
worth while to disturb a social order which was soon to be
dissolved, and run all the risks of disorder and conflict
which would result from an anti-slavery propaganda. The
author of Colossians, then, writes in entire accord with the
Pauline doctrine both in reference to slaves and women.
1 1 Cor. xi. 3. ''Ibid. xiv. 34 ff. 3Matt. vii. 12.
4 1 Cor. vii. 21. 5 Gal. iii. 28.

i2o COLOSSIANS iii. 24-iv. 3.
This is one of many historical examples of the predominance
of the Time-Spirit over the Christ-Spirit.
Knowing that from the Lord ye shall receive the recompense
of the inheritance (iii. 24). — In the Messianic kingdom the
slave who has been faithful to his master will be recompensed
at the hand of Christ himself. Let him endure his bondage
for a little while. ' ' The day is at hand ' ' ; and in the blessed
" age to come " he will be on an equality with him who in
" the present age " is lording it over him, for " in Christ "
there is neither bond nor free.
For ye serve the Lord Christ (iii. 24). — The Christian slave
is really a servant of Christ, though outwardly serving man.
For he that doeth wrong shall receive again for the wrong
that he hath done (iii. 25). — The slave is expected to make
an application of this commonplace to the effect that the
master who treats him unjustly will receive a merited pun
ishment, since there is no respect of persons in the divine
judgment. Finally, the masters are admonished, since they
also have a Master in heaven, to render to their slaves what is
just and equal (iv. i), that is, to treat them in accordance
with the principle of Christian brotherhood which places all
men, bond and free, upon a footing of equality. The idea
that setting them free might be implied in this treatment is
not expressed.
Continue stedfastly in prayer (iv. 2). — See Rom. i. 9, xii.
12; 1 Thess. v. 17, "pray without ceasing." Compare
Luke xviii. 1.
Watching therein, that is, being spiritual, attentive, and
alert (iv. 2). See Matt. xxvi. 41 ; Eph. vi. 18 ; 1 Thess.
v. 6 ; 1 Pet. iv. 7, v. 7.
Withal praying for us also, that God may open unto us a
door (iv. 3), that is, may furnish an opportunity for the min
istration of the gospel,1 the mystery of Christ.
For which I am also in bonds (iv. 3). — The writer declares
1 1 Cor. xvi. 9 ; 2 Cor. ii. 12.

iv. 5-12. COLOSSIANS 121
that on account of the mystery of Christ or the gospel, he is
in bonds also, that is, in addition to other afflictions which
he had suffered in the same cause. On the supposition of
the spuriousness of the Epistle this belongs to the fiction of
authorship. Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming
the time (iv. 5). — In respect to those who do not belong to
the Christian community the readers are exhorted to employ
not simply shrewdness, but also the wise and upright and
kindly dealing which springs from the Christian disposition.1
Redeeming the time (iv. 5), that is, so using the time as
to employ the right moment for the actions in which the
wisdom in dealing with those who are not believers consists.
Let your speech be always with grace seasoned with salt (iv.
6). — Speech to " those without " should be with pleasant
ness, agreeableness, yet not without the seasoning of vigour,
point, and manliness. It should not be insipid and flat.2
The Epistle concludes with personal references, greetings, etc.
(iv. 7-18).
All my affairs shall Tychicus make known to you, the beloved
brother (iv. j). — A Tychicus is mentioned in Acts xx. 4 as a
companion of Paul's on one of his missionary journeys and
also in 2 Timothy iv. 12, and Titus iii. 12.
Together with Onesimus (iv. 9), the slave of Philemon
(Philem. 10).
Aristarchus (iv. 10). — See Acts xix. 29, xx. 4, xxvii. 2 ;
Philem. 24. Mark. See Acts xii. 12, 25, xiii. 5, 13, xv.
37 ; 2 Tim. iv. 11.
And Jesus who is called Justus (iv. II). — Nothing is known
of this man, who is probably not the one mentioned in Acts
xviii. 7.
Epaphras, who is one oj you (iv. 12). — See i. 7 and Philem.
23. According to i. 7 he had been a teacher of the Colos-
1 Phil. ii. 14 ; i Thess. v. 17 ; 1 Cor. v. 12. 2 Mark ix. 49, 50

122 COLOSSIANS iv. 14-18.
sians, and he is here represented as striving for them in his
prayers, probably on account of the perils to which their
faith was exposed by the presence of the false teachers.
Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas (iv. 14). — See 2
Tim. iv. 10, 11; Philem. 24. We can only conjecture why
Luke should have been distinguished with this professional
epithet, while Demas is simply mentioned by name.
Nymphas (iv. 15) is mentioned as one in whose house some
of the Christians in Colossse were accustomed to assemble.
Their probably includes Nymphas and his household.
And when this Epistle hath been read among you (iv. 16).
— That from Laodicea can only mean one sent by the writer
of. Colossians to the church at Laodicea. An exchange of
Epistles is thus enjoined, whether because similar needs in
the two places rendered such a proceeding desirable or not, is
uncertain. Nothing is known of this Epistle.
And say to Archippus (iv. 17). — What the ministry of Ar
chippus was is uncertain. In the absence of Epaphras he
may have had an oversight of the interests of the church,
but why he should have been thought to need the particular
admonition conveyed in the words here employed can only
be conjectured.
Remember my bonds (iv. 18). — This sententious expression,
whose touching pathos, coming from the heart, speaks to the
heart, may be regarded as an appeal of the writer for the
prayers of his brethren in Colossse (verse 3), or as a delicate
intimation that in view of his afflictions they should not fail
to give due heed to the teachings contained in the Epistle,
so as not to add to his sorrows by listening to those who
were leading them away from the true faith.

THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.

INTRODUCTION.
EPHESUS, a city of Ionia in Asia Minor, was visited by
Paul on his second missionary journey with Aquila
and Priscilla. Here he " reasoned with the Jews" in the
synagogue, but remained only a short time. Hither came
Apollos, " mighty in the Scriptures," and, knowing only
the baptism of John, was instructed "more carefully" in
' ' the way of God, ' ' by these companions of the apostle whom
he had left there. ' Paul afterwards visited the city again
and remained there two years and three months teaching in
the synagogue and in the school of Tyrannus. Considerable
success appears to have attended his labours here and " the
word of the Lord grew mightily and prevailed." 2
The Epistle naturally falls into two principal parts — a
doctrinal (i.-iii.) and a practical (iv.-vi.). After the saluta
tion the writer proceeds to express gratitude to God for the
" spiritual blessings " of the believers, especially blessed in
that they have been chosen " before the foundation of the
world" to " adoption as sons," and have redemption and
forgiveness through the blood of Christ, in whom it was the
purpose of God to ' ' sum up all the things in the heavens
and upon the earth " (i. 1-14). Special thanks being given
for the faith of the Ephesians, the writer takes the occasion
1 Acts xviii. 19-21. 2 Ibid. xix. 20.
123

124 INTRODUCTION
furnished by the incidental introduction of the name of
Christ to express his conception of the preeminent rank and
glory which belong to him in his exaltation " above all rule
and authority " (i. 18-23). The gentile readers are congrat
ulated on having been brought out of their former mode of
life which was ' ' according to the prince of the power of the
air," and " raised up " with Christ, so that they are " no
more strangers and sojourners," but " fellow-citizens with
the saints" (ii. 1-22). The third chapter begins with a
reference to i. 1-14 as furnishing occasion for thankfulness
and prayer, but the course of thought is immediately broken
off by the intrusion of a thought about the gentile Christians
(iii. 1-13). The subject is resumed in iii. 13-21. The rest
of the Epistle is occupied with various exhortations not easily
summarised. The address of the Epistle is doubtful. The words " in
Ephesus" stand in all the ancient versions and in all the
manuscripts except the Sinaitic and the Vatican. They are
omitted in the former, and in the latter are written in the
margin by another hand than that of the copyist. Tischen
dorf places them in brackets, and remarks that he does not
regard them as from the author of the Epistle. Origen's
text did not contain them, and Basil the Great says that
they were wanting in the text known to his predecessors,
and that he had found them to be absent in ancient copies.
Jerome was acquainted with this text ; but remarks that
others suppose that the saints in Ephesus were addressed.
Tertullian says that the orthodox Christians have the Epistle
as addressed to the Ephesians, but the heretics as addressed
to the Laodiceans. The Epistle contains no internal evi
dence of having been addressed to the Ephesians. Ac
cording to Acts xviii. 19, 20, xix. 8, 13-16, 34, there was a
considerable Jewish-Christian element in the church in
Ephesus ; but the Epistle is directed and adapted to gentile-
Christian readers (ii. 1, 2, 11-13, 19, iii. 1, 6, iv. 17, 22, v.

EPHESIANS

"5

8), and scarcely a trace of Jewish readers can be found in it.
How the words ' ' in Ephesus ' ' came to be inserted in the
text of some ancient manuscripts is altogether a matter of
conjecture. Addressed to gentile Christians, one leading object of the
Epistle is to show tbat they stand on an equality with the
Jewish-Christian believers, and should be fully united with
them in the unity of one great Church of Christ. This
" body of Christ," its building up, and its oneness must be
regarded as the one leading idea to which for the most part
the other conceptions of the Epistle are subordinated. Ac
cordingly it has been noted that the sections especially
devoted to this point (ii. 11-22, iv. 1-16) show the most
independence, while other portions are in a greater degree
dependent on the Pauline Epistles. A doctrine of the person
of Christ is set forth very much after the manner of Colos
sians, and he is said to have ascended far above all the
heavens, that he might fill all things (iv. 10) ; but the
writer does not lose sight of his main object even when
touching upon this cosmic greatness of Christ. Rather for
him the consummation of all desirable things is that " we all
attain unto the unity of the faith," and " grow up in all
things into him which is the Head, even Christ" (iv. 13,
15). Christ is indeed " above all rule and authority and
power and dominion " as in Colossians, but his exaltation is
to the end that he may be " head over all things to the
Church, which is his body " (i. 21, 22). He " broke down
the middle wall of partition ' ' between Jew and gentile,
' ' that he might reconcile both in one body unto God
through the cross." This " one body" is Christ who is
"the chief corner-stone, in whom each several building . . .
groweth into a holy temple in the Lord " (ii. 20, 21).
It is doubtful whether any specific false teaching was in
the mind of the writer, against which he wished to warn his
readers. The absence of local colour, personal reference,

126 INTRODUCTION
greetings, etc., renders it improbable that the Epistle was
addressed to a particular church. The writer appears to
have in mind the needs of Christians generally in his time
with special reference to the one main object previously
mentioned and to modes of life which called for exhortation
and admonition. The letter has the character of a catholic
or general Epistle like i Peter.
If we compare the Epistle with those which by the general
consensus of New Testament scholars are attributed to Paul,
that is, Romans, i and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Thessa
lonians, and Philippians, we find the differences so radical
and striking as to suggest a diversity of authorship even on
a superficial observation. No one can read it in connection
with either one of those mentioned even in a translation
without feeling that it is inferior to them in conception, in
force of thought, and in strength of style. The supposition
that Paul commissioned some one of his companions to write
it for him on the basis of the Epistle to the Colossians is
rendered improbable by the prominence given to the person
ality of the real author who either was Paul, or wished to
pass for him (i. 15, iii. 1-13, iv. 1, vi. 19-22). If Paul had
associated anyone with him in the composition of the Epistle,
that person would probably have been mentioned as is done
in Colossians i. 1, to say nothing of the improbability of his
having assigned to a disciple the discussion of so grave a
matter as that which constitutes the kernel of the Epistle,
while he was at leisure in prison. As to the Epistle's hav
ing been written by some disciple of Paul's upon a basis
supplied by a letter of his, the style and general character
exclude this hypothesis, for which there is far less ground
in this case than in that of Colossians.
Not to dwell on the large number of words never used by
Paul, many of which are not elsewhere found in the New
Testament, the combinations of terms never made by Paul,
and the abundant employment of conceptions seldom found

EPHESIANS 127
in the apostle's writings, the entire style of the Epistle is
unpauline in its wordiness, its accumulation of synonyms,
its stringing together of prepositional phrases of ambiguous
reference, and its attaching of genitives whose meaning is
conjectural. " Exegetes have long since remarked and em
phasised this forced heaping up of substantives, this obscure
affluence of expression not always occasioned by an excess
of matter or of thought, the broad, wordy, tautological, and
often turgid tone, the awkward style, often overloaded with
parentheses, in consequence of which sentences are frequently
resumed which one has already forgotten." The occasional
irregularities of style which Paul permits himself have been
well said to be due to the " springing ' ' of his thought, while
those of this Epistle, which are the rule rather than the ex
ception, are chargeable to the " clinging " of the writer's
thought. Not only is the style throughout impossible as an achieve
ment of Paul's, but the ideas of the Epistle are in a large
measure such as cannot fairly be ascribed to him. The cen
tral thought of the Epistle is that of the Church as an indis
tinguishable unity of Jews and gentiles. But the relation of
the Church to Christ is conceived in a manner unknown to
Paul, in whose thought the individual believers are together
' ' one body in Christ. ' ' ' But here Christ is the head of the
Church, which is conceived as his " body " (iv. 15, v. 23).
The term " body," which was employed by the apostle gen
erally for a single church, becomes here a designation of
Christianity as a whole. The ' ' churches ' ' of Paul give
place to " the Church " as a unity, and the saving work of
Christ concerns it as such, while individuals are subordinate
to it. It is furthermore contrary to all that we know of Paul
from his undisputed Epistles that he should address a letter
to the gentile Christians in which the Jews and gentiles are
distinguished as here from each other by the frequent " we "
¦Rom. xii. 5 ; 1 Cor. xii. 13.

128 INTRODUCTION
and " you." To Paul there was in Christ neither Jew nor
gentile.1 The almost entire absence of the great Pauline
doctrine of justification through faith is an indication of a
time and point of view long after the apostle's polemic on
this subject. Paul never uses the expression, " the holy
apostles," and it can only be regarded as " the rhetorical
product of a time remote from the apostles."
The death of Christ, so prominent in the Pauline Epistles,
is here retired into the background. In one passage only,
which is adopted from Colossians, " redemption through his
blood " is mentioned. But the work of Christ is not con
ceived in accordance with the Pauline thought. Christ is
the immediate reconciling principal, not a means or agent
through whom God reconciles (ii. 14, 16). 2 Rather after the
manner of Hebrews than of Paul Christ's death is spoken of
as an " offering, a sacrifice to God for an odour of a sweet
smell " (v. 2). The removal of the law through the death
of Christ (ii. 14-16) is in order that the enmity between Jews
and gentiles may be taken away, and no stress is laid as in
Paul's doctrine on the abolishing of the individual's sin and
his reconciliation to God whereby, the law of the Spirit hav
ing taken the place of the old law of works, he comes into
the freedom of a child of God.
The doctrine of the Epistle concerning Christ centres in
his relation to the Church as an historical, or perhaps rather
cosmical, entity and unity. He " nourishes and cherishes"
it (v. 29). As a man shall leave his father and mother, and
cleave unto his wife, and the twain shall become one flesh,
so with Christ in relation to the Church. He descends from
heaven to the earth, and distributes " gifts " to the Church,
or establishes officers and determines their functions (iv. 8-
11). Accordingly, he is present in the Church, which in
him as " the corner-stone " " groweth into a holy temple in
the Lord." Not only is the Church the " body " of Christ,
1 Gal. iii. 28. 2 Rom. v. 10 ; 2 Cor. v. 18.

EPHESIANS 129
but his " fulness " 1 (i. 23, iv. 13), " the fulness of him that
filleth all in all." This is quite unlike Paul, and finds its
explanation only in an historical setting unknown to him,
that of a Church seeking for a principle of union in a time
when the absorbing question was not as with him how the
individual might be saved by faith, but how the Church as a
whole might " attain unto the unity ofthe faith " (iv. 13).
In accordance with this point of view the problem of the
future is not, as in the apostle's thought, concerned with the
fortune of the individual believer at the second coming of
Christ, and the great consummation is not conceived as
effected by the victorious and descending Lord, but
through the instrumentality of the Church, his " body."
The personal coming of Jesus to judgment, which was so
conspicuous an object of Paul's thought and " earnest ex
pectation," is not even mentioned in the Epistle. Christ is
not himself to put down " all rule and authority and power "
of the opposing spirits of evil,2 but it is " through the
Church ' ' that ' ' to the principalities and powers in the
heavenly places " are to "be made known the manifold wis
dom of God." The glorious " age to come " (i. 21, iv. 30)
is not indeed lost sight of, but Christ's part in its consum
mation is disregarded in the writer's preoccupation with his
coming to the Church.
The relation of the Epistle to other New Testament writ
ings is unique. Its dependence upon the letters traditionally
ascribed to Paul is such that it is filled with verbal accords
with all of them except 2 Thessalonians and the Pastoral
Epistles, 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. Its relation to Colos
sians presents a difficult problem which has received conflict
ing solutions. Some portions of it are partly amplifications
of Colossians and partly verbal parallels ; some are repro
ductions of passages in Colossians ; some are exact parallels.
" Out ofthe 155 verses in Ephesians 78 contain expressions
1 nXr'jpoofj.a. 2 1 Cor. xv. 24.
9

_3o INTRODUCTION
identical with those in the Colossian letter." Those who
regard both Epistles as the work of Paul think that he re
produced his own thoughts with the same verbal expression.
The improbability of this supposition is apparent to anyone
who compares the undisputed Epistles of the apostle with
one another. The priority of Colossians and the consequent
dependence of Ephesians upon it may be regarded as estab
lished beyond reasonable doubt by recent investigations of
the most careful and thorough character. On this account
as well as for other reasons which need not be given here
the opinion must probably be rejected that Colossians is a
Pauline Epistle interpolated by the writer of Ephesians.
The important differences in the point of view of the two
Epistles render it improbable that they were written by the
same person. Indications of a late date have already been
pointed out in the conception of the Church which is funda
mental in the Epistle and in the expression " holy apostles."
The declaration that the Church was " built on the founda
tion of the apostles and prophets " (ii. 20), the " prophets "
in question being those of the early Church, could not have
proceeded from Paul who recognised Christ as the ' ' founda
tion," and said there could be no other (1 Cor. iii. n), who
would not thus speak of himself (for as an apostle he always
regarded himself, although " the least " of them), and who,
if he wrote this Epistle, declared that he was " less than the
least of saints " (iii. 8). The post-apostolic age is indicated
in the assignment of a place to " the apostles and prophets,"
which Paul reserved for Christ alone — a time when they
were looked back upon and regarded as " holy " (iii. 5). It
is incredible that Paul, who had spent more than two years
in Ephesus teaching and " reasoning," should express a
doubt as to whether the Ephesian Christians had " heard
of the dispensation of that grace of God given to him to
ward " them, that is, his apostleship to the gentiles given
by " revelation " (iii. 2), and that he should refer them to a

EPHESIANS 131
portion of the Epistle itself that they might " perceive his
understanding in the mystery of Christ ' ' (iii. 4), that is,
"that the gentiles are fellow-heirs," etc. This doctrine
was the central idea of the apostle's ministry, and could not
have been unknown in Ephesus, where it must have been
repeatedly proclaimed from his own lips. The reference to
it here as something that the Ephesians were to learn appa
rently for the first time from the Epistle itself places the
spuriousness of the letter beyond reasonable doubt.
No data exist for determining the authorship of the Epistle.
That it was written by a man who was in touch with Paul
ine ideas is evident. The author was probably a disciple of
the apostle's, who, in accordance with the notions of the
times, deemed it neither a wrong nor a fraud to use his mas
ter's name in order to promote his ideas. Pseudonymous
writings were not exceptional in the later Jewish literature,
particularly the apocalyptic sort to which this Epistle is kin
dred, and to make the great men of the past speak to the
present generation was regarded as legitimate and praise
worthy, provided their message promoted the cause of piety.
The author has been well described as " a man of unusual
rhetorical gifts, high mental culture, speculative flight of
thought, mystic inwardness of piety, a fine understanding
for the ethical consequences of the new religion, and the
capacity of a genius as well for taking up and independently
working over the thought of others as for grasping at the
decisive point the needs of the time and leading to their sat
isfaction." The place from which the Epistle was written is
altogether conjectural. The time of its composition was
probably the end of the first century or the beginning of the
second, possibly as late as a.d. 140.

THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.

EXPOSITION.
After the greeting in the Pauline style (i. I, 2) the portion i. 3-14
may be regarded as constituting the introduction.
The construction is involved and difficult. Verses 3-6
contain mention of the blessings of the believers, of the
ground of them in the foreknowledge of God, and of the end
in " adoption "; 7-10 set forth the means of their redemp
tion and emphasise the idea of the divine purpose mentioned
in 3-6 ; 11 and 12 and 13 and 14 compose two parallel
groups, each connected by " in him ' ' and ' ' in whom ' ' with
the closing words of verse 6, each terminating with ' ' to the
praise of his glory " repeated from verse 6 and containing
many of the ideas expressed in the section 3-6.
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (i.
3). — This formula is precisely that employed in 1 Corinthi
ans i. 3.
Who hath blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the
heavenly places in Christ (i. 3). — Spiritual blessings is a term
for the charisms or gifts which were believed in the early
Church to be communicated by the Spirit of God or the Holy
Spirit. Hence they are called "spiritual" from their
source.1 In the heavenly places (i. 3) is to be understood literally as
designating the locality where God was supposed to dwell
1 Rom. xii. 6 ; 1 Cor. i. 7, xii. 1, 4, 31 ; 1 Pet. iv. 10.
133

i34 EPHESIANS i. 3"5-
according to 2 Maccabees iii. 39. Spiritual blessings were
conceived to be in the heavenly places with God, and to de
scend thence upon the believers. The expression, which
occurs five times (i. 3, 20, ii. 6, iii. 10, vi. 12) in this Epistle,
is not used by Paul.
In Christ (i. 3), that is, as the ground of all Christian
blessedness. Outside of him God would bestow no such
" gifts." Even as He chose us in him before the foundation of the
world (i. 4). — The author here adopts the Pauline theology
according to which those who were to become Christians
were chosen by God. The "called according to His purpose ' '
were " foreknown," and " foreordained to be conformed to
the image of His Son." '
In him (i. 4) is used as in verse 3. The formula "in Christ "
or " in the Lord " is characteristic of the writer, and occurs
thirty times in the Epistle. The preexistence of Christ is
probably implied here, in accordance with 2 Tim. i. 9, 1 Pet.
i. 20. This election was before the foundation ofthe world,
that is, prior to the beginning of time or in eternity.2 The
expression is not used by Paul.3
Having foreordained us unto adoption as sons (i. 5). — Some
read " in love" with this clause instead of with the preced
ing. The adoption as sons to which the Christians are con
ceived to be pre-ordained can only be realised through Christ,
that is, through his mediation, the " redemption through his
blood" (verse 7). Only those who "through faith" re
ceive him as " set forth by means of his blood to be a pro
pitiation," 4 become sons in the sense here intended.6 This
is the Pauline point of view respecting the spiritual sonship
of men. The method of Jesus is simpler, requiring only
love of enemies.6
1 Rom. viii. 28-30. * Rom. iii. 25.
2 1 Cor. ii. 7 ; 2 Thess. ii. 13. 5 Gal. iii. 26, iv. 5.
3 See John xvii. 24 ; Heb. iv. 3. 6 Matt. v. 45.

i. 5-9. EPHESIANS 135
According to the good pleasure of His will (i. 5). — Man's
will in the matter is not taken into the account.
To the praise of the glory of His grace (i. 6).— The object
of the foreordination of the believers is regarded as the glory
of God according to Phil. i. 11. Bestowed on us in the Be
loved, that is, Christ, the " beloved Son." * The Greek
word here employed is not elsewhere used in the New Testa
ment in reference to Christ.2
In whom we have our redemption through his blood, the for
giveness of our trespasses (i. 7)- — Through the blood oi Christ
the believers are regarded as ' ' bought off ' ' from the penalty
of sin, or the consequences of " the wrath of God." 3 The
doctrine is distinctively Pauline.4 Trespasses is used to de
signate individual transgressions, and there is no question
of " original sin " here. The word rendered forgiveness does
not occur in the undisputed Epistles of Paul.6
Having made known unto us the mystery of His will (i. 9),
that is, the mystery which concerns His will, and is depend
ent on it. This is the divine decree of redemption through
Christ, and is a mystery in the sense that it was hidden in
the eternal counsels of God until made known through the
gospel." According to His good pleasure (i. 9) is to be connected with
1 Mark i. ii, ix. 7 ; John iii. 35 ; Col. i. 13.
2 fjy aitafiev oS. ' Rom. i. 18.
4 Rom. iii. 22-27, v- 9 ; 1 Cor. vi. 20 ; 2 Cor. v. 21. The attempt is
futile to make it appear that ditoXvrpoodii means simply the deliver
ance of men from sin by means of the ethical influence of Jesus, and
not their ransom " through his blood," that is, by his satisfaction of
the demands of the law on the cross. The word belongs to an antique
mode of thought, and must be interpreted with reference to it, and
not forced into accord with a rationalising Christian philosophy. The
original, antique, unadulterated doctrine of atonement came into the
New Testament through Paul from Judaism, and it is not for us to
interpret it out ofthe New Testament because we do not believe it.
Dr. T. K. Abbott devotes several pages to this inachievable task.
6 Col. i. 14. 6Rom. xvi. 25 ; Col. i. 26.

136 EPHESIANS \. 10.
made known (see verse 5). Which He purposed in him. The
text is uncertain here, and it is doubtful whether the proper
rendering is "in him " [Christ], or " in Himself" [God].
"In him " has the analogy of verse 4 in its favour.
Unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times (i. 10). — Unto
denotes the object in view in the purpose of God. Ofthe
fulness of the times defines the dispensation as a fulness-of-
the-times dispensation, that is, an economy which was to be
instituted when the time was fully come. The term desig
nates the completion of the pre- Messianic age or world-period
which was conceived as about to come to an end when Christ
should appear the " second time unto salvation " (Heb. ix.
28). As a significant event in this pre-Messianic age the first
coming of Jesus into the world is said in Galatians iv. 4 to
have taken place " when the fulness of the time came."
To sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens
and the things upon the earth (i. 10). — The word rendered to
sum up means "to bring together again for Himself into one."
All things are conceived to find themselves again in right re
lations in Christ, who is the principle of unity, "the Head"
(verse 22). A kindred idea is expressed by Paul,1 although
there the triumph of Christ is conceived as resulting from an
abolishing and subjection of opposing powers. The term in
question is not adequately rendered without " again " or its
equivalent. Restoration to a former condition is implied in
it, and the idea of the writer appears to have been that a
primal condition of unity and harmony had been disturbed
by the entrance of sin into the world. The " heavenly
places' ' also had been affected by the same curse that had de
vastated the earth, for some ' ' angels ' ' had ' ' left their proper
habitation," and constituted a realm of demonic powers.2
The " creation," the material world, was supposed to have
been disturbed by the sin of man so that it was " in the
bondage of corruption." ' In the " consummation of the
1 1 Cor. xv. 24, 28. 3 Jude 6. 3Rom. viii. 19-21,

i. io. EPHESIANS 137
age," at " the fulness of the times," the sin- tainted regions
of the heavens, the abode of ' ' the prince of the powers of
the air," of " the principalities and powers and world-rulers
of this darkness" (ii. 2, vi. 12), and the old earth, which
with the rest of the ' ' creation ' ' was groaning and travailing
in pain,1 would be abolished, the heavens passing away
" with a great noise " and the earth being " burned up." 2
In their place "according to His promise " the early Christ
ians " looked for new heavens and a new earth wherein
dwelleth righteousness." 3 At his second coming, which
was believed to be in the near future, it was thought that
Christ, or rather God through him, would resolve all this
discord into a divine unity of righteousness, and " bring to
gether again all things in one." Then the triumphant Son
would ' ' deliver up the kingdom to God, ' ' that He may be
" all in all." * " All things" must be understood as in
cluding not only the disturbed natural order of existence,
the " creation," which was conceived to be in " bondage,"
but also the realm of moral and spiritual being, and hence
all men and angels good and bad.
Taken by itself, the passage may be interpreted in accordance with
the doctrine of universal restoration, including the demons, as Origen
understood it. But if this was the writer's thought he was not in
accord with other Christian authors of his time who said nothing of
saving the devil and other fallen angels, but spoke only of their
"judgment." 5 As to the fortune of wicked men or unbelievers at
the second coming of Christ, such terms are used as "vengeance,"
" punishment," " eternal destruction," and " sudden destruction." 6
This aspect of the subject is not, however, of importance for modern
Christian doctrine, since the end of the world, which these writers
had in mind, was expected soon to come, and in the temporary and
transient character of their belief their speculations about the issues
1 Rom. viii. 22. ' 2 Pet. iii. 10. 3Rom. viii. 21 ; 2 Pet. iii. 13.
4 1 Cor. xv. 24, 28. * 2 Pet. ii. 4 ; Jude 6; Rev. xx. 1-3.
6 1 Thess. v. 3 ; 2 Thess. i. 8, 9 ; 2 Pet. ii. 21.

138 EPHESIANS i. n-14.
ofthe event must be involved. Origen's doctrine may, however, be
a legitimate inference from the spirit of the passage.
In him, I say, in whom also we were made a heritage (i. II).
— We designates Christians in general. The heritage is the
Messianic kingdom, of which the believers were regarded as
the inheritors, and into the possession and enjoyment of
which they expected soon to enter, when Christ should come
to establish it.
Having been foreordained according to the purpose of Him
who worketh all things after the counsel of His will (i. II). —
The same idea is contained in verse 5, only that here the
issue ofthe " adoption as sons " is brought forward. Here
also the glory of God is made the end in view in the divine
predestination (see verse 6).
We who had before hoped in Christ (i. 12). — We refers to
the Jewish Christians who as Jews had had a hope in a Mes
siah prior to the coming of Jesus, whom they, when they
became Christians, regarded as the fulfilment of the Messi
anic prophecies.
Ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise (i. 13). — In
this verse the writer addresses gentile Christians, assuring
them that, since they had believed in Christ, they were
sealed, that is, confirmed as heirs of the Messianic kingdom.
The reception of the Holy Spirit of promise, or the promised
Holy Spirit, was the evidence of their being sealed, and in
possessing it they have an earnest of their inheritance, since
they were sealed unto the redemption of God's own possession
(i. 13, 14), or to a share in the blessedness of Christ's king
dom when he should come again. God's own possession is
His people, and here designates the Christians who are re
garded as a possession acquired by God through the atone
ment of Christ.1
The writer now proceeds to express his thanks to God for the
Ephesians on account of their faith and to say that he prays they
1 1 Pet. ii. 9.

i. 17, 18. EPHESIANS 139
may have a spirit of wisdom, and understand how much is involved
for them in the exaltation of Christ. They have been quickened
who formerly walked according to the course of this world, and
have been raised up with Christ. The section constitutes a transi
tion from the preceding introduction to the principal portion of the
Epistle and comprises i. 15 ii. 10.
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ (i. 17). — That ex
presses the object of the prayer. While " God and Father
of our Lord Jesus Christ " is a common formula, this ex
pression is not used by Paul. " My God " in the mouth of
Christ occurs in John xx. 17 and Rev. iii. 2, 12. Father of
glory is also foreign to Paul, though he uses " Lord of
glory " ' and " Father of mercies." 2 Glory is a favourite
word with the writer of the Epistle.
Spirit of wisdom and revelation (i. 17), that is, the Spirit
of God, or the Holy Spirit.3 Revelation is a fitting term with
reference especially to the " mystery " (verse 9)." In the
knowledge of Him, that is, God.
Having the eyes of your heart enlightened (i. 18). — Heart is
a term which in biblical usage denotes in general ' ' the centre
and seat of spiritual life, the soul or mind," and often the
understanding, the faculty of intelligence. The eyes of the
heart is a figurative designation of the knowing faculties
which are illuminated hy the divine truth.6
In the Pauline psychology, which had no scientific expression, and
in which a loose popular usage often obscures the meaning of the
terms, heart (xapSi'a) denotes in general " the inward man." Moral
fuuctious are attributed to it, since it may be " darkened " and "im
penitent " (Rom. i. 21, ii. 5). It is a point of attachment for the
spiritual life which comes through the divine Spirit (see " circumcision
ofthe heart," love of God in the heart through the Holy Spirit, Rom.
ii. 29, v. 5). It is the seat ofthe feelings and affections, grief, sorrow,
1 1 Cor. ii. 8. 3 1 Cor. ii. 10, xii. 7-12.
* 2 Cor. i. 3. 4 See 1 Cor. xiv. 6, 26.
6 Ibid. iv. 6 ; Rom. i. 21 ; Heb. iv. 12 ; Phil. iv. 7 ; 2 Pet. i. 19.

140

EPHESIANS i. 18-20.

etc.1 The function of volition is ascribed to it in I Cor. iv. 5, holi
ness in 1 Thess. iii. 13, cf. Eph. iv. 18. Iu Rom. ii. 15 "the work of
the law" is said to be "written in the heart." As in the passage
under consideration, the functions of the intellect are said to belong
to it. The questioning thought arises in it 2 ; it is "senseless," that
is, without understanding in some cases (Rom. i. 21) ; a "veil "is
upon it ' ; compare " eyes of the heart." 4 The suggestion is worthy
of note that a physical movement in the region of the heart in con
nection with the inward phenomena mentioned may have occasioned
the usages in question.
That ye may know what is the hope of His calling (i. 1 8)
may mean ' ' what a glorious hope is his who is called of God
to the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom, " or " what a
hoped-for object that kingdom is to which He calls." His
inheritance in the saints, that. is, the inheritance which comes
from God, and which in the Messianic kingdom to which
the writer looks forward will be the portion of the saitits or
the believers at the second coming of Christ in " glory." 6
The expression, in the [his] saints is not found in Paul.
The writer now proceeds to show how the object of the be
lievers' hope, the glorious " inheritance," is to be effected,
that is, by the greatness of the power of God, which is also one
of the things which he wishes them to " know."
These they will be able relatively to measure when they
consider the strength of His might which He wrought in
Christ, when He raised him from the dead, and made him to
sit at His right hand in the heavenly places (i. 19, 20).
Heaven or the heavens, regarded as a locality, were believed
to be the abode of Jesus after his resurrection, until he
should soon return to the earth in the glory of his Parousia,
or second coming " in his kingdom." "
After the manner of the author of Colossians the writer
'Rom. ix. 2, x. i. ; 2 Cor. ii. 4, vi. 11, vii. 3. 4Eph. i. 18.
2 Rom. x. 6. 6 1 Cor. vi. 9, xv. 50 ; Gal. v. 21 ; Eph. v. 5.
a2 Cor. iii. 15. "Acts i. 11, iii. 21 ; 1 Thess. iv. 16 ; 1 Pet. iii. 21.

i. 21-23. EPHESIANS 141
exalts Christ in his heavenly estate "far above all rule and
authority, and power and dominion (i. 2l), that is, above all
the ranks or orders of angelic beings. According to the
Jewish mythology personal existences and not abstract
potencies must be understood by these terms. The writer
probably mentions the different orders in accordance with
their supposed rank beginning with the highest. The
' ' thrones ' ' mentioned in the parallel passage in Colossians
(i. 16) are omitted here. These and the " authorities " were
believed to occupy the seventh heaven.
And every name that is named, not only in this world, but in
that which is to come (i. 2l). — As if the list of celestial beings
which had been given might not be exhaustive, the possi
bility that any created existence should be above Jesus in
his exaltation at the right hand of God is cut off by this
declaration. In this world, refers to the then present or pre-
Messianic age, and that which is to come to the Messianic age
when Jesus was looked for from heaven " with his angels."
And He put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave
him to be head over all things to the Church, which is his body,
the fulness of him that filleth all in all (i. 22, 23). — The first
clause is quoted from 1 Cor. xv. 27, where it is a repro
duction of Ps. viii. 6. In the Psalm the words are used
with reference to man, and their application to Christ in
these two passages is in accordance with a method of inter
pretation prevalent in the early Church and known as the
allegorical. By means of it the interpreter found in the
Old Testament whatever he wished to find. Conspicuous
examples of this method are contained in the Epistle to the
Hebrews. As head over all things to the Church (i. 22), he is of course
its head (Col. i. 18, ii. 19), and guarantees to it, which is his
body (ii. 16, iv. 4, 12, 16, v. 23, 30), complete security for all
its interests and its future. As the fulness of him, the Church
is that which is filled with Christ, inasmuch as it is permeated

i42 EPHESIANS i. 22.
and quickened by his indwelling spirit and power.1 This
Christ who fills the Church is also the one who filleth all
with all, that is, filleth all things with all things, is the all-
sustaining principle and ground of all being, material and
spiritual,2 since, according to Col. i. 16, " all things have
been created through him and unto him, . . . and in
him all things consist."
This assignment of a cosmic position to Christ, the position of a
universal creative and sustaining principle, is a peculiarity of Hebrews,
Colossians, and Ephesians. In this respect they go beyond Paul iu
the exaltation of Christ, though the apostle's undisputed writings
contain expressions which may be regarded as suggestions of this
doctrine. As it is formulated in these Epistles it has the appearance
of a development of Pauline conceptions under the influence of, and
in opposition to, speculations, perhaps those of the Gnostics, which
tended to _. subordination of Christ. It is peculiar to Ephesians,
however, that the writer prominently connects the Church with
Christ and his function in this cosmic position. It appears from iv.
7-13 that the Church has an agency in the bringing together in one
of all things in heaven and on earth (i. 10). It is through the Church
that the eternal purpose of God in Christ is to be "made known to
the principalities and powers in the heavenly places " (iii. 10), and
the contest of the Church is declared to be against the demonic
powers, "the world-rulers of this darkness, the spiritual hosts of
wickedness in the heavenly places " (vi. 11, 12). Christ is the head
of the Church, and it as his body, " the fulness of him," subserves
the eud which he is to accomplish through the "attaining unto the
measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ " (iv. 13) on the part
of the believers. The expression (TtXr/pao/xa), or fulness of Christ, is
capable of two meanings : Christ may be the one who fills, or the one
who is filled, and the Church as "the fulness of him" may signify
that it is full of him, or that it fills him. The idea, however, of the
indwelling of Christ in the believers, which is frequently expressed
in the New Testament, and especially in iii. 16, favours the former
interpretation. The doctrine of the Epistle, then, is that Christ fills
the Church, is its head, uses it as his " body " for the accomplishment
of the mission with which he is charged in his cosmic position. In
1 Rom. viii. 9, 10; 2 Cor. iii. 17 ; Col. i. 27. 2Heb. i. 3.

ii. 1, 2. EPHESIANS 143
Colossians the believers are said to be " made full in Christ, who is
the head of all principality and power," in immediate connection
with the declaration that " in him dwelleth all the fulness of the God
head bodily." " To be filled with Christ is, accordingly, to be full
of God ; and our Epistle presents a conception parallel to this in iii.
19, "that ye may be filled unto all the fulness of God." But here, in
accordance with the central idea of the Epistle, it is not the individ
ual merely, but the Church as a divine unity charged with a mission
of cosmic significance, that is thus God-filled.
And you did He quicken when ye were dead in trespasses and
sins (ii. 1). — In has the sense " by reason of." Trespasses
and sins are in fact synonymous as used here, since both
denote individual transgressions, and the expression is re
dundant. The gentile Christians here addressed are repre
sented as having been dead in their former condition of
unbelief. The term must be understood as anticipatory
rather than as expressive of an actual ethical condition. In
the usage of Paul and his school the death of the body is
the consequence of Adam's sin. To this all men are subject
without regard to their spiritual condition. But this uni
versal sinful condition together with individual transgres
sions entails another kind of death, unless men are redeemed
from it in being redeemed from sin through the atonement
of Christ accepted and appropriated by faith. This sort of
death was understood to be exclusion from the condition of
the blessed in the Messianic kingdom, at the advent of which
" the dead in Christ " or those who had physically died in
belief in him would be ' ' raised ' ' and the living believers
' ' changed ' ' by putting off the ' ' corruptible ' ' body and
putting on ' ' incorruption. ' ' This was believed to be " life, ' '
the opposite of " death " in this latter sense.2
According to the course of this world, according to the prince
of the power of the air (ii. 2), literally, " according to the age
of this world. ' ' The expression means simply ' ' this present
1 Col. ii. 9, 10. '' 1 Cor. xv. 23, 51 ; Rom. vii. 10, 13 ; John v. 24,

i44 EPHESIANS ii. 2, 3.
age, ' ' or the pre-Messianic world-period, a characteristic of
which was wickedness,1 while " the age to come," or that
of the reign of Christ after his second coming, was conceived
to be one of righteousness.
The prince of the power of the air (ii. 2) is an expression for
the chief or ruler of the demons or satanic agencies who, in
accordance with Jewish mythological conceptions, had their
abode in the air.
Of the spirit that now worketh in the sons of disobedience
(ii. 2). — Spirit depends upon prince. Satan is the prince of
the power of the air and also of the spirit of evil conceived as
working in men for their moral corruption, perhaps not as a
personality, but as an influence emanating from the devil,
as the Holy Spirit emanates from God. Or since power in
the first clause is a collective term for evil spirits, spirit in
the second clause may be construed as in apposition with it.
Were by nature children of wrath even as the rest (ii. 3). —
After having spoken of the sinfulness of the gentile Christ
ians prior to their conversion whom he addresses as " you "
(verse 1), the writer now includes all Jewish Christians in the
general corruption of mankind,2 and declares that the latter
were by nature children of wrath, that is, subject to the wrath
of God, which expresses itself in punishment, or ultimately
in exclusion from the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom.
The meaning of by nature must be determined from the con
text. That it is not the same as in Gal. ii. 15 (" Jews by
nature ") is probable, since in verses 1 and 5 the " death "
to which gentiles and Jews are said to be subject is declared
to have resulted from trespasses. The idea of inborn or native
depravity is incompatible with this teaching, which is ac
cording to the Pauline doctrine of sin. Paul says that in
the great day of the Messianic judgment God " will render
to every man according to his works . . . wrath, indig-
1 Rom. xii. 2 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4 ; Eph. vi. 12. s Rom. i.-iii.

ii. 5, 6. EPHESIANS 145
nation, etc., upon every soul of man that worketh evil." 1 It
is possible, however, that contrary to Rom. ix. 4, xi. 21, 24
the writer intended to place Jews and gentiles upon the
same footing, and to declare that the former were sinners
by nature, that is, apart from their covenant-condition, into
which they did not come by nature, but only through the
rite of circumcision. The purpose to bring Jewish and
gentile Christians nearer together is served by this method
of argument.
Quickened us together with Christ (by grace have ye been
saved) and raised us up with him (ii. 5, 6). — Us here includes
Jewish and gentile Christians. Quickened us together with
him has the same meaning as in Col. ii. 13. To be given
life together with Christ expresses the opposite of" death,"
and accordingly means, made to share with him the blessed
ness of the kingdom which he was expected soon to come to
establish. This " life " so near and so certain to the early
Christians is spoken of as already entered upon. In verse 7
it is referred to as to be consummated ' ' in the ages to come, ' '
or the Messianic world-period. This context and that of i.
18 exclude the interpretation in the sense of an ethical mak
ing alive of which there is no intimation in the passage or
in its connection. The Pauline usage is preponderatingly
in accord with the interpretation here favoured. By grace,
the writer informs his readers, in accordance with the Pauline
doctrine,2 are they to become partakers of this Messianic
salvation. The Pauline doctrine that upon the resurrection of Christ
depends the believers' hope of a resurrection at his second
coming (Paul does not clearly teach the resurrection of any
but those who had died " in Christ ") is expressed in raised
us up with him. This expression occurs only in Col. ii. 12,
iii. 1. And made us to sit with him in the heavenly places in
1 Rom. ii. 5-10; see also Rom. i. 18, vii. 7.
2 1 Cor. xv. 10. See Cone, " Paul, the Man," etc., chap. ix.

i46 EPHESIANS ii. 6-10.
Christ Jesus (ii. 6). As Christ had been exalted to the
heavenly regions (i. 20), the believers who are to be par
takers ofthe " life " in the coming kingdom are conceived as
destined to share in his dominion, according to the thought
of one of the writers contemporary with our author : " If we
endure, we shall also reign with him." ' Paul also assigned
the believers to a position of exalted dignity in the Messianic
reign, when he declared that they would judge " the saints "
and " angels." 2
That in the ages to come (ii. 7). — These words do not occur
elsewhere in the New Testament in the Greek form here
employed. They are an expression for the Messianic age,
which was to be ushered in, as was believed, by the second
coming of Christ. The singular form, " the age to come,"
is of frequent occurrence.
For by grace have ye been saved through faith, etc. (ii. 8, 9).
—This is the Pauline doctrine, though Paul never employs
the Greek perfect participle used here (see verse 5). Faith
in the atonement made by Christ is the condition required
on the part of man of participation in the Messianic salvation
which was conceived as consisting of the blessedness of the
kingdom soon to come.3 Grace was God's part in the trans
action. To Him so far as His justice was related to the
sinner, Christ was ' ' the end of the law, ' ' as well as to the
believer,4 and He could be gracious to the sinner because
Christ had satisfied the law.
For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus Jor good
works, etc. (ii. 10). — The argument is that the believers
could not of themselves or through works have obtained the
salvation of the Messianic kingdom, for what they then were
as Christians they owed to God who had created them in
Christ for good works. Compare the words of Paul : " If any
1 Tim. ii. 12. 3Rom. iii. 25, xi. 32 ; Gal. ii. 16.
2 1 Cor. vi. 2. 4Rom. x. 4.

ii. 10-12. EPHESIANS 147
mau is in Christ he is a new creature. ' ' ' Good works, ac
cording to this doctrine, followed naturally after a man had
become a "new creation" in "Christ,"2 but salvation
could not be gained by any ' ' works ' ' that he might do be
fore. The " salvation " which these writers had in mind
was admission to the Messianic kingdom, when Christ should
come again — a state of blessedness which might well be re
garded as a " gift of God." It was not character, which
must be acquired by works and cannot be a " gift."
Which God afore prepared that we should walk in them (ii.
10). — This is perhaps equivalent to " prepared us for good
works." Since the redeemed believer, the believer in the
state of redemption, is God's creation, the " good works"
which he in that condition performs must be attributed to
God or prepared by Him.
The peace between Jews and gentiles and the union of both in
one body or the Church as the result of Christ's atonement con
stitutes the subject ofthe next section (ii. 11-22).
Wherefore remember (ii. II). — A conclusion from verses
4-10, that is, since you have been favoured with so great a
grace, and have so splendid a promise for the future, bear in
mind that you gentiles, who are jeered at by the Jews as
uncircumcised, were at that time separate from Christ, alienated
from the commonwealth of Israel.
It is uncertain to what period at that time (ii. 12) refers.
The separation of the gentiles from Christ may be that
which existed prior to his earthly mission, in which case the
gentiles as a class historically regarded, and not those ad
dressed, would be meant. Or reference may be had only to
the gentiles living since the beginning of Christ's mission
and to their condition prior to their conversion to Christianity.
The object of the passage evidently is to show the advantage
of the Jews and the disadvantage of the gentiles with refer-
1 2 Cor. v. 17 ; Gal. vi. 15. e 2 Cor. ix. 8.

148 EPHESIANS ii. 12, 13.
ence to Christ and Christian salvation. So far as the Jews
believed in a Messiah, " had before hoped in Christ " (i. 12),
they might be said in a sense not to have been apart from
Christ. But to be apart from him in this sense has no rela
tion to the acceptance of the historical Christ, which is the
question here. The idea that the Jews had any advantage
over the Gentiles in this latter relation is not in accord with
Paul.1 Strangers from the covenants of the promise (ii. 12). — The
covenants with the patriarchs and especially with Abraham
are meant. Paul speaks of the Israelites as having " the
adoption and the glory and the covenants and the giving of
the law and the service of God and the promises." 2 The
covenants of the promise is an expression for the covenant by
preeminence, that of the Messianic deliverance of the people,
which Paul by the allegorical method of interpretation refers
to the historical Jesus.3 See Gen. xii. 2, 3, 7, xiii. 15, xv.
18. Without God in the world (ii. 12). — Atheoi (adeoi) occurs
here only in the New Testament, and probably means that
they had no God (since their gods were " no gods " l), and
hence were without the sense of protection and support which
the believer in the true God has. The question may here
be raised, but cannot be discussed, whether this sweeping
judgment on the gentiles does not require modification with
reference to some conspicuously devout men among them.
But now in Christ Jesus ye that were once afar off are made
nigh in the blood of Christ (ii. 13). — In Christ is the effective
power which brings nigh them that were afar off, " without
hope and without God." In the blood of Christ, that is, by
means of his atoning sacrifice, expresses the manner in
which the Gentiles were brought nigh.

¦Rom. ix. 30. "Gal. iii. 15-18.
iIbid. ix. 4. 4Ibid.iv.8.

ii. 14, 15. EPHESIANS 149
For he is our peace, who made both one (ii. 14). — He is em
phatic, he himself. The peace is ours, that is, is a peace
between Jews and gentiles so far as they become Christians,
according to Gal. iii. 28 ; Col. iii. n. 1 This is not peace
with God in the Pauline sense, but the making of both one.
And brake down the middle wall of partition (ii. 14), that is,
which consisted of a partition.
This is explained as the enmity abolished in his flesh (ii.
15), or in his death.2 This consummation can be no other
than the union of Jewish and gentile Christians in one re
ligious fellowship in which there is no longer either Jew or
Greek. Even the law of commandments contained in ordinances (ii.
15). — The Mosaic law was, in the death of Christ who be
came its " end," rendered ineffective, so far as it was the
occasion of " enmity " between Jews and gentiles, when both
uecame Christians, since for them then the law no longer
existed, they being in the dispensation of "grace" and
under " the law of the spirit of life." 3 The accumulation
of terms in the phrase " the law of commandments in ordi
nances " is foreign to the style of Paul. The teaching, too,
that in Christ's death the law was abolished with reference
to the relations of Jews and gentiles is not Pauline. Its
historical setting is that of a later time when the idea of the
Church as a unity was predominant.
One new man (ii. 15), " neither Jew nor Greek." In ac
cepting Christianity both have laid aside their distinguishing
religious and social peculiarities. Perhaps " the new man " 4
suggested the idea, and the writer conceived the Jewish and
gentile Christians as having " put on the new man," Christ,
and in addition to have become one in the unity of a common
Church. 'See Col. iii. 15, where "peace" is employed with a different
application. 3Rom. viii. 2.
2 Col. i. 24. 4Col. iii. 10.

i5o EPHESIANS ii. 16-20.
Reconcile them both in one body unto God through the cross
(ii. 16). — The reconciliation is not of the two to each other,
but of both to God in the sense that His " wrath " (ii. 3) is
removed on account ofthe " propitiation " offered by Christ
through the cross, and " grace " prevails in its place.1 The
sense of in one body is doubtful. It may mean " in Christ,"
who is incorporated in the one new man having been ' ' put
on " by both Jews and gentiles, and who ' ' in his flesh ' ' has
done away with the " enmity " formerly existing between
them ; or it may mean in the Church, which is regarded as
Christ's " body." If the former view be adopted the words
through his cross appear to be superfluous, and this circum
stance together with the analogy of the use of" body " in
the Epistle inclines the judgment to the latter interpretation.
In either case while the idea of atonement is Pauline, that
of peace between the two parties goes beyond Paul.
And he came, and preached peace to you that were afar off
and peace to them that were nigh (ii. 17), that is, to gentiles
and to Jews. A series of acts is implied in the establishment
of the peace (vv. 14-16) " through the cross " and afterward
the preaching of it. Hence it cannot be the personal preach
ing by Christ himself that is meant, and we have our choice
between the promulgation of it through the Church, whose
head he is, or, by the Holy Spirit manifested through the
believers. For through him we both have our access in one Spirit unto
the Father (ii. 18). — Since according to verse 3 both Jews
and gentiles were ' ' children of wrath, ' ' and as such could
not have access to God whose disposition was not favourable
to their reception, it was conceived to be through Christ that
the hindrance was removed in his atoning sacrifice for sin.2
One Spirit. See i. 14, and the commentary on the passage.
Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (ii.
20).— " The household of God" (verse 19) probably sug-
1 Col. i. 22 ; Rom. v. 10 ; 2 Cor. v. 18. 2Rom. v. i, 2.

ii. 21. EPHESIANS 151
gested to the writer the figure here employed. The founda
tion ofthe apostles and prophets may mean either the foundation
laid by them, or the foundation which they are. The fact
that Paul says, " I laid a foundation,"1 is not a reason for
the former interpretation; for Paul's "foundation" was
Christ, and the passage under consideration was probably
suggested by that in Corinthians, but altered in correspond
ence with the expression " holy apostles and prophets " (iii.
5) in accordance with the point of view of a later age. The
prophets were undoubtedly those of the primitive Church,
but that Paul should have ranked them with the apostles is
in the highest degree improbable. Just as Paul, moreover,
makes the ' ' foundation ' ' personal in Christ, so here it is
personal in the apostles and prophets, but the divergence from
Paul is evident.
In whom each several building, fitly framed together groweth
into a holy temple in the Lord (ii. 2l). — The chief corner-stone
is Christ2 in whom, etc. It is doubtful whether each several
building is the correct rendering in the sense of the several
distinct churches, since the writer nowhere refers to sin
gle churches along with the one Church. This interpreta
tion is, however, grammatical. On the other hand the
Greek does not admit of the rendering " the whole build
ing " regarded as a unity or totality. But "all the
building " considered with reference to its parts, especially
the Jewish and gentile Christians, is probably the writer's
meaning. Groweth into a holy temple in the Lord (ii. 21). — The Church
in its completed form is the holy temple in the Lord, Christ.
Since but one temple was known to the Jewish religion from
which the term is taken, the holy temple is probably the
correct rendering. The article in the Greek was not essen
tial to the expression of this idea. It is futile to inquire
whether in the Lord is to be connected with growth, with
1 1 Cor. iii. 10. 2 1 Pet. ii. 6.

152 EPHESIANS ii. 22-iii. 3.
holy, or with holy temple. In Christ the temple has its ex
istence or its growth, and out of him there would be no
Church, no " life."
In whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God
in the Spirit (ii. 22). — Ye also, asapart of "all the building."
For (or unto) a habitation of God in the Spirit. By means
of the Spirit dwelling in your church (1 Cor. iii. 16 ; 2 Cor.
vi. 16).
The writer, personating Paul, expounds the ministry to the gen
tiles, and prays that his readers may be strengthened in the inward
man, and grounded in love, etc. (iii. 1-21).
For this cause (iii. 1). — The sentence begun with these
words is broken off at gentiles, and resumed with verse 14.
If so be that ye have heard of the dispensation of that grace
of ' God which was given me to you-ward (iii. 2).1 — The personal
acquaintance of the Ephesian Church with the writer is ex
cluded by these words. The most that the particle can mean
here is " if indeed," " on the assumption that " — a form of
expression highly improbable in the case of a teacher who
had lived for more than two years among the persons ad
dressed. Paul could not have so written to any church with
the establishment of which he had been connected. On
grace of God see Gal. ii. 9; Rom. xii. 3, xv. 15; 1 Cor. i. 4,
and in connection with ii. 20, 21, see 1 Cor. iii. 10. The dis
pensation was in the grace of God.
How that by revelation was made known unto me the mystery
(iii. 3). — The writer essentially employs Paul's expression as"
to the manner in which the ministry to the gentiles was
made known to him, but he modifies it from " through revel
ation" to " according to revelation," or "in the form of
revelation" by a change of the Greek preposition." The
1 Col. i. 25.
" xard ditoxdXvipiv instead of Si djtoxaXvfEcoi. See Gal. ii. 12.

iii. 3-7. EPHESIANS 153
mystery is the idea of the inclusion of the gentiles in the
Messianic kingdom.1
As I wrote before in a few words (iii. 3). — The reference is
to a preceding portion of the Epistle as in 1 Pet. v. 12.
Probably the section which the writer had in mind includes
i. 20-ii. 22.
Whereby when ye read ye can perceive my understanding in
the mystery of Christ (iii. 4). — See Col. ii. 2. Paul would
not have been likely to refer to his letter to prove to readers
who had known him that he had an understanding of the
great subject of his ministry.
His holy apostles arid prophets in the Spirit (iii. 5). — As in
ii. 20, prophets refers to those of the Christians who had the
charism or ' ' gift " of prophecy.2 Paul could not have men
tioned these persons with the apostles, and would hardly
have applied to either or both the epithet holy.
That the gentiles are fellow-heirs and fellow-members of the
body (iii. 6). — This is the " mystery " " not made known in
other generations unto the sons of men. " 3 As fellow-heirs
the gentiles were to be admitted with the Jews, to whom
belonged the promise,4 to the blessedness of the Messianic
kingdom. Thus they would become fellow -partakers of the
promise, though out of Christ they had been " strangers
from the covenants of the promise " (ii. 12). This fortune
was to be theirs in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
WhereoJ I was made a minister (iii. 7)- — The word is
Staxovos, which according to Trench " represents the serv
ant in his activity for the work, not in his relation either
servile, as that of the SovXos, servant, slave, or more volun
tary, as in the case of the depart wv to a person." The
English derivative is ' ' deacon. ' ' Paul once uses vnn pirns, "
which like Siowovos denotes the relation of servant, service,
1 See i. 9 and iii. 6. 8 Col. i. 26.
8 1 Cor. xii. 10. 4 Gal. iii. 29 ; Heb. vi. 17.
5 1 Cor. iv. 1.

*54

EPHESIANS iii. 8-10.

subordination, etc., — the former from " rower," the latter
perhaps from " runner."
Less than the least of all the saints (iii. 8). — This was perhaps
suggested by " the least ofthe apostles " (1 Cor. xv. 9), but,
since saints means all the Christians, the expression of hu
mility far surpasses that of this passage, and is a feature in
dicative ofthe questionable Pauline authorship.1
The unsearchable riches of Christ (iii. 8). 2— This " mystery "
of the gospel is too profound for the comprehension of the
human mind.
And to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mys
tery (iii. 9). — All men is omitted by Tischendorf and some
other textual critics, in which case the passage must read,
" and to bring to light," etc. Hid in God who created all
things. A variation of verse 5. "Through Christ" is
added in some manuscripts.
To the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers
in the heavenly places (iii. 10). — To the intent relates to the
clause, been hid in God (verse 9). The doctrine of this pas
sage is not elsewhere expressed in the New Testament.
God is represented as having ' ' from all ages ' ' kept con
cealed the " mystery " of the gospel to the gentiles in order
that now, in this present age, He may make it known to the
angelic beings through the Church. One can hardly think
of Paul as soaring in such a region of thought. How the
Church was- to make this communication we are not told.
Perhaps the writer had in mind the influence of the united
Church, " the holy temple," "the habitation of God in the
Spirit " (ii. 21, 22, iv. 16), upon the angels regarded as be
holding its development. This spectacle would reveal to
1 It is, to say the least, highly improbable that the great apostle
should have placed himself below the believers, his converts, whom,
although he calls them " saints," he censures for their carnality, and
reprimands for various irregularities (i Cor. iii. 2, 3, vi. 8).
2 ii. 7 ; Rom. xi. 33.

iii. n-16. EPHESIANS 155
them the manifold wisdom of God in conceiving a plan of re
demption inclusive of gentiles as well as of Jews.
According to the eternal purpose which He purposed in Jesus
Christ our Lord (iii. 11). — The purpose is conceived as one
"ofthe ages" (rwv aioovwv), that is, as existing in the
mind of God during the preceding ages, ' ' before the found
ation of the world" (i. 3) and "hidden in Him from all
ages ' ' (verse 9). Which He purposed in Jesus Christ. The
original is capable of the rendering, which He accomplished
in Jesus Christ, the Greek verb being " made," and Noyes
so translates the clause.
In whom we have boldness and access in confidence through
our faith in him (iii. 12).- — Paul employs boldness only with
reference to men, but here and in other late Epistles it is
used to designate a disposition toward God and Christ.1
Access, repeated from ii. 18. In confidence 2 is connected
with we have. See the fine expression of confidence by Paul
in Rom. viii. 38. Access to God and confidence are through
faith in Christ, because by faith the atonement, by which
God was propitiated,3 was accepted and appropriated by
men, who could then " draw near with boldness unto the
throne of grace," 4 now no longer a throne of " wrath."
For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father from whom
every family in heaven and on earth is named (iii. 14). — The
thought of verse 1 is here resumed. God is represented as
the Father of men and of the several orders of angels (verse
10). The idea of the inclusion of the gentiles in the " pro
mise ' ' (verse 6) is reflected here in the conception of the
universal fatherhood of God.
Strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inward
man (iii. 16). — See i. 13, ii. 18, 22 ; Rom. xv. 13, vii. 22 ;
2 Cor. iv. 16.
1 Heb. iii. 6, iv. 16, x. 19 ; I Tim. iii. 13 ; 1 John ii. 28, iii. 21, iv. 17,
v. 14. 3 Rom. iii. 25 ; Heb. ii. 17.
'' 2 Cor. iii. 4. 4 Heb. iv. 16.

156 EPHESIANS iii. 18-21.
Strong to apprehend with all the saints what is the breadth
and length and height and depth (iii. 18). — The idea in the
writer's mind is not completely expressed, and accordingly
it is uncertain of what he means to affirm breadth, etc. One
cannot determine with certainty what was in his thought.
It may have been "the unsearchable riches" (verse 8),
" the mystery " (verse 9), or possibly " the love of Christ "
(verse 19), though the last is improbable on account of
the introduction in this verse of a new subject by ' ' and to
know." The love of Christ which passeth knowledge (iii. 19). —
Christ's love for men is meant, or possibly a love in men
awakened by Christ, such a love as Christ has. See " the
peace of Christ " (Col. iii. 15). The idea ofthe indwelling
of Christ (verse 17) suggests the latter view. Yet a love
like Christ's in men could hardly be said to pass knowledge,
since it would be a state of consciousness. The apparent
contradiction implied in knowing a love that passes know
ledge is to be resolved by supposing that an adequate
knowledge of it is regarded as impossible.
That ye may be filled unto all the fulness of God (iii. 19),
that is, " until ye are filled to the full with God." The
filling with God and the filling with Christ are interchanged
in the Epistle (i. 23, iv. 13) like the indwelling of God and
of Christ (ii. 22, iii. 17). This is not surprising in view of
the doctrine of the person of Christ entertained by the
writer. The doctrinal part of the Epistle here closes with
a doxology (iii. 20, 21). Glory in the Church and in Christ
fesus. Such a conjunction does not elsewhere appear. But
the importance which our author attached to the Church led
him to place it in connection with Christ as equally with
the latter, or in like manner at least, manifesting the in
dwelling divine glory.
The practical or hortatory part of the Epistle (iv.-vi.) begins with
exhortations to unity and cooperation (iv. 1-16).

iv. 1-6. EPHESIANS 157
Prisoner in the Lord (iv. 1). — See " prisoner of Christ
Jesus" (iii. 1), leading, that is, to the Christian estate.1
Lowliness and meekness and longsuffering (iv. 2). — See Col.
iii. 12.
Keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (iv. 3). —
The Holy Spirit is meant, not " unity of spirit." The unity
in question is such as the indwelling Spirit of God effects.2
There is one body and one Spirit, even as also ye were called
in one hope of your calling (iv. 4). — The body is that of
Christ, or the Church (ii. 16),3 and the Spirit is the Holy
Spirit which is the animating principle of that body (ii. 18).
The believers were also called in one hope of their calling,
that is, the hope of the Messianic kingdom or salvation,
" the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." 4
One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of
all, who is over all and through all and in all (iv. 5> 6). —
Manifestly in this enumeration no order of rank is observed.
The " body," the Church, is mentioned first, and the Holy
Spirit next, perhaps because of its indwelling in the Church.
At the head of another series is the one Lord, Christ, then
the one faith representing the believer's inward relation to
him, afterward the one baptism as the outward sign of the
appropriation of his atonement through faith.6 The omis
sion of the sacrament of the Lord's supper is noteworthy,
but inexplicable. From the analogy of 1 Cor. x. 17 it is
probable that Paul would have mentioned it. The series
closes with the one God the Father of all.' The all here
includes only Christians, as is evident from the connection,
one faith, one baptism, etc. It is probable that the succeed
ing all' s are masculine, and have reference to the same per
sons. God is over them all as ruler, through them all as a
moving Spirit, and in them all as indwelling Spirit.
1 1 Cor. i. 26 ; Rom. xi. 29. 4 Phil. iii. 14.
2 Phil. i. 27 ; 1 Cor. xii. 13 ; John xvii. 21. 5 Rom. vi. 3 ; Gal. iii. 27.
3 Rom. xii. 5 ; 1 Cor. x. 7, xii. 13. ' 1 Cor. viii. 6.

1 58 EPHESIANS iv. 7-9.
To each one of these believers, however, was the grace
given according to the measure of the gift of Christ (iv. f). —
The grace is manifested in the various " gifts " or charisms
of the believers. " Having different gifts according to the
grace that was given us." l These are represented as given
according as Christ bestows on one and another a gift of
greater or less importance.
Wherefore He saith, When he ascended on high, he led
captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men (iv. 8). — Wherefore
introduces a proof of the foregoing statement about " gifts"
from the Old Testament. He saith, that is, God, who is
assumed to have spoken in the Old Testament. The quot
ation is from Ps. lxviii. 18, and relates in the original to
the triumphal entrance of Jehovah upon Zion. The writer
refers the passage to Christ's ascension into heaven and his
giving of " gifts " to the Church thereafter. The words are
not only distorted from their original meaning and con
nection, but are incorrectly quoted to adapt them to the
writer's purpose. So the " received gifts for men " ofthe He
brew text is made to read ' ' gave gifts to men. ' ' The writer
has not even followed the Greek translation (the Septuagint).
Paul, indeed, employed the allegorical interpretation, but
he nowhere showed such a disregard of the original as is
here manifested. Captivity is used for ' ' captives, ' ' and the
meaning is that Christ in his triumphant ascension over
came the " principalities and powers, " " or the demonic
agencies who are hostile to his cause and to mankind, and
who according to vi. 12 have their abode in the heavenly
regions. How the writer conceived this victory to have
been achieved does not appear. The gifts are the charisms,
" prophecy," " tongues," etc. 3
Now this, He ascended, what is it but that he also descended
into the lower parts of the earth (iv. 9). — The writer argues
that the ascent implies a previous descent, or, in other
1 Rom. xii. 6. s Col. ii. 15. 3 1 Cor. xii. 8-10 ; Acts ii. 33.

iv. 10-12. EPHESIANS 159
words, that Christ existed in heaven prior to his descent upon
the earth, so that in ascending he returned to his former
abode. Into the lower parts ofthe earth does not necessarily
mean a region lower than the earth, or hades, but probably
denotes simply the earth. The writer's thought appears to
be occupied only with the heavens and the earth and the
intervening space.
Far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things (iv.
10). — The idea of a series of heavens' (" third heaven")
is conveyed. Compare Heb. iv. 14, vii. 26, where we find
" through the heavens" and " higher than the heavens"
used of Christ's exaltation. The purpose expressed in the
clause, in order that he might fill all things, is grammatically
connected with ascended far above all the heavens.
And he gave some to be apostles ; and some prophets ; and
some evangelists ; and some pastors and teachers (iv. II). —
In 1 Cor. xii. 28 evangelists are not mentioned, and here are
wanting " miracles, gifts of healing, governments, divers
kinds of tongues." He gave. The several capacities are
supposed to be related to Christ in their origin either directly,
or indirectly through the Holy Spirit. The apostles were
immediately called by him. The prophets were supposed to
be endowed with the Holy Spirit to proclaim religious truths
or foretell future events.2 The evangelists were auxiliary
missionaries. 3 Pastors and teachers, overseers and instructors.
For ihe perfecting of the saints, unto the work of ministering,
unto the building up ofthe body of Christ (iv. 12). — These and
several objects of the " gifts," according to the revised ver
sion, which follows King James' . An allowable and perhaps
preferable rendering connects " for the work," etc., directly
with " he gave " (verse 11), to this effect : " For the per
fecting of the saints he gave teachers, etc., unto the work
of the ministry, to the building up of the body of Christ."
1 2 Cor. xii. 2 (" third heaven ").
2 Acts xi. 27 ; 1 Cor. xii. 10, 28. 3 Acts xxi. 8 ; 2 Tim. iv. 5.

160 EPHESIANS iv. 13-16.
It is also allowable to connect " perfecting of the saints"
immediately with "unto the work of the ministry," and
read : " [He gave] for the perfecting of the saints to the
work of the ministry," etc. This is Noyes' translation.
The exact shade of thought in the writer's mind is inde
terminable. But the main object in view is the building up of the
Church, till we all attain unto the unity of the faith (iv. 13). —
Faith is not employed here to denote the subjective state,
the attitude of mind, of the Pauline usage, but rather an
object, a doctrine, a confession, in which all Christians
should attain unity. This usage has for its historical setting
a later time than that of Paul, when the whole or catholic
Church was striving to form itself.
The measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ (iv. 13). —
The word rendered stature literally means " age," and the
sense is " the age in which we are fitted to receive the ful
ness of Christ," that is, the growth in spiritual life which
befits the fulness of Christ.
Carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of
men (iv. 14). — Compare " precepts and doctrines of men "
(Col. ii. 22). Sleight of men, literally the " dice-playing,"
" dishonest tricks " (Noyes). If the writer had any particu
lar false and misleading doctrine in mind, he has given no
intimation of its character.
But speaking truth in love may grow up in all things into
him which is the head, even Christ (iv. 15). — The rendering
" dealing truly " is allowable, and grow up in love into him
in all things is the proper connection. Love to the brethren
is the condition and element of Christian growth.
From whom all the body fitly framed and knit together
. . maketh the increase of the body (iv. 1 6). — From the
head, Christ, the body being fitly framed and knit together
by means of every supplying joint, comes the growth of his
body, the Church. Love (omitted in the parallel passage

iv. 17-21. EPHESIANS 161
in Colossians) is the principle in which the growth of the
Church proceeds.
Exhortations to the moral deportment becoming Christians now
follow, preceded by a delineation of the former condition of the
gentiles (iv. 17-v. 21).
In the Lord (iv. 17), that is, in Christ, in whom, and not
in himself, his thought is grounded.1 As the gentiles also
walk. Some manuscripts read, "the rest of the gentiles"
(ii- 3)-'
Being darkened in their understanding, alienated from the
life of God (iv. 18). — See ii. 12 ; Col. i. 21 ; Rom. i. 21. In
the phrase the life of God the relation of life to God is that of
origin, the life derived from God. The life is that condition
of mind which begins with faith, and is to be consummated in
' ' the age to come, " that is, after the second coming of Christ,
in the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom. It is the oppo
site of " death, ' ' which in the Pauline and post-Pauline usage
includes exclusion from the resurrection and from participa
tion in the " reign " of Christ.
Because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hard
ening of their heart (iv. 18). — Ignorance is here placed in a
causal relation with sin — a conception rare in the New
Testament.3 Perhaps the comma after " them" should be
omitted, and the second clause subordinated to the first,
" ignorance that is in them because of the hardening of
their hearts." Hardening of the heart is simply obduracy.
Who being past feeling, etc. (iv. 19), that is, in a condition
of moral indifference.
But ye did not so learn Christ (iv. 20), that is, so as to
adopt such a mode of life. Paul does not use the expression
learn Christ. If so be that ye heard him (iv. 2l), that is, have
been instructed as to him, so as to know what his moral
' Rom. ix. 1 ; 1 Thess. iv. 1. 2 1 Thess. iv. 13.
3 See Acts xvii. 30 ; Heb. v. 2, ix. 7 ; 1 Pet. i. 14.

162 EPHESIANS iv. 22-24.
requirements are. And were taught in him, even as the truth
is in Jesus : that ye put away, as concerning your former man
ner of life, the old man (iv. 22). In him, a favourite expres
sion of the writer's, which means here that the instruction
was Christian, had Christ as its centre. The connection of
the clause, that ye put away, etc., is doubtful on account of
the looseness of the construction. As the truth is in Jesus,
that ye put away is a possible construction, but awkward.
A connection with verse 17 in the sense, that ye no longer
walk, that ye put away, has analogies in the broken structure
of the Epistle in its favour, and perhaps gives the best sense,
although, and were taught that ye put away, is an intelligible
construction. As concerning your former way of life (iv. 22). — If this
means, " as something that concerns your former way of
life," it is not a correct translation. If we read, " that as to
your former way of life, ye put off," etc., there is a want of
clear logical relation. The structure is obscure, but there is
no doubt that the writer exhorts his readers to put away a
sinful disposition and sinful practices as the Adam, or old
man, which to Paul was a figure for sin.
Which waxeth corrupt after the lusts of deceit (iv. 22). —
The lusts that arise from sin, which is a deceiving principle
in man.1
And that ye be renewed in the spirit of your mind (iv. 23). —
Spirit is here used to denote the disposition, the ruling prin
ciple of the individual, of which the mind is the organ.2
And put on the new man, which after God hath been created
in righteousness and holiness of truth (iv. 24). — The change
of tenses here indicates in the original the idea of the putting
on of the new man as a continued process. After God, that
is, the new creation is after the image of God.3
Wherefore, putting away falsehood speak ye truth each one
1 Rom. viii. n ; Heb. iii. 13.
2 Rom. vii. 23, 25 ; 2 Cor. xi. 4. 3 Col. iii. 10.

iv. 25-29. EPHESIANS 163
with his neighbour (iv. 25). — See Col. iii. 8, where the figure
of putting off the old man is closely connected with the ex
hortation.1 Members one of each other, from Rom. xii. 5.
Be angry and sin not (iv. 26). — Taken verbatim from Ps.
iv. 4 according to the Septuagint. The meaning is, in be
ing angry sin not, a denial of a necessary connection between
anger and sin. Let not the sun go down upon your wrath.
On the ground that a writer in the fourth century quotes
these words as a saying of Jesus', and that Clement of Alex
andria refers to the passage as " Scripture," Resch concludes
that we have here a genuine logion of the Master's which has
not been recorded in the Gospels. The evidence is, however,
insufficient to support the claim.
Neither give place to the devil (iv. 27). — In an angry mood
there is especial need to be watchful against the tempter,
hence, give him no opportunity. Paul does not use the
word here employed for the tempter,2 but it is of frequent
occurrence in the post-apostolic literature. In the Clement
ine Homilies the writer, after quoting the words iu Matt.
xiii. 39 as a saying of Jesus', adds as if from the same source,
" do not give a pretext to the evil one." The conclusion,
however, that the Ephesian passage or the other is therefore
a logion which should be attributed to Jesus does not follow.
Its aphoristic form places it in the same class to which the
sayings or logia of the Master belong, and that a writer,
whose references to passages in the New Testament show
frequent inaccuracies, should have referred the words or
similar ones to him is not surprising.
Labour, working with his own hands (iv. 28), from 1 Cor.
iv. 12.
That it may give grace to them that hear (iv. 29). — Grace is
here used in the sense of " kindness," " benefaction,"
"favour," and the meaning is "do good to them that
hear." 1 Zech. viii. 16. 2 SidfioXoS.

Z64 EPHESIANS iv, 30.
And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, in whom ye were
sealed unto the day of redemption (iv. 30). — The Holy Spirit
of God, supposed to reside in the Christian, is conceived as
grieved by corrupt speech. The idea is unique, but has a
parallel in the " Wisdom of Solomon," i. 5.
Whatever the psychological facts in the case may have been, it is
an incontestable fact that the primitive-Christian community regarded
its members as endowed with a supernatural power which was technic
ally designated " the Holy Spirit." The conception was not original,
but was derived from the Old Testament and the later Judaism. If for
a time the Spirit of God had been withdrawn from the Jewish people,
it was believed to have returned with fresh and abundant efficacy with
the advent of Christianity. It was thought to have descended upon
Jesus,1 and to impel him.2 He assured his disciples that it should be
in them,3 and in the early Church others than the apostles were sup
posed to be " full " of it.4 It was thought to be the possession of
Christians in general,5 and this bestowal was regarded as the fulfil
ment of a prophecy in Joel iii. 1-5. 6 It does not appear to have been
conceived in general as the source of the Christian disposition and
belief, but as bestowed sometimes immediately upon those who have
listened to the word,' sometimes previously to, and again after, bap
tism,8 and in connection with the "laying on of hands" ofthe apostles.
It was evidently the belief of the early Church that all who confessed
Christ were thus inspired and somehow endowed with supernatural
powers. There were also special manifestations of the Spirit 9 in
ecstatic speech, prophecy, etc. The interpretation put by the early
Christians upon these phenomena, due in some measure to the pre
vailing enthusiasm and fanaticism, is readily apprehensible when
we consider their strictly theistic point of view and their disregard of
second causes. A doctrine of the Spirit first appears in the writings
of Paul, in which along with a deeper ethical apprehension of the
matter are manifest also the prevalent popular notions of exceptional
"gifts," such as ecstatic utterance (speaking with "tongues"), in
articulate and requiring "interpretation," phenomena of so-called
1 Mark i. 10. 4 Acts vi. 3, vii. 55. ' Ibid. x. 44, xi. 15.
2 Matt. iv. 1. B Ibid. ii. 38, x. 44, 47. 8 Ibid. x. 47, viii. 15, 16.
'Ibid. x. 20. 6 Ibid. ii. 17. » Ibid. ii. 4, x. 44-46, xix. 6.

iv. 30-v. 2. EPHESIANS 165
" prophecy," etc.1 These exceptional manifestations were, however,
to Paul of subordinate importance, although he himself claimed to be
the subject of them. Paramount in his doctrine of the Spirit was the
conception of it as dominating the entire Christian life and experi
ence, which thus had to him a supernatural character. The Spirit
alone could, he believed, overcome the power of the flesh, and secure
" incorruption " or the resurrection to "life." 2 He thought himself
to be a possessor of the Spirit, a pneumatic, from the time when God
revealed His Son in him.3 A supernatural divine energy works in
and by him whether called " the Spirit of God " or Christ, for he con
ceives Christ the Lord to have been " the Spirit " 4 ; and he does not
think himself to be an exception in this regard, for all believers are
to him the " temple of God," 6 since the Spirit of God dwells in them.
The possession ofthe Spirit is also the " earnest" of the future in
heritance of the kingdom soon to come.6
Sealed unto the day of redemption (iv. 30) has a meaning
similar to i. 13. The day of redemption, the day of " pro
mise," is that of the second coming of Christ.
Let all bitterness and wrath and anger, etc. (iv. 31)- — See
Col. iii. 8.
And be kind, etc. (iv. 32). — See Col. iii. 12, 13.
Be ye, therefore, imitators of God as beloved children (v. i),
that is, imitation of God becomes you, being God's children.
The imitation of God may have been suggested by Matt.
v. 48 ; Luke vi. 36.
And gave himself up for us an offering and a sacrifice to God
for an odour of a sweet smell (v. 2). — This clause is adopted
from Gal. ii. 20. Offering and sacrifice. This conception
recalls Heb. x. 10, 12. Paul does not apply these terms to
Christ, but to Christians.7 For an odour of a sweet smell is
derived from the Hebrew sacrificial directions in which the
expression is used of a ram offered as a burnt offering."
1 1 Cor. xii. 4-11, xiv. 5-33. 5 1 Cor. iii. 16.
2 Rom. viii. 9-1 1, 13-17. 6 2 Cor. v. 5 ; cf. Eph. i. 14.
3 Gal. i. 16. 'Rom, xii. 1, xv. 16 ; Phil. ii. 17, iv. 18.
4 2 Cor. iii. 17 ; Rom. xv. 18, 19. 8 Ex. xxix. 18.

166 EPHESIANS v. 3-6.
Paul, with his sense of fitness, does not employ the expres
sion in reference to Christ, but once regarding gifts frpm a
church.1 But fornication and all uncleanness, or covetousness (v. 3). —
See Col. iii. 5.
Filthiness (v. 4). — This is a term inclusive of baseness or
dishonour of various kinds, and is not elsewhere used in the
New Testament. ' ' Shameful speaking ' ' is mentioned in
Col. iii. 8, and omitted in iv. 31 of our Epistle, which passage
is formed on that in Colossians.
For this ye know of a surety that no fornicator, nor unclean
person, nor coveteous man, which is an idolater, hath any in
heritance in the kingdom of Christ and God (v. 5)- — The
motive for a clean and right life is conceived to be inclusion
in the kingdom of Christ, since one should not do the for
bidden thing because knowing that exclusion from that
kingdom will be the consequence.
The kingdom of Christ and God is the Messianic king
dom which was expected soon to be set up at the second
coming of Christ. Those who believed in Christ and prac
tised the Christian virtues would share in its blessedness.
Men could not enter it by means of " works," but only
through " faith " and the works which follow it.2
Let no man deceive you witk empty words, for because of these
things cometh the wrath of God upon the sons of disobedience
(v. 6).— See " philosophy and vain deceit " (Col. ii. 8). The
empty words are probably the specious arguments by which
some persons were attempting to seduce the Ephesians to
practise the vices mentioned in verses 3 and 5, to which these
things refers.
For because of these things, etc., is found in Col. iii. 6.
The wrath of God (v. 6) would be manifested at the judg
ment to be held at the second coming of Christ when the
wicked, would suffer " destruction." 3
1 Phil. iv. 18. » 1 Cor. v. 9, 10 ; Gal. v. 19-22. 3 2 Thess. i. 8, 9.

v. 8-14. EPHESIANS . 167
For ye were once darkness, but are now light in ihe Lord
(v. 8). — See ii. 11, 12, iv. 17, 18 ; 2 Cor. vi. 14 ; Rom. vi. 17.
Now , that is, since their conversion (1 John i. 7, ii. 9).
For the fruit of the light, etc. (v. 9). — Compare "fruit
of the Spirit," Gal. v. 22. " The fruit which the light
ripens." Goodness and righteousness and truth, Gal. v. 22 ;
Rom. vi. 21 ; Phil. i. n.
The unfruitful works of darkness (v. II). — Works of dark
ness is a Pauline expression,1 and denotes ungodliness and
immorality in general. They are " works of the flesh," 2
"dead works,"3 and "works of ungodliness."4 They
are unfruitful, since they do not effect the salvation of
the Messianic kingdom, but their end is " death " and " cor
ruption," the opposite of participation in the resurrection
and " eternal life " 6 at the coming of that kingdom.
For the things which are done by them in secret it is a shame
even to speak of (v. 12). — Them refers to " the sons of dis
obedience ' ' (verse 6). Nothing in the text or context indi
cates a particular sort of evil deeds, and it is unwarrantable
to read into the passage an allusion to " heathen mysteries,"
etc. See John iii. 20, " for everyone that doeth ill hateth
the light, and cometh not to the light, lest his works should
be reproved."
But all things when they are reproved are made manifest by
the light, for everything that is made manifest is light (v. 13).
— By reproof, which is based upon truth, all deeds of dark
ness or sin come into the light of truth and are made mani
fest, and accordingly become light, that is, are no longer in
darkness, so that their true nature can be discerned. In
this proposition the writer lays a foundation for ' ' rather
even reprove them " (verse n).
Wherefore He saith, Azvake thou that sleepest, and arise from
the dead, and Christ shall give thee light (v. 14). — He saith,
1 Rom. xiii. 12. 3Heb. vi. i.
2 Gal. v. 22. 4Jude 15. 'Rom. vi. 21, viii. 12 ; Gal. vi. 8.

168 EPHESIANS v. 16-22.
the writer's formula for introducing Scripture-quotations,
leads us to expect here a citation from the Old Testament.
But no one has been able to find in the Jewish canonical or
apocryphal literature a passage corresponding to this. Texts
having some points of resemblance to it are Ps. xliv. 24; Is.
xxvi. 19, li. 17, lx. 1, and these may have been the sources
of it, but it is no proper citation from any known writing
despite the solemn formula with which it is introduced. It
has been conjectured that the passage was a formula used
on receiving members into the Church after baptism. No
such procedure as this appears in any of Paul's Epis
tles. The writer may have fancied that he was quoting
Scripture. Redeeming the time (v. 16). — See note on Col. iv. 5.
Because the days are evil (v. 16). — Compare " this present
evil age ' ' (Gal. i. 4). The wickedness of the times is re
garded as a reason for improving every moment in behalf of
righteousness. And be not drunken with wine wherein is riot
(v. 18). — Wherein refers to the preceding clause. But be
filled with the Spirit, that is, the Spirit of God, the Holy
Spirit.1 Speaking one to another in psalms and hymns and spiritual
songs (v. 19).— This is a variation of Col. iii. 16, with the
substitution of Lord, Christ, for " God." On hymns and
spiritual songs see note on the parallel passage in Colossians.
There follow now directions and exhortations touching certain
domestic duties according to Col. iii. 18-iv. 1, with a special elab
oration of the relation of husband and wife (v. 22-vi. 9).
Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands as unto the
Lord (v. 22)— a variation of Col. iii. 18, where we find " as
is fitting in the Lord." Subjection is supplied from the pre
ceding verse.
For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ also is the
1 Col. ii. 10 ; Acts vi. 3, vii. 55, xii. 24.

v. 23-27. EPHESIANS 169
head of the Church, being himself the Saviour of the body (v.
23). — This is adopted from 1 Cor. xi. 3 with modifications in
accordance with the writer's doctrine of Christ as the head
of the Church (i. 22). Himself the Saviour of the body. See
verse 25. Christ as the head of the body, the Church, is its
Saviour, as will be apparent when he comes in his king
dom. But as the Church is subject lo Christ, etc. (v. 24). — If this
sentence had been intended as an inference from the preced
ing declaration one would expect it to begin with " there
fore," or " accordingly." The but, however, appears to
indicate an opposition to the doctrine which it contains, that
was known to the writer, or that he had in his mind as sup
posable, as if someone had argued or might argue against
the subordination of the Christian wife to her husband.
And gave himself up for it (v. 25). — The Church in the place
of the individual according to the predilection of the writer.
That he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing
of water with the word (v. 26). — The connection of the clauses
indicated in this translation is probably correct. With the
word does not belong to sanctify, but to having cleansed. The
teaching, however, is unpauline, since the apostle never con
nects sanctification with the death of Christ as its result.
The doctrine is post-Pauline, and belongs with the concep
tion of the death of Jesus as an " offering," which in the
levitical system was regarded as purifying. The idea fre
quently occurs in Hebrews.1 The washing of water is bap
tism.2 Paul does not, however, use the expression, which
has been regarded by some as containing an allusion to the
usual bath of the bride on the day preceding her marriage.
The meaning of with the word is doubtful. Perhaps the
writer had in mind the baptismal formula, or, indeed, the
gospel itself.
That he might present the Church to himself, etc. (v. 27). —
1 Heb. i. 3, ix. 14, 22, 23, x. 2 ; Tit. ii. 14. s 1 Cor. vi. 11.

i7o EPHESIANS v. 28-32.
This is the purpose of the sanctification of the Church, and
is regarded as about to be consummated at ' ' the end of the
age," when Christ should come in his glory to establish the
Messianic kingdom. Then the Church would be received
by Christ as his spotless bride. See 2 Cor. xi. 2, where Paul,
however, refers to an individual church and not to the Church
as a whole, and does not represent Christ, but himself, as
presenting the bride. Our author has introduced an incon
gruity into his figure in making the bridegroom present the
bride to himself.
As their own bodies (v. 28). — The meaning is not " as they
love their own bodies, " but " as being their own bodies,"
just as the Church is the body of Christ. It was a rabbinical
doctrine, probably known to the author, that the wife was
her husband's body (see Gen. ii. 24, " and they shall be one
flesh"). Because we are members of his body (v. 30).1 — " Of his flesh
and of his bones " is the reading of many manuscripts im
mediately after " of his body."
For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother
(v. 31). — From Gen. ii. 24, slightly altered.
This mystery is great, but I speak in regard of Christ and
the Church (v. 32). — The mystery is the hidden meaning
which the writer sees in the passage from Genesis in accord
ance with his allegorical method of interpretation. Whether
the relation of the Church to Christ as his bride was regarded
by the writer as existing in the then " present age," or was
thought of as a consummation to be effected in the Messianic
" age to come," is not certain. But the latter supposition
can hardly be established by the future tense in shall leave
his father and his mother applied to Christ's leaving the
heavens at his second coming in order to join his bride
the Church on the earth. The reference of the matter to the
future Messianic age is probably correct on the ground of
1 Cor. xii. 27. ,

v. 33-vi. 5- EPHESIANS 171
the general Christian consciousness of the apostolic and
post-apostolic times.
And let the wife see that she fear her husband (v. 33). — This
counsel corresponds to the injunction in verse 22 and Col.
iii. 18, " be in subjection," and means " treat with reveren
tial obedience." Husbands are told to love their wives,
wives to fear and obey their husbands. The writer does not
appear to have been greatly in advance of the best thought
and sentiment of his age regarding the relation of husband
and wife.
Children obey your parents in the Lord ; for this is right
(vi. 1). — This is similar to Col. iii. 20. " In all things " is
omitted, and in the Lord is inserted. In the second clause
for this is right is in the place of ' ' for this is well- pleasing
in the Lord." In the Lord, that is, Christ, designates the
required conduct as Christian. Right means according to
the law.
The first commandment with promise (vi. 2). — The first in
the decalogue. The fact that the succeeding commandments
have no promise does not render this statement inaccurate,
for the writer was probably thinking only that none of the
foregoing have a promise, and did not reflect whether there
was a second with one.
That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on
the earth (vi. 3). — From Ex. xx. 12, substantially according
to the Septuagint.
In the chastening and admonition of the Lord. — Chastening is
instruction and training, admonition is exhortation and
warning. Of the Lord relates to Christ as the guiding
agency of the culture of the children through the fathers.
No exhortation is given to the mothers respecting the train
ing of their children. This omission is in accordance with
the subordinate position to which the writer assigns them.
Servants, be obedient unto them that according to the flesh are
your masters with fear and trembling (vi. 5)- — See Col. iii.

172

EPHESIANS vi. 6-9.

22. ' ' In all things ' ' is omitted and with fear and trembling
is added.1 The servants are slaves (verse 8). On the recog
nition of slavery by Paul and the post-Pauline writers, see
note on Col. iii. 22-24.
As servants of Christ (vi. 6). — See " ye serve the Lord
Christ" (Col. iii. 24) and compare 1 Cor. vii. 22. Doing
the will of God from the heart. The slaves should be recon
ciled to their condition as according to the will of God. To
do the will of God is not found in Paul's writings.
Doing service as unto the Lord (vi. 7)- — Compare " as
servants of Christ " (verse 6). As Christian slaves they
should serve their masters as if the latter stood in the place
of Christ.
He shall receive again from the Lord whether he be bond or
free (vi. 8). — In the parallel in Colossians we find: " Know
ing that from the Lord ye shall receive the recompense of
the inheritance" (iii. 24), that is, reward in the Messianic
kingdom. The change of phraseology here does not alter
the nature of the conception. The good thing done and the
action rewarded are alone mentioned here, while in the
parallel passage in Colossians we find " he that doeth
wrong," etc.
And ye masters, do the same things unto them and forbear
threatening (vi. 9). — The same things is a loose and inaccurate
expression. Perhaps the writer had in mind " with good
will" (verse 7). Col. iv. 1 is more explicit.
And there is no respect of persons with him (vi. 9). — The
one Master of slaves and their masters is the Christ ; who
has been exalted " on the right hand of God." With him
there is no respect of persons. In Colossians this is said with
reference to the judgment of the slaves, and is not predicated
of Christ.
The general exhortations of the Epistle now proceed to the con
clusion of the hortatory portion of it (vi. 10-23).
1 2 Cor. viii. 15.

vi. 10-12. EPHESIANS 173
Finally, be strong in the Lord, etc. (vi. 10). — Strength in
the Lord designates strength that is in Christ or Christian,
since the principle of the Christian's life is Christ.'
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand
against the wiles of the devil (vi. II). — The panoply of God is
that equipment which He gives against the evil one, the
devil, who with cunning arts seeks the destruction of men.
The figure here employed was probably derived from Isa.
lix. 17 or from 1 Thess. v. 8.
For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against
the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers
of this darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the
heavenly places (vi. 12). — The connection of thought is, we
must be armed against the wiles of the devil, for our wrest
ling, etc. Flesh and blood means simply human enemies,
opponents among men.2 The contrast is between two kinds
of external foes — men and devils. The demonic foes are
named according to their classification in the Jewish myth
ology, principalities, etc. The world-rulers of this darkness
is an expression peculiar to this Epistle, and is a designation
of the hostile evil beings supposed to rule over the darkness,
or sinfulness, of the so-called present age, the mass of the peo
ple of which were conceived as wicked, since they were not
believers in Christ, and would have no part in the joys of
the blessed " age to come." The demonic being hostile to
the believers is also called " the god of this world," 3 " the
prince of this world,"4 "the evil one,"6 "Satan," etc.
The spiritual hosts of wickedness is a designation of the same
evil powers with refererfce to their badness, while in the
heavenly places, to be connected with hosts of wickedness, indi
cates their locality. See " prince of the power of the air "
(ii. 2).
1 1 Cor. xvi. 13. 3 2 Cor. iv. 4.
2 Gal. i. 16. 4 John xii. 31, xvi. II.
5 Matt. v. 37, vi. 13, xiii. 19 ; John xviii. 15 ; 1 John iii. 12, v. 18, 19.

174 EPHESIANS vi. 13-14.
These conceptions, which were brought from the Jewish mythology
into the Christian literature, should not be interpreted as personifica
tions of evil tendencies in man. To the New Testament writers the
"principalities and powers," " the evil one," etc., were nothing short
of personal agents of wickedness, tempters, enemies of the Christians
and of God and Christ. Those who do not believe in the existence of
the devil should not attempt to make it appear that the authors ofthe
Gospels and Epistles and even Jesus himself did not believe in him,
by applying a method of interpretation which would, if fully carried
out, remove the doctrine of the personality of God from the New
Testament. That ye may be able to withstand in the evil day (vi. 13). —
The evil day must have been understood by the readers as a
particular period of time, a day of preeminence, when a
conflict with ' ' the evil one ' ' must be endured. Such a con
ception must have been current among the Christians of the
time, and' was probably connected with "this present evil
world" [age],1 " the last days," 2 the " grievous times,"
and " the last hour." 3 It was a Jewish belief that shortly
before the coming of the Messiah Antichrist would appear,
and in 1 John ii. 18 this belief is referred to as obtaining
among the Christians, the coming of Antichrist being con
ceived as immediately preceding the second appearance of
Christ, which to them was the real Messianic manifestation.
Such is the meaning of the words : " It is the last hour, and
as ye have heard that Antichrist cometh." Then the be
lievers would especially need " the whole armour of God."
Having girded your loins with truth (vi. 14). — The spiritual
warrior needs for his girdle truth, as the soldier must have a
girdle about his loins in order to be equipped for battle (Isa.
xi. 5). The breastplate of righteousness, that is, virtue, moral
uprightness (verse 9). In the spiritual sense this is such a
protection against " the wiles of the devil " (verse 11) as the
real breastplate was to the soldier against the spears and
darts of the enemy.
1 Gal. i. 4. sTim. iii. 1. s 1 John ii. 18.

vi. 15. EPHESIANS 175
The occurrence in Luke xii. 35 of the words, " Let your loins be
girded about and your lights burning," suggests the relation of the
Epistles to the Gospel-history with respect to the influence upon their
writers of the sayings of Jesus therein recorded. Since Paul's Epistles
were written prior to any ofthe Gospels, there is question in his case
only of his relation to words of Jesus handed down in the current
tradition. To this are probably to be referred the remark respecting
divorce,1 that about the support of ministers,2 the account of the last
supper,3 and the words in Gal. vi. 2." With respect to 1 Cor. xi. 23-
26 it is questionable whether Paul's account was not the source of
Luke's. "By the word of the Lord" 5 probably refers to a direct
revelation which the apostle supposed he had from Jesus. The fact
that the fundamental conceptions ofthe Epistles generally are differ
ent from those of the synoptic discourses of Jesus is regarded by von
Soden as indicating the slight immediate influence exerted by his
teachings upon the thought of the primitive Christians. " To love "
(dyaitdv) is not used in the synoptics of God or Jesus toward men.
"Sin " in the singular conceived as a principle or power (d/iapria),
imputed righteousness in the Pauline sense, xodiioS as the world of
evil men, "seed of David " for Jesus, "faith" as Paul usually em
ploys the word, the conception of Jesus as the second Adam, and the
Pauline Christology in general, are all wanting in the first three
Gospels. On the other hand, the forgiveness of sin — a frequently
occurring expression in the Gospels — appears in the undisputed
writings of Paul only in _ citation from the Old Testament. The
figures and parables of the synoptic discourses of Jesus seem to have
exerted no influence on the writers of the Epistles, while their ter
minology and theological conceptions are to a considerable degree
foreign to the original Gospels. Ephesians contains no citation of
a saying that can be attributed to Jesus, and it is doubtful whether
von Soden is correct in finding in this Epistle the influence of the
synoptic collections of his words upon its terminology and elucida
tions. The expression in iv. 14 does not require Luke xii. 35 for its
explanation,6 and vi. 18 is explicable without reference to Mark xiii.
33. 35, 37-
And having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel
of peace (vi. 15). — The preparation is that for the contest,
1 1 Cor. ii. 10. * 1 Cor. ix. 14. • 1 Cor. xi. 23-26.
4 Acts xx. 35 ; 1 Tim. v. 18. 5 1 Thess. iv. 15. 6 See Is. xi. 5. '

176 EPHESIANS vi. 16-21.
and the gospel of peace with God is regarded as furnishing
it. The peace mentioned in ii. 14 and 17 may have been in
the writer's mind.
The shield of faith (vi. 16).— In 1 Thess. v. 8 we find Paul
speaking of " the breastplate of faith and love." It is
doubtful whether any doctrinal significance should be at
tached to this variation. But that the apostle would thus
have changed the figure is improbable. The fiery darts of
the evil one. The figure is derived from the malleoli or fire-
darts of the Romans. These the shield would quench, or
render harmless.
And take the helmet of salvation (vi. 17). — Seels, lix. 17.
In 1 Thess. v. 8 Paul speaks of a helmet which is ' ' the hope
of salvation " — a figure doubtless suggested by the passage
in Isaiah.
And the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (vi.
17). — The sword of the Spirit is the sword which the Holy
Spirit supplies, and is, indeed, the word of God, or the gospel,
a weapon of attack and defence (ii. 18, 22, iv. 3, 4).
Praying at all seasons in the Spirit (vi. 18). — Compare 1
Thess. v. 17; Col. i. 3; Phil. i. 4. In the Spirit means in a
state of mind determined by the Spirit of God, or the Holy
Spirit. Thereunto, that is, with reference to praying at all
seasons in the Spirit.
That utterance may be given me in opening my mouth (vi.
19). — That God may give me what I should speak when I
open my mouth. The mystery of the gospel. Compare " the
mystery of Christ " (Col. iv. 3). It is the mystery contained
and made known in the gospel.
But that ye also may know my affairs, etc. (vi. 21). — This
is an imitation of one of the personal references in Colossians,
and carries out the fiction of the authorship. The also be
trays the writer. For the meaning evidently is " you as
well as the Colossians." But it could not have escaped the
notice of Paul that the also would be unintelligible to the

vi. 22-24. EPHESIANS 177
Ephesians, since an Epistle to the Colossians is not referred
to in this.
Whom I have sent unto you for this very purpose (vi. 22). —
This is an exact reproduction of Col. iv. 8.
Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith (vi. 23). —
There is no good reason for understanding peace here in a
sense different from that in which it is used elsewhere in the
Epistle, that of concord among the members of the Church
conceived as a unity (ii. 14, 15, 17, iv. 3, vi. 15).
Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in
uncorruptness (vi. 24). — The Greek word here rendered
love x is not used by Paul of a feeling of the believer toward
Christ. It has been well remarked that the use of the third
person in this concluding expression is without parallel, and
shows that the writer had in mind no circumscribed circle of
readers, but Christians in general.
' dyaitdoa.

SOME DOCTRINAL FEATURES OF COLOSSIANS
AND EPHESIANS.
The doctrinal features of these two Epistles which will be discussed
here are those that denote a greater or less departure from the teach
ings of Paul in the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians,
i Thessalonians, and Philippians. Some of these both Epistles have
in common, and others are peculiar to one of them. Among the
most important is the doctrine of the person bf Christ, which for
brevity we shall call Christology. That this rests upon the basis of
the Pauline teaching there can be no doubt. To Paul Christ is " the
image of God," ' as in Col. i. 15, and there is a resemblance between
the conceptions of him as "the first-fruits of them that are asleep " 2
and "the firstborn among many brethren," 3 and "the beginning,"
" the firstborn from the dead " of Col. i. 18. But " the firstborn of
the whole creation " 4 goes beyond the Pauline conception. The
absence from these Epistles of the Pauline ideas of Christ as "the
second Adam," "the man from heaven," according to which he stood
in an intimate relation with men as the representative of the human
race, is significant of a point of view indicating a development of
Christology in the direction of a greater exaltation of the person
of Christ. In the designation of him as "the image of the invisible
God " there is at least an intimation of his divine nature in accordance
with Philo's idea of a twofold distinction in God as hidden and mani
fest. Is not "the image of the invisible God " the God manifested?
Again, the most that Paul said of Christ in his relation to the universe
is that he was the medium " through " whom it was made.6 But in Co
lossians he is not only declared to be the one " in whom and through
whom all things have been created," even the "thrones, dominions,"
etc., but "unto" whom they were all made (i. 16). He is not only
the "beginning," but the end of creation, and "in him all things
1 1 Cor. xi. 7 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4. 2 1 Cor. xv. 20,
8 Rom. viii. 29. 4 Col. i. 15. • Ibid. viii. 6.
178

COLOSSIANS AND EPHESIANS 179
consist" (i. 17). Paul says this of God in substance, "for of Him
and through Him and unto Him are all things." ' That the writer
of Colossians was dependent upon this passage and diverted it to a
Christological application is very probable. It is entirely compatible
with this exaltation of Christ as the end unto which all things were
created that a doctrine should be taught in Ephesians that is irrecon
cilable with the Pauline idea that the "reign" of Christ after the
Parousia, or second coming, was to be temporary, "until he hath put
all his enemies under his feet," when he would ' ' deliver up the king
dom to God." 2 This termination is consistent with the Pauline con
ception ofthe subordination of Christ to God. But in Ephesians the
speculative idea of a cosmic, metaphysical Christ is carried out in the
declaration that Christ was seated "at the right hand of God in
the heavenly places far above all rule and authority and power and
dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but in
that which is to come " (i. 21). Quite in accord with this point of view
is the absence of a distinction between the kingdom of God and that
of Christ in the expression, "the kingdom of Christ and God,"3
which an eminent advocate of the Pauline authorship of this Epistle
finds "peculiar." The Christological point of view of these two
Epistles, contrasted with that of the undisputed writings of Paul,
cannot be explained as a "slight modification" which might occur
within a few years in the mind of a strong thinker like the apostle.
A considerable lapse of time, a change of environment, the necessity
of a defence ofthe Christology of the Church against new opponents
and heresies unknown to au earlier time, and the occupation of other
minds with the theme, are necessary to an explanation of so radical
a change. A marked influence of Philo's speculations is apparent,
and though the term Logos is not directly applied to Jesus, the doc
trine of these Epistles regarding Christ is well advanced toward that
ofthe fourth Gospel.
The couception of the work of Christ in Colossians and Ephesians
corresponds with the speculative Christology which they set forth.
The work ofthe "second Adam" ofthe Pauline Epistles, who by his
death freed men from the curse of the law, and made possible their
justification by faith, is here extended into the heavenly regions.4
Paul conceives of God as reconciling us, that is, the believers, to
Himself. But in Colossians not only men, but also " the things in
the heavens," are said to be reconciled to Christ, and the result of
'Rom. xi. 36. » 1 Cor. xv. 24, 28. 'Eph. v. 5.. 4Col. i. 20.

180 COLOSSIANS AND EPHESIANS
the work of this cosmic Christ, who is regarded as the beginning
of all things, the one in whom all things "consist," and "unto"
whom they were created, is the foiling ofthe demonic "principalities
and powers" and a "triumphing over them."' In him, in whom
dwelt " all the fulness of the Godhead bodily," and who was " the
head of all principality and power " (Col. ii. io), the writer of Ephes
ians conceives that it was the purpose of God to "sum up all things
in the heavens " and "in the earth " (i. io). It is incontestable that
the Pauline conception of reconciliation, which includes only men,2
and that of the author of Hebrews, which directly excludes all other
beings 3 is transcended in the doctrine of the work of Christ set forth
in these two Epistles.
This extension of the work of Christ proceeds hand in hand with
an angelology developed beyond that of Paul by the addition of new
orders of angels ("thrones" and "dominions"), and, since the
thought of the two writers dwells preponderatingly in the regions of
spiritual existences, with a demonology denoting a marked advance
upon the earlier Christian thought. Accordingly, we find here "the
world-rulers of this darkness " and " the spiritual hosts of wickedness
in the heavenly places," 4 "filling the whole atmosphere " after the
manner, as it has been remarked by Bleek, of the representation of
the Rabbis and Greek philosophers of the time. Chief of these
demonic powers is "the devil" (SidfioXoi), "the evil one,"5 "the
prince ofthe power ofthe air." The " wrestling " ofthe believers Is
against these terrible agencies, and they need "the whole armour of
God" to withstand "the fiery darts ofthe evil one." The demon
ology of Ephesians has been with good reason regarded as a develop
ment of early-Christian thought concerning evil angels, which lies
between Paul and the author of the fourth Gospel. The conception
of a mighty personal power whom the latter represents as "the
prince (dpxoor) of this world " 6 is not surprising to one who reflects
upon this development. The difference between the Johannine
representation and that of Ephesians is noteworthy in that the latter
intensifies the satanic conception by enlarging the number of beings
included in it, while the former drops out the subordinate agencies,
and concentrates all the badness and hatred in one fearful personality,
'Col. ii. 15. <Eph. vi. 12.
5 Rom. xi. 15 ; 2 Cor. v. 19. » itovepoS.
3 Heb. ii. 16. 6 John xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11.

COLOSSIANS AND EPHESIANS 181
the great "murderer from the beginning," "a liar and the father
thereof." '
So far as the outcome ofthe saving work of Christ is concerned, the
two Epistles represent the Pauline thought with respect to its con
summation in " the age to come," 2 but the method denotes a marked
departure from the doctrine of the apostle. The tendency of the
post-apostolic age to disregard the Pauline doctrine of justification
by faith is apparent here. Salvation " by grace through faith," as
"the gift of God," and as "not by works" is, indeed, mentioned.3
But " good works " are immediately included as a factor not to be
disregarded and in fact as predetermined of God "that we should
walk in them." Instead of "accounted righteous through faith,"
etc., we find the unpauline phraseology " forgiveness of sins " or
' ' trausgressions, " 4 and the death of Christ spoken of as " an offering
and a sacrifice" 6 in agreement with the Epistle to the Hebrews. In
stead of "justified by his blood" (Rom. v. 9), the death of Christ
is said to result in "sanctifying" men,6 and for the thought ex
pressed in Col. i. 22, 28 there exists no parallel in Paul's writings.7
On the other hand, great stress is laid upon "knowledge," or the
intellectual apprehension ofthe "mystery," long concealed and at
length revealed (Col. i. 6, 9, 10, 26, 27, ii. 2, iii. 10 ; Eph. i. 9, iii. 3,
4, 9> v. 32).
' John viii. 44. 2 Eph. i. 21, ii. 17. 3 Ibid. ii. 8, 9.
4 Col. ii., 13, 14. 6 Eph. v. 2. ' Ibid. v. 26. ' See Tit. iii. 8.

THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

INTRODUCTION.
THE occasion of this brief Epistle was the escape of a
slave of Philemon's, Onesimus, to Paul, when the
apostle was in prison either in Csesarea or in Rome. The
apostle sends Onesimus back to his master, whom he desig
nates as his " fellow- worker." In Col. iv. 9 it is said that
the slave was sent along with Tychicus when he carried the
letter to the Colossians. But according to verse 19 Philemon
had been converted by Paul, and since the apostle had never
been in Colossse or in Laodicea,1 it is probable that he
knew Philemon elsewhere, and that the connection of the
slave's return with the journey of Tychicus is incorrect — a
not improbable supposition if Paul did not write Colossians.
Philemon, it appears, had a house in which believers were
accustomed to assemble. Accordingly the Epistle is ad
dressed not only to him, but also to the " Church in his
house" (v. 2). The address also includes "Apphia our
sister," and " Archippus our fellow-soldier." The genuine
ness of the Epistle was first contested by Baur, but his
objections to it as the beginning of a romance-literature are
in part obviated by the not improbable supposition that
Onesimus was acquainted with Paul prior to his escape from
his master. A few words not found in the larger Epistles
of Paul are contained in it. It is in every way worthy of
the great apostle in style, dignity, courtesy, and friendliness.
¦Col. ii. 10.
183

THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

EXPOSITION.
Paul a prisoner of Christ Jesus (v. i). — Of Christ Jesus,
that is, for the sake of Christ, whose he is, he is in prison.
The customary " apostle " is omitted, perhaps because not
appropriate to a personal letter. Fellow-worker.1 We are
not informed of the circumstances of the relation here indi
cated, and it is not known how Apphia and Archippus (v. 2)
stood related to Philemon.
Grace to you and peace, etc. (v. 3). — Verbally like Phil. i.
1. Compare Col. i. 1.
Hearing of thy love and of the faith which thou hast toward
the Lord Jesus (v. 5). — This clause expresses the reason
why Paul is thankful to God. Whether love should be con
nected with to the brethren and Jaith with toward the Lord
Jesus, or faith with the Lord Jesus and the brethren in the
sense of " fidelity," love being left without relation to either
through the prepositions is doubtful. The translation here
given is in accordance with the latter alternative, and affords
a good sense.
That the fellowship of thy faith, etc. (v. 6). — This clause is
capable of connection with " making mention " (verse 4), or
with " which thou hast " (verse 5), indicating the direction
of the faith. The meaning probably is ' ' that others, being
1 Col. iv. 11; Phil. ii. 25, iv. 3.
185

1 86 PHILEMON v. 7-16.
in spiritual communion with you, may make common cause
with your faith, and so come to a knowledge of every good
thing that is in you for Christ and his cause."
Because the hearts of the saints (v. 7). — The reference is
vague and we have no means of identifying the saints.'
Wherefore, though I have all boldness in Christ, etc. (v. 8).
— In what respect the apostle had boldness in Christ to enjoin
Philemon is not certain. Some relation to Christ is clearly
conceived to be the ground of his boldness, but whether he
had in mind his apostleship in Christ, or was thinking of
Christ as the common ground of the religious life of himself
and his friend, is not clear.
I beseech thee for my child (v. io), that is, his convert — an
affectionate designation, and touching in connection with
verse 9.'
Onesimus, who was aforetime unprofitable to thee (v. II). —
Apparently a play upon the word Onesimus, which from its
derivation means ' ' profitable, " " helpful. ' ' In what respect
the slave had been unprofitable is not certain, perhaps in
that he had escaped. A possibility only is indicated in
verse 18.
But is now profitable to thee and me. See verses 13, 15,
16. — That is, my very heart (v. 12). — By these words Onesi
mus is designated as very dear to the apostle. See " my
child " (v. 10). In the bonds of the gospel (v. 13), that is, in
the bonds which the gospel places upon him, since for its
sake he is in prison.
That thy goodness should not be of necessity (v. 14). — The
goodness of Philemon in the ministering of the slave to the
apostle. For perhaps he was therefore parted (v. 15). — For gives a
reason why Paul did not do what he would " fain " have
done (v. 13), that is, a providential dispensation is the
" reason." 1 1 Cor. xvi. 18. 2 See 1 Cor. iv. 14, 15.

v. 17-25. PHILEMON 187
Both in the flesh and in the Lord (v. it), that is, both in
his human relation as a slave and in his relation " in Christ "
as a spiritual brother.
If, then, thou countest me a partner (v. 17), that is, in
Christian fellowship, receive him as if you received me, as
you would receive me.
But if he hath wronged thee at all, or oweth thee aught (v.
18). — A considerate way of putting the matter, "Attic
politeness." That I say not unto thee how that thou owest to me even thine
own self besides (v. 19), that is, in declaring his obligation to
pay any loss the apostle will not remind Philemon that he
owes to him his conversion to Christianity.
Let me have joy of thee in the Lord, refresh my heart in
Christ (v. 20). — The word rendered let me have joy is akin
to Onesimus and appears to have been chosen for that
reason as a play upon the slave's name. It does not occur
elsewhere in the New Testament. From this point of view
let me have profit, or advantage, is the correct translation.
In the Lord, with the usual meaning of in Christ as the
ground of Christian faith, hope, etc.
In thine obedience indicates his apostolic right to command
waived in verse 8. — The grace (v. 25). — Verbally like Phil.
iv. 23, See Gal, vi. 18,

THE PASTORAL EPISTLES.

INTRODUCTION.
THE three Epistles generally designated " the Pastoral "
(i and 2 Timothy and Titus) are so similar in char
acter as to warrant a common introduction. In the early
literature of the Church all are known wherever one is
known. There is no evidence that they were used by any
writer before about the middle of the second century. Jus
tin Martyr appears to have known them, and they were
recognised as Pauline writings in the canon of Muratori
and by Tertullian, Irenseus, and Clement of Alexandria.
They are not occupied with the discussion of doctrinal quest
ions or with the establishment of a theology, but their
common object is to combat certain false teachings in the
Church, to direct its organisation, and to maintain the tra
ditional faith. The style of all is similar, and many indica
tions favour the supposition that the three are the work of
the same author ; although each has peculiarities of lan
guage. It is not probable that the writer of any one of
them used either of the others, but if- there were different
authors they must have been closely related in thought and
purpose. The supposition that the Epistles were written at
different times furnishes a natural explanation of some of
their diversities.
The fact that Christian writers of the end of the second
century and the beginning of the third believed the Epistles
189

i9o INTRODUCTION
to have been written by Paul does not suffice to settle the
question of their authorship. This question must be determ
ined by the relation of the historical situations appearing
in them to the facts of Paul's life as they are known from
Acts and from his undisputed Epistles, and by their contents
both as to thought compared with the apostle's and as to the
historical environment implied. With respect to i Timothy
the circumstances of its composition indicated in it do not
fit any known period of the life of Paul. According to the
Epistle itself Paul, who had been with Timothy in Ephesus,
had gone into Macedonia, and left Timothy in his place to
attend to the false teachers. He writes him this letter in
order to exhort him anew to this end (i. 3, 4), although ex
pecting soon to return to him (iii. 14, iv. 13). Now we
learn from Acts that Paul was twice in Ephesus, once on his
first missionary journey, when he remained but a short time.1
He could not have written the Epistle after leaving on this
occasion, for there was then no church there, and he did
not then go into Macedonia. The second time he resided
there from two to three years, and on leaving went into
Macedonia. But the circumstances are not favourable to
the writing of the Epistle at this time. For the Epistle
requires that Timothy be in Ephesus when it was written.
Yet he had been sent away into Macedonia before Paul went
thither.2 According to 1 Cor. iv. 17 he had directions to go
also to Corinth, and was expected to return.3 But there is
no mention either in Acts or any of Paul's Epistles that he
came back to Ephesus prior to Paul's departure. Again,
when Paul wrote his first Epistle to the Corinthians from
Ephesus he did not intimate an intention to return to that
city, but wished them to set him on his way after he should
have visited them, " whithersoever" he might go,4 and on
his return from Greece he went by determination past it in
1 Acts xviii. 19. ! Acts xix. 22. 3 1 Cor. xvi. n. 4 1 Cor. xvi. 6.

THE PASTORAL EPISTLES 191
order to reach Jerusalem by Pentecost.1 But in the Epistle
he expresses his purpose to come back to Ephesus (iii. 14,
iv. 13). Finally it appears from 2 Cor. i. 1 that Timothy
was with Paul in Macedonia when that Epistle was written,
and according to Acts xx. 4 he accompanied him on his
journey from Corinth to Philippi. Yet according to 1 Tim.
iv. 13 he had directions to remain in Ephesus until the
apostle's return ! 2
Unable to bring the composition of 1 Timothy into accord
with known events of the apostle's life, some defenders ofthe
Pauline authorship have supposed a second Roman impris
onment preceded by a journey, the incidents of which are
invented to fit the situation presupposed in the Epistle.
But this second imprisonment out of which the letter is
assumed to have been written rests upon the slender support
of a passage in Clement of Rome, which is of doubtful inter
pretation on account of the corrupt state of the text, and
upon an unsupported statement of Eusebius in the fourth
century. If the work of Paul continued some time after the
Roman imprisonment known to history it could not have
failed to leave traces behind it. There is no intimation of
it in the First Epistle to Timothy, supposed on this theory to
have been written thereafter, and Acts is not only silent
1 Acts xx. 16.
2 The question has been raised whether, assuming that Timothy
was left in charge at Ephesus, Paul would have written him such
directions as are contained in the Epistle. On this matter Prof. E.
Y. Hincks writes in the fournal of Biblical Literature, 1897, p. 104 :
" It is altogether probable that before going away the apostle would
have given his vicar directions as to the matters treated of in the let
ter. In that case the instructions of the Epistle repeat or fill out the
initial instructions. We should expect in a writer as practical, skilful,
and tactful as Paul was some allusion to the fact. . . . With regard
to the administration of church government not only is there no sug
gestion that Timothy had been told how to act, but the directions
taken by themselves would suggest that he had not."

192 INTRODUCTION
about it, but also presupposes that the journey to Rome
which it records was to his death. Such a desperate resort
as this invention of a second imprisonment in order to save
the Pauline authorship of i Timothy cannot commend itself
to the sober second thought of unbiased scholars.
The Second Epistle to Timothy is also involved in his
torical difficulties which preclude its composition by Paul
during his imprisonment in Rome. Trophimus is said to
have been left ill at Miletus during the journey to Rome.1
But in Acts xxi. 29 Trophimus is mentioned as with Paul in
Jerusalem, and hence could not have been left behind at
Miletus. Besides, Paul did not stop at Miletus when he
went from Csesarea to Rome. The statement that Eras
tus abode at Corinth ' does not correspond with the facts,
for on the journey in question the apostle did not stop
at this city. Besides, it is very improbable that Paul should
mention, long" after their occurrence, to Timothy events of
another journey on which according to Acts xx. 4 he was
his companion. A writer assuming the rdle of Paul and
having a vague knowledge of circumstances which he did
not cleverly put together might place persons and inci
dents in such relations, but the apostle himself could not
have made these mistakes.
The situations presupposed in Titus do not fit into the life
of Paul as it is known to us from Acts. We have in fact no
account of a work of his in Crete, either alone or in connec
tion with Titus, such as is assumed in Titus i. 5. In the
account in Acts xxvii. 7-13 of the apostle's sailing by Crete,
a prisoner on the way to Italy, and putting in at a harbour
of that island there is no intimation that there were any
Christians on the island whom he was permitted to see as
in other places.3 Accordingly it has been supposed by some
that the Christianity of the island was of a later origin.
But this gives Paul no opportunity to have visited the island
1 2 Tim. iv. 20. " Acts xxvii. 3, xxviii. 14, 15.

THE PA S TOR A L EPIS TLES 1 93
except on the presumption of a journey thither after an
assumed deliverance from the first Roman imprisonment.
But this supposition allows too short a time for the conver
sion of the Cretans and the rise of heretical opinions and
teachers. Conjectural combinations are possible, but they
are of little importance since they are without an historical
foundation. There is no mention of Titus in Acts, and
though he is several times introduced in Paul's Epistles he
is nowhere said to have been in Crete. The Epistle is
without historical setting, and has such internal incongruities
as that Paul tells Titus what according to the assumed situ
ation he must already have known (i. 5), and gives him a
description of the false teachers which he must be supposed
to have had from Titus himself (i. 10-14), an(l which was in
any case needless, since the latter should be assumed to
know them better than he did. Such language regarding a
people among whom he had laboured as we find in i. 12 is
without parallel in the apostle's writings.
The appearance of false teachers is the occasion of the
three Epistles and one of the principal objects in view in
their composition was evidently to warn against and combat
the dangerous doctrines which these innovators were propa
gating. The interest manifested by the writer in the
organisation of the Church may have been subordinate to
this end, since a Church well organised and officered is an
effective means of opposing heresy. The vagueness with
which the false teachers are characterised renders it difficult
to identify them among the many forms of so-called heresy
in the early Church. We find such terms employed of their
teachings as ' ' myths " or " fables, " " profane and old
wives' fables," "genealogies," etc.1 Among their teach
ings were ascetic prohibitions of certain foods and of mar
riage,2 and Timothy is warned to "turn away from the
profane babblings and oppositions of the knowledge (gnosis)
1 1 Tim. iv. 7 ; 2 Tim. iv. 4 ; Tit. iii. 9. 2 1 Tim. iv. 3, 4.

i94 INTRODUCTION
falsely so called." 1 Heresy appears to have become a
standard designation, and a man is designated as " heret
ical " who departs from the " sound doctrine." 2
The false teachers are also charged with misleading the
people morally. They are said to combine immorality with
their heresy, to be " corrupted in mind and reprobate con
cerning the faith." 3 They are lovers of self and of money,
unthankful, unholy, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of
God. They creep into houses and take captive silly women
laden with sins, led away by divers lusts. They hold a form
of godliness, but have denied the power thereof.4 In 2 Tim
othy two are mentioned in particular, who have " erred
concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is past
already" (ii. 18). This was probably a totally different
phase of doctrine from that mentioned in 1 Cor. xv. 12,
which was a denial that there is a resurrection. Its contents
cannot be exactly determined. Perhaps it was that " the
age to come " had already begun, that there was to be no
future Parousia, or second coming of Christ, in connection
with which the orthodox Christians expected the resurrec
tion, and that accordingly men ought then to live the angelic
life, to abstain from flesh, from marriage, etc., and be "as
the angels." 6 In opposition to these teachings are perhaps
such passages as 1 Tim. ii. 12, 15, v. 23, vi. 5, 14 ; 2 Tim.
ii. 18, iv. 1 ; Tit. i. 2, ii. 4. That the false teachers repre
sented some form of Gnosticism is very probable, and Iren-
seus, Tertullian, and Epiphanius were of this opinion, but
the exact phase or stage of that many-sided heresy which
appears in the Epistles is indeterminable. That the errors
combated were later than the time of Paul may be regarded
as hardly questionable, and that they belonged to the first
decades of the second century is almost certain.
The organisation of the Church occupies a large share of
1 1 Tim. vi. 20. 2 Tit. iii. 9, 10. 3 2 Tim. iii. 8.
4 Ibid. iii. 1-8. 5 Matt. xix. 12 ; Luke xx. 35.

THE PA S TOR A L EPIS TLBS 1 95
attention in the Epistles as a means of overcoming the
heresies. This is especially the case in 1 Timothy, which is
probably the latest of the three. Unmistakable traces ap
pear of a condition of the Church far advanced beyond the
time of Paul. Prayers are enjoined for " all men, kings,
and all that are in high place." ' We meet here with none
of the conditions ofthe worship of the Christians of Paul's
time as set forth in 1 Cor. xii. 28, xiv. 3, 4, 6, 26, 27, but
one office of teaching and doubtless a public liturgical read
ing of the Old Testament.2 Traces of a fixed confession of
faith appear in such expressions as : " Jesus Christ, risen
from the dead, of the seed of David " ; " Jesus Christ who
under Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession " ; " who
should judge the quick and the dead." 3 The direction
regarding widows 4 indicates a well-developed church-organi
sation. The injunction that a bishop must not be a recent
convert does not fit a time when the Church was in the
beginning of its existence, as during Paul's life.
The requirement in a bishop that he be " the husband of
one wife " " is totally unfitting to the time of the apostle and
contrary to the spirit of his teaching. The meaning without
doubt is that a man is unfit for a bishop if he marry a sec
ond wife after the death of his first, since polygamy was so
exceptional among both Jews and gentiles of that age as to
be excluded, and adultery or fornication would, if intended,
have been expressed in other terms. But the Church fathers
relate that in the second and succeeding centuries a prejud
ice existed against second marriages, some regarding them
as immoral, and since there is no evidence that Paul in his
undisputed writings entertained any such opinion, but rather
allowed the marriage of widows," the conclusion is forced
upon us that the requirement regarding the remarriage of
1 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2. ' 1 Tim. iv. 9-13.
2 Ibid. iv. 13. 6 Ibid. iii. 2 ; Tit. i. 6.
8 Ibid. vi. 13 ; 2 Tim. ii. 8, iv. 1. 6 1 Cor. vii. 9-13.

196 INTRODUCTION
bishops indicates the late date of the Epistles. As a coun
terpart to this injunction may be cited that regarding the
widows, who might be " enrolled," that is, put on the list
for support, if they had not contracted a second marriage. '
This is certainly not simply unpauline, but anti-Pauline,
and shows how strong the sentiment was against a second
marriage when the Epistles were written. The connection
of " the gift of God " with " the laying on of hands,"
whether of an apostle or of the " presbytery," is without
parallel in the writings of Paul.2 To him the "gifts"
were solely by the " working " of the Spirit,8 and the situa
tion implied in the Pastoral Epistles is that of a time when
the apostolic conception of an office in the Church was pass
ing or had already passed into the ecclesiastical, in which
an ordination by a college of presbyters took the place of the
earlier direct endowment of the Spirit. It is the opinion
of the most competent judges that the idea of a bishop as
the head of the college of presbyters was in the mind of the
writer, and that it shows itself in the functions which he as
signs to Timothy and Titus. The conception of the Church
as an organised whole, that is, as " catholic, ' ' which we have
seen in Ephesians, is unmistakable in these Epistles. His
torical criticism must, then, assign them to a period in the
development of the Church in which the actual environment
corresponds to their contents.
The indications of an unpauline authorship shown in the
language, style, and diction are numerous, but the discussion
of this subject would be out of place in a handbook intended
for the general reader. It may suffice to remark that an
examination has shown that out of the 897 words used in
the Epistles, names of persons excluded, 171 are not found
elsewhere in the New Testament, and 133 are not known to
the undisputed Pauline writings. Peculiar families of words
and new compounds abound, and the style indicates not
1 1 Tim. v. 9. %Ibid. iv. 14 ; 2 Tim. i. 6. 3 1 Cor. xii. n.

THE PASTORAL EPISTLES 197
Paul grown older, but a man of a different mind and manner
of thinking. The dependence upon the genuine Epistles,
shown in numerous contacts with them in ideas and phrase
ology, betrays an imitator. The writer was evidently a
disciple of Paul's, and represents him in some of the features
of his teaching, while in accordance with the general tend
ency of the post-apostolic age, allowing others which are
the most distinguishing to drop out of sight. Apart from
the dependence on Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, and 1
Thessalonians, in many expressions peculiar ideas of He
brews are suggested, although a literary dependence on that
Epistle is not certain. Numerous expressions similar to
passages in 1 Peter have been pointed out, a detailed exam
ination of which shows the probable priority of the latter.
Some contacts with Ephesians and numerous ones with
Luke and Acts have been found. Especially noteworthy is
it that out of the 80 words not found in the Pauline writings
which these latter contain 34 appear in the Pastoral Epistles.
Since Hebrews, 1 Peter, Ephesians, Luke, and Acts consti
tute a related group of writings showing many features of
similarity in points of view, the judgment appears to be
well founded which places the Pastoral Epistles in the midst
of this post-Pauline development. In the traits of the false
teachers combated there is some similarity with those of the
heretics in 2 Peter and Jude. Some contacts with the
Johannine group of writings are apparent, but whether to
the Pastoral Epistles should be assigned the priority or not
is indeterminable.
The time of the origin of the Epistles must be placed in
the last part of the first or the early years of the second
century, with a preponderance of probability in favour of
the latter, between a.d. 118 and 140. Second Timothy pur
ports to have been written from Rome, and the Latinisms
of the style of all three, together with the preponderant
dependence on the Epistle to the Romans, favour the suppos
ition that they originated there.

THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY.

EXPOSITION.
The Epistle begins with the address and greeting usual in the
Pauline letters and immediately proceeds to a consideration of the
truth of Christianity as opposed to false teachings (i. 1-20).
Christ Jesus our hope (i. 1). — Suggested perhaps by 1 Cor.
xv. 19 or 1 Thess. i. 3. Paul does not call Christ or God
our hope. He speaks of ' ' the hope of salvation ' ' and of
" the hope of the glory of God" ' with reference to the
blessedness which Christ at his second coming would pre
pare for the believers in his kingdom.2
As I exhorted thee (i. 3). — This introductory clause (vv. 3
and 4) has no conclusion, but a conclusion is easily supplied.
Certain men, that is, men whom I do not wish, or do not
need to name. Perhaps scorn is implied.
Teach a different doctrine (i. 3). — The word so rendered
occurs here and in vi. 3 only in the New Testament, and
means, to teach a doctrine not in accord with that which had
been handed down, that which was " sound " (verse 10). 3
Tables and endless genealogies (i. 4). — This expression is
too vague to admit of precise determination, and there has
been no little discussion as to the particular doctrines of the
1 1 Thess. v. 8 ; Rom. v. 2.
2 Similar Tit. i. 2, ii. 13.
3 ii ¦ Ep0S1SadxaXe.lv. See Gal. i. 6 ; 2 Cor. xi. 4 ; Rom. xvi. 17.
199

200 FIRST TIMOTHY i. 4-8.
early heretics which are referred to. The reference to the
Gnostic speculations of the second century is probably cor
rect, especially since the Christian writers of about the time
in which that heresy flourished so understood the matter,
supposing Paul to have prophetically anticipated the heresies.
Myths (i. 4) may be understood as designating the current
Gnostic " fantastic fictions" regarding the world of spirits,
and genealogies as describing the speculations of the Gnostics
about the orders of the so-called seons or emanations of the
Deity. Perhaps the two terms are nearly synonymous.
These speculations the writer says minister questionings
rather than a stewardship or dispensation of God, which is
grounded in faith. This dispensation is God's plan of
salvation. But the end of the charge is love (i. 5). — Charge is taken
up from verse 3, and its object is said to be love, that is,
kindly regard for the welfare of others, the love that
springs " out of a pure heart and a good conscience and
faith unfeigned " (see " faith working through love," Gal.
v. 6).
Desiring to be teachers of the law (i. 7). — These were not
"doctors of the law" (Luke v. 17; Acts v. 34, where
alone the word occurs, besides, in the New Testament), but
those who occupied themselves with idle talking about the
law, with Gnostic speculations, perhaps, as to its origin and
meaning. But we know that the law is good (i. 8). — The law is here
as with Paul the entire Mosaic law, ritual and moral, which
the apostle calls "holy, just, and good" (Rom. vii. 12).
The lawful use of it has reference to the teachers, as is evid
ent from verse 7. If the heretical teachers do not make a
right use of it, this fact does not disparage the law as such.
Perhaps the declaration that the law is good was also directed
against the heretics, who may have denied its value and de
preciated its importance. The rambling list of sinners for

i. 10-14. FIRST TIMOTHY 201
whom the law is intended might well have been dispensed
with, since it must necessarily be deficient unless it should
be extended beyond all propriety. As it is, it goes beyond
good taste, and is not at all in the style of Paul. The writer
appears to have let his mind rove without a definite purpose.
Abusers of themselves witk men (i. 10). — Sodomites, see
Rom. i. 27 ; 1 Cor. vi. 9. The sound doctrine. In 2 Tim. iv.
13 this term is employed to designate the right belief handed
down from the apostles. Here it denotes the opposite of a
number of violations of the moral law. The writer doubt
less connected good morals with right doctrine.
According to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God (i. 1 1).
— This is to be connected with ' ' for the law is not made for
a righteous man " (verse 9). On the glory of God see Rom.
ix. 23 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4, 6. This was manifested in Jesus, and is
the content of the gospel.1
/ thank him that enabled me, even Christ Jesus our Lord
(i. 12), that is, made me capable of performing the arduous
labours of an apostle. The writer is of course speaking
ostensibly for Paul.
Though I was before a blasphemer (j.. 13). — Paul does not
so designate himself, and the word is not elsewhere used in
the New Testament.2 The occasion for this arraignment is
not apparent, and the whole connection is forced and un
natural compared with 1 Cor. xv. 8, 9. " The monstrous
difference " between this and all the passages in which Paul
speaks of his former life has been remarked.
Howbeit, I obtained mercy (i. 13). — Paul never uses
" mercy " in connection with his conversion, but " grace." 3
" Mercy" is employed with reference to his apostleship.4
Ignorantly in unbelief. See Eph. iv. 18; Acts iii. 17, xvii.
30; 1 Pet. i. 14; Heb. v. 2.
And the grace of our Lord abounded exceedingly with faith
and love which is in Jesus Christ (i. 14). — This sentence ap-
' Tit. ii. 13. 2 fiXadcprj/j-oi. 3 1 Cor. xv. 10. 4 2 Cor. iv. 1.

202 FIRST TIMOTHY i. 15-17.
pears to indicate a want of clear conception on the part of
the writer. The sense is that the grace of Christ abounded
exceedingly along with faith and the love which is in Christ,
that is, the writer represents Paul as having experienced the
grace of Christ on the ground of his own faith and love.
Faithful is the saying and worthy of all acceptation (i. 15),
as if the fact that Jesus came into the world to save sinners
needed this special corroboration either to the writer or to
the reader, remarks Schleiermacher. The expression came
into the world, etc., is introduced as if it were a current say
ing. It is not found in Paul and not in the other Pastoral
Epistles, but is Johannine.1 Of whom I am chief. An imi
tation of 1 Cor. xv. 9, " the least of the apostles." The in
tensifying goes beyond that of Eph. iii. 8, " less than the
least of all the saints," and the Epistle of Barnabas goes
farther with the inclusion of the rest of the apostles.
For this cause I obtained mercy, that in me as chief (i. 16). —
The idea is probably not as "chief sinner," but "especially,"
or "foremost," and "in me especially," is a preferable
rendering, although in the original the same word is used that
in verse 15 is properly rendered " chief." Believe on him.
Belief on (ini ) Christ — a conception in which he is not the ob
ject but the ground of faith in the sense of " confidence " or
" trust," is not elsewhere expressed in the New Testament.
Now unto the king (i. 17). — King eternal, literally " king
of the ages," is not elsewhere in the New Testament applied
to God.2 It occurs in the earliest extra-canonical Christian
literature, with which the Pastoral Epistles were probably
nearly contemporaneous. The doxology seems to be inap
propriate here, and occupies an awkward position at the con
clusion of an incidental portion of the chapter. But after
this interruption the writer does not proceed to a new subject
but resumes the theme of verse 5, as is evident from the
words " charge," " faith," and " a good conscience."
'John i. 9, vi. 14, xi. 27. 2 fiadiXevS r<Sv aimvmv.

i. 18-20. FIRST TIMOTHY 203
This charge I commit . . . according to the prophecies
which went before on thee (i. 18). — Prophecies constituted one
of the so-called expressions of " the Spirit" in the early
Church.1 Perhaps prophetic words were spoken on Timothy
when he was ordained by ' ' the laying on of the hands of the
presbytery " (iv. 14). In them, that is, within the sphere of
these prophecies.
Holding faith and a good conscience (i. 19), that is, possess-
ing faith, holding it fast. A good conscience in contrast with
the false teachers, who are ' ' branded in their own conscience
as with a hot iron " (iv. 2). Thrust from them is ill chosen,
since unsuitable to a possession, and fit with reference to
something offered.
HymencBus and Alexander. See v. 20, and 2 Tim. ii. 17,
iv. 14. Delivered unto Satan. This is evidently adapted
from 1 Cor. v. 5, where the expression occurs. To be de
livered unto Satan was to be excluded from the Church and
handed over to " the god of this world " for punishmept of
some sort. In 1 Cor. v. 5, it is called " the destruction of
the flesh " of the subject. Perhaps the story of Job determ
ined the conception. At any rate it was a current idea in
the early Church that the apostles possessed extraordinary
powers of discipline,2 and it is not surprising that legends
arose accordingly.3
That they might be taught not to blaspheme (i. 20). — This
does not mean that Satan would conduct their moral educa
tion, but that through the torments which he would inflict
upon them they might be led to see their errors. It appears
to have been thought, as well by the writer of this Epistle as
by Paul, that Satan was subject to the apostles to the extent
that he would carry out their requirements of discipline.
His kingdom was thus divided against itself.
1 Rom. xii. 6 ; 1 Cor. xiii. 8 ; 1 Thess. v. 20.
2 John xx. 23.
"Acts v. 1-6, xiii. 9-11.

204 FIRST TIMOTHY i.-20.
The extraordinary authority assumed here in the name of the apos
tle and actually arrogated to himself by Paul in I Cor. v. 3 doubtless
rested upon the supposed possession of " the Spirit " (see the discus
sion under Eph. iv. 30). The Spirit was believed to confer not only
authority in discipline, but in doctrine also. The illumination which
it bestowed was regarded as supernatural in the sense that the subject
of its influence possessed a knowledge and insight unattainable by
the unaided human mind. Not with "man's wisdom " did he speak,
but with "the demonstration of the Spirit and of power." ' He was
able to declare " the wisdom of God in a mystery," " the deep things
of God" "revealed" unto him "by His Spirit," things that "eye
hath not seen nor ear heard," "prepared" by God " for them that
love Him." Of himself " no man knoweth the things of God," but
they are known by "the Spirit of God," and accordingly he who has
this "Spirit" is able to reveal them, since he "knows the things
freely given of God." 2 So exalted is the condition ofthe spiritual
or pneumatic man that "he judgeth all things, yet he himself is
judged of no man."8 It is the prerogative of the believer to be
"filled with all the fulness of God," to be "strengthened with power
by His Spirit in the inner man," and to enjoy revelations " by the
Spirit" of a " knowledge which in other ages was not made known
unto the sons of men." 4 Whatever spiritual knowledge is wanting
to the believer God will make up to him by a special revelation.5
The " sufficiency " of the apostle is not of himself, but of God who
has made him " sufficient as a minister of the New Covenant" 6 — a
remark which evidently imports that no higher authority than his
own word is required. The believer thus illuminated is assumed to
be able himself to "prove all things" and know " the will of God." '
The consummation of the Christian life is to be " strengthened with
all power" and "filled with the knowledge of God's will in all wis
dom and spiritual understanding." 8 It is deemed fitting to offer
prayer for the believers that God may give them " the Spirit of wis
dom and revelation in the knowledge of Him." 9 In this " spirit of
revelation " they may speak "as the oracles of God," and " minister
ofthe ability which God giveth," 10 for "the Lord giveth understand-
1 1 Cor. ii. 4. e 2 cor. iii. 5, 6.
2 Ibid. ii. 4-12. ' Rom. xii. 2 ; 1 Thess. v. 21.
3 Ibid. ili6. 8Col. i. 9, 11.
4 Eph. iii. 4, 5, 16, 19. 2 Eph. i. 17, 19.
'Phil. iii. 15. °iPet. iv. 11.

ii. 1, 2. FIRST TIMOTHY 205
ing in all things." ' This assumption of special and "sufficient"
knowledge and authority does not, indeed, imply a sense of independ
ence of Christ, for it was the belief of the times that the communica
tion of " the Spirit " was through him ; but it is not surprising that
from this point of view it should be thought that his teaching
and example could be dispensed with. Hence the slight interest
shown in them by the writers of the canonical Epistles. It was
only the return to Jesus at a later time that saved the Church from
the subjectivity, arbitrariness, and confusion which necessarily attend
the confidence reposed in the individual possession ofthe " witness "
of the Spirit (see the discussion under Heb. ii. 14).
The writer now proceeds to give regulations respecting the
public worship of the Christians and the organisation of the
Church (ii. i-iii. 16).
I exhort therefore (ii. 1). — It is uncertain whether first of
all should be joined with I exhort, or with prayers, etc., be
made. Supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings,
etc. This accumulation of words including all the expres
sions of public worship is characteristic ofthe author's style.
The words all apply to all men, and thanksgiving is of course
enjoined for the meanest as well as the best, for those enumer
ated in i. 9, 10, as well as for Christian brothers and friends.
That we may lead a tranquil and quiet life (ii. 2). — That
probably denotes the purpose of the " supplications," etc.,
although it may be connected with "exhort" (verse 1).
The prayers were not for the conversion of those " in high.
place," but perhaps to convince them that the Christians
were well disposed so that the latter might be left in quiet;
or the object may have been to ask for grace for the rulers
that they might properly perform their duties and accord
ingly leave the Christians in peace. The connection with
' ' all men ' ' is obscure in relation to the object of the prayers.
But such a want of precision is not uncommon with the
author. Godliness and gravity. The two words thus trans
lated are not used by Paul. 1 2 Tim. ii. 7.

206 FIRST TIMOTHY ii. 3, 4-
This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour
(ii. 3).— This refers to all that precedes in verses i and 2 re
specting the offering of prayers, etc., and the object of offer
ing them. God is not called the Saviour of men by Paul.
He is only indirectly so designated in 1 Cor. i. 21, and then
only through the preaching of Christ. Apart from the Pas
toral Epistles, the poetic citation, Luke i. 47, and Jude 25,
the function of Saviour is throughout the New Testament
applied to Christ.1 Perhaps this departure from the general
New Testament doctrine was due to the contest with Gnos
ticism, which made a distinction between God and the
Saviour by placing the former in its system out of relation
with men.
Who willeth that all men should be saved, and come to the
knowledge of the truth (ii. 4). — Compare Tit. ii. n. This
passage should be connected with the exhortation to pray
for all men. Chrysostom comments on this passage: " Imi
tate God; if He wishes all men to be saved, do thou wish it;
if thou wishest it, pray for it." See Tit. ii. 11. The
emphasis laid in these Epistles on the universality of the
divine grace, whether intended to oppose Jewish exclusive
ness like Rom. iii. 29 or not, is probably attributable to the
exigencies of the strife with the Gnostics, who distinguished
between " pneumatic " or spiritual and " hylic " or material
men. The one God whom the Christians of this period
opposed to the Gnostic "genealogies" was thought to
stand in a similar relation to all men. Yet along with this
doctrine goes the idea that there are some who are the
" elect," and who will " obtain the salvation which is in
Christ Jesus with eternal glory," that those who deny Christ
he " will deny," and that only those who " endure" will
1 Luke ii. 11 ; John iv. 42 ; Acts v. 31, xiii. 23 ; Eph. v. 23 ; Phil.
iii. 20 ; 2 Pet. i. 1, 11, ii. 20, iii. 2, 18 ; 1 John iv. 14 ; see also 2 Tim.
i. 10, ii. 10, iv. 18 ; Tit. i. 4, ii. 13, iii. 6 ; but God as Saviour, Tit. i.
3, ii. 10. iii. 4 ; 1 Tim. i. 1, ii. 3, iv. 10.

ii. 4-6. FIRST TIMOTHY 207
" reign with him." ' The declaration, moreover, that " the
Lord knoweth them that are his" 2 implies that there are
some who are not Christ's. The doctrine that all men
would share the blessedness of the Messianic "reign" is
not taught in these Epistles.
The knowledge of the truth (ii. 4) is probably conceived as
the end to which salvation leads, although the idea that this
knowledge is the means of salvation may have lain in the
writer's mind, the condition being introduced after the
result." For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men,
himself man, Christ fe sus, who gave himself a ransom for all
(ii. 5, 6). — For connects with the immediately preceding
thought — the one wish with respect to all men involves ac
cording to the apparent course of the writer's thought the
unity of the Deity. The same doctrine is affirmed in Rom.
iii. 30 with relation to the idea that Jews have not one God
and gentiles another, and in 1 Cor. viii. 6 with reference to
the heathen divinities.' Mediator, that is, one who inter
venes between two persons either to make an agreement or
to restore harmony. Paul uses the word once " with refer
ence to the giving of the law, and in Hebrews it is used of
Moses and of Christ as mediators of " covenants." The
idea is not Pauline, but appears to have been derived from
Hebrews or from the circle of thought which that Epistle
represents. ' Himself man. The Greek reads, ' ' man Christ
Jesus " without the article. The only other passage in the
New Testament in which Jesus is so designated is Rom. v.
15, where " the man Christ Jesus " is contrasted with the
first Adam through whom sin and death came into the
world. The connection of thought here is different and may
be that the offer of salvation through the mediator Jesus, a
1 2 Tim. ii. 10-12. 4 Eph. iv. 6.
2 Ibid. ii. 19. 5 Gal. iii. 19, 20.
3 Ibid. iii. 7. 6 Heb. viii. 6, ix. 15, xii. 24.

208 FIRST TIMOTHY ii. 6, 7.
man, extends as far as mankind, that is to all men. Per
haps the humanity Of Jesus is here emphasised in opposition
to the Docetic heresy which denied that Jesus had a real
body of flesh and blood. But compare Tit. ii. 13.
Gave himself a ransom for all (ii. 6). — The word rendered
ransom means " that which is given in exchange for another
as the price of his redemption," and the idea is the Pauline
one expressed in Gal. iii. 13, by "Christ redeemed us [bought
us off] from the curse of the law." According to 1 Pet. i.
18 the price of man's redemption paid by Jesus was his
" precious blood." The penalty of the law was " death,"
which in the Pauline sense included exclusion from the
resurrection at the second coming of Christ and from the
blessedness of the Messianic kingdom to be established at
that time. As the representative of the human race, " the
last Adam," Christ paid this penalty for men, " having be
come a curse for us," and on condition of " faith " they will
be regarded as not having broken the law, as "justified,"
and will be raised at his coming, so as to " reign with him "
in his kingdom, after having been clothed upon with
' ' spiritual bodies ' ' conformed to ' ' his body of glory. ' ' The
unconditional deliverance of all men from sin is of course
not implied. This fundamental tenet of Paulinism found its
way into the synoptic Gospels, and appears there as a teach
ing of Jesus himself, though quite opposed to his conception
of his function in saving men' from sin.1
Testimony to be borne in its own times (ii. 6), that is, the
announcement of the historic fact that Christ gave himself
as a ransom for all was to be at a suitable time, God's own
time.2 Whereunto I was appointed a preacher and an apostle
. . . a teacher of the gentiles, etc. (ii. 7), that is, unto this
" mystery" that Christ gave himself a " ransom for all."
The writer, personating Paul, is careful to add apostle to
1 Matt. xx. 28 ; Mark x. 45.
s Tit. i. 3.

ii. 8-12. FIRST TIMOTHY 209
preacher. Perhaps Paul's apostolic work was denied by the
false teachers. The words, a teacher of the gentiles, are an
elaboration of the idea that the gospel of which the writer
makes Paul declare himself a preacher and an apostle was
inclusive of all men.
The writer now turns to exhortations regarding the posi
tion of men and women in the Church.
/ desire, therefore, that men pray in every place, lifting up
holy hands, without wrath and disputing (ii. 8). — Only men
should pray in the public assemblies according to 1 Cor. xiv.
34, and in every place probably means in all the places where
believers assemble for public worship. The lifting up of the
hands was customary among the Jews in prayer.1 Holy
hands. The expression is symbolical of a pure life.2 With
out wrath and disputing. See Phil. ii. 14.
In like manner, that women adorn themselves (ii. 9). — It is
necessary to supply " I desire " from verse 8. The seemly
attire and the modesty and sobriety recommended to women
would place them in contrast with those of their sex whose
life was not chaste. Braided hair. See 1 Pet. iii. 3.
Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection (ii. II). —
This is the oft-recurring teaching of the apostolic and the
post-apostolic age regarding the relation of wives to their
husbands.3 But I permit not a woman to teach, norto-have dominion over
a man (ii. 12). — Both clauses probably relate to woman's
position in the religious assemblies. If she were to teach,
she would hold a position of authority. This teaching is in
accordance with Paul's instructions on the subject to the
effect that if the women ' ' would learn anything, let them
ask their own husbands at home." 4
1 Ps. xxviii. 2, xliv. 21.
2 Jas. iv. 8 ; Acts ii. 23.
8 1 Cor. xiv. 34 ; Col. iii. 18 ; Eph. v. 22 ; 1 Pet. iii. 1.
4 Ibid. xiv. 35.
14

210 FIRST TIMOTHY ii. 13, 14-
For Adam was first formed, then Eve (ii. 13). — As Paul,
following the allegorical method of interpretation, regarded
the history and legend of the Old Testament as symbolical
of conditions and events of a later time, so the author of this
Epistle founds man's superiority to woman upon the priority
of Adam's creation in the story of the origin of the human
race in Genesis. Compare Paul's declaration that man is
" the image and glory of God," but the woman is only " of
the man," ' and accordingly by implication inferior.
And Adam was not beguiled, but the woman, being beguiled,
hath fallen into transgression (ii. 14). — This passage has
caused the expositors no little trouble. Some have proposed
supplying " first," and others " by the serpent" after be
guiled, in order to overcome the apparent exclusion of Adam
from participation in the fall.2 An insight, however, into
the allegorical interpretation has cleared up the difficulty.
The writer did not intend to clear Adam of blame, and prob
ably did not by an oversight omit to mention him ; but in
accordance with the allegorical method which often selects a
single word for special emphasis, and hangs the whole eluci
dation upon it, he here presses beguiled as applicable only to
Eve. She fell into the snare of the tempter, and in the
original narration she alone is mentioned as having been de
ceived by the serpent. See 2 Cor. xi. 3, where Paul employs
this word. In fact, Adam's case was not much better since
he was apparently so easily led astray ; but the facts did not
stand in the way of the allegoriser, who here as usual makes
out his case, and shows that woman, being so weak as the
story of her ancestress proves her to be, is fit only for sub
ordination, and should not assume to teach, but quietly sub
mit to be taught and directed by man. The author of Rom.
v. 12-14, J9 could not, however, have written the passage
under consideration.
1 1 Cor. xi. 3, 8. s Rom. v. 12-14.

ii. 15-iii. 2. FIRST TIMOTHY 211
But there is hope for her, for she shall be saved through the
child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctifica
tion with sobriety (ii. 15). — This idea was perhaps suggested
by Gen. iii. 16. Woman's destiny is the bearing of children,
and in fulfilling it she will be saved, is the thought of the
writer. This defines her sphere and she should confine her
self to domestic duties, and not let herself be heard in the
public assemblies. How much the prohibition of marriage
by the false teachers (iv. 3) may have had to do with the
origin of this teaching we do not know. There is certainly
nothing like it in Paul, and it can hardly be made to accord
with his discouragement of marriage.1 Unpauline, too, is
•salvation by works, with faith subordinated, and coordinated
with love and sobriety, and the introduction of the plural if
they continue, together with the loose combination, faith and
love and sanctification with sobriety, indicates a want of direct
ness and precision which betrays a writer inferior to the great
apostle. Ifa man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work
(iii. I). — The word here rendered the office of a bishop (ini-
0KOTtrj), means primarily " inspection," " visitation," " in
vestigation," " that act by which God looks into and searches
out the ways, deeds, and character of men in order to ad
judge them their lot whether joyous or sad." Hence " the
day of thy visitation." 2 Here it is correctly rendered the
office of a bishop.* The bishop was the overseer of a church,
and his office is in this connection distinguished from that
of a " deacon " (verse 8).
The bishop, therefore, must be without reproach, the husband
of one wife, etc. (iii. 2). — The injunction regarding the
marital relation ofthe bishop is not a prohibition of poly
gamy, is not to be understood figuratively in the sense of
celibacy, as if the Church were his wife, and does not mean
1 1 Cor. vii. 8.
2 tTtidKOTijj'Z. Luke xix. 44 ; 1 Pet. ii. 12. 3 Acts i. 20.

212 FIRST TIMOTHY iii. 3~7-
simply that he must be a married man, as if one before wife
were equivalent to the indefinite article, or that as such he
should be faithful to his wife. It is a prohibition of a second
marriage after the death of one wife. (See the Introduction.)
Apt to teach, that is, skilful in imparting knowledge, not
" inclined to teaching." The word so rendered is found in
2 Tim. ii. 24, and not elsewhere in the New Testament. It
does not occur in the classic Greek.
No brawler, no striker (iii. 3). — See Tit. i. 7, that is, not
given to wine and not quarrelsome and pugnacious. No
lover of money. Compare " not greedy of filthy lucre,"
Tit. i. 7.
Having his children in subjection with all gravity (iii. 4). — .
"With all gravity" is perhaps incongruously subjoined.
The words are at least loosely connected with the preceding,
and commentators are in doubt whether to refer them to the
bishop or to the children.
Not a novice, lest being puff ed up he fall into the condemnation
of the devil (iii. 6). — Novice, neophyte, does not mean a
young man, but a recent convert. (See the Introduction.)
Puffed up. Perhaps ' ' blinded with pride or conceit ' ' were
a preferable rendering. The condemnation of the devil is of
doubtful import, the genitive being either subjective or ob
jective. If the genitive is subjective the meaning is " the
condemnation which the devil decrees," and the judgment
must be assumed to be that pronounced by the enemies of
Christianity regarded as prompted by the devil. If the
genitive is objective the condemnation is such as falls upon
the devil supposed to be chargeable with a similar offence.
It is impossible to determine which idea was in the writer's
mind. Lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil (iii. 7). —
It is uncertain whether reproach is to be taken absolutely or
in connection with the devil, " reproach of the devil." In
the latter case the interpretation must be similar to that

iii. 8-10. FIRST TIMOTHY 213
given of " the condemnation of the devil" under the ob
jective genitive. The snare of the devil, a figure drawn from
hunting, indicates the perils prepared by the evil one through
temptation for the destruction ofthe good.1
Deacons in like manner must be grave (iii. 8). — In the
apostolic Church deacons had the care of the poor.2 They
are mentioned in Phil. i. 1 in immediate connection with
bishops. That their functions were the same in the post-
apostolic Church represented in these Epistles is improbable.
The word originally means " a minister," " one who per
forms services for another, ' ' and Paul speaks of the deacons
(" ministers ") of Satan and " ministers of Christ " 3
Not givefi to much wine (iii. 8). — These Epistles oppose the
intemperate use of wine, but not its use in moderation.4
The " brawler" is one who becomes noisy from drinking
too much wine.
Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience (iii. 9).
— The expression, the mystery of the faith, is not elsewhere
used, but " mystery of godliness" occurs in verse 16. To
Paul the contents of the gospel of Christ is a mystery " kept
in silence through times eternal." 6 It is here the truth em
bodied in the faith of the believers, and not that contained
in faith regarded as a system of doctrine. But why it should
be called a mystery is not apparent, since the idea is not
suggested by the connection as in Eph. i. 9, iii. 3; 1 Cor. ii.
7. The whole expression has the appearance of phrase-
making without a definite conception or purpose.
And let these also first be proved (iii. 10). — How or by whom
the persons to be chosen were to be proved is conjectural.
Probably no more is meant than that those who were to
choose them should make the necessary inquiries. Whether
in the time to which these Epistles belong they were chosen
by the churches as in the apostolic age is uncertain.
¦ 2 Tim. ii. 26. "2 Cor. xi. 15, 23.
2 Acts vi. 1-6. 4 1 Tim. v. 23 ; Tit. ii. 3. 5 Rom. xvi. 25.

2i4 FIRST TIMOTHY iii. 11-14.
Women in like manner must be grave (iii. II). — To what
women reference is made is uncertain. To pass from deacons
to women in general would be abrupt. Then wives of deacons
are mentioned in the next verse. Perhaps the women in
question were such as stood in semi-official relation to the
churches. Let deacons be husbands of one wife (iii. 12). — This is to be
interpreted in the same way as the similar injunction regard
ing bishops (verse 2).
For they that have served well as deacons gain lo them
selves a good standing, etc. (iii. 13). — For is not clear,
since the following words do not appear to be connected
with the foregoing in such a relation as can be indicated
by this conjunction.
Standing (iii. 13) has given rise to much discussion. The
word means " step," " grade of dignity," " rank," and its
interpretation depends on the questions whether the rank or
position in the writer's mind was related to promotion in the
Church or to a standing in the future life of the kingdom of
God. The absence of any reference to the life to come and
the succeeding words, boldness in the faith, which may well
mean confidence in the midst of official duties, favour the
former interpretation. The fact that the latter is unpauline
in making the rewards of the life in the age to come de
pendent on works is not a reason for rejecting it as the
teaching of the writer of this Epistle.
These things I write unto thee hoping to come unto thee shortly
(iii. 14). — These things probably refers to the directions given
in the foregoing section beginning with chapter ii. There
is no known situation in which Paul could have written this
Epistle with the hope of soon going to Timothy, and if he
were entertaining such a hope there appears to be no reason
why he should have written the letter at all. The author
in assuming the part of the apostle has not well adapted
his writing to all the circumstances. The interpretation

iii. 15, 16. FIRST TIMOTHY 215
" although hoping to come to thee shortly " partially re
lieves the difficulty, but is of questionable correctness.
The house of God, which is the Church of the living God (iii.
15). — As God was supposed to dwell in the tabernacle or
temple these were called His house* So the Church being
His people, is regarded as figuratively His abode or house.
Accordingly, God is " the master of the house," 2 and the
apostles are His stewards.3 In Eph. ii. 19, Christians are
said to be " of the household of God." See 1 Cor. iii. 9,
" ye are God's building." The definite designation of the
Church as the house of God indicates a post- apostolic time
when the conception of its unity, which is apparent in
Ephesians, was developed in the direction of compact
organisation. The pillar and ground of the truth (iii. 15). — This is the
Church, not God. The truth is accordingly supported by
the Church instead of the Church being supported by the
truth. The advance here indicated beyond Paul in the
direction of ecclesiasticism is apparent when we consider
that for him Christ was the foundation.4 Even in Ephesians
it is " the apostles and prophets " (ii. 20).
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness
(iii. 16). — The connection of this declaration with the pre
ceding course of thought is not very evident. Probably the
writer had in his mind a vague relation of ' ' truth ' ' (verse
15) to the mystery of godliness.
He who was manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen
of angels (iii. 16). — The reading according to which " God "
was at the beginning of this passage instead of" who " is
without adequate support. It is fruitless to search for an
antecedent to ' ' who ' ' among the words that precede. No
antecedent is expressed, and none is implied. The writer
has simply employed a liturgical formula or a fragment of a
1 Matt. xii. 4, xxi. 13. 2 Matt. xiii. 27. 3 1 Cor. iv. 1.
* 1 Cor. iii. 11. See Hincks, ut supra, p. 109 f.

216 FIRST TIMOTHY iii. 16.
hymn familiar to him as part of the religious services of the
Church. He appears to have brought it into some relation
in his mind with " the mystery of godliness, " but any such
relation is far-fetched. The formula is doubtless intended
as a shot at the false teachers who probably denied some of
the propositions which it contains. The manifestation in
the flesh opens the series of Christological declarations, and
of course refers to the earthly appearance of Jesus. The
same word (manifested) is employed in this sense in Heb. ix.
26 ; 1 Pet. i. 20 ; 1 John iii. 5, 8. In Col. iii. 4 it is used
of the Parousia, or second manifestation of Christ at " the
end of the age. ' ' The words in the flesh are doubtless em
ployed with emphatic intention. Compare, " is come in the
flesh, ' ' 1 John iv. 2 ; 2 John 7. If the emphasis be placed on
manifested the writer may be understood to have expressed
himself after the manner of the Docetic heretics, who main
tained that the body of Christ was unreal, that is, onfy a
manifestation. If in the flesh be emphasised, the words may
be intended to oppose this false teaching. The expression
evidently implies the doctrine of the preexistence of Christ,
since only one who had formerly existed without a body of
flesh could be declared to have been manifested in the flesh.
fustified in the spirit (iii. 16). — The term justified is no
where else in the New Testament applied to Christ, and the
meaning is not that in which it is used by Paul in connection
with faith, "justified through faith," etc. The sense is
similar to Rom. i. 4, " declared to be the Son of God," that
is, shown to be what he really was, not merely flesh, but
Spirit. Perhaps the idea of his resurrection is involved, in
accordance with the expression, ' ' put to death in the flesh,
quickened in the Spirit." '
Seen of angels (iii. 16) — In being exalted to heaven Christ
showed himself to the angels in accordance with a conception
which finds manifold expression in the later Epistles.2
1 1 Pet. iii. 18. 2Eph. iii. 10 ; 1 Pet. i. 12, iii. 22.

iii. 16-iv. i. FIRST TIMOTHY 217
Preached among the nations (iii. 16). — "Nations" is an
expression for the peoples who are not Jews, though it is not
intended here to exclude a proclamation to the latter.1
Believed on in the world (iii. 16), that is, became an object
of faith. World is used as in i. 15, vi. 7 without the bad
sense of the evil world in which it is frequently employed.
Received up in glory (iii. 16). — The writer does not say
" into glory," as if he conceived Jesus to have been " re
ceived up " into a state in which he was not already, unless
we suppose him to have meant to say " received up into
glory and abiding in glory "—an interpretation which has
been suggested, and which is perhaps admissible.
As in 2 Tim. iii. 1 f. the writer now gives attention again to the
false teachers resuming matters touched upon in i. 3, 4, 6, 7, 19, 20
(iv. 1-15).
But the Spirit saith expressly that in later times some shall
fall away from the faith, etc. (iv. I). — The Spirit designates
the Holy Ghost regarded in the early Church as the prophetic
principle. But where the express sayings of the Spirit are
to be found is not indicated. In later times. — In the corre
sponding passage in 2 Tim. iii. 1, " the last days" is em
ployed meaning the end of the pre-Messianic age, or the
time immediately before the second coming of Christ in
" his kingdom " (2 Tim. iv. 1). Later times is not precisely
equivalent to this expression, but means a period subsequent
to the apostolic age, in which age, personating Paul, he
places himself, and speaks prophetically. By some or certain
ones, who shall fall away are not meant the false teachers
themselves, but those whom they should mislead. Faith is
used in the sense ofthe accepted doctrine of the Church.
Giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils (iv. 1).
— ' ' Seducing spirits ' ' means spirits of seduction without
1 1 Tim. iv. 2 ; 1 Cor. xv. 12 ; 2 Cor. i. 19 ; Phil. i. 15.

218 FIRST TIMOTHY iv. 2-4.
personification in opposition to " the spirit of truth." '
Doctrines of devils does not denote doctrines concerning devils,
but those that originate with devils, like " doctrines of
men," 2 and the wisdom that is devilish.3 Contemporary
with the writer was the doctrine that false teachings, heathen
wisdom, Gnosis, etc., were diffused upon the earth by fallen
angels, how, except they were conceived to dwell in men, is
not intelligible. Perhaps the writer thought of the devils as
' ' possessing ' ' the false teachers.
Through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies (iv. 2). — The
connection of these words is very obscure, and they stand in
an objectionably loose relation. They must be joined either
with " fall away," or with " giving heed." The men that
speak lies are false teachers.4
Branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron (iv. 2). —
Slaves and criminals were ' ' branded ' ' on the forehead. So
the false teachers are branded in their conscience. The figure
is not well chosen. The brand of a criminal was an evidence
of his guilt, but a branded conscience is not comparable to
an exhibition of a mark of guilt to the world. The expres
sion is not used elsewhere in the New Testament.
Forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats
(iv. 3). — Irenaeus says ofthe Gnostics known as Saturninians
that they taught that marriage and the propagation of
children were of the devil. There can be little doubt that
this passage and ii. 15 are directed against this heresy and
kindred ones, perhaps including that of Marcion, or at least
that of the Ophites.
For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected
(iv. 4). — The word here rendered creature ' is not used by
Paul. Included in it are evidently all animals suitable for
food. The connection is against the supposition that the
writer had anything else in mind, women, for example, the
1 1 John iv. 6. 2 Cor. ii. 22. 3 Jas. iii. 15.
4 2 Pet. ii. 1. ° xrid/ia.

iv. 5-8. FIRST TIMOTHY 219
" weaker vessel " according to von Soden' s suggestion,1 as
if he were writing for men only.
Sanctified through the word of God and prayer (iv. 5)- —
Taken in connection with ' ' thanksgiving ' ' (verse 4), these
words may be understood to refer to the prayerful expression
of thanks. The word of God is in any case a term of obscure
meaning as here employed.
But refuse prof ane and old wives' fables (iv. 7)- — This term
does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.2 Compare
2 Tim. ii. 23. It is a characterisation of the teachings of the
heretics or Gnostic speculators, who dealt in myths or fables,
genealogies (i. 4), etc., respecting the so-called " aeons."
Exercise thyself unto godliness (iv. 7).- — The word rendered
exercise means to put forth any strenuous exertion. The end
here is godliness, which is opposed by the writer to the occu
pations of the false teachers.
For bodily exercise is profitable for a little, but godliness is
profitable for all things (iv. 8). — " Bodily exercise" is prob
ably to be taken literally rather than as indicating the ascetic
restraints of the false teachers or the gestures and ceremonies
of a certain sort of piety. The connection of thought is
loose, and it appears as if "exercise" in verse 7 sug
gested to the writer the gymnastic performances of the
Greeks, and led him to throw in the remark to supply an
antithesis to " godliness." For a little is set over against all
things in the following clause, and does not mean " for a little
while " as the same Greek words do in Jas. iv. 14.
But godliness is profitable for all things, having the promise
of the life that now is and of that which is to come (iv. 8). — This
utilitarian maxim has many analogues in the New Testament
ethics, in which a personal advantage to be realised in the
attainment of salvation, or in other words, in the securing of
the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom, is a prominent
motive. Godliness is profitable, because it has the promise of
' 1 Pet. iii. 7. 2 rpaaSSr/S.

22o FIRST TIMOTHY iv. 9, 10.
the present life, but in what respect is not indicated. Pos
sibly a long life according to the Hebrew idea of the goods
of this world is meant (see ' ' the first commandment with a
promise," Eph. vi. 2). Moreover, godliness has the promise
of the life to come, an expression not elsewhere used in the
New Testament, although " the age to come " is of frequent
occurrence. The words refer to the Messianic age when the
believers would, as was expected, enter upon the enjoyment
of the " reign " of Christ. The promise of this blessedness
belonged to the godly.
Faithful is the saying (iv. 9). — These words are intended
to support the preceding declaration. The writer, unlike
Paul, was not content to leave his propositions and argu
ments to carry what conviction they might, but prefixes
or adds the assertion that his ' ' sayings ' ' are ' ' faithful, ' ' etc.
For to this end we labour and strive, because we have our hope
set on the living God (iv. 10). — The connection made by for
is not very clear, and to this end is wanting in precision.
Here as in some other instances the writer appears to have
had a thought which he did not logically connect with the
context. His style is not rich in particles, and when he uses
them he shows himself deficient in skill. He was not a clear
thinker. Who is the Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe
(iv. 10). — On God as Saviour see note on i. 1. This passage
should be interpreted in the light of ii. 4 according to which
God wishes the salvation of all men. The writer's thought
doubtless was that God is potentially the Saviour of all men,
is willing that all should be saved, while He really saves
only those who comply with the conditions of salvation, that
is, become believers. The salvation known to Paul and the
writers of the post-Pauline Epistles was participation in the
Messianic " reign " of Christ, which was to be inaugurated
at his expected early coming. In the apostle's thought it was
distinctly confined to believers, and this writer misses as usual

iv. 12-15-v. 1. FIRST TIMOTHY 221
the precision of his great predecessor's expression when he
says ' ' especially of them that believe. ' ' The strictly Pauline
words would have been " exclusively of them that believe."
Yet Paul can hardly be imagined as saying that God is the
Saviour of all men and adding this qualification respecting
believers. Let no man despise thy youth (iv. 12). — On the supposition
of the Pauline authorship of the Epistle, Timothy could not
have been so young as to justify this exhortation.1
Give heed to reading, to exhortation, to teaching (iv. 13). —
These are all offices of a public character in the religious
assemblies for worship. The reading is that of the Scrip
tures, the Old Testament, in these assemblies.
Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by
prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery (iv.
14). — Which one of the several " gifts," which in the early
Church were supposed to be communicated by the Spirit,2
the writer had in mind is not apparent. Since the " gifts "
were believed to be from the Holy Spirit, by prophecy may be
understood as indicating the instrumentality of its bestow-
ment. Some prophetic expression appears to have accom
panied the laying on of the hands of the presbytery, a word
which occurs here only, and denotes a post- apostolic organ
isation of the Church. A formal ceremony of ordination is
implied in the passage. (See the Introduction.)
Be diligent in these things (iv. 15), that is, in the observ
ance of the exhortations given in verses 12-14.
Pastoral directions respecting relations to old and young and
respecting the widows of the Church, elders, and servants are
given in v. i-vi. 21. Schleiermacher calls this section the kernel of
the whole Epistle, the most concrete and most intelligible part of it.
Rebuke not an elder (v. 1). — " Elder " is not here an officer
of the Church, but simply a man of years. The Greek word
is used to designate the official " elders " of the Jews and
' See Tit. ii. 15. 2 1 Cor. xii. 4-12. See Hincks, ut supra.

222 FIRST TIMOTHY v. 2-4.
Christians and also forefathers, and is employed here only in
the New Testament in this sense.
In all purity (v. 2) may grammatically relate to all the
preceding members ofthe sentence, but was probably thought
by the writer only in connection with the younger women,
who should be treated as sisters.
Honour widows that are widows indeed (v. 3). — This sub
ject is not treated elsewhere than in this section throughout
the Pastoral Epistles. Widows are incidentally mentioned
by Paul1 and in Acts vi. 1, ix. 39-42. Honour is used in
the usual sense and does not signify "give aid" as some
have argued. Widows indeed were probably widows who had
no relations on whom they could depend, and were accord
ingly in a position of peculiar lonesomeness and need,
although why all widows should not be honoured is not
apparent if they were deserving of honour for their character.
Possibly " wives of one husband " are meant, widows who
had never entered upon a second marriage.
But if any widow hath children . . . let them first learn
to show piety toward their own family (v. 4). — The writer
has not made himself understood in so simple a matter as
this. The most learned expositors ancient and modern do
not agree as to what is the subject of let them first learn, some
thinking it to be a pronoun representing any widow, regarded
as a collective term, and others finding it in children, etc. If
the former view be adopted, the widow is enjoined to show
piety toward her children, etc., and if the latter, the children,
etc., to take care ofthe widow. But on this latter hypoth
esis the plural parents is unnatural, since the relation of
children and grandchildren toward a parent, the widow, is
in question. Yet even in this case the writer might have
thought of widows and not of one widow, and been led at
the end of the sentence to use the plural. It is not certain,
however, that the children in question were assumed to be
1 1 Cor. vii. 8.

v. 5, 6. FIRST TIMOTHY 223
old enough to take care of the mother. On the whole, the
former interpretation of the two mentioned is preferable.
First, that is, probably before they (the widows) occupy
themselves with the affairs of the Church. Requite their
parents means to do for their own children what their own
parents have done for them.
Now she that is a widow indeed and desolate hath set her hope
on God (v. 5). — And desolate is explanatory of a widow indeed,
who is desolate because having no relations either to care for
her or to be objects of her care. Such a one sets her hope
on God, having no earthly object of hope, and perhaps hav
ing made a resolution not to marry again (verse 11).
In supplications and prayer night and day (v. 5). — See
Luke ii. 37 ; Rom. xii. 12 ; Col. iv. 2 ; 1 Thess. ii. 9.
The portraiture of a widow here given bears some resemblance to
that contained in Luke ii. 37, and perhaps denotes the influence of
the Gospel-narrative upon the writer. The indications are, however,
very few that he was familiar with the ideas or the phraseology ofthe
Gospels. The designation of God as Saviour (1 Tim. i. 1, ii. 3, iv.
10 ; Tit. i. 3, ii. 10, iii. 4) occurs in the Gospels only in Luke i. 47,
and is easily explained without reference to that passage. The em
ployment of " that day " (2 Tim. i. 12, 18, iv. 8) for the time of the
second coming of Christ (the Parousia more probably denotes the
influence of Luke vi. 23, x. 12, xvii. 21, xxi. 34 (see also 2 Thess.
i. 10). It is, however, somewhat hazardous to attribute, as von Soden
does, " to save sinners" (1 Tim. i. 15) to a. combination of "to call
sinners" and "to save the lost" in Luke v. 32 and xix. 10. The
same must be said of "labourer" (1 Tim. v. 18) with reference to
Luke x. 2, 7.
But she that giveth herself to pleasure is dead while she liveth
(v. 6). — A voluptuous, pleasure-seeking life is a life in
death, an apparent and not a real life. The Greek verb,
" to die," ' here used is not found elsewhere in the Epistles.
" Death " in the ethical sense is rare in the New Testament
1 Bvijpxao.

224 FIRST TIMOTHY v. 8-10.
(Matt. viii. 22), and it is doubtful whether it ever occurs in
Paul, who generally understood by it bodily dissolution,
which came as the consequence of sin, together with exclus
ion from the resurrection at the Parousia and from partici
pation in the Messianic kingdom.
But if any provideth not for his own and especially his own
household, he hath denied the faith (v. 8). — It is questionable
whether this passage is to be taken in a general sense or to
be interpreted in connection with the foregoing and follow
ing, that is, in relation to widows. It furnishes another
example of the author's loose construction. It seems very
improbable that even he should have inserted a general
remark into the midst of the discussion of the duties of
widows, and accordingly it is perhaps correct to relate the
passage to verse 4 in the sense that those who are not
' ' widows indeed ' ' should not neglect their relations and
dependents in order to attend to the affairs of those who are
" widows indeed."
Let none be e?irolled as a widow under threescore years old,
having been the wife of one man (v. 9). — " Be enrolled."
This verb is not elsewhere used in the New Testament, and
means "to be put on a list." Here the list is that of the
" widows indeed." It is not clearly indicated to what end
the enrollment was to be made, but the list was probably
one of widows who were to be supported by the Church.
Whether they had stated duties to perform and constituted
an official class is uncertain. It was a requirement that the
woman should not be a widow of a second husband, just as
a bishop must be " the husband of one wife " (iii. 2 ; Tit.
i. 6). Well reported of for good works ; if she hath brought up
children (v. io).— The " good works " are mentioned in the
successive clauses introduced by if, and all are requirements
for enrollment on the list of " widows indeed." It is not
stated, perhaps not implied, that the children brought up

v. H-I4- FIRST TIMOTHY 225
must have been the widow's own. The conditions are in
any case rather hard, and indicate, in the detail with which
they are laid down, a time much later than the apostolic age.
But younger widows refuse, for when they have waxed wan
ton against Christ, they desire to marry, having condemnation,
because they have rejected their first faith (v. II, 12). — This in
junction is not in opposition to that of verse 3, but requires
the exclusion oi younger widows from the enrollment (verse
9), which could include no widows under sixty. Waxed
wanton includes desire only and not necessarily overt acts of
lust. In contrast with this manifest condemnation of the
marriage of widows see Paul's milder judgment.1 Here the
natural desire for marriage is declared to be against Christ,
and a second marriage would exclude a widow from the sup
port of the Church, however destitute and worthy she might
be. The apostle says only that while widows are " free to
be married" to whom they will, he thinks they will be
"happier" unmarried. Rejected their first faith relates to
an implied or expressed promise not to marry again on the
part of widows as a condition of enrollment (verse 9). To
reject faith is to break a promise.
I desire, therefore, that the younger widows marry (v. 14). —
Widows does not stand in the original, and accordingly " the
younger women " is an admissible translation. The writer
can hardly have intended to say that he wished the younger
widows to marry if the enrollment previously directed was
with a view to the support of needy widows by the Church,
since a second marriage would exclude a widow from the
list in question. If the enrollment was with a view to the
setting apart of a class of widows, " widows indeed," for
certain functions in the Church, these functions must have
been regarded as of importance, or the writer would not have
given detailed instructions regarding them. But if his desire
should be carried out, and all younger widows should marry,
1 1 Cor. vii. 39.
15

226 FIRST TIMOTHY v. 14-17.
there would be no widows to perform them. To counsel all
young widows to marry, then, was either to advise them to
prejudice their fortunes and " reject their first faith " (verse
12), or to favour a procedure which must prejudice the wel
fare of the Church. If, then, the writer is to be regarded
as consistent with himself, younger widows of the revised
version should be ' ' younger women ' ' according to King
James' version.
Give none occasion to the adversary for reviling (v. 14). —
' ' The adversary ' ' is probably the opponent of Christianity,
a man hostile to the Church,1 and not, as some think, the
devil. The word here translated adversary " is not used in
the New Testament to designate the devil.
For already some are turned aside after Satan (v. 15). —
Satan occurs in only one other place in these Epistles (i.
20), where the writer, in imitation of Paul, says that he de
livered certain persons unto Satan (see note on that pas
sage). The meaning of this passage is doubtful. The writer
may have had in mind a going astray from the true faith
after the false teachers, or the pursuit of a life of sensuality.
If any woman that believeth hath widows (v. 1 6). — It is
uncertain whether hath widows means has them as relations
and dependents, or has them in her house for support, but
probably the former, according to verse 4.
That it may relieve them that are widows indeed (v. 16). —
These words support the opinion that the " widows indeed "
were " enrolled " for support according to verse 9.
Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double
honour, etc. (v. 17).— " Elders " is used here in a different
sense from that of " elder " in verse 5, and means members
of the "presbytery" (iv. 14). The ancient commentators
understood honour in the sense of honorarium, or pay for
their services, and the citations in the next following verse
support this interpretation. Still this verse might be sepa-
1 1 Cor. xvi. 9 ; 2 Thess. ii. 4.

v. 18-21. FIRST TIMOTHY 227
rated from the following and honour understood as it evid
ently must be in vi. 1, had not the writer connected the two
by " for." In the word and in teaching, discourse and in
struction. A distinction is made between the presbyters
who rule and the presbyters who teach, indicating a devel
opment of the organisation of the Church in the post-
apostolic age.
For the Scripture saith (v. 18). — For a similar allegorical
interpretation of this passage from the Old Testament see
1 Cor. ix. 9. The other citation is a saying of Jesus, but
whether it was quoted as ' ' Scripture ' ' from Luke x. 7 or
was a current " word of the Lord" known independently
of the Gospel-record is uncertain. Moreover, if the words
were quoted from Luke it is not certain that the writer
regarded that Gospel as a part of sacred Scripture, for he
may have intended the formula, " the Scripture saith," to
relate only to the former citation. The saying was probably
repeated by Jesus from the current proverbs, and was doubt
less in use as such when the Epistle was written. Its use in
immediate connection with a quotation from ' ' Scripture ' '
would be more significant than it is here in the hands of a
precise writer. Yet there is no example in the New Testa
ment of the quotation of " Scripture " and a proverb in im
mediate connection.
Except at the mouth of two or three witnesses (v. 19). — See
Deut. xix. 15; 2 Cor. xiii. 1; Matt, xviii. 16.
And the elect angels (v. 2l). — The meaning of this term is
obscure. In Enoch xxxix. 1 elect angels are mentioned,
but it is questionable whether those so designated were
regarded as constituting a superior class, or whether they
were thought to be simply " holy angels," ' — a term which
does not necessarily designate a class. But since election
has reference to salvation when applied to Christians, and
since some angels were supposed to have attained salvation
1 Luke ix. 26.

228 FIRST TIMOTHY v. 22-23.
or to have kept their first estate and others to have failed of
it, it is not improbable that the former may have been de
signated here by the term elect .
Lay hands hastily on no man (v. 22). — The laying on of
hands designates in these Epistles the induction into an
office.1 Probably the appointment of " elders " is intended
on account of the connection, in which there is nothing to
indicate the induction of catechumens or the reception of
those who may have been expelled for heresy, although the
reference to either of the two latter cases is not improbable.
By laying hands on an unworthy man Timothy would be a
partaker of his sins.
Some men's sins are evident going before unto judgment, etc.
(v. 24). — The sins of some men are so notorious that the judg
ment which manifests all iniquity is not required to disclose
them. Going before requires ' ' them ' ' for its more precise
definition. The connection of this verse is with verse 22, but
is broken by the inept insertion of verse 23. If this is the
true connection, the judgment is such a test as Timothy
might apply to candidates before the laying on of hands.
The disconnected character of the section, verses 22-24,
renders its interpretation difficult. The occurrence of
"sins" in verse 22 may have suggested to the writer a
general remark on notorious sins in verse 24 without any
other connection of thought.
Be no longer a drinker of water, but use a little wine for thy
stomach's sake (v. 23). — The recommendation must be under
stood so far as water is concerned to be against the exclusive
drinking of it. As to wine, the moderate use of it is recom
mended.2 The exclusive drinking of water and total abstin
ence from wine were directly in accord with the excessive
[intemperate] asceticism of the false teachers, and rather
advanced than opposed their principles. Accordingly the
writer, one of whose chief contentions is against these
1 2 Tim. i. 6 ; 1 Tim. iv. 14. 2 See iii. 8 ; Tit. ii. 3.

vi. 1-4. FIRST TIMOTHY 229
teachers, recommends a true temperance. The purpose to
give a dietetic prescription, which appears in the form of
the advice, belongs to the fiction of authorship.
Let as many as are servants under the yoke count their own
¦masters worthy of all honour (vi. I). — The directions here
given regarding slaves are in the spirit and intention of
those in Col. iii. 22-25; Eph. vi. 5-9; 1 Pet. ii. 18-25. Yoke
is used here only in the New Testament of the yoke of slav
ery. It is employed in a metaphor of the Mosaic law in
Gal. v.- 1. Their own masters refers to the heathen masters
of Christian slaves (see verse 2).
That the name of God and the doctrine be not blasphemed
(vi. 1) is a curious connection of two objects of blasphemy.
With greater precision it might have been said, " that the
name of God be not blasphemed, and the doctrine not suffer
reproach. ' '
The slaves of believing masters (vi. 2) ought not to despise
them, since they are brethren. Rather they should con
tentedly remain in service because they (the masters) who
are benefited by it are believing and beloved. Here as in
other places in the New Testament where the relations of
slaves are touched upon, nothing is said of the evil and
injustice of slavery, but the institution is recognised and
regulated. The writer now briefly addresses himself to the false
teachers, abruptly breaking off from the foregoing and
finally rambling, on the suggestion of the word " gain," into
a discussion of riches and the love of money.
If any man teacheth a different doctrine (vi. 3). — See note
on i. 3. A different doctrine is the heterodoxy of the false
teachers who oppose the sound words of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Puffed up (vi. 4).— See iii. 6. Blinded by foolish pride,
and not simply vain, is the idea conveyed by the word ren
dered puffed up. Though knowing nothing and doting about
questionings and disputes of words, they assume to be capable

230

FIRST TIMOTHY vi. 5-7.

of teaching the sublime truths of religion. The word rend
ered doting means " having a morbid fondness for."
Supposing that godliness is a way of gain (vi. 5), that is,
that their false piety, the " form of godliness " (2 Tim. iii.
'6), will bring them gain, since they teach ' ' for filthy lucre's
sake." ¦
The corruption of " mind " attributed to these men suggests a brief
consideration of this term (vovi), as it is used in the psychology of
Paul. The most comprehensive determination of it is found in Rom.
vii. 23, where it represents "the inward man " in contrast with " the
flesh" or the "law in the members." There " the law ofthe mind"
is nothing less than the law of righteousness or the moral law.
In this ethical capacity the "mind" may become "reprobate,"2
"blinded," and " corrupted." 3 Compare " vanity of mind," 4 "mind
ofthe flesh " (Col. ii. 18), and defilement of " mind and conscience." 5
It is in this ethical relation that the mind is regarded as capable of
"renewal." 6 In this state of renewal it is conceived as "the mind
of Christ," ' that is, as such a mind as was that of Christ in respect to
its spiritual and moral attitude toward the divine law.8 The functions
of knowledge, thought, and reason are among those most frequently
ascribed to the vovi. By it the " invisible things of God " are " un
derstood " from the things that are made.9 In I Cor. xiv. 14 it stands
for the reflective thought which may be fruitful or " unfruitful." In
Rom. vii. 18 ff. the " will" should probably be assigned to the vovi,
since in verse 23 it is the "law of the mind," which stands opposed
to the "law in the members." Thus )iEravoEiv denotes to change
the direction of the will, to repent.
But godliness with contentment is great gain (vi. 6). — This
is to be explained according to iv. 8, " godliness is profit
able for all things. ' '
The fact that we brought nothing into the world and can
carry nothing out of it (vi. 7) is adduced as a reason why
godliness with contentment is great gain. But really what
1 Tit. i. 11. 4 Eph. iv. 17. * 1 Cor. ii. 16.
2 Rom. i. 28. 6 Tit. i. 15. s gee gpij iv 2-_
3 2 Cor. iii. 14, xi. 3. 6 Rom. xii. 2. 9 Rom. i. 20.

vi. 9-13. FIRST TIMOTHY 231
the writer appears to have intended was to give a reason why
men should be contented with meagre possessions,_/»o_? and
covering being sufficient. Such as drown men in destruction
and perdition (vi. 9), that is, effect their exclusion from the
Messianic kingdom.1 " How hardly shall they that have
riches enter into the kingdom of God " (Mark x. 23). See
also Phil. i. 28, where perdition is opposed to " salvation."
For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil ; which
some reaching after, etc. (vi. 10). — This is an extravagant
statement, since there are manifestly very many kinds of evil
with which the love of money has no connection, of which it
cannot be called the root. The relation that introduces the
second clause makes an inaccurate connection, since in the
original it must be joined with the word translated the love
of money. " The love of money . . . which some reach
ing after," etc., makes an incongruous expression.
But thou, O man of God, flee these things (vi. II). — These
things could only inaccurately be related to the love of
money, and should probably be referred to the whole con
tents of verses 3-10, the false teachings as well as avarice.
A group of noble virtues follows, righteousness, godliness, etc.
Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on the life eternal (vi.
12). — See 1 Cor. ix. 24-26 ; 1 Thess. ii. 2 ; Heb. xii. 1 ; 2
Tim. iv. 7. The fight of faith is the life-contest in which all
must engage who would be true to the Christian belief.
The life eternal is the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom,
to which believers are said to be called or chosen, since they
are " the elect." 3 This eternal life is conceived as the
award of the conflict, the prize, and accordingly the criticism
is fair which regards the injunction to lay hold on it as incon
gruous, since it must be a gift of God. Among many wit
nesses, probably at the ordination by the presbytery (iv. 14).
/ charge thee in the sight of God who quickeneth all things
(vi. 13). — See Rom. xi. 36 ; 1 Cor. viii. 6 ; Heb. i. 3. The
1 1 Thess. v. 3. 2 Rom. viii. 23 ; Col. iii. 12 ; 2 Tim. ii. 10.

232 FIRST TIMOTHY vi. 14-16.
injunction to " keep the commandment " hardly appears to
be introduced by all this solemn formula of a liturgical
character with a right sense of literary congruity and
proportion. Until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ (vi. 14). —
Paul does not use the word here translated appearing
(iiticpaveia) for the second coming of Christ, unless the
doubtful authorship of 2 Thessalonians be ascribed to him.
It appears in that Epistle once (ii. 8), but Paul employs in
his undisputed Epistles, "revelation" and "parousia."
Apart from the Pastoral Epistles ' it occurs only in 2 Thess.
ii. 8. The injunction to Timothy to keep the commandment
until the appearing implies that the writer looked for this
event within a comparatively short time in accordance with
the general belief of the age.
Which in its own times He shall show (vi. 15). — See ii. 6 ;
Tit. i. 3. The manifestation of the kingdom of the Messiah
was conceived to be effected by God Himself, and the grand
eur of the theme moves the writer to break forth in a
doxology probably adopted from the liturgical service of the
Church of the time.
Who only hath immortality (vi. 16), that is, who alone has
it in Himself, unimparted. The word rendered immortality
is in 1 Cor. xv. 53 used as synonymous with ' ' incorrup-
tion," which was supposed to be a quality of the spiritual
bodies which the believers would assume at the Parousia.
This incorruption was not thought to belong to man by
nature, but to be the gift of God on account of faith in
Christ, through whose death it was procured for as many as
should believe. The idea that God dwells in light is not
elsewhere found in the New Testament.
Connecting with verse 9 or 10 the writer again addresses
himself to the rich, and tells Timothy to charge them not to
be high-minded and not to set their hope on riches, but on
1 2 Tim. i. 10, iv. 1, 8 ; Tit. ii. 13.

vi. 17-21. FIRST TIMOTHY 233
God, from whom all things that we enjoy proceed, and that
they make a benevolent use of their wealth.
Laying up in store for themselves a good foundatio7i against
the time to come (vi. 17, 18, 19). — This charge to admonish
the rich not to be high-minded, etc., indicates the late date
of the Epistle, since the earliest churches were in all prob
ability composed of humble people. The conditions here
presupposed have a place only in a church that has enjoyed
years of prosperity, during which some fortunes have been
accumulated. There is an incongruity in the idea of storing
up a foundation, and the words present a grammatical diffi
culty which has been resolved by construing foundation as in
apposition with the noun implied in the participle rendered
laying up in store. The author's idea evidently is that the
rich be taught that a spiritual advantage, " gain," might
be secured by a benevolent use of their wealth, and as the life
which is life indeed (vi. 19) doubtless means the " eternal
life " of the Messianic kingdom, the teaching appears to be
that through benevolence the rich might be saved. This
is not only undisguised utilitarianism, but also a doctrine
directly antagonistic to Paul's salvation by faith, " not by
works." In concluding the Epistle the writer again takes up the
main theme, that of heresy, in warning Timothy to turn
away from the profane babblings and oppositions of knowledge,
which is falsely so called (vi. 20). — Profane babblings is a good
example of the expression of the odium theologicum. In this
style of argument the writer has had many imitators. In
designating the false teaching as a Gnosis (" knowledge ")
falsely so called, he with apparent intention names the op
ponents whom he has been combating as Gnostics.
Which some professing have used concerning the faith (vi.
2l). — Some designates the false teachers (i. 3) and perhaps
their followers (i. 6; 2 Tim. ii. 18).

THE SECOND EPISTLE TO
TIMOTHY.

EXPOSITION.
The Epistle opens with a greeting after which follow exhorta
tions to Timothy to the interruption at i. 15 (i. 1-18).
The greeting in this Epistle differs from that of the other
two Pastoral Epistles in connecting, in imitation of Paul,
apostle with by the will of God, and in joining also to that
title the unpauline expression, according to the promise of the
life which is in Jesus Christ (i. 1). — In 1 Tim. i. 1 we have
" according to the commandment of God," and in Tit. i. 1
" according to the faith of God's elect." According to the
promise probably indicates here the object of the apostleship,
that is, the preaching of the promise, etc. On the life which
is in Jesus Christ, see Rom. v. 17, vi. 2-14, xiv. 7-12 ; Gal.
ii. 19, 20 ; Phil. i. 21, ii. 16 ; Col. iii. 4 ; John i. 4, xi. 25,
xiv. 6 ; 1 John iv. 9, and " the life which is life indeed." '
If the term is not limited to the life of " the age to come,"
it doubtless includes this Messianic blessedness.2
I thank God . . . how unceasing is my remembrance
of thee (i. 3). — The sentence is not clear on account of the
introduction of the subordinate clause by how, where " that "
1 1 Tim. vi. 19. ' See 1 John ii. 25.
235

236 SECOND TIMOTHY i. 4-6.
would be more natural. But the idea is that the writer's
thanks to God relate to Timothy.
That I may be filled with joy (i. 4) is connected with de
siring to see thee.
Having been reminded (i. 5) does not necessarily imply
an external occasion.
Which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois and thy mother
Eunice (i. v). — This language seems appropriate only if
addressed to a boy or a very young man and uncalled for in
any case. The opinion that the writer thought of Timothy
as a young man appears to be well founded.1 These names
do not appear elsewhere. In Acts xvi. 1 the mother of
Timothy is called " a Jewess who believed," and since
neither of the names is Jewish, the conjecture is probable
that, unless this whole matter of Timothy's grandmother
and mother is fictitious, Lois was a Jewish proselyte, so
that both were Jewesses only in belief. The "faith" of
Lois, then, was not that of a Christian woman.
And I am persuaded iti thee also (i. 5). — This is surprising
after the mention of Timothy's unfeigned faith, and is super
fluous unless intended to express doubt.
For which cause I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up
the gift of God (i. 6). — ' ' For which cause " is a latinism, and
is not used by Paul. The connection of the phrase is doubt
ful. If it be related to " unfeigned faith " or to " I am per
suaded," it hardly seems appropriate, because the exhortation
which follows it implies a want of spiritual life. Yet there
appears to be nothing else to which it can be related. The
exhortation which it introduces is appropriate if we suppose
" I am persuaded," etc., to imply a doubt in the writer's
mind of Timothy's faith. The gift, or charism, as known to
Paul was regarded as communicated by the Holy Spirit, and
he never speaks of its communication by the laying on of
hands. Here there is no reference to the ordination by the
1 Tim. iv. 12.

i. 7-10. SECOND TIMOTHY 237
" presbytery," ' on which occasion another " gift" was, it
appears, bestowed. We are not informed as to the nature of
either of them. The " gift," whatever it may have been,
was not conceived as independent in its operation and effect
iveness of the nature of its recipient, since in Timothy it is
here assumed to have become inactive, and he is supposed to
be able to stir it up.
For God gave us not a spirit of fearfulness (i. 7). — This ap
pears to have been suggested by Rom. viii. 15. See " spirit
of the world " 2 and " spirit of stupor." 3 Spirit of fearful
ness does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament. Dis
cipline may mean self-control or the power of controlling
others. Be not ashamed, therefore, of the testimony of our Lord
(i. 8).—" For I am not ashamed of the gospel." 4 The
meaning is testimony in respect to Christ, perhaps, " the
works of an evangelist " (iv. 5).
Who saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according
to our works (i. 9). — God instead of Christ is represented as
saving the believers, for whom us stands.6 Called us* The
calling was through the preaching of the gospel. Paul never
connects holy with it. Not according to our works, is from
the Pauline point of view, as is the expression, His own pur
pose and grace.1 The called are such as are included in the
purpose of God.9 Which was given, etc., refers to grace. In
times eternal ; it was of course given only in the purpose of
God. Who abolished death (i. 10), that is, rendered death in
effective, broke its power. Paul uses the same word: " The
last enemy that shall be abolished is death." * The writer
' 1 Tim. iv. 14. z 1 Cor. ii. 12. 3Rom. xi. 8. 4 Ibid. i. 16.
5 See i Tim. i. i, ii. 3, iv. 10 ; Tit. i. 3.
6 Eph. iv. 1, 4 ; Heb. iii. 1 ; 1 Cor. vii. 20.
7 Eph. ii. 9 ; Jas. ii. 14-26 ; Rom. iii. 27, iv. 2, ix. 11.
* Rom. viii. 28 ; Eph. i. 11. 9 1 Cor. xv. 26.

238 SECOND TIMOTHY i. 10-12.
does not mean, as Paul does not, that physical death was at
once to come to an end. This would end only when the
Christ should come again to set up his kingdom. Then the
believers would be clothed upon with incorruptible spiritual
bodies, and in that kingdom there would be no more death.
But " death " is also used in the sense of " perishing," that
is, of exclusion from the resurrection and the Messianic king
dom. This sort of death Christ abolished lor all who believe.1
The life and incorruption brought to light (i. io) by Jesus
are those of this kingdom so earnestly expected soon to come,
in which " this corruptible shall have put on incorruption." 2
Through the gospel this Messianic salvation was made known
and made possible (Rom. i. 16). This entire conception is in
accordance with the Pauline " gospel." 3
An apostle and a teacher (i. ii). — Paul never calls himself
a teacher. For the which cause (i. 12), that is, since I am an
apostle. These things (see verse 8).
To guard that which I have committed unto him against that
day (i. 12). — This passage is capable of two grammatical
renderings according as " the deposit of me" or " my de
posit" (napadriunv piov) is understood as a deposit made
by, or to, me. According to verse 14 and 1 Tim. vi. 20, the
latter is the probable meaning, and the translation should be
that which has been committed unto me, probably his ministry.
God in whom he has believed will, he thinks, guard this,
that is, through His aid he himself will be able to guard it,
against the day of the coming of Christ, when he will render
an account of it." In these three passages only does " the
day ' ' of the Parousia ha ve " that ' ' connected with it. Paul
says " the day," 6 and " the day ofthe Lord." '
1 1 Thess. iv. 14-18 ; 1 Cor. xv. 51-55.
2 1 Cor. xv. 54. 3 Rom. ii. 16. 4 i. 18, iv. 8 ; 2 Thess. i. 10.
5 Rom. xiii. 12 ; 1 Cor. iii. 13 ; 1 Thess. v. 4.
6 1 Cor. i. 8 ; 2 Cor. i. 14 ; 1 Thess. v. 2. See also Rom. ii. 5, 16,
and " day of redemption," Eph. iv. 30.

i. 14-ii. 7. SECOND TIMOTHY 239
That good thing which was committed unto thee (i. 14). —
This is the office of a minister (verse 12). Through the Holy
Ghost which dwelleth in us. The indwelling " Spirit" was
regarded as the principle of the religious life.
All that are in Asia (i. 15). — This exaggeration marks the
section (vv. 15-18) as spurious, or rather is an indication of
the spuriousness of the Epistle, notwithstanding some traits
of genuine personal references which appear in it. Paul
could not so have expressed himself regarding the many true
followers of his in Asia. The persons mentioned by name
are otherwise unknown.
In that day (i. 18). — See note on verse 12.
The writer now resumes, after the interruption (i. 15-18), his
exhortations to Timothy (ii. 1-13).
Be strengthened in the grace that is in Christ Jesus (ii. 1). —
The grace abides in Christ, but is conceived as a source of
strength to believers.1
Among many witnesses (ii. 2). — A reference perhaps to
Timothy's ordination or baptism.2
Suffer hardship with me (ii. 3). — See i. 8, 12, 16. — Figures
drawn from military service and the games are loosely con
nected in vv. 4 and 5 relating to entanglement in the affairs
of this life and to contending lawfully. By the latter term is
perhaps meant contending with an eye single to the contest
and hence without attention to other things.
The disconnected style of the writer is illustrated again in
the remark on the compensation of the minister (ii. 6), to
which subject he flies off without apparent occasion in the
connection.3 The following is without logical relation to
what precedes (vv. 7_9)-
For the Lord shall give thee understanding, etc. (ii. 7)- —
For does not here give a reason for the preceding, but has
the sense of " and truly " or " truly."
1 2 Cor. xii. 9. ! 1 Tim. iv. 14, vi. 12. 3See 1 Tim. v. 18.

24o SECOND TIMOTHY ii. 8-12.
Remember Jesus Christ, of the seed of David, etc. (ii. 8). —
These words should probably be related to verse 3. The re
membrance of Jesus' sufferings would strengthen Timothy to
endure" hardship." But why the series of prominent events
from the birth of Jesus to his resurrection should have been
added is inexplicable except on the assumption that the
writer allowed his pen to wander off into the transcribing of
a portion of the formula of a confession of faith used in public
worship. But the word of God is not bound (ii. 9). — Men may bind
the preacher with chains, but the word goes forth, and it is
not in their power to check its course.1
Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sake, etc. (ii.
10). — See note on i. 9. The elect probably includes those
already believing and as many as should become believers
prior to the Parousia, " the day of the Lord," on which they
would obtain salvation with the eternal glory of the Messianic
kingdom, that is, their salvation would then be consummated.
Faithful is the saying (ii. II). — This expression is peculiar
to the Pastoral Epistles, and is a stylistic mark.2
For if we died with him (ii. II). — The source of this saying
(vv. H-13) is uncertain. The supposition that it was taken
from an ancient Christian hymn is not improbable. The
words in Rom. vi. 8 and viii. 17 appear to lie at the basis of
the first two clauses, although Paul in the former passage
speaks of death in the sense of dying to " the old man," the
symbol of which was baptism : ' ' We were buried therefore
with him through baptism into death. ' ' 3 But the connection
here requires us to interpret died with him in the sense of
death by martyrdom.
We shall also reign with him (ii. 12). — As in Rom. viii. 17
the reference here is to the reign of Christ in the Messianic
kingdom. 1 2 Thess. iii. 1.
" 1 Tim. i. 15, iii. 1, iv. 9 ; Tit. iii. 8. 3Rom. vi. 4.

ii. 13-18. SECOND TIMOTHY 241
Faithless (ii. 13) does not mean " unbelieving," but
" wanting in fidelity." '
From ii. 14-iv. 22 the writer occupies himself chiefly with direc
tions for the conduct of Timothy with reference to certain false
teachers, and continues his exhortations.
Of these things put them in remembrance (ii. 14). — These
things probably refers to vv. 1 1-13, though possibly including
more. Them has no antecedent, but probably represents
either the members of the Church or those who are to be
come teachers. Strive not about words. See 1 Tim. vi. 4.
To the subverting of them that hear. See 2 Cor. x. 8.
To present thyself approved unto God (ii. 15). — See Rom.
vi. 13, 16. Handling aright the word of truth. The render
ing " rightly dividing " is nearer to the sense of the Greek
word according to its composition.2 The idea is, to teach the
truth correctly. The word is not elsewhere used in the New
Testament. But shun prof ane babblings, for they will proceed (ii. 16). —
See 1 Tim. vi. 20. The subject of will proceed (they) is sup
plied, and refers to those who occupy themselves withprofane
babblings. The construction is faulty.
And their word will eat as doth a gangrene (ii. 17), that is,
will spread to the sound parts of the body. Two of these
false teachers are now mentioned by name. Of whom is [are]
Hymenaeus and Philetus. Nothing more is known of these
men (see 1 Tim. i. 20).
Who concerning the truth have erred saying that the resur-
rection is past already (ii. 18). — Any more definite character
isation of this so-called heresy is wanting in the Epistle.
The ' ' forbidding to marry ' ' 3 may throw some light on it,
since if ' ' the age to come ' ' had already dawned, men ought
to live in accordance with the conditions of that life in which
there would be no marriage.4 This is not the same denial
1 Rom. iii. 13. 2 opBozofieoo. 3 1 Tim. iv. 3. 4 Luke xx. 35.
16

242 SECOND TIMOTHY ii. 19-22.
of the resurrection as that combated by Paul,1 for his oppon
ents averred that there was no resurrection at all. Perhaps
in the second century the long delay of the Parousia had led
some to maintain that it had already come ; and since with
it the resurrection was expected, this contention would carry
with it the doctrine that the dead had already been raised in
the only sense in which they ever would be raised. Perhaps
it was asserted that the resurrection waspast in the sense that
there is only a spiritual resurrection. This view would ac
cord with Tertullian's charge that the Gnostics " distorted
the resurrection of the dead into an imaginary one."
Howbeit, the firm foundation of God standeth, having this
seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His ; and, Let every
one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from unrighteous
ness (ii. 19). — The faith of some may be overthrown, but the
firm foundation of God standeth. Seal is probably " inscrip
tion." The first (foundation) is based on Numb. xvi. 5, and
the second (seal) perhaps on Isa. lii. 11. With an apparently
abrupt transition the writer now proceeds to speak of the
different kinds of persons in the Church under the figure of
the different sorts of vessels in a great house (ii. 20).
If a man purge himself from these (ii. 21). — These is of
doubtful reference. If it be referred to vessels of dishonour
violence is done to the figure by introducing a man among
the two kinds of vessels. Either the writer confused the
figure in his own mind — a not improbable supposition accord
ing to our knowledge "of his thinking — or these relates to the
persons mentioned in verse 18.
But flee youthful lusts, etc. (ii. 22).— See iii. 6; Tit. ii. 12,
iii. 3. On the supposition of Paul's authorship of the Epistle
Timothy was a man of mature years to whom such an ad
monition would be an impertinence. But, as we have seen,
the writer thought of Timothy as a young man.2 The rela-
1 1 Cor. xv. 12.
2 1 Tim. iv . 12. Professor Hincks finds that the manner in which

ii. 23-iii. 4. SECOND TIMOTHY 243
tion of this verse to the preceding thought is obscure. ' 'But
flee," etc., and " but foolish and ignoraut questionings
avoid," constitute a random collocation of phrases. Verse
23 is an abrupt return to the matter of false teachings.'
But the Lord's servant must not strive (ii. 24). — Strive, prob
ably, in the bad sense ; yet he must be " a good soldier "
(verse 3).
Repentance (ii. 25), that is, turning away from the opinions
mentioned inverses 16-18.
And they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil
(ii. 26). — Recover themselves. The Greek word means " to
return to soberness." To return to soberness out of a snare is,
however, a figure of doubtful elegance. The devil, the
author of all evil, is chargeable, of course, with ensnaring
(intoxicating ?) the false teachers. Paul never uses the
word, but always " Satan."
Having been taken captive by the Lord' s servant unto the will
of God. — There is nothing in the original that corresponds to
these words ! The Greek reads : " Out of the snare of the
devil [they] having been taken captive unto the will of that
one." But know this that in the last days grievous times shall come
(iii. 1). — The last days designates the time immediately pre
ceding the second coming of Christ, " the end of the age "
[world]. The expression, which Paul does not use at all,
occurs here only in the Pastoral Epistles (see Jas. v. 3).
For similar expressions see 1 Pet. i. 5, 20 ; 2 Pet. iii. 3 ;
Jude 18.
For men shall be lovers of themselves (iii. 2-4). — This does
not mean " there shall be men," but " men in general shall
be." It has been remarked that the first five epithets de
scribe men who have regard to themselves only and not to
Timothy is addressed in the two Epistles does not comport with Paul's
character, p. 99.
1 1 Tim. i. 4, vi. 4 ; Tit. iii. 9.

244

SECOND TIMOTHY iii. 5-9.

their fellow-men, and that qualities follow which rest upon a
suppression of moral feeling, and are accordingly unnatural.
Holding a form of godliness, but having denied the power
thereof (iii. 5). — The outward appearance of godliness (the
word is not used by Paul), practising, perhaps, the conven
tional Christian morals. It has been conjectured that the
description fits ascetic false teachers, who were in fact
1 ' lovers of pleasure, ' ' but who maintained that the precepts
about abstinence from marriage and certain foods did not
concern them as " pneumatics," but rather that all things
were allowed to them as inaccessible to contamination on
the principle that " to the pure all things are pure." a In
describing these persons, among whom the false teachers are
included, the author shows his usual extravagance in ac
cumulating apparently all the epithets known to his vocabul
ary applicable to bad men, thereby rather weakening than
strengthening his case.
Creep into houses and take captive silly women, etc. (iii. 6). —
The word rendered silly women is a diminutive of " woman,"
and is a term of contempt, ' ' little women, " " weak women, ' ' 2
etc. It is not elsewhere used in the New Testament. One
cannot but ask whether here is not another case of exaggera
tion, that is, whether all the women who accepted the teach
ings of the Gnostics were of the character here indicated.
The odium theologicum of the writer must be taken into
account in this entire connection.
And like as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses (iii. 8).
— See Ex. vii. 11, 22. The sorcerers are not named in the
account in Exodus, and where the writer found these names
is unknown. The characterisation, reprobate concerning the
faith, indicates that he had the false teachers in mind.
But they shall proceed no further (iii. 9). — The writer
prophesies that the false teachers will be checked in their
career, though they may " proceed further in ungodliness "
1 Tit. i. 15. 2 yvvaixdpia.

iii. 10-13. SECOND TIMOTHY 245
(ii. 16), for men will see their folly, as that of the sorcerers
became evident.
But thou didst follow my teaching, etc. (iii. 10). — In con
trast with the false teachers was the conduct of Timothy.1
Follow, in the sense of act in accordance with. The writer's
fondness for accumulating words is illustrated here in the
enumeration of particulars without regard to their appro
priateness to the word follow, of which they are all the
object. What things befell me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra
(iii. II). — See Acts xiii. 50, xiv. 1-5, 19-21. What determ
ined the choice of these particular localities, which are not
elsewhere mentioned in the Epistles, is a matter of conject
ure. Timothy was not with Paul at these places, and it is
not apparent in what sense he could have " followed " these
events. It would have been more natural to select incidents
in which he had had part. The probability is that these
names were taken at random from the writer's recollection
of the history in Acts. The Lord delivered me, that is, Christ
delivered me. Paul ascribes his deliverance from perils in
Asia to God.2
Yea, and all that would live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer
persecution (iii. 12). — This sentence is without apparent
connection with the foregoing or the following. It indicates
that the Epistle was written at a time when persecution
actual or impending was general, or when a general per
secution in the not remote past was looked back upon.
But evil men and impostors (iii. 13). — In contrast with the
" godly," evil men, etc., will degenerate. Impostors. The
Greek word primarily means "jugglers," and probably
the writer had in mind men who practised secret arts and
magic formulas in so-called exorcism. The false teachers
are doubtless included in the term.
But abide thou in the things which thou hast learned (iii. 14).
1 1 Tim. iv. 6. 2 2 Cor. i. 8-10.

246 SECOND TIMOTHY iii. 15-iv. I.
See 1 Tim. ii. 15 ; John viii. 31. Of whom.— The plural is
the approved reading, and Timothy's mother and grand
mother (i. 5) are probably intended.
And that from a babe thou hast known the sacred writings
(iii. 15).— The Old Testament was doubtless in the writer's
mind, although he appears to have quoted Luke as Scripture.
From a babe (flpicpos) is inaccurate, for the word denotes an
unborn foetus or a newly born infant. The sacred writings
of the Old Testament would be able to make one wise unto
salvation only on condition oi faith in Christ Jesus.
Every Scripture inspired of God (iii. 16). — The original
reads, " Every Scripture inspired of God and [or also] use
ful." The question on which the interpretation depends
is whether inspired and useful are both predicates or the
former is an attribute. If inspired belongs to the predi
cate, " is " must be inserted before; if not, the copula must
stand after and, as, " is also useful." This latter view of
the matter makes the author say, " Every Scripture that
is inspired of God is not only inspired of God, but is also
useful." The most natural rendering is to regard both
adjectives as attributes, and read " Every Scripture is in
spired of God and useful," etc. Scripture in the language
of the time stood as a technical term for the whole Old
Testament canon, that is, for all that is "written," and
there is no reason for dividing this term so that a discrimin
ation shall be thrust in to the effect that a part of it is
inspired and a part not. There is no example of such a
discrimination in the literature of the New Testament, and
no reason exists for supposing that this writer departed from
the general opinion of his time regarding the inspiration of
every Scripture. But whether he did or not is a matter of no
great doctrinal importance, since the passage gives only the
judgment of an unknown writer ofthe second century.
I charge thee in the sight of God and of Christ Jesus, who
shall judge the quick a?id the dead, etc. (iv. 1). — The judg-

iv. 2-5. SECOND TIMOTHY 247
ment, conceived as future, is that which was looked for at
the second coming of Christ. Here the judge is conceived
to be Christ, as in John v. 22, 27, and Acts x. 42. Paul,
however, ascribes the judgment to God alone or " by Jesus
Christ." ' The judgment at the ParOusia would, it was be
lieved, be pronounced upon the living (quick) and the risen
dead, though it is not clear that Paul believed in the resur
rection of unbelievers. His appearing, that is, the " revel
ation," as Paul called it, at the Parousia. His kingdom is
the Messianic, to be set up at the Parousia.
Preach the word (iv. 2). — Paul speaks of preaching " the
gospel " and " the word of faith," 2 but not the word simply.
Be instant in season, out of season (iv. 2). — The Greek word
means " be at hand." In 1 Thess. v. 3, it is rendered " com
eth upon," of destruction upon the unbelievers." Here it
means " be at hand " wherever occasion is for ministration.
In season, out of season, probably means, " welcome or not."
Longsuffering and teaching is a collocation of ideas which to
most readers must appear strange and unexpected.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doc
trine (iv. 3). — Sound, that is, literally in good health. A
sound doctrine is one that is pure, uncorrupted, and hence
opposed to the false teaching. The expression occurs only
in these Epistles." Will heap to themselves teachers, etc. This
verb is found here only in the New Testament. The figure
is anything but well chosen. Having itching ears. Compare
' ' to tell or hear some new thing. ' ' "
Unto fables (iv. 4). — See 1 Tim. i. 4, iv. 7; Tit. i. 14; 1
Pet. i. 16.
But be thou sober (iv. 5), that is, deliberate, well-poised, or,
in Calvin's words, having " spiritual sobriety."
' Rom. ii. 15, 16.
2 Gal. ii. 2 ; I Thess. ii. 9 ; Rom. x. 8.
3 i<pidT7/jui.
4 1 Tim. i. 10 ; Tit. i. 9, ii. 11. 5 Acts xvii. 21.

248 SECOND TIMOTHY iv.5-8.
Do the work of an evangelist (iv. 5). — This word occurs be
sides only in Acts xxi. 8, and Eph. iv. 11. Its meaning is
somewhat obscure. Philip was so called, and in Acts vi. 1-5
he appears as one of the seven men appointed to look after
the widows of the Hellenists. According to Acts viii. 5, 26,
he was occupied with " proclaiming the Christ," and con
verted and baptised an Ethiopian. Theodoret regarded
evangelists as men who ' ' went about preaching, ' ' and Euse
bius speaks of them as those who were occupied with the
tradition or " handing down of the holy Gospels," while
Chrysostom thinks they were the authors of Gospels. Prob
ably their office was not definitely determined, and only so
much seems certain, — that they were helpers of the apostles
in a subordinate capacity.
For I am already being offered, and the time of my departure
is come (iv. 6). — Being offered is literally " poured out as a
libation." The word is used besides only in Phil. ii. 17.
The writer represents the apostle as pouring out his blood
" like the wine of sacrifice on the altar of God." I have
fought the good fight (iv. f), that is, the appointed conflict
of life.1 I have finished the course.2 I have kept the faith, that
is, the true Christian faith in opposition to all false doctrines.
Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness,
etc. (iv. 8). — Instead of henceforth, the rendering " at last,"
or " besides," or " already " is more fitting. The crown of
righteousness is a crown which would denote the righteous
ness of his life. See 1 Cor. ix. 25. In that day. See note
on i. 12.
To all them that have loved his appearing (iv. 8). — Since
appearing is used in i. 10 for the historical manifestation of
Christ and elsewhere in these Epistles for his Parousia or
second coming, the reference here is doubtful. The perfect
tense, have loved, favours the former interpretation, and the
1 1 Tim. vi. 12 ; i Thess. ii. 2 ; Phil. i. 30.
2 Rom. ix. 16 ; 1 Cor. ix. 24 ; Gal. ii. 2, v. 7.

iv. 9-14. SECOND TIMOTHY 249
connection the latter. It should probably be interpreted as
in verse 1, the perfect being regarded as expressing a re
lation to an expectation long cherished which one may say
one has loved, or dwelt fondly upon.
Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me (iv. 9). — On the
supposition of the genuineness of the Epistle, it is strange
that, in view of all the perils from false teachers, Ephesus
could be abandoned by Timothy for the sake of a personal
visit to the apostle in prison. Moreover, if Timothy was to
come shortly, what need of the letter containing instructions
which could much better have been given orally ?
Demas forsook me, having loved this present world (yv . IO).1 —
This present world or age is contrasted with " the age to
come," or that of the Messianic kingdom. Useful to me for
ministering (iv. II). — Whether ministering of the gospel or
by personal service be meant, this request does not well
accord with verse 6. The request that Timothy come
" shortly " is also hardly reconcilable with the writer's being
at the point of death, in view of the means of transportation
available at that time and the distance of Ephesus from
Rome. The fiction of authorship is not well carried out
here. The cloak that I left at Troas . . . and the books (iv.
13). — The word translated cloak is of doubtful orthography
and doubtful meaning, and is not elsewhere used in the New
Testament. It is strange that the apostle who in verse 6 is
represented as at the point of death should be represented as
asking for a cloak and books which at the best could not be
brought to him for some months.
Alexander the coppersmith (iv. 14). — An Alexander is men
tioned in 1 Tim. i. 20, as a false teacher whom the apostle is
represented as having " delivered unto Satan," that he
" might be taught not to blaspheme." Whether the same
person was in the writer's mind here or not is uncertain.
1 Col. iv. 14 ; Philem. 24.

250 SECOND TIMOTHY iv. 16-18.
He is confident that the man will receive his deserts, for the
Lord will punish him, that is, probably, Christ as judge and
avenger again.
At my first defence, etc. (iv. 16). — This implies that a second
judicial hearing had been accorded. The desertion of those
who should have supported him seems not to have stirred
the apostle, whom the writer personates, as did the conduct of
Alexander, and a more Christian note is struck in the words,
may it not be laid to their account. * But the Lord stood by me,
etc. (iv. 17). The Lord probably denotes Christ. The pro
clamation of the message probably refers to the knowledge
of his courage and fidelity which would be spread abroad.
Deliverance out of the mouth of the lion is a figure for escape
from peril, perhaps here simply the postponement of the
judicial decision.
The Lord will deliver me from every evil work, and will save
me unto his heavenly kingdom (iv. 18). — The meaning of
every evil work is doubtful. If the words refer to the evil
that was contemplated in his further trial and death as a
martyr, they are in direct opposition to verse 6. ' ' Any evil
deed which he might commit " is not a permissible interpret
ation, for the Greek word rendered deliver is not appropriate
to this sense. Perhaps the meaning is that he would be de
livered from the evils which threatened him from his adver
saries in the sense that though he might be overcome and
put to death, no prejudice would be done to his character as
a Christian, to his steadfastness and fidelity, and that he
would accordingly be saved in the heavenly kingdom, that is,
the Messianic kingdom of the Parousia.
The expression, heavenly kingdom (iv. 18) does not occur
elsewhere in the New Testament. But " the kingdom of
God " relates to the future Messianic kingdom, as here, in 1
Cor. vi. 9, 10, xv. 50. It is called " the kingdom of Christ
and God ' ' in Eph. v. 5." His kingdom is Christ's, for whom
1 Luke ___iii. 34. 2 Sec 2 Pet. i. 11.

iv. 19-22. SECOND TIMOTHY 251
Lord stands. The doxology, to whom be glory, etc., is ad
dressed to Christ contrary to Paul's usage.
Prisca and Aquila (iv. 19), see Acts xviii. 2, 3, 26, were
in Ephesus when 1 Corinthians was written,1 as well as prob
ably when Romans xvi. was written.
Eubulus, Rudens, Linus, and Claudice (iv. 21) are not else
where mentioned.
With thy spirit (iv. 22). — See Gal. vi. 18 ; Philemon, 25 ;
1 Tim. vi. 22. 1 1 Cor. xvi. 19.

THE EPISTLE TO TITUS.

EXPOSITION.
The long and involved introduction is somewhat after the style of
that of the Epistle to the Romans without its precision and force
(i. 1-4).
Servant of God (i. i). — Paul does not so designate himself
in the introductions to his Epistles.
According to the faith of God's elect (i. i). — See note on
" according to the promise," etc., 2 Tim. i. 1. This is the
faith which God's elect have, the true faith held by all Christ
ians, the catholic faith. The apostleship is also according
to the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness,
and hence opposed to all forms of false teaching, the truth
which corresponds to godliness, and is congruous with it.
In hope of eternal life (i. 2). — The doubtful relation of this
phrase illustrates the writer's want of precision. It has been
referred to truth, to godliness, and to both together, but prob
ably was in the writer's mind related to apostle. The eternal
life is that ofthe Messianic kingdom.1
Which God who cannot lie promised before times eternal
(i. 2). — Which relates to " life." God is so designated here
only, but in substance in Heb.. vi. 8.2 Before times eternal.
See Eph. i. 4 ; 1 Pet. i. 20.
But i?i His own seasons manifested His word (i. 3). — In His
1 Rom. v. 2, viii. 21. 3 See Rom. iii. 4.
253

254 TITUS i. 3-7-
own seasons is peculiar to the Pastoral Epistles.1 Paul says
" due season." 3
In the message wherewith I was intrusted (i. 3). — The writer,
speaking for Paul, represents him as preeminently the one
through whom the word of God was manifested. In 2 Tim.
i. n, " the gospel " has the precedence. God our Saviour.
See note on 2 Tim. i. 9. .
The first theme of the Epistle is now developed in directions to
Titus regarding the appointment of elders (i. 5-9).
The things that were wanting (i. 5). — An implication per
haps that Paul had been in Crete, and had left some matters
unfinished. (See the Introduction to the three Epistles.)
As I gave thee charge (i. 5). — The charge having been given
would naturally include the necessary particular directions.
As these would render the Epistle unnecessary, so far at least
as this matter is concerned, it appears as though the writer
had for the time become inattentive to the part which he had
assumed. If any man is blameless, the husband of one wife (i. 6). — See
note on 1 Tim. iii. 2, where the requirement regarding mar
riage is made respecting a bishop. Having children that be
lieve. This condition surpasses in severity that laid down in
1 Tim. iii. 4, where " having his children in subjection " is the
requirement. The word here rendered that believe (believ
ing) ' generally means " trusty," " faithful," etc., but here,
" holding the Christian faith " as opposed to all other beliefs
and heresies. See also 1 Tim. iv. 3, 10, 12, v. 16, vi. 2.
For the bishop must be blameless as God's steward, etc.
(i. 7)- — The connection in which this officer is mentioned
indicates that no distinction was made between " elders " or
"presbyters" and "bishops." Steward. See 1 Cor. iv. 1;
1 Pet. iv. 10. No brawler, no striker.'' Not greedy of filthy
1 1 Tim. ii. 6, vi. 15. 3 itidvoi.
* Gal. vi. 9. « 1 Tim. iii. 3.

i. 0-12. TITUS 255
lucre. Compare " no lover of money," given to hospitality.
See 1 Tim. iii. 2, 3.
Holding to the faithful word, which is according to the teach
ing (i. 9). — The word is according to the [apostolical] teaching,
and hence to be relied on, that is, opposed to the " profane
babblings " ' of the false teachers. Sound doctrine. Com
pare 1 Tim. vi. 3; 2 Tim. i. 13. The gainsayers. The false
teachers. Compare 2 Tim. ii. 25.
Bishops of this sort are needed on account of these false teachers,
to whom the writer now addresses himself in the second main divis
ion ofthe Epistle (i. 10-16).
For there are many unruly men, vain talkers and deceivers
(i. 10). — Vain talkers, because they dealt in " myths and
genealogies," "profane babblings," etc.2 Specially they of
the circumcision? Christians, doubtless, who had become in
fected with some of the heresies of the time. Since the false
teachers are not elsewhere so designated in these Epistles,
there is no ground for supposing that they were generally of
Jewish descent.
Men who overthrow whole houses (i. Il), that is, disturb
families by creating divisions through their false teaching,
and all this for filthy lucre's sake It should be considered
that we have to do here with a statement coloured by a
partisan interest. That the teachers in question should re
ceive pay ought not to be occasion for reproach in view of 1
Cor. ix. 4-1 1 ; Gal. vi. 6 ; 2 Cor. xi. 7 ; Phil. iv. 10-15 ! *
Tim. v. 17, 18.
One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said (i. 12). —
Prophet occurs here only in the Pastoral Epistles. Apart
from 2 Pet. ii. 16, the word is used in the New Testament
for the Old Testament and Christian prophets and for Christ.
Here it designates a heathen poet, a vales/ indeed, according
' 2 Tim. ii. 16.
' 1 Tim. i. 6 ; 2 Tim. ii. 16. 'Acts x. 45.

256 TITUS i. 13-ii. 2.
to some of the ancient commentators, it was Epimenides,
whom Cicero mentions.
This testimony is true (i. 13). — A harsh judgment, an un-
discriminating and uncharitable judgment.
For which cause reprove them sharply, that they may be sound
in the faith. The argument seems to be, that reproof on
account of lying, bestiality, and gluttony will have as its re
sult that these people will become sound in the faith !
Jewish fables (i. 14). — Perhaps those of the later Jewish
tradition, rabbinical and talmudic.
To the pure all things are pure, but to them that are defiled
(i. 15). — This general principle is probably aimed at the
prohibitions of certain foods. x But both their mind and their
conscience are defiled.- Mind (vovs) 2 designates the faculty
of perceiving, judging, and feeling with reference to tempo
ral and religious matters. Conscience is the discrimination
of right and wrong respecting conduct.3
They profess that they know God (i. 16). — The false teachers
claimed to have a superior knowledge (Gnosis) of God, but
the writer regards this as no true knowledge, because its
outward manifestation is a denial of Him, being abominable
and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
There follow various practical directions for the conduct of life
(ii. 1-15).
But speak thou the things that befit the sound doctrine
(ii. I). — See i. 9 ; 1 Tim. i. 10 ; 2 Tim. iv. 3.
Aged men (ii. 2), not the "elders " of the Church but men
advanced in years. Temperate. The Greek word occurs
only in the Pastoral Epistles. See 1 Tim. iii. 2, n, and
means abstinence from the immoderate use of wine. Total
abstinence is not enjoined in these Epistles. Sound in the
faith. See i. 13.
1 Rom. xiv. 20.
2 1 Tim. vi. 5 ; 2 Tim. iii. 8. 3 dvr'EiSndtt, Rom. ii. 15, ix. 1.

ii. 3-12. TITUS 257
Not slanderers nor enslaved to much wine (ii. 3). — A curious
collocation of ideas! Is the implication perhaps contained
here that the aged woman may take a little wine " so as not
to favour the asceticism of the false teachers ?
That they may train the young women to love their husbands
(ii. 5). — The preceding qualities of character are regarded as
qualifying aged women to train the younger women to certain
domestic virtues, to so educate them that they will love their
husbands and children, being in subjection to the former.2
That he that is ofthe contrary part may be ashamed (ii. 8). —
The expression, he that is of the contrary part, probably refers
to such as would blaspheme the word of God (verse 5) in
case the Christian women should not display the virtues
mentioned in that connection, that is, the heathen.
Exhort servants to be in subjection to their own masters
(ii. 9). — Similar directions are given respecting slaves in
Eph. vi. 5 f. ; Col. iii. 22 f. ; 1 Pet. ii. 18 f. ; 1 Tim. vi. 1, 2.
(See notes on these.) Their condition receives ample atten
tion in the later Epistles, but the system of which they are
the victims is not condemned. It would appear that a con
siderable number of the converts to Christianity were among
this unfortunate class.
For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all
men (ii. II). — See note on 1 Tim. ii. 4. That the " grace "
and ' ' mercy ' ' of God are extended to all men so that salva
tion is brought to them without discrimination, that is, is
placed within their reach, is a Pauline doctrine in opposition
to Jewish exclusiveness, and repetitions of it appear in the
post- Pauline literature of the New Testament.3 Yet see
Rom. ix. 16-18.
Instructing us to the intent that, etc. (ii. 12). — Instructing
should be joined with grace of God. An educative power is
1 1 Tim. v. 23.
» Eph. v. 22 ; Col. iii. 8 ; 1 Pet. iii. 1.
8 Rom. v. 18, xi. 32 ; Acts xvii. 31 ; John iii. 16 ; 2 Pet. iii. 9.

258 TITUS ii. 13-14.
accordingly attributed to grace, as with greater accuracy to
the Scriptures in 2 Tim. iii. 16.
Looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of
our own great God and Saviour Jesus Christ (ii. 13). — Hope
is used here for its object as in Gal. v. 5 and Rom. viii. 24.
The question whether in the expression, the glory of our
great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, God is to be regarded as
distinct from Jesus Christ, or the latter as called God, cannot
be settled on grammatical grounds. The fact that there is
no article before Saviour and the manifest reference of the
words, " who gave himself for us," etc., to Christ are
favourable to the latter view. Saviour might, however, be a
second subject introduced without the article as in 2 Pet. i.
1, " the grace of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ," and 2
Thess. i. 12, " the grace of our God and Lord Jesus Christ."
Yet if two subjects were intended an " and " should be ex
pected as in 1 Tim. i. 1 ; 2 Tim. i. 2, and Tit. i. 4. The
usage of the New Testament writers may well be cited to
decide the question, since the writer of this Epistle may be
supposed to have been in accord with the ideas of his time
on such a matter as this. Now, nowhere in the New Testa
ment is " God" connected with " Christ" as an attribute,
as if one should say " Christ our God," or " our God Jesus
Christ," and " Lord" in connection with Christ does not
mean ' ' God, ' ' while, as shown above, ' ' God " and " Christ ' '
are often mentioned together as separate personalities.
Moreover, the adjective great indicates that God is to be
regarded as distinct from Christ after the analogy of 1 Tim.
i. 17, iv. 10, v. 15. Noyes's rendering is not only gram
matical, but in accordance with the general doctrine of the
New Testament : " The glory of the great God and of our
Saviour Jesus Christ. ' '
Appearing relates to Christ, and means his Parousia.
Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all
iniquity (ii. 14).— For us, that is, for our sake. See Rom.

ii. 14-15- TITUS

259

v. 8, viii. 31, 32, 34; 1 Cor. xi. 24; Gal. ii. 20; 1 Tim. ii. 6.
Redeem here means to " cause to be delivered for one's self
by the payment of the ransom." Jesus paid the ransom
when he gave himself, that is, redeemed men by his " pre
cious blood" (1 Pet. i. 18, 19). This is the Pauline doc
trine ' — the idea of a purchase or buying off. ' ' Ransom ' ' or
" redemption " occurs in Rom. iii. 24 ; 1 Cor. i. 30 ; Col. i.
14; Eph. i. 7. The expression here, however, is not strictly
Pauline, for Paul does not speak of a redemption from
iniquity, but from the " law " and " the curse of the law."
' ' The condition from which according to Paul the death of
Christ saves is not the moral quality of iniquity, but the
religious condition of guilt with reference to God," that is,
with reference to the " law," which is the expression of His
will. The appropriation of the atonement of Christ through
" faith" secured the "justification" of the sinner, in which
condition he was " accounted" guiltless as to the law, or
righteous, having " the righteousness which is of faith." 2
And purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good
works (ii. 14). — Purification as the result of Christ's sacrifice
is not a Pauline conception, but belongs to the point of view
of the Epistle to the Hebrews.3 It belongs to a later devel
opment of theological thinking which had no appreciation
of Paul's teaching of a satisfaction of the law and a justifica
tion by faith.4
Zealous of good works (ii. 14).— Here we.note the practical,
ethical end of Christ's work, which is made prominent in the
later Epistles." Let no man despise thee (ii. 15). See note
on 1 Tim. iv. 12.
The Epistle is concluded with further exhortations, a surprising
confession, directions about heretics, and salutations (iii. 1-15).
Put them in mind to be in subjection to rulers, to authorities
1 1 Cor. vi. 20, vii. 23 ; Gal. iii. 13 ; cf. 2 Pet. ii. 1.
2 Rom. x. 6-10. 4 1 John i. 7 ; 2 Pet. i. 9.
3 Heb. i. 3, ix. 14. 5 Eph. ii. 10 ; 1 Pet. i. 15-18.

_6o TITUS iii. 1-5.
(iii. 1). — This was perhaps suggested by Rom. xiii. 1.,
although Paul employs only the word here rendered author
ities, there, " powers," while he uses the two words together
for the angelic powers.1 See a similar use in Eph. i. 21, iii.
10, vi. 12 ; Col. i. 16, ii. 10, 15.
For we were aforetime foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving
divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hating
one another (iii. 3). — The writer is here apparently carried
away by his passion for accumulating words and exhausting
his vocabulary, so that he overlooks the incongruity of mak
ing Paul, whom he personates, and includes by the use of we,
guilty of offences to which the great apostle with all his self-
depreciation would hardly have confessed, such as disobedi
ence, malice and envy, hatefulness and a spirit of hatred.
Foolish, without understanding.2 Other writers of the later
Epistles regard this state of mind as characteristic of the
pre-Christian condition of men.3 Deceived. See 2 Tim. iii.
13. Pleasures. See Jas. iv. 1, 3; 2 Pet. ii. 13. Envy. See
Rom. i. 29; Gal. v. 21; 1 Pet. ii. 1; Jas. iv. 5.
But when the kindness of God our Saviour and his love
toward man appeared (iii. 4). — Kindness. Compare " the
riches of His goodness," Rom. ii. 4, and " if ye have tasted
that the Lord is gracious," 1 Pet. ii. 3. And his love toward
man. The word expressing this quality appears in the New
Testament only here and in Acts xxviii. 2.
Not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves
(iii. 5). — This is in accord with Rom. ix. n ; Gal. ii. 16 ;
Eph. ii. 9. But according to His mercy He saved us. See
Eph. ii. 7, 8. In 2 Tim. i. 9 the " grace " and " purpose"
of God are set over against ' ' works ' ' as mercy is here.
Through the washing of regeneration (iii. 5), that is,
through baptism. Compare Eph. v. 26, and " the washing
of water with the word," Heb. x. 23. The word rendered
regeneration appears elsewhere in the New Testament only
1 1 Cor. xv. 24. 2 1 Eph. iv. 18. 3 1 Pet. i. 14 ; Heb. v. 2, ix. 7.

iii. 6-8. TITUS 261
in Matt. xix. 28, where it means the renewal of all things at
the Parousia. Here it designates the new birth of the indi
vidual, the putting on of the new man. It is connected with
baptism, and regarded as effected by the Spirit as in John
iii. 5, " Except a man be born of water and the Spirit he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Renewing. See
Rom. xii. 2 ; 2 Cor. iv. 16; Col. iii. 10 ; Heb. vi. 6.
Which He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ
our Saviour (iii. 6).— Compare Rom. v. 5, " the love of God
hath been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy
Ghost." Poured forth. See Acts ii. 17, 18, 33, x. 45. The
Holy Ghost was supposed to be poured out at baptism — an
idea unknown to Paul. Through Jesus Christ. Christ is
the mediator of all the spiritual gifts and blessings bestowed
on believers. The doctrine of the communication of the
Spirit is Pauline.1
That , being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs
according to the hope of eternal life (iii. 7). — The object ofthe
pouring out of the Spirit is thus stated. Justified. This
Pauline term does not appear elsewhere in the Pastoral
Epistles with reference to salvation. His grace is that of
Christ as in Acts xvii. ; Rom. v. 5 ; 2 Cor. viii. 9, xiii. 13 ;
Gal. i. 6. Yet it may be grammatically related to God, the
subject of " poured out." Heirs is used here only in the
Pastoral Epistles, and should probably be joined with eternal
life — heirs of eternal life according to hope. The eternal life is
that of the Messianic kingdom, which was the object of the
hope of the primitive Christians, their " inheritance," the
great consummation of which they had the ' ' promise. ' ' '
Faithful is the saying (iii. 8). — This relates to the fore
going. Concerning these things, that is, the things mentioned
in verses 3-7.
1 1 Cor. ii. 12, vi. 19 ; 2 Cor. i. 22 ; Gal. iv. 6 ; 1 Thess. iv. 8.
2 Rom. viii. 17 ; Col. iii. 24 ; 1 Cor. vi. 9, xv. 50 ; Gal. v. 21 ; Jas.
ii. 5-

262 TITUS iii. 8-14.
That they which have believed God may be careful to main
tain good works (iii. 8). — This exhortation is not in the line
of the Pauline "justification through faith," but rather in
accord with the later tendency to emphasise works, which
are here brought into close connection with faith, as if the
watchword had become, as in the Epistle of James, faith and
works instead of the Pauline faith versus works.
These things are good and profitable unto men (iii. 8). —
This flat utilitarianism is the highest ethical note struck in
the Pastoral Epistles.'
But shun foolish questionings and genealogies (iii. 9). — See
1 Tim. i. 4, vi. 4.
A man that is heretical (iii. 10). — Heretical2 is not else
where used in the New Testament. Paul uses " heresies "
to designate divisions in the churches * without reference to
erroneous doctrines. The same word is translated "sect"
in Acts v. 17, xv. 5, xxvi. 5, " sect of the Pharisees," etc.
According to the connection here the adjective heretical
designates a false teacher or a follower of those who intro
duced " foolish questionings," " myths," etc. Such a man
should be avoided, if two admonitions are not effective for
his correction. With reference to the relations of believers
with objectionable persons see also 1 Cor. v. 9, 11; 2 Thess.
iii. 14 ; 2 John 10.
Artemas (iii. 12). — Not elsewhere mentioned. Tychicus.
See 2 Tim. ii. 23.
Zenas (iii. 13). — Only here.
Good works (iii. 14). — Inept in this connection.
1 1 Tim. iv. 8. 2 aipsnxoi. a i Cor. xi. 19 ; Gal. v. 20.

SOME DOCTRINAL POINTS OF VIEW OF THE
PASTORAL EPISTLES.
No one can read these Epistles in connection with those which are
unquestionably of Pauline authorship without being impressed with
the wide departure which they show from the distinctive doctrinal
points of view of the apostle. Although they are not, like Paul's
letters, dominated by a theological purpose, and iu this respect present
a striking contrast to them, yet they contain sufficient intimations of
doctrinal opinions and tendencies to indicate that they occupy a place
by themselves in the theological and religious development of primi
tive Christianity. While the writer assumed the part of the apostle '
and evidently wished to set forth his teaching, so far as he expressed
any theological doctrines at all, the Time-Spirit was too strong for
him, and the Paulinism which he actually represents is that of a later
time than the apostolic age, a Paulinism transformed in being trans
planted into an age which had no interest in the problems with which
it was originally concerned, but which was chiefly occupied with
questions of ecclesiastical organisation and a conflict with manifold
heresies. The Pauline point of view respecting salvation as not due to desert
on account of works but to the mercy and grace of God is represented
especially iu 2 Tim. i. 9 and Tit. iii. 4. Yet here the original Pauline
doctrine appears in a partial expression without its distinctive contrast
of faith and works and its conception of justification through faith.
The idea ofthe death of Christ as a "ransom " is, indeed, expressed,
but the Pauline doctrine of a ransom from "the curse of the law"
does not appear.2 In place of it we have the conception ofthe work
of Christ as " redeeming us from all iniquity," and "purifying unto
himself a peculiar people " — the later ethical instead ofthe original,
Pauline, legal point of view. This emasculated Paulinism is familiar
1 1 Tim. ii. 7 ; 2 Tim. i. 11, 15, iv. 17.
2 1 Tim. ii. 6 ; Tit. ii. 14. 263

264 DOCTRINES OF PASTORAL EPISTLES
to the hearers ofthe popular " evangelical " preaching ofthe present
time. In connection with the doctrine of the result of Christ's work,
which finds incidental mention in these Epistles, may be mentioned
the abolishing of death. This is a genuinely Pauline idea, although
the form of expression is not that of the apostle, and the teaching that
this eud is effected "through the gospel," that is, through the in
fluence of the word of Christ, makes primary the ethical and pedagogic
aspect ofthe matter, which with Paul was secondary.
According to Paul death, which came through Adam's sin, and
"passed upon all men, in that all sinned," was put away by the sacri
fice of Christ, "the last Adam," as the representative of the human
race, who bore "the curse ofthe law" for men. In its extreme and
most intense significance it was deprivation of the resurrection at the
Parousia and of the joys of the Messianic kingdom, and could be
escaped only by faith. But the death and resurrection of Christ,
which were in the apostle's thought fundamental in the saving work
of Jesus, have only incidental mention in these Epistles, and faith
does not hold, as it does in the doctrine of Paul, the place of chief im
portance. Good works, godliness, and piety are, however, promin
ently mentioned.1 Instead of denoting, as in the apostle's thought,
an attitude ofthe individual, faith finds its conspicuous mention as a
doctrine, a "sound doctrine," or, in other words, the belief of the
whole (catholic) Church, a creed which the exigencies ofthe time re
quired to be emphasised in the conflict with " heretics."
The prominence given in these Epistles to God and His attributes
is noteworthy. He is strangely not designated at all as " our Father,"
but He is called "the only God,"2 "one God,"3 "the only Poten
tate,"4 "the king invisible,"5 "the living God,"6 "almighty,"'
"who cannot lie," and "faithful,"8 "incorruptible," "who only
hath immortality," 9 "blessed," and " dwelling in light unapproach
able."10 Peculiar to the Pastoral Epistles is His designation as
"Saviour," with the exception of Jude 25, and Luke i. 47. " See also
2 Tim. i. 9. Since Gnosticism made a distinction between the
1 1 Tim. ii. 2, 10, iii. 16, iv. 7, 8, v. 10, vi. 3, 5, 6, n ; 2 Tim. iii. 5,
12, 16 ; Tit. i. 1, ii. 12. i Ibid. iii. 15, iv. 10.
2 1 Tim. i. 17. ''Ibid. i. 17, vi. 15.
sIbid. ii. 5. »Tit. i. 1 ; 2 Tim. ii. 13.
4 Ibid. vi. 15. 9 1 Tim. i. 17, vi. 16.
"Ibid. i. 17, vi. 16. ™ Ibid. vi. 15, 16.
11 Ibid, i. 1, ii. 3, iv. 10; Tit. i. 3, ii. 10, iii. 4.

DOCTRINES OF PASTORAL EPISTLES 265
Creator-God and the Saviour, it has been conjectured that this em
phatic designation of God as Saviour had reference to that heresy.
The fact that the doctrine appears to a considerable extent in liturgical
formulas, which von Soden instances as opposed to this opinion,
counts for little, since a motive may well be assumed for such
citations. Some peculiar points of view respecting the person of Christ
(Christology) deserve consideration. The Christology is expressed in
Pauline formulas, but the conception cannot be said to be on the
whole essentially Pauline. Jesus is nowhere called "the Son of
God," and "Christ" alone only once (i Tim. v. ii), while "Christ
Jesus " and " Lord " are the usual designations. Once he is expressly
called "man."1 He is declared to have been "of the seed of
David." 2 The doctrine of Jesus' preexistence which Paul teaches in
I Cor. viii. 6, x. 4 ; 2 Cor. viii. 9 ; Phil. ii. 7, 8, and which finds ex
pression in Heb. ii. 16, 17, is mentioned in the Johannine formula 1
Tim. i. 15 and in 2 Tim. i. 10, where "the appearing of our Saviour
Christ Jesus" implies an existence prior to his manifestation to men.
See also " manifested in the flesh." 3 That the emphasising of his
humanity and of his real appearance in the flesh is due to an opposi
tion to Gnostic teachings and to Docetism, which denied the reality of
his flesh, cannot properly be called " unthinkable," with von Soden.
In view ofthe anti-heretical tendency ofthe Epistles this explanation
is at least probable. The ascription of a doxology to him ("Lord"
doubtless referring to Christ) in 2 Tim. iv. 18 is unique with the ex
ception of Heb. xiii. 21 ; 2 Pet. iii. 18 ; Rom. ix. 5 being doubtful, but
probably containing an ascription of praise to God, "who is over all."
In accordance with the general New Testament usage Jesus is desig
nated "Saviour" in 2 Tim. i. 10 (see ii. 10 and in Tit. i. 4, ii. 13
iii. 6).
Iu accord with Paul and with the prevalent belief of the primitive
Christians " the last days " are at least incidentally recognised and
the Parousia appears as a tenet of the common faith. "The present
distress " of which Paul vaguely speaks in 1 Cor. vii. 26 is here more
definitely characterised as " the last days " in which all sorts of evil
men, the random catalogue of whose abominations is characteristic
of the style of the writer, will appear, among whom are the false
teachers who "are never able to come to a knowledge ofthe truth." 4
' 1 Tim. ii. 5 ; cf. Rom. v. 15 ; 1 Cor. xv. 21.
2 2 Tim. ii. 8 ; cf. Rom. i. 3. '1 Tim. iii. 16. 4 2 Tim. iii. 1-9.

266 DOCTRINES OF PASTORAL EPISTLES
Doubtless these moral and spiritual degeneracies were phenomena
present to the mind of the author, who speaks of them prophetically
in accordance with the fiction of his authorship. He is evidently in
uncertainty as to the time ofthe " appearing " of Christ,' but could
not have thought of it as far in the future, since he exhorts to a sober
and godly life in view of its arrival within the lifetime of his readers.
But he gives directions for the regulation of the affairs of the Church
as if he expected that institution to have a long life. God will
"show" "the appearing of our Lord," however, "in its own times."
The writer is not at all events in accord with Paul regarding the
Parousia so far as the latter's personal relation to it is concerned.
For he represents the apostle as on the point of dying a martyr's
death,2 while Paul sometimes speaks of himself as expecting to be
among the living who should "remain " at the time of the second
coming of Christ.3 If we render the "we" in these passages as
" those of us," the possibility of the apostle's presence among them
is at least implied, and this is excluded in 2 Tim. iv. 6, and, indeed,
the writer could not well have represented a man whom he knew to
be dead as possibly participating, as living, in the Parousia. More
over, in Paul's thought the Messianic kingdom was to be established
only at Christ's second coming. How, then, exposed to dying a
martyr's death before the advent of that kingdom, could he be " saved
into" it?4 Paul knew nothing of a " heavenly kingdom" of Christ,
and when he speaks of being absent from the body and at home with
the Lord,5 he does not imply an entrance into the "kingdom" of
Christ. This implies only an apparently hoped-for- exceptional de
liverance from a tarrying in the underworld until the resurrection
at the Parousia.
1 1 Tim. vi. 14 ; 2 Tim. iv. 1 ; Tit. iii. 13.
* 2 Tim. iv. 16.
3 1 Thess. iii. 17 ; 1 Cor. xv. 2.
' 2 Tim. iv. 18.
6 2 Cor. v. 8.

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES.

INTRODUCTION.
THREE men bearing the name of James are prominently
mentioned in the New Testament, James the son of
Zebedee, an apostle, who was put to death about a.d. 44, '
James the less,2 the son of Alphaeus, also an apostle, and
James the brother of Jesus.3 The James mentioned by Paul in
Gal. ii. 9, 12 as foremost among the leaders (" pillars") of
the Church in Jerusalem should doubtless be regarded as the
brother of Jesus of i. 19. His prominence in the Church is
evident from this passage, and in 1 Cor. ix. 5 " brethren of
the Lord," among whom James is probably to be included,
are mentioned between " the rest of the apostles and
Cephas." The same James is probably the one mentioned
in 1 Cor. xv. 7 as one to whom the risen Christ " appeared."
In Acts, after the account of the execution of James the son
of Zebedee, mention is made of a James as practically the
head of the Church in Jerusalem.4 Very early traditions of
the Church represent James the brother of Jesus as a bishop
of the original Church in Jerusalem and chief bishop of all
Christendom. In view of the prominence of this James it is
probable that the writer of the so-called Epistle of James
wished to pass for the brother of Jesus.
The object of the Epistle is to correct certain evil conditions
1 Acts xii. 2. 3 Matt. xiii. 55 ; Gal. i. 19.
2 Mark xv. 40. 4 Acts xii. 17, xv. 13, xxi. 18.
267

268 INTRODUCTION
in the Church, avarice, worldliness, contempt of the poor,
sins of the tongue, absorption in trade, profanity, etc. The
theme is the perfect man (iii. 2), whether Christian or not,
and the writing is unique among those of the New Testa
ment in the absence of specifically Christian conceptions.
Almost all its precepts are borrowed from the practical
morality of the Old Testament, or may at least be found in
that book, and of such doctrines as those of grace, atone
ment, and salvation there is no mention. Prominent
characters in Old Testament history, prophets and saints,
are held up as examples (v. 10, 11, 17, 18), and receive more
attention than Christ, who is mentioned by name only twice
(i. 1, ii. 1).
The unique address of the Epistle presents a problem on
the solution of which scholars are unable to agree. A writer
representing himself as " James, a servant of God and of the
Lord Jesus Christ," writes a letter " to the twelve tribes
which are of the Dispersion," that is, apparently to the
Jews scattered about. The problem is again complicated by
the circumstance that the contents do not fit the vagueness
of the address, since definite and local conditions are implied
in several passages (iv. 1-3, 13, v. 1-6). Since the Epistle,
if it is of Christian origin, cannot have been addressed to
Jews, we are left to choose between Jewish-Christian readers,
Christians in general, or gentile Christians. The data fur
nished in the Epistle do not warrant a positive conclusion
as to the persons addressed.
Since the Epistle contains no reference to the early con
troversy respecting the relations of Jewish and gentile
Christians in the Church, it was written either before that
controversy broke out, or after it had died away. The lat
ter alternative must be taken on account of the relation of
the Epistle to other New Testament writings, which shows
their priority and its dependence. That the writer was
acquainted with Romans and probably with 1 Corinthians,

JAMES 269
Hebrews, and 1 Peter is conceded by many competent
judges. If a literary dependence on the last two cannot be
shown with certainty, there is at least a high degree of prob
ability that the writer was familiar with their ideas and
general mode of thought, and was accordingly nearly con
temporary with their authors. Moreover, the reference to
the pursuit of riches, to the preponderating influence of
wealthy men in the Church, and to a wide-reaching degen
eration, indicates that the writer had before him, not the
primitive simplicity of the early Christian communities, but
the conditions of a later time. All the so-called burning
questions of primitive Christianity, the proof of Jesus' Mes
siahship from the Old Testament, the relation of his death
to salvation, and his resurrection appear to lie outside of the
writer's horizon of thought and interest.
The Epistle is peculiar among the New Testament writings
in that it contains an attempt at a pointed refutation ofthe
teaching of another canonical writer. The passage ii. 14-26
is directly aimed at Paul's doctrine of faith. This is evid
ent, whether the author correctly apprehended the Pauline
teaching on the subject or not, from the fact that he employs
the apostle's terms in order to reject their import (see " apart
from works," Jas. ii. 18, 20 and Rom. iii. 28, also "justified
by works," Jas. ii. 24 and Gal. ii. 16), and instances with
an opposite intention the case of Abraham.1 It appears
from the construction which the writer puts upon ' ' faith ' '
either that he himself misunderstood the original Pauline
doctrine concerning it, or was opposing a degenerate form
of it.
It is evident to the careful student of Paul and of this Epistle that
the apostle teaches that on account ofthe atonement of Christ a man
may through faith be declared righteous, although so far as works are
concerned he be not righteous at all. Since Christ in his death, hav
ing been "made sin" for him, became "the end ofthe law," his
¦Jas. ii. 23 and Rom. iv. 1-5, 19.

2 7o INTRO D UCTION
trespasses are not reckoned to him,1 so soon as he becomes a believer.
Yet upon the man who has once come into this condition of imputed
or " forensic " righteousness Paul lays unequivocally the obligations
of a life of righteousness by works, and declares that every believer
will be judged according to his deeds.2 The writer of James does not
appear to have correctly apprehended the Pauline teaching.
The adoption of the alternative that he was opposing a
later form of Paulinism requires a later date for the Epistle
than the former which, of course, demands that it be placed
long enough after Paul for his teaching to have become
known to the wide circle of readers addressed in James.
Moreover, the reference to Rahab is probably directed
against the teaching in Heb. ix. 31, and since this Epistle
was written toward the end of the first century, the pre
sumption in favour of the polemic in James being directed
against a perverted form of Paul's doctrine of faith is there
by strengthened. The opinion is probably correct that the
section on faith and works does not represent a part ofthe
real purpose of the Epistle, since the writer was not a dog-
matiser, and had no sympathy with doctrinal controversies
as such. His real contest is against worldliness and the love
of riches and the oppression of the poor (iv. 1-5). It has
been conjectured, too, with considerable reason that he had
in view in chapter iii. certain false teachers who were giving
currency to an assumed " wisdom," which he visits with a
harsh condemnation. He knew of a " faction " which led
men to " lie against the truth," and since the terms which
he employs resemble those used in Hermas against the false
teachers of the early part of the second century, the judg
ment of those scholars may be well founded who think that
he had the same persons in mind.
It has long been observed that the maxims of the Epistle
have a resemblance to many of the sayings attributed to
Jesus in the synoptic Gospels, especially to those of the Ser-
1 2 Cor. v. 19. 3 Rom. ii. 6, xi. 22 ; 2 Cor. v. 10.

JAMES 271
mon on the Mount, although Spitta, who maintains that it is
not a Christian, but a Jewish writing of an early date, finds
parallels to all these in the Jewish literature. The writer
may have known Matthew and Luke, but there is no evid
ence of a direct literary dependence upon them. Since the
source of his maxims cannot be determined, their presence
does not prove that he wrote at a time when they were cur
rent in tradition only, that is, prior to the composition of our
synoptic Gospels (a.d. 70-90).
The Epistle did not fare well as to recognition in the early Church.
The canon of Muratori omits it, and the earliest trace of an acquaintance
with it is found in Irenaeus, who refers to Abraham as " the friend of
God" (Jas. ii. 23), but he does not mention the Epistle. From Ter
tullian's silence regarding the Epistle it must be concluded that he
either was unacquainted with it, or, knowing it, regarded it as spuri
ous. Eusebius, in writing of it as an historian, classifies it as among
the controverted books, and says that it is reckoned spurious, and that
not many of the ancients have mentioned it. Yet in his commentary
on the Psalms he quotes it as " the holy apostle's." Doubtful traces
of its use by Clement of Alexandria are found in his writings, although
he is said by Eusebius to have written commentaries on all the Catho
lic Epistles. Good reasons, however, for doubting his acquaintance
with it are given by Salmon. Origen knew and quoted an Epistle of
which he spoke doubtfully as "reputed to be James's." Jerome,
while acknowledging its genuineness, remarks that it was said to be
published by another in the name of James, though it gradually
acquired authority.
Conjectures as to the author must be fruitless. That
James the brother of Jesus could not have written the Epistle
is evident, for even in a practical, hortatory writing like this,
allusions to conditions of the early years of Christianity, the
doctrines, the questions at issue, and above all to the person
and history of Jesus, instead of to Old Testament characters,
must have escaped from the pen of such a man. Besides,
the Greek style may well be declared impossible to the son
of Joseph and Mary. That this champion of the law against

272 INTRODUCTION
Paul, this " pillar " of legalism, should have so far misunder
stood the apostle's position as to misapprehend his doctrine
of ' ' works of the law ' ' is improbable. The time of the com
position is indeterminable, but it has been well observed that
the later we place it the more comprehensible become the
presupposed conditions among the Christians, such as perse
cutions, the limitation of miraculous powers to officers of the
Church (v. 14), the moralising character pertaining to the
time of the formation of the Catholic Church, the conflict
against false teachers, the departure from the leading ideas
of Paul, and the relation of dependence on the earlier Christ
ian literature. There are good reasons for dating it in the
early years ofthe second century.1
1 See the writer's article, "James, Epistle of," in the Encyclopaedia
Biblica, vol. ii.

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES.

EXPOSITION.
The Epistle opens with a greeting to the readers, after which
follow maxims regarding patience, temptation, hearing and doing,
and true religion (i. 1-27).
James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ (i. 1). —
The writer does not call himself an apostle, but after Paul's
manner when associated with one who was not an apostle, a
servant. '
To the twelve tribes (i. i). — According to Gal. vi. 16; Rom.
ii. 29, this address might refer to Christians as the " true
Israel," the real inheritors of the " promise." But the
question naturally arises whether the writer would be likely
to refine in this manner when writing an address. Whoever
wrote the address, and it is not certain that it was written by
the writer of the rest of the Epistle, must have had in mind
Jews or Jewish Christians. The writing has not the char
acter of an Epistle, but rather that of a homily, and the
address may have been prefixed by some one who was im
pressed with its Jewish tendency.
Manifold temptations (i. 2). — Temptations are generally
understood to refer to the persecutions to which the Christ
ians were subjected, yet manifold renders the term inclusive
of more. Perhaps trials, including persecution, were in the
writer's mind.2
'Phil. i. 1. » See 1 Pet. i. 6.
18 273

274 JAMES i. 3-12.
The proof of your faith worketh patience (i. 3).— This is the
reason for rejoicing at temptations.
And let patience have her perfect work (i. 4). — See Heb. x.
36. Perfect and entire, that is, may appear before the judg
ment of Christ at the Parousia without blame.1
But if any of you lacketh wisdom, let him ask of God, etc.
(i. 5). — Practical wisdom in the conduct of life is doubtless
meant (see iii. 13-17). The idea that wisdom is a gift of
God is expressed in Prov. ii. 6.
In faith (i. 6), that is, in confidence that God will grant
what is asked. For he that doubteth, etc. The primary
reference is to one praying in doubt, as is evident from i. 7,
let not that man think, etc.
A double-minded man (i. 8). — He who prays for wisdom
must have his mind single toward God in " faith."
But let the brother of low degree glory in his high estate
(i. 9). — The abruptness of the transition is apparent. Low
degree is to be taken literally, as poor or oppressed. Let such
a one glory in his inner integrity, and perhaps also in the
hope of future exaltation in the Messianic kingdom.
And the rich in that he is made low (i. 10), because his
riches are temporary and fleeting, and though he be made
low by affliction and distress, his true exaltation must be,
like that of the poor man, inward.2
For the sun ariseth with the scorching wind, etc. (i. II). —
The figure is borrowed from Isa. xl. 6-8; Ps. xc. 6, ciii. 15;
Job. xiv. 2.
Blessed is the man that endureth temptation (i. 12). — The
writer here returns to the thought in verse 2 f. The man,
whether poor or rich. The crown of life. It is uncertain
whether the future reward in the Messianic kingdom is here
referred to, as it evidently is in 1 Pet. v. 4. Of life is prob
ably the " genitive of opposition," the crown which is life.
1 1 Cor. i. 8 ; Phil. i. 10, ii. 15-17 ; 1 Thess. v. 23.
2 Luke xvi. 15.

i. 13-15- JAMES 275
According to the "Christian consciousness" of the age
' ' eternal life ' ' at the Parousia should here be implied, and
" life " must be so interpreted if " the Lord," which is sup
plied as the subject of promised, be Christ. But there is no
subject in the original, according to the best authenticated
reading, and the subject may be " God."
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God,
etc. (i. 13). — Temptation in general is probably here meant,
according to verse 14. It is thought by some that the writer
here opposes the fatalism of certain Gnostic teachers of the
second century. This reference is not necessary, while it is
probable that he knew that the doctrine which he opposed
was advanced from some quarter.
For God cannot be tempted with evil (i. 13). — The Greek
word rendered cannot be tempted with is capable of the sense
" has no experience of," and this is perhaps a preferable
translation. But each man is tempted when he is drawn away by his own
lust, and enticed (i. 14).— The word rendered lust is used in
the New Testament, when it stands without a qualifying
term, in the sense of " evil desire," as in Romans vii. 7,
translated " lust" in King James' version, but less appro
priately " coveting " in the revised.
Then the lust, when it hath conceived, beareth sin (i. 15).
— The figure of the conception of desire (feminine) was, prob
ably taken at random by the writer and without so much re
finement of imagination as is shown by some of his expositors,
who suppose the will of the subject to be the other party to
the conceiving. Psychologically sin is an act prompted by
desire ; but that desire is pregnant with and brings forth the
monster is a poetic fiction.
And the sin, when it is full grown, bringeth forth death (i.
15). — The figure is carried further, and the child of desire
becomes the mother of death. So it pleased the writer's
fancy to represent the relation of cause and effect. Death is

276 JAMES i. 16.
regarded as the penalty of sin (see iv. 12) in accordance with
the Pauline doctrine, 1 with which the writer was evidently
acquainted. It is not merely mortality, but also the opposite
of" life" in the technical Pauline sense, that is, exclusion
from the Messianic kingdom, which would include only those
who should here believe in Christ, those who should be
" his at his coming."
The Pauline doctrine of the entrance of death into the world pre
sents a contradiction in thought (technically, an antinomy). " By
one man," that is, Adam, he says, "sin entered into the world, and
death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all sinned,"
namely, individually, and not "iu Adam." 2 Yet it is a fundamental
doctrine of his anthropology that " the flesh," which is the substance
of man's physical organism, is "corruptible" or naturally subject to
death.3 As the seat of sin, of " the law in the members," it must be
regarded as the primal occasion of all sin conceived as a power or
principle, and hence as mortal in itself. Accordingly, its mortality
or corruptibility cannot have been caused by the " transgression " of
Adam or by the transgressions of his posterity. These two teachings,
then, appear to stand over against each other : That had there been
no act of sin, man would have been immortal ; and that, as being "of
flesh," he is naturally mortal. The apostle does not teach that either
sin or death descended by heredity from Adam to his posterity. " In
Adam all die " 4 means that since all men, like Adam, the " psychi
cal " or natural head ofthe race, partake of his nature, they must be
mortal, just as he, being "of flesh," "of the earth, earthy," was
naturally mortal; The power over death, " incorruption," immor
tality, came only through " the second man, the Lord from heaven." 5
On the ground of their relation to " the first man " (" in Adam ") all
men die ; but on the ground of their relation to " the second man "
("in Christ ") all may by faith be " made alive," that is, may attain
the resurrection at " the end," since he is " a life-giving Spirit."
Be not deceived (i. 16). — Perhaps a reference to false
teachers. This admonition probably refers to the foregoing.
1 Rom. vi. 23. ^ Ibid. v. 12. 3 1 Cor. xv. 53.
4 Ibid. s^. 22. 6 Ib id. xv. 47.

i. 17-21. JAMES 277
But the connection here, as throughout the Epistle, is very
loose. Every good gift and every perfect boon is from above, coming
down from the Father of lights (i. 17). — This comports with
the teaching of verse 5. Father of lights means the Creator
of the heavenly luminaries. This designation of God is not
found elsewhere either in the Old or the New Testament.
Although He is the Father of lights, He has no change
(variation) like that of the moon or shadow of a turning, like
that from morning to evening.
Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth
(i. 18). — Expositors have applied their ingenuity to the task
of finding a logical connection for this verse. It is neither
" a proof that God cannot be a tempter," nor " a logical
conclusion from the preceding verse." Possibly it may be
regarded as beginning a new subject and supplying a basis
for the exhortations that follow. The word of truth is the
gospel. First-fruits, that is, first-chosen to the new life in
Christ.1 But let every man be swift to hear, etc. (i. 19). — Hearing
may perhaps be referred to " the word of truth " (verse 18).
See verses 21, 22. The terms swift and slow do not else
where appear in the New Testament in the senses here in
tended. The righteousness of God (i. 20). — This expression is of
doubtful meaning, since the Greek genitive is capable of
several significations. " The righteousness which God effects
in man " seems inappropriate, since no one would think that
man's wrath could have this result. Perhaps the righteous
ness acceptable to God or willed by Him may be the
meaning. The implanted word (i. 21). — This is " the word of truth "
(verse 18). This is regarded as implanted in the hearts of
the believers, although there is an apparent incongruity in
' Rom. xvi. 5 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 15.

278 JAMES i. 22-27.
exhorting them to receive it. Able to save your souls, " the
power of God unto salvation." '
But be ye doers ofthe word (i. 22). — See Matt. vii. 24-29.
For if any man is a hearer (i. 23, 24). — The comparison to
looking in a mirror and forgetting what manner of man he
was need not be pressed so far as to the supposition that the
writer intended to compare the word of God to a mirror in
which men may see their true character reflected. The
point of the comparison lies in the look into the mirror and
the turning away and forgetting. So is he who only hears
and does not appropriate the word permanently in his hfe.
But he that looketh into the perfect law of liberty, etc. (i. 25).
— This perfect law is probably "the word of truth" (verse 18).
The infiuence of Pauline ideas is apparent in designating it
as the perfect law of liberty :' Yet the Jewish literature con
tains expressions to the effect that " he only is free who is
a pupil of the law." The doing of the law is, of course, a
Jewish precept, and Jesus in emphasising it followed the
great teachers of his people.
If any man thinketh himself to be religious while he bridleth
not his tongue, etc. (i. 26). — The writer here returns to the
remark " slow to speak" (verse 19). The word rendered
religious 3 is not used elsewhere in the New Testament, and
does not occur in classic Greek. It refers rather to the out
ward service of God than to an inward state.
Pure religion and undefiled before God and our Father
(i. 27). — To the religion that is " vain," mentioned in the
preceding verse, is here opposed that which is pure and un
defiled. Before God, etc., that is, as He must regard it in
His sight.
To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction and to
keep himself '[oneself] unspotted from the world (i. 27). — This
is the religion of " works " in the sense in which the writer
understood that word. Its externality fits well with the
1 Rom. i. 16. 2 Gal. v. 1. 3 Bptjdxoi.

ii. 1-5- JAMES

279

meaning of the word which he uses for " religion" — the
noun corresponding to the adjective translated " religious "
employed in verse 26. A definition of religion which in
cludes only the moral virtues of helpfulness and purity must
be regarded as quite one-sided and inadequate.
The readers are now admonished not to have respect to persons,
and in connection with the keeping of the law mention is made of
the law of liberty (ii. 1-13).
My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord fesus Christ, the
Lord of glory, with respect of persons (ii. 1). — Expositors have
had no little difficulty with the accumulation of epithets here,
the original reading, ' ' faith of the Lord of us Jesus Christ of
glory. ' ' Probably the expression of glory should be regarded
as qualifying our Lord Jesus Christ and not any part of the
phrase, as " Lord of glory," etc. Faith of our Lord Jesus
Christ is faith in Christ. This, the writer says, should not
be had in such a way as to pay regard to persons, that is, as
believers in Christ his readers are exhorted to pay no heed
to outward distinctions.
For if there come into your synagogue a man with a gold
ring, etc. (ii. 2, 3). — Synagogue, although the name for the
Jews' place of assembly for worship, was also applied to
that for Christian worship. Here it designates simply an
assembly. Are ye not divided in your own mind (ii. 4). — The division
is one of discriminating, judging, becoming doubtful (see
verse 6). In making a distinction between rich and poor
they doubt the Christian gospel, which attaches no import
ance to external conditions.
Did not God choose them that are poor as to the world (ii. 5) ?
— The poor are the object of consideration in the Jewish lit
erature nearly contemporary with the origin of Christianity.
In the book of Enoch the poor who are oppressed by the
rich are repeatedly called " the elect." In the synoptic

280 JAMES ii. 5-12.
Gospels they are especially mentioned as the ones to whom
Christ came.1
Heirs of the kingdom which He promised to them that love
Him (ii. 5). — On condition of being rich in faith the poor
are the ones especially chosen to be heirs of the kingdom,
that is, of the Messianic kingdom which Christ was ex
pected speedily to come to establish. The idea that believers
were to be the heirs of the coming kingdom finds frequent
expression in the Epistles.2
But ye have dishonoured the poor man (ii. 6). — This state
ment appears to point to local conditions known by the
writer. Do not the rich oppress you, and themselves drag you before
the judgment-seats (ii. 6) ? — If these forms of injury be
regarded as inflicted in matters of money on account of debt,
etc., it is not necessary to suppose that the rich were thought
of as outside the churches.
Blaspheme the honourable name (ii. 7), that is, by their
unchristian conduct in oppressing the poor.3
Howbeit, if ye fulfil the royal law according to the Scriptures
(ii. 8). — Royal, because chief.4 Law is here used for " com
mandment." For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and stumble (ii. 10).
— The disposition to break the law is present if a man stumble
in one point, that is, err in respect to one commandment.
This doctrine was taught by the Jewish Rabbis.
By a law of liberty (ii. 12). — This is the Christian law as
opposed to the Jewish,6 and is mentioned in i. 25 as " the
perfect law."

1 Matt. xi. 5 ; Luke vi. 26, vii. 22, xiv. 13.
2 Rom. viii. 7 ; Gal. iii. 29; Eph. iii. 16; Tit. iii. 7 ; Heb. vi. 7.
3 1 Tim. vi. 1 ; Tit. ii. 5.
4 Matt. xxii. 39 ; Rom. xiii. 8-10 ; Gal. v. 14 ; 1 Tim. i. 5.
• Gal. ii. 4, v. i, 13.

ii. 13, 14- JAMES 281
For judgment is without mercy (ii. 13). — " Blessed are the
merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." '
Proceeding from the point of view of i. 22, 25, respecting the
importance of men being " doers of the word," the writer now
undertakes a refutation of the teaching that faith without works
can save (ii. 14-26).
What doth it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith,
but have not works ? Can that faith save him (ii. 14) ? — This
question implies that the writer had some person or persons
in mind who maintained the proposition that faith without
works was sufficient for salvation. The way in which the
terms "faith" and "works" are introduced cannot but
give the impression that they were well known, and that the
writer assumed his readers to have been familiar with them
in their relation to each other. If a man say, etc., is prob
ably not to be interpreted, " if a man pretend that he has
faith." What doth it profit (ii. 14) ? evidently refers to the interest
of the man who makes this claim. What good does it do
him so far as saving him is concerned ? Can he expect to
be an " heir ' ' of the Messianic kingdom on the strength of
his faith, of such a faith ?
The Epistle really contains no doctrine of faith and no adequate
conception of it as a principle of salvation. In i. 6 and v. 15 the word
signifies no more than " confidence." In ii. 1 faith in Christ as " the
Lord of Glory " is mentioned without attaching to it any inward,
spiritual significance and with an immediate practical application to
"respect of persons." With respect to God it is simply a metaphysical
belief that He exists (ii. 19). The Pauline conception of it in relation
to the atonement of Christ is not mentioned in the Epistle. In fact,
the atonement has no recognition, and there is no indication that the
writer believed that faith has any relation to it. Accordingly, the in
ference which has been drawn from these facts, that the decisive
weight which Paul laid upon the atoning suffering and death of Christ
was offensive to the writer, is not without justification.
' Matt. v. 7.

282 JAMES ii. 15-19.
If a brother or sister be naked, etc. (ii. 15, 16). — The example
adduced represents the case of a man appealed to for charity,
who should say to himself that he has faith and expects to
be saved by it, and accordingly refuses the charitable offices,
simply sending the applicant away. The writer well asks,
What doth it profit? Is a man who possesses such a dispo
sition fit for the kingdom of God ? But that this is a carica
ture of Paul's position respecting faith and works is evident
from 1 Cor. xiii., and the writer either misunderstood the
apostle's doctrine or directed his argument against those
who held a perverted form of it. A man who had faith in
Paul's sense could not omit such " works " as are mentioned
here, but the apostle would never have said that a man could
be " justified by works "(vv. 24, 25). Our author overlooks
Paul's conception of "grace" in justification, which is
accorded "through faith" by reason of Christ's having
borne ' ' the curse of the law ' ' for men and delivered them
from " bondage " to it. Paul's doctrine relates to becoming
a Christian, while our author has in mind those who are
already Christians.
The writer here introduces another person who takes up the
argument, and contends against the false faith (ii. 18-23).
Yea, a man will say, Show me thy faith apart from thy
works (ii. 18). — That is, convince me without the doing of
works that you have faith, and I will show you that I have
faith by doing works, or, in other words, I will prove that
your faith is " dead."
Thou believest that God is one (ii. 19). — This sort of belief
has, of course, no resemblance to the Pauline ' ' faith. ' ' The
use, in two or three places during the discussion, of the
Pauline formulas and very words, — a use which can hardly
be without intention, — together with such a superficial appre
hension of the teaching of the apostle, appears to indicate

ii. 21-25. JAMES 283
that the writer had no sense for the mystical doctrine that
he was opposing.
Was not Abraham our father justified by works (ii. 2l) ? —
The writer here employs the very example adduced by Paul '
with a contrary intention.
Thou seest that faith wrought with his works (ii. 22). — In
his interpretation of this account the writer not only directly
contradicts the apostle's conclusion, but reads into the declar
ation in Genesis a meaning which it does not contain, that is,
that the faith of Abraham wrought with his works. His
works were really the result of his faith.
Ye see that by works (ii. 24). — Here the writer himself
resumes the discussion, and asserts a doctrine in pointed
opposition to the Pauline teaching.
The statement that the writer resumes the discussion at verse 24 is,
however, open to question. The section, vv. 18-24, is very obscure,
and if another speaker is introduced at verse 18, whether an advocate
of the Pauline doctrine or a " mediator," it is very difficult to determ
ine where the words ascribed to him end. The "someone" (verse
18a) may be supposed to say, " You have faith and I have works," in
the sense that it is not necessary that both be manifested, since the
one presupposes the other. Then the writer may be assumed to
answer (verse 18 b), "Show me your faith without your works, and I
will show you my faith by my works." So long as the "someone"
could not do this, he must acknowledge himself defeated in the argu
ment. From this point of view the writer must be supposed to con
tinue his refutation in verse 19 ff.
And in like manner was not also Rahab the harlot justified
by works (ii. 25) ? — The example of Rahab was probably
taken from Heb. xi. 31 with such a variation as indicates a
quotation from memory. The author of Hebrews, however,
in adducing the example was not making an argument for
justification by faith, and did not use " faith " in the Pauline
sense. He represents Rahab as doing certain "works"
1 Rom. iv. 2-4.

384 JAMES ii. 26-iii. 3.
" by faith " quite in the manner of our author. Did the
latter misapprehend him too ?
The conclusion of the whole matter is that as the body
apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith apart from works
is dead (ii. 26) —a proposition to which no one using faith
in the writer's sense could object, but which is the oppos
ite of the doctrine of Paul as to the relation of faith and
works. A warning is now declared against too much eagerness to become
teachers, and against the unrestrained use of the tongue, together
with remarks on wisdom (iii. 1-18).
Be not many teachers . . . knowing that we shall receive
heavier judgment (iii. 1). — Probably the freedom to speak
allowed to everyone in the early church according to 1 Cor.
xiv. 16-23 tad led to abuses, so that there was need of
restrictions upon too much teaching. The heavier judgment
relates to the responsibility assumed by anyone who under
takes to teach.
For in many things we all stumble (iii. 2). — For introduces
a reason for the remark regarding responsibility with an
extension of the subject to all. In many things, that is, in
respect to many things, should probably be limited by a re
ference to speech. In speaking, that is, in giving instruction
in the religious assemblies, we all err in respect to many
things. If any stumbleth not in word, the same is a perfect man, able
to bridle the whole body also (iii. 2). — This is the doctrine that
self-control in one respect carries with it complete self-con
trol — probably a half-truth.
Now if we put the horses' bridles into their mouths . . .
we turn about the whole body also (iii. 3). — This is intended
as an illustration of the doctrine of the preceding verse.
The illustration limps, however, since the principle that a
man who can control his tongue (mouth) is " a perfect man' '

iii. 4-7- JAMES 285
is not exemplified by the fact that a horse may be turned
about by means of a bridle in its mouth.
The same is true of the illustration drawn from the rudder
of a ship (iii. 4). Nothing is exemplified except the fact
that a little thing, like the tongue, a bridle, or a rudder, may
accomplish much.
This idea is carried forward in the declaration that the
tongue is a little member and boasteth great things. Behold
how much wood is kindled by how small afire (iii. 5), literally,
" how small a fire kindles how great a forest."
The writer now proceeds to an application of the figure suggested
by the word " fire."
And the tongue is a fire ; the world of iniquity among our
members (iii. 6). — The world of iniquity means the totality
of evil. The writer is evidently carried away by his zeal
against the tongue, and furnishes an example of extravagant
speech in attributing the sum total of badness to intemperate
language. Which' defileth the whole body is also an exag
geration. And setteth on fire the wheel of nature (iii. 6). — The mean
ing of this expression is doubtful. The word rendered
nature signifies primarily " origin," and by extension
" that which follows origin," " life," is sometimes expressed
by it according to good authorities. Perhaps ' ' the wheel of
life," life being regarded as in rotation, " the natural rota.
tion of life," is a tolerably correct rendering of the words.
The figure is too obscure to be elegant, and the translation,
wheel of nature, renders it more extravagant than the words
require it to be regarded.
For every kind of beasts and birds, of creeping things, and
things in the sea, is tamed (iii. 7). — " Every nature of beasts "
is the original, and the writer intends to contrast the two
natures, that of man as exemplified in the tongue and that
of beast.

286 JAMES iii. 8-18.
But the tongue can no man tame (iii. 8). — This assertion
can hardly be regarded as true, at least so far as the control
of one's own tongue is concerned, and is shown to be false by
many examples. The declaration that in general the tongue
is untamable, and cannot be brought under subjection by
discipline and Christian education is somewhat hazardous,
and is certainly too pessimistic and extravagant to be ac
cepted without question.
Full of deadly poison (iii. 8). — The figure of a serpent.
Compare Ps. cxl. 3, " the poison of asps is under their lips."
The figures of the fountain, the fig-tree, etc. (iii. II, 12)
are intended to strengthen the declaration that these things
ought not so to be (iii. 10).
Who is wise and understanding among you ? let him show
by his good life his works in meekness of wisdom (iii. 13). — The
attempt to bring this verse into connection with the idea im
plied in the analogies of the " fountain," etc., is strained.
The writer begins here a new theme. Meekness of wisdom,
that is, a gentleness which flows from or is peculiar to wis
dom. But strife, jealousy, and faction spring not from the
wisdom that is from above (i. 5), but from its opposite (vv.
14, 15)-
But the wisdom that is from above (iii. 17). — This is one of
the " good gifts " of " the Father of lights " (i. 17). With
out variance, that is, without dubiousness or uncertainty.
The fruit of righteousness is sown in peace for them that make
peace (iii. 18). — This passage has caused no little perplexity
to the commentators, and it must be conceded that the writer
has not expressed himself with precision. Since fruit is not
literally sown, the term may be taken in the so-called " preg
nant " sense for the seed which produces the fruit. Right
eousness is not "justification," but the moral quality of
uprightness, and its fruit is the moral conduct appropriate
to it.1 The seed, of which the outcome is this conduct, is
1 Gal. v. 22 ; Phil. i. 11 ; Heb. xii. 11.

iv. 1, 2. JAMES 287
sown in peace, which is emphatic in contrast with the " jeal
ousy and faction " mentioned in verse 16. The sowing is
not the act of God, but of the men themselves who make
peace. Accordingly the translation, for them that make peace,
is incorrect, and " by them," etc., should take its place.
Perhaps the passage was suggested to the writer's mind by
the " peaceable wisdom " of verse 17. Compare " peaceable
fruit . . . even the fruit of righteousness." '
In immediate connection with the words in favour of peace, which
conclude the preceding chapter, the writer proceeds to speak of
discord among Christians and of the relation to it of evil desires,
together with various matters of a practical character (iv. 1-17).
Whence come wars and fightings among you (iv. i) ? — This
question appears to indicate that the writer had certain local
conditions in mind, with which he was familiar. The char
acter of the fightings cannot be determined from the text.
They may have been over questions of doctrine or of pro
perty. By the form of the succeeding question the writer
implies that they originated in the pleasures of his readers.
Pleasures is probably used by metonomy for desires. Hence
he continues :
Ye lust and have not, ye kill and covet, and cannot obtain
(iv. 2). — The objects of the lust are left to be conjectured.
Have not, that is, do not obtain. Ye kill. This is probably
not to be understood as denoting the overt act of homicide.
We have already seen that the writer is somewhat extrava
gant in his language (see 1 John iii. 15).
Ye have not, because ye ask not (iv. 2). — To ask here evid
ently means to pray for, according to verse 3, and the writer
evidently believed in prayer for such things as the per
sons whom he had in view were contending (fighting) about.
Yet in contradiction of the declaration that they do not ask,
he goes on to say : 1 Heb. xii. n.

288 JAMES iv. 3-5-
Ye ask, and receive not because ye ask amiss,- that ye may
spend it in your pleasures (iv. 3), that is, their prayer is a
bad one, and is not answered because the purpose for which
they ask is to spend whatever they may receive in answer to
prayer in pleasures. It is evident that the writer had in
mind praying for material possessions, that is, such posses
sions as might be spent in pleasures, and that he believed
such things could be " received " in answer to prayer, if the
purpose for which they were asked was good.
Ye adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world
is enmity with God (iv. 4) ?— Adulteresses. The feminine
alone is used according to the most approved reading. But
if it be allowed with nearly all commentators that the word
is employed in a figurative sense ' to denote faithlessness,
worldliness, etc., the feminine form is explicable only on the
supposition that not individuals, but churches are referred to.
A friend ofthe world is evidently not one who wishes to do
good to the world (iv. 4), but one who is worldly minded, not
spiritual, etc. The world is frequently used in the New Tes
tament for " the whole mass of men alienated from God." 2
Or think ye that the Scripture speaketh in vain, etc. (iv. 5) ? —
A citation from the Old Testament is naturally looked for in
the words that follow, but no one has been able to find one
in them. The passage quoted in verse 6 relates to another
subject. The writer might have had in mind passages in
the Old Testament which accord with the sentiment of verse
4, but omitted to quote any particular one.
Doth the spirit which He made to dwell in us long unto envy
ing (iv. 5) ? — This is capable of the rendering : ' ' Doth He
even to jealousy long for the spirit which He hath made to
dwell in us ? " Whether this was a current proverb which
the writer took for a Scripture quotation, or is a passage
from some apocryphal writing, or neither, its connection
1 Matt. xii. 39, xvi. 4.
9 John vii. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 21, vi. 2 ; 2 Cor. vii. 10 ; Jas. i. 27 ; 1 Pet. v. 9.

iv. 6-1 1. JAMES 289
with what precedes it is exceedingly obscure. A very ob
scure connection appears if we suppose the sense to be that
if we are worldly God does not long for (love) the spirit
which He has made to dwell in us, that is, our spirit, not the
Holy Spirit, which is not recognised in the Epistle.
But He giveth more grace (iv. 6). — The thought is here
also sadly wanting in clearness and precision. The meaning
may possibly be that God gives more grace than if He did
not love (" long for ") us. Wherefore the Scripture saith :
God resistelh the proud, but giveth grace to the humble. This
citation is from Prov. iii. 34, ' substantially according to the
Septuagint. Connection with verse 4 may be established by
supposing the writer to have thought the worldly to be
proud. Be subject, therefore, unto God; but resist the devil, and he
will flee from you (iv. J). — The former injunction may be
regarded as addressed to the " proud." The second appears
to indicate a dependence on 1 Pet. v. 8. The devil is the per
sonal evil power who represents " the world" (verse 4) —
' ' the prince of this world. ' ' 2
Draw nigh to God (iv. 8). — See Heb. vii. 19. Fellowship
with God and the divine support are made to depend on our
attitude toward Him. Double-minded (iv. 8). See i. 8.
Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep (iv. 9). — " For godly sor
row worketh repentance." 3 See also Luke xviii. 13.
Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord (iv. 10). — This
appears to indicate an acquaintance with Matt, xxiii. 12, or
Luke xiv. 11, or at least with the saying of Jesus recorded
in these places. See also 1 Pet. v. 6. In the apocryphal
book of Sirach it is said, " They that fear the Lord will hum
ble their souls before Him " (ii. 17).
Speaketh against the law and judgeth the law (iv. II). — No
connection with the foregoing is here discernible, and the
writer appears to begin a new theme. The law is probably
1 See 1 Pet. v. 5. 2 John xii. 31, xiv. 30. " 2 Cor. vii. 10.
19

290 JAMES iv. 12-15.
that referred to in i. 25 and ii. 9, the Christian law. He
who speaketh against another may be said to contemn this
law, to judge it, instead of being a doer of it.
Only one is the Lawgiver and Judge, even He who is able to
save and destroy (iv. 12). — This appears to be a reminiscence
of Matt. x. 28. Who art thou that judgest ? '
The writer now addresses himself to those who are absorbed in
getting gain by means of trade (iv. 13-17).
Go to now, ye that say, To-day or to-morrow we will go into
this city (iv. 13).— There is no reason for supposing that the
writer had not in mind the rich members of the Christian
communities which he was addressing. Go to. This ex
pression, meaning " come now," is used here and in v. 1 only
in the New Testament.2 The condemnation here implied of
the prosecution of a legitimate business for gain, there being
no intimation that the business in question was carried on
dishonestly, appears to have been written from the point of
view of the opposition to riches and hostility to rich men,
which is represented in other places in the Epistle. The
condemnation is unqualified, and the question does not ap
pear to have been considered whether a man might not trade
and get gain, and still be righteous, God-fearing, and benev
olent. If the rich men in question were base and selfish,3
these characteristics might well have been censured rather
than the pursuit of riches in itself. The passage illustrates
the one-sided way the writer had of looking at things (iii.
2-4). Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow (iv. 14).
— The fact, however, that we do not know what the morrow
may bring forth is no reason why we should not honestly
get gain to-day.
For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will (iv. 15). — If this
verse has a logical connection with the foregoing it means
1 Rom. xiv. 4. 2 aye vvv. 8 Luke xii. 18-21.

iv. 16, 17. JAMES

291

that one ought not to say, " I will go into this city," etc.,
but, " If the Lord will, I will go." But the emphatic point
in verses 13 and 14 is the condemnation of getting gain, and
the writer can hardly have meant in view of verse 14 that
getting gain is allowable, if one say one will trade if the
Lord will, provided the Lord's will were ascertainable in
every case. There seems to be a confusion of thought here.
The formula, " If the Lord will," may convey an expression
of piety, or may be only an empty form. Paul uses it in 1
Cor. iv. 19, but sometimes dispenses with it.1
But now ye glory in your vauntings (iv. 16). — According to
the connection this appears to mean nothing more than that
the persons in view say they will go into this or that city
and trade without saying, " If the Lord will."
To him, therefore, that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not,
to him it is sin (iv. 17).— If this verse is to be interpreted in
connection with the foregoing, and not as an independent
aphorism, it means that he who knows that he should say,
" If the Lord will," and does not say it, commits a sin. As
an independent aphorism it is an ethical commonplace.
The thought here (verse 17) is essentially that of Luke xii. 47,
"that servant who knew his lord's will and prepared not himself
neither did according to his will shall be beaten with many stripes."
The relation of the two passages does not, however, indicate a literary
dependence. The writer of the Epistle does not make any citations
from the Gospels, and can hardly be said, indeed, to have been famil
iar with them, since he betrays their influence in only a slight degree
if at all. The recommendation that in a case of sickness " the elders "
be called upon, who will "pray over " the subject and "anoint him
with oil in the name of the Lord " (v. 14), suggests Mark vi. 13 where
healing by the disciples is mentioned in connection with anointing
with oil. "A doer of the work" (i. 25) simply reminds us of Matt.
vii. 21, 24, 26 and Luke vi. 47, 49, but there is nothing in the form of
expression which denotes that the writer was acquainted with these
sayings of Jesus, as is the case likewise with 1 Peter iii. 14, iv. 14, in
1 Rom. xv. 28 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 5.

292

JAMES v. 1-3.

relation to expressions found in the Gospels. The occurrence of
siugle words used in the synoptic Gospels proves nothing as to the
writer's acquaintance with them or the influence of their vocabulary
upon him, particularly since he neglects to quote words of Jesus in
several instances in which such a citation would naturally be expected
from one familiar with them. Most of the expressions which he does
employ that are akin to sayings of Jesus belong to the aphoristic
wisdom of the Jews from which Jesus himself largely drew. The
slight interest shown by the writers of the Epistles in the events of
the life of Jesus and in his teachings is noteworthy.
The Epistle closes with woes upon the rich and with exhorta
tions as to patience, faith, and the healing of the rich by prayer
(v. 1-20).
Go to now, ye rick, weep and howl for your miseries, etc. (v.
I). — The rich are warned of miseries which are to come upon
them, but no discrimination is made between different kinds
of rich men. All are visited with a sweeping condemnation,
apparently because they are rich. What miseries the writer
had in mind can only be conjectured. Perhaps he was
thinking of " the last days," that is, the Parousia (verse 3),
when the rich would, as he supposed, be visited with ' ' eter
nal destruction from the face of the Lord." 1
Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-
eaten (v. 2). — These figures are a poetic exaggeration. Eat
your flesh as fire. Compare Ps. xxi. 9.
Ye have laid up your treasure in the last days (v. 3), that
is, in the days just preceding the second coming of Christ to
j udgment, when ye ought to have been thinking of other
matters. Now very soon these riches will bear testimony
against you in that judgment.
The dishonest actions and the oppressions of the rich are now
specially mentioned as a reason for the condemnation of these
people, but here again there is no discrimination (v. 4).
Moreover, they appear to have lived delicately and taken
their pleasure, fattening themselves for the day of slaughter,
1 2 Thess. i. 8, 9, 10.

v. 5-12. JAMES 293
when the " vengeance" ' of the Messianic judgment would
fall upon them (v. 5). Compare Jer. xii. 3, xxv. 34.
Ye have condemned, ye have killed the righteous one (v. 6).
— This is a charge against the rich of injustice or of procur
ing unjust decisions from the legal tribunals against righteous
men, perhaps by influence or bribery or both. Probably
killed is not to be understood literally.
Be patient, therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord
(v. 7). — These consolatory words are addressed to the op
pressed Christians. Therefore, that is, because the oppres
sive rich men will soon be punished, the coming of the Lord
being at hand, when in the Messianic judgment justice will
be done to all. An illustration of patience is drawn from
the husbandman, who waits for the precious fruit of the earth.
The blessedness of the Messianic kingdom would be the har
vest ofthe true believers. Accordingly, they should stablish
their hearts, for the Parousia was at hand.
Therefore they are admonished not to murmur one against
another, the oppressed, probably, against the rich oppressor,
lest they be judged (reminiscence of Matt. vii. 1). The
judge standeth before the doors (v. 9). Let them not, then,
think of executing vengeance themselves.2
The prophets are referred to as an example of patience which
was especially shown in the case oi fob (vv. 10, 11).
The end of the Lord (v. 10) is the end which He gave.
/ saw the Lord is full of pity and merciful (v. 1 1). — God is
frequently called merciful in the Old Testament, but. in the
New only here and in Luke vi. 36.
But above all things . . . swear not (v. 12). — This
verse is independent of connection with the context, and the
writer evidently attached great importance to the prohibition
which it contains, as above all things indicates. The passage
bears a close relation to Matt. v. 34-37, but the deviations
indicate rather a reminiscence than a quotation.
1 2 Thess. i. 8. 2 Rom. xii. 19.

294

JAMES v. 13-15.

Is any among you suffering? let him pray, etc. (v. 13). —
Suffering is probably used in a general sense, and does not
relate to suffering from the oppression of the rich. Let him
sing praises. See 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 26.
Is any among you sick f Let him call for the elders of the
Church (v. 14). — The elders of the Church must be interpreted
as the " presbyters " or the officials referred to in 1 Pet. v.
1-3. The language indicates that the writer had in mind
not individuals of this class, but " the Presbytery," the
college of presbyters.1 Since these were to pray over the
sick man and anoint him with oil it is evident that a miracu
lous healing power was supposed to reside in this official
body. This circumstance has rightly been regarded as indi
cating the late origin of the Epistle, for in the earlier Church
"healing" and "miracles" pertained to believers indis
criminately according to 1 Cor. xii. 9, 10.
Anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord (v. 14). — It
is related in Mark vi. 13 that the apostles when sent out by
Jesus " anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed
them. " It is not probable, however, that the cure was attrib
uted to the anointing in either case, which was rather a the-
urgic or magical application made in accordance with
Oriental usage. The whole process was doubtless analogous
to the mind- and prayer-cures of modern times, although the
writer is certain of the efficacy of the means employed.
The prayer of faith shall save him that is sick, and the Lord
shall raise him up (v. 15). — The prayer of faith is the prayer
which faith offers, or which is offered in faith. Shall save
him, that is, will heal him.2 The Lord is probably Christ,
although the word is often used for " God " in this Epistle.
And if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him (v.
15). — Perhaps the sins that the writer had in mind were
those which had caused his disease, though there is no intim-
1 1 Tim. iv. 14.
2 Matt. ix. 21 ; Mark v. 23, " saved " or " made whole."

v. 16-20. JAMES 295
ation in the connection that any disease incurred without
the subject's fault might not be treated in this way. It is
not apparent in any case why the sins of the sick man should
heforgiven, since his repentance is not intimated, and nothing
is said about his having " faith." Yet confession of their
sins one to another is strangely made a condition ofthe healing
of the believers (v. 16). The supplication of a righteous man
availeth much, and not alone for " wisdom " (i. 5), but for
material advantages (iv. 3, v. 14, 15) according to the doc
trine of the Epistle. Even rain may be obtained or prevented
by prayer, as the case of Elijah proves, according to the writ
er's understanding of the matter. He shows himself, how
ever, not well read in the Old Testament, for there is no
account of Elijah's having prayed either that there should
not be or that there should be rain.1 There is also a devia
tion from the account in 1 Kings as to the length of time
during which the drought continued. According to 1 Kgs.
xviii. 1 Elijah announced " in the third year," that is, the
third year of the reign of Ahab, that there would be rain,
but this was not three years and six months from the time
when he declared that there would be no rain " these years "
(xvii. 1). The writer appears to have followed a tradition
which was followed in Luke iv. 25.
If any among you do err from the truth, and one convert him
(v. 19). — According to the following verse, converteth a sin
ner from the error of his way ; the truth here doubtless means
not " sound doctrine," but " practical truth."
Shall save a soul from death (v. 20), that is, from the death
to which all but believers would be subject at the Parousia,
" eternal destruction." '
And shall cover a multitude of sins (v. 20). — This probably
proverbial expression 3 does not appear to be appropriately
employed in this connection.
1 1 Kgs. xvi. 1, xviii. 1, 41. s 2 Thess. i. 7-9. 3 1 Pet. iv. 8.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER.

INTRODUCTION.
THIS Epistle is addressed to " the elect who are sojourners
of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia,
and Bithynia." Here, as in Jas. i. i, "the Dispersion"
suggests Jewish-Christian readers as the persons addressed.
But the manifest references in the Epistle to antecedent cir
cumstances and conditions of the readers, which imply that
they were gentile Christians, renders this view untenable
(i. 14, 18, ii. 9, 10, iv. 3, 4). In order to make the address
accord with these indications several interpretations of the
phrase " sojourners ofthe Dispersion " have been proposed,
among the most probable of which is that it designated in the
thought of the writer gentile Christians in accordance with
iii. 6, where the Christian women are called daughters of
Sarah, and with ii. 9, 10, v. 3, where the believers addressed
are called " a holy nation," " the people of God," and " the
flock," ' just as Paul designates Christendom as " the Israel
of God," ' and the gentile Christians as " sons of Abra
ham." 3 The writer evidently had before his mind believers
who were in tribulation on account of persecutions which
they had endured or with which they were threatened (ii.
12, iii. 16, iv. 4, 12, 13, v. 8, 9), and he wrote in order to
encourage and strengthen them, ' ' exhorting and testifying
that this is the true grace of God ; stand ye fast therein "
' Jer. xiii. 17. 2 Gal. vi. 16. 3 Ibid. iii. 17.
297

Z98 INTRODUCTION
(v. 12). Over against the sufferings which the Christians
addressed were called upon to endure are placed a " living
hope," an "inheritance incorruptible," and the salvation
of their souls (i. 3, 4, 9). The introduction (i. 1-12) is
occupied with these encouragements. There follow exhort
ations to holiness "in all manner of living " (i. 13— ii. 10) ;
abstinence from " fleshly lusts," and subjections of various
kinds (ii. 1 1— iii. 12) ; patient endurance in view of Christ's
sufferings, etc. (iii. 13-iv. 6) ; soberness and pure love, etc.
(iv. 7-19); and duties of elders and members of the Church
(v. 1-11).
The relation of the Epistle to other New Testament writ
ings is of importance with reference to the question of its
date. A literary dependence ^upon Romans is almost uni
versally conceded. Especially does the section of Romans
including xii. i-xiii. 14 furnish material which the writer of
1 Peter has in several passages reproduced. Weiss is the
only scholar of note who maintains that Romans shows de
pendence on 1 Peter. The contacts with 1 Corinthians and
Galatians show their priority in the influence of the Pauline
thought and manner of expression, but not certainly a lit
erary dependence of our Epistle upon them. The same is
probably true of Hebrews and Ephesians. The influence of
the synoptic Gospels upon the writer of the Epistle cannot
be successfully disputed. It is probably prior to James, but
the relation of the two writings is of such a character that
no certain conclusion regarding it is likely to be reached.
The fourth Gospel and the Epistles ascribed to John are
undoubtedly later, but they show no literary dependence
upon it.
The Epistle may be regarded as Pauline in the sense that
many of the ideas of the apostle are represented in it, al
though they are modified, as in other later Epistles, in
accordance with the general tendency of the post-apostblic
age to soften their harder dogmatic character. The influ-

FIRST PETER 299
ence of Paul's style is so apparent as to indicate that the
writer was a diligent student of his Epistles.
The fact that the form and thought of the Epistle are
Pauline, that the apostle's ideas are not only presupposed,
but also hospitably appropriated, stands unquestionably
against the supposition that Peter was its author. There is
little probability that Peter could have been so well-read in
the Pauline literature as the author of the Epistle evidently
was, and that he could so far have forgotten the fundamental
ideas of Jesus' teaching as to give them little place in an
Epistle to the churches — the conceptions of " the kingdom
of God, Son of God, and Son of Man." The man who was
one of the " pillars" at Jerusalem in support of the law
could hardly have written without reference to it. A per
sonal companion of Jesus could not, as this writer does, omit
reminiscences of the Master's life and words, and put faith
and atonement in the Pauline sense in the place of the imme
diate relation of man to God represented as his teaching in
the synoptic Gospels. The man who was "resisted" by
Paul, and stood " condemned " before him with respect to a
fundamental question of Christianity, ' would not write an
Epistle whose essential contents accuse him of being his dis
ciple. A Jewish fisherman who as an apostle required an
interpreter, according to Papias, could not write in a Greek
style like that of this Epistle. The style shows no evidences
of a translation from Aramaic into Greek, and the supposi
tion that it was written by Mark or Silas after the dictation
of Peter is totally unsupported. " By Silvanus" (v. 12)
designates Silvanus as the bearer of the Epistle (to whom or
to what church ?) as a part of the fiction of its origin.
The opinion, defended by many eminent scholars and
recently adopted by Ramsay,2 that the persecutions to which
the Epistle represents the Christians as exposed were prob
ably, according to intimations contained in it, those instituted
' Gal. ii. 11-17. 2 The Church in the Roman Empire, pp. 280 f.

300 INTRODUCTION
by the Roman authorities and carried out by Pliny, has
a strong probability in its favour. Persecution to the
death appears to be implied in iv. 15, 16, and after question
and trial in iii. 15, while it seems from v. 9 to have been
general. " They suffer for the Name (iv. 14-16) pure and
simple; the trial takes the form of an inquiry into their re
ligion, giving them the opportunity of ' glorifying God in
this Name.' " This was not the kind of persecution carried
on in the reign of Nero. The circumstances implied in the
Epistle fit the conditions of persecution which existed toward
the end of the first century or the beginning of the second.
That it was written, then, as late as the time of Trajan, that
is, in the first decade of the second century, is not improb
able, while a date earlier than the last quarter of the first
century is untenable.
The Epistle purports to have been written from Babylon
(v. 13), for " she that is in Babylon, elect," probably refers
to the church in Babylon. This appellation is, however, in
all probability intended for Rome, which might well receive
the name in a time when persecutions of the Christians were
ordered there, especially if we suppose the letter to have
been written after the portions of Revelation in which the
city is so designated.'
Testimonies to the existence of the Epistle very early in
the second century are doubtful. The second Epistle of
Peter refers to it (iii. 1), and apparent contacts with one or
two expressions contained in it are found in Clement of
Rome, the Ignatian letters, and Barnabas. But these con
tacts are too doubtful to warrant the affirmation that the
writers in question were acquainted with it. The common
expressions may have been current in the religious language
of the time, so that they may as reasonably be supposed to
indicate the contemporaneous origin of the several writings
as the use of one of them by the writers of another. The
1 Rev. xiv. 8, xvi. 19, xvii. 5.

FIRST PETER 301
writer of 'Hermas is thought by Zahn to have been acquainted
with the Epistle, but this scholar's argument is not conclu
sive. Eusebius found traces of a knowledge of it in Papias
(about a.d. 140), and thought that Polycarp, who died after
the middle of the second century, had read it. Neither he
nor Justin Martyr, however, expressly quotes it. It is
wanting in the canon oflVluratori — a list of received New
Testament books made by an unknown writer toward the
end of the second century. It is accepted as a writing of
Peter's by Irenseus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian,
and Origen called it " an acknowledged Epistle."

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER.

EXPOSITION.
In the introduction the readers are encouraged on the ground of
their inheritance through Christ, salvation through whom was
foretold by the prophets (i. 1-12).
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the elect who are sojourn
ers, etc. (i. I, 2). — On sojourners of the Dispersion see the
Introduction. Pontus, etc. The provinces mentioned are
those of Asia Minor. We have no knowledge of the spread
of Christianity in Pontus, Kappadocia, and Bithynia during
the first century. We know from a letter of Pliny's to
Trajan that in the beginning of the second century it was
somewhat extended in Bithynia. That an Epistle should
have been written to these provinces about the middle ofthe
first century by Peter is of course incredible. Asia probably
includes some western provinces, Phrygia, etc. According
to the foreknowledge of God is to be connected with elect. The
writer regards the Christians as foreknown by God to be_
such, that is " elected " or foreordained.1 This is a Pauline
idea, but is not contained in the teaching of Jesus. The
writer of this Epistle betrays here the influence of Paul, and
shows by his departure from the original Christian tradition
the improbability of the supposition that he was the apostle
Peter. 1 Rom. viii. 29.
303

3o4 FIRST PETER i. 2-5.
Unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (i.
2). — This like the two preceding clauses must be connected
with elect. The sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ refers
to the sprinkling of the people with the blood of the sacrifice
on the occasion of the covenant-offering,' and signifies here
that the elect were received into the covenant concluded by
the shedding of the blood of Christ. The expression is not
used by Paul, although the idea of redemption expressed is
Pauline, and the conception belongs to the point of view dis
tinctively represented by the Epistle to the Hebrews.2 The
presence of a Jewish element in Christian doctrine is to be
noted here, which is happily foreign to the teaching of Jesus.
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (i. 3). — A Pauline
phrase.3 Begat us again unto a living hope. The idea of
the new birth. The word is used only in this Epistle (see
verse 23).
Unto an inheritance, etc. (i. 4). — This denotes that to
which the living hope looks forward. The inheritance desig
nates the hoped-for blessedness of the Messianic kingdom,
of which the believers were regarded as " heirs " 4 who
would soon enter upon their ' ' eternal inheritance " 6 — an
seonian inheritance, hence incorruptible. The early Christ
ian writers generally did not think of the " reign " of Christ
after his second coming as having an end, until he should
deliver up the kingdom to God,c after which its blessedness
would continue, since God would be " all in all." Reserved
in heaven. See Col. i. 5. The kingdom was regarded as in
heaven, because Christ was expected to descend thence.*
Guarded through faith (i. 5), that is, from apostasy, etc.,
in order that as believers they (the Christians addressed)
might enter upon the salvation ready to be revealed in the last
time, for only true believers could share in the blessedness of
lEx. xxiv. 8. 2Heb. ix. 19, xii. 24. 3Rom. xv. 6 ; 2 Cor. i. 3.
4 Gal. iv. 7. 6 Heb. ix. 15 ; Gal. iii. 18. 6 1 Cor. xv. 24.
' 1 Thess. iv. 16.

i. 6-10. FIRST PETER 305
the Messianic kingdom. Faith is here employed absolutely,
that is, without indication of an object, God or Christ, and
is evidently regarded as the essential basis of the Christian
life, while at the same time it is conceived as the means of
salvation "at the appearing of Jesus Christ" (verse 7).
The doctrine is more fully expressed in verse 21, where
belief in God is declared to be " through ' ' Christ, and is
connected with His having raised Jesus from the dead.1
This course of thought clearly indicates the writer's de
pendence on Paul, although the doctrine of "justification
through faith " is not explicitly mentioned. Harnack cor
rectly finds that in 1 Peter, as well as in Hebrews and the
Pastoral Epistles, certain fundamental features of Paul's
thought are reproduced according to the peculiar apprehen
sion of the several writers. The last time is the time of the
expected second coming of Christ, the Parousia, " the end
of all things," which was conceived as "at hand " (iv. 7).
The world-order of " the present age " would then be closed,
come to its " end," and that of " the age to come," the
Messianic age, would begin.
Put to grief in manifold temptations (i. 6). — Temptations,
that is, trials by means of persecution. See Jas. i. 2 ; Acts
xx. 19.
Might be found unto praise at the salvation of Jesus Christ
(i. 7). — The persecutions have for their object the proof of
the faith of the Christians, which will be shown at the Pa
rousia, when Christ shall come as judge.
On whom, though now ye see him not , believing, ye rejoice
. receiving the end of your faith, the salvation of your
souls (i. 8, 9). — This salvation is that of the Messianic king
dom, and so generally in the New Testament. Not having
seen, 2 Cor. v. 7.
Concerning which salvation the prophets have inquired (i.
10). — In accordance with the general doctrine of the early
1 1 Cor. xv. 17.

306 FIRST PETER i. II-14.
Church the writer declares that the work of Christ was fore
told by the prophets of the Old Testament. The idea that
the preexistent spirit of Christ inspired these prophets is
expressed also in Heb. ii. 11-13, x. 5-9.
Testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories
(i. II). — The passages are not indicated, but the writer could
have found them in abundance by means of the allegorical
interpretation employed in detail in Hebrews. Glories is
Pauline.1 By the Holy Ghost sent Jorth from heaven (i. 12). — Not
only the apostles but the believers in general were thought
in the early Church to receive the Holy Ghost.2 Since it was
regarded as the Spirit of God, it was conceived to be sent
forth from heaven.
Which things angels desire to look into (i. 12). — The writer
of Ephesians conceives the desire of the angels to have been
gratified in this regard.3
The writer now proceeds to exhortations to a mode of life be
coming such as have been born again (i. 13— ii. 10).
Wherefore, girding up the loins of your mind . set
your hope perfectly in the grace that is to be brought to you at
the revelation of Jesus Christ (i. 13). — Girding up, etc., is a
figure denoting spiritual preparation for the coming of
Christ in his kingdom, or the revelation of Jesus Christ. The
grace then to be looked for is the Messianic " salvation " or
entrance into the kingdom. The revelation of Christ is a
Pauline term for the Parousia or second personal coming.4
According to your former lusts (i. 14). — The writer evidently
had in mind gentile Christians whose ignorance was that of
those who knew not the true God.6
1 2 Cor. iii. 18, iv. 17 ; 1 Cor. xv. 43 ; Phil. iii. 21, iv. 19.
2 Acts viii. 15, x. 44. s Eph. iv. 10, 11.
4 1 Cor. i. 7 ; 2 Thess. i. 7. » Acts xvii. 30 ; Eph. iv. 18.

i. 15-19. FIRST PETER 307
But like as He who called you (i. 15, 16). — See 1 Thess. ii.
12, iv. 7 ; 2 Tim. i. 9. Ye shall be holy. The passage
quoted is found in Lev. xi. 44 and in other places. The
idea that men should imitate the divine qualities belongs
also to the teaching of Jesus. '
Without respect of persons (i. 17). — See Acts x. 34; Rom.
ii. n ; Eph. vi. 9 ; Col. iii. 25. Judgeth according to each
man's work. See Rom. ii. 6; 2 Cor. v. 10.
Pass the time of your sojourning in fear (i. 17). — The so
journing is that of life in this world — a figurative use of the
word. Fear is probably reverence for God, or it may be
timidity in view of His judgment.2 The sense is the same
in ii. 8 and iii. 16.
Knowing that ye were redeemed, not with corruptible things
. . . from your vain manner of life . . . but with pre
cious blood, as of a lamb . . . even the blood of Christ (i.
18, 19). — Redeem means to purchase or release by the pay
ment of a ransom. This is the strictly Pauline sense of the
term, most explicitly expressed in Gal. iii. 13, where Paul
represents Christ as having ' ' bought us off from the curse
of the law " by having " become a curse for us," that is, by
having borne its penalty for us, purchased us with his
blood. The manner of bearing it, that is, " on the tree," is
indicated. While the idea here expressed is Pauline, the
manner of expressing it is not, since not redemption from
' ' the curse of the law, ' ' from penalty, is prominent, as in
Paul's construction, but a remote result, deliverance from a
vain manner of life, is emphasised. This is the weakened
Paulinism of the later Epistles.3 Lamb, etc. See Is. iii. 7 ;
John i. 29. The words without blemish, etc., appear to indi
cate that the writer had in mind the idea of sacrifice in
accordance with Levit. xxii. 20, 21, and intended to be under
stood as teaching that the precious blood oi Christ possessed re
deeming efficacy, because it was that of a blameless sacrificial
1 Matt. v. 48 ; Luke vi. 36. 2 2 Cor. v. ii. 3 See Tit. ii. 14.

3o8 FIRST PETER t. 20-23.
victim. The question, however, whether in this Epistle, as
well as in the Pauline doctrine, the idea of sacrifice is con
nected with that of redemption must remain undecided.
The "once," iii. 18, appears to indicate, after the analogy of
Heb. ix. 26-28, a single sacrifice made in place ofthe frequent
offerings prescribed in the Hebrew ritual.1 The most emi
nent expositors disagree on this point.
Who was foreknown, indeed, before the foundation of the
world, but was manifested at the end of the times (i. 20). —
The preexistence of Christ is probably implied here, as in
verse n it is explicitly declared that he was in the prophets,
and testified beforehand his sufferings and his subsequent
glory through them. His manifestation " in these last
times ' ' implies a previous unmanifested existence, as in 1
Tim. iii. 6 ; Heb. ix. 26. The divine predetermination of
the redemption of men through Christ was a current doctrine
in the early Church.2 The idea that the believers were
' ' chosen in him ' ' is expressed in Eph. i. 4. The former
predestination was probably regarded as including the latter.
At the end of the times, that is, the end of the pre-Messianic
age. Which raised him from the dead . . . so that your faith
and hope might be in God (i. 2l). — The last clause is capable
of the rendering, " so that your faith might be also hope
in God." Compare 1 Cor. xv. 14. This connection of the
resurrection of Christ with Christian faith and hope is dis
tinctively Pauline.
Love one another, etc. (i. 22). — The essence of practical
Christianity. Having been begotten again, etc. (i. 23). — In this concep
tion the writer is more in contact with the fourth Gospel and
the Johannine Epistles than with Paul.3
1 See Rom. vi. 10.
2 Rom. xvi. 25, 26 ; 2 Tim. i. 10 ; Tit. i. 3 ; John xvii. 24.
3 John i. 13, iii. 3, 5, 6, 8 ; 1 John iii. 9, iv. 7, v. 1, 4, 18.

i. 23-ii. 6. FIRST PETER 309
Not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible (i. 23). — The
latter is the Holy Spirit. Compare " His [God's] seed
abideth in him," 1 John iii. 9.
Through the word of God, which liveth and abideth (i. 24). —
This may be grammatically rendered, " Through the word
ofthe living and abiding God," but in favour of the other
rendering is the citation from Is. xl. 6, 7.
Putting away, therefore, all wickedness and all guile and
hypocrisies (ii. I, 2, 3). — The connection indicated by there
fore is with the idea of the new birth in the foregoing.
Since you are born anew, you ought to put away, etc., and,
as newborn babes, long for the spiritual milk. ' Spiritual is a
misleading translation of a word which means "reasonable,"
" rational," in this connection, probably that which is nour
ishing to the mind. Without guile is too literal a rendering,
and " pure " were a much better translation of the Greek
word. If ye have tasted. See Heb. vi. 4.
Unto whom coming, a living stone (ii. 4). — The figure of a
stone applied to Jesus is employed in Rom. ix. 33 ; Matt.
xxi. 42; Acts iv. n. The application of the epithet living
is obscure, and has the appearance of a mixing of metaphors.
Ye also as living stones are built up a spiritual house (ii. 5).
¦ — The idea of Christ as a stone, elect, precious, probably a
corner-stone (see the quotation, verse 6), suggested to the
writer the figure of a temple, the walls of which should be
composed of believers. The figure may have been derived
from 1 Cor. iii. 16. The transition is rather abrupt from
' ' newborn babes ' ' longing for reasonable milk to ' ' living
stones" in " a spiritual house."
To be a holy priesthood (ii. 5). — It is difficult to rid oneself
of the impression of an incongruity and infelicity, if not a
confusion, of thought in this connection oi stones as part of a
house and a priesthood offering sacrifices.
Because it is contained in Scripture (ii. 6). — The quotation
1 1 Cor. iii. 2.

3io FIRST PETER ii. 7-11.
is from Is. xxviii. 16 according to the Septuagint, somewhat
abbreviated. The verse in the original Hebrew concludes
with, " he that believeth shall not flee," or " make haste."
It relates to Jerusalem, which is said to stand fast and not to
be in danger from the Assyrian. The reference of the pas
sage to Christ is wholly unwarranted as an interpretation of
it according to the thought of the prophet.
This corner-stone, Christ, is precious to the believers (ii.
7), but to the unbelievers a stone of stumbling and a rock of
offence (ii. 8).- — See Is. viii. 14. The preceding citation from
Ps. cxviii. 22 does not seem appropriate to unbelievers.
Whereunto also they were appointed (ii. 8). — As believers
were thought by Paul to have been " appointed unto the
obtaining of salvation, " ' so there was also a divine predes
tination of unbelievers.2 Whether or no this be regarded as
Paul's essential teaching according to the analogy of his
thought, it left its impress upon succeeding writers, and is
manifestly expressed here.
But ye are an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation (ii.
9, 10). — Epithets applied in the Old Testament to the Jews
are here employed of the Christians.3 See i. 1 and the In
troduction. See " a people for His own possession." 4 Into
His marvellous light, that is, God's, for to God the "calling "
of believers is generally attributed.6 Darkness is a figure
for the condition of the gentiles prior to their conversion.
The Christians are exhorted to abstain from fleshly lusts, and
submission is recommended to slaves and wives (ii. I i-iii. 12).
As sojourners and pilgrims (ii. II). — The sojourn and pil
grimage are figures for the earthly life, the life in " the
present age." Fleshly lusts. See Gal. v. 17. Soul, "the
1 1 Thess. v. 9 ; Rom. viii. 29.
2 Rom. ix. 18.
3 Isa. xliii. 21 ; Ex. xix. 6, LXX.
4 Tit. ii. 14. 'Col. i. 13.

ii. 12-19. FIRST PETER 311
spiritual substance of man ' ' as opposed to the body, not
"life" here.
Among the gentiles (ii. 12). — The. exhortation is addressed
to gentile Christians as contrasted with unconverted gentiles.
The day of visitation, that is, the visitation of God — an ex
pression which may refer to the divine judgment or to a
dealing with those visited which effects, or is intended to
effect, their salvation.1 The latter is probably the sense
here. Be subject to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake,
whether it be to the king as supreme , etc. (ii. 13, 14). — The
word translated ordinance is the one commonly signifying
" creation " or " creature," and is not used in the sense in
which it is here employed elsewhere in the New Testament.
As something that man has created or established, a human
institution, it is here properly rendered ordinance. The king
is the Roman emperor. For the Lord s sake, is for Christ's
sake, or because it is his will.
As free (ii. 16). — Probably in the Pauline sense.2 The
bondservant of God is the true freeman.
Honour all men (ii. 17). — This does not mean " be subject
to all men, ' ' but accord to all men the honour which belongs
to them, that is, no more than that which is due them as
men. Fear God. See note on i. 17.
Servants, be in subjection (ii. 18). — See notes on Eph. vi.
$£; Col. iii. 22 f. ; Tit. ii. 9 f. The froward, the unfair, per
verse. See Phil. ii. 15.
For this is acceptable (ii. 19). — Literally "this is grace."
See v. 20, where "with God " is supplied. The meaning is,
acceptable to God. For conscience toward God. This has had
various interpretations, " God's knowledge of us," " God's
knowledge with us" (co-knowledge), "conscientiousness
before God," and " the consciousness of God," carrying a
sense of obligation. The last two are not far apart, and
'Job. x. 12 ; Luke xix. 44. 2 Gal. v. 13.

3i2 FIRST PETER ii. 21-25.
either of them may be taken as a correct rendering of the
words. For hereunto were ye called (ii. 2l). — The Christian calling,
the state of being called as Christians, is regarded as requir
ing the patient endurance of wrong and hardship, because
Christ also suffered as an example.1 This is the practical
rather than the dogmatic view of Christ's sufferings — a
word which must be regarded as relating not to his passion
on the cross, but to all that he endured during his life, as is
apparent from v. 23, when he was reviled, reviled not again,
etc. Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth (ii.
22). — This is from Isa. liii. 9 according to the Septuagint,
and is there said of the " servant of Jehovah," the pious
remnant of the people of the exile.
Who his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree (ii.
24). — In Isa. liii. 12 according to the Septuagint it is said of
the subject previously mentioned, " he himself bare the sins
of many." The Jewish doctrine of atonement, according to
which the sufferings of one may release another or others
from guilt and penalty with reference to the law, is here
expressed. This is also Paul's doctrine, who taught that
Christ " bought us off " " from the curse [penalty] of the
law " by himself becoming a curse for us.2
To bear our sins in his body upon the tree (ii. 24) can have
no other meaning than to suffer the penalty of our sins in
his crucifixion, and so free us from it, so that we, having
died unto sins, might live unto righteousness. This passage
implies the writer's dependence upon the Pauline thought
and phraseology.3
By whose stripes ye were healed (ii. 24). — This is from Isa.
liii. 5 according to the Septuagint. See note on verse 22.
But are now returned unto 'the Shepherd and Bishop of
your souls (ii. 25).— The figure was perhaps derived from
1 John xiii. 15. 2 Gal. iii. 13. 3 Rom. vi. 2.

iii. 1-12. FIRST PETER 313
Ezek. xxxiv. 11, 12, 16, but the Shepherd is probably Christ.
See v. 4.
In like manner (that is, as the slaves, ii. 18), ye wives, be in
subjection to your own husbands (iii. I, 2). — This injunction
is intended for all the Christian women among the people
addressed, but especially to those whose husbands were un
believers, and did not obey the word. The end in view is
that the latter might be gained to the Christian cause by the
chastity and fear of their wives. See Col. iii. 18 ; Eph. v.
22-24 > I Tim. ii. 9 and the notes on the passages.
The hidden man of the heart (iii. 4). — See Paul's " inward
man." '
For after this manner . . . the holy women (iii. 5, 6).
— The prominence given to the idea of woman's subjection is
noteworthy. The writer treats the subject like an enlightened
man of his age who is unable to transcend its point of view.
Ye husbands, in like manner (iii. 7)- — " In like manner "
probably relates vaguely to the similarity of the relation be
tween exhortations to husbands and to wives.
According to knowledge. This is probably to be taken
adverbially in the sense of " with insight," that is, with
understanding of what belongs to the relation of husband
and wife. It were probably a preferable translation to omit
the words your wives which have been supplied, and read,
"dwell according to knowledge with the woman as the weaker
vessel, giving honour to her as both being heirs, ' ' etc.
Finally, be ye all likeminded (iii. 8, 9). — Compare Rom. xii.
13-17 ; 1 Thess. v. 15 ; 1 Cor. iv. 12 ; Luke vi. 28 ; Heb.
xii. 17 (" without a blessing "). The citation (vv. 10-12)
is from Ps. xxxiv. 13-17 according to the Septuagint.
Exhortations follow to patience under persecution in view of
Christ's sufferings. Mention is made of the preaching to the
spirits in prison, and soberness and pure love are recommended (iii.
13-iv. 19). 1 Rom. vii. 22 ; 2 Cor. iv. 16.

3I4 FIRST PETER iii. 14-19-
For righteousness' sake (iii. 14).— This passage appears to
have been suggested by the beatitude, Matt. v. 10. Fear
not their fear (iii. 14). Apparently from Isa. viii. 12, 13.
Here the meaning is, "fear not the fear which proceeds
from them."
But sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord [that is, rev
erence him . . . hold him as honoured], being ready
always to give an answer (iii. 15). — When questioned before
the Roman judicial tribunals as to yonr hope, that is, your
Christian faith, which includes the hope that is to become
fruition at the Parousia, be ready to answer.
Because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for
the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God (iii. 18). — Since
Christ was righteous, his suffering was not for his own sins,
but for the sins of men, that is, he made atonement for them
or ransomed men from bondage to them. The Pauline idea
of the relation of Christ's suffering to the law is not fully
carried out here, but the emphasis is placed on the result of
the atonement in the words, that he might bring us to God.
Once. See Heb. ix. 26, 28. The connection does not indi
cate that the writer had the thought of Hebrews in mind.
Being put to death in the flesh, but quickened in the spirit
(iii. 18). — The expression, quickened in the spirit, means
made alive, or raised from the dead (verse 21).1 This entire
verse is manifestly a reproduction of the Pauline teaching
on the subject. The suffering of Christ for sins accords with
" gave himself for our sins " (Gal. 1. 4) and " died for our
sins"(i Cor. xv. 3). We have here, too, the well-known Paul
ine antithesis of ' ' flesh" and ' 'spirit. ' ' The Pauline doctrine
ofthe spirit also appears in i. 2, 12, iv. 14. In which also he
went and preached to the spirits in prison (iii. 19). — Not as
essential to his argument, but as if expressing incidentally
a current belief which was suggested to him by the word
" spirit," the writer here inserts (for verse 18 would make
1 Rom. viii. 11 ; 1 Cor. xv. 22.

iii. 20. FIRST PETER

3i5

a good connection with verse 22) a tradition that Jesus went
into the underworld in the spirit, that is, after having laid
aside the flesh, and preached to the spirits.
Who were aforetime disobedient hi the days of Noah (iii. 20).
— In which he went, etc., literally " in which [spirit] having
gone, he preached," etc. These words unquestionably im
ply that the writer thought of a personal going of Christ to
preach to the spirits in prison, just as " having gone into
heaven" (verse 22) admits of no other interpretation. A
preaching through Noah to the contemporaries of the latter,
as some interpret the words, is accordingly excluded. Be
sides, if this latter view be adopted, in prison has no intel
ligible sense, since to say that the spirits were in prison
because they would not listen to Noah is to strain a figure
too much, to say nothing of the unfitness of calling the
living men of that time spirits. "Spirit" (nvevyioi) is
sometimes used in the New Testament to designate men who
have departed this life.1 Prison denotes the place where the
spirits of the disobedient were confined, that part of the under
world or realm of the dead assigned to bad men.2 To this
place, then, Jesus was believed to have gone in spirit to
preach to the spirits of the men who had been disobedient
when the ark was preparing , for when must be connected with
disobedient. As to the time when Christ was supposed to
have gone in spirit to preach to the spirits in prison, it is arbi
trary to suppose that the writer had in mind any period prior
to Jesus' coming in the flesh, since he is here speaking of
the passion and resurrection. The time was probably thought
to be between his death and his resurrection. The preach
ing of Christ in question was doubtless conceived to have
been similar to that in which he was engaged during his
earthly ministry, that is, a preaching of repentance, and it,
is arbitrary to suppose that he was thought to have gone to
1 Acts xxiii. 9 ; Luke xxiv. 37, 39 ; Heb. xii. 23.
2 Rev. xx. 7 ; 2 Pet. ii. 4 ; Jude 6.

316 FIRST PETER iii. 20-22.
these spirits in prison to announce to them their condemna
tion, which their imprisonment must be assumed to have
already made known to them.
This tradition of obscure origin has only an historical importance.
It shows that prior to and at the time of the composition of this
Epistle it was believed among some Christians that the disobedient
spirits in prison of the Noachian time were not in a hopeless con
dition. If the passage be regarded as having doctrinal significance,
it must be taken with the qualification that, strictly interpreted, it ap
plies only to the spirits of the people who lived when the ark was pre
paring. Why in the formation of the tradition this limitation was
put upon the preaching of Jesus to the departed must remain a mys
tery. It is evident that with this restriction the doctrinal importance
of the passage practically disappears. The preaching of repentance
to a small fraction ofthe disobedient departed spirits in a mythological
underworld is not a matter of great significance in a system of dog
matic theology.
A few . . . were saved through water (iii. 20). — Since
the eight souls were saved through the ark as instrument or
means, through cannot be taken in connection with water as
instrumental. Yet this idea seems to have been in the
writer's mind, since he says the water does now save the
Christians by means of baptism.
The flood seems to be regarded as a type of baptism after
a true likeness (iii. 21), but the writer's figure limps. The
interrogation of a good conscience. The word rendered " in
terrogation " means sometimes " an earnest seeking," and
the idea is that baptism saves because its subjects have
earnestly sought a good conscience toward God, or " a con
science reconciled to God." The Pauline idea is added that
the subjects in question are saved through the resurrection of
Jesus Christ.
Who is on the right hand of God (iii. 22). — See Rom. viii.
5$; Col. iii. i. Here his sway extends over all the heavenly
powers, which are here nanied as to their ranks in accordance
with the Jewish mythology. See the different names and

iv. 1-6. FIRST PETER 317
arrangements of the classes of angelic beings in Rom. viii.
38; Col. i. 16; Eph. i. 21.
Forasmuch, then, as Christ suffered in the flesh, etc. (iv. I).
— The believers are exhorted to imitate the Master in not
shrinking from suffering in the flesh from persecutions, for he
that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin, that is, one
who suffers on account of opposition to sin, has carried his
opposition to it to the point of suffering for it, has in fact
broken the power of sin in his life. To the lusts of men
(iv. 2). See the same construction as "to righteousness "
(ii. 24).
For the time past may suffice, etc. (iv. 3). — The past time
of their life, when they walked in lasciviousness, etc., was
sufficient to devote to the satisfaction of such desires as per
tain to the gentiles, who live " after the flesh."
Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick
and the dead (iv. 5). — This judge is Christ, see Acts x. 42 ;
2 Tim. iv. 1, who is " on the right hand of God " (iii. 22).
When he should come in glory it would be " to judgment."
The judgment at the Parousia is conceived by this writer as
about to be passed upon the living and the dead, those who
would be living at the time of Christ's second coming and
those who had died prior to that event. Probably so far as
the dead are concerned believers only are included in the
writer's thought, just as the Pauline doctrine of the last
things takes account of them alone. The believers were
conceived as subject to judgment.1
For to this end was the gospel preached even to the dead (iv.
6). — The end is that the dead might be judged as men, but
might live to God in the spirit. It is evident that none of
the dead are included except those to whom the gospel had
been preached. Accordingly, they must be supposed to be
either those of the time of Noah mentioned in iii. 19, or the
dead who had been ' ' evangelised ' ' prior to their death.
1 2 Cor. v. 10.

3 1 8 FIRS T PE TER iv. 7-8.
The resurrection and judgment of all the dead at the Parousia
is not expressed here, as it does not certainly appear to have
been the teaching of Paul, judged by his Epistles, although
intimations of such a belief are not wanting in some New
Testament writers/
But the end of all things is at hand (iv. 7), that is, the
end of the existing world-order, the pre- Messianic age, when
the judge, Christ, would appear.
It is evident that from this point of view the writer could not have
thought of a universal preaching ofthe gospel. But on that hypothesis
all who should be dead at the coming of Christ would not have heard
it, so that they could be included in the judgment ; and of the in
numerable multitude of those who had not heard the message while
living only those ofthe time of Noah are by implication favoured ac
cording to iii. 19. The materials for a system of theology here sup
plied are therefore very meagre.
Be ye therefore of sound mind . . . for love covereth a
multitude of sins (iv. 7-8). — Therefore, that is, because the
coming of Christ, the judge, is at hand. Of sound mind.
The Greek word implies the exercise of moderation of
mind, self-control. Sober unto prayer, that is, in a state of
mind suitable to prayer. In accordance with the essence
of Christ's teaching the writer exhorts his readers to love
one another, and adds the proverbial expression, love covereth
a multitude of sins, adopted from Prov. x. 12. The reference
is to the covering of one another's sins, putting them out of
sight, by a spirit of forgiveness. The relation of this practi
cal exhortation to the idea of the approaching " end of all
things " is somewhat obscure. There is no sufficient reason
for regarding these words as one of the sayings of Jesus not
recorded in the Gospels. It is quoted in the Didaskalia with
the words, " the Lord says," but Mr. Ropes calls attention
to the fact that the writer also quotes Prov. xv. 1 with the
same formula, and thinks, in opposition to Dr. Resch, that
1 Acts xxiv. 15 ; John v. 24 ; Rev. xx. 5.

iv. 9-14. FIRST PETER 319
the false reference of the passage to Jesus is " easily intel
ligible." See Jas. v. 20, " hide a multitude of sins," and
compare Ps. xxxii. 1, Ixxxv. 2.
Using hospitality (iv. 9). — See Rom. xii. 13; Heb. xiii. 2.
According as each hath received a gift (iv. 10). — A gift, a
charism. See Rom. xii. 6 ; 1 Cor. xii. 4, 28. A dependence
of the writer on these Pauline passages is evident.
Speaking as it were the oracles of God (iv. II). — This is
probably said with reference to the function of " prophet,"
or teacher, or preacher.1 He who performs this function
should not speak his own thoughts, but the oracles (logia)
of God, that is, the words of the Old Testament — the only
writing recognised as " inspired " among Christians at the
time when this Epistle was written.
If any man ministereth, ministering as of the strength which
God supplieth (iv. 11). — See Rom. xii. 7. Those who per
formed the official function of ministers or deacons, the same
that is called ' ' helps " in 1 Cor. xii. 28, should not serve
iu reliance on their own power, but on the strength which
God supplieth. Whose is the glory, etc. This doxology may
refer grammatically either to God or to Christ. The former
is probably the correct reference here, though according to
i. 21, the writer might consistently have had Christ in view.
Doxologies to Christ are not wanting in the later writings
of the New Testament.2
Brethren, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial, etc.
(iv. 12). — This is said with reference to the persecutions
which the Christians addressed were suffering (see the Intro
duction). These come to prove them, but they should
rejoice, since they endure such sufferings as Christ endured,
that at the revelation of his glory, that is, at the Parousia,
they may rejoice with exceeding joy (iv. 13).
For the name of Christ (iv. 14). — This expression is not
1 Rom. xii. 6.
2 Heb. xiii. 21 ; 2 Tim. iv. 18 (probably) ; 2 Pet. iii. 18 ; Rev. i. 6.

3_o FIRST PETER iv. 14-v. i.
used elsewhere in the New Testament. On persecution for
the Name, see the Introduction.
The Spirit of glory and the Spirit of God resteth upon you
(iv. 14). — They are made partakers of the Spirit of God
which is a Spirit of glory, that is, its " ministration " will be
glory to be realised at the coming of Christ.1
For let none of you suffer as a murderer . . . but if a
man suffer as a Christian let him not be ashamed (iv. 15, 16).
— No one could suffer as a murderer, etc., without arraign
ment before the Roman tribunals, and the suffering as a
Christian here implies such an arraignment as fits the inquiry
(iii. 15) which Pliny was ordered to conduct.
For the time is come for judgment to begin (iv. 17). — This
judgment is that of " the end of all things" (v. 7). The
house of God is the community of Christians. The judg
ment of the Parousia was conceived to be about to begin
with them, and the writer expresses doubt as to the fate of
the unbelievers, the ungodly and sinner (Prov. xi. 31), since
the righteous are scarcely saved (iv. 18). See 2 Thess. i. 8, 9.
Those who suffer according to the will of God (iii. 17) may
commit their souls in well-doing unto a faithful Creator (iv.
19). — God is not elsewhere designated Creator in the New
Testament. The Epistle ends with exhortations to elders, to submission on
the part of the younger, to constancy in faith, and to resistance to
the devil (v. 1-14).
The elders, therefore, among you I exhort who am a fellow-
elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ (v. i). — The
elders were overseers of the churches, and are not in the
New Testament distinguished from bishops.2 Fellow-elder.
If we suppose the writer consciously to act the part of Peter
here, he represents the apostle as a fellow-elder in some
unreal sense, such as that an apostle having oversight might
1 2 Cor. iii. 8. * 1 Tim. v. 17, 19 ; Tit. i. 5 ; Jas. v. 14.

v. i.-4. FIRST PETER 321
call himself an elder. This may have been his point of
view, or he may have forgotten his rdle and called himself
what perhaps he was in fact an elder or presbyter of the
church. Witness of the sufferings of Christ (v. 1). — According to
iv. 13 the sufferings of Christ may be the afflictions which
fell upon believers in persecution. A witness of these may
be one who bears testimony by his own fidelity in persecu
tion, a martyr. This interpretation seems required by the
fact that the article unites the two nouns in a single concep
tion, the fellow-elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ,
not " a fellow-elder and a witness," etc. But if witness be
understood to mean eye-witness and the sufferings of Christ
those which he personally endured, the passage is a part of
the fiction of authorship.
Also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed (v. i). —
The glory in question is that of the Parousia, when Christ
was expected to come in a surprising pomp and magnificence
to set up the Messianic kingdom (iv. 13 ; Jude 24). The
writer expects to share in that glory. Tend the flock of God,
etc. (v. 2). The figure of a flock and shepherd passed from
the Old Testament into the New.1 See Luke xii. 32. Not
of constraint. See Heb. xiii. 17. Nor yet for filthy lucre.
See Acts xx. 33 ; Tit. i. 7, 11.
And when the chief Shepherd 2 shall be manifested, that is,
at the Parousia, ye shall receive the crown of glory thatfadeth
not away (v. 4). — The unfading crown is the glory itself.
See " crown of righteousness," 2 Tim. iv. 8 ; " crown of
life," Jas. i. 12 and Rev. ii. 10. At the Parousia Christ was
expected to have a ' ' body of glory " 3 to which the bodies
of the believers would be " conformed," for those of them
who had died would be raised " incorruptible" and those
living would be " changed," 4 and both classes would " bear
•Jer. xxiii. 1-4; Ezek. xxxiv. 2. 3Phil. iii. 21.
2 Heb. xiii. 20. 4 1 Cor. xv. 52.

322 FIRST PETER v. 5-8.
the image ofthe heavenly " ' — the heavenly, glorious body
of Christ.Yea, all of you gird yourselves with humility to serve one
another (v. 5). — The word rendered gird yourselves means
"to fasten anything by means of a knot," hence "to
clothe," or " fasten on a garment." Clothe yourselves with
humility so as to be in a disposition to serve one another, is
the sense of the passage.2 The writer seeks to strengthen
this teaching by a citation from Prov. iii. 34 according to
the Septuagint with " God " for " Lord." 3
Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God,
that He may exalt you in due time (v. 6). — Mighty hand.
See Deut. iii. 24. On humility and exaltation see Matt.
xxiii. 12 ; Luke xiv. 11 ; Jas. iv. 10.
This verse has the appearance of having its origin in a reminiscence
of some passages in the Gospels, particularly Matt, xxiii. 12, Luke
xiv. n. The writer's relation to the Gospel-history is neither that of
close familiarity nor that of marked contact. The influence of ex
pressions in the earlier literature can hardly be affirmed on the
strength of such resemblances as " gird up the loins of your mind "
(i. 13) compared with Luke xii. 35, " let your loins be girded about";
of ' ' watch " or " be watchful " (v. 8), cf. Matt. xxiv. 42 and Luke xxi.
36 ; of "the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven" (i. 12), cf. Luke
xxiv. 49. "The stone which the builders rejected " (ii. 7) has accords
with Luke xx. 17 f., and Rom. ix. 33, but was not improbably a cur
rent phrase. Reminiscence may account for i. 10, cf. Luke x. 24, for
i. 6-9, ii. 12, iii. 16, cf. Luke vi. 32 f., and for i. ii, cf. Luke xxiv. 26.
Casting all your anxiety upon Him, etc. (v. 7)- — Erom
Ps. Iv. 22, substantially according to the Septuagint.
Your adversary, the devil, as a roaring lion (v. 8). —
Spiritual sobriety and watchfulness are enjoined because the
adversary of the believers, the personal power of evil, the
devil, walketh about like a roaring lion hungry for his prey,
1 1 Cor. xv. 49.
2 Rom. xii. 16 ; Eph. iv. 2 ; Phil. ii. 3. 3 Jas. iv. 6.

v. 9-13- FIRST PETER 323
seeking whom he may devour. Perhaps the special form of
temptation from the devil which the writer had in mind was
that connected with the persecutions already referred to and
again indicated in verse 9.
Whom withstand (v. 9). — See Jas. iv. 7. The same suffer
ings, etc., implies a general persecution. See the Introduc
tion. Who called you unto His eternal glory in Christ (v. 10). —
In Christ should be joined with called. Being called into
fellowship with Christ, the believers are called to the eternal
glory of God, that of which He is the Author, and which
will be manifested at the coming of the Messianic kingdom.
This is also called " the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Shall Himself perfect, stablish, strengthen you (v. 10). —
God is conceived as directly acting upon the Christians to
this end.
To whom be the dominion (v. II). — The doxology is as
cribed to God.
By Silvanus, our faithful brother, as I account him, I have
written unto you briefly (v. 12). — Silvanus, so called by Paul,
Silas, in Acts. He is here designated as the bearer of the
Epistle. (See " by them," Acts xv. 23.)
The mention of this person, who is known to Acts and
some of the Pauline Epistles,1 belongs to the fiction of the
authorship. As I account him refers to faithful.
That this is the true grace of God (v. 12). — To set this forth
and impress it upon the readers was the main object ofthe
Epistle. Hence the final exhortation, stand ye fast therein.
She that is in Babylon, elect together with you, saluteth you
(v. 13). — The interpretation of this passage to the effect that
the words, " the elect one [fern.] in Babylon," refer to the
wife of Peter or to some other Christian woman, has not
found any considerable support. The majority of expositors
understand them to refer to the church in Babylon, and the
1 Acts xv. 22 ; 2 Cor. i. 19 ; 1 Thess. i. 1 ; 2 Thess. i. I.

324 FIRST PETER
word " church " appears in the Sinaitic manuscript. Since,
however, there is no known tradition connecting Peter with
Babylon, it is not easy to explain why a writer assuming the
name of the apostle should have represented the Epistle to
have been written in that city. It is probable that Babylon
is used for Rome according to Rev. xiv. 8, xviii. 2, 10.
Such was the opinion of Papias, according to Eusebius, in
which he has been followed by Clement of Alexandria,
Jerome, and many recent expositors. The salutation from
Mark is added in accordance with the part which the writer
had assumed, since tradition connects him with Peter as an
" interpreter." Salute one another with a kiss of love. — Peace be unto you all
that are in Christ.

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER.

INTRODUCTION.
LIKE the so-called first Epistle of Peter this purports to
have been written by that apostle, although here the
name ' ' Simon ' ' is prefixed, and the writer is suspiciously
anxious to make the apostolic authorship prominent (i. i,
14, 16-18, iii. 1, 15). The address is more vague than that
of the other, being to " them that have obtained a like
precious faith with us," etc. Yet the readers so indefinitely
indicated are strangely assumed in iii. 1 to be the same as
those addressed in 1 Peter. They are represented, besides,
as having formerly been instructed by Peter and to have
received a letter or letters from Paul, whom the writer calls
"our beloved brother" (iii. 15). Such a combination is
more likely to have had its origin in the imagination of a
time when a tendency prevailed to bring the followers of
these two leaders into union in one Catholic Church, than
to have historically existed. It has not extravagantly been
characterised as " an impossibility in history."
The object of the Epistle is clearly manifest on a glance
at its contents. After a brief introduction (i. 1-4), follow
some general exhortations to the practice of Christian virtues,
in order that the readers may make their " calling and elec
tion sure " (i. 5-1 1). The design of the writing is then im
mediately made evident by a reference to the " power and
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ " (i. 16), as an evidence of
325

326 INTRODUCTION
the credibility of which a reference to the transfiguration is
introduced (i. 17, 18). A reference to prophecy is thereafter
made (i. 19-21), and in contrast with the true prophets the
Gnostic false teachers are described and condemned (ii.
1-22). In opposition to the ' ' mockers " of " the last days, ' '
who scoff at the deferred Parousia, the writer makes em
phatic the certainty of its coming with the dissolution of
" the heavens" and the melting of " the elements" with
" fervent heat " (iii. 1-13). The Epistle ends with admoni
tions appropriate to this dread certainty of the great event
(iii. 14-18).
The difference between this Epistle and the first tradition
ally ascribed to the same author, Peter, is so great, particu
larly in the matter of style, that as early as the time of Jerome
its genuineness was doubted along with the assumption of
that of the other. The two Epistles do not agree as to the
nearness of the Parousia. In 1 Pet. iv. 7 " the end of all
things is at hand," while in 2 Pet. iii. 8, 9, each day that
separated the time of the writer from that event is declared
to be " a thousand years " — an expression which, if it is not
to be taken literally, at least amounts to an indefinite post
ponement of " the end." The term employed to designate
"the coming of the Lord" is in 1 Pet. i. 7, 13, iv. 13,
" revelation," while in 2 Pet. i. 16, iii. 4, it is " Parousia."
While 1 Peter contains many citations from the Old Testa
ment, this Epistle has none, and along with occasional men
tion of events therein recorded legends from apocryphal
books are referred to without discrimination (ii. 4-8, n, iii.
5-10). The Greek style of 2 Peter as regards vocabulary
and word-forms is less Hellenistic, that is, purer, than that
of 1 Peter, while in construction the first Epistle is far more
skilful than the second. " Hope," which is a prominent
word in 1 Peter, is unknown to the second Epistle, which
has " knowledge," a term not used in the first. The false
teachers, so conspicuous in this, do not appear in the first.

SECOND PETER 327
The conclusion which must be drawn from these facts is that
the author of the second Epistle did not write the first, and
that he shows in relation to it no literary dependence. The
contacts with Paul so frequent in the first Epistle are almost
wholly wanting in this writing. Dr. Edwin Abbott has
undertaken to show its dependence on Josephus, but the
question must be regarded as undecided. The writer's ac
quaintance with any one of the Gospels is not certainly
demonstrable. But see i. 17 compared with Matt. xvii. 5.
The traits of the false teachers combated resemble those
delineated in the Pastoral Epistles, but it is not certain that
the author was acquainted with these writings.
While the Epistle is exceptionally independent of the New
Testament literature in general, it holds a unique relation to
the quaint and original Epistle of Jude. The details of the
relation cannot be minutely set forth here, but the conclusion
which an examination of them compels is that the writer of
2 Peter knew and used that Epistle. This is now the pre
vailing opinion.1 In 2 Pet. ii. 4 the conception is obscure
on account of the omission of the allusion to the particular
sin of the angels, which is made in Jude 6 in dependence on
Gen. vi. 2 by the words, " left their proper habitation."
In some places there is a revision of Jude in 2 Peter effected
sometimes by omissions, sometimes by changes, and again
by abridgment, with the advantage, so far as originality and
force are concerned, on the side of Jude.
There are no certain traces of the use of the Epistle in
Christian literature until near the end of the second century.
The canon of Muratori omits it, and it is not contained in
the Peshito, the Syriac translation of the New Testament.
Although the existing writings of Clement of Alexandria
contain no evidence of his knowledge of it, it is probable
from the testimony of Eusebius that he was acquainted with
1 See 2 Pet. ii. 4, Jude 6 ; 1 Pet. ii. 10, Jude 8 ; 2 Pet. ii. 13-17, Jude
12, 13 ; 2 Pet. ii. 18, Jude 16 ; 2 Pet. iii. 1-3, Jude 17, 18.

328 INTRODUCTION
it, and commented on it, but we do not know that he re
garded it as a writing of Peter's.
The Epistle contains many indications of a late date. Such
are the mention of the " apostles " in connection with the
" prophets " as an authority (iii. 2, 3), and an appeal to the
writings of Paul, as if they existed in a collection (iii. 15),
and as " Scriptures" (iii. 16). The Epistle of Jude is used,
which belongs to the latter part of the first century or to the
early part of the second. The doubts as to the second com
ing of Christ, which appear to have been widely prevalent,
also indicate a late period. The opinion is well sustained
which dates it as late as the middle of the second century,
and some authorities place it not earlier than 170 and 180.
The place at which it was written is indeterminable, and the
author is entirely unknown. '
1 See the writer's article, " Peter, Epistles of," in the Encylopadia
Biblica, vol. iii.

THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER.

EXPOSITION.
After a brief introduction and exhortations to the practice of
Christian virtues, the design of the Epistle is revealed in the refer
ence to the Parousia, in connection with which the transfiguration
is mentioned, and prophecy is appealed to (i. 1-21).
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ (i. I). —
Paul calls himself the servant of Jesus Christ in Rom. i. 1.
It has been conjectured that servant and apostle is due to a
combination of the " apostle " of 1 Peter i. 1 and the " serv
ant" of Jude 1. To them, etc. The address is vague and is
unique in an Epistle.
Of our God ajid Saviour Jesus Christ (i. I). — " Lord and
Saviour " is a frequent combination of attributes of Christ ;
but it is questionable whether God should here be regarded
as an attribute. Although if God be taken separately the
article would naturally be expected before Saviour, the ex
pression, " Saviour Jesus Christ," may be used without the
article as well as " Lord Jesus Christ," which is frequently
so employed. ' See note on Tit. ii. 13. Faith in the righteous
ness of God is not faith in the righteousness which He
bestows, but in that which is a quality of His nature.
Grace to you and peace be multiplied in the knowledge of God
and of Jesus our Lord (i. 2). — Knowledge is made prominent
in this Epistle (i. 3, 8, ii. 20), and here grace and peace are
1 Rom. i. 7, xiv. 14 ; 1 Cor. i. 3.
329

33°

SECOND PETER i. 3~4-

regarded as grounded upon it, for such is the sense of in. It
is doubtless due to the controversy with Gnosticism that
prominence is given to knowledge (Gnosis) in the Epistle.
To the Gnosis of the heretics is evidently here preferred that
of the Lord Jesus Christ, by means of which it is declared, in
ii. 2, that the pollutions of the world may be escaped.
' ' With all the hatred against Gnosis its chief defect, a too
exalted estimate of knowledge (Gnosis), is appropriated. ' '
Seeing that, etc. (i. 3), gives the ground on which the wish
of ' ' grace and peace ' ' (verse 2) is based. Life is the
blessedness of the Messianic kingdom, or salvation, and
godliness (a word which belongs almost exclusively to the
Pastoral Epistles) is the piety which pertains to " the
present age." These are supposed to be granted through
the knowledge of Him that called us by His own glory and
virtue. It is uncertain whether the words him that called us
refer to God or Christ, but probably the former is the correct
reference, since generally in the New Testament it is God
who "calls" the believers. But the idea of a "call"
through the knowledge of Him by His own glory and virtue is
unique, and does not convey a very clear conception. Virtue
is not elsewhere in the New Testament applied to God in
the singular. The plural in the sense of " excellencies " is
employed in 1 Pet. ii. 9.
It is through these, the " glory and virtue," that God's
great and precious promises have been granted (i. 4). The
promises relate to the blessedness in which the believers were
expected to share at the Parousia (iii. 13), and through these
they are said to become partakers of ihe divine nature. To
refer these to " the things that pertain to life and godliness"
is extremely forced, and promises is the only natural reference.
Yet how the believers were to become partakers of the divine
nature through the promises is not clear. The entire period
betrays a writer who combines current words and phrases
without a clear conception of their meaning and relations.

i- 5-13. SECOND PETER 331
The partaking of the divine nature by believers is nowhere
else mentioned in the New Testament. The nearest ap
proach to such an idea is in Heb. xii. 10, " partakers of His
holiness," and the conception of the new birth is kindred
to it.
In your faith supply virtue (i. 5), that is, having faith, let
there be virtue in connection with it, literally, contribute or
supply virtue in your faith. The knowledge which should be
supplied in virtue is Christian k7iowledge in contrast with the
Gnosis of the false teachers. Temperance is the control of
the desires in general.1
And in your love of the brethren love (i. 7), that is, love
toward all men.
Not idle nor unfruitful unto the k?iowledge of our Lordfesus
Christ (i. 8). — These virtues are regarded as leading to a
knowledge of Christy which is the true Gnosis (knowledge).
For he who lacketh these things is blind (i. 9), that is, as the
writer says, ' ' near-sighted, ' ' a word not elsewhere used in
the New Testament."
Give the more diligence to make your calling and election sure
(i. 10). — In these words is implied a danger of losing the
election through failing in practical right living.
The end of the ' ' calling and election ' ' is entrance into the
eternal kingdom of Christ (i. Il), and this will be richly sup
plied to the believers if they never slumber. The kingdom is
that which Christ was expected to establish at his second
coming or Parousia. See verse 16, iii. 4.
Wherefore I shall be ready always to put you in remem
brance of these things (i. 12). — Wherefore, that is, because he
only will enter the " kingdom " who practises the virtues
previously mentioned, and thereby makes his ' ' calling and
election sure." These things must be interpreted from this
point of view.
Tabernacle (i. 13), that is, in the bodily life. See 2 Cor. v. 1.
1 Acts xxiv. 25 ; Gal. v. 22. ! jxvmndC,aov.

332

SECOND PETER i. 14-19.

Cometh swiftly, even as our Lord Jesus signified unto me
(i. 14).— What words of Christ to Peter the writer had in
mind is indeterminable. If he was thinking of the saying
attributed to Jesus in John xxi. 18, 19, he must have misin
terpreted it, for the reference there is only to a violent
death, and nothing is said about its coming swiftly. There
is, however, no evidence in the Epistle of his acquaintance
with the fourth Gospel. He might have been acquainted
with the tradition from which the record in John xxi. 18
was made, and, misunderstanding it, have turned it to his
purpose in the rt>le of Peter.
I will give diligence (i. 15). — This does not necessarily
refer to an intention to write other Epistles than this.
For we did not follow cunningly devised fables (i. 16). — For
connects somewhat loosely with " I will give diligence."
Cunningly devised fables. This is a refe/ence to the Gnostic
myths of the false teachers.1
When we made known unto you the power and coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ (i. 16). — The Parousia is again referred
to, and thus appears as the prominent theme of the Epistle.
But we were eye-witnesses of his majesty (i. 16), that is, at
the transfiguration, according to verses 17 and 18. The
writer's excessive zeal to make it appear that he is the verit
able Peter, the apostle, is manifest. See also verse 18.
The excellent glory (i. 17) is a circumlocution for God.
And we have the word of prophecy made more sure (i. 19). —
The transfiguration is regarded as a prophetic intimation of
the glorious Parousia on account of the " glory " with which
it was attended. But the writer thinks the prophetic word of
the Old Testament is surer. The translation, made more
sure, is incorrect, and conveys the idea that the prophecy of
the Old Testament was enhanced as to its certainty of fulfil
ment by the transfiguration. The writer means to place the
prophets above the intimation given in the transfiguration.
1 1 Tim. i. 4, iv. 7 ; 2 Tim. iv. 4 ; Tit. i. 14.

i. 19-ii. I. SECOND PETER 333
What prophecy he had in mind which he could allegorise
into a foretelling of the Parousia we do not know.
Until the day dawn (i. 19). — The day is that of the Parousia,
after which in its full splendor there will be no need to take
heed to the word of prophecy.
No prophecy of Scripture is of private interpretation (i. 20).
— The meaning oi a prophecy does not depend upon a private
or personal opinion of it. But whether the writer had in
mind the interpretation of the prophet himself or of others —
perhaps those who falsely interpreted the prophecies assumed
to refer to the Parousia, so as to make them read to the
effect that there was to be none (iii. 4), or that it had already
taken place — is uncertain. The latter view is probably the
correct one, and the passage may be brought into connection
with verse 16.
For no prophecy ever came by the will of man ; but men
spake from God, being moved by the Holy Ghost (i. 21). — This
passage expresses the current view of the Church of the time
regarding the inspiration of the Old Testament writers.
The Gnostic false teachers are now described and violently con
demned (ii. 1-22).
But there arose false prophets also among the people (ii. i). —
The people are those of the Old Testament times, the Jews.
The "murmurers," " complainers," and "mockers" of
Jude (vv. 16, 17) appear here as false teachers, and since the
writer of Jude, on whom the author of 2 Peter depends in
this chapter, says that the apostles foretold the coming of
these heretics, we see our author here assuming the rdle of an
apostle and prophesying the coming of the teachers who
were evidently present in the Church in his time, and are
so spoken of in verses 9-1 1 of this chapter.
Deny even the Master that bought them (ii. 1). — Master is
a questionable rendering of the Greek word, which is not
used for Christ. " Sovereign," that is, " God," were a

334

SECOND PETER ii. 2-6.

better translation. (See Jude 4.) Swift destruction. This
is an abrupt change from the description of the heretics to
an announcement of their end.
And many shall follow their lascivious doings (ii. 2). — It
appears from this passage and from vv. 18, 19, and _>o, as well
as from Jude 4, that the false teachers connected with their
doctrines certain immoral precepts and practices. Besides,
they sought to make gain for themselves out of their occupa
tion.1 And in coveteousness made merchandise of the Christians
(ii. 3). — Here again the writer abruptly breaks off to indi
cate the destruction of these false teachers.
For if God spared not angels when they sinned, etc. (ii. 4).
— The writer now proceeds to cite three examples of sum
mary divine judgment, in order to show that the false teach
ers will be speedily dealt with. The angels that he had in
mind (Jude 6) are those who under the name of " the sons
of God" are represented in the legend, Gen. vi. 1-4, as
having ' ' come in unto the daughters of men. ' ' The passage
is obscure on account of the writer's omission of the words
in Jude 6, ' ' kept not their own principality, but left their
proper habitation." The legend is reproduced in Enoch x.,
and the idea of the punishment of the angels was derived
from that book, where it is said that they were ordered to be
' ' bound fast under the hills of the earth for seventy genera
tions, until the last judgment be held for all eternity."
Hell. The word in the Greek is Tartarus, not elsewhere
used in the New Testament. It is the word used by the
Greeks for the abode of the wicked dead in the underworld.
The second example of the divine vengeance is that of the
destruction of the ancient world by the flood (ii. 5). — This
legend is recorded in Gen. vi. 7— viii.
The third is that of the destruction of Sodom and Gomor
rah, Gen. xix. 1-29 (ii. 6).— In Jude 7 the mention of this
1 1 Tim. vi. 5, 9 ; Tit. i. 11 ; Jude 16.

ii. 9-1 1. SECOND PETER 335
story is brief, and the writer of 2 Peter has considerably
expanded that account.
The Lord knoweth how io deliver (ii. 9). — Here the writer,
who appears to have lost sight of the conclusion which
ought to follow the conditional clause beginning with verse
4, introduces a general remark on the Lord's deliverance of
the godly out of temptation, and His keeping of the unrighteous
under punishment unto the day of judgment, that is, until the
Parousia. The doctrine evidently is that in the underworld
the wicked are in a state of conscious suffering.1
But chiefly them that walk after the flesh (ii. 10). — This
verse and the following verses may be regarded as the con
clusion, somewhat clumsily introduced, of the conditional
clause previously mentioned, and we have here an applica
tion to the false teachers, who are bitterly and unsparingly
denounced through the rest of the chapter.
And despise dominion (ii. 10). — " Thrones," " dominions,"
"principalities," and "powers" are names of orders of
angelic beings according to the Jewish mythology.2 The
demonic powers are sometimes so named.3 The reference
here is probably to the good angels.
They tremble not to rail at dignities (ii. 10). — Dignities is
here used in the same sense as ' ' dominion ' ' in the preceding
verse. Whereas angels . . . bring not a railing judgment
against them before the Lord (ii. II). — Them represents
" dignities " in verse 10, but the term is here understood to
mean the demonic powers. The verse would be unintel
ligible but for Jude 9, where the railing judgment relates to
the devil, against whom Michael the archangel durst not
bring it. The writer's thought is much confused in his de
pendence on Jude, and the passage is accordingly deficient
in precision.
1 See Luke xvi. 23, 24.
2 Col. i. 16 ; 1 Pet. iii. 22 ; Jude 8. 3 Eph. ii. 12 ; Col. ii. 15.

336 SECOND PETER ii. 12-22.
But these, as creatures without reason, born mere animals
(ii. 12). — The writer's zeal against the false teachers here
betrays him into a very harsh j udgment. In their destroying
be destroyed, that is in their destructive or corrupting doings.
(Compare Jude 10.)
Count it pleasure to revel in the daytime (ii. 13). — This
rendering is doubtful. Probably "ina day " is the equiv
alent of " to a day, ' ' and the sense is ' ' count the revel of a
day a pleasure," with reference to the transient nature of the
pleasure. Spots and blemishes revelling in their love-feasts (ii. 13). —
In Jude these persons are designated as " hidden rocks " in
the " love-feasts " (v. 12). Love-feasts. Some textual
authorities here read "deceivings" (anarai<;), instead of
ayartmS. Having followed the way of Balaam, etc. (ii. 15, 16). — See
Jude n. The legend referred to is in Numb. xxii. 22-31.
These are springs without water and mists driven by a storm
(ii. 17). — " Clouds without water " is the figure in Jude 12.
They promise much, but perform nothing, giving water
neither from the spring nor from the clouds. The blackness
of darkness refers to the punishment of these persons (Jude
13)- Great swelling words of vanity. See Jude 16. They entice
in the lusts of the flesh, etc. (ii. 18). See verse 2.
The last state is become worse with them than the first (ii. 20).
— See Matt. xii. 45; Luke xi. 26. '
It has happened with them according to the true proverb (ii.
22). — Of these two proverbs the former is substantially that
of Prov. xxvi. n, and the latter is otherwise unknown.
The persons referred to in vv. 20-22 are the false teachers,
and not those whom they mislead. At the end of the pre
ceding verse the false teachers are spoken of as " bondserv
ants of corruption," being brought into bondage by that
1 Compare Heb. x. 26, 27.

iii. 1-4. SECOND PETER 337
with which they are " overcome," and in verse 20 they
appear again as " overcome," their last state having become
worse than the first.
The writer now addresses himself to the scoffers at the deferred
Parousia, and describes the terrors of its coming (iii. 1-13).
This is now, beloved, the second Epistle that I write unto you
(iii. 1). — This is probably a reference to the so-called first
Epistle of Peter, and if so, implies a knowledge of it on the
part of the writer of this Epistle, as well as his purpose to
address the Christians of Asia Minor, although he omitted
all address at the beginning. The writer of this Epistle,
who cannot have been the author of our canonical 1 Peter,
may have written another prior to this, to which he here
refers. There is no improbability in the supposition that
many letters were written in the name of Peter.
And in both of them I stir up your sincere mind (iii. I). —
See i. 13.
That ye should remember the words spoken before by the
holy prophets . . . through your apostles (iii. 2). — The
difference in purpose, point of view, and contents of the two
Epistles does not warrant this conjunction of them.
Prophets . . . apostles. The mention of the apostles as
having coordinate authority with the prophets indicates the
post-apostolic age.
Knowing this first, that in the last days mockers shall come,
etc. (iii. 3). — Knowing relates to " ye " (verse 2), or, since
this is not expressed in Greek, to the subject of " remem
ber." In the last days. These are the days of " the end of
all things," the last of the pre-Messianic age, the time just
preceding the Parousia.
Where is the promise of his coming ? etc. (iii. 4). — The ques
tion indicates a belief on the part of the ' ' mockers ' ' (Jude
18) that the promise of the Parousia is vain. The mention of
the fathers as having departed without seeing the fulfilment

338 SECOND PETER iii. 5-7.
of the promise indicates the post-apostolic age as that
of the writer, for although he here assumes the prophetic
point of view, it is evident that he had before him the
phenomena of his own time.
For this they wilfully forget (iii. 5). — This is said in refuta
tion of the saying of the false teachers that " all things
remain," etc., and the writer proceeds, after a reference to
the creation, to show from the fact of the deluge that things
had been changed.
Heavens from of old, and an earth compacted out of water and
amidst water (iii. 5). — The source ofthe author's hypothesis
of creation is uncertain. That the earth was compacted out
of water and by water (for by and not amidst is the proper
rendering) is not indicated in Gen. i. 6-8. There are other
ancient cosmogonies, however, with which the writer's con
ception accords, and he either borrowed from them or mis
interpreted the account in Genesis.
By which means (iii. 6). — The original is, " by means of
which" (plural), but to what the " which" refers is alto
gether vague. Grammatically it relates to the heavens and
the earth, but it is anything but precise to say that the
deluge came by means of the heavens and the earth.
"Water" and " the word of God" may possibly be the
antecedents of " which." But the vagueness of the con
struction remains in any case.
The world that then was . . . perished (iii. 6). — Per
ished must either be understood in the sense of " changed,"
or the world must be regarded as including all that lived
upon the earth at the time of the deluge, in which case the
word is used with approximate accuracy.
But the heavens that now are and the earth (iii. 7). — This
rendering is of doubtful propriety. It were better to read :
" The heavens, etc., are by His word kept in store, reserved
for fire against the day," etc. The writer's idea is that at
the Parousia fire would sweep away the present heavens and

iii. 7-8. SECOND PETER 339
the earth (verse 12), and that in their place " new heavens
and a new earth " (verse 13) would be provided, adapted to
the Messianic kingdom of " righteousness." The earth
was regarded as tainted with sin, but why it was thought
that the heavens should be dissolved is not apparent. Re
lated conceptions are expressed both in the Old and the New
Testament.1 Such fancies were also indulged in by the Stoic
philosophers. One cannot but recall in this connection Paul' s
idea that " the creation was subjected to vanity " and was
" groaning and travailing in pain " in consequence of
Adam's transgression. Its hoped-for deliverance " from
the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the
children of God," he evidently looked for at the Parousia.2
The author of 2 Peter will have it " delivered " and purified
by " fire."
The destruction of ungodly men (iii. f). — See 2 Thess. i. 9.
" Ungodly men " having been put out of the way, the re
novated earth, spanned by ' ' new heavens, ' ' would be a fit
abode for the saints in the Messianic kingdom. To attain
this blessedness was " salvation " according to the concep
tion of the early Christians. This was to "inherit" the
kingdom of God.
But forget not this one thing, that one day is with the Lord
as a thousand years (iii. 8). — This is the writer's answer to
those who " mocked," asking, " Where is the promise of
his coming ? ' ' He appears to have abandoned the general
doctrine of the early Church, expressed in 1 Pet. iv. 7, that
" the end of all things is at hand," and applies with a slight
variation a passage from Ps. xc. 4 in support of his position,
which is that the postponement of the Parousia cannot be
urged as a reason for doubting its certain coming, for the
Lord, that is, God, as in verse 8, is not slack concerning His
' Ps. cii. 26, 27 ; Isa. xxxiv. 4, li. 6, Ixvi. 15, 22 ; Matt. xxiv. 29, 35;
2 Thess. i. 8.
2 Rom. viii. 20-22 ; Heb. xii. 27 ; Rev. xxi. 1.

34o SECOND PETER iii. 9-15-
promise (iii. 9). He turns the delay of the coming of Christ
to good account in that he regards it as furnishing an oppor
tunity for repentance, because God does not wish that any,
being unrepentant on that day, should ' ' perish ' ' in the
" destruction" ofthe ungodly.
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief (iii. 10). —
This was probably a current saying among the early Christ
ians. See Matt. xxiv. 43 ; 1 Thess. v. 2.
In the following verses (10-12) the writer expands the
declaration made in verse 7, accumulating the catastrophic
features of " the end of all things." The elements, which
he thought would be dissolved with fervent heat, are not the
heavens or the earth, but the elements of the material uni
verse, literally, " the material causes ofthe world."
' ' The doctrine of the burning of the world, which is com
mon to this Epistle and the first Epistle of Clement, appears
first in tbe Jewish sibyls, and originated without doubt in
the Heraclitic-Stoical theory of the periodically recurring
destructions of the world by fire. It is accordingly, like pur
gatory, to be regarded as borrowed from the ancient nature-
philosophy." So Pfleiderer ; and Holtzmann remarks upon
it that this is not the only tone which the wind that blows in
the Epistle has wafted from the Grecian world.
A practical exhortation is drawn from the terrible certainty of the
great catastrophe (iii. 1 1), and the believers are told that they ought
earnestly to desire the coming of the day of God, despite the fact
that God is postponing it in the hope that the number of the saved
may be increased by the repentance of the ungodly (iii. 14-18).
Account that the long-suffering of our Lord is salvation (iii.
15). — This is to be explained from verse 9. On the reference
to Paul, see the Introduction. No such teaching of Paul's
as that here referred to is found in his extant Epistles, the
passage in question being supposed to be the first clause of
verse 15, as is probably the case. A wider reference, as to
verse 14, or to the whole subject of the Parousia, is hardly

iii. 17. SECOND PETER 341
admissible. The meaning of wrote to you is indeterminable,
since this Epistle is without address. But the writer adds
that Paul taught the doctrine in question in all his Epistles
when speaking of these things. So comprehensive a state
ment shakes our confidence in the writer and raises the
question whether he was in fact at all acquainted with Paul's
Epistles, and did not simply wish to associate the apostle
with Peter, in whose name he wrote, in the interest of a
harmonising of the Pauline and Petrine parties. The men
tion of all the Epistles of Paul manifestly implies the exist
ence of a collection of them known to the writer, or to his
readers, or to both, and the designation of them as Scripture,
implied in other Scriptures, necessarily puts a late date upon
this Epistle. If other Scriptures be not referred to the Old
Testament — a reference which would indicate a date when,
according to the history of the canon, the New Testament
writings were placed as "Scriptures" on an equal footing
with the former, that is, not far from the end of the second
century l — the term must probably mean some of the current
Christian writings, Epistles, apocalypses, etc., and we must
suppose the author to have written at a time when a begin
ning at least was being made of the formation of a collection
of such writings as now compose our New Testament.
Ye therefore, beloved, knowing these things beforehand (iii.
17), that is, that the false teachers would come before the
Parousia, beware lest . . . ye fall from your own stead-
fast?iess. " Forewarned is forearmed." The peril was
great, for the apostles would share the fate of the ungodly
on that day, that is, " destruction " (verse 7).
The remark that the unlearned and unstable wrest the
difficult things in Paul's Epistle to their own destruction
may have reference to the interpretation of his doctrine of
the abolition of the law (antinomianism) in the interest of
1 See the "Sketch of the History of the Canon of the New Testa
ment " at the end of this volume.

342 SECOND PETER iii. 18.
licence. The perils of this teaching appear to have been
pointed out by some of Paul's opponents during his own life
(Rom. iii, 8, vi. i).
But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus
Christ (iii. 18). — The writer's predilection for knowledge here
appears again. The Epistle ends with a doxology ascribed
to Christ.

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE.

INTRODUCTION.
IN Luke's list of the apostles (vi. 16) is mentioned a Judas,
the son of James, but who the James in question was is
unknown. The author of this Epistle calls himself Judas the
brother of James, thereby rendering it certain that he was
not the apostle Jude, apart from the improbability that an
apostle in writing an Epistle would not call himself an apostle
rather than the brother of some one of the name of James.
The probability, then, is that this writer wished to pass for
Jude the brother of James the brother of Jesus. ] The Epistle
is without definite address, the writer having in mind as
readers " them that are called, beloved in God the Father,
and kept for Jesus Christ. ' ' There is no reason for suppos
ing that it was intended especially for Jewish Christian
readers. The object of the Epistle is to combat certain tendencies
to false doctrine among the readers and a libertine mode of
life represented by men who, the writer says, had " crept in
privily," and whose influence was in the direction not only
of " lasciviousness," but also of a denial of Christ (vv. 3, 4).
They " rail at dignities," that is, the angelic powers, are
" mockers," and have not the Spirit (vv. 8, 18, 20). The
false teaching of certain Gnostic sects, with which libertinism
was connected, was probably in the writer's mind. The
1 Matt. xiii. 55.
343

344 INTRODUCTION
particular sects in question can only be conjectured, but
that they belonged to the second century is probable.
The writer did not discriminate between the Old Testament
canonical writings and the so-called apocryphal books, de
pending upon the Book of Enoch for his reference to the sin
and punishment of the ' ' angels ' ' and upon tradition for his
account of the contest between the devil and the archangel
Michael. He also quotes words which he says Enoch
"prophesied" (v. 14).
Indications of the late date of the Epistle appear in the
traits of the doctrines of the false teachers which are those
of the second-century Gnostics. They " deny the only
Master (Ruler) and our Lord Jesus Christ" (v. 4), as the
Gnostics did in asserting that the Creator of the world was not
" the only " supreme God, and in maintaining that Christ
was not such a being as the Christians thought him to be.
As there were Gnostics who made a sort of religious cult of
their lasciviousness and sexual looseness, so the writer
charges the enemies of the Church with turning the grace
of God into lasciviousness, says that they " defile the flesh,"
and are " hidden rocks in the love-feasts" (vv. 4, 8, 12).
A late date is also indicated in the way in which ' ' faith ' ' is
spoken of as an objective traditional doctrine, instead of a
subjective state or attitude of mind (vv. 3, 20). The expres
sion, ' ' the words spoken before by the apostles of our Lord
Jesus Christ " (v. 17), suits not the apostolic, but the post-
apostolic age.
The Epistle was used by the writer of 2 Peter not very
long probably after it was written, but apart from this there
is no certain trace of its use until after the close of the second
century. The canon of Muratori mentions it as received in
the Catholic Church or among the catholic Epistles. The
text of the Muratorian fragment is, however, uncertain at
this point. Origen mentions it as being " full of powerful
words of heavenly grace," yet he speaks with reserve in

JUDE 345
saying, "if any one receives the Epistle of Jude. ' ' Eusebiu
accounts it " controverted," and remarks that not many of
the ancients have made mention of it, while Jerome says it
was " rejected by many " in his time. Nearly one half of
the Epistle is composed of references to and extracts from
Old Testament and apocryphal stories. The style is clear,
strong, and vivid, and the writer appears as a man much in
earnest and severe against the false teachers, while zealous
and solicitous for the purity of the faith, and for the right
living of the believers.1
'Seethe writer's article, "Jude, Epistle of," in the Encyclopcedia
Biblica, vol. ii.

THE EPISTLE OF JUDE.

EXPOSITION.
After the greeting the writer proceeds at once to warn his readers
against the false teachers, whom he condemns with great severity
(vv.1-16). Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James . . .
kept for Jesus Christ (v. 1). — Beloved in God. In is causal,
and at the same time expresses the idea of the fellowship in
which ' ' the elect ' ' are supposed to stand with God.
Kept for Jesus Christ, that is, preserved for him from the
perils of apostasy so threatening at the time, so that when
he should come they might be his (1 Pet. i. 5).
While I was giving all diligence to write unto you of our com
mon salvation, I was constrained, etc. (v. 3). — The implica
tion is that the writer was either in the act or on the point
of writing to persons unknown to us a letter perhaps more
extended than this on the subject of " salvation," but found
himself "constrained" to write them an exhortation to
steadfastness in the faith which they had through tradition.
Faith here means not an attitude of mind, but a fixed doc
trine, such as might be " delivered " from one generation to
another, a sort of consensus of Christian belief. On ac
count of the appearance of false teachers there was need, as
the writer thought, that the believers should contend earnestly
for this faith.
For there are certain men crept in privily . . . set forth
347

348 JUDE v. 4-5-
unto this condemnation (v. 4).— The false teachers are re
garded as having crept in stealthily, that is, they do not
really belong among the Christians because not in ac
cord with them. Set forth unto this condemnation. The
original is literally " designated beforehand in writing,"
and the idea of the author appears to be that they were
written of in the Old Testament prophecies or in those of
the Book of Enoch, or perhaps recorded in God's book of
judgment analogous to that in which the believers were
conceived to be "enrolled in heaven."1 The divine fore
knowledge and predestination are implied in this conception.2
Turning the grace of God into lasciviousness (v. 4), that is,
they have made the grace of God granted them in the privi
leges of the Christian Communion an occasion for lascivious
practices, so that under the cloak of religion they live as
libertines. And denying our only Master and Lord Jesus Christ (v. 4).
— This should not be taken as a single conception, but
should read ' ' the only Sovereign [God] and our Lord Jesus
Christ." The word rendered Master is not used of Christ in
the New Testament (see 2 Pet. ii. 1). This was the Gnostic
denial of God as the " only " and Supreme Ruler in attrib
uting the creation of the world to a subordinate divinity.
The Gnostic view of Christ also differed materially from that
of the orthodox Christians.
Now I desire to put you in remembrance, though ye know
all things oncejor all, etc. (v. 5), that is, though the things
of which the writer is about to speak are not unknown to
his readers. He now proceeds to give three examples of
such a divine judgment as threatens the persons mentioned
in verse 4.
Having saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward
destroyed them that believed not (v. 5). — What destruction is
referred to is uncertain. It has been supposed to be that of
' Heb. xii. 23. 2 2 pet> „_ 3

v. 6-9. JUDE 349
the twenty-four thousand mentioned in Numb. xxv. 1-9,
the Babylonian exile, the destruction of Jerusalem by the
Romans, and the perishing in the wilderness during the
assumed forty years' sojourn there. See Heb. iii. 16-19.
And angels which kept not their own principality, but left
their proper habitation (v. 6). — See 2 Pet. ii. 4. The legend
of the angels who corrupted themselves ' ' with the daughters
of men" appears to have been derived from the Book of
Enoch, chapters x. and xii., since their punishment is ex
plicitly pointed out, as it is there, while in Gen. vi. 1, 2, there
is no mention of it. In Enoch xii. the angels are said to
have ' ' left the high heaven and their holy eternal place ' '
and to have " corrupted themselves with women." The
judgment of the great day is that of the Parousia or " the end
of all things."
Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, etc. (v. f). — See 2 Pet. ii.
6. In Gen. xix. no other cities are mentioned, but see Deut.
xxix. 23. Gone after strange flesh. See Lev. xviii. 22-24 '•
Gen. xix. 5.
Are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of
eternal fire (v. 7). — This is probably to be explained from the
tradition that beneath the Dead Sea raged a subterranean fire.
In their dreams defile the flesh, and set at nought dominion
and rail at dignities (v. 8). — Besides having voluptuous
dreams and imaginings, the result of their lascivious waking
thoughts and deeds, they set at nought and rail at the
angelic powers'; but since "dominions," "powers," etc.
are employed of both good and bad angels, it is probable
that dignities here refers to the latter on account of the fol
lowing verse, the sense of which is that they have a pre
sumption which Michael did not possess, since he did not
bring a railing judgment against the devil while disputing
with him about the body of Moses (v. 9). The legend in ques
tion is not contained in the Book of Enoch, and where the
1 2 Pet. ii. 10.

350 JUDE v. 10-12.
writer found it we do not know. He may have taken it from
an apocryphal writing, " The Assumption of Moses," which
according to Origen contained it, or from a tradition which
ran to the effect that God intrusted the burial of Moses to
Michael, but the devil resisted it on the ground that Moses
was a murderer, and did not deserve a decent interment — a
remarkable case of scrupulousness on the part of Satan !'
And what they miderstand naturally, like the creatures with
out reason, in those things are they destroyed (v. io). — The
reference here is to the ' ' flesh, ' ' the natural impulses of
the senses (vv. 4, 8, 16). Following these tendencies like the
creatures without reason, they destroy themselves by their
excesses. Woe unto them ! for they went in the way of Cain, ran
riotously 'in the error of Balaam for hire, and perished in the
gainsaying of Korah (v. II). — The past tense is used in went,
ran, and perished, because the writer looks at the completed
acts and the judgment from the point of view ofthe execu
tion of the latter, and thinks of the consummation of his
Woe!
In the way of Cain (v. 11). — The application is not appar
ent, since fratricide is not one of the crimes charged against
the false teachers. The case of Balaam ' is referred to as an
example of disobedience for hire. See 2 Pet. ii. 15. The
false teachers are reproached for taking pay for their instruc
tion.2 The case of Korah is taken from Num. xvi. The
writer sees the false teachers perish, as did Korah, on
account of their gainsaying.
Hidden rocks in your love-feasts (v. 12). — In 2 Pet. ii. 13 a
word similar in form to that used here is employed, the
meaning of which is " spots." Hidden is not called for by
the meaning of the word, which is simply "cliffs" or
"rocks." As these imperil ships, so does the conduct of
the false teachers endanger the salvation of those who par-
1 Num. xxii., xxiii. s 1 Tim. vi. 5.

v. 13-17- JUDE 351
take of the love-feasts with them. The word rendered love-
feasts is not used elsewhere in the New Testament except in
2 Pet. ii. 13, where the reading is doubtful. Clouds without
water, etc. This figure and those that follow are intended
to indicate the unstable and unfruitful character of the false
teachers. The blackness of darkness (v. 13) refers to the punishment
reserved for them.
And to these also Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied
(vv. 14-15). — In the Book of Enoch he is called the seventh
from Adam, probably as a distinction on account of the
sacredness of the number seven. The words quoted from
this apocryphal work are found substantially in Enoch i. 9.
These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own
lusts (and their mouth speaketh great swelling words), shewing
respect of persons for advantage (v. it). — See 2 Pet. ii. 18.
What these persons murmured and complained about is not
indicated. Probably they found fault with everything that
they did not like in the doctrine and administration of the
Church. The word translated complainers means persons
discontented with their lot. Shewing respect, etc., would
perhaps be better rendered " admiring men's person." The
desire of these men to make profit out of their occupation is
here again indicated.
After declaring that the apostles had foretold the appearance of
the false teachers, the writer exhorts his readers with respect to
the traditional faith and the love of God, and closes with a dox
ology (w. 17-25).
But ye, beloved, remember ye the words which have been
spoken before by the apostles, etc. (v. 17). — The writer could
hardly have so spoken of the apostles if he had accounted
himself one of them. One writing in the post-apostolic age
would naturally thus speak of them as having announced
certain phenomena which he then saw before him. Said to

352 JUDE v. 17-23.
you does not necessarily mean that the unknown persons
addressed had heard the apostles.
In the last time there shall be mockers, etc. (v. Vf). — This is
not necessarily to be regarded as a quotation from any
spoken or written words of " the apostles." Probably the
writer had a vague idea of some such announcement. See
1 Tim. iv. 1 ; 2 Tim. iii. 1, iv. 3 ; Acts xx. 29, 30.
In the last time there shall be mockers (v. 18). — See 2 Pet.
iii. 3. Sensual, that is, "natural," or "animal." The
same word is used in Jas. iii. 15 of the " wisdom " of certain
persons opposed to the true faith — a wisdom also character
ised as " devilish."
Having not the Spirit (v. 1 9), that is, the Holy Spirit,
which was believed to be bestowed upon Christians generally.
Your most holy faith (v. 20). — See note on verse 3. The
mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he would show at his
Parousia, when the believers would enter into eternal life or
the Messianic kingdom.
And on some have mercy who are in doubt (v. 22). — Accord
ing to the most approved reading this should be, " and
some rebuke when they contend," or " separate them
selves," that is, apostatise. Who are in doubt is not, how
ever, an incorrect rendering of the Greek word.
Hating even the garment spotted by the flesh (v. 23). — This
may be intended literally, but is probably symbolical in the
sense, "shun everything that can even outwardly contam
inate the inner life, through intercourse with the persons in
question." Now unto Him that is able (v. 23). — The Epistle closes
with an ascription of praise to God, who is called Saviour,
as in 1 Tim. i. 1, ii. 3 ; Tit. i. 3, ii. 10, iii. 4.

A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT CANON.1
THE history of the canon of the New Testament is occu
pied with the early fortune of the writings composing
it, the use that was made of them, and the estimation in
which they were held until they were united to the exclusion
of all others in a collection regarded as canonical,2 that is, as
constituting the rule of faith and practice for Christians.
Since Christianity originated in Judaism, the first Christians
recognised the Old Testament as a sacred and authoritative
book, regarded its writers as inspired, and appealed to it in
confirmation even of their new religion. This was their
Scripture, and was quoted with such formulas as, " the
Scripture saith," " as it is written," etc. It was long before
any of the Christian writings, Gospels or Epistles, received
such a recognition or became a canonical authority along
side of the Old Testament. It is evident that the history of
the canon of the New Testament, which must consider the
opinions held in the primitive Church concerning the several
books composing it prior to the time when they came to be
generally regarded as a sacred or canonical literature, has
nothing to do with investigating the origin or composition
of these writings, their date, their authorship, the inspira
tion of their authors, and kindred questions.
If it shall appear in the course of the inquiry that the
1 For a more detailed and extended treatment of this subject the
reader is referred to the author's Gospel-Criticism and Historical
Christianity, chap, ii., pp. 27-118, and the works therein referred to.
In the present sketch use has been made to some extent of that
treatise. * xavoov, a rule.
23 353

354 HISTORY OF THE CANON
books in question were at one time regarded in the Church
as merely human productions, and at another as the infallible
works of inspired men, in each case we shall have nothing
more than an historical fact, which may, indeed, be explica
ble in its genesis, but which will decisively answer no ques
tions respecting their internal character. The historian of
the canon has nothing to do with traditions regarding the
various writings except to study them historically. A
tradition that arose in or near the apostolic age will natur
ally be deemed important, since it may fairly be assumed to
have arisen among men who had valuable sources of informa
tion ; but it must be genetically examined, and subjected to
critical tests, precisely as traditions of a later origin should
be treated.
What, then, is precisely the idea of canonicity that must
be kept in mind in the course of this study, and that alone
comports with a really historical examination of the history
of the canon ? What, in a word, does it signify that certain
biographies of Jesus and certain Epistles were selected out of
the large number of such writings, and honoured with an
exclusive authority as canonical ? It is just here that the
limits of a purely historical investigation appear.
The canonicity of the New Testament writings, so far as
an historical inquiry has to do with it, is simply the reputa
tion in which they were held during a certain period as the
best or the most trustworthy among the current writings of
a similar character. Just as certain productions of other
ancient literatures have been honoured as classical by the
common judgment of mankind, so a few books of the early
Christian literature were regarded in the primitive Church
as most worthy of confidence and most excellent in form,
and were separated from others as canonical. Classical and
canonical are terms of substantially the same import from
the historical point of view.'
1 Eusebius furnishes a confirmation of this view of the matter when

HISTORY OF THE CANON 355
Even if we consider the term " canonical " from another
point of view, according to which the canonicity of a biblical
writing is regarded as determined by its genuineness, or by
its conformity to Christian doctrine as set forth in writings of
undisputed validity and eminence, it will be found to have
its origin in an act of judgment very similar to that by which
some writings are called classical in distinction from all
others. For the discussion of questions of this sort is always
carried on with reference to a certain standard, conformity
to which determines the canonicity referred to, just as con
formity to a literary standard marks a writing as classical.
It is doubtless from this point of view that the Epistle to the
Hebrews, the Apocalypse, and some other New Testament
books are sometimes treated as if their canonicity were open
to question, and that Luther called the Epistle of James an
"Epistle of straw."
Neither its supposed apostolical authorship nor the decree
of an ecclesiastical council assigning it a place on the canon
ical list can permanently establish the real canonicity of a
writing. Very likely a feeling or a judgment like that just
referred to was an important if not a determining factor in
the formation of the New Testament canon in the early
Church, and the recognition everywhere and by all (ubique
et ab omnibus) of certain writings as canonical was the re
sult of their supposed conformity to a standard that existed
in the Christian consciousness of the time.
The term "canonicity," however, when applied to a
writing of certain books, the Gospels of Peter, Thomas, the Acts of
the Apostles by Andrew and John, and other writings "adduced by
heretics, " he says : ' ' The character of the style itself is very different
from that ofthe apostles, and the sentiment and the purport of those
things which are advanced in them, deviating as far as possible from
sound orthodoxy, evidently prove that they are the fictions of hereti
cal men, whence they are not only to be ranked among the spurious
writings, but are to be rejected as altogether absurd and impious." —
Hist. Eccles., iii. 25.

356 HISTORY OF THE CANON
biblical writing to mark it as infallible or inspired, is dog
matic, and has no other foundation than an assumption of
the infallibility of the writer. It is scarcely necessary to say
that no one of the New Testament writers has set up such a
claim for himself as dogmatic theologians have gratuitously
made for all of them. With this sort of canonicity it is evid
ent that criticism can have no sympathy, since it admits of
no presumptions of the kind as to the character of the
writings in question, but requires that the results of the
critical process be awaited as the only right ground of all
judgments regarding their origin, purpose, and claims to be
regarded as exceptional productions.
The historical treatment of the canon of the New Testa
ment has never been regarded with favour from the dogmatic
point of view, and is, indeed, of modern origin. Notwith
standing the fact, which the history of the canon clearly
shows, that the early Church, at least after the second
century, exercised considerable critical discrimination regard
ing the canonicity of the New Testament writings, and that
in the classical passage in Eusebius (iii. 25) the doubts re
specting certain books, since accepted as canonical, which
prevailed as early as the beginning of the fourth century,
are set forth in detail, it was not until the first decade of the
eighteenth century that these doubts began to be brought
forward again. Semler' s thorough criticism showed that the
canon of the New Testament was a gradual growth, which
only reached a relative completion toward the end of the
second century. I. — THE APOSTOLIC AGE.
The so-called apostolic age, extending toward the close of
the fourth century, furnished few conditions favourable to
the formation of a canon of such Christian writings as then
existed, or, indeed, to the creation of a Christian literature.
The religion of Jesus found its first adherents not among the

HISTORY OF THE CANON 357
cultivated classes, but among the lowly and poor, to whom
literature was unknown. Paul writes to the church in
Corinth, which was perhaps composed of as cultivated
people as could be found in any of the churches of the
middle of the first century, that not many of them were
" wise men after the fashion of this world, not many mighty,
not many noble. ' ' This age was, too, without an historical
perspective. It had no conception of a future development
of Christianity extending through many centuries. Its
horizon was extremely narrow. The early Christians be
lieved that " the last days" were " at hand," when Jesus
would appear a second time in " glory " for the establish
ment of the Messianic kingdom. Under such conditions
literary productions intended for the instruction of future
ages or the collection of existing writings for a remote result
could not be expected.
That " unlearned and common men " ' should occupy
themselves with such matters is a priori improbable, except
that under the spur of necessity and for immediate ends they
might set down some things in a fragmentary way in writing".
Even Paul was lacking in historical foresight, and we have
from him only writings for the occasion, called forth by the
immediate needs of the communities to which they were ad
dressed. There is no evidence, and scarcely is there a prob
ability, that he intended his Epistles to constitute a sacred
canonical literature for appeal and citation by future genera
tions. He did not think himself to be specially inspired to
write. He thought, indeed, that he had " the Spirit " and
' ' the word of God, ' ' but in no especial sense. All the be
lievers of the time were supposed to be endowed with the
Holy Spirit, which was the common ' ' grace ' ' and privilege
of all who had accepted Jesus.2 He appealed to the Old
Testament as the only authoritative Scripture that he knew,3
1 Acts iv. 13. 2 Gal. iii. 2, 5 ; 1 Cor. iii. 16 ; Rom. viii. 9.
3 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10, x. 11 ; Gal. iii. 8.

358 HISTORY OF THE CANON
and applied passages from it by a strained allegorising to the
circumstances of his own time.
Tendencies, however, toward the formation of a canon are
observable in the apostolic age and in the time immediately
succeeding it. For as such may be regarded the reading in
the churches of some of the Epistles of Paul.1 But there is
no trace of any such recognition of the Gospels, and the
apostolic literature contains no reference to them. A sort of
" oral canon " of the gospel existed in the valued " words
ofthe Lord," or the sayings of Jesus, with which, however,
Paul shows surprisingly few contacts. His account of the
institution of the Lord's Supper is one of the most striking
of these.2 Apart from the crucifixion and the resurrection,
he appeared to care little for the tradition of Jesus.
It is not, indeed, improbable that some of the most im
portant sayings of Jesus may have been committed to writing
as early as the date of the great Pauline Epistles. An old
tradition runs to the effect that a writing ascribed to Matthew
was early in circulation, in which- were set down certain
" oracles " 3 of Christ in the vernacular of the people.4 But
there is no trace of its use in the apostolic age beyond its
probable incorporation in our synoptic Gospels, and its date
is altogether a matter of conjecture. The writings compos
ing our New Testament do not all belong to the apostolic
age, but tendencies found in the later ones toward a canoni
cal recognition of some of the earlier may properly be noted
here. In the so-called Second Epistle of Peter * occurs mention
of the commandment of the Saviour through the apostles in
immediate connection with the words of ' ' the holy prophets, ' '
and Paul's Epistles are spoken of as if existing in a collec
tion, and are placed side by side with ' ' the other Scriptures."
The date of this Epistle is uncertain, but it may fairly be
1 1 Thess. v. 27. * 1 Cor. xi. 23-25. 3 Xoyia.
4 Euseb., Hist. Eccl., iii. 39. 6 iii. 2, 16.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 359
concluded that in the early part of the second century the
Epistles of Paul had been collected and copied, and were
considerably used, perhaps even read in the churches along
with the Old Testament. But we are far at this period from
a New Testament canon as such.

II. — THE POST-APOSTOLIC AGE.
From the latter part of the first century to the end of the
first quarter of the second, conditions existed and influences
were at work of considerable importance to the formation of
the canon. We cannot, however, think of the Christians
of this period as entertaining views of the writings composing
the New Testament similar to those now held by believers.
The oral tradition of the life and teachings of Jesus still
existed, and was continually propagated by the preachers
and teachers in the public religious assemblies. Epistles
from leaders in the churches must have been frequently re
ceived and read, and those of Paul were doubtless circulated
and copied. Perhaps fragmentary narratives of the life of
Jesus had a similar fortune. That many such existed ap
pears from the prologue to the third Gospel, where they are
expressly mentioned.
No especial, exclusive sanctity appears, however, to have
been attached to these writings ; and when our canonical
Gospels were completed, and came into the hands of the
people, there could have been no reason, either from their
contents in comparison with other writings of the kind in
circulation or from any claims put forth by their authors,
for regarding them as possessing a divine sanction. Indeed,
the author of the third Gospel makes it very apparent in the
introduction to his narrative that he undertook the work
after the manner of an ordinary biographer who wishes ac
curately to instruct a friend.
Besides, the reverence felt by the Jewish Christians for the

360 HISTORY OF THE CANON
Old Testament must have rendered them reluctant to place
upon an equal footing with it any other writings, particularly
such as set up no claims to inspiration in their authors.
Moreover, we may reasonably suppose that there was carried
over from the apostolic age into this the belief in the gift of
the Holy Spirit as common to all Christians, so that writings
as such would not naturally be invested with a peculiarly
sacred character.1
Such an agreement among many persons to accept certain
writings and reject others, as is implied in the formation of a
canon, presupposes considerable communication and inter
course — a condition requiring a long period of time in view
of the means of transportation and the wide dispersion of the
Christians at the time in question. When we consider, be
sides, the absence of an organisation through which a
general consensus might be obtained and expressed, we see
the impossibility of an early agreement of the several com
munities of believers respecting the canonical authority ofthe
early Christian writings.
In such a condition of affairs there could not but be a con
siderable development of individual freedom of opinion in
isolated churches and a corresponding narrowness and pro
vincialism of judgment as well as decided predilections in
favour of certain writings. Such tendencies and preferences
could not but operate unfavourably to the settlement of the
canon. If we join to these considerations the fact that the
age was uncritical, that is, not inclined in the nature of
the case to undertake a recension of manuscripts and to
examine the claims of writers to special authority, when
none stood forth with preeminent authorisation, we shall
find the critical selection and sifting of books and the dis
tinguishing of some of them by a general consensus as ex
clusively to be accepted the remotest of probabilities.
Another obstacle to the formation of the canon was the
' Clem. Rom., i ad Cor. ii. 46 ; Barnab., ix., xvi., xix.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 361
conflict, dating from the apostolic age, between those who
favoured and those who opposed the Pauline doctrine that the
gentiles should be admitted into the Christian fold without
submission to the Jewish ceremonial law. It required a long
time to effect an adjustment of these differences, and although
the liberal view of Paul prevailed, it did not succeed at once
by the exclusion of all that opposed it; and accordingly there
stand side by side in our canon Gospels and Epistles in which
the opinions representing it and those opposed to it and those
of a mediating tendency are more or less openly expressed.
The important witnesses for this period are Clement of
Rome, Barnabas, and Hermas. Their testimony must be
considered with regard to the current opinions in their time
respecting the inspiration and authority of the Christian
literature then in use. In order to ascertain what were the
earliest tendencies toward the formation of a canon, they
must be questioned as to the nature of the writings in their
hands and as to their manner of using them for quotation
or for illustration.
1. Clement of Rome. — Without entering upon the question
of the genuineness of the Epistles ascribed to Clement, it is
sufficient to remark that his first Epistle addressed to the
Corinthians was probably written at the end of the first cent
ury or in the first quarter of the second. The writer was
evidently a diligent student of Paul's writings, and once ex
pressly mentions him as " the blessed Paul," the author of
an Epistle, which is not specified. We cannot determine
how many Epistles he knew, but his injunction to the Cor
inthians to " take up the Epistle of Paul " ' implies a use of
some of them in the churches of the time and perhaps the
public reading of them in the religious assemblies, which
was the first step toward the acceptance of writings as
1 " Take up the Epistle ofthe blessed Paul the apostle. ... Of
a truth he charged you in the Spirit concerning himself and Cephas
and Apollos, because even then ye had made parties."

362 HISTORY OF THE CANON
canonical, since they were thereby placed side by side with
the sacred Scriptures of the Old Testament. No citations,
properly speaking, from the Gospels are found in Clement.
' ' The words of Jesus our Lord ' ' are referred to, and repro
duced in one or two instances, apparently from memory, but
not in the form of accurate quotations.
The writer shows no evidence of an acquaintance with
any of our Gospels, and does not mention or refer to them.
The most that can be inferred from his repetition of sayings
of Jesus is that he had read some writings in which they were
recorded, probably our first Gospel and possibly the third.
But his acquaintance with some Gospels and Epistles is all
that can be affirmed. He does not intimate that he regarded
them as " Scripture," that is, as authoritative and inspired
writings. His inaccurate quotations and his ascription of
sayings to Jesus that are not found in our Gospels show that
there was to him no exclusively sacred text recording the
life and teachings of the Master.
2. The Epistle of Barnabas. — This writing, falsely attributed
to Barnabas,1 was composed at about the same time as the
first Epistle of Clement, and was held in high regard by
some of the Christian fathers. Tbe writer shows no in
tellectual grasp, no profound apprehension of Christianity,
and carries the allegorical and typological method of inter
pretation to the utmost extremes. He was evidently ac
quainted with Romans and perhaps with Galatians and 2
Corinthians, but he does not mention the Epistles by name,
or treat them as sacred writings. His quotations of sayings
of Jesus bear a strong resemblance to the record of them in
the first Gospel. In iv. 14 he cites the words, " many are
called, but few chosen," with the formula, "as it is writ
ten," and some have regarded this as a quotation from Matt.
xxii. 14 as sacred Scripture. But apart from the circum
stance that the source of the quotation is uncertain, this
' Acts iv. 26, xii. 25, xiii. 1.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 363
single instance cannot be regarded as establishing the fact
that in.the first quarter of the second century our Gospels
were reputed to constitute a sacred Scripture, especially since
this writer ascribes to Jesus sayings that are not contained
in them. Westcott admits that the proverbial phrase intro
duced by the formula of Scripture-quotation may by a failure
of memory have been ascribed by the writer to some book of
the Old Testament — a confusion similar to that which
occurs several times in Justin Martyr.
3. The Shepherd of Hermas. — An ancient tradition, as
cribed to a certain Hermas, mentioned by Paul,1 — the writing
known by this title. It was, however, written in the first half
of the second century. Like the Epistle of Barnabas, it was
highly esteemed in the primitive Church, and thought by
Origen to be " divinely inspired." It consists of visions,
commandments, and similitudes, and is destitute of literary
interest. A scholar who has written a treatise on it char
acterises it as " the most spiritless book that the ancient
Church has handed down to us." 2 The fact that such men
as Clement of Alexandria and Origen could value it so
highly as they did shakes our confidence in their judgment
on matters connected with the early Christian literature. It
has very little to do with the facts of historical Christianity.
The writer knew 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, and James,
and possibly Hebrews and 1 Peter, but he neither mentions
nor refers to any Epistle or Gospel. Westcott goes too far
in maintaining that he was familiar with our Gospels, and
even made allusions to the fourth. Weiss says that the
work contains no certain trace of them, and finds only an
' ' accord ' ' with Mark x. 24. The writer, in common with
the authors of Clement and Barnabas, believed that all the
Christians of the time had received the Holy Spirit, and
appears to think himself as well qualified as the apostles to
write for the edification of the Church. The idea of citing a
1 Rom. xvi. 4. 2Jachmann, Der Hirte des Hermas.

364 HISTORY OF THE CANON
supposed apostolical writing as an authority seems never to
have occurred to him.
4. The Didache— -The writing technically known as the
Didache, or " The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles," or, ac
cording to its sub-title, " The Teaching of the Lord through
the Twelve Apostles," should be mentioned in this connec
tion, since it probably belongs to about the time of Clement
and Barnabas, though placed later by some authorities. Its
object is to present in a simple form the rules that should
govern the Christian life. It has been well remarked that such
a writing would have been impossible had an authoritative
canon of the New Testament been in existence at the time
when it was written ; and it shows by the total absence of ref
erence to the books that have since become canonical that
the author knew nothing of an inspired Christian literature.
The only canonical authority recognised in this writing is
the Old Testament, from which several quotations are made
in due form. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke appear to
have been known to the writer, and he quotes from them
with such indifference to accuracy as is indicated in combin
ing different passages and making additions of his own. He
speaks of " the gospel " and " the teaching of the gospel,"
but does not refer to any Gospel-writing. Once he quotes
with " it is said " a saying, the origin of which is unknown.
Nothing is quoted from the Epistles of the New Testament,
although the author was probably acquainted with some of
Paul's and perhaps with Titus and 1 Peter.
5. The Gospel of Peter. — The recently discovered Fragment
of the Gospel of Peter should also have a brief notice in this
connection, on account of its relation to our canonical Gos
pels and its importance to the history of the canon. It
belongs probably to the early part of the second century,
and its treatment of the older Gospels accords with the atti
tude toward them of the writings of that period already
considered. The Fragment discloses a close relation to our

HISTORY OF THE CANON 365
synoptic Gospels, but deviates from them in details, particu
larly in the account of the resurrection. Dr. Harnack
regards it as proved, or nearly proved, that the writer knew
our Gospel according to Mark. But it is doubtful whether
he was acquainted with the first Gospel in the form in which
it now exists, since, although he follows its narrative in
some respects, he deviates from it in several particulars, and
omits incidents that he could hardly have omitted had he
known it. If his record was based on Matthew's, he re
garded the latter as of little importance, as is shown by the
liberties that he takes with it. But he very likely followed
traditions and legends that the author of the first Gospel
used, and may have drawn from that narrative also.
The relation of the Fragment to the third Gospel is similar
to that which it holds to the first. If the writer knew it, he
used it with great freedom, and even ventured to correct it.
If he knew the fourth Gospel at all, he paid little attention
to it, and corrected it in an important particular. His
sources may have been the same as those of its author.
Such an attitude toward our canonical Gospels on the part
of a writer living in the second century is of great signi
ficance respecting the question of canonicity.
If a writer undertaking to compose a history of the life of
Jesus and having some of our Gospels in his possession
could take such "liberties with them as this writer takes, it is
evident that they could not then have been regarded as con
stituting a sacred literature produced by divine inspiration,
that is, could not have been looked upon as canonical in the
sense that this word later came to have. The existence of
our Gospels at the time in question is one thing, and the
treatment that they receive in the literature ofthe period is
quite another. The whole question of the canon is involved
in the latter consideration. The fact that a second-century
writer quotes a Gospel or an Epistle is of little moment.
The important matter is how he quotes it.

366 HISTORY OF THE CANON
III. — PAPIAS AND HEGESIPPUS.
No works of Papias, bishop of Hieropolis, remain, but
Eusebius records that he wrote a work entitled, ' ' Exposi
tions ofthe Oracles of the Lord. ' ' This writing was probably
composed near the middle of the second century, and the
fragments that Eusebius has preserved are important for the
history of the canon. "The Oracles of the Lord" are
the sayings of Jesus, and the consideration of chief moment
in the case is, what sources did Papias use for these sayings ?
His own words as reported by Eusebius answer this ques
tion. He says that he gave place in his book to everything
that he heard from the "elders"; that whenever he met
anyone who had been a follower of the elders, he inquired
about the discourses of these ; and that he did not think he
could derive so much profit from the contents of books as
from the utterances of the living and abiding voice.1 Books,
then, it appears, Papias knew, that contained the sayings or
"oracles" (Aoyia) of Jesus. What these were Eusebius
informs us in the following passages : "Of Matthew he
[Papias] stated as follows : ' Matthew composed the oracles
(logia) in the Hebrew [Aramaic] dialect, and everyone trans
lated them as he was able.' " " And John the presbyter
also said this : ' Mark being the interpreter of Peter, what
ever he recorded he wrote with great accuracy, but not,
however, in the order in which it was spoken or done by our
Lord, for he neither knew nor followed our Lord, but was a
follower of Peter, who gave him such information as was
necessary, but not to give a history of our Lord's discourses.
Wherefore Mark has not erred in anything by writing some
things as he has, for he was carefully attentive to one thing,
not to pass by anything that he heard, or to state anything
falsely in these accounts.' " It does not belong to this in
quiry to determine whether the Aramaean Matthew and the
1 Euseb., Hist. Eccl., iii. 39.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 367
Mark mentioned by Papias were our first and second canoni^
cal Gospels, or were rather earlier writings that served as a
basis for them. It is enough that the books were a sort of
Gospel- writings, and that he speaks of only two of the kind.
We are especially concerned with the manner in which
Papias introduces the books. He appears to regard them as
the works of ordinary historians, which may be supplemented
by such information as he may be able to pick up from oral
sources. In the absence of any intimation that he thought
the writers inspired or the works authoritative, and in the
declaration that he preferred oral to written sources, he
shows that he had not the slightest idea of a canonical New
Testament book or books.
Papias's account of the death of Judas shows that he put
confidence in sources that do not agree with our canonical
records. He relates that Judas' s body, having so swollen
that he could not pass where a chariot could easily pass, he
was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels were emptied
out. Again, according to Eusebius, " he relates a story of
a woman accused of many sins before the Lord, which is
contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews." Euse
bius mentions no reference by Papias to our third Gospel or
to the fourth, but says that " he used testimonies from 1 Peter
and 1 John." He appears to have passed Paul by without
mention and to have quoted none of his Epistles, while it is
reported that he regarded the Revelation as inspired.1
1 "Eusebius promises (H. E., iii. 3) to record (1) the quotations of
ecclesiastical writers from ' disputed books,' (2) ' what they have said
about the Canonical Scriptures and the uncanonical as well.' His
promise to include the latter we have reason to believe that he faith
fully keeps. But he gives no extracts from Papias about Luke and
John. It may be reasonably inferred that Papias was silent about
them. This silence may have proceeded from either of two causes :
(1) John and Luke may not have been recognised by Papias as on
an equality with Mark and Matthew ; (2) though recognising them as
authoritative, Papias may have had nothing to say about them. The

368 HISTORY OF THE CANON
Hegesippus, a Palestinian Jewish Christian, after making
a journey to Rome about the middle of the second century
and visiting many churches on his way, wrote, ' ' Memoirs
of the Unerring Tradition of the Apostolic Message," of
which Eusebius has preserved a few fragments. He reported
that he found everywhere " that which the law and the
prophets and the Lord enjoin." The first two terms relate,
of course, to the Old Testament, and a first step toward the
formation of the canon of the New Testament is indicated
by joining with this ancient standard the words of the Lord,
or the sayings of Jesus.
It is, however, noteworthy that Hegesippus does not refer
to the sources of his knowledge of that which the Lord
enjoins, that is, he says nothing of any one of our four Gos
pels, and reveals no conception of a series of canonical New
latter of these alternatives just mentioned is highly improbable.
Papias dwells on the defect of order or arrangement (rd^Ei) in Mark,
who, he says, never even contemplated an orderly treatise (dvvrai.iv)
of the logia. And Luke avowed it as one of his objects to write in
(chronological) order (xaBESfji) ,and Luke's order differs not only from
that of Matthew, but also from that of John. It is hard to believe,
then, that Papias 'would have nothing to say ' about Luke if he recog
nised Luke. Again, as regards John, would not Papias have natur
ally added what the Muratorian Fragment says — that this want of
order was corrected by John, who wrote 'in order (per ordinem)' '?
The Muratorian Fragment, Clement of Alexandria, and the anony
mous tradition preserved by Eusebius (iii. 24) all have something of
great importance to tell us about the original authorship of the
' spiritual ' Gospel of John, the disciple of the Lord, and what they
say testifies to the interest taken in its origin by those ecclesiastical
writers who were among the first to recognise it as apostolical. Is it
likely that Papias, if he acknowledged it to be the work of the last of
the apostles, knew nothing about it that he deemed worth saying?
These considerations point to the conclusion that Luke and John were
not recognised by Papias as on a level with Mark and Matthew." —
E. A. Abbott, in article "Gospels," in Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol, ii.
column 1813.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 369
Testament writings. But Eusebius expressly states that he
quoted from the apocryphal Gospel according to the Hebrews.
He was, however, probably acquainted with our first and
third Gospels — a fact which, if incontestably established, as
it is not, would prove what no one disputes, that they were
then in existence. Their recognition as canonical is, as has
already been pointed out, quite another matter. Hegesippus
appears to have known some of the Pauline and the Pastoral
Epistles, expressions from which he appropriates without
acknowledgment. IV. — JUSTIN MARTYR.
Justin, who was of Greek descent and a student of the
Grecian philosophy, wrote two defences (" Apologies") of
the Christian religion and a dialogue with Trypho, from a.d.
145-160. The study of his works is of great importance to
the history of the canon, for the reason that he made exten
sive quotations from early records of Christian history. He
frequently informs us that his citations as to the life and
teachings of Jesus are taken from a work or works that he
calls ' ' Memoirs of the Apostles, ' ' but he does not designate
the author or authors of those Memoirs by name.
The number of citations is very large, and their resem
blances to and differences from their parallels in our Gospels
render the question of their source very difficult. Various
hypotheses have been advocated : That he drew from an
original or originals from which our Gospels were derived ;
that his Memoirs were the Gospel according to the Hebrews ;
that he used a harmony or combined narrative ; and that
our canonical Gospels furnished the greater part of his
materials. The way in which Justin speaks of his sources is a con
sideration of importance. " Memoirs of the Apostles " is a
somewhat inexact term, if it was intended to apply to our

370 HISTORY OF THE CANON
Gospels, only two of which were ostensibly written by
apostles. Though he once adds the explanatory words,
" which are called Gospels," and once quotes words which,
he says, are " written in the Gospel," it is impossible to de
termine what Gospel or Gospels he had in mind, since with
the single exception of a " Gospel of Peter " mentioned once,
he does not connect any particular author with his sources.
It is well known that many writings ascribed to apostles
and others were early in circulation purporting to be Gospels
(the Gospels according to Peter, James, the Twelve, Thomas,
the Hebrews, etc.), and it would be a begging of the question
to assert that whenever Justin mentioned Gospels in general
he had in mind precisely our four. Justin's remark that the
Memoirs were read along with the prophets in the Christian
assemblies for worship throws no light on their character or
on the estimation in which they were held, since many of
the early Christian writings not afterward admitted into the
canon were so used.
What Justin omits to say about his sources is also of im
portance. He does not give the names of their authors, and
does not imply that they were regarded as canonical, but he
cites them simply as historical documents without an intima
tion that they were thought to be inerrant, although he held
so rigid a doctrine of the inspiration of the Old Testament
authors that he has been called " the Doctor of Inspiration."
Indeed, his faith in the statements made in his Memoirs rests
upon the belief that the events related in them had been
foretold by the prophets.
Since Justin often quotes inaccurately from the Old Testa
ment, and sometimes refers passages to the wrong authors,
his carelessness in quoting his Memoirs does not go to estab
lish the hypothesis that they were not exclusively our
Gospels. But opposed to it is the fact that he mentions
incidents in the life of Jesus not recorded in the latter, such
as that Jesus was born in a cave near Bethlehem. Now

HISTORY OF THE CANON 371
several uncanonical Gospels record this tradition, and the
presumption is that he derived it from them, and that they
belonged to his Memoirs. The incidents also that he re
lates, that at the baptism of Jesus a fire was kindled in the
Jordan, and that when Jesus came out of the water a voice
came from the heavens : " Thou art my beloved Son, this
day have I begotten thee," are found in the fragments of the
Gospel according to the Hebrews.
Many similar examples could be cited from Justin's works,
showing that his sources were not exclusively our Gospels,
and that he derived numerous incidents from apocryphal
Gospels, and related them as if they were as authentic as
any others.
It must suffice, without further discussion of the difficult
question, to state the results that have been reached by two
of the fairest and ablest scholars, who bave thoroughly
examined the whole subject. Credner says: "Justin was
acquainted with our canonical Gospels, but used them little
or not at all immediately. The basis of his quotations was a
writing different from them, which can hardly have been
any other than his own recension of the manifold Gospel
according to the Hebrews, the same which often appears
also as the Gospel of Peter, and which must have arisen
from a harmonising combination of the evangelic history."
Hilgenfeld, who has written an extended treatise on the
subject, thus presents his conclusions in substance: " Justin
knew Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and his acquaintance with
the fourth Gospel can hardly be denied. He advances be
yond Papias, and marks a certain contrast to him in that he
totally excludes the oral tradition as a source of the know
ledge of the life of Jesus, and has everything relating thereto
in written Gospels. These apostolical Memoirs Justin
reckons among the writings which belong to the Christians,
and reports that they were read along with the prophets in
the Sunday-assemblies for worship. Thus in him we

372 HISTORY OF THE CANON
approach nearer in every respect to the conception of a collec
tion of the sacred writings of Christianity. Yet with all this
approximation it cannot be denied that Justin limits the
conception of holy Scripture to the Old Testament, and does
not transfer it to the Christian writings. Everywhere,
whether he contend with Jew or heathen, only the books of
the Old Testament are recognised by him as holy Scripture.
Justin agrees entirely with Papias in holding exclusively to
the twelve apostles. Besides the Gospels, he recognises the
Revelation as the work of the apostle John. But no mention
of the apostle Paul and his letters is found in Justin ; rather
they are directly excluded. Accordingly, the Epistles of
Paul are not reckoned by him among the Christian
writings. The fourth Gospel might possibly have found its
way into his Gospel-harmony on account ofthe name of the
apostle John.1 But in the evangelic quotations of Justin we
find much that is so peculiar as to require reference to an
uncanonical Gospel."
The opinion expressed in the foregoing summary of Hil-
genfeld's conclusion should be supplemented by the remark
that while Justin apparently with intention omits mention
of Paul and his writings, there are in his works unmistak
able indications of his acquaintance with the chief Pauline
Epistles, Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, and Philippians,
and with Colossians and Ephesians. He had evidently read
1 E. A. Abbott is of the opinion that " if Justin knew John, he re
fused to base any statement on it." " It is generally recognised that
the Synoptists do not teach, whereas John and Justin do teach,
Christ's preexistence, the feeding on Christ's ' flesh and blood ' (as
expressed in those precise words), the application of the term ' only-
begotten ' to Christ, and the Logos-doctrine. When, therefore, we
find Justin either not appealing to any authority, in behalf of these
doctrines, or appealing to pointless passages in the Synoptists instead
of pointed passages in John, it is a legitimate inference that Justin
did not recognise John as on a level with the Synoptists."— Art.
"Gospels" in Encycl. Biblica, vol. ii. col. 1835.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 373
them or heard them read. But he could not have attached
to them any special sacredness and authority, for he believed
in the inspiration of all Christians from the beginning down
to his own time, and no doubt thought himself to be as good
an authority as any preceding writer of a Gospel or an
Epistle. The attempt to explain Justin's quotations by the exclu
sion of all our Gospels, which has been made by the author
of " Supernatural Religion," and that of Westcott and Nor
ton by the exclusion of all other sources than these except
oral tradition, are both extreme and hardly tenable. The
essential facts in the case for the historian of the canon are,
however, independent of the vexed question of the character
of his Memoirs, and are rather that, granting that he knew
and used our Gospels, he nowhere intimates that they were
to him anything more than ordinary historical documents ;
that he does not regard or treat them as exclusive sources of
information, but draws freely from another source or other
sources, probably written; that he fails generally to identify
any of the records that he uses by giving the names of their
real or supposed authors ; that the only sacred Scripture
that he recognises is the Old Testament, the supposed
prophecies in which relating to events of the life of Jesus are
paramount and conclusive evidence to him of the signifi
cance of these events for the divine mission of Christ ; and
that, finally, he does not reveal in his writings any well-
defined discrimination as to canonical and uncanonical
writings, but is apparently unconscious of such a distinction.
V.— THE CLEMENTINE HOMILIES, BASILIDES, AND
VALENTINE.
An imaginary contest of arguments between Peter and
Simon Magus, supposed to personate Paul, written in the
interest of the anti-Pauline party in the Church, is repre
sented in the so-called Clementine Homilies, which date

374 HISTORY OF THE CANON
from after the middle of the second century. The work is a
forgery in the name of Clement of Rome, and has little in
terest or importance except for the history of the canon.
While Justin expressly mentions his sources as " Memoirs
of the Apostles," this writer designates no sources, and does
not mention any Gospel by name. Only three or four exact
quotations from our Gospels occur among a large number of
references to sayings and acts of Jesus, and some are not
found in them at all, e. g., "Be ye approved money
changers," and " Why do ye not discern the good reason
of the Scriptures ? ' '
Hilgenfeld' s conclusion is doubtless correct, that along
with our four canonical Gospels the writer used an uncanon
ical one, while the author of ' ' Supernatural Religion ' ' under
takes too much in maintaining that he used none of our
records. He was acquainted with the Epistles to about the
extent of Hermas' s knowledge of them.
With respect to Basilides, a leader of a Gnostic sect, who
wrote about 125, little accurate information is attainable,
since his writings have perished, and we know nothing of
them except what the later writers who opposed him tell us.
Reuss's summing up of the case must suffice for our purpose :
" The exegesis of the Gnostics attached itself above all to
the words of Jesus in order to bring out of them their own
dogmas. But these words either circulated in a purely
traditional form, or were embodied in writings more or less
different, more or less circulated, but yet not sorted by an
ecclesiastical authority, and all serving equally according to
the occasion the use one wished to make of them. Now
nothing was easier than to form new collections of this sort
either by making extracts from those that one had at hand,
or by combining several books, or by composing one's self
accounts under the direct influence of the preoccupations of
the system. There are famous examples of each one of these

HISTORY OF THE CANON 375
methods." ' The fact that Basilides had no idea of a canon
of the New Testament is evident in. that he did not confine
himself to whatever writings he may have had, but appealed
to the authority of a certain Glaucius whom he declared to
have been an interpreter of Peter, and made use of some
traditions of Matthias, who, it was maintained, had had
private intercourse with Jesus. He is reported to have
written a commentary on " the gospel," whatever that term
may have meant to him, and interpretations made by him
self and his followers of some synoptic passages and of por
tions of Romans, 1 Corinthians, and perhaps 1 Peter are
mentioned by later writers.
Valentine, another Gnostic leader of about the middle of
the second century, makes no direct appeal to the Gospels in
the fragments of his writings that have been preserved in
quotations from homilies and letters. Later writers charge
him with introducing alterations, corrections, etc., in some
of the Epistles. Origen says that his followers even altered
the form of the Gospel, and Irenaeus says that this sect
brought forward their own compositions as Gospels, and
entitled one of their books " The Gospel of Truth,"
" though it accorded in no respect with the Gospels of the
apostles." The fact that Valentine was acquainted with
Paul's Epistles and that he argued, as Holtzmann maintains,
from the Gospel of Matthew, proves nothing more than the
existence and use of these writings in his time. There is
absolutely no evidence that they were regarded as exclusive
and authoritative sources, that is, as canonical.
In view of the considerable number of Gospels that were
in circulation in the second century, the use by these writers
of isolated passages that are found in our canonical Gospels,
without reference to the particular source, does not go far
towards establishing the genuineness of these records.
1 Histoire du Canon, p. 70.

376 HISTORY OF THE CANON
Credner has well stated the circumstances and conditions
of this period : ' ' The early Church saw come forth from its
bosom a multitude of the most contradictory asseverations
and systems, which were more or less foreign to the true
sense of the Christian doctrine, and which were afterward
condemned by the orthodox as heretical. It was not inten
tional hostility to Christianity by which these so-called
heretics were animated. It was rather in the case of the
majority at least an honest seeking after truth and the in
born striving of the thoughtful and intelligent man to bring
an earlier mode of thought, in which he had been reared, and
perhaps grown grey, into accord with a new and to him ac
ceptable teaching. But these strivings would certainly have
turned out quite differently, certainly there would have been
no Corinthians, Valentinians, Marcionites, and other sects
of heretics of whatever name, at least not in the form that
they assumed, had the doctrines of Christianity been then
laid down in divinely attested writings, and not in mere
tradition. This assertion will be established if we are able
to show that all these heretics sought to confirm their
doctrines not by an appeal to certain writings authorised in
the Church, but to oral and written tradition, just as we
have found to be the case with the orthodox Christians." 1
The establishment of this fact may be regarded as one of
the assured results of historical investigation into the con
dition of the Church in the second century, to which no one
contributed more in his time than the candid scholar from
whom the preceding quotation is taken.
VI. — MARCION AND TATlAN.
The great Gnostic heretic, Marcion, a man of noble char
acter and life, undertook with sincere purpose the purification
of Christianity. He believed that it had become corrupted
1 Beitrage, i. 36.

HISTORY OE THE CANON 377
with Jewish elements, and supported his belief by the Epistle
of Paul to the Galatians. The twelve apostles, being Jews,
had in his opinion mingled their national ideas with the
teaching of Jesus, and he discovered Jewish and anti-Jewish
tendencies in the current Christian writings. He accord
ingly undertook to construct a canon of his own by selecting
out of the various existing books a few, which he regarded
as least affected by Judaism, taking considerable liberty with
them in the way of changes and excisions. He thought that
Paul was the only genuine apostle, and accordingly his col
lection of writings, made soon after the middle of the second
century, was composed of those that came from the great
apostles and from his followers. He chose ten Epistles :
Romans, Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, 1 and 2 Thessalon
ians, Ephesians (which according to Tertullian he called " to
the Laodiceans"), Colossians, Philippians, and Philemon.
The precise character of Marcion's Gospel, and he chose
only one, is indeterminable, but it is probable that he used a
somewhat modified Gospel according to Luke. But it is not
important for the present purpose to determine the precise
character of Marcion's Gospel, since our task is to ascertain
the estimation in which the Gospels in general were held,
and how they were treated in Marcion's time. His pro
cedure furnishes the desired information on this point in two
or three conclusive facts : He did not ascribe his Gospel to
any author, at least we have no information from his oppon
ents that he did so ; he simply called it " the Gospel"
(to evayyeXiov) ; he admitted that he changed the original
text, and gave his reasons for doing so.
Now the taking of such liberties with a writing is irre
concilable with a belief in its infallibility or inspiration, and
Marcion's procedure was in accord with the point of view of
his time in which, as has been shown, no trace can be found
of a belief in the exclusive divine inspiration of the writings
afterwards united in the New Testament and regarded as

378 HISTORY OF THE CANON
canonical. Accordingly, his adaptation of a single Gospel
to his purposes along with the rejection of others, his recep
tion of some Epistles that pleased him and his exclusion of
others, were in accordance with the opinions and practices
of his age, in which Christians were accustomed to rely upon
oral tradition and to quote writings afterward rejected as un
canonical, as if they were as authoritative as those finally
accepted. It has been remarked that the general laxity of belief and
usage regarding canonicity is evident from the fact that there
does not appear to have been any objection raised against
Marcion's procedure in his own time. It was unfortunate
for his fame that he took a Gospel that was afterward re
ceived as canonical, and treated it with so much freedom.
But had such an opinion of its sanctity as could alone justify
a condemnation of him existed in his time, it is certainly
unaccountable that his contemporary, Justin Martyr, who
frequently brings charges against the Marcionites, did not
raise his voice against such a profanation of sacred docu
ments.1 Tatian, an Assyrian by birth, was in Rome a disciple of
Justin. An oration or apology, addressed to the Greeks,
alone remains of his writings, and in this he shows, not by
express mention or quotation, but by " contacts," his ac
quaintance with some of Paul's Epistles, with the Epistle to
Titus, and with the four Gospels. This work dates from the
third quarter of the second century, and his performance de
notes a tendency toward the formation of the canon, in that
he sought to make some of the Pauline Epistles more read
able by improving on their literary style — an indication that
they were esteemed as works suitable for edification and
probably for public reading in the churches.
Tatian was also the author of a harmony of the four Gos-
1 Credner, Beitrage, i. 44.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 379
pels, which is known as " the Gospel by Four," or the
" Diatessaron." Eusebius is the first to mention this work,
and he speaks of it as " a certain amalgamation and collec
tion of the Gospels," put together he knows not how.
Theodoret, about the middle of the fifth century, reports
that he had seen it, that it did not contain the genealogies
or any other parts that declare that Jesus was born of the
seed of David, that it was used by others than those of his
own [heretical] sect who in their " simplicity " did not see
the evil of it, and that he collected above ten thousand copies
of it, and put them aside as dangerous.
It appears that Ephraem of Edessa wrote a commentary
on the Diatessaron about the middle of the fourth century,
of which in 1876 Massinger published a Latin translation
from the Aramaic. More recently a supposed Arabic trans
lation of the Diatessaron has been discovered. All this
shows nothing more than that our Gospels existed in the
third quarter of the second century, and that they were held
in sufficient esteem as records of the life of Jesus to induce
Tatian to make a harmony of them.
On the contrary, the fact that Tatian took such liberties
with the Gospels as to make excisions of portions of them
that did not accord with his doctrine proves that he attached
no special sacredness to these records. Historical documents
regarded as without special sanction he might, indeed, have
treated in this way, but records believed by him to be in
fallible he would rather have undertaken to bring into accord
with his theories by means of a violent exegesis, as the
writers of his time treated the Old Testament, and as all
dogmatists since his time have treated the Bible. Since his
tampering with the Gospels was carried to such a degree
that the good and orthodox Theodoret thought his harmony
unfit for the use of sound Christians, it is evident that he
had no conception of a New Testament canon.1 In this
1 " What may be the correct inferences from Theodoret's account

380 HISTORY OF THE CANON
respect he was in accord with the general point of view of
his age.
VII. — DIONYSIUS OE CORINTH, MELITO OF SARDIS, AND
ATHENAGORAS.
Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, was the author of a letter to
Soter, bishop of Rome, of which a few fragments remain.
In these he makes complaint that certain " apostles of the
devil " had taken the liberty to change some of his letters
by additions and excisions, and adds that " it is not surpris
ing if some have recklessly ventured to adulterate the
Scriptures of the Lord, when they have corrupted those
that are not of so much importance."
It is a legitimate inference from these words that a sharp
line of distinction was then drawn (about the last quarter of
the second century) between the writer's own productions
and certain writings recording the words of " the Lord," or
Christ ; but there is no intimation that a canon of the New
Testament yet existed, for at this time many spurious Gos
pels and other writings, not finally accepted as canonical,
were read in the churches and quoted as " inspired."
Dionysius, indeed, informs the Romans that the Epistles of
Clement and of Soter, their bishops, were read in his church,
and since the Epistles of Paul to this church can hardly have
been neglected, the inference is very natural that no exclu
sively sacred or canonical character can have been accorded
to the latter. It is worthy of note that the Gospels are not
mentioned among the books read in the churches.
of Tatian's excisions and of the ' mischief of the composition,' and
what ought to be inferred from Eusebius's (probably) contemptuous
statement about the work, are questions that do not affect Tatian's
recognition of John. All agree that before the end of his life, i . e.,
about 170-180 a.d. , he recognised the four Gospels as being of special
authority, although his notions of authority may not have prevented
him from handling them with considerable freedom."— E. A. Abbott,
art. "Gospels," in Encycl. Biblica, vol. ii. col. 1839.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 381
From the fact that Melito, bishop of Sardis, made a collec
tion of the books of the Old Covenant, the inference has been
drawn that he was acquainted with a corresponding list of
canonical New Testament books. But while the Old Coven
ant implies the New, a canon of the former does not imply
one of the latter, since the distinction of the two Covenants
was made in the New Testament itself long before a canon
of the latter was thought of. It may, however, be admitted
that Melito regarded a New Testament canon as attainable
and even desirable, but there exist no means of knowing
what books he or the Christians of his time (the last quarter
of the second century) would have included in such a collec
tion. On the contrary, everything goes to show that no
general agreement on the subject had been, or in the nature
of the case could have been, reached at this time.
In the "Apology" of Athenagoras, written about 176,
occur a few sentences from the Sermon on the Mount and
some passages from the Pauline Epistles, but the writer does
not indicate any of the Gospels or Epistles by name, and
gives no sign of regard for them as exclusively authoritative
or canonical writings. To him the true source of authority
is the Old Testament.
VIII. — THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH AND THE CANON OF
MURATORI.
The three books of Theophilus to Autolycus, written in the
latter part of the second century, are an important witness
for the canon, and denote a decided advance toward its
formation. He is the first writer who explicitly refers the
fourth Gospel to John, whom he calls one of the " vessels of
the Spirit." While he employs " holy Scripture " for the
Old Testament only, he quotes from the first Gospel and
some of the Epistles with the formula, " the divine word
says," and calls " the evangelic voice " "the divine word."

382 HISTORY OF THE CANON
The so-called Canon of Muratori, discovered at Milan in
the seventeenth century by Muratori in a manuscript of the
eighth or ninth century, is an anonymous list of the sacred
books accepted by the Roman Church, although the first two
Gospels are wanting at the beginning. It is the oldest list
of the kind that is known, having probably been made
toward the end of the second century. Hilgenfeld remarks
that " the conception of holy Scriptures of the New Testa
ment appears here already fully formed." The first words
of the Fragment are the conclusion of a sentence, " at which
[quibus'] nevertheless he was present, and he so placed [it]."
This sentence is supposed to relate to the Gospel of Mark,
and the preceding, which is wholly absent, to that of
Matthew. Then follow the words : " Third Book of the
Gospel according to Luke. Luke, that physician, after the
ascension of Christ, when Paul took him with him as studious
of the right, wrote it in his name, as he deemed best ; never
theless he had not himself seen the Lord in the flesh, and he
followed him according as he was able, beginning thus from
the nativity of John." The text then proceeds to narrate
some strange circumstances connected with the origin of the
fourth Gospel, which it ascribes to John " of the disciples,"
as follows: " Being entreated by his fellow-disciples, and his
bishops, John said, ' Fast with me for three days from this
time, and whatever shall be revealed to each one of us, let
us relate it to one another.' On the same night it was
revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should
relate all things in his own name aided by the revision of
all," etc.
Then follows a mention of Acts as containing a record by
Luke and of thirteen Epistles ascribed to Paul, with an
arrangement different from that in our canon and with
reasons assigned for writing some of them. An Epistle to
the Laodiceans and one to the Alexandrians (supposed by
some to be that to the Hebrews), " forged under the name

HISTORY OF THE CANON 383
of Paul," and " many others," it is declared, cannot be re
ceived in the Catholic Church. The remark that these two
Epistles are rejected because written in the interest of the
heresy of Marcion indicates a discrimination between apos
tolical and heretical writings. ' ' Gall should not be mixed
with honey," says the writer. On account of the corruption
of the text it is impossible to determine whether the Book of
the Wisdom of Solomon is included or not.
The writer appears to say that Jude and two of John are
received in the Catholic Church " as the Wisdom of Solomon
written by his friends in his honour," but " as " (ut) may be
"and" (et). The former reading implies that Jude and
" two of John " were written in honour of these apostles by
their friends, and the latter, that they are received along
with the Wisdom of Solomon. Two apocalypses " only "
are received according to the Fragment, that of John and
that of Peter, which latter " some of us are unwilling," it
is said, " to have read in the churches," — a remark that
shows the influence of the churches in the matter of canon
icity. The Shepherd of Hermas is recommended for private
reading, but is excluded from public use. The Epistles as
cribed to James and Peter are not mentioned, and nothing
is said of Hebrews, unless the Epistle to the Alexandrians,
which is rejected, be identified with it. The Fragment con
cludes with the rejection of compositions of the Gnostic
heretics, Valentine and Basilides. It is important to observe
that nothing is said of the supposed inspiration of the writ
ings accepted, but apparently real or supposed apostolical
authorship is a consideration of moment, since letters
" forged under the name of Paul " are rejected, although no
suspicion of forgery is thrown upon the Revelation of Peter
as a reason why some did not think it ought to be read in the
churches. In forming a judgment respecting this so-called canon, it

384 HISTORY OF THE CANON
should be borne in mind that the author is wholly unknown ;
that the manuscript dates from the eighth or ninth century ;
that, as Donaldson suggests, it may have received interpola
tions, although the presumption of interpolation should not
have great weight in the absence of evidence,1 and finally,
that in the light of the conclusions of the preceding investi
gations, the Fragment would present a strange anachronism
at any time before about the end of the second century.
The writer does not give his own opinion regarding the
books mentioned, but professedly the general sentiment of
the Church. If, now, in writings of undisputed date and
genuineness, we do not find that prior to about the end of
the second century the books of the New Testament are
mentioned and massed after the manner of this Fragment
of uncertain date and unknown authorship, this fact ought
certainly to have great weight in determining its importance
for the history of the canon.
IX. — IREN/EUS AND TERTULLIAN.
In his work " Against the Heretics," written about 190,
Irenaeus appeals to most of the writings of the New Testa
ment as holy Scripture and puts them substantially on an
equality with the Old Testament. He gives the tradition
regarding the composition of the four Gospels ; but he mani
fests no inclination toward a critical judgment, apparently
satisfied to record the traditional view of the origin of the
Gospels. He reports, after Papias, that Matthew wrote a
Gospel in the dialect of the Hebrews, but as to the important
relation of this to our first Greek Gospel he is uncritically
silent. His testimony, then, amounts only to this, that in
his time our four Gospels were traditionally accepted, and
ascribed to the writers whose names were associated with
them. ' Donaldson thinks that the passage regarding the date shows signs
of having been tampered with.— Hist . Chr. Doct. and Life, iii. 209.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 385
Irenseus's reasons for accepting four Gospels are such as
that there are four quarters of the globe, four general winds,
etc. He admits, however, that the fourth Gospel was dis
puted by some. That the Gospels were not in his judgment
self-authenticating is evident from the remark that " if any
say that our Lord did these things [miracles] only in appear
ance [it seems there were then doubters of the miracles], we
shall refer them to the prophetic declarations, and shall show
from them that all these things were strictly foretold." He
cites the Gospels, however, with the same formula that he
uses in citing the Old Testament, and refers to Matthew as
" inspired." The apostles are to him the authentic source
of Christian truth. He accepts the Epistles traditionally
ascribed to Paul (but not Hebrews as Paul's), 1 and 2 John,
and the Revelation. He recognises Acts, and one passage
indicates his acquaintance with James.
Tertullian, whose activity extended into the second decade
of the third century, accepted on " the authority of the
apostolic churches " our four Gospels, Mark being brought
into recognition as apostolic through Peter, and Luke
through Paul, to whom he says the third Gospel is gener
ally ascribed, since " it is allowable that that which scholars
publish should be regarded as their masters' work." Be
sides the Gospels he admitted Acts, thirteen Epistles ascribed
to Paul (excluding Hebrews, which, however, he found
recognised by some), 1 John and Revelation, Jude, and 1
Peter. Tertullian acknowledged the Shepherd of Hermas prior to
his conversion to Montanism, after which he rejected it as
" an Epistle of adulterers." The Epistle of James is not
mentioned in his writings, but in one passage a phrase seems
to imply acquaintance with it. He speaks a good word,
however, for the Epistle of Barnabas. His conception of
canonicity was evidently not well defined, and his attitude

386 HISTORY OF THE CANON
toward the whole subject was uncritical, his criterion being,
" that has been derived by tradition from the apostles which
has been preserved in the churches of the apostles."

X. — THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE CANON.
In the absence of means of easy communication between
the different and often widely separated Christian communi
ties in the second century, the conception of unity and a
common bond of faith and fellowship among them must
have been slowly developed. The journeys, however, of
prominent teachers among the various little communities
and the letters occasionally sent from the leader of one of
them to the brethren in another must have tended to gener
ate the idea of a whole Church, or a Church throughout all,
that is, a Catholic or universal Church. The Gnostic con-
troversy, however, probably contributed more than any other
influence to bring the churches to a consciousness of historic
unity. The appeal to tradition was not, indeed, unknown apart
from the exigencies of this controversy, in the midst of
which it became the very natural and general resort of the
defenders of the orthodoxy of the times. It was deemed the
best answer to the speculations of the heretics to set forth
the fundamental doctrines of primitive Christianity, as they
had been handed down from Christ through the apostles and
their successors. The creed was simple and in a few words.
There was one God, who had created the world by His Son,
the Word. This latter had inspired the prophets, had finally
become flesh, and preached the new kingdom of God ; had
been crucified, raised from the dead, and was seated at the
right hand of God, whence he sent forth the Holy Spirit
upon believers. At length, and very soon, he would return
in glory in the great Parousia to take them to himself and to
punish the unbelievers. This was " the Rule of Faith,"

HISTORY OF THE CANON 387
which had been handed down, and which was deemed essen
tial to the integrity of the Church and the soundness of the
individual believer.
Above all questions of mere interpretation of Scripture, it
appeared to the orthodox contestants to be of supreme im
portance to determine the grounds of the authority of the
writings themselves ; and it is natural that in proportion as
the conception of canonicity was formed and defined, the
tendency in this direction should become more pronounced
and positive, particularly in the controversy with heretics.
To minds untrained in critical investigation, the appeal to
the venerated tradition of the Church furnished the most
congenial source of confirmation. What Christ had taught,
and the apostles preached, could be determined in no way so
well as through the churches in which " the living word "
had been preached and handed down.
We have seen that to Papias " the living voice " was that
of individual teachers. It is not surprising that with the
consolidation of the Church a change should take place in
the form 'of the appeal to tradition ; and in Tertullian a
change is, in fact, observable. For he finds the standard of
right knowledge and belief as well as of true interpretation
in the tradition of the churches from the apostolic age down
through the entire succession. When the heretics denied the
infallibility of the apostles, and maintained that these were
incapable of comprehending the profounder sense of the
teachings of Jesus ; when they referred to the disagreement
between Peter and Paul, it was maintained by the defenders
of the faith that only among themselves, the real descend
ants of the apostles, was the genuine tradition to be found,
on which the true faith could alone be established, and in
accordance with which alone a right interpretation was
possible. It was but a step from this appeal to the tradition of the
churches, which derived its chief worth from its apostolic

388 HISTORY OF THE CANON
source, to an appeal to the writings of a supposed apostolic
origin, so as to meet the heretics with weapons drawn from
the armoury of Scripture texts. Their denial of the par
ticipation of the Supreme God in the revelation of the Old
Testament could not be more effectively answered than by
an appeal to apostolic writings recognised as equal in
authority to that, as inspired — in a word, as holy Scripture.
The ground of their validity was their supposed connection
with the apostles in their origin and their conformity in
doctrine with what was believed to be the genuine apostolic
tradition as held in the churches. A striking illustration of
this point of view is furnished in a proceeding of Serapion,
bishop of Antioch, at the end of the second century.
It appears that a division had arisen in the church at
Rhosse in reference to the Gospel of Peter. Serapion, in
order to appease the strife, at first permitted the Gospel to
be read, presumably because of its supposed apostolic origin.
But having learned afterward that it contained some hereti
cal teachings, he forbade its use. He declared the principle
on which he acted to be that Peter and the other apostles
are to be accepted as Christ himself, but that the writings
which falsely go under their names are to be rejected.
The consolidation of the Catholic Church, then, was the
condition of the settlement of the canon of the New Testa
ment. As the Church came to a consciousness of itself ; as
the instinct of self-preservation in the conflict with heresy
more and more united it ; as the appeal to the apostolic
tradition, preserved in its various branches, and to writings
believed to be of apostolic origin became a necessity ; as an
authority held to be above question could not be dispensed
with in the exigencies of its development, it found itself con
strained to hold fast to its revelation contained in the teach
ings of the apostles, to exclude all writings that deviated
from the traditional catholic faith, and to collect the docu
ments of this revelation in a canon or rule of faith and

HISTORY OF THE CANON 389
practice. Apostolic in origin, that is, written by apostles or
by men who had been in intercourse with them, and apostolic
in doctrine according to the tradition of the churches, must
all writings be that were accepted as canonical.
The chief promoters of canon-forming were probably the
bishops, and it is likely, as Holtzmann maintains against
Tischendorf, Bleek, and others, that the process of establish
ing the canon would have been much slower than it was, if
it had been obliged to wait upon the agreement of the
churches through general enlightenment and mutual under
standing. The bishops, tracing their succession from the
apostles, would naturally regard the writings of these as the
true standard of Catholic orthodoxy. The procedure of
Serapion, previously mentioned, is a good illustration of the
fact and the necessity of episcopal supervision in the matter
of accepting and rejecting the current writings. Clothed
with authority in matters of doctrine they would naturally
be looked to for a decision as to what books should be read
in the churches and should thus receive a sort of canonical
recognition. It would doubtless be an error to suppose that the leaders
in the Church during the latter part of the second century
engaged, after the manner of modern theologians, in critical
researches to establish a canon of the New Testament Script
ures. As little are we justified in thinking them to have
been preoccupied with the absolute and exclusive authority
of the supposed apostolic writings. True representatives of
the catholic tendency, which has remained essentially the
same to the present day in the Roman Church, their pre
dominant interest was ecclesiastical. They were far from
assuming the Protestant attitude toward the Scriptures or
toward tradition. According to one of them, the Spirit of
God comes to individuals only through the Church, so that
one may say not only that " the Church is where the Spirit
is, but also that the Spirit is where the Church is." They

390 HISTORY OF THE CANON
taught that the depositaries of tradition, the chiefs of the
different communities, especially of those founded by the
apostles, above all that of Rome, were the best teachers of
the truth.
XI. — THE CANON OF THE ALEXANDRIAN CHURCH.
The Alexandrians treated the conception of canonicity
with greater freedom and in a more spiritualising way than
did the western Church. Clement (170-211) not only took
into account the external, apostolic origin of Christian
writings, but also their spiritual derivation from the apostles,
or the question of their contents as worthy or unworthy of
their authorship. The perils of this subjective view were
controlled to some extent by a regard for testimony, and
modified somewhat by philological criticism. The Epistle
to the Hebrews, for example, attributed in the Western
Church to Barnabas, was regarded by Clement as the work
of Paul, because worthy of the apostle. It was thought to
have been written in Hebrew, and the translation was
ascribed to Luke, because of a similarity in its style to Acts.
According to Eusebius, Clement's canon, in a work now
existing in only a few fragments, comprised the entire New
Testament, including Hebrews and certain "disputed"
writings, such as the Epistle of Jude and the Catholic
Epistles, and, besides, the Epistle of Barnabas and the
Apocalypse of Peter. In the works of his still in existence,
he does not use 3 John, 2 Peter, and James, but does cite the
writings of Barnabas and Clement of Rome as apostolic, and
Hermas as " inspired." He also quotes other writings not
since recognised as canonical, and does not definitely dis
criminate between our four Gospels and the Gospels accord
ing to the Hebrews and the Egyptians. It is evident that
his conception of a New Testament canon was not very well
defined.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 391
Origen's canon denotes some advance upon that of Clem
ent, and we find him distinguishing between " acknow
ledged " and " disputed" books. He accepted the four
Gospels, Acts, the Epistles traditionally ascribed to Paul
(that to the Hebrews, however, not being generally acknow
ledged), seven Catholic Epistles (1 Peter and 1 John only
without doubt), and the Revelation. He mentions, besides
the Gospel according to the Hebrews without full recogni
tion, the Gospel according to Peter, and the so-called Prot-
evangelium of James. The Epistles of James, Jude, 2 and
3 John, and 2 Peter are not accorded an unquestionable
recognition. Expressions more favourable to some of these,
however, appear in those of his works that exist only in a
Latin translation. He cites Hermas as "Scripture," and
regards it as " inspired."
XII. — FROM EUSEBIUS TO AUGUSTINE.
Eusebius, in the first half of the fourth century, mentions
as " acknowledged " writings the four Gospels, Acts,
thirteen Epistles ascribed to Paul (excluding Hebrews as
"disputed"), 1 Peter, 1 John, and, "if one please," the
Revelation of John. Among the ' ' disputed ' ' books he
reckons James, Jude, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John. Another
division includes the "spurious" writings, — Acts of Paul,
the Shepherd of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the
Epistle of Barnabas, the Apostolical Constitutions, and
finally, " if one please," the Revelation of John, "which is
rejected by some, and accepted by others."
Cyrill of Jerusalem, about the middle ofthe fourth century,
recognised as " acknowledged " seven Catholic Epistles and
the Epistle to the Hebrews, but rejected the Revelation of
John. Athanasius in the East, however, accepted the
Revelation, besides the four Gospels, the Acts, fourteen
Epistles of Paul (including Hebrews), and seven Catholic

392 HISTORY OF THE CANON
Epistles. He recognised as books " to be read " the Apos
tolical Constitutions and the Shepherd of Hermas, but he
was unable with all his influence to secure general recogni
tion for the Revelation in the Eastern Church.
Theodorus of Mopsuestia, in the first quarter of the fifth
century, entertained doubts of the Epistle of James, while at
about the same time Rufinus accepted Hebrews and the
Revelation. Jerome also acknowledged these, while admit
ting that all did not agree with him. With respect to 2
Peter, James, Jude, and 2 and 3 John he admits a prepon
derating rejection, and while he reckons Barnabas among
the apocryphal writings, he speaks of the first Epistle of
Clement of Rome and the Shepherd of Hermas as read in
some churches. Under the influence of Augustine, in the
first quarter of the fifth century, the western canon was
closed with the admission of Hebrews, which in the synod
of Carthage in 397 had been mentioned apart from the thir
teen Epistles ascribed to Paul, but which in the synod of the
year 419 was admitted into the list ofthe apostle's writings.
The oldest list of the writings of the New Testament made
by a synod is that of the synod of Laodicea, the date of
which is uncertain. It was probably held not far from the
middle of the fourth century. The decree of this council
relative to the New Testament canon recognises the four
Gospels, Acts, fourteen Epistles ascribed to Paul (including
Hebrews), seven Catholic Epistles, James, two of Peter,
three of John, and Jude. The Pauline Epistles are placed
after the Catholic, and the Revelation is not mentioned.
The genuineness of this canon (No. 60) has been disputed,
but it is generally accepted. In the Syrian Church, how
ever, the Peshito, a Syriac translation of the New Testament
of uncertain date, which appears as a recognised authority
about the middle of the fourth century, contains James and
Hebrews, but omits 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the
Revelation.

HISTORY OF THE CANON 393
XIII. — THE REFORMATION AND THE CANON.
While the Roman Catholic Council of Trent in 1546
affirmed the canonicity of all the disputed books of the New
Testament, the Reformation may be regarded as denoting
the beginning of the great critical activity, which during
more than three centuries has steadily modified the judgment
of Christendom respecting the authorship, date, and authen
ticity of a large number of the writings composing the
canon. While the Church of the Reformation intensified
the doctrine of inspiration, and made the Bible rather than
the ecclesiastical tradition the sole source of authority, and
while it left the canon in form substantially inclusive of all
the previously disputed writings, some of its leaders assumed
an attitude of subjective criticism of certain books, which
practically amounted to their rejection.
Luther maintained the right of individual judgment as to
which of all the New Testament books are the best. He
regarded the fourth Gospel and the Epistles of Paul as con
stituting ' ' the right kernel and marrow ' ' of all the books,
because they contain little of the wonder- workings of Christ;
but " sketch in a masterly way how faith in Christ over
comes sin, death, and hell, and gives life, righteousness, and
salvation." Since the fourth Gospel, in contrast with the
other three, records the words rather than the works of
Jesus, it is " the only, tender, right chief-Gospel," and is
greatly to be preferred to the others. Paul's Epistles, espe
cially that to the Romans, and the first Epistle of Peter are
far superior to the synoptic Gospels.
Luther regarded Hebrews as inferior to the other Epistles
ascribed to Paul, because the writer had built, though upon
the right ground, with " wood, hay, and stubble," and
James he could not tolerate, because it ran directly counter
to Paul's doctrine of justification by faith. To him it was
" a right strawy Epistle," destitute of "evangelical quality."
He would not have it in his Bible, at least not among " the

394 HISTORY OF THE CANON
right chief-books." It is evident that his point of view is
dogmatic rather than critical. " My mind," he says, " can
not fit itself totiie book, and it is to me reason enough why
I do not hold it in high regard, that Christ is not taught or
known in it." "I stand by the books that represent Christ
to me bright and clear." As to Revelation, he regarded it
as " neither apostolic nor prophetic." The position given
to Hebrews, James, Jude, and the Revelation at the end of the
Lutheran Bible has been regarded as indicating that these
books were in the judgment ofthe reformer " disputed."
Zwingli rejected Revelation, and Calvin thought that
Hebrews was not written by Paul, and that 2 Peter was not
the work of the apostle Peter. The Arminian, Hugo
Grotius, not only entered upon a critical consideration of the
synoptic problem in endeavouring to determine the relation
of Mark to Matthew, and of Luke to Matthew and Mark,
but also contested the Pauline authorship of Hebrews, and
cast suspicion upon the genuineness of 2 Peter and 2 and 3
John. XIV. — CRITICISM AND THE CANON.
Criticism denotes no new departure in its relation to the
canon. It only affirms the right of all Christians to assume
the attitude toward the New Testament books that the
primitive Church assumed, and that was again taken up by
Luther — that of the right and necessity of judging each
separate book as to its claims to be accounted a representa
tive of apostolic Christianity. Text-criticism having ap
proximately established the original text, it is the task of
the higher criticism to determine, as far as possible, the
authorship of the various writings (genuineness), the relation
of the first three Gospels to one another (the synoptic prob
lem), the date or time of composition of the different books
with reference to the attitude that they assume toward the
ideas and tendencies of certain historical periods, and the

HISTORY OF THE CANON 395
relations existing among all of them as regards the develop
ment and progress of religious thought during the two or
three generations within which they arose. Its procedure is
historical, so far as it treats the writings as historical pro
ductions that grew out of certain conditions, and were influ
enced by an environment more or less known. Literary the
procedure also is, inasmuch as it deals with the books as
literary productions, and subjects them to an examination as
a peculiar and well-defined literature.
From these points of view criticism can entertain no
presumptions regarding the inspiration of the writings in
question in the sense that they are infallible or inerrant
in matters of history, biography, or doctrine. A certain in
spiration may as a matter of fact be accorded to their writers
in the degree to which they were affected by the influence
that proceeded from Jesus and the great spiritual awakening
that he promoted. But the inspiration of a writer is not to
criticism a criterion of the canonicity of his writing; neither
is the fact that the author of a Christian book was an
"apostolical man" such a criterion. Indeed, from the
point of view of criticism, the conception of canonicity has
undergone a radical change inwardly, while outwardly the
traditional-historical idea of it is maintained.
Criticism recognises the New Testament, as we now have
it, as the historical canonical New Testament, without regard
to the apostolical authorship of its several books or to the
inerrancy of their writers. It interprets each of its writings
historically as a literary phenomenon of its time and as hold
ing a relation near to or remote from the original teaching
of Jesus. From the point of view of the critical school,
strictly so called, the first three Gospels stand closest to the
genuine tradition of Jesus, though no one of them was writ
ten by an apostle, while the fourth Gospel is a speculative,
ideal construction of his life and teachings, representing a
later development of religious thought.

396 HISTORY OF THE CANON
The only incontestably genuine Epistles are Romans, i
and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, and i Thessalo
nians ; so that if apostolical authorship were a criterion of
canonicity, the canon of the New Testament would be com
posed of these alone. But they represent little of the original
teaching of Jesus, being an independent construction of a
doctrine of salvation foreign to the essential teaching of the
Master. The remaining Epistles represent a progressive
development of religious thought, particularly in the direc
tion of an enhancing of the Christological conception, and of
the various practical and ecclesiastical points of view of the
time when the Church was striving to solve the momentous
problems of unity and catholicity in the conflict with heresy
and in the reconciling of opposite tendencies in its own
household. The attitude of criticism toward the canon, then, denotes
a return to the point of view of the primitive Church at the
time when the question of canonicity was receiving serious
consideration — an attitude that was discriminative of the
difference in worth of different books, and with which was
consistent the recognition of disputed writings side by side
with the undisputed as having an importance to be determ
ined by the judgment and the Christian consciousness of
the Church. Criticism does not attempt to overthrow the
canon of the New Testament, but its aim is to determine
the value of each book composing it with relation to the only
real Christianity, the teaching of Jesus, and to assign it its
place in the development of religious thought that had its
beginning in his wonderful personality.
THE END.

WORKS BY ORELLO CONE, D.D.

GOSPEL-CRITICISM
AND HISTORICAL CHRISTIANITY
A Study of the Gospels and of the History of the Gospel-
Canon during the Second Century ; together with a
Consideration of the Results of Modern Criticism.
Second Edition, 8vo, gilt top, pp. xiii-365, $1.75.
CHIEF CONTENTS.— I. The Text— II. The Canon— III. The
Synoptic Problem— IV. The Gospel According to Mark— V. The
Gospel According to Matthew — VI. The Gospel According to
Luke — VII. The Gospel According to John— VIII. The Escha-
tology of the Gospels — IX. Dogmatic " Tendencies " in the
Gospels — X. The Old Testament in the Gospels ; or, The Her
meneutics of the Evangelists — XI. The Gospels as Histories —
XII. Criticism and Historical Christianity.
" A strong book, and well worth reading by any one who
knows or does not know the recent results of the higher
criticism." — Christian Union.
" The work of a scholar who has made himself familiar with
the most important recent investigations, and who appreciates
the nature and bearing of the questions at issue. . . . Re
plete with information for those who have not made the
subject a specialty, and executed in a spirit of candor and
rational inquiry." — Geo. B. Stevens, Professor of New-Testa
ment Criticism in Yale University, in Yale Review.
" It is not excelled in attractiveness by any work that has
been written on the subject." — Prof. C. H. Toy.
" I admire its careful learning and thorough mastery of the
subject, and more I admire the singular mental poise which it
exhibits. . . . Such a book marks an era in American
scholarship." — R. Heber Newton, D.D.
" A thoroughly scholarly work ; its tone is deeply reverent
and spiritual, and its literary style is marked by sobriety and
conspicuous refinement and grace. ... It has commanded
throughout our close attention and frequent admiration." —
The London Literary World.
" I feel very great admiration for the scholarship and wisdom
shown in the treatment of the whole subject. . . . The
book is admirable and cannot fail to do great good among
thinking men." — Andrew D. White.
G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS, New York and London.
FOR SALE BY ALL. BOOKSELLERS. [over]

WORKS B Y ORELLO CONE, D.D.
THE GOSPEL AND ITS EARLIEST
INTERPRETATIONS
A Study of the Teaching of Jesus and its Doctrinal
Transformations in the New Testament. 8vo, gilt top,
pp. viii-413, $1.75.
CHIEF CONTENTS. — Introduction, The Historical and
Critical Treatment of the New Testament — I. The Teaching of
Jesus — II. The Jewish-Christian Interpretation — III. The Paul
ine Transformation — IV. The Deutero-Pauline Interpretations —
V. The Johannine Transformation — VI. Anti-Gnostic Interpre
tations— VII. Jewish-Christian Apocalyptic — VIII. The Gospel
and Theology.
The object of this work is to elucidate the teaching of
Jesus and to present both in their relation to it and to one
another the principal types of religious doctrine contained in
the New Testament.
" The scholarship, skill, and spiritual insight and sympathy
evinced, have created a picture of the teaching of Jesus and of
the Pauline, Johannine, and other transformations and inter
pretations of it which, I believe, is unique in our language,
and which will be welcomed and appreciated by all who are
interested in the supreme question of our age." — J. G. Schur-
man, President of Cornell University.
" An admirable sketch of the vicissitudes of Christian doc
trine within the limits of the canonical writings." — Dr. C. H.
Toy, of Harvard University.
" Rev. Dr. Cone's second volume in the field where he is so
erudite a scholar, so candid a thinker, and so lucid a writer,
will confirm the high position at once accorded him by dis
cerning readers of his work on Gospel- Criticism and Historical
Christianity." — The Literary World.
"Handles the subject with perfect candor, learning, and
skill, yet not without the caution and reverence that belong to
every phase of biblical exegesis. "— The National Baptist.

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS, New York and London.
for sale BY ALL BOOKSELLERS. [ovbr]

By W. M. RAMSAY.
THE CHURCH IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE
BEFORE A.D. 170.
With Maps and Illustrations, 8vo  $3.00
'* Ic is a book of very exceptional value, Prof. Ramsay is a real scholar and of
the very best type of scholarship. A thoroughly good book ; a product of first
hand and accurate scholarship ; in the highest degree suggestive ; and not only
valuable in its results, but an admirable example of the true method of research."
— The Churchman.
ST. PAUL THE TRAVELLER AND THE
ROMAN CITIZEN.
With Map, 8vo  $3.00
"Awork which marks an important step in advance in the historical inter-
{iretation of St, Paul. . .. It is an immense gain to have the narrative
ifted from the mean function of being an artful monument and mirror of
a strife internal to Christianity which it seeks by a process, now of creation,
now of elimination, ^ to overcome and to conceal? to the high purpose of
representing the religion as it began within the Empire and as it actually was to
the Empire and the Empire to it. . . . Professor Ramsay has made a solid
and valuable contribution to the interpretation of the Apostolic literature and of
the Apostolic age — a contribution distinguished no less by ripe scholarship, in
dependent judgment, keen vision, and easy mastery of material, than by fresh
ness of thought, boldness of combination, and striking originality of view."—
The Speaker.
IMPRESSIONS OF TURKEY DURING
TWELVE YEARS' WANDERINGS.
8vo  $f-75
" No conception of the real status of Turkey is possible unless something is
understood of ' the interlacing and alternation of the separate and un blending
races/ ,t . . Such an understanding is admirably presented in Prof. Ramsay's
book, which gives a near and trustworthy insight into actual Turkish conditions."
— _V. Y. Times.
WAS CHRIST BORN AT BETHLEHEM?
A Study in the Credibility of St. Luke. Part I. The Importance of
the Problem. Part II. The Solution of the Problem. 8vo, $1.75
" The work is one of which students of biblical criticism will need to take account.
It is absolutely candid and straightforward, thorough and discriminating, and
courteous to other scholars whose conclusions it sees most reason to condemn.
It is a fine piece of work." — The Congregationalist.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY UPON THE
EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.
8vo  $3.oo

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS, New York and London.

DA II I THE MAN* THE mission-
rnUL) ARY. AND THE TEACHER
BY ORELLO CONE, D.D. Cloth, gilt top, $2.00
CHIEF CONTENTS— PART I. The Man: i. Formative
Influences; 2. Personal Traits; 3. The Conversion. PART
II. The Missionary: 1. The First Years — Galatia and the
Galatian Epistle; 2. Philippi, Thessalonica, Corinth; 3.
Ephesus — Rome; 4. The Paul of the Acts and the Paul of
the Epistles. PART III. The Teacher: 1. The Law; 2.
"Life," "Death," and "Salvation;'' 3. Doctrine of Sin; 4.
Salvation — Atonement; 5. Person of Christ; 6. Supernatu
ralism; 7. Faith and Justification; 8. Ethics; 9. Predestina
tion; io. The Church and the Sacraments; ii. Eschatology.
"An exposition of Paul as he was."
— Dr. Thos. R. Slicer in The New World.
"Among the many treatises on Paulinism published of
recent years, this book takes a high place. In the present
writer's judgment it surpasses all others written in Eng=
lish in acumen and vigor. ... A special merit of the
presentation of Paul's ideas is the fulness and lucidity
with which the subtle and mystical elements of his thought
are stated. Dr. Cone's style . . . has a sinewy vigor
which makes his book easy reading throughout."
— Prof. E. Y. Hincks of Andover in The Church.
"As an exhaustive and luminous account ofthe life and
work of Paul as a missionary to the gentiles and as a
teacher, it stands unrivalled. Part III is a masterly expo
sition of the apostle's thought which leaves nothing to be
desired. " — The Aberdeen Journal.
"Biblical scholarship in America has not produced a
more creditable work than this." — The Christian Register.
"A standard work . . . will for a long
time constitute the point of departure for all
studies of Paul that are to be taken seriously."
— Prof. H. Holtzmann, University of Strassburg.
PUBLISHED BY
THE MACMILLAN CO., New York
A. & C. BLACK, London

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 05118 6485