'.'.l,'.l,'ili'.l.',l.'.l,'.l,',l,'.li',l,',l,M,'il,'.l.'.l,'il,',l.',IAI,'il.',l,'.l,',I.M,',l,',l.'.l,',U,UC Library of the H?ale ©ivinirg Scbool The Books of jfranfc Cbamberlain porter Winkley Professor of Biblical Theology THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES STUDIES IN THEOLOGY Christianity and Ethics. By Archibald B. D. Alexander, M.A., D.D. The Environment of Early Christianity. By S. Angus, M.A., Ph.D. History of the Study of Theology. Vol. I. " " " Vol.H. By Dr. C A. Briggs. The Christian Hope. By W. Adams Brown, Ph.D., D.D. Christianity and Social Questions. By William Cunningham, F.B.A., D.D., D.Sc. The Justification of God. By Rev. P. T. Forsyth. Christian Apologetics. By Rev. A. E. Garvie. A Critical Introduction to the Old Testament. By George Buchanan Gray, D.D., D.Litt. Gospel Origins. By William West Holdsworth, M.A. Faith and Its Psychology. By William R. Inge, D.D. Christianity and Sin. By Robert Mackintosh, D.D. Protestant Thought Before Kant. By A. C McGiffert, Ph.D., D.D. The Theology of the Gospels. By James Moffatt, D.D., D.Litt. The Theology of the Epistles. By H. A. A. Kennedy, D.D, D.Sc. History of Christian Thought Since Kant. By Edward Caldwell Moore, D.D. The Doctrine of the Atonement. By J. K. Mozley, M.A. Revelation and Inspiration. By James Orr, D.D. A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. By Arthur Samuel Peaee, D.D. Philosophy and Religion. By Hastings Rashdall, D.Litt. (Oxon.). D.CL. (Durham), F.B.A. The Holy Spirit. By T. Rees, M.A. (Lond.), B.A. (Oxon.). The Religious Ideas of the Old Testament. By H. Wheeler Robinson, M.A. The Text and Canon of the New Testament By Alexander Souter, D.Litt. Christian Thought to the Reformation. By Herbert B. Workman, D.Litt. THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES BY H. A. A. KENNEDY, D.D., D.Sc. PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT EXEGESIS AND THEOLOGY NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH NEW YORK CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 1920 tale Divinity Libiarj All rights reserved IN AFFECTIONATE REMEMBRANCE OF DB. JAMES DENNEY PREFACE This volume scarcely requires a preface, as the method which has been followed in discussing the subject is fully described in the Introduction. One matter alone calls for remark. I have deliberately refrained from dealing with the thought of the Johannine Epistles, because that could not be adequately treated apart from the Fourth Gospel. All students of theology are aware that any such discussion must extend far beyond the limits of a handbook like the present. I have tried to limit the references to literature. But I trust I have not missed any contribution of first-class importance. It is once more a pleasure to acknowledge the large debt I owe to my friend and colleague, Professor H. R. Mackintosh, D.D., D.Phil., who, besides helping me to correct the proofs, has, by his fine sensitiveness of ear and mind, enabled me to improve both the thought and its expression. H. A. A. KENNEDY. New College, Edinburgh, May 24, 1919. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Method . . . Scope .... St. Paul's Letters . Catholic Epistles Scheme op Treatment : — 1. St. Paul 2. Post-Pauline Christianity PAGE 1 24 5 6 9 PART I Paulinism CHAPTER I St. Paul's Environment: Judaism . Hellenism 13 CHAPTER II St. Paul's Experience under the Religion of the Law: — Presuppositions . Sense of Failure . . Power of Sin in the Flesh . Human Nature . Origin of Sin . Significance of the Law His Relation to the Nazareneb "28 29 3335 3941 47 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES CHAPTER III St. Paul's Conversion : — Revelation of Jesus as Risen Call to Service His Election Bearing of Vocation on Theology 505660 62 CHAPTER IV Normative Influence of St. Paul's Conversion on his Religious Thought : — Jesus the Conqueror of Death Significance of the Cross The Messiah (Son of God) The Lord . . The Spirit The New Attitude to God 68 72 75 82 86 91 CHAPTER V St. Paul and the Christian Tradition : — The Historical Jesus . . , eschatological conceptions . . The Era of the Spirit . . The Death of Christ . . 97 108111114 CHAPTER VI The Fundamental Positions of Paulinism:— In Christ- , . . The Crucified Redeemer . The New Relation to God The Activities of the Christian The Body and Members of Christ The Cosmic Relations of Christ 119 125133142147152 CONTENTS PART II Phases of Early Christian Thought in the Main Independent of Paulinism CHAPTER I _ _ _ "OS The First Epistle of Peter: — The Situation . . . . . .161 Practical Character of the Theology . . 165 Affinities with St. Paul .... 166 Atmosphere of Common Church-Consciousness . 170 Conceptions Characteristic of the Epistle : — 1. Old Testament Prophecy. . . .174 2. The Death of Christ . . . .176 3. The Descent to Hades . . . .179 CHAPTER II The Epistle to the Hebrews. A. Prolegomena : — Special Character of the Epistle , , 182 Perils of the Community . , . 185 Relation of Author to Paulinism . . 187 Relation to Alexandrian Judaism . .190 B. Fundamental Conceptions of the Epistle : — The New Covenant : — 1. The New Covenant and the Old . . 195 2. Superiority of Christ, the Mediator of the New Covenant .... 202 Consummation of the New Covenant : — 1. Christ's Priesthood a Link between Temporal and Eternal Worlds . . .215 2. Faith, the Attitude of Members of the New Covenant. . . . .218 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES PART III The Theology of the Developing Church Shaping Forces Moralistic Tendency in Religion Thinning of Redemptive Ideas Prominence of the Church-Consciousnf.! Conception of God . Law of Liberty Eschatological Outlook Influence of Heretical Movements Hellenistic Colouring Bibliography .... Index ..... 225228 234238 241244 248252 256259 M. or (M.) denotes Professor Moffatt's Translation of the New Testament. THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES INTRODUCTION (a) Method There can be little question that the ideal method of reaching the significance of the Theology of the Epistles is to deal with it as an integral section of the history of early Christianity. The fundamental matter in that history is the religion of the first disciples of Jesus, and of those who were won for His allegiance by their missionary labours. The vital thought of the Epistles is the pre cipitate of the religious faith inspired by Jesus, and deriving its support from Him. But the task of relating this thought to the complex play of events and influences which gave it shape in the apostolic age is one of extra ordinary difficulty. The data at our disposal are meagre. Most of them are supplied by the Epistles themselves. The brief outline of history in Acts supplements them here and there, but its view of the circumstances often creates new problems. A connected survey of the apostolic age is impossible of achievement. We have only to compare Paul's passing references in Gal. i. to the events which followed his conversion, with the vague account of the situation given in Acts ix., to realise the many gaps which confront our investigation. DeUcate questions such as the precise relation of Jewish-Christian thought in the Diaspora to that of Palestine and the mother Church, and the influence of each of these factors on Paul's early Christian career, elude our instruments of investigation. A 2 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES Nor can we with any certainty determine the various forms assumed by Christianity on heathen soil.1 Further, for a complete estimate of primitive Christian thought, it would be necessary to trace the affinities which it presents with those faiths from which it gained the majority of its adherents, notably Judaism and Hellenism, as well as the syncretistic influences which surrounded it in an age when the civilised peoples of the Roman Empire were rapidly becoming unified. Here, it may be admitted, the materials for arriving at a judgment are accumulating in bewildering variety. Hasty conclusions are attractive, and usually erroneous. In no field of inquiry is it more needful to resist large generalisations, until the evidence has been adequately sifted, and its bearings carefully weighed. (b) Scope A final problem is concerned with the scope of the investigation. In the opening centuries of our era, the Church was led to construct a Canon or authoritative selection of sacred writings. Certain documents received universal recognition within the Christian community at a very early date. But as late as the beginning of the third century several of the Catholic Epistles, e.g., were regarded with hesitation, if not rejected, by some sections of the Christian Church.2 On the other hand, in the same period, the writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers were occasionally cited as Scripture. Thus Irenseus assigns Scriptural authority to a quotation from the ' Shepherd ' of Hennas, which he groups with passages from Genesis, Matthew, and Ephesians. The facts remind us that the boundary between ' canonical ' and secondary Christian writings was still fluctuating. But this condition of things is reflected in the contents as well as the history of various documents. It is practically impossible to draw a sharp distinction between the apostolic and the sub -apostolic age. Hence, such writings as 1 Clement and the Epistles of 1 See Wrede, Aufgabe u. Methode, p. 69. * E.g. the Syrian Church. INTRODUCTION 3 Ignatius have, in many respects, as good a claim to a place in the history of early Christian religion as, say, 2 Peter and Jude. And recent writers on New Testament Theology have extended their survey to the sub-apostolic period. Apart, however, from the inherent difficulty of approxi mating to the ideal treatment of our subject which has been sketched above, the limits prescribed for a handbook like the present make it impossible to attempt a systematic association of the religious thought of the Epistles with the history of the Christian Church out of which it has arisen. To essay the task would mean the covering of a bare skeleton of facts with a thin tissue of ideas. Our aim is wholly different. Our starting-point is the clear recognition that the Theology of the Epistles is not an exercise in system-building, but the transcript of a living Christian experience. If we make the experience the regulative factor in the interpretation of the thought, we shall to that extent guard against the danger of placing the ideas in a false proportion. We shall be able to dis tinguish those that are normative from those which emerge incidentally in a given situation. Ultimately, the interpretation of the ideas will prove the surest clue to the essential history of early Christian faith. For they will themselves, in large measure, supply their own context. The inner processes of thought and feeling will give life to the meagre historical outline which we are able provision ally to reconstruct from our various sources. In any case, we shall be compelled at every step to fill in as much of the background as is needful to explain the origin and character of those phases of Christian experience which the writers of the Epistles set in the forefront. Thus we shall at least avoid dealing with the material for our study as a hortus siccus, in which lifeless specimens are arranged in artificial order. There is, no doubt, a place for the history of New Testament conceptions in the various stages of their development. But that must be supplementary to New Testament Theology in the strict sense, and not its main content. 4 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES (c) Paul's ' Letters ' The formulation of Christian thought in the Epistles must be estimated in the light of the nature and genesis of the documents in which it is embodied. Much recent dis cussion has turned on the distinction between the Epistle and the Letter.1 And for our inquiry there is point in recognising that the Epistle constitutes a definite type of literature, intended for publication, while the Letter is a private interchange of thoughts and sentiments, the ex pression of a well-marked mood. Obviously the writings of St. Paul — even so elaborate a production as the Epistle to the Romans — must be classified as genuine Letters. Yet their unliterary character must not be exaggerated.2 The truth is that Paul cannot be placed under any of the ordinary categories. ' This style of letter,' says one of the most eminent living authorities on Greek Literature, 'is Paul, nobody but Paul. It is not a private letter and yet not literature, something between which cannot be imitated.' 3 And he declares that Paul's uniquely in dividual Greek, depending on no school or model, but welling up from a heart full of joyous vitality, makes him ' a classic of Hellenism.' That is justly said. These documents contain an animated monologue abounding in personal feeling, reflecting the subtlest shades of the speaker's mood. Yet it is not ordinary conversation. For the apostolic note is there, a tone of authority not anxiously claimed, but assumed as by the ambassador of Christ. So we reach a criterion for estimating Paul's conceptions. He addresses himself in his Letters to certain definite situations, and these determine the emphasis laid on particular ideas. But he never hesitates to apply eternal principles to the passing circumstances of his correspondents, and he arrives at his principles not by reference to any external authority, but as he has discovered their operation 1 See especially Deissmann, Bibelntudien, pp. 189-252. * As by Deissmann, e.g. Licht vom Oaten, p. 167 f. * Von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Die griechische Literatur d. Altertumt (in Die Kultur d. Qegenwart*), p. 232. INTRODUCTION 5 in his own experience, an operation of the very life and energy of God Himself. Hence we have to keep in view, on the one hand, the artless and occasional character of Paul's Letters, and, on the other, their claim, born of a personal assurance of contact with the Divine, to be the medium of a Gospel, a redeeming message, which has a right to challenge attention and obedience. If we give each of these aspects its due place, we shall be able to avoid two easy misconceptions : we shall not demand a rigid logic in the apostle's pastoral counsels and instruction, nor painfully labour to harmonise apparent inconsistencies in order to reach completely rounded ideas ; and we shall remember that he does not write as a contributor to the sum of human knowledge, even the knowledge of God, but as a man redeemed by Christ, who is convinced that he holds the Divine secret of peace of conscience and life eternal for all the burdened children of men. (d) Catholic ' Epistles ' The Catholic Epistles l reveal numerous affinities with those of Paul. Their authors share with him the stock of ideas which are the common property of the Church. Hence, in attempting to interpret their thought, we must guard against hasty conclusions as to their dependence upon Paulinism, although that, of course, is an element which has to be reckoned with. A notable characteristic of these Epistles is their impersonality. The reader of James or Jude, or even of 1 Peter, receives no clear-cut impression of their authors. ' It is not so much an im portant man who speaks, as an important subject.' 2 They might therefore be properly classified as ' Epistles ' in the strict sense. And yet a point must be stretched if we are to regard them as primarily literary compositions. They are certainly intended to reach a widespread 1 The Johannine Epistles do not fall within our survey, as explained in the Preface. ! Deissmann, BibeUtudien, p. 246, 6 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES audience. But they are more than general treatises. They presuppose special situations in the communities which they address. These situations, which seem to be common to many localities, are sufficiently important to call for definite treatment. This treatment is invariably practical. And the religious ideas emphasised in the documents serve mainly to provide motive power for urging home their exhortations. Accordingly the argument from silence is in this case peculiarly hazardous. We are often compelled to form a judgment of the standpoints of the writers rather from the general atmosphere of their thought than from any detailed doctrines. (e) Scheme of Treatment The real background of the Theology of the Epistles is the faith of the primitive Christian community, having its direct basis in the impression created by the historical Jesus, and confirmed by the conviction that He had con quered sin and death. But, as has already been indicated, our direct evidence for the earliest type of Christianity is scanty in the extreme. ' We are restricted to some information in Acts and the Pauline Epistles, to inferences from the Gospels and Paul, and to that which may be gathered from the nature of the historical situation.' 1 We must attempt to fill in this dim background as the opportunity offers. Meanwhile, we are confronted with a mass of unchallengeable and illuminating data when we approach the Letters of St. Paul. 1. Paul. No figure in early Christianity stands out before us in such glowing clearness as its greatest missionary. The frankness of his self-revelation, the overmastering sway of his personality, the sheer force and sweep of his Christian faith, the enthusiasm of his devotion to Christ, all combine to focus our interest on this master-builder of the early Church. Consider the range of his influence. It was Paul who liberated Christianity from the trammels of 1 Wrede, op. tit., p. 65. INTRODUCTION 7 Judaism, and thus opened up for it a world-wide mission. There were tendencies, no doubt, in the Christian con sciousness of Jewish believers throughout the Diaspora, which helped to prepare the way for his achievement. Jewish Christians, e.g., had inaugurated a mission to Greeks at Antioch.1 But a penetrating insight into the mind of Christ and a dauntless energy of purpose were needful in order to carry through a movement which to many devout souls must have appeared treachery to the revealed will of God. But not only was Paul responsible for the real creation of heathen-Christianity. Although we have no immediate evidence, the subsequent history of the Church is sufficient proof that his influence reacted on the Jewish- Christian section of the community. He may have re mained more or less suspect in the eyes of Palestinian believers,2 but for Christian Jews throughout the Empire his positions must have acquired, at least up to a certain epoch, an increasing validity. It was only in some heretical Jewish-Christian sects that the tradition of hatred towards Paul remained influential. The secret of his constructive power lies primarily in his own Christian experience. For that experience, from its very nature, led him beyond the realm of his personal interests. It made him first of all an ardent missionary. But his mission-work involved the interpretation not merely of that epoch-making contact with Christ which gave him his Gospel, but also of the facts and processes which lay behind it. He was compelled to formulate a Christian apologetic, wide in scope and admitting of varied applications. For the very sum and substance of his message was ' to Jews a stumbling-block, to Greeks folly ' (1 Cor. i. 23). Hence, a vital element in his missionary enterprise was the elaboration of Christian ideas on the basis of actual experience, and the relating of these, on the one side, to minds steeped in the religion of the Old Testa ment, on the other, to a mixed multitude of cultivated and ignorant Greeks and Orientals. But his task did not end > Acts xi. 20. > Acts xxi. 21. 8 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES with the presentation and defence of Christianity. The training of converts would be almost as pressing an obliga tion. So to Paul fell the duty of disclosing the ethical bearing of the central Christian truths, and the process shed back new light on the fundamental conceptions of the faith. But the man who showed such concern as to the life and conduct of those whom he had won for Christ must have been careful to give directions for the regulation of their existence as communities. It is certain that during his lifetime there was much elasticity in the matter of organisation, for we can gather from various passages that the guidance of the Church was associated with special ' gifts ' rather than fixed offices.1 Still we may infer from the answers given to the questions referred to Paul by the Christians in Corinth, that his practical wisdom largely determined the lines along which a definite organisa tion gradually took shape. We are justified, then, in making the religious thought of St. Paul the starting-point of our investigation. The considerations already emphasised determine the method to be followed. When Paul became a Christian, he was an ardent Pharisee, who had made full use of his training in the Rabbinic schools of Jerusalem. But by birth he was a Jew of the Diaspora, and most of his Christian career was spent in a Hellenistic milieu. We must therefore attempt to estimate the significance of his education and environment for his work as an interpreter of Christianity. But no influence in his history can compare with his con version. To form any intelligible idea of this crisis, we must examine his experience in Judaism, laying special stress upon those elements to which he himself makes constant reference in describing human helplessness and need. Thus we shall be able to judge what his conversion meant, more especially as a summons to new life and service. In the light of his new vocation as a missionary of Christ, we shall try to discover the normative influence of his conversion for his religious thought. But it i? 1 E.g. Rom. xii. 3-8 ; 1 Cor. xii. INTRODUCTION 9 necessary to recognise that when Paul entered the Christian Church, he found there the beginnings of a theology. Those elements in it which were predominantly Jewish were familiar to him already. The new thing was the tradition of the life and teaching of Jesus, and the Church's endeavour to reach an adequate interpretation of it. This situation must have affected at various points the con clusions at which he had arrived as the result of his con version. In these conclusions, as to some extent modified by the current Christian tradition, we shall look for the fundamental positions of Paulinism.1 2. Post-Paidine Christianity. The Christian experience of Paul must not be regarded as normal in early Chris tianity. His was a unique individuality. And he had to pass through a singular crisis. Hence we need not be surprised to find that, while his influence in the Church of the first century was epoch-making, some of his pro- founder conceptions were not grasped by average Christian thought. Moreover, as time went on, reactionary influ ences asserted themselves. Even in Paul's day many of the converts from heathenism had been prepared for the step they took by their connection with the worship and doctrine of Jewish synagogues. Jews in large numbers had entered the Christian community. Thus, when the burning controversy as to the necessity of the Law for salvation had died away, the fundamental ideas of Jewish monotheism were bound to exercise their sway. The second generation of Christians would be specially con cerned with problems of conduct in a heathen environment. Now much of the best Hellenistic thought was at this 1 The Epistles to the Thessalonians, Galatians, Romans, Corinthians, Colossians, Ephesians, and Philippians will be used as sources in this investigation. These, with the exception of Ephesians, are accepted by most modem scholars as Pauline. Space does not admit of a detailed argument in favour of the present writer's firm conviction that Ephesians is a typically Pauline document. Readers may consult Professor Peake's careful discussion in his Critical Introduction to the N. T., pp. 53-67. There they will also find a well-balanced statement of the reasons which prevent us from citing the Pastoral Epistles as evidence for Paul's religious thought (pp. 60-71). 10 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES period occupied with similar questions. So the demand for definite guidance in the details of practical life brought in a new legalism, whose influence was to grow with the develop ment of the Catholic Church. Besides, as the first enthu siasm of the early days began to fade, a formal Christian tradition would gradually take shape, which, because of its lower level of conviction, would be less exclusive of influ ences from outside. This attitude is reflected in varying degrees in the literature which may be described as embody ing the Theology of the Developing Church. But before we discuss that phase of early Christian thought, we must examine the religious ideas of two documents, one of which seems to reflect the best type of Christianity current in the Church contemporary with Paul, while the other represents a markedly individual outlook, revealing points of affinity with Paulinism, but still more the Alexandrian interpretation of Judaism, baptized into Christianity. a. First Peter. The First Epistle of Peter consists largely of exhortations to various communities of heathen- Christians in Asia Minor, who were exposed to persecutions of a private and perhaps also of a public character. The religious convictions of the author are introduced, not for their own sake as instruction in Christian truth, but as the driving power behind his exhortations. To a marked degree, therefore, the ideas emphasised are determined by the situation of the readers. But they give an interesting glimpse of the ground taken by an authoritative Church- leader, who has learned something from Paul's view of Christianity, and yet is far from being a mere echo of the great apostle. The Letter bears the name of Peter, and, if we follow so eminent a scholar as Mommsen in believing that the persecutions which constitute the one clear datum of the Epistle may reasonably be placed as early as the reign of Nero, there is no need to doubt a claim which has un usually good external evidence.1 There is little force in 1 For the details, see the admirable discussion in Moffatt's Introduction. pp. 319-342. INTRODUCTION 11 the objection that the Epistle ignores the life and teaching of Jesus, which Peter knew at first hand, and concentrates attention on His sufferings, death, and resurrection.1 The selection of material is determined by the purpose in hand, and, in any case, these crucial events must have held a commanding place in the hearts and minds of all the early disciples. Nor is there any real difficulty in the affinities with Paul. That which the two apostles had in common, as belonging to the authoritative Christian tradi tion, must have far surpassed their differences. Moreover, it is not unlikely that an impressionable nature such as Peter's would at various points reveal the influence of the dominating intellect of his brother-missionary. But even if the Petrine authorship be disallowed, the Epistle presents an impressive picture of the solicitude of an earnest pastor who has at his command a rich store of weighty Christian arguments resting on convictions which were central for the Christian community of his time. P. Hebrews. So much of the Pauline spirit was felt to pervade the Epistle to the Hebrews that for a long period it was included by many sections of the Church among the writings of Paul. More careful research has shown that the book is unique in New Testament literature. Its affinities with crucial conceptions of Paulinism are obvious. But it especially represents the blending of a distinct type of culture with Christian belief, and serves to remind us of the varieties of thought which found a home in the Christian society. The comparison of the Old Covenant with the New, which forms the kernel of the Epistle, is elaborated with all the skill of Alexandrian theological equipment. Yet here, too, the end in view is chiefly the practical one of sustaining a faith which falters under trials. xn> ' soul,' B?? ) fZo-av, he dehberately contrasts i'vxv with irvtvp.a, and it becomes clear that in his view ^i»x^, ' soul ' stands for the life of man as untouched by the spirit of God (irvtv/xa), which he regards as God's special gift to the Christian believer. While the noun is comparatively rare in Paul's Letters, the adjective formed from it, meaning literally 'soulish' (i/'dx'kos)' and translated 'natural' in the 1 Robinson, op. tit., p. 25. ch. n.] THE RELIGION OF THE LAW 37 Authorised Version, takes an important place. Some scholars hold that Paul was influenced in his use of this term by contemporary Hellenistic religion. The evidence is altogether inadequate. But it is worthy of observa tion that the adjective is used by the Jewish author of 4 Maccabees, who is certainly steeped in the current popular philosophy, not in Paul's sense of the ' unspiritual ' as opposed to the ' spiritual,' but in that of ' belonging to the soul ' as opposed to ' belonging to the body ' (4 Maccab. 1. 32 : T(uv Sk £iri8vp.iS>v al [lev eltriv rf/u\iKai, al &i cruip-ai ikou). Philo, in accordance with his uses of employs the adjective in all sorts of connections. In a few cases it applies to the ordinary inner hfe of man, whether viewed as physical or as the sphere of feeling and other forms of consciousness. More often it occurs in the higher sense of 1 spiritual,' which is totally alien to Paul. Like nephesh, ruach meant in certain phases of its development the ' breath -soul,' but in its earliest usage it signified (a) the wind, (b) the stormier energies of human life, (c) the influence from God which brought about abnormal or ' demonic ' conditions in men. Probably owing to this latter use, it came to connote a higher side of the inner life than nephesh, closely associated with the ruach of God Himself. Hence Paul uses ' spirit ' (vvevp.a), the word by which it is commonly rendered in the LXX, for the Divine life kindled in man as well as for the Divine Spirit which has kindled it, phenomena which must be discussed at length in a later section. Occasionally, how ever, following what we have seen to be an Old Testament usage, he employs ' spirit ' to denote the inner life without special reference to its relation to God.1 But the passage which formed the starting-point of our present discussion discloses further elements in his conception of the con stitution of human nature. There 2 he uses the expressions ' the inner man ' and the ' mind ' (vovs) to describe that part of the human consciousness, primarily his own, which 1 See esp. Robinson, op. tit., pp. 18 f., 26 f. 8 Rom. vii. 22, 23. Cf. the use of voCs in the same sense in verse 25. 38 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [ft. i. has an affinity with the will of God, which affords a point of contact, so to speak, with Divine influences. This confirms what was said above as to the error of calling Paul a pessimist in regard to human nature. It is of interest to note that Plato uses a phrase almost identical with that of Paul, ' the man within,' J in distinguishing the power of the rational consciousness from the lower capacities of the soul, and the conception passed into Neoplatonism. But here, as in the case of the cognate term in Paul, the ' mind ' (vow), we must be careful not to read into them the content which they hold in Greek philosophy. At the same time, it is quite possible that in selecting these words to describe the power of rational (and moral) discernment belonging to human nature, a carefully defined aspect of the inner activity of man, Paul was more or less directly influenced by the popular thought of his day.2 This is certainly true as regards his use of the term ' conscience ' (o-wc[8r)o-is), which ethical Greek philosophy took over from the popular consciousness and which passed into the current ethical terminology of that epoch.3 This precise word is found rather in popular writers than in philosophers, who pre ferred to use the corresponding verb. Probably Paul's use of it 4 is practically identical with that current among ourselves — the moral judgment which accompanies or follows an action, as also the source of such judgment. As Bonhoffer has instructively pointed out, the specifically Jewish and Christian use of the term was differentiated from contemporary philosophical usage by the fact that the latter did not acknowledge ' a personal God towards whom man recognises his responsibility.' 5 1 6 ivrbs &i>8pwiros {Bepub. ix. 589a). Paul's expression is 6 fob) HvdpuTos. His use of the same phrase in 2 Cor. iv. 16 seems to have the more general sense of the * spiritual ' as contrasted with the ' physical ' life. 2 Cf . his emphasis on the intellectual element in i/ovs in Rom. i. 20, where the verb voeiv describes the process by which the nature of God may be comprehended. But Paul recognises that this faculty may be degraded by misuse (Rom. i. 28, Eph. iv. 17) as well as raised to a higher level (Rom. xii. 2, Eph. iv. 23). Philo uses vovs with a wide range of signifi cance. See Hatch, op. tit., p. 125. * See an instructive note on the history of the term in Norden's Agnoatoa Theoa, p. 136, n. 1. » E.g. Rom. ii. 15 j 1 Cor. viii. 7, x. 25, etc. * Epiktet u. d. Neue Testament, p. 157. ch. u.] THE RELIGION OF THE LAW 39 (e) Origin of Sin In spite of the promptings of a better judgment, Paul, in his pre-Christian condition, was conscious of being mastered by the tyranny of sin. Sin had rendered the moral order exhibited in the Law ineffectual for enabling men to reach a right relation with God. The question naturally arises : How did Paul account for sin ? And it is easier to ask the question than to answer it. We have seen that while, as a fact of experience, he definitely associ ates sin with the ' flesh,' i.e. human nature in its existing constitution, there is nothing to suggest that in his view the ' flesh ' is inherently evil. Indeed, for Paul as a Jew, the bodily organism was the direct creation of God. On the basis of Gen. i. 27 he regards man as ' the image and glory of God.' 1 A factor has intruded to work disaster, to destroy the relation of harmony between man and his Creator. And the supreme evidence of this is death. Now the remarkable thing is that Paul repeatedly emphasises the connection between death and sin,2 which was a familiar Jewish tenet, while apparently hesitating to speculate on the background of sin itself. In several passages, however, he plainly connects the entrance of sin into the world with Adam.3 And, although no exphcit statements, are to be found on the subject, it is hard to resist the inference that theoretically Paul believed that in virtue of the solidarity of the race all sinned in Adam, and so shared in his penalty of death.4 A similar conception is found in 4 Ezra vii. 118, a document belonging to the same century as Paul. But there the explanation is given that Adam, yielding to the ' evil impulse,' * clothed himself with the evil heart,' B and this evil heart appeared in his descendants. Apparently the ' evil impulse ' was by many Rabbinic authorities identified with certain passions belonging to man as created 1 1 Cor. xi. 7. * E.g. Rom. v. 12, 17. * Rom. v. 12, 15, 18, 19 ; 1 Cor. xv. 21, 22. * So also Prof. R. Mackintosh, Christianity and Sin, pp. 80, 81. 8 4 Ezra iii. 21. 40 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. which only became evil by his improper use of them.1 It is possible that Paul also held the doctrine of the ' evil impulse,' and that it is represented by the ' other law ' of Rom. vii. 23. In any case both he and 4 Ezra are quite clear as to the responsibility of the individual for his own transgressions.2 Thus the two conceptions stand side by side. Man has a hereditary bias to sin, but he is responsible for allowing that bias to overmaster him. One passage occurs in which Paul refers to the deception of Eve by the serpent.3 Before Paul's time the serpent had been identified with Satan. We know how here and there the apostle reveals his consciousness of a dark world of evil powers which beset human life and have the present order under their sway, powers which will be abohshed before the final consummation.4 They are led by ' the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit at present working in the sons of disobedience.' s To this hierarchy of wickedness Paul assigns the gods of the heathen, who are not gods but ' demons.' 6 Perhaps behind Adam's lapse from the Divine image he recognises the influence of those fallen spirits or their leader, who, in Jewish tradition, had rebelled against the Divine authority. After all, the apostle is chiefly concerned with sin as an empirical fact. Theories of the origin of evil are secondary for him, and belong to his Jewish heritage. Hence it is not surprising that we have no clear data for connecting his idea of mankind as sinning in Adam with his doctrine of the ' flesh ' as sinful. Indeed, it is conceivable, as Prof. R. Mackintosh suggests,7 that Paul came to formulate his idea in this fashion as the result of his transforming experience, in which the power of the Spirit vanquished his evil desires, using the Old Testament term ' flesh ' for that earlier condition of helplessness on which he could now look back as a condition for ever left behind. 1 See Schechter, Some A apecls oj Rabbinic Theology, p. 267. 2 See Box's ed. of 4 Ezra, p. xlii. ¦ 2 Cor. xi. 3, in which reference is made to Gen. iii. 4, 13. ' 1 Cor. xv. 24, ii. 6 ; Col. ii. 15 ; Eph. vi. 12. * Eph. ii. 2. "1 Cor. x. 20 f. ' Expoaitor, May 1913, p. 454. ch. u.] THE RELIGION OF THE LAW 41 (/) The Significance of the Law If sin, then, makes conformity to the Law a futile effort, what is to be said of the Law itself ? What does it mean ? What is its value ? Why is it there ? Paul's precise esti mate of the Law is exceedingly difficult to formulate, not owing to the lack of material, but because his theory and his experience have often come into collision, and because his attitude has been powerfully affected by bis relations as a Christian missionary with Jews and Judaising Christians. So that his utterances regarding the significance which the Law possessed for him in his pre-Christian days can at no point be dissociated from the position which he had reached through his profound fellowship with Christ. For this reason we shall not attempt to divide our dis cussion of his attitude into clearly marked stages, although it may be possible to indicate more or less generally a certain process of development in his ideas. Paul's religious life as a Pharisee under the Law had failed to give him peace with God, primarily because he saw no prospect of winning God's favour on legal lines. Now it is true that there was room in Judaism for more than the contract-idea of religion. The very possession of the Law was regarded as a gift of the Divine grace. All its institu tions symbolised the favour of the Most High to His chosen people. The writer of Psalm cxix., whose reverence for the Law is so boundless, can count on the tenderness and loving-kindness of the Lord (w. 77, 149). And throughout the history of Judaism there were those who, regarding the Law as the revelation of the will of God, and alive to the spirit rather than the letter, cast themselves on the Divine mercy for help to be loyal to its claims. But the evidence of the Gospels, and especially the criticisms pronounced by Jesus Himself, testify unmistakably that the legahsm of the Pharisees at that epoch was in the main a religion, not of freedom, but of bondage. And if Christian documents should be charged with prejudice, there is ample proof in the Rabbinic writings themselves that childlike trust in 42 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt, t the Divine grace and the abiding assurance of the Divine love were overshadowed by a tormenting anxiety to obey the letter of the Law and so be able to stand before the Judge in the awful day of reckoning. Plainly this was the atmosphere in which Paul's earlier life was spent. His pre-Christian endeavours are reflected in the quotation from Psalm cxliii. 2, which he expands from his Christian standpoint : ' By the works of the Law " no flesh shall be justified." ' The words are echoed all through his Epistles. They describe not theory but experience, even although the apostle may have deduced a theory from them. Yet it need scarcely be said that Paul did not start from this position. The Pentateuch he regarded as divinely inspired from beginning to end. There is no evidence that he drew any distinction between the ritual and moral elements of the Law. All was a revelation from God. And, in a sense, he continues as a Christian to hold this view. In the paragraph of autobiography which has occupied us so often already, after showing that the very existence and challenge of the Law provoked him to sin, he dehberately declares : ' The law is holy, and the com mandment holy and righteous and good ' ; and again : ' We know that the law is spiritual.' 1 These epithets emphasise the intimate connection of the Law with God. Now before his conversion, one of his most tormenting problems must have been to account for the inabihty of this divinely appointed scheme of things, as he regarded it, to achieve its proper function of enabling men to become righteous. The theory he found in the Law itself : ' He that performeth these things shall live by them.' 2 Life, which was a description of the sum-total of God's best gifts in the Old Testament, awaited the man who satisfied this high claim. Death, the loss of all that made existence worth having, was the penalty of him who failed. And Paul, with his abhorrence of compromises, with his demand for truth, with his unflinching self-knowledge, felt com pelled to rank himself with the failures. Probably, even at 1 Rom. vii. 12, 14. * Lev. xviii. 5 (qu. in Ga'. iii. 12! ch. n.] THE RELIGION OF THE LAW 43 that time, he was conscious that his life in a body of flesh and blood, a life exposed to the influence of sense in all its seductive power, was somehow responsible for his failure. There is the ring of the old despair in the words : ' Wretched man that I am ! who shall dehver me from the body of this death ? n They sound true to the original situation. What he then discerned as a fact, he wove later into a theory of the function of the Law. Already, as a Pharisee, he had discovered the horror of sin. When as a Christian thinker he began to reflect on the Law in the fight of that discovery, he concluded that one purpose at least of its promulgation was to reveal sin in its true colours, to make sin as loath some as possible to the man who was guilty of it.2 But if its task stopped there, the situation would be worse than ever. What advantage is it for a man to realise the awfulness of his sin, if he sees no means of escaping from it ? Possibly Paul had almost been driven to that position. It appears in 4 Ezra, which at so many points reveals affinities with the apostle : ' The evil heart has grown up in us which has estranged us from God, and brought us into destruction, and has made known to us the ways of death, and removed us far from life ; and that not a few only, but well nigh all that have been created.' 3 When, in view of his Christian experience, Paul asked himself, ' Of what value was this revelation of the essential meaning of sin through the Law,' the remarkable answer is given : ' It was intended to prepare men for the new disclosure of grace and love and power in Jesus Christ.' There is no more remarkable flash of insight in the Epistles than Paul's statement in Gal. iii. 24 : ' The law has been the slave in charge of us (TraiSaymyos) 4 with a view to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. And now that faith has arrived, we are no longer under the slave.' He has come to estimate the Law no more as an end in itself, but as a preparatory discipline for the individual, making him fully aware of 1 Rom. vii. 24. * Rom. vii. 13 ; Gal. iii. 19. " vii. 48. * The paedagogus was a slave of the household entrusted with the supervision and discipline of the child until he reached his majority. By far the most vivid picture of his functions is found in Plato, Lyaie, 208 o. 44 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pr. i. his own helplessness in the presence of sin, and compelling him to look for aid to One who is the medium of the \ery might of God. But Paul carries this conception a stage further. He has evidently wrestled hard with the problem of the Law. That need not surprise us, for it met him continually in the course of his missionary labours. We usually allow his work among heathens to overshadow all else in his career. And we know from Gal. ii. 9 that he regarded that as his principal obhgation. But apart from the varied evidence of the Epistles, which so constantly address themselves to the Jewish consciousness, there is no reason to doubt the report in Acts that he was accustomed to make the synagogue the starting-point of his operations. It has been supposed by some scholars that Paul could not have criticised the Law before Jewish audiences in the earlier period of his career.1 To us it is inconceivable that a man who, like Paul, was conscious of having passed out of a condition of bondage into one of joyous freedom, could avoid the discussion of so momentous an element in the situation, when urging upon his fellow-countrymen the claims of Jesus Christ. The further evolution in his con ception seems indeed to have grown out of this environ ment. The Law, Paul declares, is not merely a preparatory discipline, but a temporary phase in the rehgious history of Israel.2 Here the apostle takes up a bold position. With remarkable insight he discovers in the Old Testament itself a foreshadowing of that attitude towards God which has been fully reahsed through Christ. It finds illustration in the life of the patriarch Abraham, a classical name for Hebrew religion. He is not oppressed by legal sanctions. He is content to cast himself simply upon the gracious promise of God (Gal. iii. 16-18). Paul dwells upon this with enthusiasm. Promise and Law are, in a sense, incompatible. Legahsm works with the conception of a contract between two parties. The rehgion of promise 1 So J. Weiss, op. tit, p. 169. Note the expression in Rom. v. 20 : ' The law came in as a side-issue {¦naf,ei See esp. Warneck, op. cit., pp. 81-122, 287-339. ph. m.] ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 67 course cannot be postulated as normal. But we must beware of forgetting that the elemental things in rehgion are strangely persistent. And there is rich significance in Harnack's observation that all the great movements of spiritual renewal in the history of the Church may be traced to a fresh discovery of the meaning of the Gospel of Paul. 68 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES Lpt- »• CHAPTER TV THE NORMATIVE INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION ON HIS RELIGIOUS THOUGHT (a) Jesus the Conqueror of Death Enough has been said to make it perfectly clear that Paul's entire conversion-experience circled round the person of Jesus. Henceforth he was persuaded that his function in the world was to bring his fellow-men into touch with those supreme benefits which, through Jesus Christ, had transformed existence for him. This epoch-making change affected every feature of his religious outlook. His view of God, his Messianic expectation, his eschatology, his relation to the Law, his moral ideal — all were directly modified in the light of the decisive revelation which had come to him. Truly old things had passed away ; new things had come to be.1 It is plain, therefore, that his rehgious thought will be, primarily, the result of reflection upon these new things. So that we ought to be able to discover the main drift of his theology by examining the convictions which were borne in upon his mind by his conversion. Paul, as we have noted, must have been familiar with the common faith of those Christians whom he harassed. For them everything turned on the assurance that Jesus, who had been crucified, was risen. There was no belief comparable to this in the history of Jewish religion, and its sheer daring must have impressed a mind like Paul's, more especially as it was associated with one who had died a death of shame. The crucifixion of Jesus by itself put 1 2 Cor. v. 17. ta. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 69 an end for ever to all Messianic claims and hopes. But if He could not be holden of death, no dignity could be too honourable for Him. The suggestion was monstrous. And Paul must often have fallen back on its incredibility, when his opposition to the Nazarenes required reinforce ment. But it was this Jesus who laid hold of him, who claimed his hie, who made him a new creature. Astounding readjustments of rehgious ideas were needful in every direction, as soon as he had opportunity to make them. These readjustments form the subject of our investigation. But the presupposition of them all is Jesus as the conqueror of death.The central place of this conviction in Paul's mind is evident from the stress which he lays upon it in crucial passages of his Letters. Thus in the opening words of the Epistle to the Galatians, a document intended to lay bare the essence of his Gospel, when linking together the name of Jesus Christ with that of God the Father, he attaches to the latter the description, ' who raised him from the dead.' 1 That is to say, in his new discovery of the mind and purpose of God, the most amazing element was the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The idea is elaborated in his famous statement regarding Jesus Christ in the introduction to Romans : ' Born of the seed of David by natural descent, and installed as Son of God with power in virtue of the Spirit of holiness as the result of resurrection from the dead.' 2 Here is a compendium of Paul's Christology, and it illuminates what he conceives to be the bearing of the resurrection on the person of Christ. The resurrection has put the seal upon His supreme dignity as Son of God, with all that that involves for His relation to men. He is now exalted to the highest place that heaven affords. It is no arbitrary process, for it is the operation of that Spirit of holiness which was the controlling principle of His nature, and which death could not quench. But for Paul, the practical consequence of this crowning event in the experience of his Lord and Master is paramount. In i Oal. i. 1. ! Rom. i. 3, 4 (partly M.). 70 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. one of the most intimate of all his self-revelations, he declares how he has spurned all that he once had valued in order to know Christ ' in the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings.' 1 The basis of a genuine heart-to-heart knowledge of Christ is His risen life. The later development in the Johannine literature is the elaboration of Paul's position : ' He who possesses the Son possesses life.' 2 These passages suggest the main significance of Paul's conviction that Jesus has conquered death. (1) The re surrection is God's vindication of all that Christ has been and has done. His career is shot through with a Divine purpose. What seems tragic failure can be estimated in its genuine meaning, when viewed in the light of its consummation. Christ's earthly life, Christ's death of shame, cannot be understood apart from His resurrection which involves His exaltation. It is very noteworthy that when Paul thinks of His human experience, it is as an element in His humihation (e.g. Phil. ii. 7 ; 2 Cor. viii. 9), that humiliation whose chmax is the cross (Phil ii. 8). All this leads up to His supreme dignity as Son of God with power. That is the complement of His voluntary self- renunciation : ' Wherefore also God highly exalted him and gave him the name which is above every name ' (Phil. ii. 9). (2) All that has been said imphes that for Paul the resunection forms an integral part of God's redeeming operation. Not only may such an impression be drawn from the association of ideas in Phil. iii. 10 and from Gal. i. 1-4, where the resurrection is plainly connected with Christ's redemption of men, but the fact is emphasised in the highly compressed statement of Rom. iv. 25 : ' Jesus who was " dehvered up for our trespasses " 3 and raised that we might be justified.' This is one of those character istically Pauhne passages in which the death and resur rection of Jesus Christ are regarded as inseparable co efficients of the same mighty achievement. The words 1 Phil. iii. 10 (M.). '1 John v. 12 (M.). * Quoted probably from Isa. liii. 12 (LXX). ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 71 must not be parsed, but interpreted in their broad signific ance. They do not suggest that the cross meant one thing and the resurrection another. For Paul the cross is un intelligible apart from the resurrection, and the real im port of the resurrection becomes clear only in the hght of the cross. The words mean, to quote Dr. Denney's apt comment, ' that we believe in a living Saviour, and that it is faith in Him which justifies. But then it is faith in Him as One who not only hves, but was delivered up to death to atone for our offences. He both died and was raised for our justification : the work is one and its end one.' x Here Paul interprets the death of Christ from his experience of the risen Lord. (3) But the revelation of Jesus as the conqueror of death meant for Paul immediate contact with the forces of that higher order which was destined to replace ' this present evil age.' He felt that the coming era of blessedness, so long and wistfully yearned for, was at the door. He speaks of himself and his fellow- Christians as those * whose lot has been cast in the closing hours of the world.' 2 The reign of Messiah has begun with the exaltation of Jesus. New powers are being liberated from the unseen, of which Paul is intensely conscious. The risen Lord dwells in the souls of His faithful disciples.3 The love of God has been poured forth in their hearts through the Holy Spirit given to them.4 This confidence in the dawn of the new epoch of God's dominion must inevitably kindle high hopes and enthusiasms. Already the apostle can say : ' Our commonwealth is in heaven, from whence we eagerly look for the Saviour.' 6 The corollary of such high confidence is to be found in the injunction : ' Seek the things where Christ is seated at the right hand of God . . . for you died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.' 6 (4) We know how sorely hampered Paul felt himself to be by the burden of physical life. What he calls his ' earthly tent ' 7 he makes responsible for much of the failure of his spiritual life. And he therefore sighs after that existence in * E O T., ii. p. 622. ' 1 Cor. x. 11 (M.). » Gal. ii. 20. ' Rom. v. 6. • Phil. iii. 20. ' Col. iii. 1, 3. '2 Cor. v. 1. 72 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. which his mortal element shall be swallowed up by life.1 The risen Christ is for him the pledge of perfected being. ' If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised from the dead Christ Jesus shall also make ahve your mortal body through his Spirit dwelling in you.' 2 Christ is the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep.3 His victory over the grave is the demon stration that a triumphant hfe awaits all who have entered His fellowship. (b) The Significance of the Cross For Paul, as we have observed, the significance of the cross was bound up with the conviction that Jesus Christ had conquered death and was alive for evermore. The fact of a crucified Messiah was placed in a new perspective by His exaltation. Crucifixion in this case did not involve the curse of God. Jesus had been revealed as the Chosen of the Divine love. Now the early chapters of Acts reflect the emphasis which was laid by the primitive Christian community on the human mahce which brought about the cruel death of Jesus.4 But if we are to appeal to them as evidence for such a conception, we must also recognise that they trace the event to the deliberate purpose of God ; 5 and associate it with the forecasts of the prophets.6 The description of Jesus in these chapters as the ' Servant ' of God 7 at once suggests the famous ' Songs of the Servant ' in Deutero -Isaiah. There an Old Testament basis is found for the doctrine of a suffering Messiah. We cannot be sure at how early a date this Old Testament foreshadowing was used to interpret the Passion of Jesus. Considering the authoritative place which the Scriptures held in the con sciousness of Jewish Christians, a place all the more unique now that they were being persecuted by the Pharisees and so would be detached from the oral tradition, we are obliged to suppose that almost from the beginning they must have 1 2 Cor. v. 4. » Rom. viii. 11. » 1 Cor. xv. 20. ' E.g. iii. 13, 14; v. 30, etc. * E.g. ii. 23 j iv. 28, etc. ' hi- 18. ' 6 Trats. iii, 13, 26 ; iv. 27, 30. ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 73 eagerly studied the Old Testament for fight upon the new circumstances in which they found themselves. Whether Paul, before bis conversion, had ever been led to examine the data, must be a matter of mere conjecture. But as soon as he had entered into fellowship with the risen Christ, the cross, although no longer a scandal, must have appeared an enigma. As a loyal monotheist, he was compelled to assign it a place in the Divine order. But innumerable questions would present themselves. The event was a startling reversal of Jewish ideas. The Messiah was the very symbol of triumph, and this had been degradation. Yet Jesus was sinless. Why should the Holy One of God undergo so appalling an experience ? To estimate the full significance of such a problem for Paul, we have to remind ourselves that for a Jew death was the emblem of separation from God. It marked the disastrous issue of that taint of evil which had poisoned human nature from the first. The wages of sin was death. What could this mean for God's Vicegerent ? It is far from sufficient to say that it was the necessary transition to a state of glory and exalta tion.1 Paul's strenuous mind would demand some pro- founder answer than that. And the answer must be more than the device of a skilful apologetic. We may readily admit that Paul had to interpret the significance of the death of the Messiah to other minds than his own. But surely Jiihcher's view of the situation is superficial when he declares that 'Paul . . . was obhged ... to transform the " folly " [of the cross] into wisdom.' 2 Paul felt, hke every unprejudiced thinker who has faced the facts, that there was something stupendous in the experience of Calvary, something that unveiled a realm of spiritual realities which almost blinded the mental vision of men with excess of fight. And we know how he exhausted the resources of metaphor and analogy in trying to express that intuition of the Divine nature which had flashed upon his soul from the cross of Jesus Christ. 1 So, e.g., Weizsacker, Apostol. Zeitalter, p. 111. ' Paulas u. Jesus, p. 65. 74 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. We cannot help thinking that the clue to his many- sided conception of the death of Christ is to be found primarily in his conversion-experience. Whatever else in it subdued his nature, first and foremost was his impres sion of unspeakable grace. That was the atmosphere into which he had been transferred by his wonderful contact with the risen Jesus. The bitter persecutor had been laid hold of from sheer compassion. A love too deep to com prehend had come to his aid in the midst of bewildering struggle. The whole relation of God to men was encircled with mercy. Need we be surprised that this liberated soul attained to the spiritual height of the Old Testament prophet's estimate of God ? ' In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them : in his love and pity himself redeemed them : and he bare them and carried them all the days of old.' 1 It was surely his fresh impression of the meaning of God as discovered in the living Christ which prompted him to look for the secret of the cross in the depths of the Divine love. We misconceive Paul's standpoint entirely if we try to account for his interpretation of the death of Christ as the effort to resolve by an ingenious process of dialectic a problem which re fused to square with ordinary facts. And it is easy to ascribe too much importance to the influence of information concerning Jesus which had reached him in his Pharisaic days, or to the counsel of Christian believers who assisted this strange convert in the first moments of his new life. We would by no means undervalue such factors in the situation.2 Nothing prevents us from supposing that Paul had heard of Jesus' wonderful way with outcasts and sinners. And unquestionably real light would be shed upon the mystery when he learned from his Christian brethren the pathetic story of the Last Supper, and was told of Jesus' remarkable words concerning a ' new covenant,' a new relation of men with God, to be inaugurated by His death. Paul was already conscious of this new relation. It had 1 Isa. lxiii. 9. " See J. Weiss, op. tit, pp. 345, 346. ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 75 brought joy and peace to his soul. Its foundation could be nothing else than the boundless love of God. (c) The Messiah (Son of God) Paul's conviction that Jesus was risen carried with it the acknowledgment that He was the Messiah of God. Jesus' life and teaching had involved this high claim, and from the outset His followers had placed it in the forefront. We have seen the serious issue which confronted an ardent Pharisee like Paul when he faced the situation. Jesus had shown an attitude of laxity towards such vital elements of the Jewish system as the Sabbath laws and the regula tions concerning purification. But the fulfilment of the Messianic Hope of Israel depended on strict loyalty to the authoritative standard. This teacher of heresy had only met his deserts when he was condemned to the most degrading penalty that could be inflicted, that of death by crucifixion. We can only grasp Paul's estimate of the Christian movement if we try to realise that for him, as for all devout Jews, every ideal worth living for was summed up in the Messianic Age. In his rehgious earnestness he had yearned and prayed for the advent of that era. His bold imagination had often pictured the bhss of the final deliver ance. He had studied the forecasts of prophets and psalmists. In thought he had beheld the foreign domina tion broken, and the chosen people fulfilling their function as a light to the nations. Iniquity was purged and righteousness was triumphant. As he looked on the prosaic reality of Jewish rehgion, this glorious vista must have seemed remote enough. But a worse thing had happened. The Nazarene and his followers were bringing the national Hope into contempt. Their assertions were horrid blas phemy. It is against the background of his earlier position that the full significance of his new conviction becomes evident. The glory of Messiahship in no way fades when the office is assigned to Jesus. Paul never loses sight of the fact 76 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [ft. i. that the revelation of Messiah means the climax of God's wonderful dealings with His people. He is true to his former expectations when he says of Jesus Christ : ' In him is the " Yes " that affirms all the promises of God.' 1 He cannot conceive any manifestation of the Divine purpose which will surpass that which he has received in the risen Jesus. But it is plain that his Messianic expecta tions were profoundly modified by the actual experience through which he passed. Johannes Weiss has sugges tively pointed out that there are only a few places in Paul's writings where the constantly recurring term ' Christos ' can be translated ' Messiah.' 2 The expression ' Jesus the Christ ' is never found. These phenomena indicate that the reahty of the personal Jesus has absorbed the Messianic functions. It is the living Person who has impressed the soul of Paul— we may almost say, the personal Saviour. The Messiah qud Messiah was to the Jewish mind a public functionary. His office was conceived in terms of kingship. He was set apart for judgment. Hence kingly attributes were usually ascribed to him : righteousness, justice, wisdom, power.3 For Paul and the early Church the centre of gravity is shifted. They have not to deal with an august, remote Being, whose character is composed of abstract ideals. ' Christ ' has for them become the name of a historical Person. And this historical Person is the embodiment of grace and lowliness and love. For those who had companied with Jesus in the days of His earthly ministry that impression had transcended all others. Paul had caught many glimpses of it while still a persecutor. But now, as the result of his amazing experience of the risen Jesus, it was imprinted for ever on his soul. In the hght of it, the Messianic redemption is for him transfigured. It is transferred to a new level. No longer can it mean the dehveranco of the nation from an ahen yoke, as a reward of faithfulness to their covenant with God. Salva- 1 2 Cor. i. 20 (M.). ¦ E.g. Rom. ix. 5 : perhaps also in the phrase, ' the Gospel of Christ ' j ppesibly in Rom. x. 6, 7 ; 2 Cor. v. 10. See J. Weiss, op. tit., p. 350. ' E.g. Isa. xi. 1-5. ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 77 tion is once for all released from national categories. The very significance of Paul's contact with Christ gives it a universal bearing. He has found in the risen Lord the source of spiritual power, of victory over sin and failure. Hence redemption belongs essentially to the spiritual life. It has no concern with material conditions, except in so far as these are evil. The Messiah is He who can rescue from sin, who can deliver from that Divine ' wrath ' which is the reaction of God's holiness against all that is vile.1 But the transformation of the Messianic Hope goes deeper. As has been hinted, the notion of reward falls into the background. Paul had honestly faced the facts as a Pharisee, and had been compelled to acknowledge in the secret place of his heart that if God were to reckon with His people on the ground of merit, the promised redemp tion must still remain a dream. The crisis in his own life flashed upon him an extraordinary discovery. God had not waited for him to win salvation. He was not left to purchase the boon of inward peace with the price of a laborious obedience. God in His infinite grace had anticipated his action. Lake the father in the Parable of the Lost Son, He had gone to meet him while still far off. He had plied him with love and mercy ; He had offered him the gift of new life. He had shown Himself on the side of frail human nature, appealing to men to enter His fellowship through Jesus Christ. Here is a complete revolution in eschatology. We shall have to examine its implications in the case of many of Paul's fundamental ideas. Meanwhile let us note its general bearings. It is easy to show how much of the eschatological apparatus of Judaism Paul retained as a Christian apostle. In his earliest Letters he portrays the Second Advent of Christ in typically Jewish colours. Its accompaniments are the shouts of archangels and the sounding of trumpets. It is the signal of doom for those who refuse to hsten to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus. Those who have fallen asleep in Christ shall rise from their graves 1 1 These, i. 10. 78 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. :. to meet Him.1 In later documents he employs the same type of imagery. In depicting the consummation of the Kingdom of God, he sketches, though with great restraint, the sequence of events at the Parousia. After the resur rection of His followers, Christ abohshes all opposing forces, and among these Paul includes the vast hierarchy of evil powers who enslave human destiny and contest the supremacy of God over men. Death itself is annihilated, and finally the Son dehvers up the Kingdom to the Father, ' that God may be aH in all.' In the resurrection flesh and blood shall have no part. Both living and dead will be clothed with an incorruptible spiritual organism, 'in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet- call.' 2 In a passage of extraordinary intimacy, Paul reveals his eagerness to exchange ' this earthly tent ' for his ' heavenly habitation,' and his dread of being ' naked ' at the hour of death.3 The language and imagery which he uses have numerous parallels both in the prophets and the apocalypses, as well as in the apocalyptic discourses of Jesus. We have already noted what strong emphasis he lays upon the future Judgment, and how he urges the nearness of the Parousia as a motive for self-discipline and watchfulness of Ufe. Apart altogether from traditional pictures of the Last Things, which are strangely persistent in all religions even after the behefs which they originally embodied have begun to fade, there remains a genuinely eschatological strain in Paul's religious outlook. He yearns for the consummation of God's dominion over men and the universe. He yearns for the extirpation of all the forces of evil, which he conceives as an army of spirits mustered under ' the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit which is at present working in the sons of disobedience.' 4 He longs for the spiritual attainment which will be the outcome of hberation from the trammels of a body of flesh. For him the future means perfect conformity to the image 1 1 Thess. iv. 16-17 ; 2 Thess. i. 7-10. 1 1 Cor. xv. 22-28, 50-52. » 2 Cor. v. 1-4. • Eph. ii. 2 ; cf. Col. i. 13, Eph. vi. 12. ch. rv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 79 of Christ : participation in that ' glory ' which constitutes the Divine essence. And so when he deals with Justification he invariably keeps in view the final stage, when his salva tion will be completed. Indeed, no more typical statement of the Pauhne position could be cited than that of Gal. v. 5 : ' We by the Spirit as the result of faith eagerly expect the righteousness we hope for.' But while all this is true, we must assign its proper place to the complementary aspect of Paul's rehgious thought. The future has, in a very real sense, become present. Fundamentally, that which it has to offer is given already in Christ to the trustful heart. In principle the Christian has begun to participate in his glorious heritage. Already he possesses the love of God which is in Christ Jesus his Lord, and nothing shall ever be able to rob him of his priceless possession.1 This conscious ness that he had virtually entered upon the coming Age of apocalyptic expectation meant an entire readjustment of the older Hope, and marked off Paul's outlook from that of Jewish Messianism. In a real sense, the Messianic rule was present, attested by signs and wonders and all the gifts of the Spirit. The new condition could not be com pared to the old. The resurrection and exaltation of Jesus were the proof that the ' rulers of this world had been vanquished.' Believers might still appear a feeble folk in the midst of ' a crooked and perverse generation,' but their light was visible in the surrounding darkness.2 The whole creation was eagerly waiting for the complete revelation of the sons of God. When Christ, who was their life, should appear, they also would appear with Him in glory.3 Perhaps enough has been said to bring out the unique character of Paul's conception of Jesus as Messiah. And it certainly refuses to tally with some theories much in vogue at the present time. Prominent scholars like Wrede, J. Weiss, and others have argued that the foundation of Paul's Christology is to be found in his pre-Christian view of Messiah. Taking their stand mainly upon the apocalyptic » Rom. viii. 85-39. » Phil. ii. 16. » Col. iii. 4. 80 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. pictures in 1 Enoch r and 4 Ezra,2 they hold that the heavenly being there portrayed, to whom was committed the function of judgment, may be regarded as representing the current Messianic doctrine of Judaism.8 But the evidence is highly conflicting. In the Psalms of Solomon, a Jewish work of the first century B.C., and also a product of the Pharisaic party, there is no trace of such a con ception. It adheres to the common view that the Messiah should be a prince of the house of David.4 There is no proof that the other notion was widely diffused. Mr. G. H. Box refers it to some * probably small apocalyptic circles,' while ' the orthodox Rabbinic view . . . accepts an earthly national Messiah, the son of David, and sometimes affirms for him an earthly pre-existence (e.g. that he has already been born but is in concealment, awaiting the time of his manifestation).' 5 Paul's actual language seems to coincide, as we might expect, with the usual Rabbinic position, for in Rom. i. 3 ff ., when describing the Son of God, who is the subject of his Gospel, he emphasises His Davidic descent, omitting all mention of heavenly origin, and pointing to His exaltation as the decisive moment in His Messianic career. There are, of course, important passages which refer to His pre-existence. But it is not necessary to find the origin of the idea in that strain of Jewish apocalyptic tradition which may plausibly be referred back to the early myth of the ' archetypal Man.' Pre-existence, in some sense, must belong to One who is placed on the side of Deity. The artificial nature of the attempted analysis of Paul's Christology appears from the fact that the keenest advocates of this view declare the whole period from the Incarnation to the Parousia to be a mere episode for Paul's mind.6 Such a hypothesis, even in the light of the facts already examined, is scarcely worthy of refutation. But while Paul has not constructed his Christology on 1 Esp. chapters xlvi., xlviii.. Mi. * Chap. xiii. » E.g. Wrede, Paulus, p. 86 f. ; Briiokner, Die Entstehung d. paulin. Ohristologie, paaeim ; J. Weiss, Christua, p. 18 f. * See Psa. of Solomon, xvii., xviii. * The Ezra Apocalypse, p. 284. ' This does not apply to J. Weisa. ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 91 these mechanical lines, its super-human implications appear in his frequent use of the designation, Son of God. We might naturally be disposed to look for the root of the idea in the Old Testament. And we know the central place occupied in early Christian thought by Ps. ii. 7 (LXX): ' The Lord said to me, Thou art my son, I have to-day begotten thee.' When it is observed that the succeeding sentence of the passage runs : ' Ask of me, and I will give the heathen as thine inheritance,' we can easily reahse the force of its appeal to Paul. This description of Messiah does not stand alone. In Ps. lxxxix. 28 (LXX) God declares : ' I will also make him my first-born, exalted in presence of the kings of the earth.' And Ps. ex. 3 (LXX), where again the ' begetting ' of the chosen king is a feature, was very familiar to the primitive Church. The title ' Son ' appears also in several apocalypses as apphed to the Messiah of God. This usage has obviously an official character. To be the chosen of God is to stand towards Him in a special relation. It may be legitimate to refer for a parallel to the ancient Oriental designation of kings as ' sons ' of God.1 But the comparison does not shed much hght on Paul's conception. A remarkable affinity is dis cernible between the Old Testament Messianic application of the title and such statements of Paul as Rom. i. 3, 4: ' His son, born of the seed of David by natural descent, and installed as Son of God with power in virtue of the Spirit of holiness as the result of resurrection from the dead.' Here the installation as Son of God with power is directly equivalent to the * supreme exaltation ' of which Paul speaks in Phil. ii. 9 as bestowed upon Christ by God as the result of His humiliation. There is an enhancing of His position in the universe. He is henceforth ' Lord,' with a right to universal dominion and universal adoration. Of special value for the comprehension of Paul's idea is his description of Christ as ' the image of the invisible God, the first-born of the whole creation.' 2 Here, unquestion ably, he has in view what must be called a ' metaphysical ' 1 See J. Weiss, Christua pp. 10-21. » Col. i. 15 ; cf. Heb. i. 3. 82 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. relationship. It represents something more than perfect mutual understanding, completely reciprocated love. But even in the incidental references found in the Synoptic Gos pels to the unique relation between Jesus and His Father, while we may be content with formulating it in ethical terms, we are all the time conscious that reflection cannot stop there, although it has no instrument adequate to interpret the phenomena. As a matter of fact, Paul does not speculate in this mysterious realm. To trace his use of the title ' Son of God ' to a mythological tradition which had come down from polytheistic religions, but had been gradually purged of its mythological character by monotheistic influence and philosophical abstraction, is altogether gratuitous.1 It does not, indeed, seem enough to say, with Weinel, that our phrase, ' Son,' following a common Semitic usage, merely denotes ' belonging to.' 2 We believe that here, as else where, Paul's rehgious experience lies in the background. The wonderful Person who had laid hold of him so graciously and transfigured his whole being must belong to a sphere above humanity. The Christian tradition had probably already associated the term ' Son ' with Jesus' self -conscious ness. Its use accorded with the apostle's strict mono theism. He never called Jesus God. ' Son of God ' assigns Him to His proper sphere of being. Without speculative attempts at definition, it suggests His oneness with the Father.8 (d) The Lord Johannes Weiss remarks with truth that ' early-Christian rehgion is contained in germ in the formula, our Lord Jesus Christ.' 4 We cannot precisely determine how the title ' Lord ' came into currency. In Acts ii. 36 Peter is 1 See J. Weiss, Christua, pp. 36, 37. * Paulua, p. 251. He compares Matt. xii. 27, viii. 12, xiii. 38, etc. * Bousset is inclined to think that the phrase was a creation of Paul's own, the product of religious reflection rather than of the worship of the Church (Kyrioe Chriatna, pp. 181, 182). The evidence of the Synoptics even when estimated oritically, seems to favour the view in the text. ' Christua, p. 24. ch. rv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 83 reported as saying, ' Let all the house of Israel know that God made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.' Plainly the title is here connected with His exaltation, and that idea seems always to he in the back ground of its use. The writer of Acts hnks it with a famous Messianic passage, Ps. ex. 1 : ' The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies a footstool for thy feet.' And there can be httle doubt that this passage was a most important factor in the formation of the usage. But for Paul at least it is far more than a synonym for Messiah. Possibly the same thing is true for the early Church as a whole. It is certainly significant that the translators of the LXX, in all likelihood Egyptian Jews, rendered the Old Testament ' Jahweh ' by Kiyuos, ' Lord.' No doubt in so doing they were influenced by the fact that in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament the Tetragrammaton was pronounced as Adonai, a Semitic title of deity which was a more or less accurate equivalent of Ki'pios. In any case, their action, gave the claims of the God of Israel a world-wide bearing.1 For the peoples of the Hellenistic epoch were famihar with the Divine significance of Kvpios. It was a typically Oriental title. It was constantly used of characteristically Oriental deities, such as the Egyptian Isis, Osiris, and Serapis.2 In the first century it was quickly taking its place as the designation of the deified Emperor, and thus becoming the central term of the Imperial cult.3 Its apphcation to Christ was all the more significant from its Hellenistic at mosphere, and especially from its intimate association with the cult of the Caesars. The impression which it made upon heathen-Christians is strikingly brought out by a passage in the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs (1-2), 4 where Speratus contrasts Christ as imperator noster (' our Em peror ') with the dominus noster imperator (' our Lord 1 See Deissmann, Die Helleniaienmg d. eemitischen Monotheismus, p. 14. * See Bousset, op. tit, p. 118. 3 See the examples aub voce Kiptos in Dittenberger's Orientia Graecae lnseription.es Selectae. ' Quoted by Lietzmann on Rom. x. 9. 84 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [ft. i. the Emperor') of the Roman proconsul, and another (6) in which he declares : ' I refuse to acknowledge the Empire of this World ... I acknowledge my Lord who is Emperor of the kings of all nations.' Possibly Hellenistic practice as well as the usage of the LXX had some influence in the regular ascription of the term ' Lord ' to the exalted Christ. Yet the appearance of the Aramaic formula Maran atha, ' Lord come ' (1 Cor. xvi. 22), forbids us to distinguish between Palestinian and Hellenistic Christianity in regard to the use of Kii/oios.1 The same consideration prevents us from accepting Bousset' s hypothesis that Kvpios, as applied to Jesus, means prim arily ' the Lord who presides over the community-life of Christians, as that life is unfolded in the pubhc worship of the Church, i.e. in the cult.' 2 Perhaps this conception may have formed an element in the situation. Full force must be assigned to such important phrases as ' calling upon the name of the Lord,' 3 which may be taken as a brief description of Christians, and referred to the attitude of the community assembled for worship. But the personal relationship involved in the designation must be placed in the forefront by any careful student of Paul. Here the influence of the Old Testament becomes apparent. Passages like Ps. cxvi. 17 (LXX), ' O Lord (Ku/nos), I am thy bond servant (SovAos),' give a partial clue to Paul's standpoint. Corresponding to the position of Jesus as Lord is his own as devoted slave. Again and again he calls himself by this name.4 It is no conventional description, but suggests how large and profound is the relationship between his Lord and himself. It imphes surrender, obedience, rever ence, trust, grateful love. Accordingly, whether Paul was indebted to the Christian community for this conception or not, he has, at least, made it completely his own. He uses it as the vehicle for expressing what he feels about 1 Bousset's attempt to restrict the formula to Antiochene Christianity (op. tit, p. 103, note 3) is quite unconvincing. * Op. tit., p. 105. » E.g. 1 Cor. i. 2 ; Ro-n. x. 12 ; Aots ix. 14, 21. « E.g. Rom. i. 1 j Gal. i. 10. ch. iv.) INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 86 Christ. And the feeling is the direct transcript of his conversion-experience. Christ is for the apostle pre eminently ' my Lord.' 1 So that with equal right we may derive its cult-association from its personal significance. This is evident from statements found in Paul's Letters. Thus, in 1 Cor. xii. 3, he declares : ' No one can say Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Spirit.' Here is a process of transition from the personal to the pubhc confession. Yet, however fundamental the ascription of lordship to Jesus may be for the life of the community, it must have its roots in the inward discovery of the soul. In Paul's case, that has as its issue union with the living and exalted Lord. But the idea of exaltation in Paul's use of the title must be specially emphasised. It was as the exalted One that Christ revealed Himself to the Pharisee. And that note may always be heard when Paul speaks of Him as Lord. The most important material for the elucidation of this conception is found in Phil. ii. 9, 10 : ' Wherefore (i.e. as the issue of His lowly self-renunciation) God highly exalted him and gave him the name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.' Plainly, in this passage, the ' name above every name ' is that of ' Lord.' What this meant for a devout Hellenistic Jew may be inferred from such Old Testament declarations as Isa. xiii. 8 (LXX) : ' I am the Lord (Ki'yno* 6 Stds), this is my name.' And the background of Paul's thought in the passage quoted appears in Isa. xlv. 23 (LXX) : ' I swear by myself . . . my words shall not be turned away, that to me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear (some good authorities read ' confess ') by God' (an excellent authority reads 'the Lord'). As in the case of the designation ' Son of God,' Paul, in this affirmation of His lordship, deliberately assigns Jesus to 1 Phil. iii. 8. 86 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES trT. I. the sphere of the Divine. Apart from the judgment of the Christian community which he has entered, he makes this ascription as the result of his personal experience. It is scarcely needful to point out that for ancient thought the giving of a name carried with it the imparting of all the name stood for. The Old Testament use of ' Lord ' imphes the right to universal worship and dominion : that which is due to Jahweh. With all these considerations before his mind, Paul does not hesitate to call Christ the Lord. But it is instructive to notice that the final goal of the lordship of Christ is ' the glory of God the Father.' Paul never deserts his monotheistic position. And perhaps J. Weiss is justified in suggesting 1 that he welcomed the possibility of using the term ' Lord,' which for him ex presses Christ's position of equahty with God in the eyes of men and His right to universal adoration, while, at the same time, the name of ' God ' is reserved for the Fathei to whom even Christ shall one day deliver up His dominion, ' that God may be all in all.' 2 (e) The Spirit In the most explicit account of his conversion which Paul gives in his Epistles, he speaks of the gracious purpose of God to reveal His Son ' in me.' 3 Whatever may have been the objective circumstances of the revelation, the permanent gain for the apostle is something spiritual, the fellowship of his spirit with the Divine life in Jesus Christ. Hence he can describe Him as ' life-creating spirit.' 4 And the gift of new life or power is for him the supreme token of God's operation in his personal experience. So from this time forward the decisive criterion for the Christian life is the reception of the Spirit. When he desires to bring his erring Galatian converts to the touchstone of funda mental realities, he asks them : ' This is the only thing I wish to find out from you : Did you receive the Spirit as 1 Christus, p. 26. » 1 Oor. xv. 28. * Gal. i. 16. « 1 Cor. xv. 46. ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 87 the result of observing the Law, or was it because of the hearing which your faith gave to the Gospel ? ' 1 The one vindication of his preaching which he submits to the in tellectually restless Corinthians is the ' demonstration of the Spirit anc cf < ower.' 2 How are we to estimate this standpoint of tu^ i postle ? It is noteworthy that in the earlier narratives of the Old Testament, phenomena of an abnormal or ' demonic ' nature were usually referred to the ' spirit ' or ' breath ' of God. Probably this explanation represents an advance on some primitive animistic theory. Thus, Samson's extraordinary physical strength (Judges xiv. 6) and the technical skill of Bezaleel the artificer of the Tabernacle (Exod. xxxv. 30, 31) are ascribed to the Spirit of God. As might be expected, a similar origin is presupposed for the ecstatic experiences of both earlier and later prophecy. The former were apparently more physical than spiritual in character (see, e.g., 1 Sam. x. 10). This, possibly, was the reason why famous prophets hke Isaiah and Jeremiah did not associate their prophetic utterances with the ' Spirit ' of God. The idea may still have borne traces of its more primitive unethical features. In the case of Ezekiel, however, whose career gives evidence of a marked pathological element, the conception of the Spirit of God comes into prominence (e.g. ch. xi. 1, 5, 24), although he also more frequently speaks of the ' hand ' of the Lord. In a few places, endowment with the Spirit is associated with special service in God's Kingdom (e.g. Isa. xi. 2), and occasionally its value is emphasised for the needs of the rehgious life (e.g. Ps. li. 11 ; cxliii. 10). In the Wisdom- literature of Israel, its place is taken by the semi- personalised conception of Wisdom, represented as God's instrument in creation and the channel of Divine energy to the universe. The relation of the two allied conceptions will meet us again when we examine Paul's view of the cosmic significance of Christ. In Rabbinic theology, the ' Spirit of holiness ' is the equipment of specially gifted 1 Gal. iii. 2. ' 1 Cor. u. 4. 88 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES Ipt. i. teachers. Of more importance for our purpose is the eschatological expectation that the Messianic Age should be marked by an extraordinary visitation of the Spirit (e.g. Joel ii. 28, 29). It is plain from the early chapters of Acts that this expectation took a pre-eminent place in primitive Christian thought. We are unable to determine to what extent it was due to the teaching of Jesus. The evidence of the Synoptic Gospels does not suggest that Jesus emphasised the idea of the Spirit. In one or two places the term appears to have been substituted in the tradition for a more general expression. The statements of the Fourth Gospel presuppose Paul as well as the very unique interpretation of Jesus which is there embodied. In any case, the extraordinary ferment of spiritual power and enthusiasm which prevailed among the Christians of the early Apostohc Age was associated with that outpouring of the Spirit which was believed to usher in the Messianic Era. We must consider in the next chapter in what measure Paul was affected by the conception current in the Church. The most important feature of his own conception of the Spirit is its relation to Christ. The risen Lord who appeared to him was essentially ' Spirit.' The result of this revela tion was for him, above all else, a new consciousness of spiritual power — power able to achieve undreamed-of moral effects. In the primitive community the fresh quickening of spiritual life was vaguely associated with the Spirit. In Paul's case the idea was far more concrete and personal. The Spirit as experienced by him was the Spirit of Christ. This was central for Paul's Christianity ' If any one have not the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to him.' 1 Yet we must not narrow his conception, for in the preceding clause of the passage quoted he has spoken of the ' Spirit of God ' as ' dwelhng in you.' A few sentences later he describes the new life of the Christians as due to 'the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead.'2 Nor is this all. Interchangeable with the idea of the 1 Rom. viii. 9b. » Rom. viii. 11. cu. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 89 Spirit of Christ or the Spirit dwelhng in the believer is that of the behever as being ' in Christ ' or ' in the Spirit.' x The usages we have examined prepare us for Paul's remarkable identification of Christ with the Spirit : ' Now the Lord is the Spirit.' 2 Yet the clause which follows puts us on our guard against a too hteral interpretation, for it runs : ' and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is hberty.' Paul, in other words, leaves a fluctuating margin between his conception of Christ and the Spirit. He was convinced that in the crisis on the road to Damascus he had come into touch with a living Person, but that Person belonged to the sphere of the Spirit. His essential being was Divine Spirit. The result of Paul's contact was experience of transforming power. When he thinks especially of this power, he speaks of the Spirit. When he dwells on the source of his new energy, he speaks of Christ. But always that fellowship with Christ which presupposes a living faith is the condition of the Spirit's indwelling. The Spirit is, indeed, the Divine response to the faith of the Christian. We do not stay to deal with Bousset's theory that it is not the Christ who appeared to Paul at his conversion whom he identifies with the Spirit, but the ' Lord ' (Kvptos), worshipped in the services of the Christian com munity.3 If there is anything which distinguishes Paul's conception it is its personal character. The Divine power which has laid hold of him and now operates through him is no vague world -soul, but is definitely individualised. Of course, in dealing with so impalpable a reahty as spirit, his language is bound to fluctuate. Thus, when he attempts to determine the relation of the Divine energy to the human personafity which it quickens, it is neces sarily impossible to divide the ground between the Divine and the human. But in the great majority of instances in which he uses ' spirit ' (-n-vevpa), he thinks of the Spirit of God (or of Christ) as dwelhng in the Christian, or of the 1 E.g. 2 Cor. v. 17 ; Rom. viii. 9. 8 2 Cor. iii. 17. * Op. tit, p. 145. 90 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. inner hfe of the Christian as recreated by the Spirit. It is true that there are about a dozen cases in which Paul apphes this term to the inner life apart from the influence of the Divine Spirit. In this usage he follows that of the Old Testament. For in some post-exilic passages ' spirit ' is used as a synonym for ' soul.' 1 But that does not alter the fact that when Paul speaks of the Spirit, he has in view either the energy of God (or of Christ), acting upon human nature, or human nature as renewed by such Divine action. The extraordinary significance for Paul of his contact with Christ as spirit lies in the conviction that he was now moving among the forces of the coming age, the age of final redemption. His hope of the consummation of God's saving purpose, his assurance that God would complete what he had begun, was powerfully confirmed by this experience of vital power. The great promises of the Messianic epoch were actually beginning to take shape. The Spirit was God's pledge of coming blessedness.2 It was the first-fruits of the splendid harvest which awaited believers.3 By its agency the love of God was shed abroad in men's hearts, as Paul's own experience could testify. Its presence, as known and felt, was the evidence that its possessors were ' children ' of God.4 For the Spirit dis closed to the receptive nature a new view of God. It taught men to cry ' Abba, Father.' 5 In this experience Paul found a wonderful corroboration of his conviction of Christ as working through the Spirit. For it was the Spirit of God's Son which had been sent forth into their hearts.6 In a later section we must investigate the relation of the Spirit to the moral hfe of the Christian. Meanwhile it ought to be noted that Paul's personal experience exercised an epoch-making influence upon the conception of the Spirit in the early Church. We can easily gather, not only from Acts, but from Paul's own Epistles, that 1 See p. 37, supra. ! 2 Cor. i. 22. ' Rom. viii. 23. « Rom. viii. 16 ' Rom. viii. 15. ¦ Gal. iv. 6. ch. rv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 91 the consciousness of the Spirit was associated with abnormal manifestations, such as ' speaking with tongues,' ' prophe sying^ etc. There was grave danger lest the spiritual enthusiasm of the Christian community should evaporate in mere fitful and unprofitable emotion. Paul recognised the peril. With a firm grasp of the true value of equip ment with the Spirit, he saw the necessity of self -control and discipline in giving play to this wonderful energy. From him the immature communities learnt once for all that the genuine action of the Spirit is not spasmodic or eccentric : that it is a power for worthy living. For those who assimilated the apostle's teaching, the Spirit became the normal principle of Christian life and conduct. (f) The New Attitude to God A recent investigator of Paulinism has justly said that for Paul God was first and chiefly the Father of Jesus Christ. The statement reveals at a glance the revolution accomplished in his rehgious thought and experience. The significance of that revolution may be expressed by a suggestive modern phrase, ' the Christlikeness of God.' From the day of his conversion onwards, Paul interpreted the nature and purpose of God not from the traditional beliefs of Judaism, but exclusively in the hght of the revelation of Christ to his soul. His contact with Christ was not an accident, nor was it the fulfilment of a domi nating resolution. It was Divine from beginning to end. God was behind it : God was in the heart of it. It was intended to alter the entire basis of his rehgious life. The first thing which impressed him was that he had been made the object of an amazing and wholly undeserved compassion. As he hurried on in a career whose raison d'itre turned out to be a senseless defiance of the Divine purpose, the unspeakable mercy of God had singled him out, had checked his folly, and illumined his soul with a heavenly light. This unmerited Divine tenderness is always before his mind, and becomes one of his watch- 92 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [.pt. i. words in the term ' grace,' a term which gets its colour from the crisis of his conversion. It is not mere pity : that seems too casual an idea to the apostle. Grace is something positive, basal, essential to the very character of God. It is Christ who has shown what it means. Often, indeed, the grace of God implies primarily for Paul the gift of His Son Jesus Christ, and since this supreme gift, in certain most important aspects, cannot be separated from that of the Spirit, grace frequently suggests that special working of the Divine energy. But, in the first instance, Paul from the nature of the case was profoundly influenced by the concrete form, if we may so say, in which the grace of God was expressed. Christ was the Revealer of this con tent of the Divine nature. As the result of the revelation, Paul never ceases to wonder at the incomparable Divine generosity. Thus the very circumstances of his conversion brought into bold relief the fatherly character of God. Now we need not suppose that Paul realised within a few days all that was involved in this transformation of his re ligious hfe. And yet the completeness of the transformation must have led a mind like his almost at once to seek for an adjustment between the new experiences which flooded his soul. Hence, the conception of Jesus, incarnate and crucified, as God's unspeakable gift for the sake of sinners, must have soon taken a regulative place in his efforts to understand his wonderful new attitude to God. The very revelation of Christ to him as the Chosen of God, with all the light he could shed upon it from what he had already learnt of Christ's life and activity and gospel, would in itself almost immediately lay the foundation of his new relation ship to God. Almost immediately he would become aware that the old suspicion and fear of God as task-master and judge had vanished, and an amazing vision of His heart, which seemed too good to be true, had begun to flash upon his soul. And then as he meditated upon the cross and all that led up to it, he reached the profound conclusion that ' God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself.' 1 1 ? Cor. v- in, ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 93 The fact that the issue of the crisis was a sense of obliga tion to proclaim the message of Jesus to the heathen is itself a comment on the meaning of the experience for Paul. It was a surprise to discover the God whom Jesus revealed. For instead of being struck down with terror by the entrance into his life of a power which he felt to be distinct from himself, his soul was filled with love and joy and hope. He had found that it was the good pleasure of God to act on different lines from those which he had all along taken for granted. He had striven to establish a good record in the eyes of the All-holy, striven with painful eagerness although with no permanent satisfaction. And now, in the life which burst upon him, he realised that he had misunderstood the God he was yearning to please. God's favour was not to be purchased by straining efforts. Christ, crucified and risen, crucified for sheer love to men, risen because that love was Divine love, the very index of the heart of God — the Christ who had become manifest to him, was the demon stration that God's joy was to give rather than to receive. And the giving was infinitely lavish. All that he had learnt of Christ convinced him that God did not wait for men to approach Him, but that He anticipated them in the wonder of His grace. This had been Paul's own experience. God had followed him with the subtle influences of His mercy, had in Christ laid hold of him and mastered him. All that was necessary on his part was to surrender to that loving grasp. To the trusting soul which took God as He revealed Himself, laying aside its prejudices however deep- rooted and long-standing, to the surrendered hfe God made over the wealth of His priceless gifts. This fundamental aspect of the new attitude to God is what Paul calls Faith. It lies at the heart of his conversion. In that hour he showed himself willing to be taken captive by the Divine hand. His receptivity to the influences which radiated from the risen Lord became for him, as he was well aware, the channel of new hfe. In the history of Old Testament rehgion, faith had meant the behef that God would fulfil His promises to His people. 94 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. That, of course, was an important factor in religious life, and had achieved valuable results. Later, and especially in Hellenistic Judaism, it denoted firm conviction as to the actual existence of invisible things, above all of God Himself. Both these meanings are to be found in the Pauline Epistles, but they are completely overshadowed by the profound expansion of significance which the idea of faith undergoes in Paul's hands. For him it is primarily the complete response of the soul to the good news of God embodied in Christ. That no doubt includes the great acts in which Christ has accomplished the Father's purpose, His incarnation, His redeeming death, His resurrection and exaltation as Saviour. But even in these instances it does not merely signify assent to the truth that such events have happened. It involves sympathy with their redemptive value and acceptance of the purpose of God as disclosed by them. But for Paul it chiefly describes a relation between one person and another, the grateful and reverent sub mission of the entire inner nature to the Divine heart whose love appeals to men in Jesus Christ. This relation constitutes the basis of all those descriptions of the dealings of God with the soul which lead to the new attitude on which Paul has so joyously entered. We are sometimes repelled by the technical ring of such terms as justification, adoption, righteousness. When we try to analyse their precise meaning, we discover certain formal elements in them, due primarily to Paul's environment. But, as a matter of fact, they are all attempts from differing angles of vision to set forth the wonderful approach to God of which Paul has become conscious. He knows himself to be on a wholly new footing with the Almighty. Probably the description of widest range which he can give of it is Sonship. He does not use this word. He calls the new status Adoption. The atmosphere of the term comes from his own experience. Men who have wandered far from God, and have been guilty of all manner of sin and disobedience, have utterly forfeited their right to any place in His family, that family for which they were destined in ch. iv.] INFLUENCE OF ST. PAUL'S CONVERSION 95 creation. But God, in that infinite grace of His which has become manifest in Jesus Christ, deliberately invites them to become His children. He adopts them, makes them His children out of sheer goodness, deals with them as children, lavishes on them all the love that a father can bestow. This is not theory. Paul is sure that it has happened in his own experience. That unspeakable Divine love of which Christ is the pledge has made him heartily ashamed of his sin. He has given himself to a new bondage, the bondage of Jesus Christ, and that means peace with God. The old uncertainty and fear have become impossible. He has grasped the full significance of the father's answer in the Parable of the Lost Son : ' Son, thou art always with me, and all that I have is thine.' That is the focus of the message of Jesus Christ. It is also the clue to Paul's new attitude towards God. Quite plainly such a standpoint involves the doom of Legahsm. There is no idea of bargain in such a relation ship. There is no suggestion of a quid pro quo. Paul has simply taken the gift held out to him in Jesus Christ, the gift of salvation. Hence the thought of earning some reward from God loses all relevance. There is no compari son between man's obedience and God's unspeakable gift. Thus the apostle can say from the depth of his heart : ' Christ is the end of the law to every one who believes.' By this new attitude to God we are warned against the notion that the centre of gravity in Paul's rehgion was eschatology. We must give all due emphasis to the stress he layB on the consummation of the Kingdom of God. We must estimate at its full value the importance he attached to that life in a perfected spiritual organism which was to begin with the Second Advent. We must recognise the place he assigned to a final verdict of God at the Judgment, the last word on the destiny of individuals. We must endeavour to appreciate his yearning to get rid of the hampering influence of existence in the flesh. But while, in one or two instances, Paul's sensitive conscience seems to tremble before the final issues of hfe, the very core 96 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. of his rehgious position is the certainty that he has already been received into the realm of God's grace. He is already an heir of God. He possesses the Spirit, which is the pledge and foretaste of the heritage of blessedness awaiting him. And, after all, this is the most important fact of bis rehgion. He can say with unwavering conviction : ' We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, who are the called according to his purpose. . . . We are more than conquerors through him that loved us." l ¦ Bom. viii. 28, 37. ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 97 CHAPTER V ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION (a) The Historical Jesus In the famous passage in which he speaks of his conversion Paul firmly emphasises the independence of his Gospel and his apostolic vocation. The shaping of his Christian convictions he ascribes directly to the influence of the risen Christ with whom he had been brought in contact.1 It is impossible to regard any vital element in his Christian consciousness as coming to him at second-hand. And we have tried to show in the preceding section that his experi ence on the Damascus road was decisive for the regulative features of his new position. But we must not exaggerate Paul's assertions in Gal. i. For these are made in a con troversy which is for the apostle a matter of life or death. So he does not pause to qualify them. It has already been pointed out that Paul the persecutor and champion of the Pharisaic ideal must have formed certain definite impressions of the sect he was seeking to extirpate, and that he cannot have ignored the significance of Jesus. The extent of his knowledge must remain a matter of conjecture, but the fact that he identified the living Person who appeared to him with Jesus of Nazareth is sufficient proof of the influence exerted on his mind by the information he had received regarding the alleged Messiah. But it is of much greater moment to remember that immediately after the supreme crisis Paul associated himself with the Christian community. There is no reason to doubt the report in Acts that he became intimate in : Gal. i. 1, 11, 12. G 98 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. Damascus with a Cliristian disciple named Ananias,1 and he must speedily have got into touch with the other believers in Christ who were to be found in that region. His own evidence that he was a marked man in Damascus 2 corroborates the vague information of Acts as to his bold proclamation of the Gospel,3 and warns us against taking too literally the bare statements of Galatians referred to above. Even from Gal. ii. 1 it is obvious that Paul had been for a considerable time a fellow-worker with Barna bas, and the passage in Acts which mentions their early intimacy 4 has often been insufficiently appreciated. Paul himself describes a journey to Jerusalem from Damascus, which he dates apparently three years after his conversion, ' to interview Peter.' 4 An unprejudiced reader can have little doubt that this visit is identical with the sojourn at Jerusalem narrated in Acts ix. 28, 29 : only that Luke wishes to put as favourable a construction as possible on the relations of the new convert to the Christians of the Mother- Church, and leaves the impression that the visit was con siderably longer than Paul's own statement permits us to believe, and of a much more public character. Paul singles out Peter and James as the apostles whom he met. In view of later events that is suggestive. At every stage in his career, Paul was in immediate contact with those who had known Jesus and their friends or converts. Hence it was inevitable that from the outset of his Christian course he should be familiar with all that was essential in the tradition of the Church. This being so, his fundamental positions as a Christian would be profoundly affected by the information which came to him regarding the fife and teaching of the Lord, and the attitude towards that hfe and teaching which he found in the primitive community. Various misconcep tions have arisen at this point. It is true that soon after Paul's mission-work among Gentiles began to assume large proportions, he was brought into sharp conflict with the 1 Acts ix. 10 ff. * 2 Cor. xi. 32 f. * Acts ix. 22-25. * ix. 27. « Gal. i. 18. ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 99 older sections of the Church as to the obligation on Gentile converts to keep the Mosaic Law. From the emotion revealed by the broken sentences which open Gal. ii., it is clear that he was anxious, at least for a time, about the decision of the Jerusalem apostles. And even after they had shown their genuine Christian insight by refusing to lay down a rigid rule of compliance, and by giving Paul a free hand for his own special sphere, representatives of the Mother-Church continued to dog his steps and to urge on his converts that he was preaching a mutilated Gospel. But this special aspect of the situation in no way justifies the idea that Paul occupied a different Christian position from that of the primitive Church; As we have seen, there is no suggestion that they were at variance on the supreme question of Christology.1 Jiilicher has cogently pointed out the all-important matters of agreement between Paul and so unassailable a witness to the standpoint of primitive Christianity as the Gospel of Matthew.2 They were at one as to Christ's resurrection and exaltation, His universal Lordship, His relation as Son to the Father. Both alike acknowledged His Messianic dignity and His sinlessness. Indeed Paul himself makes direct reference to his indebted ness to those who were in Christ before him, when he declares to the Corinthians : ' I handed on to you first of all that which I myself received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.' 3 But further, the notion of Paul's isolated position is deduced from his alleged indifference to the earthly career of Jesus. The paucity of references to Jesus' teaching and activity is insisted on as a proof that Paul was not interested in the historical person : that his attention was absorbed by the exalted Lord. Now it is plain that he could never completely adopt the attitude of those who 1 See, e.g., Wernle.. Einfithrung, p. 177. * Pauius u. Jesus, p. 30. 1 Cor. xv. 3-fi. 100 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. had companied with Jesus. He did not feel the necessity of such a course, for he was deeply conscious of his own special vocation, and believed that, in the Divine wisdom and grace, he had been prepared for his task by the most fitting type of discipline. Moreover, the nature of his individuality did not lend itself to be the external reflection even of so solitary and incomparable an ideal as that embodied in the life of Jesus. What he assimilated of His precepts and example would inevitably be woven into the very texture of his Christian character and be manifested through the mirror of his marked personafity. But apart from such psychological considerations, the aim of Paul's correspondence must be kept in view if we are to avoid hasty inferences regarding the place which it gives to the life and teaching of Jesus. These letters were never intended to be missionary addresses. In every instance the apostle writes to men and women who were already behevers in Christ, and who had received at least some training within the Christian community. His purpose almost invariably is to warn against perils to which he knows his readers are exposed, to encourage in circum stances of trial and temptation, or to give practical guidance on problems of Church life which had been referred to him by the community in question. It is surely obvious that he will take for granted a more or less accurate acquaintance on their part with the sahent features of Jesus' character and history. No more reckless assertion could be made than that His life on earth was for Paul an unimportant episode. As Johannes Weiss sugges tively puts it, ' the fundamental presupposition of Paul's Gospel is that Christ accomphshed his work of redemption in the flesh.' x It is scarcely necessary to quote passages. In Paul's view the cross is the crowning-point of that humiliation which was involved in the earthly life of Jesus.2 An outstanding element in his description of the Son of God is ' that he was born of David's seed by natural descent.' When he explains the redemption which brings 1 Das Urchristentiim, p. 167. • Phii. ii. 7, 8, ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 101 sonship, he emphasises the fact that the Redeemer was born of a woman, born under the Law.1 At a later point we shall have occasion to examine the material in some detail. Meanwhile a further misconception which bears on our present subject must not be overlooked. It has been frequently asserted in -ecent theological hterature that between Paul and Jesu. there is a chasm which cannot be bridged. Jesus is solely concerned with the claims of the moral imperative which He identifies with the will of the Father in heaven. Paul assigns central importance to a scheme of redemptive facts or events which must be accepted with a view to salvation. From the course of the preceding discussion it is suffi ciently clear that this is an altogether misleading de scription of Paul's position. But it does take account of a truth which is vital for any comparison between Paul and Jesus. The comparison, to put it in a sentence, cannot be made on equal terms. We are ignoring the real character of the situation when we say : ' Such and such was the teaching of Jesus : but this is the teaching of Paul.' We forget that the supreme factor in Paul's religious experience was the Person of Jesus Himself in every stage through which He passed from His entrance into the world to His final exaltation. Therefore it is irrelevant to compare their points of view. Jesus, as all His followers and Paul himself were convinced, stood in a relation to God which no one else could share. His contact with His Father knew no barrier. Paul as a Christian found God in Jesus Christ. He was never conscious that the medium distorted his vision. Its inestimable worth was bound up with the love of Him who humbled Himself and became obedient even unto death. We must carefully examine his view of the mediation. But let us remember that apart from it Paul would not have come to understand God at all. Accordingly it would be erroneous to estimate Paul's relation to the historical Jesus from a comparison of the form of their teaching. But it is not difficult to show that ' Oal. iv. 4. 102 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. h at every turn Paul, like the primitive Church, presupposes the hfe and doctrine and influence of Jesus. How, it may be asked, would such a background be likely to appear in occasional writings like the Pauline Epistles ? We should expect no more than incidental references. And the more spontaneously these appear, the more evidently do they presuppose a close and accurate acquaintance of Paul with the tradition of Jesus. The readiness with which he can use his material appears throughout his writings. When the Corinthians, in their perplexity about the resurrection, put definite questions to him on the matter, he takes his stand on the resurrection of Christ Himself, and, without constraint, enumerates various appearances of His to individual disciples and to groups of believers.1 In dealing with abuses connected with the observance of the Lord's Supper at Corinth, of which news had reached him, he gives an account of Jesus' farewell meal with His disciples, so vivid and so graphic as to show his thorough acquaintance with the details.2 In reply to the difficulties raised about marriage by persons of ascetic tendencies in the Corinthian Church, he directly appeals to the Master's teaching : ' For married people these are my instructions (and they are the Lord's, not mine). A wife is not to separate from her husband — if she has separated, she must either remain single or be reconciled to him — and a husband must not put away his wife.' And then he proceeds : ' To other people I would say (not the Lord) : if any brother has a wife who is not a behever, and if she consents to hve with him, he must not put her away ; and if any wife has a husband who is not a believer, and if he consents to five with her, she must not put her husband away.' 3 This instance is extraordinarily instructive for our purpose. Where the disciples have preserved a ruling of Jesus on any point of perplexity, that ruling is necessarily decisive. In the present instance Paul can cite the opinion of Jesus on divorce, which has been handed down to us in the Synoptic 1 1 Cor. xv. 3-8. I l Cor. xi. 23 ff. • 1 Cor. vii. 10-13 (M.). ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 103 tradition.1 But the question of mixed marriages, which was bound to create difficulties in a heathen-Christian community like that at Corinth, had never been before Jesus. So the apostle deals with it on his own responsibility, taking care to make plain that he has not the Master's authority for his advice. The passage clearly indicates Paul's attitude towards and dependence on the teaching of Jesus. A further interesting example occurs in a section of 1 Corinthians in which the apostle, who has been urging the stronger-minded Christians to respect the scruples of the weak and to deny themselves, seeks to show that he himself has never asserted his ' rights ' in his dealings with the Corinthian community. One example of his self- renunciation is afforded by his refusal to accept support from them. ' Do you not know that as men who perform temple-rites get their food from the temple, and as attend ants at the altar get their share of the sacrifices, so the Lord's instructions were that those who proclaim the gospel are to get their living by the gospel ? ' 2 Here, as a matter of course, he points out Jesus' counsel on the subject, which he accepts, and expects his readers to accept, as authoritative. It will be observed that all the illus trations we have given are taken from the First Epistle to the Corinthians. The fact is suggestive, for this happens to be the only letter in which a number of practical ques tions affecting the hfe and organisation of the Church were dealt with by Paul at the request of his converts. If more of such inquiries had been preserved in documents (for the situation must have been common), it is almost certain that we should have found numerous additional references to definite instructions of Jesus. We do not propose to collect evidence for Paul's know ledge of details in the career of Jesus. A meagre amount is available in the existing sources, and if any samples of the apostle's instruction of converts had been handed 1 Mark x. 1-12, with parallels. It is, of course, impossible to say whether Paul was here dependent on written documents or oral tradition, » 1 Cor. ix, 13, 14 (M.J. 104 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. l down, more would undoubtedly have been forthcoming. But in this connection it may be frankly admitted that in Paul's mind all else in Jesus' earthly experience was over shadowed by His entrance into humanity, His self-sacrific ing death on the cross, and His resurrection to glory and triumph. Whatever emphasis he may have laid on the proof of Jesus' love and compassion afforded by deeds of which he was informed, nothing could be compared with the knowledge that ' while we were yet sinners, Christ died for the ungodly.' However often he may have alluded to the Divine power energising in Jesus, its supreme ex pression was His victory over death and the grave. But before we examine more carefully the influence of Jesus' teaching, with which he became acquainted in the Christian community, upon the rehgious thought of Paul, it is worth while to note the impression left on his mind by what he learnt of the Master's character. Here again, as might be expected, we have to do with incidental allusions and not with elaborate references. But the very fact that they are introduced so artlessly reveals Paul's intimacy with the historical tradition. When pleading for a fair judgment of his own conduct, which had been maligned by opponents within the Christian Church, he appeals to the Corinthians ' by the gentleness and reason ableness of Christ.' x In writing to his much -loved con verts at Philippi, he calls God to witness that he yearns for them all ' with the affection of Christ Jesus himself.' 2 When exhorting the strong to bear the burdens of the weak, he reminds them that ' Christ never pleased himself, but, as it is written, the reproaches of those who denoimced thee fell upon me,' the Old Testament quotation showing that he had in mind the scorn and abuse which the Master had to bear in accomplishing His mission.3 It is quite probable that when, in setting before the Corinthian Christians the duty of a liberal contribution to the col lection organised for the poorer brethren in Jerusalem, he speaks of ' the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, who, ' 2 Cor. x. 1. * phil- j_ 8 {M)_ , Rom ^ 3 cu. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 105 though he was rich, yet for your sakes became poor,' x he is thinking of Jesus' awtual poverty in His earthly exist ence. Of special interest are the indications that Paul portrayed the character of Jesus to his converts as the ideal for imitation. In the passages in question he often associates himself with his Lord, as supplying the standard of ethical hfe. This is simply an example of his pastoral skill and insight. For it is the unanimous testimony of missionaries that their own lives have to serve in the first instance as a pattern for immature heathen converts. In his earhest letters he gives thanks that his readers ' began to copy us and the Lord.' 2 In 1 Corinthians, which we have so often cited, he entreats them : ' Copy me, as I copied Christ.' 3 And when he warns Christians in Asia against yielding to pagan vices, he declares : ' That is not how you have understood the meaning of Christ, for it is Christ whom you have been taught, it is in Christ that you have been instructed, the real Christ who is in Jesus.' 4 References of such a kind plainly imply that the man who made them not only had an intimate knowledge of the character and conduct of the historical Jesus, but laid the prof oundest emphasis upon them in the discharge of his work as a missionary. But we must further observe that the fundamental note of Jesus' teaching, the revelation of the Fatherhood of God, dominates Paul's rehgious conceptions from beginning to end. This can be made clear in a variety of directions. We may be surprised that the apostle has not given a larger place to the idea of the Kingdom of God, on which Jesus laid so much emphasis. There are, of course, various instances of its occurrence in his Epistles, and these reveal the same shades of meaning as those which appear in the Synoptic Gospels. In some passages, as, e.g., 1 Thess. ii. 12, 1 Cor. xv. 24, etc., the term ' kingdom ' is essentially eschatological. Others, as, e.g., 1 Cor. iv. 20, Col. i. 13, as plainly presuppose that the Kingdom has already been 1 2 Cor. viii. 9. * 1 Thess. i. 6. » 1 Cor. xi. 1 (M.). « Eph. iv. 20, 21 (M.). 106 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. inaugurated, and exists as a power in the world. But the very fact that the Kingdom-idea has fallen into the back ground in Paul's mind only shows the more conclusively that he has penetrated behind the form to the inner substance of Jesus' thought. For we are not unduly pressing the data when we assert that for Paul the con ception of the Family of God, as established and knit together in Christ, takes the place of the Kingdom.1 To make good this position, evidence might be adduced from the whole range of Paul's writings. A few typical instances will suffice. No statement more powerfully sums up Paul's notion of the Christian life than that which forms the climax of one of his greatest arguments in Galatians : ' You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.' 2 The rich significance of these words is disclosed in a later sentence of the paragraph : ' When the fulness of the time came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption. Now because you are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father. So that you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then also an heir through God.' 3 Practically everything of moment in Paul's experience of rehgion is here expressed — the Incarnation, the Redemption in Christ, the gift of the Spirit, the crucial relation to God of sonship, the right to the completed inheritance. And it is plain that the terms in which he formulates his experience go back to the teach ing of Jesus. It was He who, out of the depth of His own unique consciousness, disclosed the high truth that men are called to be sons of God, not in abstract name, but in the reality of a personal relationship. His consciousness of Sonship, although solitary, sets the norm for those whom He is not ashamed to call His brethren. Thus, His redemp tion of men from their false relation to God, the relation of 1 We do not here refer to the parallel conception of the Body of Christ, which will be examined in the next chapter. » Gal. iii. 26. ¦ QBi, jv, 4.7, ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 107 guilty fear, and the bestowal of that Spirit which is His own life-principle, introduce them into what Paul calls 'the hberty of the glory of the children of God.' In Christ Jesus they are constituted God's sons. The intimate affinity of Paul with Jesus is equally manifest in what he teaches concerning the Family-spirit. When Jesus was asked, ' Which is the supreme of all the commandments ? ' He rephed : ' The chief is : Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord, and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind and all thy might : the second is this : Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' l It is needless to recall Paul's wonderful eulogy of love in 1 Cor. xiii., a passage in which the matchless grace of the thought is almost equalled by the rhythmical beauty of the language. His estimate, as there unfolded, may well have been derived, as some eminent scholars have suggested, from the life and character of Jesus Himself. However this may be, Paul makes plain by the language which he employs that he stands in the direct succession of Jesus. In Rom. xiii. 8 ff., when formulating various Christian duties, he makes this most suggestive statement : ' Be in debt to no man apart from the debt of love one to another. He who loves his fellow-man has fulfilled the law. Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not covet — these and any other commands are summed up in the single word, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love never wrongs a neighbour : therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.' 2 That this is no isolated reference becomes plain from Gal. v. 14 : ' The whole law is fulfilled in one command, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' The keynote of Paul's ethical thought, which cannot be dissociated from the outcome of his rehgious faith, he has caught once for all from the teaching of Jesus. • Mark xii. 29-31. ' Chiefly M. 108 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. (b) Eschatological Conceptions A careful reader of the Pauline Epistles must be im pressed by the prominence given by the apostle to the element of Hope. We have already exemplified this in the section on the Messiah in the preceding chapter. The very existence of a Messianic ideal involved such a feature. And it belonged, of course, to the essence of Paul's pre- Christian consciousness. Now we have seen how com pletely his conception of Messiah was altered by his experi ence of the risen Jesus. In the strict sense, the ardent expectation of those who waited for the Kingdom of God was already in process of being realised. Phenomena were visible which testified to the power of the unseen world. Unique gifts and graces in the Christian community were the evidence of a new order. Fellowship with the living Christ lifted the soul out of the present. Even now Christians were in possession of redemption.1 This redemption was different from the earher hope of national dehverance. It was embodied in the forgiveness of sins, and had no political bearings at all. In one aspect of it, nothing more satisfying could be conceived. Yet, as has been noted, Paul was keenly ahve to the hampering con ditions inseparable from bodily life and the evils imposed by the existing constitution of the world. Redemption will only be complete when the present organism of flesh and blood shall be exchanged for the spiritual organism, which will be a perfectly adequate expression of the renewed hfe of the Christian : when this age, which is cursed with futihty and death, shall give place to that which is to come, the epoch of ' glory,' in which men shall be transformed into the very image of God. It is evident that Paul has developed these ideas from a deep-rooted personal instinct. But he has also preserved a large amount of the eschatological material of Judaism. Here again we may explain the fact by saying that he remained true to his Jewish inheritance. But how are we to reconcile that with his altered con- ' Col, i. 14, ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 109 ception of Messiah ? How are we to account for the extra ordinary prominence he assigns to the Parousia, the Second Advent of Christ, with all its eschatological accompani ments ? Has he here elaborated on apocalyptic lines the contents of his Damascus experience ? Or is he attempting to combine two incongruous ideas, the traditional machinery of Jewish eschatology with the spiritualised Messianic doc trine involved in his own Christian view of Messiah ? The clue to his procedure is at least partly to be found in the attitude of the early Church. The New Testament writings, almost without exception, reveal an eager longing for the consummation of God's redeeming purpose, which will coincide with the return of Christ. It is plain, there fore, that primitive Christianity was possessed by an overpowering eschatological enthusiasm. The Apocalypse, which is a typical product of its age, closes with the words : ' He who bears this testimony says, Even so : I am coming very soon. Amen, Lord Jesus, come ! ' (M.). The ejaculation corresponds to the final salutation of so completely different a document as Paul's first letter to the Corinthians : ' If any one has no love for the Lord, God's curse be upon him. Maran atha ! ' (' Lord come ! ') In what is probably the latest book of the New Testament, the writer is chiefly concerned with meeting the scoffing reproach hurled at Christians : ' Where is his promised advent ? Since the day our fathers fell asleep, things remain exactly as they were from the beginning of creation.' x The return of Christ introduces the resur rection and the judgment. Sometimes the final con summation is preceded by a limited rule of Christ on earth, during which all opposing forces are subdued. The Synoptic Gospels indicate that we must allow for something more than the traditions of Jewish Messianism in attempting to account for this constant strain in the religion of the primitive Church. It is extremely difficult to determine with any accuracy the eschatological teaching of Jesus. A comparison of parallel passages shows the 1 S Pet. iii. 4 (M.). 110 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. t effect of varying traditions. Not only so. In an atmo sphere of such eager expectation of the Parousia as that in which the report of Jesus' words was handed down, His sayings were exposed to modifications likely to stamp them with eschatological features.1 But after due allow ance has been made for such influences, there remains a residuum of evidence which cannot be explained away. Here we can only touch the subject. Various utterances of Jesus appear to imply that He expected the Kingdom of God to be consummated within a comparatively short period. More than once He associates this consummation ¦with His own return in glory. When, however, we consider that the Gospel which He brought laid supreme emphasis on the immediate recognition of the love of the Father and its present enjoyment by His children, it is obvious that questions of chronology cannot be of primary importance for Jesus' conception of the Kingdom. So that His predic tion of its immediacy as an eschatological magnitude may simply express the prophetic certainty that the cause of God must be victorious. Whatever be the precise explana tion of this aspect of His teaching, it was natural that its literal form should above all else appeal to men and women who had been taught to look forward to a definite moment in history at which God should intervene, either directly, or through His Vicegerent, the Messiah. Paul found this expectation dominant in the Christian community when he entered it. He was profoundly impressed by it, as we can gather from such passages as 1 Thess. iv. 13 — v. II ; 1 Cor. xv. 20-28; Rom. xiii. 11-13. He can describe the change through which his heathen converts have passed as a turn ing to God from idols, ' to serve a living and true God, and to wait for the coming of his Son from heaven— the Son whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who rescued us from the wrath to come.' 2 And he uses the expectation in his letters as a powerful motive to self -discipline and watchful- 1 See on the whole subject the admirable discussion in Moffatt's Theology of the Gospels, pp. 41-84. 2 1 Thess. i. 9, 10 (chiefly M.). oh. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 111 ness of life. It is of interest to note that in his eschato logical teaching he constantly reflects not only the thought but also the language of Jesus. (c) The Era of the Spirit No conception, as we have discovered, was more central for Paul than that of the Spirit. This we endeavoured to trace, primarily, to his conversion-experience. The supreme crisis of his hfe was always identified by the apostle with a new consciousness of spiritual power. That power he could only ascribe to the risen Lord who had revealed Himself. Thenceforward, possession of this high endowment was regarded by Paul as the main criterion of the Christian life. A remarkable example of his position is found in 1 Cor. xii. 3, where, in distinguishing between genuine and spurious spiritual manifestations, he declares : ' No man can say, Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit,' He admits, as this passage shows, the existence of spiri tual phenomena which are worthless and perilous. These were visible in heathen communities, and, so far as their external form was concerned, might easily be confounded with those of the Christian society. The crucial difference lay in the fact that the Holy Spirit was directly associated with Christ. He is described as ' the Spirit of God's Son,' or ' the Spirit of Christ.' ' Where the Spirit of the Lord is,' Paul asserts, ' there is freedom.' x Obviously then, in his judgment, the Spirit is above all else the witness to the power and presence of the living Christ and all that that involves. We cannot tell how early in his Christian career Paul came to formulate his conception of the Spirit along the lines which are discernible in the Epistles. But we know that when he entered the Christian Church he was con fronted with experiences similar to his own, which were grouped together under the category of the Spirit. The opening chapters of Acts are of priceless value as 1 2 Cor. iii. 17, 112 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. revealing the tone and feeling of early Christianity. ' Day after day,' we are told, ' they resorted with one accord to the temple and broke bread together in their own homes : they ate with a glad and simple heart, praising God and looked on with favour by all the people.' 2 The truth fulness of the picture is corroborated throughout the New Testament. Ahke in Paul and other writers we overhear the same note of exhilaration and joy.2 More than once the temper of these primitive believers is described by the term irapprja-ia, glad, courageous self-expression. This excites the amazement of the Jewish authorities in the case of Peter and John .3 The writer of Acts definitely associates it with the Spirit : ' When they had prayed, the place where they were met was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak the word of God with glad fearlessness.' 4 The connection of this attitude with the Spirit belongs, no doubt, to the primitive thought of the Church. For the early traditions, incorporated in Acts, are saturated with the conception of the Spirit. The chief emphasis, indeed, is laid upon abnormal phenomena. Again and again in Acts, speaking with ' tongues ' is singled out as typical of the Spirit's operation in the life of believers.8 Paul's discussion of spiritual gifts, in reply to the question addressed to him on that subject by the Christians at Corinth, shows the firmly estabhshed place this endowment held in the esteem of the community.6 Most scholars are now disposed to identify this * glossolalia ' with a phenomenon which belongs to all outbursts of spiritual enthusiasm. In such times of nervous tension, the emotional hfe bursts through its ordinary barriers, and men and women break forth into ejaculations of praise and prayer, often quite unintelhgible to their neighbours, but serving as an outlet for their pent-up feeling. Paul clearly indicates the restraints which ought to be placed upon such manifestations. And, as we have seen, his profound 1 Acts ii. 46 (M.). Cf. iv. 33, v. 41. » Cf. Phil. iv. 4 ; 1 Pet. ii. 9 ; Jas. i. 2. » Acts iv. 13. « Acts iv. 31. • Acts ii. 4, x. 46, xix. 6. • 1 Cor. xiv. ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 113 influence probably did more than anything else to keep them under control, and to turn this exuberance of emotional vitality into the channels of moral action. But already in the early Church the more wholesome con ception of the significance of the Spirit had begun to assert itself. Indeed from the beginning fearless pro clamation of the Gospel was traced to the power of the Spirit, just as definitely as gifts of healing or interpretations of truth or glossolaha.1 But naturally what was extra ordinary attracted special attention. Behind all lay the conviction that the Messianic Age had begun to dawn. Now already in the Old Testament the new era, so ardently longed for, was connected with a unique out pouring of Divine influences. In Isa. xi. 2, it is said of the Messianic King that ' the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.' Jeremiah speaks of the wonderful days to come in which God will put His law in the inward parts of His people, and write it in their hearts.2 Ezekiel has the same idea of the ' new spirit ' which is God's Spirit.3 First Enoch describes the Messiah very much in terms of Isa. xi. 2,4 and later, the Psalms of Solomon speak of the wisdom, righteousness, and might of God's Anointed as wrought by the Spirit.5 In Isa. xxxii. 15 the epoch of bhss is ushered in by the outpouring of the Spirit from on high. The early Christians, quoting the apocalyptic words of Joel,6 are convinced that all these forecasts have found their reahsation through the exalted Jesus. The pro nouncement of Peter in Acts ii. 32 f . gives the clue to the general behef : ' This Jesus God raised up, as we can all bear witness. Exalted then by God's right hand, and receiving from the Father the long-promised holy Spirit, he has poured on us what you now see and hear.' 7 This indissoluble association of the Spirit with Jesus had already 1 See Acts iv. 31 as above. l Jer. xxxi. 33. • Ezek. xxxvi. 26, 27. * 1 Enoch xlix. 3. * Pss. of Sol. xviii. 8. ' Joel ii. 28 ff. Cf. Acts ii. 16 ff. ' Chiefly M. 114 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. before Paul's time ensured that the conception should not degenerate into a mere external superstition. Enough probably has been said to indicate that Paul must have been under real obligations to the Christian community which he entered, in formulating both for his own mind and for his audiences in the mission-field a fruitful conception of the Spirit.1 Yet it is none the less clear that he worked out to its proper consummation the idea, which was apt to be lost in the midst of startling phenomena, that the Spirit, as the gift and pledge of Christ, was not an endowment for special occasions or special activities, but rather the life-principle of every trustful and loyal disciple. (d) The Death of Christ From the very dawn of his Christian career Paul was obhged to reflect upon the significance of the death of Jesus, the Messiah. In the next chapter we must carefully examine his interpretation of the facts. But, with a view to that investigation, it is of moment to ask : From what point of view was this crucial event regarded in the circle of primitive believers ? The pre-eminent position given to the story of the Passion in the Synoptic tradition bears witness to the absorbing interest which it created in the early Church. And in their work among their own fellow- countrymen the first preachers of the Gospel must neces sarily have endeavoured to explain the meaning of the cross to those who considered it as discrediting the claims of Jesus. When we turn to the early chapters of Acts, we find some illumination as to the direction which was being taken by Christian thought on the subject. It aocords with what 1 We have not discussed the question of Jesus' teaching on the Spirit. The data in the Synoptics are quite inadequate for the purposes Those in the Fourth Gospel are an interpretation which presupposes Paulinism. And yet the place given by the writer to the conception of the Spirit is more intelligible if some traditions of Jesus' teaching on the subject wore current hi the Church. Cf. Luke xxiv. 48, 49 ; Acts i. 4 f. ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 115 we might expect in the opening stages of reflection. The simplest point of view is that which regards the death of Jesus as a crime committed by the Jews, in ignorance of its full and awful import. ' I know, brethren,' says Peter, ' that you acted in ignorance, as did also your rulers.' 1 Stephen compares the murder of ' the Righteous One ' with the persecution and slaying of the prophets in earlier generations.2 But from the beginning their action is regarded as no mere accident, due to an outburst of human malice. It belongs to a deliberate and predetermined purpose of God. The Jews were only instruments to carry out His will, ' to do what thy hand and thy counsel had decreed to happen.' s Indeed, even when blaming their ignorance, Peter describes it as the means which God took to carry out that which He had announced long before by the mouth of the prophets.4 The Second Psalm is quoted as declaring that ' the kings of the earth rose up and the rulers gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ.' 5 Again and again in the earher section of Acts the for giveness of sins is more or less vaguely associated with the person of Jesus as crucified. Thus, immediately after he has pointed to the fulfilment of prophecy in the suffering of Christ, Peter urges upon his hearers repentance ' with a view to the blotting out of your sins.' 6 Having described Christ as ' the stone rejected by you builders ' (Psa. cxviii. 22), he asserts that ' in no other is there salvation.' 7 No better example of the position could be given than Acts v. 30, 31 (M.) : ' The God of our fathers raised Jesus whom you murdered by hanging him on a gibbet. God hfted him up to his right hand as our pioneer and saviour, in order to grant repentance and remission of sins to Israel.' In all these passages — and they are only a selection — there is no attempt to explain the relation of forgiveness to the death of Jesus. Yet the words in our last quotation which 1 Acts iii. 17. * Acts vii. 62. « Acts iv. 27, 28 ; ii. 2B. • Acts iii. 18. • Acts iv. 26. * Acts ih. 19. » Acta iv. 12. 116 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPlSTLES [pt. i. speak of ' hanging him on a gibbet,' and which are them selves cited from Deut. xxi. 22, undoubtedly suggest a particular drift of reflection. And it may be noted that the reference is found not only here, but also in Acts x. 39, Gal. iii. 13, and (probably) 1 Pet. ii. 24. The original passage describes the man who is ' hanged on a gibbet ' as ' accursed by God.' What can be the meaning of a curse lying upon One who was perfectly righteous ? We have seen that the idea of a suffering Messiah was read into the prophets by the early Christians. The suffering, the curse, must somehow be related to human sin. Now already in Judaism there were traces of the belief that the merit of an innocent man could atone for a guilty.1 This position at least was reached in the primitive Church, for Paul can say : ' First and foremost, I passed on to you what I had myself received, namely that Christ died for our sins, as the Scriptures had said.' 2 It is instructive to notice that on this crucial matter Paul appeals not to any saying of the Master but to the Old Testament as inter preted in the Church. If we ask what Scriptures were so expounded, Isaiah liii. will inevitably suggest itself. As soon as the earliest Christians began to explore the Old Testament for light on the stumbling-block of the cross, they were bound to be impressed by the extraordinary dehneation of the Servant of Jahweh in that chapter. There they read of one who was ' despised and rejected of men,' who ' was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities,' who ' was brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.' But of peculiar significance would be the declaration of ver. 10 : ' If he should make his soul an offering for sin, he should see his seed, he should prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord should prosper in his hand.' The idea of the sin-offering would illuminate the mystery of Dfeut. xxi. 22 f. The cross would receive a profound meaning in the hght of the prophetic word : ' The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us 1 i Maooab. xvii. 22. * 1 Cor. xv. 3 (M.). ch. v.] ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION 117 all ' (Isa. liii. 6). It might be precarious to infer a definite doctrine of the death of Christ in the early Church from, the fragmentary data at our disposal. The evidence suggests that it was interpreted now from one standpoint, now from another. But enough material has survived to reveal the germ of Paul's conception of Christ as the propitiation and sin-bearer. Indeed, a careful examination of Isa. liii. in the LXX discloses at various points the essential back ground of Paul's doctrinal construction. The Servant ' bears our sins ' (ras d/xap-rtas f)p,(iiv tpepei). He ' shall have many for his inheritance and shall share the spoil of the strong, because his life (^'Xv) was dehvered up (irapeSddt)) x unto death, and he was reckoned among the transgressors (avo/xots) and he bore (av-qveyKev) the sins of many, and was delivered up because of their transgressions.' We have observed that in recording the traditions which he had received in the Church regarding the death of Christ, Paul appeals to the authority of the Old Testament. Yet the Church had preserved sayings of the Lord which could at least find some place in the scheme of thought under review. In an incidental statement of the purpose of His mission, Jesus declared that He had come ' not to be served (SiaKovridrji-at) but to serve, and to give his life (^xvv) a ransom (Xvrpov) for many.' 2 It is difficult not to discern here the influence upon His rehgious thought of the Servant-passages. The same thing is true of His remark able utterance at the Last Supper : ' This is my blood of the covenant (or, * the new covenant in my blood,' so Luke and Paul) poured out for many.' 3 For in Isa. xlix. 8, 9 the Servant is described as ' given for a covenant of the people . . . that thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth : to them that are in darkness, Show yourselves.' 4 These, and other passages which might be quoted from the 1 Used by Paul in his central statements regarding the death of Christ : e.g. Bom. iv. 25, viii. 32 ; Gal. ii. 20 ; Eph. v. 2, 25. 1 Mark x. 45 and parallels. 1 Mark xiv. 24. * The best MSS. of the LXX have the ' covenant ' in verse 6 as well. 118 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. Gospels, indicate that Jesus' thoughts on the profoundest aspects of His own mission were moving among Old Testa ment forecasts and symbols, and there can be no doubt that the wonderful figure of the ' Servant ' exercised a unique influence upon His Messianic consciousness.1 i See a series of articles by the present writer on ' The Self -consciousness of Jesus and the Servant of the Lord,' in the Expository Times for 1908. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 119 CHAPTER Yt THE FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OP PAULINISM (a) In Christ In the preceding chapters an attempt has been made on the basis of the data furnished by the Epistles to set forth, first, the features characteristic of Paul's pre-Christian rehgious experience, secondly, those conceptions which were brought into the forefront by the transformation of that experience due to his conversion, and finally, the influences already dominant in the early Church which seem to have affected the apostle's rehgious thought. All these elements must have had normative value in the shaping of his fundamental positions. No man can shake off his past hke a worn-out garment. His ancestral heritage of ideas will assert itself, even when in principle he has discarded it. The symbolism in which the mind takes refuge has a strange fashion of surviving, after the things signified have been seen in a new hght. It is needless, in view of Chapter rv., to lay further emphasis on Paul's spiritual crisis. In each section of our present discussion its central significance becomes more and more clear. But we must not minimise the fact that Paul entered a society in which a theology had begun to take shape. When we recognise that that society was guided by original disciples of Jesus, it is plain that he could not afford to ignore interpretations of facts and experiences which were regarded by the large majority of Christians as authoritative. Keeping all these factors before us in their right proportions, we ought to be able to outline the fundamental positions of Paulinism. 120 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. l In taking as our starting-point Paul's famous descrip tion of his Christian status, we would endeavour to adhere to the genetic method which was vindicated in the opening chapter. We are least likely to err if we begin with that stratum in his rehgion in which Paul himself always finds his surest standing-ground, the immediate and unassailable reality of his personal relation to Christ. What, then, is the content of the phrase, ' in Christ,' which Paul loves to use when he desires to represent the profoundest aspect of his religious hfe ? We must not lay too much stress on the form of the expression, and yet we must not attempt to explain it away. The impression made upon Paul by the revelation of the living Lord was an impression of boundless love and grace. It is probable that in his pre-Christian days he had heard of Jesus' self-sacrificing devotion to the needy and the outcasts. But his personal experience was decisive. And when he found the clue to Christ's char acter and mission in the voluntary humiliation of the cross, the sense of a love inestimable by human standards over powered him. He was swept away in its current. This infinite love claimed him. And he yielded himself up to Christ as His willing slave. Henceforward his connection with Christ was the primary element in his rehgious life : ' What things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ : indeed I count anything as loss compared to the supreme value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have lost everything (I count it all the veriest refuse) in order to gain Christ.' x The consequence of ' gaining ' or ' knowing ' Christ he describes as being ' in Christ.' As the result of a searching investigation of the phrase, Deissmann 2 reaches the following conclusion : ' The formula iv Kpio-rtji constructed ... by Paul char acterises the relation of the Christian to Jesus Christ as an existence in the pneumatic Christ to be conceived locally. This thought, for which there is no analogy in any relation of man to man, we may clarify by means of the 1 Phil. iii. 7-8 (chiefly M.). * Die neuteatamentliche Formal ' in Chriato Jesu,' pp. 97, 98. ch. vi.l FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 121 analogy of the notion underlying the phrases iv ir«v/«ui and ev to! 9f(p, the notion of dwelling in a Pneuma-element which may be compared to the air. The question whether we have to take the local idea, which is the basis of the formula, in its proper sense or merely as a rhetorical meta phor, cannot be decided with certainty, yet the former alternative has a higher degree of probability. In any case, whether it is to be understood literally or metaphoric ally, the formula is the characteristic expression for the profoundest fellowship conceivable between the Christian and the living Christ.' The statement is iUuminating, even although we may not assent to all its positions. It is true that we cannot rule out the possibility that Paul conceived * spirit ' in a semi- physical sense, although there are no clear indications of this in the Epistles. And we must certainly correlate the formula ' in Christ ' with that which may be substituted for it, ' in the Spirit.' But it would be hazardous to press the ' local ' significance of the formula, as Deissmann is inclined to do. Indeed it seems highly probable that the usage is metaphorical, when we recollect that Paul describes the same personal relationship by saying : ' Christ hves in me.' x Here the element which might be compared to the air would be Paul's human nature, which is obviously out of the question. If it be observed that these interchange able phrases primarily denote the interaction of two wills, the will of Christ which dominates and inspires the inmost fife of the Christian, and the will of the Christian which submits to and glories in that sovereignty, suggestions of ' locahty ' seem irrelevant. Nor is a hteral interpreta tion necessary. Paul's Epistles abound in examples of metaphors equally daring. But we must not go to the other extreme, and thin down the apostle's conception. If any conviction was central for his religious life, it was that of communion with Christ. His most famous description of the experience occurs in the passage to which reference has been made 1 Gal. ii. 20. 122 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i above : ' I have been crucified with Christ, so it is no longer I that hve, but Christ lives in me : and the life which I now hve in the flesh, I live by faith, faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me.' x The same intimacy of relationship is expressed, almost incidentally, in 1 Cor. vi. 17 : 'He who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit [with him].' In Rom. vi. 5 he asserts that ' if we have grown into him [Christ] by a death like his, we shall grow into him by a resurrection like his.' 2 How much does this involve ? Does it mean that the fundamental element in Paul was a mystic absorption in Christ ? It has become fashionable to emphasise the mysticism of Paul. And if by ' mysticism ' we mean that contact between the human and the Divine which forms the core of the deepest religious experience, but which can only be felt as an immediate intuition of the highest reality and cannot be described in the language of psychology, the emphasis is thoroughly justified.3 Over and over again Paul bears witness to this unfathomable intimacy between himself and the exalted Christ and all that it means for his personal life, although he nowhere ottempts to analyse its significance. Thus, in Phil. iv. 13 he makes the triumphant confession : ' I can do all things in him that strengthens me.' And the same type of experience lies behind the uplifting assurance that came to him from Christ : ' My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is perfected in weakness.' 4 Even more. We may frankly admit that some of those visions to which he refers might be called mystical in a strict sense, notably his ' rapture ' to the third heaven, narrated with such emotion in 2 Cor. xii. But, as J. Weiss pointedly remarks, the fact that he mentions them in detail shows that they cannot have been frequent occurrences.6 Indeed there is no trace of the characteristically mystical idea of absorption in God or in Christ. Even in the famous passage quoted above, in which his language suggests that his own individu- 1 Gal. ii. 20. » M. "Up to a certain point all Christians are mystics ' (Bigg, Em. of St. Peter and St. Jude, p. viii). ' * 2 Cor. xii. 9. Das V rchristentum, p. 397. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 123 ality has been replaced by that of Christ, he guards against any interpretation which might be termed mystical in the technical sense by proceeding to describe his life as strictly personal, a life of faith in the Son of God. Here we touch the very foundation of Paul's rehgious experience. The appeal of the love and grace of Christ, of which he became conscious at his conversion, penetrated to his inmost being. It set in motion all the activities of his soul. And this response, which carried his whole nature with it, he calls Faith. We have already seen how much faith includes for Paul : how it takes into account the historical basis of the Gospel in the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus : how it interprets these in the light of the revelation made to him as an individual : how it is woven of love and adoration and trust and obedience. The relationship of faith does not imply for Paul the dis solving of the separate personalities involved, and the blending of them in one. Although he can speak of being ' in Christ,' yet he looks forward to being ' with Christ.' * Faith remains throughout the link which binds the 'bond-servant' (oorXos) to his 'Lord' (Kvpio ). The union is one of dependence, not absorption. But that does not derogate from its reahty and power. Rather does it prevent the relation from becoming mere contemplative ecstasy. It is the channel by which Divine resources are imparted. And the supreme Divine gift which is bestowed on faith is that of the Spirit.2 But in this connection the Spirit is scarcely distin guishable from Christ Himself. Paul's statement in Rom. viii. 9, 10 reveals his point of view : ' You are not in the flesh but in the Spirit if the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if any one have not the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to him. But if Christ be in you, the body indeed is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteous ness.' Here Christ and the Spirit are virtually synonymous. Probably we should be most true to Paul's standpoint in saying that he regards Christ as operating in the inner hfe 1 Phil. i. 23. * E.g. Gal. iii. ?. 124 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. I. of the Christian through the Spirit.1 From this activity of the exalted Lord are derived all the highest blessings of the Christian life. These we must examine in a later paragraph. Meanwhile it ought to be noted that this supremely intimate relation of union with Christ con stitutes for Paul the pre-supposition of everything that counts in salvation. Without anticipating our subsequent discussion of such central Pauline ideas as justification, death to sin, and the final redemption, we must briefly notice the bearing upon them of the present conception. While in his more theoretical and controversial statements Paul follows an ' order of salvation ' which implies successive stages, as a matter of practical experience their common basis is found in union with Christ. That is the apostle's rehgious starting-point. His doctrinal constructions are interpretations of it. When he speaks of God justifying a man because of his faith, receiving him into a new relation, the relation of a child to his Father, his language seems at times unduly to objectify the process, to keep it apart from the experience of the individual. But for Paul the very existence of faith means that the subject of it is 'in Christ.' Hence, all God's dealings with the individual stand on that footing. To quote the apostle himself, God's grace is ' bestowed on us in the Beloved.' 2 That is to say, God comes into touch with men in virtue of their relation to Christ. So too with the nature of the new life. Paul has formulated, as we shall discover in the next section, something of a theory regarding the ' death ' of 1 J. Weiss (op. cit, p. 356, note 3) suggestively illustrates Paul's usage from Philo's doctrine of the ' powers ' of God which penetrate into the world and man. He quotes from Zeller's exposition (Phil. d. Griechen iii. 2, p. 385) : * In his doctrine of the Powers, two ideas cross, the religious conception of personal mediating beings, and the philosophical of imper sonal : he unites both, without observing their contradiction : indeed he cannot possibly observe it, because otherwise the role of mediators, the double nature of the Divine Powers, would at once be lost, by means of which on the one hand they must be identical with God, so that it might be possible for a finite being by means of them to partake of Deity, while on the other they must be separate from Him, in order that Deity, in spite of this participation, should remain apart from any contact with the world." * Eph. i. 6 (M.). ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 125 the behever to sin. That theory is implicated in his con ceptions of the Flesh and the Law. But when you get behind his logic, you reach the crucial fact that the man who is in intimate connection with Christ, from the nature of the case feels the utter incongruity of sin, and must break with it if that connection is to endure. In union with Christ he takes Christ's attitude towards sin and Christ's attitude towards holiness. Contact with Christ can mean nothing else than new life. ' If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature : the old things have passed away : new things have come into being.' x Plainly, this relation to Christ is also the guarantee of a completed salvation. To have a part in it is to share in His whole experience : to die with Him, to rise with Him, to be changed into His likeness as exalted, that condition which Paul calls ' glory.' ' You died, and your life has been hid with Christ in God : when Christ, our life, shall be revealed, then you also shall be revealed with him in glory.' 2 The pledge of final redemption, that redemption of the whole personality on which Paul laid so much emphasis, is often identified with the gift of the Spirit.3 But this only con firms the fact already indicated, that Paul regards this vital union of the behever with Christ as mediated by the Spirit, through whom God meets faith. (6) The Crucified Redeemer It may be truly said that when Paul speaks of the death of Christ, the resurrection stands in the background of his mind. He invariably interprets the cross in the hght of the resurrection. This follows the order of his rehgious experience. It was the risen Christ he came to know in the spiritual crisis of his career. And this knowledge, which is far deeper and larger than a mere intellectual process, remains the foundation of his victorious Christian life. It is the condition of that central relationship which is » 2 Cor. v. 17. ' Col. iii. 3, 4. » E.g. 2 Cor. v. 5, i. 22 ; Eph. i. 13, 14. 126 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. expressed by the phrase, ' union with Christ.' But the living Lord to whom he clings with all the might of his unfaltering faith has passed through death, the degrading death of the cross. There can be little doubt that Paul recalls a personal impression when he describes Christ crucified as a ' cause of stumbling ' (o-Kav8aXov) to the Jews.1 Even when the accounts of Jesus which reached him in his persecuting zeal disclosed features so rare as to prompt to caution in his project, the conception of a crucified Messiah closed his mind, and hardened his resolve to extirpate such blasphemy. And now he had discovered in this degraded impostor ' life-giving Spirit.' The Christ whom he knew as the source of inward power, the Christ who had convinced him of the boundless love of God, had met and conquered death. His crowning vision of Christ was a vision of love. Love was the clue to His words and deeds. Such was the tradition of those who had companied with Him. But Paul had no need of evidence at second hand. The love of Christ had been demonstrated to him immediately. Tradition merely confirmed his experience. Must not Christ's death also be illumined by love ? Must it not serve some generous purpose ? When questions like these emerged, it is plain that the death of Christ would become the subject of Paul's profoundest reflection. He was compelled to start with certain assumptions, assumptions about which he never argued. Christ was the sinless Son of God. Paul shared that position with the whole early Church. Yet Christ had suffered death. Now, for Paul as a Jewish thinker death was the penalty of sin. ' The wages of sin,' he declares, ' is death ' : 2 ' through sin came death.' 3 Here he stood in line with the great prophetic tradition : ' the soul that sinneth it shall die.' 4 The tradition was handed on in the Rabbinic schools. ' Satan and Yezer (the Evil Impulse) and the Angel of Death,' said R. Simon b. Lakish, ' are one.' 5 ' See, my » 1 Cor. i. 23; of. Gal. v. 11. * Bom. vi. 23. » Bom. v. 12. * Ezek. xviii. 4. • Balm Bathra, 16a (qu. by Schechter, Some Aspects of Rabbinic Theology p. 244). ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 127 children,' said R. Chaninah b. Dosa to his disciples, ' it is sin that kills.' x There is little doubt that when Paul speaks of death, he regards it synthetically, not distin guishing, as we are wont to do, between its physical and spiritual aspects, but viewing the experience in its entirety as involving primarily separation from God. That Jesus Christ, being what He was, should die, was to his mind a perplexing problem. But the perplexity was intensified as he reflected on the nature of Christ's death. It was death by crucifixion. The degradation of such a doom was universally acknowledged. ' May the very name of a cross be far removed not only from the bodies of Roman citizens, but even from their thoughts, their sight, their hearing.' 2 In the Pentateuch it was singled out for special execration : ' Cursed by God is every one who is hanged on a tree.' 3 Paul leaves out the words ' by God ' when he associates the passage with the death of Christ, but his quotation of it in Gal. iii. 13 shows its importance for his thought. This particular death lies under the curse of the Law. And Paul cannot tear his mind away from the significance of such a ban. ' He humbled himself, becoming obedient as far as death, and that the death of the cross.' 4 What could this unspeakable shame mean for the Messiah of God, the ' Lord of glory ' ? Christ could not he under any Divine curse. The thought was blasphemy. And yet, as Paul was convinced, Christ had given Himself willingly to the cross. We have already tried to estimate the interpretations of the death of Christ which Paul must have found in the Christian community when he entered it. Although the data are meagre, it is plain that two main traditions were being emphasised. On the one hand, the crucifixion was no mere accident, but an integral part of the Divine pur pose. On the other, it was felt that the whole experience was illuminated by the mysterious hints and suggestions 1 Beraehoth, 33a (qu. by Schechter, op. oit, p. 247). * Cic. pro C. Babirio, v. 10. « Deut. xxi. 23 (LXX). « Phil. fl. 8. 128 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. of such Old Testament passages as Isaiah liii. There, unquestionably, the ' Servant of Jahweh ' was represented as bearing the burden of sins not His own, as giving Himself for a sin-offering. Hence the idea of propitiation, which in post-exilic Judaism received an extraordinary promin ence in the sacrificial system, was sure to attach itself to reflection on the death of Christ. It is also noteworthy that in 4 Maccabees (xvii. 22, vi. 29), a Jewish document which probably belongs to the first half of the first century a.d., the conception that righteous men atone for sinners is clearly set forth. We have seen that the language which Paul often uses in connection with the death of Christ reflects the terminology of Isaiah liii. And the fact that Jesus' own mind, when He spoke of the significance of His mission, reveals the influence of these Old Testament ideas, must have powerfully affected the drift of Paul's thought. It is probably accurate to say that Paul has no fully elaborated theory of the significance of the death of Christ, but we can discern the outlines of certain attempted constructions. These have their starting-point in prin ciples belonging to the rehgious heritage of his race, modified by his personal experience and interpreted in the hght of his communion with the risen Lord. We might expect that one who had found his sorest bondage in the tyranny of the Law and who regarded its claims, which he could not satisfy, as aggravating sin and provoking resentment against God, would bring the death of Christ into some connection with his dehverance. This he does from two divergent but related standpoints. First of all, he regards men as confronted by the Law as an imperious, almost personified power, which issues its commands and punishes disobedience. Now men were unable to render a complete obedience, they were unable to achieve righteous ness. But for the Law it was all or nothing. Those who failed came under its curse.1 Here is one ray of light for him on the mystery of the cross. Here is an explanation of the curse which Christ voluntarily bore. ' Christ • Gal. iii. 10. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 129 redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become accursed on our behalf.' x He had never been guilty of disobedience. But in accordance with the will of the Father He suffered for men the penalty of the broken Law : it exhausted its claim in the vicarious Redeemer. For it was a recognised principle that ' he who has died is absolved from sin.' 2 Those, therefore, who are united to Him by faith are for ever released from its obhgations. They have no longer to torment themselves with a fruitless struggle. Christ is ' the end of the law with a view to righteousness to every believer.' 3 ' Him who knew not sin he (God) made sin on our behalf (i.e. dealt with as a sinner : appointed for him the cross) that we might become the righteousness of God in him.' 4 They are accepted in Christ.5 In Him a right relation to God becomes once for all possible. More or less closely linked with this is another inter pretation on which he lays emphasis. In Rom. viii. 3 he refers the ineffectiveness of the Law in procuring right eousness to the resistance of the flesh. The ' flesh,' as we have seen, is Paul's description of human nature as it is known in actual experience, i.e. as defiled by sin. Sin, like the Law, is represented almost as a personal Power. It wars against the higher aspirations of the soul and pre vents obedience to the righteous will of God. Therefore if sin is to be vanquished, the flesh must somehow be robbed of its vitality. Now Christ, in becoming incarnate, entered into the common life of humanity, conceived by Paul as the living organism of ' sinful flesh,' 6 in order to redeem it. Hi a death was a judgment upon the flesh, i.e. upon sinful human nature with which He had identified Himself, and which He represented as the Second Adam.7 Those who become one with Him through faith are included in that judgment. But in the death which was sin's condemnation He passed out of all relation to sin.8 The resurrection was the triumphant proof that He had got 1 Gal. iii. 13. s Rom. vi. 7. 3 Bom. x. 4. '2 Cor. v. 21. • Eph. i. 6. * Bom. viii. 3. ' 1 Cor. xv. 22, 45; Rom. v. 12-19. " Rom. vi. 10. 130 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. beyond the reach of its dominion. So all who have been united with Him are sharers in His crucifixion and His resurrection.1 Their old nature was crucified along with Him. They now live in Him to God.2 This new life into which they have passed is the life of the Spirit.3 These closely related interpretations of the death of Christ are perhaps the nearest approach on Paul's part to a theoretical construction. It is easy to see how the ideas of atonement and sacrifice may be found in them, although they are not definitely expressed. In the first instance, Christ is represented as giving Himself up willingly to endure that which men merited because of their dis obedience. He atones for their sins. ' As through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] the many were constituted sinners, so also through the obedience of the one the many shall be constituted righteous.' 4 Through Him they receive reconciliation with God. In the second there are similar implications. Christ's voluntary death means the doom of sin, that sin which hindered men from entering upon the right relation to God. So He removes all barriers and enables them to come into fellowship with the Father through Himself. It is obvious, however, that there is no attempt to equate the sacrifice with any special rite of Jewish ceremonial. Even when in 1 Cor. v. 7 (M.) he says, ' Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed,' the context shows that he is only using a metaphor. A similar general statement in Rom. iii. 24 f. suggests that we are not to ask in detail what constitutes the propitiation : ' Justified for nothing by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth in propitiatory power 6 by his blood (i.e. by his death) to be received by faith.' 7 The clause which follows, ' in order to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, that he might be righteous himself, and accept as righteous him who beheves in Jesus,' simply points out that the cross makes plain that 1 Rom. vi. 6 ; Gal. ii. 19. » Bom. vi. 11. 3 Bom. viii. 10. * Bom. v. 19. » 2 Cor. v. 18. • So Denney. ' Rom. iii. 24, 25. en. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 131 God cannot trifle with sin, for there Christ submits to its doom, and that all who, in union with Him, assent to this judgment of God upon sin, are accepted in His sight as righteous. Paul makes no attempt to explain the precise bearing of the propitiation on God. Plainly, his treatment of the theme is many-sided. He seems to be feeling out for analogies (necessarily imperfect) by which he can express the discovery which has flashed upon his inmost soul, that the Divine heart suffers in and with and for the sin of the world. As Wernle has well said,1 ' Paul interpreted the atoning death from above, instead of from beneath.' In his view, God is the inspiring Power in it from beginning to end. Nothing is so true to his profoundest conception as the statement that ' God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself.' 2 For Paul's deepest experience there was no sense of a transaction between the Father and the Son. The Divine attitude of grace towards the sinful is paramount. It may be well at this point to illustrate in a few sentences the richness and breadth of Paul's interpretation of the death of Christ, gathering up part of the material which has already been used, (a) Often he simply emphasises the fact of Christ's love in dying : e.g. Gal. ii. 20, ' The Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me ' ; 2 Cor. v. 14, ' The love of Christ constrains us who have reached this conviction, one died for all.' (b) He also regards the cross as an overpowering exhibition of the love of God : e.g. Rom. v. 8, ' God proves his own love towards us, because while we were still sinners, Christ died for us ' ; viii. 32, ' He who spared not his own Son, but gave him up for us all, shall he not with him give us all else besides ? ' (c) The death of Christ is the great instrument of God's own reconciliation between men and Himself : e.g. Rom. v. 10, ' If, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son ' ; 2 Cor. v. 19 (quoted above). (d) On the cross Christ made atonement for sin : e.g. Rom. v. 6, ' While we were still weak, Christ died in due 1 Anjange, p. 146. * 2 Cor. v. 19. 132 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. time for the ungodly ' ; Rom. iii. 24-26 (quoted above) (e) Christ's death is a redemption from evil : e.g. Gal. iii. 13, ' Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become accursed for us ' ; Eph. i. 7, 'In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our sins.' (f) Christ's death makes possible the destruction of the principle of sin in human nature : e.g. Rom. vi. 6, ' Know ing this that our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, so that we should no longer be in bondage to sin ' ; Rom. viii. 3, ' God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful death and for sin, con demned sin in the flesh.' (g) Christ's death is a willing sacrifice on His part : e.g. Eph. v. 2, ' As Christ also loved us, and gave himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God ' ; 1 Cor. v. 7, ' Christ, our paschal lamb, was sacrificed.' This classification is by no means exhaustive, yet it is sufficient to reveal the depths and heights which Paul had discovered in the Cross of Christ. It suggests that the apostle could never be content to confine the interpretation of so unfathomable an aspect of the self-manifestation of God to men within the frame-work of any single formula. Indeed, his discussion of what he calls the ' folly ' of the cross (1 Cor. i. 18— ii. 5) as contrasted with the more intel lectual or rationalising presentation of the Gospel which found favour at Corinth, and which he designates ' wisdom,' implies that he trusted to the direct appeal of Christ crucified to the restless, sin-burdened conscience. In any case, the ultimate clue to the meaning of the cross for Paul's mind is to be found in his own experience. When he exclaims, ' I have been crucified with Christ,' or when he declares, ' We were buried with him through our baptism into his death, that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of fife,' x we do not require to look for an explanation of his figures in the mystery-cults of Attis or Osiris. He is using the great events of the Passion to set 1 Rom. vi. 4. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 133 forth the transformation of his own life which has been brought about through his union with Christ by faith. As Christ, in dying, realised to the full the Divine judgment on sin and never flinched from His loyalty to righteousness, so the Christian, identifying himself with Christ's attitude to sin, through the power of Christ in his soul vanquishes the evil bias of his nature. As Christ could not be holden of death, but, in virtue of the Spirit of holiness which was His life-principle, rose to glory, so the Christian, clinging to the risen Lord, is raised into the new atmosphere of glad obedience to the Divine will.1 Accordingly, Paul's large conception of the death of Christ is an endeavour, by means of inherited as well as freshly minted ideas, to expound the significance of his contact with a gracious, forgiving God in Jesus Christ. However theoretical certain elements in it may appear, the heart of it is a profound and soul -satisfying vision of God. And so the word of the cross becomes on his lips a call to repentance, faith, love, and obedience. (c) The New Relation to God — its Beginning, Development, and Issues For Paul, rehgion denoted fundamentally the right atti tude to God. In his pre-Christian days he had taken for granted that the will of God for men was embodied in the legal code of Judaism. Hence men's sole obhgation was to obey. But as they found that to be impossible, their religious outlook was hopeless. There was nothing more to be done. The supreme wonder of Paul's conver sion-crisis was that there God took the initiative. That was his unassailable conviction. The God who met him in 1 Paul regards the ritual of Baptism as an impressive picture of the Christian's crucial experience. As, in Christ's name, he is plunged into the baptismal water, he passes out of contact with his old environment, he dies to his past. As ho emerges out of the water, he enters into a new environment, which is the realm of the Spirit, or ' the kingdom of the Son of God's love ' (Col. i. 13). To associate magical notions with Paul's view of Baptism is to misconceive the whole manner of his approach to Christ. We shnll discuss the topic in a later section. 134 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. Jesus Christ transferred him into a realm of forgiveness and peace and hope. Of course he was conscious of this gracious transformation long before he attempted to analyse its significance. In any case it must be noted that the various descriptions he gives of it are regulated by the circumstances in which they are given and the purposes for which they are intended. We do not for a moment minimise the central importance which he assigns to the conception of Justification by Faith. But in this case, too, environment counts. It is not accidental that Justification is most prominent in those Epistles which directly reflect the burning controversy with Judaism regarding the validity of the Law into which Paul had to plunge for the defence of his missionary Gospel. And the very emergence of this controversy intensified the emphasis which he laid on the idea. J. Weiss may be right in asserting that the most com prehensive description of salvation in Paul is Recon ciliation.1 Both here and in Justification the crucial feature consists, as we have suggested above, in the initiative of God. That is a practical certainty for Paul, whatever be the terms in which he formulates it. And he exults in it as the antithesis of his old Pharisaic behef. Let us observe what this means. For Pharisaic Judaism the centre of gravity lay in the doctrine of Retribution at God's great day of reckoning. The history of apocalyptic thought shows how, along with the growth of individualism in religion, a growth plainly visible in Ezekiel, who has not unfairly been called ' the father of apocalyptic,' the idea of retribution became more and more prominent, until at length it might be regarded, in Bousset's phrase, as ' the shibboleth of the pious.' 2 Now originally this conception marked a deeper understanding of the moral order. It was a reaction against the simple and super ficial view current in Israel, that righteousness of conduct was rewarded by material prosperity, while ungodliness was visited with outward affliction and loss. But when Op. tit, p. 384. » Die Religion d. Judentuma,* p. 222. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 135 in a time of sore calamity men could only appeal to the justice of God, the doctrine was apt to overshadow other elements in the Divine action which could not be ignored with impunity. For sensitive consciences the conception had a double edge. Soon it began to react on the idea of God with serious consequences. Judgment became the supreme function of the Almighty. And when the standard of judgment was a* elaborate code of precepts, it was no wonder that those who faced the facts shuddered with foreboding at the thought of the final verdict. For Paul, Reconciliation took the place of Retribution. On the basis of unassailable personal experience, he can describe his Gospel as ' the ministry of reconciliation.' x He can say of himself : ' I am an ambassador on Christ's behalf, God appealing by me, as it were, I entreat you, on Christ's behalf, to be reconciled to God.' 2 Through his contact with the risen Christ, his whole conception of the Divine attitude to men has been revolutionised. God's disposition towards them is not cold, not even impartial. He yearns for men's love. Christ's sacrifice, which is God's sacrifice, is the convincing demonstration of it. So Paul's Gospel, which is really the formulation of his own discovery of God in Christ, pleads with men to accept the gift which He offers in His Son, to allow the Father to restore His erring children to His fellowship. The initial step in this wonderful redeeming process Paul calls ' being justified.' Its most startling expression is found in the phrase : ' He that justifies the ungodly.' 3 It need scarcely be said that the idea of Justification has its background in the Old Testament. Typical instances are Isa. v. 23 : ' Woe unto them . . . which justify the wicked for a bribe ' ; 4 and Exod. xxiii. 7 : 'I will not justify the wicked.' 5 These passages reveal the forensic meaning of the term, ' to give a decision in favour of.' 1 2 Cor. v. 18. * 2 Cor. v. 20. * Rom. iv. 5. 4 In the LXX (which Paul seems always to use) : oial . . ol dtKat- ovvrcs rbv ive^ij tvexev Sdipum. * The LXX here varies from the Massoretio text : oi StKauitrtu rbv iaeprj 'ivenev tilipav. F omits IveKev Siipuv. 136 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. That of course implies : ' to pronounce them not guilty.' When the final verdict of God upon individual fives was placed in the forefront of Jewish rehgious thought, the supreme problem for anxious souls came to be : ' Shall I be acquitted or condemned, declared righteous (8iKaim$rjvai) or ungodly, in the great day of reckoning ? ' The question had been a burning one for Paul, as for all earnest Pharisees. And now the man who had despaired of obtaining a favour able verdict on the ground of achieving obedience to the law, who had concluded that sin was too strong for him, joyfully recognises that a new order has been unveiled. To quote his own words : ' Now we have a righteousness of God disclosed apart from law altogether : it is attested by the law and the prophets, but it is a righteousness of God which comes by believing in Jesus Christ. And it is meant for all who have faith. No distinctions are drawn. All have sinned, all come short of the glory of God, but they are justified for nothing by bis grace through the ransom provided by Christ Jesus.' J In this connection the new attitude or relation to God is called ' righteousness.' That was the attainment aimed at in legal obedience. Now it comes or is brought about, not by laborious efforts, but by believing in Jesus Christ. It is the gift of God to faith. We have seen what faith means for Paul : not the assent to certain truths, although that is included : not even primarily the belief that God is and that He is the rewarder of those that diligently seek Him,2 although that is for him a presupposition : but the trustful surrender of his whole being to Christ, as crucified and risen, and the complete identification of himself with Christ's attitude to God and to sin. Hence God's gracious judgment on a life grounded, as Paul represents it to be, on faith, is not arbitrary or unreal. It presupposes a very definite relation to Christ. And when the apostle speaks of ' justifying the ungodly,' he means that the sinner has, in dependence on Christ, turned his face in a new direction, and that God in 1 Rom. iii. 21-24 (M.). » Heb. xi. 6. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 131 His mercy deals with him as with one who has made a fresh start. Paul is too practical not to recognise that the progress of the new life may in many cases be slow. That accounts for his frequent exhortations to members of the Christian community to be on their guard against evil, e.g. Rom. vi. 13 : ' You must not let sin have your members for the service of vice, you must dedicate yourselves to God as men who have been brought from death to life.' x But he has such complete confidence in the faithfulness of God, whose purpose of love lies behind every changed career, that he cannot beheve that a life in which the Divine Spirit has begun to work will ever be lost.2 Justification, which can scarcely be distinguished from forgiveness, except that it emphasises the positive element in God's act of grace, places men on a new footing in relation to God. Peace and joy take possession of their souls. The love of God is shed abroad within them by the Holy Spirit.3 This relationship, from which fear and shrinking are banished, Paul calls Adoption. The term sounds technical, but when its significance is examined we discover the very heart of Paul's rehgion. It is needless to look for its origin in the usage of mystery -cults. It is, as we have already seen, a transcript of his own experience. There is only a formal distinction between it and the ' birth from above ' of the Fourth Gospel. In the one case, emphasis is laid on admission into the family of God, in the other on the operation of the hfe of God. In both instances the result is the relation of a son or child to the Father. Here, obviously, Paul comes into direct line with the central teaching of Jesus. For Jesus the child is the emblem of simplicity and artlessness. He loves and reverences and depends upon his Father. He trusts Him completely, and is sure that He will always do the best for him. These human ties are but Him reflections of those which link the soul to God. But Jesus' use of them indicates that in the child relationship He discerns the most life-like picture of 1 M. * E.g. Phil. i. 6. » Rom. v. 1, 5. 138 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. that fellowship with God which is the true end for human personahty. We have noticed in an earlier section how close is the affinity between Paul's position and that of Jesus in His classical exposition of Sonship, the Parable of the Lost Son. The profound utterance of the father may be recalled : ' Child, thou art always with me, and all that I have is thine.' x It might almost be felt that Paul's mind had been dwelling on these words, when he exclaims : ' All things are yours.' 2 Here is revealed an element which brings a sense of exultation to the spirit of the apostle, what he elsewhere calls ' the glorious hberty of the children of God.' This was the direct antithesis of his former rehgious con dition. For that he could find no name but ' slavery.' It was all compact of fear and uncertainty and distrust and foreboding. In Christ he is master of circumstances — the world, life, death, things present and things to come. For now he is an heir of God.3 This victorious condition Paul always associates with the gift of the Spirit. Tt gives their content to the prayers of the Christian. Sonship and freedom constitute the atmosphere which the Spirit creates. ' The sons of God are those who are guided by the Spirit of God. You have received no slavish spirit that would make you relapse into fear : you have received the spirit of sonship. And when we cry, Abba, Father, it is this Spirit testifying along with our own spirit that we are children of God.' 4 The keynote of this hfe of sonship is heard in the term ' glorying ' which Paul dehghts to use.6 Its occurrence in Rom. ii. 17, 23 suggests that in the vocabulary of Judaism it expressed the satisfaction of the man who had made good his claim upon God by fulfilling his legal obligations.6 If that be so, its significance is all the richer in its new appUcation. For Paul it has been stripped of every hint 1 Luke xv. 31. ! 1 Cor. iii. 22. 3 Bom. viii. 17. « Bora. viii. 14-16 (M.) ; of. Gal. iv. 6. 1 Kavxaadai : e.g. Rom. v. 2, 3, 11 ; Phil. iii. 8. ' See J. Weiss on 1 Cor. i. 29. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 139 of self-confidence. Rather does it now connote the most complete self-abnegation : ' God forbid that I should glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me and I to the world.' x Everything that counts, everything that has enduring worth, is bound up with Christ. He is the sole standard of values. He kindles the heart with an exultation which the sharpest tribulations are powerless to quench.2 Now this exultant mood of Paul's is constantly related to the future. Typical of his attitude is Rom. v. 2 : ' We exult in hope of the glory of God.' And so we are reminded that for him both Justification and Adoption are in a very real sense daring anticipations of God's final purpose. An iUustration of his complete view of Justifica tion is to be found in Gal. v. 5 : ' We by the Spirit, as the result of faith, eagerly expect the righteousness we hope for.' The statement is extraordinarily comprehensive. Christians possess the gift of the Spirit, which is the Divine response to faith. But this possession is not an end in itself. It is the basis of a splendid hope, that hope whose content is righteousness. And righteousness here means the perfected relationship to God which can never be annrdled. That relationship is made final at the con summation of the Kingdom when Christ shaU appear. Adoption is viewed by Paul in the same perspective. It is of course a reahty here and now. But it has by no means reached its final stage. This comes out clearly in Rom. viii. 23 : ' Even we ourselves who have the Spirit as a foretaste of the future, even we sigh to ourselves as we wait for the redemption of the body that means our full sonship.' 3 Paul seldom refers to the stages by which behevers are prepared for the consummation. Occasionally he reveals a sense of incompleteness which spurs him on to higher endeavour : ' Not that I have already attained this or am already perfect . . . my one thought is ... to press on to the goal for the prize of God's high call in Christ ¦ Gal. vi. 14. * Rom. v. 3. ' M. HO THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. Jesus.' * Once or twice he speaks of the actual process : ' Though my outward man decay, my inner man is renewed day by day : ; 2 and more concretely : ' We aU with un veiled face (as contrasted with the veiled face of Moses in Old Testament story), reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same likeness from one glory to another— for this comes of the Lord the Spirit.' 3 When it is remembered that glory in Paul's usage means the revealed nature of God, the Divine life as manifested, we can reahse the grandeur of his conception of the existence which awaits the redeemed soul. We have seen how inevitable it was that Paul, steeped as he must have been in the eschatological tradition of Judaism, and participating in those ardent expectations«of the coming aeon which the early Church associated with the teaching of Jesus, should keep his gaze fixed on the Parousia of Christ which is to usher in the final Messianic salvation. In his earliest letter, he describes the Christian life of his converts at Thessalonica as ' serving a Uving and true God and waiting for the coming of his Son from heaven.' 4 In one written nearer the middle of his career he speaks of ' these days of waiting tiU our Lord Jesus Christ is revealed.' 5 And in that which marks the close of his activity he characterises his readers and himself as those who ' eagerly wait for the Saviour from heaven, the Lord Jesus Christ, who wiU transform the body of our humihation (i.e. the earthly life) into the likeness of the body of bis glory.' 6 It is, however, scarcely possible to trace in his writings any consistent scheme of eschatology. Thus, for example, he never discusses such questions as the fate of those who reject the Gospel of Christ,7 or a possible intermediate state. And although the idea of the final Judgment appears frequently, it is difficult to determine his view of its precise relation to the other events of the End. Besides the Parousia, to which reference has » Phil. iii. 12-14 (M.). » 2 Cor. iv. 16. 1 2 Cor. iii. 18 (partly M.). • 1 Thess. I. 10. 6 1 Cor. i. 7 (M.). • PhU. iii. 20. ' These he designates ' the perishing ' : e.g. 2 Cor. iv. 3 ; 1 Cor. 1. 18. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 141 been made, Paul lays special emphasis on the resurrection, and this becomes more prominent as his expectation of surviving until the Parousia grows more uncertain. NaturaUy the picture which he has formed owes much to his conception of the resurrection of Christ. It wiU mean a transformation of being with a view to entrance into a new order, as it meant for Christ.1 Such a transformation he also anticipates for those who are still aUve when Christ returns.2 He gives various hints of the process for which he so eagerly longs. It is an exchanging of that earthly body of flesh which he feels so burdensome and which ' cannot inherit the kingdom of God,' 3 for a spiritual ' organism,' prepared by the Divine power, and destined to be a fit instrument for the perfected spirit.4 He can describe it as ' the image of the heavenly,' which is equivalent to the likeness of the exalted Christ. This he names in the passage already quoted from Phihppians, * the body (or organism) of his glory.' That is to say, be lievers are to share in the exalted life of the Lord Himself. Thus we are brought back to the significance for Paul of the Parousia. Now in so far as he is true to the escha tological tradition of Judaism, this represents to him the complete triumph of God, the consummation of the Divine kingdom. And occasionaUy that aspect is placed in the forefront.6 But in contrast with the usual tendency of Jewish apocalyptic he is as a rule far more concerned with the destiny of individual behevers than with the realised victory of God as such. In the great epoch of Christ's appearing, death is to be swallowed up by life,6 and this wiU be the victory of those who are united to him. Hence the condition of blessedness which the Parousia inaugurates is speciaUy designated '.life ' or ' eternal life.' 7 It is the disclosure of a high potentiality already present. ' You died,' he says, ' and your life has been hid with 1 Phil. iii. 20. s 1 Oor. xv. 61-63. ' 2 Cor. v. 1, 2, 4 ; 1 Cor. xv. 50. « 2 Cor. v. 1 ; 1 Cor. xv. 44-46. 5 See especially 1 Cor. xv. 24-28. • 1 Cor. xv. 54, 55. ' Occasionally ' salvation.' 142 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. Christ in God. When Christ shaU be manifested, who is our life, then you also wiU be manifested with him in glory.' x ' Glory ' constitutes the loftiest description of the perfected existence, the final issue of the new attitude to God. (d) The Activities of the Christian There could scarcely be a greater misconception than to suppose that Paul's mind was so completely engrossed in contemplating and interpreting the mysteries of the faith as to ignore the practical sphere of ethical obhgation. The sequence of Rom. vi. on Rom. v. is true to his essential standpoint. If God's gracious response to men's faith is the estabUshing of a new relationship of love and freedom, that relationship must express itself in an obedience to Him which is moral. Such utterances as Rom. xii. 1 show clearly his general position : ' I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, consecrated and weU pleasing to God.' This use of aU one's powers in the Divine service is the highest privilege of the new life. Those who are sons of God are no longer at the mercy of the ' flesh,' i.e. the lawless desires and seU-will which characterise human nature apart from the Divine influence. They are led by the Spirit. But the Spirit is not now regarded merely as the source of abnormal manifestations, as in the earhest days of the Christian community. We have seen in a former section how Paul corrected that prevalent view, restraining the spiritual energy which found its chief outlet in such phenomena as ' speaking with tongues,' and urging upon his converts that real spiritual power should take effect in ethical activity. ' The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness of heart, faithfulness, meekness, self-control.' 2 An atmosphere of inward har mony is established which prompts to generous service. It is noteworthy that love stands first in the series of 1 Col. iii. 3, 4. • Gal. v. 22. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 143 spiritual qualities enumerated by Paul in Galatians. That this is no accident may be inferred from various impor tant passages, of which the most remarkable is 1 Cor. xiii. There, after a delicate and penetrating analysis of love, he sums up in the famous words : ' As it is, there abide faith, hope, love, these three : but the greatest of these is love.' When we remember that for Paul faith is the foundation of his fellowship with Christ, and that the hope of final redemp tion at the Parousia is to him the very breath of hfe, we can scarcely over-estimate the significance of the primacy which he assigns to love. The cardinal importance of love arises for him out of the depths of his rehgious experi ence. It has already been pointed out that Paul's con version-crisis meant the discovery of a love at the heart of things which almost exceeded comprehension. He caUs it ' the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.' And his immediate answer to it was a whole-hearted loyalty and devotion. But he realised at once that this affection could be no mere inward rapture. It must go out to others as the love of Christ had gone out to him. And the more closely he became acquainted with the tradition of the hfe and teaching of Jesus, the more clearly did he discover that boundless love had been the keynote of aU His earthly activities. In this, pre-eminently, those who had seen Him had seen the Father. Accordingly we recognise that for Paul, as for his Master, there is no severance between rehgious and moral values. The activity of love, like all the ethical activities, is the index of a definite relation to God. The great statement of 1 John iv. 19 is strictly true to Paul's conviction : ' We love because he first loved us.' Here is a new and enduring basis of moral action. As Weinel has aptly described the situation, ' " Thou shalt " no longer rules the individual, but " I wfll." ' x The quahty of conduct is fundamentaUy altered. From the purified motive in which selfish ends are forgotten springs a spontaneity of action which enhances and ennobles life. It need scarcely be observed that this is the direct converse 1 Pauhta, p. 105. 144 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. of legalism. No one had been better acquainted than Paul with the tormenting chaUenge of innumerable ordinances. His pre-Christian view of obhgation had never got beyond these. But now, in Christ, aU separate maxims — and the apostle has stiU to urge these on his converts — are absorbed in the high ideal which Jesus has promulgated. The new spirit is the decisive factor. That spirit is to determine the kind of activity for which every separate situation caUs. The more completely the Christian suffers the Divine power to possess him, the more certainly wiU he be defivered from morbid scruples regarding each separate moral decision he has to make. His enlightened judgment wiU enable him to strike the balance between freedom and self -limitation. Paul's discussion of this pro cess in Rom. xiv.1 is a classical example of spiritual and ethical tact. And no better instance of his normative position could be found than Gal. v. 14 : ' The whole law is fulfiUed in one sentence, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' It is surely not a mere coincidence that this was the obligation which Jesus placed next to that of complete devotion to God. This recognition of Paul's supreme motive at once suggests that, like aU healthy moral energy, his ethic wiU be largely social. And the range of the term ' social ' wiU be regulated by his circumstances and environment. Not that this latter influence must be exaggerated. For when Paul urges the members of the Christian community at Rome, ' Bless those that persecute you, bless and do not curse them,' 2 it is plain that he looks far beyond the circle of his brethren in Christ. And when he foUows up such injunctions by bidding them to ' be in debt to no man except to love one another,' 3 we cannot doubt that his conception of ' neighbourship ' was derived from that of his Master and equaUy wide in its scope.4 But due importance ought to be assigned to the situation in which he found himself. As an ardent missionary, he was absorbed in the 1 Cf. 1 Cor. viii. and ix. ¦ Rom. xii. 14. 3 Bom. xiii. 8. « Luke x. 30-37. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 143 work of spreading the Gospel over the Grseco-Roman world. No part of his labour was more pressing than that of guiding his converts into a life worthy of the name they bore. Hence there is nothing abstract or theoretical in his moral teaching. It reaches down to the most elementary duties, the avoidance of theft, drunkenness, lying : and it ascends to the moral heights from which Jesus had beckoned, self-denial, love of enemies, forgiveness. Above aU, the Christian community affords the best training in ethical discipline. Plainly the types of moral action with which Paul deals wiU depend upon the actual pro blems that confront the immature Christian communi ties. A primary question wiU be that of their relation to their pagan environment. Paul handles it with masterly sagacity. It came before him definitely in a request for advice from Corinth regarding sacrificial meat. Some members of the Church, taking fuU advantage of the Christian position that an idol is ' nothing,' x are able to treat the situation with indifference. It matters nothing to them that the meat they eat has been consecrated in a temple. ' The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.' For others the old associations are decisive. It is a violation of conscience to partake of such food.2 Which attitude is to be regulative ? ' AU things are aUowed,' says the apostle, ' but not aU things are expedient. AU things are aUowed, but not all things edify.' 3 Hence, ' it is a good thing neither to eat flesh nor to drink wine, nor anything that your brother feels to be a stumbling- block.' For Paul the criterion of love among the brethren is normative.4 A further point of discussion was the relation of the sexes. NaturaUy Paul used no uncertain language re garding aU breaches of personal purity, a subject on which gross laxness prevaUed in heathen society. Nor does he shrink from taking the highest ground : ' Do you not know that your bodies are members (hterally, limbs) of Christ ? » 1 Cor. viii. 4. * 1 Oor. viii. 7. » 1 Cor. x. 23. ' Rom- »v. 21. 146 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. ShaU I then take the members of Christ and make them the members of a harlot ? God forbid.'1 It is from the same lofty platform that he estimates the position of woman. In this matter he has been seriously misunderstood. His injunction that women should keep silence in the public services of the Church 2 has been seized upon as an indica tion of his contempt for the sex. In reality the advice is given lest Christian women should incur the suspicion of a forwardness which offended the sensibility of the ancient world.3 Paul's position is clearly discernible in Gal. iii. 28 : ' There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or freeman, there is no longer male or female : you are all one in Christ Jesus.' This passage also goes to the root of the apostle's attitude towards slavery. But there happens to be extant an application to a particular case of the principle here laid down. Onesimus, the slave of PhUemon, a Christian belonging to the community at Colossae, had run away from his master. He drifted to Rome, and there under PauPs influence became a convert to Christianity.4 The apostle had the delicate duty of sending him back to his master : and in the singularly beautiful note which he gives him to hand to PhUemon he reveals his own standpoint. 'Perhaps this was why you and he were parted for a while, that you might get him back for good, no longer a mere slave, but something more than a slave, a beloved brother : especially dear to me, but how much more to you as a man and as a Christian.'8 If a slave can be treated as ' a beloved brother,' his social position has lost its bitterness. If Paul's principle of the oneness of Christians in Christ be adopted, slavery as an institution is doomed. He made, indeed, no attempt to interfere in any formal way with the existing social order. He goes so far as to advise slaves not to be troubled by their condition. ' Of course, if you do find it possible to get 1 1 Cor. vi. 15. » 1 Cor. xiv. 34. ' Some scholars regard verses 336-35 as a later interpolation. Verses 34-35 are placed by most Western authorities after verse 40. Certainly the words seem to contradict 1 Cor. xi. 5. See J. WeisB ad. Joe. * Philem. 10. • Philem. 16, 16 (M.). ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 147 free, you had better avail yourself of the opportunity. But a slave who is caUed to be in the Lord is a freedman of the Lord.' * As the context of this passage shows, the consideration which weighs with him is the imminence of the Parousia.2 When Paul deals with the relation of the Christian to the State, it is from the standpoint of the practical missionary. He lived in the epoch of the Pax Romana. Nowhere was the boon of a carefully organised yet non- despotic government more highly prized than in the Provinces which were the scene of Paul's evangeUstic work. It is not, therefore, surprising that he preserves an attitude of respect towards the Imperial rule. Here, as in his whole estimate of society, he is guided by the principle which he lays down in Rom. xii. 18 : ' If it be possible, so far as that rests with you, live peaceably with aU men.' But he directly enjoins submission to the State, on the ground that it has been divinely ordained to rule righteously and put down evU.8 Christians are to dis charge their duties to the State as genuinely moral obhgations. It has often been observed that at various points of his ethical outlook Paul reveals affinities with the popularised phUosophy of his time. But from beginning to end it is plain how that outlook was determined by rehgious motives. (e) The Body and the Members of Christ We have found that Paul's ethical teaching is pre dominantly social. From the nature of the case the society which chiefly absorbs his attention is the Church, the community of Christians. His conception of the Church is most clearly realised by means of his favourite metaphor, the Body of Christ.4 The previous course of discussion has shown that for Paul the fundamental aspect 1 1 Cor. vii. 21, 22 (M.). * Ibid., verges 26, 29, 31. 3 Rom. xiii. 1-7. 4 See especially 1 Cor. xii. j Eph. iv. 1-16. 148 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. of Christianity is the union of the behever to Christ. That union is constituted by the Spirit, who mediates the life of Christ in response to the faith of the individual. An obvious inference from this process is the communion of Christians in Christ through the same Spirit. The one Spirit, as the real life-principle of the society, suggests the correlative idea of the one Body, the living organism which gives expression to the life of the Spirit. This is ideaUy the embodiment of the mind and wUl of Christ. Hence the Christian community is designated by Paul the Body of Christ, and those who belong to it His members. A typical expression of his view is found in Rom. xii. 4, 5 : 'As we have many members in one body, and aU the members have not the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and severaUy members one of another.' x Let us examine the essential features of Paul's idea of the Church, as set forth in this most suggestive figure. (1) There is a singular lack of reference in the Epistles to external organisation. This certainly does not mean that Paul was neghgent of order in the hfe of the Christian society. We have direct evidence of the emphasis which he laid upon it.2 But his was the period of charismatic functions in the Church.3 It is highly significant that when he ranks the offices in the Church, he places first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers.4 Probably none of these represent permanent officials. They are aU persons endowed with a special ' gift ' (x«pio-/ia), which they readily place at the service of the Christian society. They are to be found where their work is most required. It may be that the terms ' helps ' and ' administrations,' which occur later in the same context, stand for the more concrete ' deacons ' (hteraUy, ' servants ' : cf . Mark x. 45, which perhaps helped to estabhsh the usage) and ' over seers ' («Vi'o-ko7toi), titles only found in PhUippians,6 which is probably the latest of Paul's Epistles. The 1 Cf. 1 Cor. xii. 12. * E.g. 1 Cor. xiv. 40. » E.g. 1 Cor. xii. 4-11. ' 1 Cor. xii. 28. » Phi', i. 1. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 149 existing data suggest that during the period of Paul's activity the organisation of the Church was in a flexible condition. What primarily concerns the apostle is the spiritual vigour of the Body. (2) The health of the Body depends on the unity of the Spirit which pervades it. Paul constantly dweUs on this idea ; e.g. Eph. iv. 3-6 : ' Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one spirit, as you were caUed in one hope of your calling ; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of aU, who is above aU, and through aU, and in aU.' The important point to be noted in aU his utterances on this theme is the inwardness of the conception. It seems highly probable, as has been hinted, that there was as yet no such thing as uniformity of organisation. Paul's general view of the situation, in so far as it can be reconstructed from the avaUable evidence, would lead us to suppose that he was prepared for large divergence in the methods of Christian service. For he dehghts to dweU on the mani- foldness of the gifts bestowed by the Spirit for the up- buUding of the Christian society. But he constantly keeps in the forefront the obUgation to unity of mind and heart in the separate Christian communities. ' I beseech you, brethren,' he writes to the Corinthians,1 ' by the name of the Lord Jesus Christ that you aU speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you ; but that you be perfectly knit together in the same mind and the same judgment.' This is simply the appUcation to a particular case of his great general principle : ' God has tempered the body together, with a special dignity for the inferior parts, so that there may be no disunion in the body, but that the various members should have a common concern for one another.' 2 That is to say, the supreme object of membership in the Body of Christ is mutual service and helpfulness. (3) But Paul's conception of the Body of Christ implies that the Church is the special representative of her living 1 1 Cor. i. 10. * 1 Cor. xii. 24, 25 (M.). 150 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. Lord upon earth. Christ is frequently described as the ' Head ' of the Body,1 and of course that is always pre supposed. The head requires the body. The brain controls the limbs. The will demands an instrument to carry out its purposes. Here is outhned the daring idea that the Church is the direct manifestation of the life of Christ to humanity, the supreme witness to the Divine intention for the universe. On the other hand, contact with the Head ensures that the Body shaU attain its fuU development, growing up completely into Him.2 A special aspect of the Divine purpose for mankind, which lies close to the apostle's heart, is that on which he may be said to have staked aU his activity — the feUow- ship of Gentiles with Jews in the common salvation of Jesus Christ. The proclamation of this great discovery he regards as his peculiar function : ' The Divine secret was disclosed to me by a revelation . . . namely, that in Christ Jesus the Gentiles are co-heirs, companions, and co partners in the promise.' 3 In this union of those who had been aliens with the members of the historic community of Israel ' in one body through the cross,' Paul recognises the disclosure of ' the fuU sweep of the Divine wisdom.' 4 The unity of the members of the Body of Christ in Him their Head receives solemn expression in the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. It is absurd to say that ' Paul created the sacramental conception.' 6 He found these rites in the Christian community when he entered it. And there is no evidence to show that he enhanced their importance. It is significant that in so careful and syste matic a delineation of his religious beliefs as the Epistle to the Romans there is no reference to the Lord's Supper.* » E.g. Col. i. 18, ii. 19 ; Eph. i. 22. • Col. ii. 19 ; Eph. iv. 12-16. • Eph. iii. 3, 6 (M.) ; similarly Col. i. 25-27. ' Eph. iii. 10 (M.). * So Wernle, Anf&nge, p. 166. • There is no force in the position taken by Professor Lake in his Earlier Epi&tlee of St. Paul, p. 384, and elsewhere, that Paul did not need to refer to beliefs which were ' common ground to him and all other Christians.' As a matter of faot he does invariably recur to such beliefs, as, e.g.. that in the Holy Spirit. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 151 And in 1 Cor. i. 17 he distinctly subordinates Baptism to the preaching of the Gospel. StiU, like his fellow-Christians throughout the Church, he regarded these rites as of real value for the quickening of faith. No statement in the Epistles suggests that he looked on Baptism as the originat ing cause of faith. Indeed the baptismal formula, ' into the name of Christ,' takes for granted that the candidate had come already into a definite relation with Christ — that he had formed a definite estimate of the ' name ' by which he was caUed.1 Even the utterance of Gal. iii. 27 : ' AU of you who had yourselves baptized into Christ have put on Christ,' in no way conflicts with the clear teaching of the entire Epistle that faith is primary. For the whole context shows that in this passage faith is the presupposition of Baptism.2 Baptism marks the definite entrance of the convert into the Christian community. As such it was an event of epoch-making importance in his history. It was of course a symbol, and as such Paul uses it to set forth his profound conception of dying and being buried with Christ in relation to the old sinful hfe, and rising with him to the new life of righteousness.3 But Baptism is more than a symbol. As in this impressive rite the convert takes the decisive step of turning his back on his old spiritual environment, and making himself over to the lordship and obedience of Christ, his faith is powerfuUy intensified : he receives a fresh inspiration : the solemn ritual becomes to him a real pledge of the unfailing grace of God. It is not otherwise with the Lord's Supper. Paul nowhere implies that feUowship with Christ is inaugurated by the Eucharist. He dehberately states his view of its signific ance in 1 Cor. xi. 26 : ' As often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you represent (KarayyeXXcTt) the Lord's death tiU he come.' To quote a statement which the 1 See Sokolowski, Geist u. Leben bei Paulus, p. 270. • See verses 23, 24, 25, 26 ; so also in Col. it. 12. * Rom. vi. 3, 4. It is worth noting that in the most remarkable descrip tion of this experience (Gal. ii. 19, 20) there is no mention of Baptism. It is, therefore, quite irrelevant to say that for Paul the experience is nori'J.tioncd by Baptism. 152 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES {pt. l present writer has made elsewhere,1 'the bread and wine represent not the flesh and blood of Christ as such, but His human person as slain on the cross. Therefore com munion with the body and blood of Christ means com munion with the Lord as crucified, and aU that this involves. Hence we never find the apostle speaking of " eating the flesh " or " drinking the blood " of Christ. He is careful to associate the solemn actions only with the bread and the cup. It is thus apparent that the Lord's Supper sets forth visibly, for Paul, the supreme spiritual experience which he has described in Gal. ii. 19 : "I have been crucified with Christ." And as the apostle can never dissociate the Crucifixion from the Resurrection, the appropriation of the benefits of the death of Christ which is quickened by the sacred celebration wiU carry with it a like appropriation of the resources of the risen Lord.' Here, as in Baptism, to the befieving consciousness the symbol becomes a sacrament, a convincing pledge of the mercy of God in Christ the crucified. But Paul does not, any more than in Baptism, ascribe to the actions a magical effect. The spiritual benefit is the Divine response which is never denied to adoring faith. It may be noted, finally, that the common meal is the most impressive exhibition of the unity of the Body of Christ. Paul is keenly alive to this when he declares : ' Many as we are, we are one bread, one body, since we aU partake of the one bread.' a (/) The Cosmic Relations of Christ Starting from his own experience, Paul was convinced that the most momentous event in the history of the in dividual was his redemption from sin and from the sway of that hierarchy of evil forces to which he regarded the present world-order as subject. Only by this means could humanity attain the destiny appointed for it in the wisdom and loving-kindness of God. Now the sole medium of the 1 St. Paul and the Mystery-Religione, p. 270. • 1 Cor. x. 17 (M.). ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 153 redemptive process is Christ. He is the Last Adam, the Second Man,1 who, as life-giving Spirit, counteracts the principle of sin and death which had attained universal sway through the transgression of the First.2 As such, He becomes the Founder of a new humanity.3 Hence His incarnation, death, and resurrection are not mere incidents of a personal history. Their bearing is universal. For the establishing of right relations between the God who is over aU and the creatures whom He has made for likeness to Himself is central in the world of being, which Paul of course conceives as a moral and spiritual order. It is an easy and natural step from this position to find in Christ the focus of the cosmic system, the constitutive principle of universal life. Paul's statements are remark able. Already in 1 Cor. viii. 6 (M.) he speaks of ' one God, the Father, from whom aU comes, and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom aU exists and by whom we exist.' But the formulation of the idea is most clearly seen in the Captivity-Epistles, written from his Roman prison towards the close of his career. By this time his great controversies with Judaizers on behalf of the hberty of the Gospel have lost their intensity. Circum stances have thwarted the extension of his own missionary labours. And although he is stiU in constant communica tion with aU parts of his mission-field, he has some leisure to reflect on the unfathomable significance of that Lord who is the end and aim of his activity, ' in whom are hid aU the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.' It is true that in the Epistle to the Colossians, in which especiaUy these meditations find expression, he was confronting a definite situation in the Churches of the Lycus-vaUey, a chaUenge by the adherents of an obscure theosophy to the supremacy of Christ. But the whole tone of Colossians and Ephesians, not to speak of the unique passage on the incarnation in so thoroughly practical a letter as Phihppians, indicates clearly enough the regions in which his thought was moving. 1 1 Cor. xv. 45, 47. « Rom. v. 12. » 1 Cor. xv. 22. 154 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. The most important statement for our purpose is Col. i. 15-20, and it is worth noting that Paul links it on to a reminder of the redemption which his readers have attained though God's ' beloved Son,' because that is the real basis in his experience of the cosmic functions of Christ on which he proceeds to enlarge. ' He is the hkeness of the unseen God,' says the apostle, ' born first before aU the creation — for it was by (better, ' in ') him that aU things were created both in heaven and on earth, both the seen and the unseen, including thrones, angelic lords, celestial powers and rulers ; aU things have been created by him and for him ; he is prior to aU, and aU coheres in him.' Then after emphasising Christ's headship of His Body, the Church, in virtue of the pre-eminence He has reached as ' the first to be born from the dead,' Paul continues : ' It was in him that the Divine Fulness wiUed to settle without limit, and by him it willed to reconcile in his own person aU on earth and in heaven ahke, in a peace made by the blood of his cross.' x Thus the paragraph ends as it began in the atmosphere of redemption. It is perhaps true to say that the far-reaching inferences which Paul has here made are already involved in his conception of Christ as the Son of God. But even if this be so, it does not alter the conclusion at which we have already hinted, that in Christ crucified, the Redeemer of men from an evil order of things and its conqueror,2 Paul is assured that he has come into touch with Ultimate Reality. Hence he feels justified in elaborating the im plications which such a Reality involves : pre-existence, mediation of the Divine activity in creation, the sustaining principle of the universe, the goal of aU being. AU these things are implied in the passage quoted above. But the fact that, after using an aorist tense to state the creation of all things by Christ, ' he lapses into perfects and presents, is a suggestive hint that he contemplates ' Christ's pre- existence, 'through the medium, so to speak, of the 1 (M.). Cf. Eph. i. 10, 22, 23. * Col. ii. 15. ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 155 exalted life . . . His function as Creator is prolepticaUy conditioned by his achievement as Saviour.' x The description of Christ's cosmic significance reveals intimate affinities with tendencies of thought current in contemporary HeUenistic speculation. Even the language Paul uses in defining the relations of the created universe to Christ, more especiaUy the prepositional phrases, ' by him,' ' through him,' ' for him,' ' in him,' find remarkable paraUels ahke in the hterature of Stoicism, and (through Stoic influence) in the regular vocabulary of the popularised phUosophy of the day.2 It is natural, as an induction from the facts, to conclude that the apostle has here an apolo getic aim in view : that of set purpose he desires to exhibit Christ as satisfying the presuppositions of a type of philo sophy of religion which had become influential throughout the Roman Empire. For on every side speculation was busy with the conception of mediating influences between God and the world. The prominence of the Logos- hypostasis in the Stoics and in Philo, who mirrors the movements of his time, indicates the drift of HeUenistic metaphysics. And Paul's statement that ' aU coheres in ' Christ reminds us of the common Stoic position that life and order in the universe depend on the world-soul, which is the constitutive principle in the system of created things. This world-soul received the names of Logos and Pneuma in Stoicism. The very term Paul employs in Col. i. 17 for 'coheres' (o-wio-TH)K.ev) appears in precisely the same connection in contemporary hterature : e.g. in the anony mous ILtpl K6o-p.ov, 6 (which has many traces of Stoic influence) : ' AU things are of God (e'« 6tov), and through God (Sio Qtov) cohere (o-ui to-Tij«£i) for us.' 3 Of course the special occasion which prompted this remarkable formulation of Paul's inferences as to the cosmic functions of Christ was, as has been noted, the emergence in the Churches of the Lycus-vaUey of a hybrid 1 H. B. Mackintosh, The Peraon of Jeeua Christ, p. 70. • See E. Nbrden, Agnostos Theos, pp. 240-250. ' Quoted by Norden, op. tit., p. 250. Other instances in J. Weiss, Dot Vrchristentum, p. 370, n. 1. 156 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. blend of doctrines in which the worship of angels, ecstatic visions, and ascetic ordinances held an important place. In Paul's eyes the peculiar perU was the attempt to reach God by another path than Christ. The propagandists were evidently emphasising the existence of a chain of mediating beings linking the material to the spiritual. Through purifying mystery-ritual the soul could come into touch with these, and thus attain the Divine. Paul attacks the error by exalting Christ as the sole channel of life and power between God and the universe, and in the process discloses the large horizons of his thought regarding the ontological significance of Him whom he had come to know as Redeemer and Lord. It is by no means improbable that here Paul, as at other points, touched HeUenistic speculations through a Jewish medium. In the Wisdom-hterature of Judaism the con ception of Wisdom had received a remarkable personi fication, as, e.g., in Prov. viii. 22, 23, 29, 30 : ' The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting . . . When he appointed the foundations of the earth, then I was by him as a master-worker ' ; and Wisd. of Sol. ix. 2 : ' By means of thy wisdom thou didst create man.' It is difficult to draw any sharp distinction between this personification and the Spirit of God. ' She is a breath of the power of God,' says the author of Wisd. of Sol. (vii. 25 ff.), * and a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty . . . She is an effulgence (diravyaa-pa) from everlasting light, and an unspotted mirror of the working of God, and an image (eUiev) of his goodness. And she, being one, hath power to do aU things, and remaining in herself reneweth aU things : and from generation to generation passing into holy souls she maketh men friends of God and prophets ' Paul would be famihar with this realm of thought, for it was influential in the Rabbinic schools. It is noteworthy that he designates Christ the ' image ' (eiKiov) of God, using the very term applied to Wisdom in the passage just cited. Philo gives the same description ch. vi.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 157 of the Logos, an hypostasis with which Paul was probably acquainted. But Paul had also identified the exalted Lord with the Spirit.1 Hence, when he endeavours to set forth the universal bearing of Christ, who had been for him not a metaphysical abstraction but a living, redeem ing personality, it was natural that he should express his ideas by means of thought-forms and a terminology which had already provided a meeting-point for Hellenistic and Jewish speculation. It may be observed incidentaUy that it was easy for a thinker of that age to pass from personified concepts to personafity. The evidence of 1 Cor. viii. 6 suggests that, apart from the definite situation presupposed in Colossians, Paul's mind was occupied with the ultimate consequences of his profound conception of Christ. There are no clear data to establish the position, often hastUy affirmed by some modern scholars, that these consequences were involved in the apocalyptic idea of Messiah. We are on far surer ground in regarding them as inferences from what he had discovered Christ to be in bis own experience and in that of the Church, inferences which he clothed in language which would appeal to his readers, both Jewish and Gentile. Only it seems hazardous to attempt a detailed analysis of his statements. J. Weiss, e.g., commenting on the phrase ' in him were created aU things ' (Col. i. 16), asserts that these words must be taken in their most hteral sense. ' With his creation aU was created : he contains the AU in himself . . . This can only be understood if Christ is here identified with the Logos. In PhUo the Logos as compendium of aU God's creative " ideas " con tains the whole world " in idea," the " kosmos noetos." It is doubtful . . . whether Paul had recourse to this conception . . . Presumably he conceived of the process more materiaUy : the pre-mundane Son of God, as " life- creating Spirit " contained the energies and elements of all being realiter in hiniself : thus he was in a certain sense the world itse'f .' 2 We may admit the close kinship be- 1 E.g. 2 Cor. iii. 17 ; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 45. J Christus, pp. 46, 47. 158 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. i. tween Paul's idea of the pre-incarnate Christ and the contemporary notion of the Logos. But it is altogether arbitrary to read into the apostle's statements meta physical conceptions for which there is no evidence in his writings. His thought was, in aU likelihood, no more metaphysical than that of the Wisdom-literature of his nation, his affinities with which we have noted above.1 We must be content with the same vagueness in esti mating Paul's description of the final goal for the universe, the ' summing-up of all things in Christ, the things in heaven and the things on earth ' (Eph. i. 10). To force on the words an abstract, pantheistic construction would be to faU into contradiction with various statements of the apostle as to the real individuahty of believers in the future glorified existence. It has already been observed that for Paul the birth, death, and resurrection of Christ are more than events in a personal history. They belong to God's redemptive purpose. They are normative for the development of the world -order, and yet the apostle is so completely dominated by the impression of the historical Person which has been wrought in him through his experience of the living Lord and the tradition current in the community, that only once does he treat of the pre-mundane existence of Christ, which he is compelled to postulate in view of the centraLreligious significance he has discovered in Him. The passage occurs incidentally in an exhortation to lowliness, and its primary purpose is to emphasise the humility of Christ. It con tains much that is undefined, and it scarcely lends itself to dogmatic construction, but it none the less indicates that Paul's mind had dwelt earnestly on what may be called the presuppositions of the Incarnation. ' Though he was divine by nature,' he writes to the Philippians, ' he did not snatch at equaUty with God, but emptied himself by taking the nature of a servant : born in human Windisoh greatly exaggerates the influence of the Jewish conception of the Divine Wisdom on Paul's Christology in his essay in Neutestament- >iehe Studienfur G. TIeinriti, pp. 220-?!?!, ch. iv.] FUNDAMENTAL POSITIONS OF PAULINISM 159 guise and appearing in human form, he humbly stooped in his obedience even to die, and to die upon the cross. Therefore God highly exalted him, and gave him the name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow . . . and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.' x Here we have Paul's clearest utterance as to the pre-existence of Christ, a pre-existence which he regards as in some sense individual. The most difficult phrase in the paragraph is that which speaks of an ' equality with God ' at which Christ did not snatch. Plainly the apostle views the pre- incarnate attitude of Christ from the standpoint of his post-resurrection existence. He had come into contact with him as the glorified Lord to whom was due the universal worship of men. His possession of this name (Kupios), as we have seen, placed Him side by side with God in the eyes of humanity. That is what Paul means by ' equality.' But He had reached that glory by a path of lowly obedience which led through the scorn and rejection of His earthly life, and the shame and agony of the cross. This was the cost of redemption, although Paul does not here exphcitly refer to that. The incarnation was a great act of self-renunciation for the sake of mankind, a great act of obedience in which the Son made Himself one with His Father's wiU that He might bring sinful men to God. Possibly the noteworthy expression, ' did not snatch at equality with God,' contains a reminiscence of the First Adam, who, in disobedience to the Almighty, yielded to the temptation to ' be as God ' (Gen. iii. 5). It is remark able that even here Paul does not dweU on the metaphysical impUcations of his statement. He hastens to the act of humble self-denial, revealing the true focus of his interest. We are not, therefore, justified in attempting to analyse what he means here by the Divine Nature (/iopaivop.ivmv) : 8 in xii. 27, the ' created ' world, as ' shaken,' passes away : the ' un shaken ' kingdom endures. Numerous additional examples might be quoted, but enough has been said to show that this fundamental antithesis between the visible and the invisible, the earthly and the heavenly, the temporal and the 1 Phrynichus advisee the use of wapddetypa as more correct than irbSeiypa (see Rutherford, New Phrynichus, p. 62). * Exod. xxv. 40. The writer finds this passage in admirable harmony with his general standpoint. * Dr. Moffatt's phrase, 'out of the invisible,' scarcely brings out the full force of the words. 192 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. n. eternal, the world of copies and the world of the ideal, which is the truly real, is normative for the writer of Hebrews. But he uses the Philonic scheme as an instrument of Christian apologetic. The visible and transient order is, for rehgion, exemplified in the legal ritual of Judaism and the covenant which that ritual is supposed to ratify and maintain. The invisible realm is that to which those who have accepted the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, the ' better ' covenant, are already linked by a hope resting on the Divine promises, which is ' as an anchor of the soul secure and steadfast,' cast already from earth into heaven (vi. 18, 19), Although stiU involved in an imperfect order, they have already ' tasted of the powers of the world to come ' (vi. 5). In the great series of contrasts by which he works out his argument in favour of the finafity of the Christian religion, which he pictures as ' the new covenant ' — Christ and the angels, Christ and Moses, Christ and the Aaronic priesthood in aU the details of its service — his object is to prove that in each instance Christ has achieved the heavenly or spiritual reahsation of those aims which the legal institutions of the Old Testament attempted to reach on earthly or physical lines. As Feine has aptly pointed out, Philo endeavoured to disclose the relation of the Old Testament revelation to the ideal world by aUe- gorising its contents. He had no other reahty to set over against it.1 Hebrews has the revelation of Christ, who has actuaUy entered the world of heavenly reahty as the Forerunner and High Priest of His people. Of this revela tion, which is a genuine facsimile of the unseen, those ordinances by which the people of God sought to draw near to Him in the Levitical ritual were but a dim outline (atcta, di>riTvira). We must relate this fundamental presupposition of the contrast between the copy and the pattern, the physical symbols and the spiritual reahty which they represent, to every stage of our investigation of the leading ideas of the Epistle. Meanwhile, various further traces of Alexandrian 1 JV. T. Theologie, p. 651. ch. n.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 193 influence ought to be noted. Our author is true to his training in his employment of the allegorical method of exegesis so characteristic of Philo. This is typically exemplified in his use of the Old Testament figure of Melchizedek, described as king of Salem in Gen. xiv. 18-20, who met Abraham as he returned from his victory over the kings of the East, gave him his blessing, and as a priest- king received tithes from him. The source from which he derives his Ulustration is Ps. ex. 4, a passage interpreted MessianicaUy both in Judaism and in the early Church. For the purposes of his argument the writer emphasises the etymology of Melchizedek's name, ' king of righteousness,' l and of the name of his kingdom, ' peace,' to bring out their resemblance to Messianic ideals. And he dwells on the fact that no genealogy of Melchizedek is mentioned, and no history, in order to contrast him with the Aaronic priests, who succeed to office because of their pedigree and pass away in ever-changing succession, and to accen tuate the paraUel with Christ, who becomes priest because of His inherent worth, and remains a priest for ever. Philo, too, has used the figure of Melchizedek for purposes of aUegory, but curiously enough he seems to make no reference to Ps. ex. 4. Indeed, his apphcation of the significance of this Old Testament passage foUows, as usual, another direction than that in Hebrews. like our author, he caUs attention to the etymology of ' Melchizedek ' and ' Salem,' but he identifies him not with any Messianic ideal but with the Logos, ' as the common reason of mankind, that higher principle of personahty by which we are brought into contact with Divine thoughts and precepts.' 2 Of more essential importance for the theology of our Epistle is the relation of the author's conception of Christ to PhUo's Logos-doctrine. Here we must beware of 1 His derivation is not scientifically accurate : the name probably means, 'my king is Sidiq ' (a Phoenician deity). 2 Drummond, Philo, ii. p. 227. The meaning of the description of him in Genesis as ' a priest of the most high God ' is that ' Reason is a priest, having the Self -existent as his portion, and entertaining high and sublime and magnificent thoughts about him ' (Leg. Alleg., iii. 82). N 194 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. n. identifying too exclusively with Alexandrian ideas that strain in New Testament thought which sets forth the cosmic significance of Christ. And it has also to be observed that the central element in the Christology of Hebrews, the high-priesthood, does not correspond to anything Philonic.1 For when PhUo speaks of God's ' first-born divine Logos ' as high priest (dpx^ptvs), the temple in which he ministers is the ordered universe, and he evidently represents the Reason which gives its meaning to the entire system of things.2 But there can be little doubt that our author has been influenced by Alexandrian thought and terminology in setting forth the unique position of Christ. EspeciaUy noteworthy is the description in the opening paragraph of Chap. i. Strangely enough, he does not make use of the term ' Logos ' : his highest conception of the essential nature of Christ is expressed in the title, ' Son of God,' which is found repeatedly in PhUo as the equivalent of the Logos.3 Here, as in the case of the Melchizedek-story, Philo moves in a realm of abstractions. For him ' Son ' of God has no suggestion of personality.4 The writer of Hebrews, on the other hand, is above aU else impressed by the real human life of Jesus Christ. Yet he does not hesitate to apply to Him the very language employed by Philo. Thus, in i. 2 he speaks of Him as God's instrument in creation : just as Philo says of the Logos that, in creating the world, God used him as His instrument ( lpydvToyovos) of God. But it would be altogether precarious, as we have seen, to equate Philo's conception of the Logos with our author's designation of Christ as Son of God. The title is one which he must have found in early Christian usage, for he feels it unnecessary to offer any explanation of it. It is possible, from the frequent reference in the New Testament to Ps. n. 7, that it was originaUy used in an adoptive sense But our investigation of its significance for Paul has alreacy shown that its history presents a some what complex probiom . In any case, the writer of Hebrews does not require to establish the Divine Sonship of Christ by argument. He takes for granted that his readers agree with his position. And that position is, to aU intents and purposes, identical with Paul's, only that this writer, for his special purpose, has to elaborate it. It is not enough to say, with some authorities, that our author's association of the Christian order with the invisible heavenly world necessarily presupposes the pre-existence of Christ. He starts, like Paul, from the historical Person, and works ch. n.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 203 back to what he regards as the inevitable implications of that overpowering Reahty. His Alexandrian training may have helped him in the formulation of the convictions at which he has arrived. But his statements about Christ as the ' first-born ' (jrptoTOTOKos, i. 6), as God's instrument in creation (i. 2), as ' Son ' par excellence (i. 2, i. 8, etc.), are not the consequences of a metaphysical theory. They are the inferences forced upon him by the total result of Jesus' historical mission as embodied in the Christian community, and stiU more as apprehended in his personal experience. It has been noted that the Christology of the Epistle is indissolubly linked to the idea of the Christian revelation as the New Covenant. Hence the supremacy of this covenant is involved in the supremacy of its Mediator. The author, however, is not content with a general exhibi tion of Christ's sovereignty as Revealer of God. For his concern is to show how the later revelation overshadows and antiquates the earlier. Therefore he draws a contrast in detaU between the new and final Mediator between God and men, and those temporary mediators to whom his readers were inclined to attach undue importance. He begins with angels, beca«se it was a current Jewish doctrine, taken over into the Christian Church, that they were concerned with the giving of the Law at Sinai.1 It might however be objected that they were spiritual beings, and that it is iUegitimate to take them as representa tives of that visible and material order which is here con trasted with the invisible realm of the spirit. But, as Prof. Peake points out, ' Jewish theology connected them closely with the material universe, so that each thing had its angel.' 2 There is scarcely a tone of disparagement in his reference. The angels have a valuable function to perform in the history of redemption (i. 14, U. 2). But they are thrown into the shade by the essential dignity of Christ. He is Son. They are ' ministering spirits,' barely 1 Cf. Acts vii. 53 ; Gal. iii. 19 j Deut. xxxiii. 2 (LXX). 2 Hebrews (Century Bible), p. 18. Cf. Paul's use of o-roixela in Gal. iv 3,9. 204 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. u. conceivable as personalities. As such they may be trans formed into natural forces to carry out in this medium the behests of God (i. 7). Christ's exaltation is eternal. He shares God's throne for ever, raised above aU mutation of being (i. 8, 10-12). No angel has ever been invited into this lofty partnership with God (i. 13). Rather are they bidden to bow down in worship before the First-born of the eternal world (i. 6). FinaUy, their sphere of adminis tration is the present, with aU its imperfection. Christ is Lord of the coming order, and His lordship is the pledge that frail men shaU have that glorious invisible world as their heritage (ii. 5-9) -1 Two moments in the career of Jesus are skilfully worked into this contrast : His con descension in sharing flesh and blood with His brethren, and His exaltation to God's right hand (ii. 9, 14, i. 3, 4). We caU attention to these, because again and again in the course of his argument the writer pauses to dweU upon them (e.g. iv. 14, 15, v. 7-10, xn. 2). No doubt in this he is above all else carrying out the chief object of his letter, the bracing up of his readers in loyalty to Christ. He can assure them of their Master's sympathy because He has entered into their experiences, and can urge home the great spiritual principle that suffering is the path to victory. Probably also he has the apologetic aim of setting the humihation of Christ, which may have been to some a stumbling-block, in its true perspective as a necessary stage in the accomplishment of salvation. Nor can we overlook his eagerness to prepare his readers' minds, as he does by so many similarly subtle hints, for his great central exposition of Christ's aU-sufficient priesthood. /3. Moses One of the supreme glories of Jewish tradition was the mediatorship of Moses. On him had been conferred the 1 The details of the contrast between Christ and the angels are based on 0. T. passages which the author, no doubt in common with the whole early Christian community, interprets Messianically. These would have the force of proof-texts for his readers , although to us his method is alto gether foreign. ch. n.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 205 unique privilege of acting as the channel of the Divine will to Israel in the formative period of its history. No name stood higher on the national roU of honour. The writer's estimate of his heroic figure is plain from chap. xi. 23-28. No other personage in the catalogue of worthies is marked out for such distinction. The special characteristic of Moses selected for emphasis in the present comparison is taken from the statement of Numb. xii. 7 (LXX) that he was ' faithful in aU God's house.' Obviously in that passage, ' house ' stands for ' community ' or ' common wealth.' 1 His fidelity is manifested in his administration of Israel as the community of God. Now for a mind steeped in the Pentateuch, the foundation of the community would be directly associated with the inauguration of the covenant at Horeb. So that, in accord with his general scheme of thought, this moment probably hes in the background of the writer's mind. We know that Moses stands out as the medium between God and the people in the great act of dedication which, in Exod. xxiv. 8, is caUed a ' covenant,' an act which is the response to the gracious entrance of God into their history. For our author, a new epoch of history, the final epoch, has begun with Christ. He stands between God and man as Moses did. His fidelity is evident to aU who are acquainted with the story of His mission. In no respect does He come behind Moses in this, the most important quahty demanded of any one who is entrusted with the fulfiUing of a high vocation. Now, as a matter of fact, Moses' aim was only partiaUy attained. Although the whole community entered through him into the covenant, the loyalty of many broke down, and the promise embodied in the covenant was in their case thwarted. Even Joshua, the successor of Moses, was not able to lead them to the desired end (iii. 16-19, iv. 6-8). Here, although the contrast is not made expUcit, there is a suggestion that it remained for Christ to make possible in the New Covenant that satisfying relation to God for which they had craved. This, however, is not the central point 1 See Dillmann, ad lots. 208 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. n. of the comparison. Moses, the writer shows, was after all only a servant in the consecrated community. Christ, as the Son of God, who of His grace founded the community, has authority over it as the vicegerent of God, the Founder. That is to say, on its new basis, the consecrated com munity is not at one remove from God, as reaching the knowledge of God through one of its own number. In Christ it is brought directly into the Divine feUowship, for as the Son He knows and represents the Father perfectly. y. Aaronic High Priests It is at first sight almost startling to find the remarkable passage which describes the human experience of Jesus as perfect sympathy with the needs and trials of His brethren (ii. 9-17) culminating in the statement : ' in order to become a compassionate and faithful high priest (for them) in relation to God.' We are net prepared for this abrupt introduction of the idea of priesthood. With equal abruptness this conception is made the pivot of the ex hortation which closes the elaborate warning against unbehef in iii. 7 — iv. 13, only that now an important note of explanation is added : ' As we have, therefore, a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession ' (iv. 14). The words reaUy form the climax of the writer's thought up to this point, and they reveal the lines along which his mind has been sUently moving. He began the Epistle by dwelling upon the glory of Jesus as Son of God, through whom the Father has given His final revelation to men. But this Jesus humbled Himself to enter the lot of tempted humanity. His aim was to understand men through and through. Now He is exalted to God's right hand. There He stiU bears the burdens of His brethren, and represents their needs in God's presence, and thus in an altogether new and glorified fashion performs the function of high priest, keeping them in feUowship with the Divine mercy and grace. From this point up to x. 32 the main theme ch. n.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 207 of the Epistle is the high-priesthood of Christ, viewed in various aspects as the great ministry through which men are able to draw near to the living God. From the elaboration of the writer's leading thesis we can gather the steps by which he has reached his position. The order of subjects in the Epistle presupposes rather than indicates these steps.1 We have already collected and examined the data which determine the writer's general out look. Let us recaU its main features. Fundamental is the antithesis between the realm of the visible and transient, embodied for rehgion in the legal ritual of Judaism, and that of the invisible and eternal which has projected itself into human experience in the Christian revelation. Now the end of rehgion is to bring men near to God. This relation of access to God found expression in the Old Testament conception of the covenant. The writer retains the idea, which makes so powerful an appeal to aU Jewish minds, and through the medium of Jeremiah's great picture of the New Covenant finds it marveUously exemplified in Christianity. But the function of a covenant being to maintain the community in feUowship with God, and that maintenance, according to the Law, depending on appro priate sacrifices, everything wUl turn on the existence of an adequate priesthood, that can represent the community in making offerings to atone for their sins. In the Christian dispensation Christ is the aU-sufficient Priest. His one sacrifice of Himself both inaugurates the New Covenant, a ceremony which in the ritual of the Pentateuch involved a sprinkling of blood, and constitutes an eternal atonement for the sins of His people, which would otherwise interrupt their feUowship with God. (1) Christ's Priesthood included all the valuable qualities of a worthy High Priest of the Aaronic Order We are now in a position to discuss the writer's compari son of Christ's high-priesthood with that of the Aaronic 1 See p. 201, supra. 208 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. n. order. First, he sets himseff to show that it included all the valuable qualities of a worthy high priest of the Aaronic order. Now the primary function of the high priest was to take direction of the worship of the community. As the worship of Israel, like that of aU ancient peoples, was chiefly sacrificial, his main business was to see that the offerings of the people were presented to God in the manner prescribed by religious authority. These offerings, the writer assumes, are usually intended to make atonement for sin, to remove whatever defilement may hinder the people from finding access to their God. His language, however, suggests that the high priest who is true to his sacred calling wiU not be a mere official ministrant of sacrifice. He will take a larger view of his vocation than that. He will feel the obligation to deal with burdened consciences, to offer spiritual counsel, and aU in a spirit of sincere sympathy, for we know that confession of sin for the post-exihc community formed the very core of the sacrificia^ ritual.1 Hence the high priest, a frail man himseff, must be able ' to deal gently with the ignorant and the erring ' (v. 2). The remarkable term here used to describe his attitude (ptTptowadtiv) implies the mean between censorious severity and mere good-natured leniency. He will not terrify the penitent by unqualified condemnation, and yet he dare not make hght of any moral lapse. In virtue of his office he can declare the wiU of God, but at the same time he wiU be fuUy ahve to the frailty which besets even those whose purposes are good. Further, no man of himself would choose a vocation of such tremendous responsibility (v. 4). He simply enters upon it according to Divine appointment, and the sense of a Divine purpose encourages him when otherwise he would shrink from his task. Here, of course, the author has in view the Jewish tradition of a priesthood hereditary by Divine prescription in the tribe of Levi. Christ possesses both of the specific qualifications laid down. On the one hand, He is able to sympathise with 1 See Wheeler Robinson, Beligioue Ideas of the 0. T., p. 167. ch. n.; THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 209 the mfirmities of His brethren, because He was ' tempted in all points ' like them ' yet without yielding to sin ' (iv. 15). No writer outside the Synoptic Gospels gives so prominent a place as this to Jesus' discipline of suffering x as the condition of His final fitness to be Saviour. The subject seems to fascinate him. No doubt, as has been already hinted, he finds in it a strong ground of consolation to offer to his readers who are undergoing severe trials. It reminds them not merely that their living Lord under stands their situation, and can therefore give them the succour they require, but also that the way of suffering is that which leads to ultimate perfection. But at the same time it directly answers the author's central purpose of exhibiting Jesus Christ as the completely adequate High Priest who can accomplish what has never been accom plished before : who is able to remove aU the barriers which separate God from His children whom He desires to 'bring to glory' (U. 10). On the other hand, this function of Christ is assigned to Him by the Father. That is taken for granted again and again in the Epistle. When the writer wishes to demonstrate it, he quotes two passages from the Book of Psalms, which were always interpreted MessianicaUy (v. £, 6). His method, which to us appears so external, would appeal forcibly to his readers. The second of his quotations, ' Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchizedek ' (Ps. ex. 4), strikes the keynote of the elaborate discussion of Christ's high superiority to the older priesthood which occupies the body of the Epistle. (2) Christ's Priesthood possessed in addition those qualities for lack of which the Aaronic Order of Priests failed in its religious Office It is important to observe that in seeking to estabhsh this superiority, the author is not simply at the mercy of an imposing theory. The basis of aU his elaborate argu- 1 E.g. ii. 9, 10, 14, 17, 18 ; iv. 15, 16 ; v. 7-9 ; xii. 2. O 210 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. ii. ment hes in his personal experience of Jesus Christ. This man, who from his earhest days has been familiar with the sacrificial system of his nation, who is aware of the firm hold it has taken even of spiritual minds, has discovered for himself that in Christ he has actuaUy come into that feUowship with God which the traditional ceremonial had promised, but which it had never achieved. Here is the New Covenant which Jeremiah had foretold in real opera tion. Its existence is intrinsicaUy involved in that of the exalted Christ, ' who ever hves to make intercession for ' His people. Hence it is thoroughly relevant to his own rehgious history as weU as to the pressing needs of his readers to set forth with reverent care those qualities by which Christ, in contrast to the Aaronic line of officials, has realised for His people the true function of High Priest. (a) Christ belongs fo a new order of priesthood. The elaborate discussion of this theme in vii. 1-25 has been skU- fuUy prepared for by a three-fold introduction of the phrase, ' a high priest (or, priest) according to the order (rd£iv) of Melchizedek,' x and the discussion itself starts from a characteristicaUy Alexandrian treatment of the primitive story in Genesis, of which the priest-king Melchizedek forms the centre. Two considerations have prompted the introduction of this strange figure. On the one hand, there is the psalmist's phrase which, in the judg ment of Jews and early Christians, describes the priesthood of Messiah and therefore directly refers to Christ (Ps. ex. 4). On the other, the author, entirely in the Philonic manner, finds the most impressive feature of the ancient narrative to be the timelessness of Melchidezek as a historical personage. He sees the psalmist's description, ' a priest for ever,' exemplified in this man, who appears without any setting of lineage or family : who is not represented, like the Aaronic priests, as belonging to any succession : who, on the sacred page, ' has neither beginning of days nor end of 1 v. 6, 10 ; vi. 20. Holtzmann's attempt to find in the author's emphasis on Christ's priesthood the influenoo of Philo's description of the Logos as high priest in one or two places is far-fetched (op. tit., ii. p. 334). But it may have been one of the factors in the formation of his thought. ch. n.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 211 life,' and thus, so far as Scripture is concerned, ' abides a priest for ever.' x Here is a priest-king who occupies his station, not on account of legal arrangement, but in virtue of his own personafity. His is the order to which Christ belongs. He has become priest ' not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an indissoluble life' (vii. 16). Christ's priesthood invalidates the old Aaronic order. That depended on heredity. His depends on personahty, a fulness of hfe which cannot be quenched. He who has come to impart to men ' overflowing life,' in the Johannine phrase (John x. 10), is the true priest for men, the true medium between God and them. His priesthood, from the nature of the case, is eternal and inviolable (vii. 23, 24). The full significance of the eternal priesthood emerges at a later stage of his argument. But the new order of priesthood imphes essentiaUy the establishment of the New Covenant. (b) The aU-important function of the priest is to offer sacrifice, as representing the people before God. The New Covenant established by Christ involves a new type of sacrifice. The contrast between the old and the new is drawn in detail. The Aaronic priests offered their sacrifices in an earthly sanctuary. But its inner chamber, the special place of the Divine Presence, was closed except for a single day in the year, on which the high priest entered, carrying the blood of the sacrificial victim, which he sprinkled on and in front of the mercy-seat, the first time as an atone ment for his own sin, the second, for the sins of the people. On this great day, by a simUar ceremony, the holy place itself, with its furniture, was * atoned for,' or purged from sin.2 These actions, as we have seen, were intended to ' purify ' (Ka0api(uv) or ' sanctify ' (dyidfav) the people, that is, to preserve them in covenant-relation with their 1 vii. 3. It is unnecessary for our purpose to ask whether the phrase ' for ever ' in Ps. ex. 4 is associated for the psalmist, as for our author, with the Melchizedek-figure as described in Genesis. Obviously the latter so regards it, and justifies the association by his exegesis. For a suggestive explanation of the phrase, see Poake on Heb. i. 13. Kittel (Die Psalmen, pp. 400, 401) contests the ascription of Ps. ex. to the Maocabean period. 2 See Lev. xvi 11-19. 212 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EriSTLES [pt. a. God.1 The writer brings into close connection with the ritual of the Day of Atonement that belonging to the inauguration of the covenant as described in Exod. xxiv. (ix. 18-20). Indeed his reference to the sprinkling of holy places and vessels is introduced as if related to the latter. But throughout he draws no clear distinction between the inauguration of the covenant and its maintenance, as is plain from ix. 15, where, in describing the death of Christ as the initiation of the New Covenant, he goes on to declare that that death had as its aim the forgiveness of the sins committed under the earher covenant. That is to say, the same event is regarded both as an inaugural and an atoning sacrifice. As a matter of fact, the basal idea in his mind is expressed in ix. 22 : ' Apart from shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins.' Both these types of sacrifice have as their purpose the forgiveness of sins, which are the violation of the covenant. Probably the dictum laid down is an axiom for the writer, as it was for the Hebrew mind in general. He does not theorise on its significance. Blood, regarded as the seat of life, atones. But his description of the Levitical ritual, as it culminated in that of the Day of Atonement, emphasises its inadequacy. The same ceremonial was repeated year after year. The Holy of Hohes where God was to be met remained closed save for one day annuaUy. The sacrifices themselves were bound up with a system of ' meats and drinks and various purifications.' They consisted of the blood of buUs and goats.2 As regards these, the writer bluntly declares that ' it is impossible that they should remove sin ' : that * they have no power to perfect (TtXtiwo-at) the worshipper in his conscience,' i.e. to remove his sense of guilt so that he may have the assurance of real fellowship with God. The very fact of this repetition pointed to the abiding consciousness of guilt.3 And he boldly appeals to Ps. xl. 6-8 as scriptural evidence that God had no pleasure in 1 In ix. 9 reXetuaai, ' to perfect,' is used in the same sense. See Feine, op. cit, p. 559. " ix. 26, ix. 7-9, ix. 10, ix. 12. » x. 4, ix. 9, x. 2. ch. n.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 213 sacrifices, but that His delight was in the obedient will (x. 5-9). Hence we may take as his general principle the statement made with reference to the priesthood : ' The earher commandment is canceUed on account of its feebleness and futihty, for the law brought nothing to its goal' (vn. 18 f.). The question naturaUy arises : Did the writer hold that the older ritual had been simply labour lost ? That would be a most precarious inference. It was an integral part of the rehgious system of Israel, and although ' the law brought nothing to its goal,' it contained nevertheless ' a shadow of the blessings to come,' and its ministrants served 'a copy of the heavenly reaUties ' (x. 1, vfii. 5). But whUe the * shadow ' is very different from ' the fac-simUe ' which is presented in the Christian faith, it is better than nothing. It provided a ritual cleansing for the community (ix. 13), a cleansing which, for devout minds that could penetrate beneath the letter to the spirit, must have often meant a sense of restoration to the Divine communion. But at best the machinery was cumbrous : at best the pathway into God's presence was dimly hghted. No wonder that a man who had in his own experience grasped the significance of Christ could affirm that the old sacrifices ' were of a kind which could never remove sin ' (x. 11) : no wonder that he exulted in ' the new and living (i.e. effective) way ' into the sanctuary of God's presence, inaugurated by the sacrifice of Christ.1 Christ, in contrast to the Aaronic priests, is ' a minister of the genuine taber nacle,' which is the heavenly world, the real abode of God's presence. As exalted above aU that is material and imperfect, He represents His people in the Holy of Holies 'not made with hands.' He too has made an offering, but not on His own behalf, an atoning sacrifice in virtue of which He could enter the Divine presence, to give His worshipping people the assurance that their sins were purged away. This He did once, and once for aU. The offering was Himself, in His spotless purity. It was made > x. 19, 20. 214 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. ii. ' through eternal spirit.' x This differentiates it from the animal sacrifices. It had the whole power of His deathless personahty in it : it was an embodiment of all that He was. So its worth can never fade. Its moral significance is that it realises the Divine wiU. It is an act of perfect obedience Its effect corresponds to its character. It does completely what the earher ritual had never achieved : it cleanses the conscience from dead works to serve the living God.2 The description is very remarkable. The fiving God is God manifested as He truly is, in Jesus Christ, ' all active in putting Himself forth to men, and aU responsive to their putting of themselves forth to Him.' s As soon as the conscience is unburdened of its sin, it passes out of the sphere of death into that of life, which is the sphere of God. For the first time the human spirit finds its real home. This new condition the writer describes by the old ritual term, 'sanctify' (ayidfciv). The word retains its associa tion with the covenant-idea. But it implies a covenant ' which has been enacted on the basis of better promises.' * This, then, is the assurance brought to the believing heart by the sacrifice of Christ. The writer sets forth, as usual, in the language of cultus, the. transformation which had been wrought in his own fife and that of his fellow- Christians by coming into relation with Christ and His redeeming activity. It is for him concentrated in His death and (as we shall see) His exalted life of intercession. ' Having been perfected,6 he became the cause of eternal salvation to all who obey him ' (v. 9). But what He has done carries with it the total impression of His career as Saviour. To each element ahke we may apply what Prof. Bruce has said of Christ's sacrifice, that it ' acts on the conscience through the mind interpreting its significance, and in proportion as it is thought on.' 6 Such inter pretation and reflection would necessarily be coloured by 1 viii. 2, vii. 26, ix. II, vii. 27, ix. 12, x. 12, ix. 14. • x. 9, 10 ; ix. 14. » Davidson on Heb. iii. 12. * x. 10, 14, 29 ; viii. 6. * His reXeiowis was effected by suffering and death ; it was realised in His exaltation. • Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 350. ch. ii.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 215 the author's presuppositions. When these presuppositions are modified in the course of a long development of reU gious experience the interpretation inevitably receives an enlargement of range and an enriching of content. (b) Consummation of the New Covenant in the World to Come 1. Christ's High Priesthood a Link between the Present and the World to come The ultimate issue of our author's conception of the high-priesthood of Christ finds expression in viii. 1 : ' We have a high priest of such a character that he sat down at the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens.' Christ's exaltation completely overshadows His resurrection in this Epistle, while of course presupposing it. And it is invariably linked to the atoning' sacrifice of Himself which He offered as High Priest for His people : ' Having offered one sacrifice for sin of eternal value, he sat down at the right hand of God ' (x. 12). The latter phrase which he uses so often has come from his favourite Psalm, the 110th. But he always interprets it from the point of view of Christ's high-priesthood. By the pathway of His sacrificial death, which, as we have seen, was at once the inauguration of a new relationship to God and the pledge that such a relationship should never be broken, He passed into the Divine presence and abides there for ever. There can therefore be no interruption to the ap proach of those ' who come unto God by him, seeing he ever hves to make intercession for them ' (vn. 25). A barren controversy has been waged around the question : When did Christ become high priest ? Was it at His death or when He entered heaven ? The author draws no such distinction. According to the symbolism used, He must have been high priest when He offered the sacrifice, but the sacrifice is not complete until it is presented before God. But Christ never leaves the heavenly sanctuary, therefore He is an eternal high priest. His people can 216 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [ft. n. always count on His interest in their needs. They may always be sure that He ' can bring to bear aU the resources of the Almighty for the complete and final salvation of his brethren.' x A remarkable turn is given to the idea of Christ's high- priesthood, which reveals a further range of the writer's thought. It is introduced almost as if incidentally, but it belongs to a fundamental element in his scheme of con ceptions. In describing the hope of the Christian as an anchor cast within the heavenly world, that world which is at present veiled from his eyes as the Holy of Holies was curtained off from the gaze of the worshippers in the ancient tabernacle, he reminds his readers that Jesus has penetrated behind the veU as their High Priest, but also as their Forerunner (7rpo'8po/ios).2 Here is a vital trans formation of the picture. The Aaronic high priest was permitted once a year to pass within the Holy of Hohes, but no worshipper could ever expect to foUow him. At best their feUowship with God was mediated. Christ has entered the true sanctuary in the heavenly world, not to spend a brief moment there but to abide for ever. But in so doing He has prepared the way by which His people are destined to foUow Him. The veil has been withdrawn. Their perfecting wiU be on the same lines as His (v. 9). It wiU mean entrance into the real sanctuary, complete and immediate communion with God. That wiU be the consummation of the New Covenant. Now a most important feature in our author's outlook is the conviction that already Christians have entered upon this consummation, have begun to live in the world to come, the invisible heavenly order. At an early stage in our discussion we found how central for the Epistle was the contrast between the present, as the world of shadows, embodied for rehgion in the ritual of Judaism, and the world to come as the realm of reahties, which have their true copy in the Christian dispensation. The author ventures to go further than this, and to declare that, in a 1 Bruce, op. tit., p. 280. • yj. 20. ch. n.] THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 2T7 sense, the world to come, the Messianic age of ardent Jews, has already broken in, has already projected itself into the closing epoch of this present age. That is the real meaning of the New Covenant. It is not merely a hope : it is already fruition. Here he touches the thought of Paul. Paul too has the behef that Christians are even now ' delivered from this age which is evil.' Their common wealth is already in heaven. Their lot has been cast in ' the closing hours of the world:' x This phrase has a marked resemblance to that of Heb. i. 2 : ' the close of these days,' an epoch signalised by the manifestation of Jesus Christ.2 His appearance, or at least His high-priestly service on behalf of His people, has virtuaUy inaugurated the coming era. Their present access to God through Him is a genuine anticipation of the future. They know that they possess a better than any earthly heritage, one that endures. They have already 'tasted the heavenly gift . . . and the powers of the world to come ' (piXXovros aiwi-os).8 In Jesus Christ their representative High Priest and Forerunner, who has carried with Him into the heavenly order the life and experience in which He became one with His brethren, they are now ' partakers of a heavenly calling.' They have come ' to Mount Sion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to myriads of angels in festal gathering, to the assembly of the first born enroUed in heaven.' 4 The Christian is thus living a two -fold life. ' ActuaUy he stiU hves within the lower order. But ideaUy he has already transcended it, and he confidently looks forward to the time when the actual shaU be one with the ideal.' 6 Even now, in wondrous fashion, the ideal is translated into the real through faith. 1 Gal. i 4 ; Phil. iii. 20 ; I Cor. x. ] 1 (M.). * Cf. ix. 26 : M o-vrreXela rdv aliivwv . . . iri06I't«s) by His [God's] grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.' This fine passage, which almost stands alone, echoes Paul's phraseology.1 Yet there is no mention here of faith, which is the very nerve of Paul's position. And the prominence given to the bath of regenera tion points to the development of Catholic doctrine. The use of ' justify ' in the Epistle of James (ii. 21, 24, 25) is typical of the period. Paul's daring rehgious paradox as to the justification of the ungodly is no longer appreciated. The man is now said to be justified who cammends himself as a Christian by obeying the revealed wUl of God in a life of worthy activity. It is impossible in Paul's teaching to distinguish sharply between justification and forgiveness. The latter is im plied in the former, and both are intimately associated with the death of Christ. There is no reference to this normative idea even in the unique passage quoted above. Hence we are not surprised to find that when forgiveness is mentioned (James v. 15, 20), its affinity is closer to Jewish than to distinctive Christian conceptions. Indeed the whole view of salvation which meets us in this epoch lacks the freshness of profound experience. Terms are used which remind us that Paul's teaching and that of the early apostohc Church are still influential. But the significance of such a passage as Tit. U. 14, ' Who gave himself for us that he might redeem (Xvrptaa-rjrai) us from aU iniquity (dvopias) and purify for himself a people to be his possession (Xabv 7rdveiav) of the great God and of our Saviour (o-voI <£i'o-*u>s) and their escape from that destruction which is produced in the world by lust. The conception of sharing the Divine nature is not found elsewhere in the New Testament, although, of course, there are approximations to it in Paul. But Paul never has the notion of a metaphysical deification, which is 1 This word occurs so often in the Greek inscriptions of the East that in the index to his selection from these Dittenberger considers it needless to give the references. s For details, see an article by the present writer on ' The Hellenistic Atmosphere of the Epistle of James,' in Expositor, 1912, pp. 37-52. • See the examples in the succeeding paragraphs. 254 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES [pt. characteristicaUy Hellenistic. It means primarily that the goal of the rehgious hfe is the attainment of an incor ruptible essence, as is plain from the second clause of our passage. The idea was fraught with momentous conse quences for the development of early Christian theology, for it carried with it the tendency to shift the emphasis from the ethical to the metaphysical. The subsequent history of Christian doctrine bears eloquent testimony to the perilous issues involved. This conception occurs repeatedly in Philo, e.g. De Decal. 104, where he speaks of the heavenly bodies as ' possessing a share in the divine and blessed and beatific nature.' 1 The negative clause of 2 Pet. i. 4 is equaUy significant. Plato, in a famous passage of the Theoetetus (176 A, B), which shows how evils hover around the earthly nature and the material sphere, declares through the lips of Socrates that ' we must try to fly from hence yonder as quickly as pos sible, for flight means likeness to God (tpp6vu>s), and righteousness (&iKaim%), and piety (evo-«/35«) in this present world.' Righteousness is that attitude towards one's fellow-men which recognises their just claims. Piety describes the proper relation to supernatural powers. Self-control is the most characteristic of HeUenic virtues, that principle of order and balance, which preserves the real unity of a life by maintaining its elements in their due proportions. BIBLIOGRAPHY (SELECTED WORKS) I. ENVIRONMENT OF EPISTLES (a) Jewish Bousset. Die Religion des Judentums, ed. 2, 1906. Charles. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, 1913. Hort. Judaistic Christianity, 1894. Mathews. The Messianic Hope in the Neiv Testament, 1905. Schechter. Some Aspects of Rabbinic Theology, 1909. SoHtJRER. The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (K T.), 1890-96. (4th German ed„ 1901-11.) Volz. Jiidische Eschatologie, 1903. (6) Hellenistic Angus. The Environment of Early Christianity, 1914. Bonhoffer. Epiktet und das Neue Testament, 1911. Br£hier. Les I dees Philosophiques et Religieuses de Philon, 1908. Cumont. Les Religions Orientates dans le Paganisme Romain, ed. 2, 1909. Dill. Roman Society from Nero, to Marcus Aurelius, 1904. Glover. The Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire, 1907. Harnaok. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity (E. T.), 1908. Kennedy. St. Paul and the Mystery-Religions, 1913. Norden. Agnosias Theos, 1913. Ramsay. The Church in the Roman Empire, 1893 ; St. Paul the Traveller, 1895. Reitzenstein. Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, 1910. Wendland. Die hellenistisch-romische Kidtur, ed. 2-3, 1912. n. THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES AS A WHOLE Feine. Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 1910. Holtzmann. Neutestamentliche Theologie. ed. 2, 1911. M'Giffert. History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age, 1897. Stevens. The Theology of the New Testament, 1899. Wbinel. Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 1911. 268 BIBLIOGRAPHY 257 Weiss, J. Christus, 1909 ; Das Urchristentum, 1 Teil, 1914; 2 Teil, 1917. Weizsacker. The Apostolic Age (E. T.), 1894-95. Wernle. The Beginnings of Christianity (E. T.), 1903. HI. PAULINISM (1) Commentaries of special value for Pauline Theology Romans, Denney (Exp. Greek Test.), 1900; Kuhl, 1913. 1 Corinthians, Ftndlay (E. G. T.), 1900 ; J. Weiss (9th ed. of Meyer), 1910. 2 Corinthians, Denney (Expos. Bible), 1894; Heinbici, 1887. Galatians, Lightfoot (ed. 9), 1887 ; Ftndlay (Expos. B.), 1889. 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Moffatt (E. G. T.), 1910; von Dobschutz (7th ed. of Meyer), 1909. Ephesians, Armitage Robinson, 1903 ; Haupt (7th ed. of Meyer), 1897. Colossians, Lightfoot (ed. 8), 1886 ; Peake (E. G. T.), 1903 ; Haupt (6th ed. of Meyer), 1897. Philippians, Lightfoot (ed. 8), 1888; Haupt (6th ed. of Meyer), 1897. (2) General Studies Bacon. The. Story of St. Paul, 1904. Deissmann. St. Paul (E. T.), 1912. Ftndlay. Art. Paul (H. D. B.). Moffatt. Paul and Paulinism, 1910. Morgan, W. The Religion and Theology of Paul, 1917. Pfleiderer. Paulinism (E. T.), 1877. Sabattjsr. The Apostle Paul (E. T.), 1891. Strachan, R. H. The Individuality of St. Paul, 1917. Wetnel. St. Paul (E. T.), 1906. Weiss, J. Das Urchristentum, 1 Teil, 1914, pp. 103-416. Wernle, P. Jesus u. Paulus, 1915. Wrede. Paulus, 1904. (3) Special Subjects Denney. The Theology of the Epistle to the Romans (Expositor, vi., vols. 3, 4), 1901. Dibelius. Die OeisterweU im Olauben des Paulus, 1909. Dickson. St. PauPs Use of the terms Flesh and Spirit, 1883. Fetne. Jesus Christus und Paulus, 1902. Grafe. Die paulinische Lehre vom Oesetz, ed. 2, 1893. Gunkel. Die Wirkungen des Heiligen Oeistes, ed. 2, 1899. Kaftan. Jesus und Paulus, 1906. Kennedy. St. Paul's Conceptions of the Last Things, 1904. Menegoz. Le PecM et la Redemption d'apres St. Paul, 1882. Olschewski. Die Wurzeln der paulinischen Christologie, 1909. Robinson. The Christian Doctrine of Man, 1911, pp. 104-136. 258 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES Sokolowski. Geisl und Leben bei Paulus, 1903. Somerville. St. PauVs Conception of Christ, 1897. Thtus. Der Paulinismus unter dem Gesichts-punkt der Seligkeit, 1900. Warneck. Paulus im Lichte der heutigen Heidenmission, 1913. IV. EARLY CHRISTIAN THOUGHT INDEPENDENT OF PAUI (1) First Peter (a) Commentaries valuable for Theology : Bigg, 1901 ; Hort (incomplete), 1898 ; Windisch (in Lietzmann's Handbuch zum N. T.), 1911. (b) Studies : Chase, Art. First Epistle of Peter (H. D. B.) ; Moffatt, Introduction to the Literature of the N. T., 1911, pp. 319-344; B. Weiss, Der petrinische Lehrbegriff, 1855. (2) Hebrews (a) Commentaries : Davidson (Bible Handbooks), 1882 ; Dods (E. G. T.), 1910 ; A. Natrne, The Epistle to the Hebrews (C. G. T.), 1917 ; Peake (Cent. Bible), n.d. ; B. Weiss (6th ed. of Meyer), 1897. (b) Studies: Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 1899; H.^MacNeill, The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 1914 ; Menegoz, La Theologie de VEyilre aux Hebreux, 1894 ; G. Mtlligan, The Theology of the Epistle to the Heb/ews, 1899. ^ V. THE THEOLOGY OF THE DEVELOPING CHURCH (1) Commentaries Pastoral Epistles, Bernard (Camb. Greek Test.), 1899; von Soden, ed. 2 (Handcommentar), 1893. James, KnowlinG, 1903 ; Mayor, ed. 3, 1910; Windisch (in Lietzmann), 1911. Jude and 2 Peter, Bigg, 1901 ; Mayor, 1907 ; Windisch, 1911. (2) Studies W. Bauer, Die kalholischen Brief e, 1910 ; Chase, Artt. Epistle of Jude and Second Epistle of Peter (H. D. B.) ; Grate, Die Stellung und Bedeutung des Jacobusbriefes, 1904 ; Hoennicke, Das Juden- chrislentum, 1908 ; Titius, Die vulgare Anschauung von der Seligkeit im Urchristentum, 1900; von Dobschutz, Die wchristlichen Gemeinden, 1902, pp. 176-205. INDEX I.— SUBJECTS Adam, 21, 39, 40, 159. Ages, Two, 18, 217. Angels, 45, 197, 202 ff. Apocalypses, 17-20, 80, 103, 134. Atonement, 128-131, 189, 196 f., 211 ff. See Death of Christ. Church, as body of Christ, 147-150 ; officials in, 148 ; organisation of, 148, 234 ; as uniting Jews and Gen tiles, 150; as guardian of sound doctrine, 235, 248. Clement, First Epistle of, 2, 61, 162, 241. Colossae, tbeosopbical movement at, 153-156, 219. Confessions of faith, 236, 238. Corinth, problems at, 102 f., 145. Covenant, central in Hebrews, 11, 201 ; Jesus' use of, 117, 198 ; meaning of old, 195 ; new and old, 195 ; inauguration of old, 196 ; in Jeremiah, 197 f., 210 ; Paul's atti- tude to, 199 ; in sense of testament, 199 n., 200 ; mediators of, 201, 203 ; religion of, as access to God, 207 ; sacrifices of, 211 f. ; consummation of, 216 f. Death of Christ, central for Panl, 66 ; scandal of, 68 f., 126 ; relation of, to resurrection, 70 f., 125 ; early explanations of, 72 f., 115 ff., 127 ; constructions of, in Paul, 128-131 ; many-sidedness of Paul's view of, 131 ff. ; in First Peter, 176-179. See Atonement. Deification, 253. Diaspora, 7 f., 14, 22, 26, 241. Diatribe, 23. Didache, 233 f., 244. Doctrine, sound, 235, 237, 248. Enoch, 20, 80, 113, 180. Ezra, Fourth, 21, 39 f., 43, 80. Faith, in O. T., 93; in Paul, 93 f., 123 ; in First Peter, 167 ff. ; in Hebrews, 190, 218-221; in post- Pauline Epp. , 229 ; in sub-apostolic period, 229 ff. Fathers, Apostolic, atmosphere of, 12, 222 f., 244. Freedom, Christian, 44, 106, 111, 128, 138, 142, 144, 249. Glory, 14, 79, 125, 189 ff., 246 n. Glossolalia, 112 f. Gnosticism, 225, 239, 249 ff. God, re-discovery of, by Paul, 52, 55 ; fatherhood of, in Paul, 91 ff, 105 ff. ; in Jewish propaganda, 238 ; Gnostic views of, 239 ; fatherhood of, in post-Pauline Epp., 240. God-fearers, 64 f. Hades, 180. Hebrews, homilies in, 182 ; com munity addressed in, 183 ; author ship of, 184 ; perils of cotnnimiii.y, 185 ff. ; relation of, to Paul, 18S tt'. ; 26k 260 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES relation of, to Alexandrian Judaism, 190 ff. ; complete efficacy of Christ's offering in, 213 f. Hennas, Shepherd of, 2, 222, 227. Hope, in Paul, 79, 108, 139 ; in First Peter, 166, 172 ; in Hebrews, 221. Impulse, evil, 21, 39 f. Influence, Hellenistic, on Paul, 22-27, 37, 155 ff. ; on post-Pauline Epp., 252-255. Jeremiah, 58, 113, 197 f. Jesus Christ, impression made by character of, 50, 54, 104 f. ; names of, in Paul, 53 n.,76; significance of resurrection of, 69-72 ; as Son of God, 81 f., 202 f., 206; as Lord, 82 ff. ; exaltation of, 85, 204 ; importance of, as historical, 97 ff. ; alleged difference between teaching of, and Paul's, 100 ff. ; instructions of, normative for Paul, 102 f. ; eschatology of, 110; sacrifice of, 130, 135 ; on the Lost Son, 138 ; cosmic significance of, 152-155, 157 ; incarnation of, 158, 160 ; and other mediators, 192 ; as mediator, 201, 239 ; offering of, in Hebrews, 211- 214; intercession of, in Hebrews, 215 f. ; as forerunner, 216 f. See Messiah. Judaism, view of God in, 19, 238 ; mediating powers in, 20 ; con fronted in Hebrews, 186. Justification, 63, 135 ff., 230 f. Kingdom of God, place of, in Paul, 105 f., 110; spirit of, 107. See Church. Knowledge, 16, 25, 232 f. Law, perils of, 30 ff., 44 ; burden of, on Paul, 31 f. ; problem of, for Paul, 81, 41 f. ; developing attitude to, of Paul, 42-46 ; as preparatory discipline, 43 ; criticism of, by Paul, 45 f. ; in Paganism, 46 ; as religion of contract, 95 ; curse of, 128 f. ; in Hebrews, 188 f. ; in sub- apostolic period, 224; of nature, 241; the new, 242; of freedom, 243. Letters, contrasted with epistles, 4 f. ; nature of Paul's, 100. Libertinism, 249. Life, eternal, in Paul, 70 ff., 86, 122, 125, 130, 141 ; in post-Pauline Epp., 245. Logos, affinities of, with Paul, 155- 158 ; traces of, in Hebrews, 193 ff. See Philo. Lord, in LXX, 23, 85; as title of Jesus, 82^86 ; Oriental and Hellen istic uses of, 83 ; in early Church, 83 f. ; in O. T., 84 ff. ; in Paul, 84 ff., 89, 159; relation of, to the Spirit, 111. Love, in Paul, 107, 120, 143 f. Maccabees, Fourth, 37, 116, 128. Maran atha, 84, 109. Matter, 24, 33 f., 251. Melchizedek, 193, 209 f., 211 n. Messiah, doctrine of, in Judaism, 18, 80; as Heavenly Man, 57, 80, 159 f. ; place of, in Paul, 64, 75 ff. ; a suffering, 72 f. ; in early Church, 76, 171 ; pre-existence of, 80, 154, 158, 194; as Son of God, 81 f. See Jesus Christ. Moses, 204 ff. Mystery-religion, 25, 132, 137, 156. Mysticism, 120-122. Nero, 164. Parousia, in Paul, 66, 78, 140 ff. ; in First Peter, 172; in later Epp., 246 f. Pattern (heavenly), contrasted with copy (earthly), 190 f., 213. Paul, Christian experience of, 7, 65 f., 74, 86, 88, 132 ; missionary voca tion of, 7, 56 ff., 59, 93; as belong ing to Diaspora, 14 ; training of, 14 ff. ; Rabbinic methods in, 15, 17, 45; O. T. in, 16 f., 23 ; mono- INDEX 261 theism of, 19, 86 ; conscience in, 26, 38 ; flesh in, 33 f., 36 ; soul in, 86 ; spirit in, 37, 88 ff. ; mind in, 87 f. ; relation of, to Stephen, 47 f. ; relation of, to historical Jesns, 49, 58, 98 ff. , 158 ; grace in, 61, 61, 74, 91 f., 95, 133, 137 ; con version of, 51 ff. ; apostolic con sciousness of, 58-60 ; meaning of election for, 58-62 ; eschatology of, 64, 77 ff, 95, 108 f., 140; ethics of, 65 f., 107, 142 ff, 225 ; mis sionary preaching of, 63-67 ; influ ence of conversion of, on thought, 66,68, 74, 86, 91 f., 97, 119, 143; and the original apostles, 98 ; and the Gospel of Matthew, 99 ; know ledge of Jesus' life in, 103 f. ; on transformation of Christians, 139 f. ; on slavery, 146 ; on woman, 1 46 ; on the state, 147 ; creative energy of, 223. Pax Romana, 147. Perfecting (of Christians), 189, 212. Persecutions, 163-165. Peter, First, author of, 10 ; composi tion of, 161 ; date of, 165 ; practical character of, 166 : relation of, to Paul, 167 f. ; divergence of, from Paul, 169 f. ; use of O. T. in, 171 ; reminiscences of Synoptics in, 173 ; affinities of, with Hebrews, 173, 174 n. ; influence of prophets on, 174 f. ; descent to Hades in, 180 f. PhUo, 24, 26 n., 38, 124 n., 155 ff., 190, 192-195, 202, 218 ff, 240, 253 f. Piety, 237, 255. Plato, 34, 38, 43, 190, 254. Powers, evil, 20, 40, 46, 65, 78, 154. Priesthood, Aaronic, 206 ff. ; of Christ, 209 ff. Psaims of Solomon, 80. Reconciliation, 130, 134 f. Redemption, 24, 25, 65, 106, 108, 154, 189. Retribution, 134, 135. Righteousness, 21, 136, 230, 231. See Justification. Sacraments, 133 »., 150-152. Sacrifices, 130, 195 196, 214. Saviour, 239, 252, 263. Septuagint, 28, 83, 84, 237. Sermon on Mount, 11 n., 173 »., 242. Servant of Jehovah, 72, 116-118, 128. Sin, and flesh, 33 f., 129 ; origin of, 39 ; relation of, to death, 126. Sonship, 94 f., 106 f., 137, 138. Spirit, Holy, as criterion of Christian life, 86 ; in O. T., 87, 113 ; Paul's conception of, 88-90 ; relation of, to Christ, 88 f., Ill, 123; in Mes sianic age, 88, 113 ; transformation of doctrine of, 90 f . ; promise of, in Acts, 112; teaching of Jesus on, 114 n. ; in Christian conduct, 142; receding of idea of, 233 n. Stoicism, 23, 25 f., 165, 227. Tarsus, 14, 25. Tradition, authority of, 224, 235, 248. Ukion with Christ, 119-124, 132. Wisdom-literature, 21, 24, 26, 87, 156, 158, 191, 195, 253 Works, good, 226, 227. World-soul, 24, 156. 262 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES II.— BIBLICAL REFERENCES (1) Old Testament Genesis — PAGE i. 27, . . . . 39 iii. 5 159 vi. 12 f., 180 xiv. 18 ft, . 193 xv. 6 218 Exodus — xii. 13, ... 177 xix. 5 (LXX), 231 xx. 22,. 31 xxiii. 7, . . . 135 xxiii. 19, . . 31 xxiv. 4 ff., . . . 195 xxiv. 7f., . . 178 Leviticus — xviii. 5, . . . 32, 42 Numbers — xii. 7, .... 205 Deuteronomy— xxi. 22, ... 116 xxi. 23, 127 xxvii. 26, . 32 xxxiii. 2 (LXX), . 45, 19 7,203 Judges — xiv. 6 87 1 Samuel — x. 10, . 87 Job— iv. 17-19, . 36 xxv. 5 f., . . , 36 Psalms — ii. 7 (LXX), ... 8 1,202 xl. 6 ff., 212 li. 11 87 lvi. 4, . 34 lxxxix. 28 (LXX) , 81 ex. 1 83 ex. 3 (LXX), 81 ex. 4, . . . 193, 2< 9,210 cxvi. 17 (LXX), . 84 oxix. 77, 149, 41 exxx. (LXX), . 231 Psalms — cxliii. 2, . Proverbs — viii. 22 f., 29 f., Isaiah — v. 23, . viii. 14, xi. 1 ff., xi.2, . xxviii. 11, xxviii. 16, xxxi. 3, xxxii. 15, xiii. 7, . xiii. 8 (LXXI, xlv. 23 (LXX), xlix.'S f., Iii. 3, . liii.liii. 6, . liii. 7, . liii. 10, liii. 12 (LXX), lxi. 1 f., lxiii. 9, Jeremiah — i. 6, . xxxi. 33 f., Ezekiel — xi. 1, 5, 24, xviii. 4, xxxvi. 26 f., Daniel — ix. 24-27, . xii. 9, . Joel — ii. 28 f., Amos — iii. 2, . Habakkuk— ii. 4, . . PAGE 42 156 , 135 168 76 87 113 15 168 218 34 113 . 180 85 85 117 198 177 128 177 117 178 116 . 70 180 • 74 58 113 197 87 126 • 113 175 175 88, 113 . 218 INDEX 263 Matthew — v. 11, . xxvi. 28, Mark— a. 1-12, i. 45, . xii. 29 ff., xiv. 24, Luke — iv. 18 ff., x. 30-37, xv. 31, . John — x. 10, . Acts — ii.4, . ii. 23, . ii. 82 f„ ii 36, . ii. 46, . iii. 13 f., iii. 13, 26, Ui. 17, . iii. 18, . iii. 19, . iv. 12, . iv. 26, . iv. 27 f., iv. 31, . v. 30 f., vi. 11 ff., vii. 62, . vii, 53, ix. 10 ff., ix. 14, 21, ix.27, . x. 46, xi. 25 f., xxvi. 14, Romans — i. 1, . i. 3 ft, . i. 20, . i. 28, . ii. 14 f., ii. 15, . (2) New Testament Romans— ii. 17ft, iii. 10-18, iii. 21 ff. , iii. 24 f., iv. 5, . iv. 25, v. 1, 5, v. 2f.,ll, v.5, . v.6, . v. 8, . v. 10, . v. 12, . v. 12, 17, v. 12-19, v. 19, . v. 20, . vi. 3 f., vi.4, . vi. 5, . vi. 6, . vi 7, . vi. 10, . vi. 13, . vi. 23, . vii. 7f., vii. 7-11, vii. 13, vii. 18, . vii. 19, . vii. 22 f., vii. 24, . vii. 25, . viii. 3, . viii. 9, . viii. 9 {., viii. 10, viii. 11, viii. 14 ff., viii. 15, viii. 16, viii. 23, viii. 28, 37, viii. 32, viii. 35-39, »AGE 164 198 103 ." 117 148 107 117 181 , , 144 • 138 • 211 112 72, 115 171 . 113, 175 , , 82 112 . , 72 . , 72 115 i 72, 115 , 115 115 115 ' 72, 115 . 112, 113 115 32 115 45, 197, 203 98 . 84 98 . , 112 , . 56 • 49 56 ,84 . 68, 8C , 81 38 26 , 38 26 , , 38 PAGE 31, 138 . 15 . 13<5 130, 132 . 135 70, 117 . 137 138, 139 . 71 53, 131 . 131 . 131 39, 126, 153 . 39 . 129 . 130 . 44 . 151 . 132 . 122 130, 132 . 129 . 129 . 137 . 126 . 31 . 35 . 43 . 34 . 35 31, 35, 37 . 43 . 33 129, 132 88,89 . 123 . 130 72,88 ' . 138 . 90 . 90 90, 139 . 96 117, 131 . 79 33 264 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES Romans — PAGE 1 Corinthians — PAGE ix. 4 f., , . . 14 xiv. 21, . 15 ix. 5, . , , . . 76 xiv. 34, . 146 x. 4, . . . 47, 129 xiv. 40, . 148 x. 12, . . . 84 xv. 3, . . 116 xii. 1, . . 142, 168 XT. 3 ff, 99. 102, 167 xii. 4 f„ 148 xv. 8 f., . 52 xii. 14, . . 144 " xv. 21 {., . 39 xii 18, . 147 xv. 22, . . 129, 153 xiv. 21, . 145 xv. 22 ff, 50 ff., . . . 78 xv. 3, . . 104 xv. 24, . . 40, 105 xv. 16 f., . . . . 59 xv. 45, . 36, 86, 129, 157 1 Corinthians— xvi. 22, . 84, 109 i. 2, . . . 84 2 Corinthians — i. 7, . . . 140, 172 i. 5, . . 53 i. 10, . . 149 i. 20, . . . . 76 il7, . . . 151 i. 22, . . 90, 125 i. 23, . 7, 126 ii. 14, . . 56 i. 30, . . 26 iii. 6, . . 59, 199 ii 4, . . 87 iii. 17, . 89, 111, 157 iii. 10, . . 69 iii. 18, . . 140 iii. 23, . . 138 iv. 6, . 61, 56, 223 iv. 1, . . 69 iv. 7, . . 59 v. 7, . . 130, 132, 178 iv. 16, . . 38, 140 vi. 15, . . 146 v. 1, . . 71, 141 vi. 17, . . 122 v. 2, . . . . 141 vii. 10-13, . . 102 T.5, . . . 125 vii. 21 f., . . 147 v. 10, . . . . 76 viii. 6, . . 1 53, 157, 202 v. 14, . . 131 viii. 7, . 26, 38, 145 v. 16, . 49 ix. 1, . . , 63, 59 v. 17, . . 63, 89, 125 ix. 13 f., . . 103 ». 19, . . 92, 131 ix. 16, . . 68 ». 20, . . 59, 135 ix. 20, . . 14 v.21, . . . 129 ix. 21, . . 24 viii 9, . . 70, 105, 160 x. 6-11, . 16 x.l, . . 104 x. 11, . . 72, 217 xi.l, . ; 59 x. 17, . . . . 152 xi. 3, . . 40 x. 20 f., . 40 xi. 28, . . 60 *. 23, . . 145 xi. 82 f., . . 98 xi. 7, . . 39 xii. 9, . . 122 xi. 11, . . 105 xiii. 3, . . 60 xi. 14, . . . . 26 xiii. 9, . . 60 xi. 23 ft, . . 102, 198 Galatians — xi. 26, . . 151 i Iff.,. . 97 xii. 3, . . 85, 111 i. 10, . 56, 84 xii. 24 f., . . 149 i. 14, . 14, 81 xii, 28, . . 148, 234 i. 15 f., 52, 56 xiii. . . , . 23, 107 i 16, . 69, 86 INDEX 265 Galatians— PAGE Philippians — PAGE ii. 1, . . 98 ii- 7, . . . 70 ii. 9, . . 44 ii. 7 f., .' 100 ii. 16, . . 167 ii. 8, . . 127 ii. 19, . . 180, 152 ii. 9, . 70, 81 ii. 191, . 151 ii. 9f., . 85 iiSO, . 11, 117, HI, 122, 181 ii. 12 f., . 26 iii. 2, . . 87, 123 ii. 15, . . 79 iii. 7ft, . 15 iii. 4-6, . 14 iii. 10, . . 32, 128 iii. 7f., . 120 iii 18, . 116, 1J7, 129, 132 iii. 8, . . 85 iii. 15, . . 199 iii. 10, . 70 iii. 16 ff, . 44 iii 12, . . 52 iii 18 ft, 45 iii. 12 ff, , . J9, 140 iii. 19, . 43, 45, 46, 197, 203 iv. 8, . . 26 iii. 23, . 58 iv. IS, . . 122 iii. 23ft, . 161 Colossians — Ui. 24, . 43 i.18, . . 78, 105, 138 iii. 26, . . 106 i 14, . . . 108 iii. 27, . . 151 i. 15, . . 81 iii. 28, . . 57, 146 i. 16-20, . 154 iv. 3, 8 ft, 46, 203 i.18, . . . 157, 203 iv. 4, . . 101 i. 17, . . . 155, 202 iv. 4 ft, . 106 i. 25 ft, . 59, 150 iv. 6, . . 90, 138 ii. 14 f., 46 iv. 21 ft, . 15 ii. 16, . 20, 40, 154 v. 3, . . 83 ii. 19, . . 150 v. 5, . 79, 139 iii. 1, 8, 71 v. 14, . . 107, 144, 242 iii. 3f., . 125, 142 v. 22, . . 142, 224 iii. 4, . . . . 79 vi. 14, . . 139 PhUemon — 1 Ephesians — 15, 16, . . 146 i. 6, . . 124, 129 1 Thessalonians — i. 7, . . 132 i 6, . . 105 i 10, . . 158 i.9f., . . . 110 ii. 2, . 40, 78 i. 10, . . . 77, 140 iii. 8, 6, . 150 iv. 16 ff., . . . 78 iii. 10, . . 150 v.24, . . . 61 iv. 3 ft, . 149 2 Thessalonians— iv. 20 f., . 105 i. 7, . . . 172 v. 2, 26, . 117, 132 1 Timothy— vi 11 f., . 21, 165 i. 2, ' . . . 240 vi. 12, . 40, 78 i. 4, . . . 250 PhUippians — i. 6 ff., . . 243 i. 6, . . 61, 187 i. 7, . . 251 i. 8, . . 104 ii. 4, . . 232, 240, 250 i. 21, . . 65 ii. 5 f., . 232, 236, 238, 239 i. 23, . . 123, 246 ii. 10 f. , . 237 ii. 6 ff., . 159 iii. 1 f., . 234 266 THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES 1 Timothy — iii. 15, . iii. 16, . iv. 3f., iv. 6, . iv. 8, . vi. 3, . vi. 12, . vi. 15 f., 2 Timothy— ' i. 2, . i. 10, . i. 13 f., ii. 1 f., ii. 21, . ii. 25, . iii. 5, . iii. 17, . iv. 4, . Titus— i. 16, . ii. 10, . ii. 11, . ii 12, . ii. 13, . ii. 14, . iii. 4 f., iii. 5ft, iii. 8, , iii. 9, . Hebrews — i. 1ft, . i.2, . i 3, . i. 14, . ii. 2, . ii. 3, . ii. 5-9, . ii. 9ff, iii. 16 ff., iv. 2, . iv. 14, . v. 1 f., . v. 2, . v. 4, . v. 5 f., . v. 9, . v. 12, . vi. 9, . 226 238, 2; PAGE 224, 236, 238 . 236 238, 239, 251 229, 235, 237 . 237, 245 235, 237 236, 245 238, 239 . 240 233, 245 . 235 235, 240 . 226 . 232 . 237 . 226 . 256 226, 249 235, 239 228, 240 237, 255 . 252 , 231, 232 9, 240, -253 230, 240 . 226 250, 251 228. 202, 204 194, 202, 217 81, 194 . 203 45, 197, 203 . 182 . 204 204, 206, 209 . 205 . 220 185, 204, 206 . 185 . 208 . 208 . 209 214, 216, 220 . 182 . 182 Hebrews — FAGI vi. 11 1, '.:':' vi. 18 f., . 192, 221 vi 20, . . 210, 216 vii. 16, . 211 vii. 18, . 213 vii. 19, . 187 viii. 2, . 191, 201 viii. 5, . . 213 ix. 11, . 191, 214 ix. 11 ff. , . 200 ix. 13, . . 213 ix. 14, . 178, 214 ix. 15 ft, . 199 ix. 18 ft, . . i; 8, 179. 212 ix. 22, . . 212 ix. 24, . . 201 x. 1, . . 213 i. 5-9, . . 213 x. 16 f., . 198 x. 32 f., . u 3, 206, 219 x. 38, . . 218 xi. 1, . . 219 xi. 3, . . 191 xi. 23 ff, . 205 xi. 27, . . '208 xi. 39 f., . 219 xi. 40, . . 175, 219, 220 xii. 2, . 185, 204, 209, 219 xii. 4-11, . 183, 185 xii. 22 f., . 217 xii. 28, . 221 xiii. 4 ft, 9 f , , . 183 xiii. 13, . 186 xiii. 22, . 182 xiii. 24, . 183 James — i 17 f., . 238, 239, 240 i. 18, . . 227, 233 i. 25, . . 243 i. 27, . 227, 240 ii. 1, . . 246 ii 12 f., . 243 ii. 19, . . 227 ii. 20, . . 229 iv. 11 f., . 243 v.8, . . 246 v. 15, 20, . 231 INDEX 267 1 Peter— PAGE i. 2, . 174 176, 178 ill, . . , . 175 i. 18, . . 174, 176 i. 20 f., . . 169 ii. 3ff., . 171 ii 6 ft, . 168 173, 174 ii. 9, . 171, 174 ii. 12, . 172, 173 ii. 21 ft, . 1 69, 173 f. 176 f. iii. 9, . 168, 174 iii. 16, . . 163 iii. 18, . , . . 170 iii; 19 f., . . 171, 180 iv. 1 f., , , 170, 176 iv. 3, . , , . 162 iv. 12, . , , . 164 iv. 14, . , , 164, 174 iv. 15, . , . . 163 v. 8, . . . 164 v. 9, . . , , 164, 174 ». 10, . , . 172, 173 v. 12, . , . 161, 165 1 Peter— PAGE v. 13, . . . . 162 2 Peter— i. 1, . . 230 i.2f., . . . 254 i. 3, . . . 237 i. 4, . . . 245, 253, 254 i. 10 f., . 227, 232, 244 i. 16, . . 246, 247, 250 ii 1, . . 241 ii. 20, . . 233, 254 iii. 4, . . . 109, 247 iii. 6 f., . 247 1 John — iii. 4, . . . 35 iv. 19, . . 143 v. 12, . . 70 Jude — 3, . . . 224, 229 4, . . . 228, 241 Apocalypse— xxii. 20, . . . 109 YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 9002 05130 6372