James Hastings.

Dictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) online

. (page 152 of 234)
Online LibraryJames HastingsDictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) → online text (page 152 of 234)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

missionary labours (e&ayytXiov sixty times in Epp.
Paul, besides in Epp. and Apoc. only twice ; ei>-
ayyeXtfccrQai twenty times in Epp. Paul, besides once
mid. seven times pass.)' (Sanday-Headlamj-Zfomans 5 ,

In Mk I 1 , dpx 1 ? T 5 efiayyeXiov 'Irjffov XpurroO, and
Rev 14 6 , Ka.1 eldov fiXXov #776X01' . . . fxovra et-
ayytXiovalwi'iov e{iayye\t(rat, we see the word in almost
the transition stage between a spoken message and
a book. Before the Death and Resurrection of
Jesus, ' gospel ' was the glad message of the King-
dom, brought and proclaimed by Himself and those
whom He sent out to prepare the way before Him.
But in Ac 20 24 ' the gospel of the grace of God,' Ro
I 1 ' 8 'the gospel of God regarding His Son,' and 2
Co 4 4 ' the gospel of the glory (manifested perfection)
of Christ,' the second stage is approached.

2. The content of the gospel. As to the subject-
matter of the apostolic gospel, one can scarcely say
that the content varied ; it was rather that the
emphasis was changed. In his synagogue ministry
to the Dispersion, St. Paul found the soil in some
measure prepared. The irai8ay<>ry6s had brought
men so far that certain beliefs might be taken for
granted as a foundation laid by the Spirit of
Revelation in the OT Scriptures both legal and
prophetic. This would rule the content of his
gospel message to them. The case was different,
however, in purely missionary and pioneer work,
not only in rude places such as Lystra, but also
among the more cultured, though equally pagan,
populations in the great cities of the Empire, both
in Asia and in Europe. The pioneer gospel, there-
fore, would have notes of its own. Then, again,
after a district had been evangelized and churches
planted, we can see how the emphasis of the
message would change, as apostolic men, prophets
and teachers, sought to lead the primitive Christian
communities up to ' the measure of the stature of
the fulness of Christ' (Eph 4 1S ; cf. He 6 1 ).

From 1 and 2 Thess. we may gather the content
of St. Paul's evangelistic gospel in his heathen
mission. ' Those simple, childlike Epistles to the
Thessalonian Church are a kind of Christian primer '
(A. B. Bruce, St. Paul's Conception of Christianity,
p. 15 ff.). From the address on Mars' Hill (Ac
1730-31) we nave further indications of the staple of
his message to those outside. But, perhaps more
succinctly and perfectly than anywhere else, in 1

Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures ;
and that he was buried ; and that he has been
raised on the third day according to the scriptures ;
and that he appeared unto Cephas ; then to the
twelve : then he appeared to aoove five hundred
brethren at once ; of whom the majority survive
to this day, though some have fallen asleep. Then
he appeared to James ; then to all the apostles.
And last of all, as to the one untimely born, he
appeared to me also.' This summary of the Chris-
tian Creed reveals what, to St. Paul, constituted
the essential content of the gospel (cf. J. E.
McFadyen, The Epistles to the Corinthians [Inter-
preter's Com., 1911], p. 205 ff.).

To this synopsis of nis gospel St. Paul adds (1 Co
15 11 ), ' Whether then it be I or they, so we preach,
and so ye believed.' In all essentials St. Paul
stood on the same ground as the Twelve St. Peter,
St. James, and St. Paul were absolutely unanimous.
Had it been otherwise, one can hardly see how he
could have won recognition among ' the pillars ' or
been accepted by the Church. His gospel was not

a different (?re/joy) gospel, though his rapidly chang-
ing spheres, and the pressing need of the occasion,
may have shifted the accent. This he acknow-
ledges when, speaking of the evangelical mission
of the Church,he says (Gal 2 7 ), ' I had been entrusted
with the gospel of (for) the uncircumcision, even as
Peter with the gospel of (for) the circumcision.'
But it was the same gospel in all its manifold
adaptability. There is no schism in the NT as to
the content of the gospel message. The opinion
that there is has been well called a ' perversity of
criticism.' Thus (HDB, s.v.) the apostolic gospel
may be denned as ' the good tidings, coming from
God, of salvation by His free favour through Christ.'
But as the ' gospel ' of a church is to be sought not
only in the message of its preachers, but also in its
condensed creeds and in its hymns, there ought
to be added to the above summary at least two
splendid fragments that have the true liturgical
ring about them :

(1) Christ exalted: 1 Ti 3 18 (Sj, not 6efc, is the
subject, RV)

5s <f>avcp<S>07i



'This fragment, in its grand lapidary style, ia
worthy to be placed by the side of the Apostles'
Creed (KOhler, quoted by J. Strachan, Captivity
and Pastoral Epistles [Westminster NT, 1910],
p. 218 f.).

(2) God glorified : 1 Ti 6 18 - 16

6 /uucd/HOS Kal (ibvos dvvdffnjt,

Kvpios TWV Kvptev6vruv t
6 /uofos \<i)v aOavaffiaVf


dv flSev ovdels dvdpdnruv
ovde Ideiv Svvarai.
$ TI/J.I] Kal irpdroj aiuviov.

3. The relation of the gospel to the Law. Ao 13

records the opening of St. Paul's official missionary
labours, and there (vv. 88 - m ) we have the first indica-
tion of the Pauline attitude to the Law. In his
address in the synagogue of Pisidian Antioch, he
generalizes the incident of Cornelius : ' Be it known
unto you therefore, brethren, that through this
man (Jesus) is proclaimed unto you remission of
sins : and by him every one that believeth is justi-
fied from all things, from which ye could not be
justified by the law of Moses.'

But Ro 7, with its logical conclusion in ch. 8, is
the crucial passage for the understanding of the
relations of Law and gospel in the life of St. Paul,
and in that of the NT Church generally. It is the
Apostle's account of the struggle, 'often baffled,
sore baffled,' that filled the years before his conver-
sion. He also was a rich young ruler troubled with
the haunting question, ' What shall I do to inherit
eternal life ? ' For years he had struggled to put
down sin in his own heart, to be righteous in the
sight of God, passionately longing to have the
assurance of the forgiveness of sins, that in peace
he might will his will and work his work. In this
respect he is like his spiritual kinsmen, Luther and
Bunyan. In some respects, St. Paul sharpened the
antithesis between Law and grace to a point that
was extreme, in that it did not take account of the
prophetic element in the Old Testament which was
not legal. Jeremiah, 2 Isaiah, and Hosea may be

But in his day, as a general rule, it was the legal
aspect of the OT that held the thought of the Jewish
people. Judaism knew but one answer to such




questionings as St. Paul's ' Keep the law ' ; and if
a man replied, ' I cannot,' the answer came back
remorselessly : ' Nevertheless, keep it. ' ' Whosoever
shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one
point, he is become guilty of all' (Ja 2 10 , Gal 3 l ).

As the Apostle looked back on the long, weary
way over wnich he had come, he found that he had
travelled into ' a dark and dreadful consciousness
of sin and disaster' (Rainy in The Evangelical Suc-
cession, p. 20). And this refers to the observance
not of one part of the Law but of the whole ; what
appealed to the conscience of men everywhere,
ceremonial Judaism, and the tradition of the elders
all that v6/xos means is included.

'All his experience, at whatever date, of the
struggle of the natural man with temptation is
here [ch. 7] gathered together and concentrated in
a single portraiture. [But] we shall probably not
be wrong in referring the main features of it especi-
ally to the period before his Conversion ' (Sanday-
Headlam, op. cit. p. 186). But of course, as St.
Paul presents it to the churches, it is his own ex-
perience universalized. There is no possibility of
winning a standing before God by the Law

' For merit lives from man to man,
And not from man, O Lord, to Thee.'

He had discovered also that there was no life to
be hoped for from the Law. Such had never been
its intention. The ' parenthesis ' of the Law had
for its purpose to create the full knowledge of sin
(Sia v6fJLov tirlyvuffis dfjutprias), to produce in the con-
science the conviction of it.

Moreover such is the weakness of human nature
the Law tended to stir sin into dreadful activity,
for every commandment seemed to bring up a new
crop of sins into his life.

But to the Law St. Paul held on as long as pos-
sible ; his sudden conversion means as much. The
Law was the one outlet to the hopes of Judaism ;
while to the patriotism of St. Paul Christianity
seemed anti-national. Therefore he hung on till
he could hold no longer ' O wretched man that I
am ! Who shall deliver me out of the body of this
death?' (Ho 7 M ). ' Any true happiness, therefore,
any true relief, must be sought elsewhere. And it
was this happiness and relief which St. Paul sought
and found in Christ. The last verse of Ro 7 marks
the point at which the great burden which lay upon
the conscience rolls away ; and the next chapter
begins with an uplifting of the heart in recovered
peace and serenity; "There is therefore now no
condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus " '
(Sanday-Headlam, op. cit. p. 189). He had found
salvation by grace, redemption in Christ, and
righteousness by faith and union with Him ; ' the
law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me
free from the law of sin and of death ' (Ro 8 2 ). The
very essence of St. Paul's gospel is to be found in
his conception of Christ's relation to the condemning
Law. There is no condemnation to them that are
in Christ Jesus, because He stood condemned in
their place, and took their condemnation upon Him-
self ; therefore St. Paul is bold to say, ' Christ re-
deemed us from the curse of the law, having become
a curse for us ' (Gal 3 13 ).

It is characteristic of his rebound and glad-
ness of spirit that he, by pre-eminence in the NT,
called his message the good news (ftayyeXiov), and
the discovery sent him out everywhere ('Woe is me
if I preach not the gospel ') to the multitudes of
burdened souls, who were held, as he had once
been held, in this strange captivity. Through all
his letters, the contrast between Law and gospel
as mutually exclusive is developed in the anti-
theses, law and faith, works and grace, wages and
free gift 'Ye are severed from Christ, ye who would
be justified by the law ; ye are fallen away from
grace ' (Gal 5 4 ). In the Third, the Pauline, Gospel,

we have our Lord's story of the two debtors, both
of whom, when they had nothing to pay, were
frankly forgiven. In the days before his conver-
sion, St. Paul had been painfully trying to pay
that debt. Brought to the knowledge that he had
nothing wherewith to pay, he made the great dis-
covery that Christ had paid the debt and set him
free. And, as he who has been forgiven much
will love much, therefore evangelical love burned
in St. Paul's heart, as perhaps never in the heart
of man besides, to the ' Son of God who loved me
and gave himself for me.'

Though the idea of the Law in the Epistle to the
Hebrews is so different that it is impossible for Gal.
and Heb. to have come from the same pen, yet the
contrast between the Law and the gospel is ' with-
out doubt identical with that of St. Paul, although
the writer of Hebrews possibly reached that posi-
tion by a different road (A. B. Davidson, Hebrews
[Handbooks for Bible Classes], p. 19). Both writers
hold that Christ is the end of the Law to every one
that believeth, and through Him is the Atonement
made once for all. But inasmuch as the question
between Jews and Gentiles had in the days of
Hebrews passed beyond the stage of keen contro-
versy, and a free gospel was preached everywhere,
the writer did not feel it needful to develop the
contrasts between Law and gospel in the Pauline
manner. Yet 'the ceremonial observances are
in themselves worthless (He 7 18 10 1 -*) ; they were
meant to be nothing more than temporary (9 8 " 10 8 18 ) ;
for God Himself in OT Scripture has abrogated
them (7 18 10 9 ) ; and the believing Hebrews are
exhorted to sever all connection with their country-
men still practising them (13 13 )' (A. B. Davidson,
op. cit. p. 19). When the Sun has risen, all other
lights pale and fade. The substance has come, the
shadow disappears.

It has already been pointed out that there is no
sufficient reason for assuming a schism re Law and
Faith in the apostolic writings. St. Paul stood
on substantially the same ground as the Twelve ;
his recognition by them (Gal 2 1 " 10 ), and much more
his acceptance by the Church, imply as much.
Nor is there on a fair and careful interpretation any
antagonism between the Epistle to the Romans and
the Epistle of James. The question turns on the
meaning of iri<rrts. St. James is not denouncing
the Pauline iri<m$, but the caricature of it in a
narrow Judaism, which has reduced this noble
faculty of the soul to the mere intellectual accept-
ance of a dogma & fides informis, ethically fruit-
less a faith without works ( Ja 2 26 ). St. Paul, on
the other hand, thinks of a fides formata, ' faith
which worketh by love' (Gal 5 6 ). Words mean
different things to different men. To St. Paul
' works ' mean fpya v6fj.ov, while to St. James they
correspond to what St. Paul calls ' the fruits of the
Spirit.' Thus, ' so far as the Christian praxis of reli-
gion is concerned, James and Paul are at one, but each
lays the emphasis on different syllables ' (Moffatt,
LNT, p. 465). It is nothing strange that both
go to the story of Abraham (Gn 15 6 ) for an apposite
example, for it has been pointed out (Ligntfoot,
Gal. 6 , 1876, p. 157) that this passage was a stock
subject of discussion in the Jewish schools and in
Philo. St. Paul, quoting Genesis, affirms that the
initial act for which Abraham was accepted in the
sight of God was his faith ; and St. James, thinking
more of Gn 22 12 than of Gn 15", says that his faith
was made clear, ' seeing thou hast not withheld thy
son, thine only son, from me.' ' Faith alone justi-
fies, though the faith which justifies does not
remain alone.' Thus we read (Tit 3 8 ), ' I will that
thou affirm confidently to the end that they which
have believed God may be careful to maintain
good works ' (cf. the Scots Paraphrase [56], ' Thus
faith approves itself sincere, by active virtue




crowned '). But while all real opposition between
the apostles (whatever may be the temporal rela-
tion between Romans and James) may be dis-
allowed, it need not be denied that the formal
differences which appear in the Epistles may well
have risen from the extremities to which the con-
troversy was pushed in the different schools of
thought in the Church (paulinior ipso Paulo).
The Apostle was not oblivious of misinterpretation
(Ro 6 1 - 16 ), and the school of St. James doubtless
had those who carried their master's doctrine to
extreme lengths. But in the balance of Holy
Scripture, the truths of which St. James and St.
Paul are protagonists are not contradictories, but
safe and necessary supplementaries in the body of
Christian doctrine. (For the relation between the
doctrines of St. Paul and St. James re the Law and
Faith, reference may be made to Romans? \ICO~\, p.
102 tf. ; James [Cambridge Bible, 1878], p. 76 if. ;
The General Epistles [Century Bible, 1901], p.
163 ff. ; Molfatt, LNT, p. 465.)

LITERATURE. Sanday-Headlam, Romans* (ICO, 1902), pp.
184-189; J. Denney, Studies in Theology, 1894, p. 100 ff.,
' Romans' in EGT, 1900, p. 632 ff., also art ' Law ' in HDB ; R.

Rainy in The Evangelical Succession (Lects. in St. George's
Free Church, Edinburgh), 1882, p. 20 ff. ; A. B. Bruce, The
Kingdom of God*, 1891, pp. 63-84, St. Paul's Conception of
Christianity, 1894, p. 293 ff. ; ExpT vii. [1895-96] 297 f., xii.
[1900-01] 482b, xxi. [1909-10] 497 i. For the Law in Hebrews,
see A. S. Peake, Hebrews (Century Bible, 1902), p. 30 ff.


Date. (a) The central factor here is the date of
the Second Gospel. The conspectus of dates given
in Moffatt (LNT, p. 213) will show that this Gospel
is dated by modern writers between A.D. 44 and
130, and that recent opinion narrows these limits
to 64-85. Moffatt himself decides on a date soon
after 70 on the following grounds : (1) Irenaeus,
adv. Hcer. in. i. 1, dates the Gospel after the
death of St. Peter and St. Paul. This is doubtful
(see below). (2) 'The small apocalypse' (ch. 13)
suggests a date soon after 70. This is based on
the very precarious inference that Mk 13 could
not have been substantially spoken by Christ. He
need not have had more than the prophetic insight
of a Jeremiah to have spoken everything contained
in this chapter.

Since the publication of Moffatt's book Harnack
has re-opened the whole question of the date of the
first three Gospels by arguing that Acts was written
at the end of St. P"aul's imprisonment in Rome.*
It would follow, of course, that the Third Gospel
must be earlier, and the Second, since it is one of
the sources of the Third, earlier still. The funda-
mental question here is the evidence of Irenaeus.
The whole passage should be read carefully. One
clause in it has generally been taken to mean that
St. Mark wrote his Gospel after the death of St.
Peter and St. Paul. But J. Chapman,t and now
Harnack, argue that the words ' after the death of '
do not date the writing of the Gospel, but, taken
in the light of the whole context, mean that the
apostolic preaching did not come to an end with
the death of the apostles, but was handed down
after their death, in written books, about the date
of the composition of which nothing is said.

Harnack is thus left free to place the Second
Gospel before St. Paul's imprisonment. He thinks
that the late evidence of Clement of Alexandria,
which connects the Gospel with Rome, may per-
haps mean that Mark edited there his previously
written Gospel. Harnack does not attempt to date
the Second Gospel more narrowly.

But we may carry the argument further. If the
writing of Acts at the end of St. Paul's imprison-

* Beitrage zur Einleitung in das Neue Testament, iv., Leipzig-
t JThSt vL [1905] 563 fl. J Ap. Bus. HE vi. 14.

ment affords a limit after which the Second Gospel
could not have been written, the relationship be-
tween the Second Gospel and the First, which pre-
supposes it, may furnish another.

(b) The First Gospel is assigned by most modern
writers to the period 65-90 (see Moffatt). Harnack
thinks that it must have been written near the Fall
of Jerusalem, but not necessarily before it. Moffatt
is clear that it must have been written after that

Apart from its relationship to St. Mark, the in-
clination to date the First Gospel relatively late is
due to a belief that it reflects the atmosphere of a
period in which the Church has become organized
and developed. It is, it is argued, 'Catholic' in
tone. This method of argument seems wholly due
to the fact that modern critics read the Gospel
through ' Catholic' spectacles. Read it from the
standpoint of a Jewish Christian of Antioch about
the period of the controversy as to the admission
of Gentiles into the Church, and everything is in
place. In particular, two lines of thought in the
Gospel point to this period: (1) the writer's belief
in the permanent validity of the Mosaic Law, (2)
his eschatology. On the first see St. Matthew?
(ICC, 1912), p. 326, and ExpT xxi. [1909-10] 441.
As to the second point, a few words may here
be added in addition to what is written in St.
Mattheiv 3 , p. Ixix, and ExpT xxi. 440.

The First Gospel is, as is well known, the most
apocalyptically coloured of the Synoptic Gospels.
But there are many who do not realize how deeply
the apocalyptic element penetrates the book. It
is, e.g., urged by E. Buckley * that the presence of
passages like 24 29 - 34 does not presuppose an early
date for the Gospel, because the Evangelist, writing
comparatively late, might have preserved such say-
ings if he found them in his sources. He might of
course have done so, but the question is not one of
a few isolated passages ; it affects the whole Gospel.
V. H. Stanton t also says that the language of ch.
24 need not make for an early date, because the
writer could quite well have left unaltered expres-
sions of his source. This misses the whole point.
Not only does the editor leave unaltered expressions
of his sources, but he also alters St. Mark in order
to bring that Gospel into line with the idea of the
nearness of the Parousia which was so prominent in
his own mind (cf., e.g., Mt 16 28 with Mk 9 1 , Mt 24 29
with Mk 13 24 ). It is not only one or two isolated
passages in one of his sources, it is the Evangelist
himself giving preference to one eschatologically
coloured source (Q) and revising another source (St.
Mark) in accordance with its ideas. There are
many who think that the prominence of the apoca-
lyptic element in the First Gospel is due to the
Evangelist forcing it in upon the tradition of
Christ's sayings. The truth is rather that the
Evangelist had one source full of this element, and
that he was so heartily in sympathy with it that
he not only preserved large sections of it, but also
allowed himself to transfer sayings of an apocalyptic
nature from it into appropriate sections of St.
Mark's Gospel.

That the apocalyptic colouring of the First
Gospel, in so far as it is peculiar to that book, is
due to the Evangelist himself and not to one of his
sources seems wholly incredible. Allow that the
Gospel was written about the year A.D. 50 by a
Jewish Christian of the party who wished to enforce
the keeping of the Law upon the Gentiles, and the
writer, as one who was anxious to preserve all
those sayings of Christ which represented Him as
One who taught that He was the Messiah of the
Jews who would shortly inaugurate the Kingdom,
is in his natural place in the development of the

* Introduction to the Synoptic Problem, p. 278.
t The Gospels as Historical Documents, ii. 367.




Church. He is contemporaneous with the apoca-
lyptic period of St. Paul's teaching. Would the
Church ever have received a book into which the
writer had thrust his own conception of Christ as
an utterer of apocalyptic fantasies at a later period
when they had a Gospel of St. Luke ? Its reception
by the Church seems explicable only on the ground
that it was a book written early in the history of
the Church, received at first in the district where
it was written by a community which was in agree-
ment with its apocalyptic teaching, and that it thus
held a place in the Church from which it could not
be deposed.

B. H. Streeter* argues that the Apocalypse,
written towards the close of the century, proves
that there were at that period circles with a strong
liking for apocalyptic literature, and seems to think
that the Mrst Gospel may therefore have been
written comparatively late. But the two cases
are not in the least parallel. The Gospel was read
in the Church at an early date and everywhere
received. The use of the Apocalypse was long con-
tested. Moreover, it was one thing for the Church
to value an Apocalypse placed in the mouth of the
Ascended Christ ; it would have been quite another
matter for it at a date when, as the Third and
Fourth Gospels show, the tendency was rather to
diminish than to enhance the apocalyptic element
in the Lord's words, to accept a Gospel in which
(according to the theory) there were placed whole-
sale in His mouth during His earthly life sayings
couched in technical apocalyptic language which
He never used. A Gospel so judaized, as would
be the First Gospel on this theory, in idea and in
language, would have been recognized as alien to
the true tradition of Christ's life, and would have
stood little chance of being received as an apos-
tolic writing.

Notice may be taken here of a few passages which
are supposed to suggest a late date.

Chs. 1 and 2 are certainly early. Harnack
now recognizes that nothing in them need have
been written later than A.D. 70. The sayings
about the Church (16 17ff - 18 18ff -) are certainly early,
for they are couched in language in which the
Jewish colouring is very remarkable. The word
' Church ' is supposed to betray a late date, but
why? About A.D. 52 St. Paul was using it of
the Church at Thessalonica. When the Evangelist

Online LibraryJames HastingsDictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) → online text (page 152 of 234)