/\
Dictionary
of the
Apostolic Church
Dictionary
of the
Apostolic Church
"K'e.f 440
EDITED BY / f Jj
. n q-
JAMES HASTINGS, D.D.
WITH THE ASSISTANCE OP
JOHN A. SELBIE, D.D.
AND
JOHN C. LAMBERT, D.D.
VOLUME I AARON-LYSTRA
/<?
NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK
1916 0
an
BS440 -H4
COPTBIGHT, 1916, BY
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
H
The above copyright notice is for the protection of articles copyrighted in the United States.
Messrs. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, have the sole right of publication of this DICTIONARY OF THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH in the United States and Canada.
PREFACE
IT has often been said that the Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels is of more practical value than a Dictionary of the Bible. From all parts of the world has come the request that what that Dictionary has done for the Gospels another should do for the rest of the New Testament. The DICTIONARY OF THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH is the answer. It carries the history of the Church as far as the end of the first century. Together with the Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, it forms a complete and independent Dictionary of the New Testament.
The Editor desires to take the opportunity of thanking the distinguished New Testament scholars who have co-operated with him in this important work.
AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN THIS VOLUME
ALLEN (WILLOUGHBY CHARLES), M.A.
Archdeacon of Manchester ; Principal of Egerton Hall, Manchester ; author of ' The Gospel according to St. Matthew' in The International Critical Commentary. Anointing, Children of God, Gospels, Kingdom of God.
ALLWORTHY (THOMAS BATESON), M.A. (Camb.),
B.D. (Dublin).
Perpetual Curate of Martin-by-Timberland, Lincoln ; Founder and First Warden of S. Anselm's Hostel, Manchester. Ampliatus, Andronicus, Apelles, Aristo- bulus, Asyncritus, Epaenetus, and other proper names.
BANKS (JOHN S.), D.D.
Emeritus Professor of Theology in the Wesleyan Methodist College, Headingley, Leeds ; author of A Manual of Christian Doctrine. Christian, Contentment.
BATIFFOL (PIERRE), Litt.D.
PrStre catholique et prelat de la Maison du Pape, Paris ; auteur de Tractatiis Origenis de libris scripturarum (1900), Les Odes de Salomon (1911), La Paix constantinienne et le Catholicisme (1914). Ignatius.
BECKWITH (CLARENCE AUGUSTINE), A.B., A.M., S.T.D.
Professor of Systematic Theology in Chicago Theological Seminary ; author of Realities of Christian Theology ; departmental editor of the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge.
Beast, Blindness, Blood, Dysentery, Fever, Gangrene, Lamb, Lion.
BERNARD (JOHN HENRY), D.D. (Dublin), Hon.
D.D. (Aberd.), Hon. D.C.L. (Durham). Bishop of Ossory, Ferns, and Leighlin ; some- time Archbishop King's Professor of Divinity, Dublin, and Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral. Descent into Hades.
BOYD (WILLIAM FALCONER), M.A., B.D. (Aberd.),
D.Phil. (Tubingen).
Minister of the United Free Church of Scot- land at Methlick.
Alexander, Crown, Desert, Gog and Magog, Israel, Jew, Jewess, and other articles.
BROOKE (ALAN ENGLAND), D.D.
Fellow, Dean, and Lecturer in Divinity at King's College, Cambridge ; Examining Chaplain to the Bishop of S. Alban's; author of A Critical ana Exegetical Com- mentary on the Johannine Epistles. James and John, the Sons of Zebedee, John (Epistles of).
BULCOCK (HARRY), B.A., B.D.
Minister of the Congregational Church at Droylsden, Manchester. Anger, Care, Cheerfulness, Comfort, Commendation, Fool, Grief, and other articles.
BURKITT (FRANCIS CRAWFORD), M.A., F.B.A.,
Hon. D.D. (Edin., Dublin, St. And.), D. Theol. h.c. (Breslau).
Norrisian Professor of Divinity in the Univer- sity of Cambridge ; author of The Gospel History and its Transmission. Baruch (Apocalypse of).
BURN (ANDREW E.), D.D.
Vicar of Halifax and Prebendary of Lichfield ; author of The Apostles' Creed (1906), The Nicene Creed (1909), The Athanasian Creed (1912).
Confession, Hallelujah, Hymns, Inter- cession.
CARLYLE (ALEXANDER JAMES), M.A., D.Litt.,
F.R. Hist. Soc.
Lecturer in Economics and Politics at Univer- sity College, Oxford. Alms, Community of Goods.
CASE (SHIRLEY JACKSON), M.A., B.D., Ph.D.
Professor of New Testament Interpretation in the University of Chicago ; author of The Historicity of Jesus, The Evolution of Early Christianity ; managing editor of The American Journal of Theology. Allegory, Interpretation.
CLARK (P. A. GORDON).
Minister of the United Free Church at Perth. Divination, Exorcism, Lots.
CLAYTON (GEOFFREY HARE), M.A. Fellow of Peterhouse, Cambridge.
Corinthians (Epistles to the), Eucharist, Love-Feast.
Vlll
AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN THIS VOLUME
CLEMENS (JOHN SAMUEL), B.A., Hon. D.D. (St.
And.).
Governor of the United Methodist College at Ranmoor, Sheffield.
Bondage, Constraint, Liberty, Lord's Day.
COBB (WILLIAM FREDERICK), D.D.
Rector of the Church of St. Ethelburga the Virgin, London ; author of Origines Judaicce, The Book of Psalms, Mysticism and the Creed.
Antipas, Balaam, Euphrates, Hymenseus, Jannes and Jambres, Jezebel, and other articles.
COOKE (ARTHUR WILLIAM), M.A.
Minister of the Wesleyan Methodist Church at Wallasey, Cheshire ; author of Palestine in Geography and in History. Elamites, Galilee.
COWAN (HENRY), M.A. (Edin.), D.D. (Aberd.),
D.Th. (Gen.), D.C.L. (Dunelm). Professor of Church History in the University of Aberdeen ; Senior Preacher of the Uni- versity Chapel ; author of The Influence of the Scottish Church in Christendom, John Knox, Landmarks of Church History.
Apphia, Archippus, Epaphras, Epaphro- ditus.
CRUICKSHANK (WILLIAM), M.A., B.D.
Minister of the Church of Scotland at Kinneff, Bervie ; author of The Bible in the Light of Antiquity.
Arts, Clothes, Games, Jerusalem, Key, Lamp, and other articles.
DA VIES (ARTHUR LLYWELYN), M.A.
Siracox Research Student, Queen's College, Oxford.
Ascension of Isaiah, Assumption of Moses, Enoch (Book of).
DEWICK (EDWARD CHISHOLM), M.A. (Camb.).
Tutor and Dean of St. Aidan's College, Birkenhead ; Teacher of Ecclesiastical History in the University of Liverpool ; author of Primitive Christian Eschatology. Eschatology.
DlMONT (CHARLES TUN NACLIFF), B.D. (Oxon.).
Principal of Salisbury Theological College ; Prebendary of Salisbury; Chaplain to the Bishop of Salisbury.
Business, Labour.
VON DOBSCHUTZ (ERNST), D.Theol.
Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the University of Breslau.
Communion, Fellowship, Hellenism, Josephus.
DONALD (JAMES), M.A., D.D. (Aberd.).
Minister of the Church of Scotland at Keith- hall and Kinkell, Aberdeenshire.
Dispersion, Gentiles, Heathen, Libertines.
DUNCAN (JAMES WALKER), M.A.
Minister of the United Free Church at Lass- odie, Dumfriesshire. Canaan, Haran.
DUNDAS (WILLIAM HARLOE), B.D.
Rector of Magheragall, near Lisburn. Authority, Dominion.
FAULKNER (JOHN ALFRED), B.A., B.D., M.A.,
D.D.
Professor of Historical Theology in Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, N. J. Benediction, Doxology.
FELTOE (CHARLES LETT), D.D.
Rector of Ripple, near Dover ; sometime Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge ; author of Sacramentarium Leonianum, The Letters and other Remains of Dionysius of Alex- andria.
Akeldama, Candace, Chamberlain, Ethiopians, Ethiopian Eunuch, Judas Iscariot.
FLETCHER (M. SCOTT), M.A., B.D., B.Litt.
Master of King's College, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia ; author of The Psychology of the New Testament. Edification, Enlightenment, Exhortation.
FREW (DAVID), D.D.
Minister of the Church of Scotland at Urr. Barnabas, Esdras (The Second Book of), Herod.
GARVIE (ALFRED ERNEST), M.A. (Oxford), D.D.
(Glas.).
Principal of New College, London ; author of The Ritschlian Theology, Studies in the Inner Life of Jesus, Studies of Paul and his Gospel.
Evil, Fall, Good. GORDON (ALEXANDER REID), D.Litt., D.D.
Professor of Hebrew in M'Gill University, and
of Old Testament Literature and Exegesis
in the Presbyterian College, Montreal ;
author of The Poets of the Old Testament.
Judgment-Hall, Judgment-Seat, Justice,
Lawyer. GOULD (GEORGE PEARCE), M.A., D.D.
Principal of Regent's Park College, London ; Ex-President of the Baptist Union of Great Britain and Ireland.
Berenice, Drusilla, Felix, Festus, Lysias.
GRANT (WILLIAM MILNE), M.A.
Minister of the United Free Church at Drumoak, Aberdeenshire ; author of The Religion and Life of the Patriarchal Age, The Founders of Israel. Assembly, Building, Day-Star, Founda- tion, Genealogies, Gospel, and other articles.
GRENSTED (LAURENCE WILLIAM), M.A., B.D. Vice-Principal of Egerton Hall, Manchester ; joint-author of Introduction to the Books of the New Testament.
Colossians (Epistle to the), Ephesians (Epistle to the).
GRIEVE (ALEXANDER JAMES), M.A., D.D.
Professor of New Testament Studies and Christian Sociology in the Yorkshire United Independent College, Bradford. Form, Friendship, Fruit, Image.
GRIFFITH- JONES (EBENEZER), B.A. (Lond.), D.D.
(Edin.).
Principal, and Professor of Dogmatics, Homi- letics, and Practical Theology, Yorkshire United Independent College, Bradford ; author of The Ascent through Christ, Types of Christian Life, The Economics of Jesus, The Master and His Method, Faith and Verification.
Abiding, Abounding, Acceptance, Access, Account, Answer.
HAMILTON (HAROLD FRANCIS), M.A., D.D.
Ottawa, Canada ; formerly Professor in the University of Bishop's College, Lennoxville, Quebec. Barnabas (Epistle of).
HANDCOCK(P.S.P.), M.A.
Member of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at- Law ; Lecturer of the Palestine Exploration Fund ; formerly of the Department of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities in the British Museum ; author of Mesopotamian Archaeology, Latest Light on Bible Lands. Dog, Eagle, Goat, Hospitality, Locust, and other articles.
HOOKE (SAMUEL HENRY), M.A. (Oxon.), B.D.
(Lond.).
Professor of Oriental Languages and Litera- ture in Victoria College, Toronto. Heaven, Immortality, Lake of Fire.
JAMES (JOHN GEORGE), M.A., D.Lit.
Author of Problems of Personality, Problems of Prayer, The Coming Age of Faith, The Prayer-Life.
Cross, Crucifixion, Custom, Dream.
JORDAN (HERMANN), Ph.D.
Professor of Church History and Patristics in the University of Erlangen. Catholic Epistles, Epistle, Letter.
LAKE (KiRSOPP), M.A. (Oxford), D.D. (St. And.). Professor of Early Christian Literature in Harvard University ; author of The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul.
Acts of the Apostles, Acts of the Apostles (Apocryphal), Luke.
LAMBERT (JOHN C.), M.A., D.D.
Fenwick, Kilmarnock ; author of The Sacra- ments in the New Testament. Antichrist, Body, Conscience, Flesh, Life and Death, Light and Darkness, and other articles.
LAW (ROBERT), D.D. (Edin.).
Professor of New Testament Literature in Knox College, Toronto ; author of The Tests of Life : A Study of the First Epistle of St. John.
Covetousness, Formalism, Generation, Glory, Hour.
Fulness,
LlGHTLEY (JOHN WILLIAM), M.A., B.D.
Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature and Philosophy in the Wesleyan College, Headingley, Leeds. Epicureans.
LOFTHOUSE (WILLIAM F.), M.A.
Professor of Philosophy and Old Testament Language and Literature in the Wesleyan College, Handsworth, Birmingham ; author of Ethics and Atonement, Ethics and the Family.
Conversion, Creation, Forgiveness, Free- dom of the Will.
MACKENZIE (DONALD), M.A.
Minister of the United Free Church at Oban ; Assistant Professor of Logic and Meta- physics in the University of Aberdeen, 1906-1909.
Abstinence, Feasting, Fornication, Harlot, Lust, and other articles.
MACLEAN (ARTHUR JOHN), D.D. (Camb.), Hon.
D.D. (Glas.).
Bishop of Moray, Ross, and Caithness ; author of Dictionary of Vernacular Syriac ; editor of East Syrian Liturgies. Adoption, Angels, Ascension, Baptism, Demon, Family, and other articles.
MAIN (ARCHIBALD), M.A. (Glas.), B.A. (Oxon.),
D.Litt. (Glas.).
Minister of the Church of Scotland at Old Kilpatrick ; examiner in Modern and Ecclesi- astical History and in Political Economy in St. Andrews University ; member of the Examining Board of the Church of Scot- land. Cymbal, First-Fruit, Harp.
MARSH (FRED. SHIPLEY), M.A.
Sub- Warden of King's College Theological Hostel and Lecturer in Theology, King's College, London ; formerly Tyrwhitt and Crosse Scholar in the University of Cam- bridge.
Clement of Rome (Epistle of), Galatians (Epistle to the), Hebrews (Epistle to the).
MARTIN (A. STUART), M.A., B.D.
Formerly Pitt Scholar and Examiner in Divinity in Edinburgh University and Minister of the Church of Scotland at Aberdeen ; author of The Books of the New Testament. Grace, Justification.
MARTIN (G. CURRIE), M.A., B.D.
Lecturer in connexion with the National Council of Adult School Unions ; formerly Professor of New Testament at the York- shire United College and Lancashire College. Hell.
MATHEWS (SHAILER), A.M., D.D. (Colby,
Oberlin, Brown).
Dean of the Divinity School, and Professor of Historical Theology, in the University of Chicago ; President of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America ; author of The Messianic Hope in the New Testament. Assassins, Judas the Galilsean.
MAUDE (JOSEPH HOOPER), M.A.
Rector of Hilgay, Downham Market ; formerly Fellow and Dean of Hertford College, Oxford; author of The History of the Book of Common Prayer. Ethics.
MITCHELL (ANTHONY), D.D.
Bishop of Aberdeen and Orkney ; formerly Principal and Pantonian Professor of Theology in the Theological College of the Episcopal Church in Scotland. Hermas (Shepherd of).
MOE (OLAF EDVARD), Dr. Theol.
Professor of Theology in the University of Christiania. Commandment, Law.
MOFFATT (JAMES), D.Litt., Hon. D.D. (St.
And.), Hon. M.A. (Oxford). Professor of Church History in the United Free Church, Glasgow ; author of Th» Historical New Testament, The New Testa* ment : A New Translation. Gospels (Uncanonical).
AUTHORS OF ARTICLES IN THIS VOLUME
MONTGOMERY (WILLIAM), M.A. (Cantab.), B.D.
(London).
Lecturer in Divinity in the University of Cambridge ; author of St. Augustine. Book of Life, Book with the Seven Seals, James the Lord's Brother, James (Epistle of).
MONTGOMERY (W. S.), B.D.
Minister of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland at Ballacolla, Queen's County. Beating, Buffet, Chain, Fire, Jailor.
MORGAN (WILLIAM), M.A., D.D. (Aberd.).
Professor of Systematic Theology and Apolo- getics in Queen's Theological College, King- ston, Ontario ; Kerr Lecturer for 1914. Judgment.
Moss (RICHARD WADDY), D.D.
Principal, and Tutor in Systematic Theology, Didsbury College, Manchester ; author of The Range of Christian Experience. Aaron, Aaron's Rod, Anathema, Condem- nation, Curse, Levite.
MOULTON (WILFRID J.), M.A. (Cantab.).
Professor of Systematic Theology in the Wesleyan College, Headingley, Leeds; author of The Witness of Israel. Covenant.
MUIRHEAD (LEWIS A.), D.D.
Minister of the United Free Church at Broughty - Ferry ; author of The Terms Life and Death in the Old and New Testa- ments, The Eschatology of Jesus. Apocalypse.
NlCOL (THOMAS), D.D.
Professor of Biblical Criticism in the Univer- sity of Aberdeen ; Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, 1914. Assurance, Education, Election, Fore- knowledge, and other articles.
NIVEN (WILLIAM DICKIE), M.A.
Minister of the United Free Church at Blair- gowrie ; co-examiner in Mental Philosophy in the University of Aberdeen. Cerinthus, Doctor, Ebionism, Emperor- Worship, Essenes, Gnosticism.
PEAKE (ARTHUR SAMUEL), M.A., D.D.
Rylands Professor of Biblical Exegesis in the University of Manchester and Tutor in the Hartley Primitive Methodist College ; some- time Fellow of Merton College and Lecturer in Mansfield College, Oxford ; author of The Problem of Suffering in the Old Testa- ment, A Critical Introduction to the New Testament, Christianity : its Nature and its Truth.
Cainites, Jude the Lord's Brother, Jude (Epistle of).
PLATT (FREDERIC), M.A., B.D.
Professor of Systematic and Pastoral Theology in the Wesleyan College, Handsworth, Bir- mingham ; author of Miracles: An Outline of the Christian View. Atonement.
PLUMMKR (ALFRED), M.A., D.D.
Late Master of University College, Durham ; formerly Fellow and Senior Tutor of Trinity College, Oxford ; author of ' The Gospel according to S. Luke ' in The International Critical Commentary, and other works. Apostle, Bishop, Church, Deacon, Evan- gelist, and other articles.
POPE (R. MARTIN), M.A. (Cantab, and Man- chester).
Minister of the Wesleyan Methodist Church at Keswick ; author of Expository Notes on St. Paul's Epistles to Timothy and Titus, and other works.
Abba, Christian Life, Conversation, Gifts, Judging.
REID (JOHN), M.A.
Minister of the United Free Church at Inver- ness ; author of Jesus and Nicodemus, The First Things of Jesus, The Uplifting of Life ; editor of Effectual Words. JEon, Age, Aged, Honour.
ROBERTS (JOHN EDWARD), M.A. (London), B.D.
(St. Andrews).
Minister of the Baptist Church at Manchester; author of Christian Baptism, Private Prayers and Devotions.
Apollo s, Aquila and Priscilla, Bar-Jesus, Gallic, and other articles.
ROBERTS (ROBERT), B.A. (Wales), Ph.D. (Leipzig). Rhuallt, St. Asaph. Expediency.
ROBERTSON (ARCHIBALD THOMAS), M.A., D.D.,
LL.D.
Professor of Interpretation of the New Testa- ment in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Ky. ; author of A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, and other works.
Bond, Debt, Deliverer, Destruction.
ROBINSON (GEORGE L.), Ph.D., D.D., LL.D.
Professor of Biblical Literature and English Bible in M'Cormick Theological Seminary, Chicago. Caesarea.
ROBINSON (HENRY WHEELER), M.A. (Oxon. and
Edin.).
Professor of Church History and of the Philosophy of Religion in the Baptist College, Rawdon ; sometime Senior Kenni- cott Scholar in the University of Oxford ; author of ' Hehrew Psychology in Relation to Pauline Anthropology' in Mansfield College Essays, The Christian Doctrine of Man, The Religious Ideas of the Old Testa- ment.
Adorning, Ear, Eye, Feet, Hair, Hand, Head.
SANDAY (WILLIAM), D.D., LL.D., Litt.D., F.B.A. Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford ; Chaplain in Ordinary to H.M. the King. Inspiration and Revelation.
VON SCHLATTER (ADOLF).
Professor of New Testament Introduction and Exegesis in the University of Tubingen. Holy Spirit.
SCOTT (CHARLES ANDERSON), M.A., D.D.
Professor of the Language, Literature, and Theology of the New Testament in West- minster College, Cambridge ; author of The Making of a Christian, and other works. Christ, Christology.
SlDNELL (HENRY CARISS JONES), B.A., B.D.
(London).
Minister of the Wesleyan Methodist Church at Ilkley.
Admonition, Chastisement, Discipline, Excommunication.
AUTHORS OF AETICLES IN THIS VOLUME
SMITH (SHERWIN), M.A., B.D.
Minister of the Wesleyan Methodist Church at Burnley. Abomination, Clean and Unclean.
SOUTER (ALEXANDER), M.A., D.Litt.
Regius Professor of Humanity and Lecturer in Mediaeval Palaeography in the University of Aberdeen ; formerly Professor of New Testament Greek and Exegesis in Mansfield College, Oxford ; author of A Study of Ambrosiaster, The Text and Canon of the New Testament.
Augustus, Caesar, Caligula, Citizenship, Diana, Domitian, and other articles.
SPOONER (WILLIAM ARCHIBALD), D.D.
Warden of New College, Oxford ; Hon. Canon of Christ Church, Oxford ; Examining Chaplain to the Bishop of Peterborough. Lucius.
STEVENSON (MORLEY), M.A.
Principal of Warrington Training College ; Hon. Canon of Liverpool ; author of Hand- book to the Gospel according to St. Luke, and other works.
Author and Finisher, Circumcision, Divisions, Forerunner, Heresy, Judaiz- ing.
STEWART (GEORGE WAUCHOPE), M.A., B.D.
Minister of the Church of Scotland at Hadding- ton (First Charge) ; author of Music in the Church.
King, King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Lord.
STEWART (ROBERT WILLIAM), M.A., B.Sc., B.D. Minister of the United Free Church at Duthil (Carr Bridge). Apostolic Constitutions.
STRACHAN (ROBERT HARVEY), M.A. (Aberd.),
B.A. (Cantab.).
Minister of the Presbyterian Church of England at Cambridge. Consecration, Fast (The), Holiness, Holy Day.
STRAHAN (JAMES), M.A., D.D.
Professor of Hebrew and Biblical Criticism in the M'Crea Magee Presbyterian College, Londonderry ; Cunningham Lecturer ; author of Hebrew Ideals, The Book of Job, The Captivity and Pastoral Epistles, Abraham, Colours, Elements, Galatia, Hypocrisy, and other articles.
THUMB (ALBERT).
Professor of Comparative Philology in the University of Strassburg ; author of Hand- book of the Modern Greek Vernacular.
Hellenistic and Biblical Greek. TOD (DAVID MACRAE), M.A., B.D. (Edin.).
Minister of the Presbyterian Church of England at Huddersfield ; formerly Hebrew Tutor and Cunningham Fellow, New College, Edinburgh.
Faith, Faithfulness, Ignorance, Know- ledge.
VOS (GEERHARDUS), Ph.D., D.D.
Charles Haley Professor of Biblical Theology in the Theological Seminary of the Presby- terian Church at Princeton, N. J.
Brotherly Love, Goodness, Joy, Kind- ness, Longsuffering, Love.
W ATKINS (CHARLES H.), D.Th.
Minister of the Baptist Church at Liverpool ; Lecturer in the Midland Baptist College and University College, Nottingham ; author of St. Paul's Fight for Galatia. Ambassador, Blessedness, Brethren, Conspiracy.
WATT (HUGH), B.D.
Minister of the United Free Church of Scotland at Bearsden ; Examiner for the Church History Scholarships of the United Free Church of Scotland. Didache.
WELLS (LEONARD ST. ALBAN), M.A. (Oxon.). Vicar of St. Aidan's, South Shields ; sub- editor of the Oxford Apocrypha and Pseud- epigrapha. Alpha and Omega, Amen.
WILLIS (JOHN ROTHWELL), B.D.
Canon of St. Aidans, Ferns, and Rector of Preban and Moyne.
Angels of the Seven Churches, Collec- tion, Contribution.
WORSLEY (FREDERICK WILLIAM), M.A., B.D.
Subwarden of St. Michael's College, Llandaff ; author of The Apocalypse of Jesus. Areopagite, Baal, Babbler, Calf, Damaris, Dioscuri, Idolatry, Jupiter.
ZENOS (ANDREW C.), D.D., LL.D.
Professor of Historical Theology in the M'Cormick Theological Seminary, Chicago. Dates.
ZWAAN (J. DE), D.D. (Leiden).
Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the University of Groningen. • Acts of Thomas ' in Acts of the Apostles (Apocryphal).
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
I. GENERAL
App. = Appendix.
Arab. = Arabic.
art., artt. = article, articles.
A. S. = Anglo-Saxon.
Assyr. = Assyrian.
AT = Altes Testament.
AV = Authorized Version.
A Vm= Authorized Version margin.
Bab. = Babylonian.
c. = circa, about.
cf . = compare.
ct. = contrast.
ed. = edited, edition.
Eng. = English.
Eth.= Ethiopia
EV, EW = English Version, Versions.
f. =and following verse or page.
ff. = and following verses or pages.
fol. = folio.
fr. = fragment, from.
Fr. = French.
Germ. = German.
Gr.= Greek.
Heb. = Hebrew.
Lat. = Latin.
lit. = literally, literature.
LXX = Septuagint.
m., marg. = margin.
MS, MSS = manuscript, manuscripts.
n. =note.
NT = New Testament, Neues Testament.
N.S. =new series.
OT = Old Testament.
pi. = plural.
Sv., qq.v. =quod vide, quce vide, which see. hem. =Rhemish New Testament, rt. - root.
RV — Revised Version. RVm — Revised Version margin. Sem. = Semitic, sing. = singular. Skr. = Sanskrit. Syr. = Syriac. Targ. = Targum. tr. = translated, translation. TR = Textus Receptus, Received Text, v. = verse.
v.l. —varia lectio, variant reading. VS, VSS = Version, Versions. Vulg., Vg. = Vulgate.
II. BOOKS OF THE BIBLE
Old Testament.
Gn= Genesis.
Ex = Exodus.
Lv = Leviticus.
Nu = Numbers.
Dt = Deuteronomy.
Jos = Joshua.
Jg= Judges.
Ru = Ruth.
1 S, 2S = 1 and 2 Samuel.
1 K, 2K = 1 and 2 Kings.
1 Ch, 2 Ch = l and 2
Chronicles. Ezr=Ezra. Neh = Nehemiah. Est = Esther. Job.
Ps = Psalms. Pr= Pro verbs. Ec=Ecclesiastes.
Apocrypha.
1 Es, 2 Es=l and 2 To = Tobit.
Esdras. Jth= Judith.
Ca= Can tides. Is = Isaiah. Jer = Jeremiah. La = Lamentations. Ezk = Ezekiel. Dn = Daniel. Hos = Hosea. Jl = Joel. Am = Amos. Ob = Obadiah. Jon = Jonah. Mic=Micah. Nah = Nahum. Hab = Habakkuk. Zeph = Zephaniah. Hag=Haggai. Zee = Zechariah. Mal = Malachi.
Ad. Est = Additions to Sus = Susanna.
Esther. Bel = Bel and the
Wis — Wisdom. Dragon.
Sir = Sirach or Ecclesi- Pr. Man = Prayer of
asticus. Manasses.
Bar = Baruch. 1 Mac, 2 Mac = 1 and 2
Three = Song of the Three Maccabees.
Children.
New Testament.
Mt = Matthew. 1 Th, 2 Th = l and 2
M k — Mark. Thessalonians.
Lk = Luke. 1 Ti, 2 Ti=l and 2
Jn = John. Timothy.
Ac = Acts. Tit = Titus.
Ro = Romans. Philem = Philemon.
1 Co, 2 Co = 1 and 2 He = Hebrews.
Corinthians. Ja= James.
Gal = Galatians. 1 P, 2 P = 1 and 2 Peter.
Eph = Ephesians. 1 Jn, 2 Jn, 3 Jn = l, 2, Ph = Philippians. and 3 John.
Col = Colossians. Jude.
Rev = Revelation.
XIV
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
III. BIBLIOGRAPHY
^iG!Gr=Abhandlungen der Gbttinger Gesellschaft
der Wissenschaften.
A JPh= American Journal of Philology. AJTh= American Journal of Theology. ARW = Ajtchiv fiir Religionswissenschaft. AS=Act& Sanctorum (Bollandus). .BJ"=Bellum Judaicum (Josephus). .B.L = Bampton Lecture. BW= Biblical World. CE— Catholic Encyclopedia. CIA = Corpus Inscrip. Atticarum. CIG = Corpus Inscrip. Graecarum. CIL= Corpus Inscrip. Latinarum. C1S= Corpus Inscrip. Semiticarum. CQR= Church Quarterly Review. CR = Contemporary Review. CSEL = Corpus Script. Eccles. Latinorum. DB=Dict. of the Bible. DCA=Dict. of Christian Antiquities. DCS = Diet, of Christian Biography. DCG=Dict. of Christ and the Gospels. DGRA = Dict. of Greek and Roman Antiquities. DGRB = ~Dict. of Greek and Roman Biography. DGRG = Diet, of Greek and Roman Geography. EBi= Encyclopaedia Biblica. JE.Br= Encyclopaedia Britannica. EGT= Expositor's Greek Testament. ERE= Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics. Exp = Expositor. ExpT= Expository Times. 6?.4P=Geograpbie des alten Palastina (Buhl). GB= Golden Bough (J. G. Frazer). GGA = Gottingische Gelehrte Anzeigen. GGN= Nachrichten der konigl. Gesellschaft der
Wissenschaften zu Gb'ttingen. G!«7F'=Geschichte des jiidischen Volkes (Schiirer). Grimm-Thayer = Grimm's Gr.-Eng. Lexicon of the
NT, tr. Thayer.
HDB = Hastings' Diet, of the Bible (5 vols.). ffJ£=Historia Ecclesiastica (Eusebius, etc.). HGHL = Historical Geography of the Holy Land
(G. A. Smith).
HI= History of Israel (Ewald). HJ= Hibbert Journal. HJP= History of the Jewish People (Eng. tr. of
OJV).
HL = Hibbert Lecture. #.A/"=Historia Naturalis (Pliny). ICC= International Critical Commentary. ISS= International Science Series. JA = Journal Asiatique. JBL= Journal of Biblical Literature. JE= Jewish Encyclopedia. JHS= Journal of Hellenic Studies. JPh= Journal of Philology.
JPTh= Jahrbiicher fiir protestantische Theologie. JQR= Jewish Quarterly Review. JRS= Journal of Roman Studies. JThSt — Journal of Theological Studies. ^r^4T2=Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament*
(Schrader, 1883). /JL".4jr8=Zimmern-Winckler's ed. of the preceding
(a totally distinct work), 1902-03.
KIB= Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek.
iC5/=Literarisches Centralblatt.
LNT=Int,Tod. to Literature of the New Testament
(Moflatt). LT = Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah
(Edersheim). M G WJ= Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissen-
schaft des Judentums. NGG = Nachrichten der konigl. Gesellschaft der
Wissenschaften zu Gottingen. Nene kirchliche Zeitschrift. = Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte (Holtz-
mann and others). OED = Oxford English Dictionary. OTJC=Old Testament in the Jewish Church (W.
R. Smith). Pauly-Wissowa = Pauly-Wissowa's Realencyklo-
padie.
PB = Polychrome Bible. PC= Primitive Culture (E. B. Tylor). PEF= Palestine Exploration Fund. PEFSt = Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly
Statement.
P.R.£=Realencyklopadie fiir protestantische Theo- logie und Kirche. PSBA= Proceedings of the Society of Biblical
Archaeology.
RA = Revue Archeologique. RB = Revue Biblique. REG = Revue des Etudes Grecques. RGG = Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. RHR= Revue de 1'Histoire des Religions. Roscher=Roscher's Ausfiihrliches Lexikon der
griech. und rbm. Mythologie. RS = Religion of the Semites (W. Robertson
Smith). 5.8,4 W=Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie
der Wissenschaften. SBE= Sacred Books of the East. Schatf-Herzog=The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclo- pedia (Eng. tr. of PEE). SDB = Hastings' Single-vol. Dictionary of the
Bible.
SEP = Memoirs of Survey of Eastern Palestine. £ff"=Studien und Kritiken. S WP = Memoirs of Survey of Western Palestine. ThLZ= Theologische Litteraturzeitung. 7Vir=Theol. Tijdschrift. TS= Texts and Studies. TU=Texte und Untersuchungen. Wetzer-Welte = Wetzer-Welte's Kirchenlexikon. WH = Westcott-Hort's Greek Testament. ZATW = Zeitschrift fur die alttest. Wissen-
schaft. ZDMG — Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenland-
ischen Gesellschaft.
ZKG = Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschichte. ZKWL = Zeitschrift fiir kirchl. Wissenschaft und
kirchl. Leben. ZNTW = Zeitschrift fur die neutest. Wissen-
schaft. ZTK= Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche.
Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Theologie.
DICTIONARY OF THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH
AARON. — By name Aaron is mentioned in the NT only by St. Luke (Lk 1B, Ac 740) and by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (54 7U 94), and in his personal history very little interest is taken. Officially, he was represented to be the first of a long line of high priests, specifically appointed such (Ex 28lf>) in confirmation of the status already allowed him in Arabic usage (Ex 414) ; and, though his successors were prob- ably not all in the direct line of descent, they found it convenient to claim relationship with him (Ezr 261fi), and gradually the conceptions in- volved in high-priesthood were identified with the name of Aaron. That continued to be the case in the apostolic period ; and it became a familiar thought that the nigh priest was a type of Christ, who was viewed as the antitype of all true sacer- dotal persons and ministries.
In this typical relation between Aaron as the embodiment of priestly ideas and Christ as their final expression, an attempt was made to trace differences as well as correspondences. Christ was thought of, not as identical with His prototype, but as invested with higher qualities, of which only the germ and promise are to be found in Aaron.
1. In regard to vocation, both were appointed by God (He 54) ; yet to the priesthood of Christ no Aaronic (711), or Levitical (7"), or legal (99) measure may be put. He was a man like Aaron (216t), capable of sympathy both by nature and from experience (41B) ; yet His priesthood is distinctly of a higher and eternal order (59), limited neither to an earthly sanctuary (924), nor to the necessity of repeating the one great sacrifice (&**•), nor in efficiency to the treatment of offences that were chiefly ceremonial or ritual (9s' 14).
2. In the consecration of the high priest the supreme act was anointing with oil (Lv 812), from which, indeed, the designation Messiah ('anointed one') arose. Yet such was the lofty position of Jesus, and such was His consciousness, that He could say, ' I consecrate myself ' ( Jn I?19™), on the very eve of His priestly sacrifice.
3. In function Aaron stood between God and the congregation, representing each to the other. On the one hand, not only were the priests gathered together into an embodied unity in him, but in his annual approach to God he brought a sacrifice even for the 'ignorances' of the people
VOL. I. — i
(He 97), and purified the sanctuary itself from any possible defilements contracted through the sins of its frequenters (919ff> ; cf. Lv 1618). As the repre- sentative of God, he wore the sacred Urim and Thummim in the pouch of judgment upon his heart (Ex 2830), indicating his qualification to com- municate God's decision on matters that tran- scended human wit ; and through him and his order the blessing of God was invoked. In the Chris- tian thought of the apostolic age all these functions pass over to Jesus Christ, with modifications em- phasizing their ethical effect and the intrinsically spiritual benefit that follows. One of the most general statements is He 217, where the phrase ' things pertaining to God ' covers both sides of the relations between God and man, though promin- ence is given, as in the passages that speak of Christ as our Advocate with God, to the work done by Him as representing men. Much the same is the case with the great passage on medi- atorship (1 Ti 2s). As He is the Saviour, so He is the High Priest, of all men, 'specially of them that believe' (1 Ti 410). In virtue of His imma- nence as God, as well as of His priestly rank and sympathy, He fitly represents all men before God, while for those who have put themselves into a right attitude towards Him He acts as Paraclete (1 Jn 21), promoting their interests and completing their deliverance from sin. On the other hand, as representative of God, He bestows gifts upon men (Eph 48), communicating to them the will of God and enriching them with every spiritual bless- ing. He is not only the Revealer of the Father ; but, just as He offers His sacrifice to God in the stead of man, so He represents to man what God is in relation to human sin, and what God has devised and does with a view to human redemption. Between God and man He stands continuously, the medium of access on either side, the channel of Divine grace and of human prayer and praise. See, further, art. MELCHIZEDEK.
LITERATURE. — See art. ' Aaron ' in HDB, DCG and JE, and Comm. on Hebrews, esp. those of A. B. Davidson and B. F. Westcott, A. S. Peake (Century Bible), E. C. Wickham (Westminster Com.) ; also Phillips Brooks, Sermons in English Churches, 1883, p. 43 ; J. Wesley, Works, vii. [London, 1872] 273. R. W. MOSS.
AARON'S ROD.— Aaron's rod is mentioned only in He 94, which locates the rod in the ark. An earlier tradition (Nu 1710 ; cf. 1 K 89) preserves it
ABADDON
ABBA
'before' the ark, on the spot on which it had budded (see HDB i. 3b). In either case the object was to secure a standing witness to the validity of the claims of the Aaronic priesthood (so Clement, 1 Cor. § 43). The rod has sometimes been identi- fied as a branch of the almond tree ; and both Jewish and Christian fancy has been busy with it. For early legends associating it symbolically with the cross, or literally with the transverse beam of the cross, see W. W. Seymour, The Cross in Tradi- tion, History, Art, 1898, p. 83. B. W. MOSS.
ABADDON.— The word is found in the NT only in Rev 911. In the OT text 'dbhaddon occurs six times (only in the Wisdom literature), AV in each case rendering 'destruction,' while RV gives 'De- struction' in Job 2822 3112, Ps 8811, but 'Abaddon' in Job 266, Pr 15" 2720, on the ground, as stated by the Revisers in their Preface, that ' a proper name appears to be required for giving vividness and point.' Etymologically the word is an abstract term meaning ' destruction,' and it is employed in this sense in Job 3112. Its use, however, in paral- lelism with Sheol in Job 266, Pr 1511 2720 and with ' the grave ' in Ps 8811 shows that even in the OT it had passed beyond this general meaning and had become a specialized term for the abode of the dead. In Job 2S22, again, it is personified side by side with Death, just as Hades is personified in Rev 68. So far as the OT is concerned, and not- withstanding the evident suggestions of its deriva- tion (from Heb. 'dbhadh, 'to perish'), the connota- tion of the word does not appear to advance be- yond that of the parallel word Sheol in its older meaning of the general dwelling-place of all the dead. In later Heb. literature, however, when Sheol had come to be recognized as a sphere of moral distinctions and consequent retribution, Abaddon is represented as one of the lower divi- sions of Sheol and as being the abode of the wicked and a place of punishment. At first it was distin- guished from Gehenna, as a place of loss and de- privation rather than of the positive suffering assigned to the latter. But in the Rabbinic teach- ing of a later time it becomes the very house of perdition (Targ. on Job 26tf), the lowest part of Gehenna, the deepest deep of hell (Emek Ham- melech, 15.3).
In Rev 911 Abaddon is not merely personified in the free poetic manner of Job 2822, but is used as the personal designation in Hebrew of a fallen angel described as the king of the locusts and ' the angel of the abyss,' whose name in the Greek tongue is said to be Apollyon. In the LXX 'dbhadddn is regularly rendered by diruXeia ; and the personification of the Heb. word by the writer of Rev. apparently led him to form from the corresponding Gr. verb (diroXXtfw, later form of dw6\\vfu) a Gr. name with the personal ending <av. Outside of the Apocalypse the name Abaddon has hardly any place in English literature, while Apollyon, on the contrary, has become familiar through the use made of it in the Pilgrim's Pro- gress by Bunyan, whose conception of Apollyon, however, is entirely his own. Abaddon or Apoll- yon was often identified with Asmodseus, ' the evil spirit' of To 38 ; but this identification is now known to be a mistake.
LITERATURE.— The artt. s.m. in HDB and&Bi; art. 'Abyss' in ERE ; ExpT xx. [1908-09] 234 f. J. C. LAMBERT.
ABBA. — Abba is the emphatic form of the Aram, word for 'father' (see Dalman, Aram. Gram. p. 98, for 3* and its various forms ; also Maclean, in DCG, s.v.). It is found only in three passages in the NT, viz. Mk 1438, Ro 815, Gal 46 ; in each case 6 ir<x«7/> is subjoined to 'A$3£, the whole expres- sion being a title of address. [The use of 6 var^p,
nominative with the article, as a vocative, is not a Hebraism, as Lightfoot thought, but an emphatic vocative not unknown to classical Greek and com- mon in the NT : ' nearly sixty examples of it are found in NT ' ; see Moulton, Gram, of NT Greek, Edinburgh, 1906, p. 70.]
Lightfoot on Gal 46 argues that the bilingual expression is a liturgical formula originating with Hellenistic Jews, who, while clinging to the original word which was consecrated by long usage, added to it the Greek equivalent ; but he supports an alternative theory that it took its rise among Jews of Palestine after they had become acquainted with the Greek language, and is simply an expression of importunate entreaty, .and an example of that verbal usage whereby the same idea is conveyed in different forms for the sake of emphasis. As illustrations of this repetition, he quotes Rev 911 ('AiroXMwv, 'Aj3a8duv) 129 202 (Zaravas, Aid^SoXos). Thayer, in HDB (s.v.), points out that, though de- votional intensity belongs to repetition of the same term (e.g. ictipie, Kvpie), it is also expressed by such phrases as val d-^v, ' Hallelujah, Praise the Lord,' where the terms are different. The context of each passage where 'Abba, Father' is found appears to prove that the Greek addition is not merely the explanation of the Aramaic word, such as, e.g., St. Peter might have added in his preaching — a custom to be perpetuated by the Evangelists, as suggested by the passage in Mk. ; but is rather an original formula, the genesis of which is to be sought further back, perhaps in the actual words used by our Lord Himself. Thus Sanday-Headlam on Ro 815 (ICC, 1902) remark :
'It seems better to suppose that our Lord Himself, using familiarly both languages, and concentrating into this word of all words such a depth of meaning, found Himself impelled spontaneously to repeat the word, and that some among His disciples caught and transmitted the same habit. It is signifi- cant however of the limited extent of strictly Jewish Christi- anity that we find no other original examples of the use than these three.'
Thus, the double form is due to the fact that the early Christians were a bilingual people ; and the duplication, while conveying intensity to the ex- pression, ' would only be natural where the speaker was using in both cases his familiar tongue.' F. H. Chase ( TS I. iii. 23) suggests that the phrase is due to the shorter or Lucan form of the Lord's Prayer, and that the early Christians repeated the first word in the intensity of their devotion, coupling a Hellenistic rendering with the Aramaic A bba. He argues that the absence of such a phrase as 8 t<rriv, or 8 fori /judep/j.rjvevotJ.ei'ov, in Mk 1436 is due to the familiarity of the formula ; and that, while the Pauline passages do not recall Gethsemane, they suggest the Lord's Prayer as current in the shorter form. Moulton (op. cit. p. 10), combating Zahn's theory that Aramaic was the language of St. Paul's prayers — a theory based on the Apostle's 'Abba, Father ' — remarks that ' the peculiar sacredness of association belonging to the first word of the Lord's Prayer in its original tongue supplies a far more probable account of its liturgical use among Gen- tile Christians.' He mentions the analogy (see footnote, loc. cit. ) of the Roman Catholic ' saying Paternoster,' but adds that ' Paul will not allow even one word of prayer in a foreign tongue with- out adding an instant translation ' ; and further refers to the Welsh use of Pader as a name for the Lord's Prayer.
It seems probable (1) that the phrase, 'Abba, Father,' is a liturgical formula ; (2) that the duality of the form is not due to a Hebraistic repetition for the sake of emphasis, but to the fact that the early Christians, even of non- Jewish descent, were familiar with both Aramaic and Greek ; (3) that Abba, being the first word of the Lord's Prayer, was held in special veneration, and was quoted
ABEL
ABOMINATION
with the Greek equivalent attached to it, as a familiar devotional phrase (like Maran atha [1 Co 1622], which would be quite intelligible to Chris- tians of Gentile origin, though its Greek transla- tion, 6 Ki/ptos tyyts [Ph 4s], was also used ; cf. Did. 10", where ' Maran atha' and ' Amen ' close a public prayer) ; and (4) that our Lord Himself, though this cannot be said to be established beyond doubt, used the double form in pronouncing the sacred Name, which was invoked in His prayer.
In conclusion, it should be noted that, while the phrase is associated with the specially solemn occa- sion of the Gethsemane agony, where our Lord is reported by St. Mark to have used it, both ex- amples of its use in the Pauline writings convey a similar impression of solemnity as connected with the Christian believer's assurance of sonship — and sonship (let it be noted) not in the general sense in which all humanity may be described as children of God, but in the intimate and spiritual connota- tion belonging to vlof)e<ria, or ' adoption,' into the family of God.
LITERATURE.— See art. • Abba ' in HDB, DOG, and JE, an art. in ExpTxx. [1909] 356, and the authorities cited above.
K. MARTIN POPE.
ABEL. — Abel ("AjSeX) has the first place in the roll of ' the elders' (ol irpeafitrepoi, He II2), or men of past generations, who by their faith pleased God and had witness borne to them. It is recorded of him that he offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice (vXeiova ffwiav) than his elder brother (He II4). In the original story (Gn 41'7) his offer- ing was probably regarded as more pleasing on account of the material of his sacrifice. It was in accordance with primitive Semitic ideas that the occupation of a keeper of sheep was more pleasing to God than that of a tiller of the ground, and accordingly that a firstling of the flock was a more acceptable offering than the fruit of the ground. The ancient writer of the story (J) evidently wished to teach that animal sacrifice alone was pleasing to God (Gunkel, Genesis, 38 ; Skinner, 105). The author of Hebrews gives the story a different turn. The greater excellence of Abel's sacrifice consisted in the disposition with which it was offered. The spirit of the worshipper rather than the substance of the offering is now considered the essential element. Abel's sacrifice was the offering of a man whose heart was right. Through his faith he won God's approval of his gifts, and through his faith his blood continued to speak for him after his death. In a later passage of Heb. (1224) that blood is contrasted with ' the blood of sprinkling,' by which the new covenant is confirmed. The blood of Abel cried out from the ground for vengeance (cf. Job 1618, Is 2621, 2 K 9s8 ; also Rev e9- 10) ; it was such a cry as is sounded in Milton's sonnet, ' Avenge, O Lord, thy slaughtered saints ' ; but the blood of the eternal covenant intercedes for mercy.
St. John (1 Jn 312) uses the murder of Abel by his brother to illustrate the absence of that spirit of love which is the essence of goodness. The writer indicates that the new commandment, or message (ayyeXla), which has been heard from the beginning of the Christian era, was also the funda- mental law of the moral life from the beginning of human history. Cain was of the evil one (£K rov v), and slaughtered (ftr^a^ev) his brother.
LITERATURE.— Besides the artt. in the Bible Dictionaries, see W. G. Elmslie, Expository Lectures and Sermons, 1892, p. 164 ; J. Hastings, Greater Men and Women of the Bible, vol. i. [1913] p. 53 ; G. Matheson, The Mepresentative Men of the Bible, L [1902] 45 ; A. P. Peabody, King's Chapel Sermons, 1891, p. 317 ; A. Whyte, Bible Characters, L [1896] 44.
JAMES STRAHAN.
ABIDING. — As in the Gospels, so in Acts and Ephesians we find both the local and the ethical connotations of this word, which in almost every
case is used to render pfru or one of its numerous compounds (&rt-, Kara-, irapa-, irpos-, VTTO-). With the purely local usages we have here no concern ; but there is a small class of transitional meanings which lead the way to those ethical connotations which are the distinctive property of the word. Among these may be mentioned the several places in 1 Co 7, where St. Paul, dealing with marriage and allied questions (? in view of the Parousia), speaks of abiding in this state or calling. In the same Epistle note also 314 'If any man's workafiicfe,' and 1313 ' And now abide faith, hope, love.' * Simi- larly we are told of the persistence (a) of Mel- chizedek's priesthood (He 73), (b) of the Divine fidelity even in face of human faithlessness (2 Ti 213), and (c) of the word of God (1 P I23).
It is, however, in the 1st Ep. of John, as in the Fourth Gospel, that we get the ethical use of abiding most fully developed and most amply pre- sented. But, while in the Gospel the emphasis is laid on the Son's abiding in the Father ana Christ's abiding in the Church, in 1 Jn 2s4- 27 the stress is rather on the mutual abiding of the believer and God (Father and Son). Note the following ex- perimental aspects of the relation in question.
1. The believer as the place of the abiding. — A somewhat peculiar expression is found in 1 Jn 227, where we read : ' The anointing . . . abideth in you.' By x/M<r/*a is meant the gift of the Holy Spirit (cf. 2 Co I21), whose presence in the heart gives the believer an independent power of testing whatever teaching he receives (cf. ' He shall take of mine and shall show it unto you,' Jn 16'8).f In 1 Jn 214 it is said that the word of God abideth in ' young men ' ; but it is also the meaning in v.24 ; while in S24 Christ is mentioned as abiding in them ' by the Spirit.' In each passage we have a subtle instance of the perfectly natural way in which the operation of the risen Christ on the heart is identi- fied with that of the Spirit. The believer's soul is thus mystically thought of as the matrix in which the Divine energy of salvation, conceived of in its various aspects, is operative as a cleansing, saving, and conserving power, safeguarding it from error, sin, and unfaithfulness.
2. The abiding place of the believer. — In 1 Jn 2M we have the promise that ' if the [word] heard from the beginning' remains in the believer's heart, he shall ' continue in the Son ' and in the Father (cf. 38). This reciprocal relation between the implanted word and the human environment in which it energizes is peculiarly Johannine. Secondary forms of the same idea are found in 210 ('he that loveth his brother abideth in the light'), and in 314 ( ' he that hateth his brother abideth in death '). In 2s we have the fact that the believer abides in Christ made the ground for a practical appeal for consistency of life, and in y.28 the reward of such living is that the believer ' abideth for ever,' i.e. has eternal life. As a general principle, in the use of this word we find a striking union of the mys- tical and the ethical aspects of the Christian faith.
LITKRATURB. — G. G. Findlay, The Things Above, 1901, p. 237 ; G. H. Knight, Divine Uplifting*, 1906, p. 85 ; F. von Hugel, Eternal Life, 1912, p. 365 f . ; and also the art. ' Abiding ' in DOG, and the literature there cited.
E. GRIFFITH-JONES.
ABOMINATION (pdfrvyna). — Like the word ' taste ' — originally a physical, then a mental term, — ' abomination ' denotes that for which God and His people have a violent distaste. It refers in the OT to the feeling of repulsion against pro- hibited foods (Lv II10, Dt 14s), then to everything
* Popular opinion, based on a well-known hymn (Par. 49lsr), very erroneously makes faith and hope pass away, only love abiding.
t As indicated in HDB \. 101>, the words of 1 Jn£27 gave rise to the practice of anointing with oil at baptism.
ABOUNDING
A.BHAHAM
connected with idolatry (Dt 7125, Ko 222 [Gr.]).* Thence it acquires a moral meaning, and together with fornication stigmatizes all the immoralities of heathendom (Rev 174- *). Its intensest use is reserved for hypocrisy, the last oti'ence against religion (Lk 1616, Tit I18, Rev 2127).
SHERWIN SMITH.
ABOUNDING.— The English word 'abound' in the Epistles of the NT is the translation of the Gr. words irXeovdfa and irfpura-evw. There is nothing of special interest in these terms ; perhaps the former has the less lofty sense, its primary connotation being that of superfluity. As used by St. Paul, however, there seems little to choose between them, although it is worth noting that, where he speaks (Ro 5-°) of the ' offence ' and ' sin ' abounding, he uses ir\eovd£eiv. Yet lie employs the same term in Ro 6l of the ' abounding of grace,' and in Ph 417 of the fruit of Christian giving. His favourite term, however, is irepicrffevu (in one case inrepirepiffffetiw, 'overflow,' Ro 520), whether he is speaking of the grace of God (Ro 51S), the sufferings of Christ (2 Co I5), or the Christian spirit that finds expression in liberality (2 Co 87 98), contentment (Ph 412- ls), hope (Ro 515), service (1 Co 1558). This list of references is not exhaustive, but it is representative. These words and the way in which they are used give us a suggestive glimpse into —
1. The religious temperament of the Apostle. — His was a rich and overflowing nature, close-packed with vivid, ever-active qualities of mind and heart. His conception of the gospel would be naturally in accordance with the wealth of his psychic and moral nature ; he would inevitably fasten on such aspects of it as most thoroughly satisfied his own soul ; and he would put its resources to the full test of his spiritual needs and capacities. It is fortunate that Christianity found at its inception such a man ready to hand as its chief exponent to the primitive churches, and that his letters remain as a record of the marvellous way in which he opened his heart to its appeal, and of the manifold response he was able to make to that appeal. In all ages our faith has been conditioned by the human medium in which it has had to work. The ages of barrenness in Christian experience have been those which have lacked richly-endowed per- sonalities for its embodiment and exposition ; and vice versa, when such personalities have arisen and have given themselves wholeheartedly to the Divine Spirit, there has been a wide-spread efflor- escence of religious experience in the Church at large. Ordinary men and women are pensioners religiously, to a peculiar degree, of the great souls in the community. St. Paul, Origen, Augustine, Bernard. Luther, Wesley, etc., have been the focal points through which the forces of the gospel have radiated into the world at large, and lifted its life to higher levels.
2. The superabundant wealth of the gospel as a medium of the Divine energies of redemption. — The Christian faith is full of spiritual resources on which the soul may draw to the utmost of its needs. In the teaching of our Lord, the prodigality of His illustrations, their varied character, and the frequency with which He likens the Kingdom to a ' feast,' with all its suggestions of a large welcome and an overflowing abundance of good things, are very characteristic of His own attitude towards the gospel He preached ; and St. Paul is pre- eminent among NT writers for the way in which he has grasped the same idea, and caught the spirit of the Master in his exposition of spiritual realities. (Cf. 'How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare ' [Lk 1517]
* Cf. the well-known expression, ' abomination of desolation,' applied to a heathen altar (Dn 12" ; cf. 1 Mac 154, Mt 241", Mk IS"). See art. ' Abomination of Desolation ' in HDB.
with ' the grace of God, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many' [Ro 516 ; also vv. 17- 1M- -°- 21], and many other passages.)
3. The call for an adequate response on the part of believers to the varied and abundant resources of the gospel. — Here, again, St. Paul exhausts the power of language in urging his con- verts to allow the Divine energies of salvation to have their way with them. The normal type of Christian is not reached till his nature is flooded with the grace of God, and he in turn is lifted into a condition which is characterized by an abounding increase of hope, grace, love, good works, and fruit- fulness of character. ' Therefore, as ye abound in (everything), see that ye abound in this grace also ' (2 Co 87) expresses one of his favourite forms of appeal. He was not satisfied to see men raised to a slightly higher plane by their faith in Christ ; they were to be ' transformed in the spirit of their minds' (Ro 122) ; they were always to 'abound in the work of the Lord v (1 Co 1558 ; cf. 2 Co 98) ; and, as ' they had received ' of him how they might walk and ' to please God,' they were exhorted to ' abound more and more' (1 Th 41), and that especially because they knew what commandments ' had been ' given them by the Lord Jesus ' ( 1 Th 42). It was a subject for joy fulness to him when he found his converts thus responding to the power of God (see 2 Co 8"-). As regards his realization of this Divine abundance in his own experience, we find him breaking out into an ecstasy of thanksgiving at the thought of what God has done for him, and of the sense of inward spiritual abundance which he consequently enjoys, so that he feels quite in- dependent of all outward conditions, however hard they may be (cf. Ph 411'13). This is the language of a man who enjoys all the resources of the God- head in his inner life, and who can, therefore, be careless of poverty, misfortune, sickness, and even the prospect of an untimely end.
LITBRATURK. — See Sanday-Headlam, and Ligfhtfoot (especi- ally Notes on Epistles of St. Paul), on the passages referred to, also Phillips Brooks, The Light of the World, 1891, p. 140, and
viii. [1897] 5i4». E. GRIFFITH-JONES.
ABRAHAM ('A/3/>ad/t). — Addressing a Jewish crowd in the precincts of the Temple, St. Peter emphasizes the connexion between the Hebrew and the Christian religion by proclaiming that ' the God of Abraham . . . hath glorified his servant (iraiSa ; cf. RVm) Jesus ' (Ac 31S). This Divine title, which is similarly used in St. Stephen's speech (732), was full of significance. All through the OT and the NT the foundation of the true religion is ascribed neither to the Prophets nor to Moses, but to Abraham. Isaac (Gn 2624) and Jacob (3142) wor- shipped the God of Abraham, but Abraham did not worship the Elohim whom his fathers served beyond the River (Jos 244 14- 15). He was the head of the great family that accepted Jahweh as their God. Jews, Muslims, and Christians are all in some sense his seed, as having either his blood in their veins or his faith in their souls. To the Jews he is ' our father Abraham ' (Ac 72, Ro 412, Ja 221), 'our forefather (rbv TrpoTr&Topa) according to the flesh' (Ro 41). To the Muhammadans he is the 'model of religion' (imam, or priest) and the first person 'resigned (muslim) unto God' (Qur'an, ii. 115, 125). To the Christians he is 'the father of all them that believe ' (Ro 411), ' the father of us all' (416). Taking the word Abraham to mean (according to the popular word-play, Ro 417 1| Gn 17s) ' a father of many nations,' St. Paul regards it as indicating that Abraham is the spiritual ancestor of the whole Christian Church.
1. In the Epistles of St. Paul. — As Abraham was the renowned founder of the Jewish nation and faith, it was crucially important to decide
ABRAHAM
ABKAHAM
whether the Jews or the Christians could claim his support in their great controversy on justifica- tion. The ordinary Jews regarded Abraham as a model legalist, whose faith in God (Gn 155'-) con- sisted in the fulfilment of the Law, which he knew by a kind of intuition. According to the Jewish tradition (Bereahith Rabb. 44, Wiinsche), Abraham saw the whole history of his descendants in the mysterious vision recorded in Gn 15lff-. Thus he is said to have ' rejoiced with the joy of the Law ' (Westcott, St. John [in Speaker's Com.], 140). In the philosophical school of Alexandria there was a much higher conception of faith, which was re- garded as ' the most perfect of virtues,' ' the queen of virtues,' ' the only sure and infallible gooa, the solace of life, the fulfilment of worthy hopes, . . . the inheritance of happiness, the entire ameliora- tion of the soul, which leans for support on Him who is the cause of all things, who is able to do all things, and willeth to do those which are most excellent' (Philo, Quis rer. div. her. i. 485, de Abr. ii. 39). In these passages faith, in so far as it expresses a spiritual attitude towards God, does not differ much from Christian faith. Nor could anything be finer than the Rabbinic Mechilta on Ex 1431 : ' Great is faith, whereby Israel believed on Him that spake and the world was. ... In like manner thou findest that Abraham our father inherited this world and the world to come solely by the merit of faith whereby he believed in the Lord ; for it is said, and he believed in the Lord, and He counted it to him for righteousness ' (Light- foot, Galatians, 162). But the ordinary tendency of Judaism was to give Abraham's life a pre- dominantly legal colour, as in 1 Mac 252 ' Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness ? '
To St. Paul faith is the motive power of the whole life, and in two expositions of his doctrine — Bo 4, Gal 3 — he affirms the essential identity of Abraham's faith with that of every Christian. He does not, indeed, think (like Jesus Himself in Jn 8s8) of Abraham as directly foreseeing the day of Christ, but he maintains that Abraham's faith in God as then partially revealed was essentially the same as the Christian's faith in God as now fully made known in Christ. Abraham had faith when he was still in uncircumcision (Ro 411), faith in God's power to do things apparently impossible (417-19), faith by which he both strengthened his own manhood and gave glory to God (420). Abraham believed ' the gospel ' which was preached to him beforehand, the gospel which designated him as the medium of blessing to all the nations (Gal 38). And as his faith, apart from his works, was counted to him for righteousness, he became the representative believer, in whom all other believers, without distinction, may recognize their spiritual father. It is not Abraham's blood but his spirit that is to be coveted (32) ; those who are of faith (ol £K irlffreus) are ' sons of Abraham,' are ' blessed with the faithful Abraham ' (37- 9) ; upon the Gentiles has come ' the blessing of Abraham ' (314) ; all who are Christ's, without any kind of distinction, are 'Abraham's sons,' fulfilling, like him, the conditions of Divine acceptance, and in- heriting with him the Divine promises.
St. Paul uses the narratives of Genesis as he finds them. Before the dawn of criticism the theologian did not raise the question whether the patriarchal portraits were real or ideal. To St. Paul Abraham is a historical person who lived 430 years before Moses (Gal 317), and who was not inferior to the great prophets of Israel in purity of religious insight and strength of inward piety. It is now almost universally believed that the faith ascribed to the patriarchs was itself the result of a long historical evolution. But, while the maturer conceptions of a later age are carried back to Abraham, the patriarch is not dis- solved into a creation of the religious fancy. ' The ethical and spiritual idea of God which is at the foundation of the religion of Israel could only enter the world through a personal organ
of divine revelation ; and nothing forbids us to see in Abraham the first of that long series of prophets through whom God has communicated to mankind a saving knowledge of Himself ' (Skinner, Genesis [ICC, 1910], p. xxvil).
2. In the Epistle of St. James.— St. James (2s1-23) uses the example of Abraham to establish the thesis, not that 'a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law ' (Ro S28), but that ' by works a man is justified, and not only by faith' (Ja 2M). While the two apostles agree that Christianity is infinitely more than a creed, being nothing if not a life, they differ in their conception of faith. The meaning which St. James attaches to the word is indicated by his suggestion of believing demons and dead faith (219- w). St. Paul would have regarded both of these phrases as con- tradictions in terms, since all believers are con- verted and all faith is living. Asked if faith must not prove or justify itself by works, he would have regarded the question as superfluous, for a faith that means self-abandonment in passionate adoring love to the risen Christ inevitably makes the believer Christlike. St. James says in effect : ' Abraham believed God, proving his faith by works, and it was counted to him for righteous- ness.' With St. Paul righteousness comes between faith and works ; with St. James works come between faith and righteousness. Had St. James been attacking either Galatians or Romans, and in particular correcting St. Paul's misuse of the example of Abraham, his polemic would have been singularly lame. Such a theory does injustice to his intelligence. But, if he was sounding a note of warning against popular perversions of evangeli- cal doctrine, St. Paul, who was often ' slanderously reported ' (Ro 38), must have been profoundly grate- ful to him. See, further, art. JAMES, EPISTLE OF.
It is interesting to note that Clement of Rome co-ordinates the doctrines of the two apostles. Taking the typical example of Abraham, he asks, ' Wherefore was our father Abraham blessed ? ' and answers, ' Was it not because he wrought right- eousness and truth through faith ? ' (Ep. ad Cor. § 31). If the two types of doctrine could be regarded as complementary sets of truths, justice was done to both apostles. But the difference assumed a dangerous form in the hard dogmatic distinction of the Schoolmen between fides informis and fides formata cum caritate, the latter of which (along with the ' epistle of straw ' on which it seemed to be based) Luther so vehemently re- pudiated.
3. In the Epistle to the Hebrews. — The writer of Hebrews bases on the incident of Abraham's meeting with Melchizedek (He 7 ; cf. Gn 14) an argument for a priesthood higher than the Aaronic order (v.llff-). To the king -priest of Salem Abraham gave tithes, and from him received a blessing, thereby owning his inferiority to that majestic figure. As Abraham was the ancestor of the tribe of Levi, the Aaronic priesthood itself may be said to have been overshadowed in that hour and ever afterwards by the mysterious order of Melchizedek. This is the conception of the writer of Ps 110, who identifies God's vicegerent, seated on the throne of Zion, not with the Aaronic order, but with the royal priesthood of Melchizedek. When the Maccabees displaced the house of Aaron, and concentrated in their own persons the kingly and priestly functions, they found their justifica- tion in the priestly dignity of Melchizeaek, and called themselves, in his style, ' priests of the Most High' (Charles, Book of Jubilees, 1902, pp. lix and 191). Finally, when Christ had given a Messianic interpretation of Ps 110, it was natural that the writer of Hebrews should see the Aaronic priesthood superseded by an eternal King-Priest after the ancient consecrated order of Melchizedek.
For divergent critical views of the Abraham-Melchizedek pericope of Gn 14 see Wellhausen, Comp.t, 1889, p. 211 f. ; Gunkel, Genesis, 253 ; Skinner, Genesis, 269 f. Against Wellhausen's theory that the story is a post-exilic attempt to glorify the priesthood in Jerusalem, Gunkel and Skinner argu» for an antique traditional basis.
ABSTINENCE
ABSTINENCE
The writer of Hebrews illustrates his definition of faith (II1) by three events in the life of Abraham. — (1) The patriarch left his home and kindred, and ' went put not knowing whither he went ' (He II8). His faith was a sense of the unseen and remote, as akin to the spiritual and eternal. In obedience to a Divine impulse he ventured forth on the unknown, confident that his speculative peradventure would be changed into a realized ideal. The doubting heart says, ' Forward, though I cannot see, I guess and fear ' ; the believing spirit, ' Look up, trust, be not afraid.' — (2) Abraham remained all his life a sojourner (ir&poiicos ical ira.peirldr)/j.os=3v'in} na, Gn 234) in the Land of Promise (He II9). He left his home in Chaldsea, and never found another. Wherever he went he built an altar to God, but never a home for himself. He was encamped in many places, but naturalized in none. His pilgrim spirit is related to his hope of an eternal city — a beautiful conception transferred to Genesis from the literature of the Maccabsean period (En. 9028- 2fl, Apoc. Bar. 32s-4 etc.).— (3) By faith Abraham offered up Isaac, ' accounting that God is able to raise up, even from the dead' (He II19). Here again the belief of a later age becomes the motive of the patriarch's act of renunciation. The narrative in Gn 22 contains no indication that the thought of a resurrection flashed through his agonized mind.
LITERATURE. — F. W. Weber, Syst. der altsyn. palastin. Theol. aus Targum, Midrasch, u. Talmud, 1880, ch. xix. ; J. B. Lightfoot, Galatians, 1866, p. 158 ff. ; Sanday-Headlara, Romans*, 1902, p. 102 ff. ; W. Beyschlag, NT Theology, 1894-96, i. 364 ff. ; A. B. Bruce, St. Paul's Conception of Christi- anity, 1896, p. 116 f. ; G. B. Stevens, Theology of the NT, 1901, p. 289 ; B. Weiss, Biblical Theology of the NT, 1882-83, L
*37 ff. JAMES STEAHAN.
ABSTINENCE. — Introduction. — The whole of morality on its negative side may be included under Abstinence. Christian moral progress (sanctification) includes a holding fast (KaTtyecrOai.) of the good, and an abstaining from (&ir£x.eff6u) every form of evil (1 Th 521L). While Christianity has general laws to distinguish the good from the bad, yet for each individual Christian these laws are focused in the conscience, and the function of the latter is to discriminate between the good and the bad — it cannot devolve this duty on out- ward rules. With it the ultimate decision rests, and on it also lies the responsibility (Ro 148, He 514). The lists of vices and virtues,* of 'works of the flesh' and 'fruits of the spirit,' given in the NT are not meant to be exhaustive, out typical ; nor are they given to make needless the exercise of Christian discernment. The NT is not afraid to place in the Christian conscience the decision of what is to be abstained from and what is not, because it believes in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and because it exalts personal responsibility. It is necessary to make this clear, because, as we shall see, the ultimate tribunal of appeal in mat- ters of abstinence in the ordinary sense (i.e. in the sphere of things indifferent) is the Christian conscience. The ideal of Christian conduct is sometimes said to be self-realization, not self- suppression ; consecration, not renunciation. These antitheses are apt to be misleading. In the self with which Christianity deals there are sinful ele- ments that have to be extirpated. Christian sanc- tification takes place not in innocent men, but in sinners who have to be cleansed from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit (2 Co 71). To purify oneself (1 Jn 33) is not simply to realize oneself; it is to do no sin.
In all moral conduct there is suppression ; in Christian conduct there is extirpation. This nega-
• See Dobschutz, Christian Life in the Primitive Church, Eng. tr., 1904, p. 406 ff., for lists.
tive side of Christian conduct is abstinence. It is the crucifying of the flesh — death unto sin — and it is the correlative of 'living to righteousness,' ' being risen with Christ,' etc. Abstinence in this sense is an essential and ever-present moment in the Christian life.
More narrowly interpreted, abstinence is a re- fraining from certain outward actions — as eating, drinking, worldly business, marriage, etc. It is thus applied to outward conduct, while continence ((••y/rpdreia) is used of inward self-restraint. Cicero makes this distinction, though, from the nature of the case, he cannot always consistently apply it (see Lewis and Short, Lat. Diet., s.v. ' Abstinentia').
We may look first at the outward side of absti- nence, and then try to find out what the Christian principles are (as these are unfolded in the apos- tolic writings) that determine its nature and its limits.
I. ASCETIC PRACTICES. — 1. Fasting.— (a) Fast- ing, or abstinence from food and drink, may be un- avoidable or involuntary (e.g. Ac 2721- M, 1 Co 411, 2 Co 68* II27,* Ph 412). Such fastings have a re- ligious value only indirectly. They may overtake the apostate as well as the apostle. If they are caused by devotion to Christian service, they are, like all other privations so caused, badges or fidelity; and they may be referred to with reasonable pride by Christ's ministers (2 Co 61"- II28). They ought to silence criticism (cf. Gal 617, where St. Paul speaks of his bruises as arty/mra rov 'IijaoO), and they enforce Christian exhortation (Col 418, Eph 4'). On the principle that he who chooses the end chooses the means, such fastings are real proofs of fidelity to Christ. They are like the scars of the true soldier.
(b) An absorbing preoccupation with any pursuit may be the cause of fasting. The artist or the scientist may forget to take food, in the intensity of his application to his work ; or any great emo- tion like sorrow may make one 'forget to take bread.' Such a fast we have in Ac 99, where St. Paul, we are told, was without food for three days after his conversion. As Jesus fasted in the wil derness (Mt 41'11), or at the well forgot His hungei (Jn 4311-), so the ferment of the new life acted on St. Paul thus also. Fasting is not the cause of such pre-occupation, but the effect ; and so its value depends on the nature of the emotion causing it.f Such involuntary privations, however, are not fast- ing in the proper sense. In themselves they are morally indifferent, as they may overtake any one irrespective of moral conditions ; but, when borne bravely and contentedly in the line of Christian duty, they are not only indications of true faith, but in turn they strengthen that faith (Ro 58'8, Ph 4").
(c) Real fasting is purposive and voluntary. It is a total or partial abstinence from food for an unusual period, or from certain foods always or at certain times, for a moral or religious end. Such a fast is mentioned in Ac 132- 8 1423 in connexion with ordination. It is associated with prayer. Some hold that it was the form to ' be permanently observed ' in such cases (Ramsay, St. Paul, 1895, p. 122). There is no mention, however, of fasting at the appointment of Matthias (Ac I24), or of the seven (6"). We cannot, therefore, take it as inher- ently binding on Christian Churches at such solem- nities. It is rather the survival of ancient religious practices (like the fasting on the Day of Atone- ment), which on the occasions referred to were adopted through the force of custom, and served
* These are sometimes explained as voluntary fasts — to use Hooker's expression (Ecc. Pol. v. 72. 8) — but the contexts seem decisive against that view.
t This was probably what Jesus had in view in the saying in Mt 9i«.
ABSTINENCE
ABSTINENCE
to solemnize the proceedings. The Atonement fast (Ac 279) is mentioned only as a time limit after which navigation was dangerous. It is not said that St. Paul fasted on that day, though probably he did.
These Jewish survivals were conserved without investigation by the Palestinian Church, though, after what Jesus had said on fasting, we may be- lieve that the spiritual condition of- the believer, rather than the performance of the outward rite, would be the essential element. Pharisaism, how- ever, follows so closely on the heels of ritual that in some quarters it very early influenced Christi- anity (cf. Did. i. 3 : ' Fast for those who persecute you' ; and Epiph. Hcer. Ixx. 11 : 'When they {i.e. the Jews] feast, ye shall fast and mourn for them ' ; cf. also Poly carp, vii. 2 ; Hernias, Vis. iii. 10. 6 ; and, in the same connexion, the interpolations in the NT [Mt 1721, Mk Q29, Ac 10s0, 1 Co 7s]). Even the Pharisaic custom of fasting twice a week (Monday and Thursday) was adopted in some quarters, though these days were changed to Wed- nesday and Friday (Did. viii. 1). These are the later dies stationum or crdcretj (cf. Clem. Alex. Strom, vii. 12, p. 877). See ERE v. 844b.
To evaluate the practice of fasting, we must look to the end aimed at and the efficacy of this means to attain that end. (1) In many cases it would be mainly a matter of tradition. On any eventful occasion men might practise fasting, to ratify a decision or induce solemnity, as those Jews did who vowed to kill St. Paul (Ac 2312). Under such a category would fall the Paschal and pre-baptismal fasts. Though not mentioned in the NT, they were early practised in the Christian Church (Eus. HE v. 24 ; Did. vii. ; Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 61). There can be no doubt that ordination and bap- tismal and Paschal fasts may serve to solemnize these events, yet there is no warrant for making them an ecclesiastical rule. In such traditional fasting there is often, consciously or unconsciously, implicated the feeling that God is thereby pleased and merit acquired, and the result in such cases is Pharisaic complacency and externalism. Jesus, following the great prophets (Is 585'7, Zee 819), had relegated outward rites to a secondary place. He demanded secrecy, sincerity, and simplicity in all these matters, and the Apostolic Church never wholly lost sight of His guidance. St. James, while emphasizing the value of prayer (517'20), says nothing of fasting, and be makes real ritual consist in works of mercy and blameless conduct (I27). Even when fasting was enjoined, the danger of externalism was recognized (Hermas, Sim. v. 1 ; Barn. ii. 10 ; Justin Martyr, Dial. 15). St. Paul had to prove that such fastings could not be re- demptively of any value, that they were not bind- ing, that they did not place the observer of them on a higher spiritual plane than the non-observer, that even as means of discipline they were of doubtful value, and that they were perpetually liable to abuse (Col 220ff-).
(2) Fastings were used in certain cases to induce ecstatic conditions. This is a well-known feature in apocalyptic writings. Perhaps the Colossi an heretics did this (cf. & e6pa.Kev ^u/3arei;a>»', Col 218). St. John and the other Apostles with him are said to have fasted three days before writing the Fourth Gospel (Muratorian fragment). The Apocalypse, however, though a opacrw (vision), is lacking in the usual accompaniments of a vision, viz. prayer and fasting (contrast Hernias, Sim. v. 1). St. Peter's vision (Ac 109'18) was preceded by hunger, but it was not a voluntary fast ; nor is there any reference to fasting in the case of St. Paul's visions (Ac 169 189f-, 2 Co 12«0, and the reference in the case of Cornelius (Ac 1030) is a later interpolation. It was more when direct prophetic inspiration be-
came a memory rather than when it was a reality that men resorted to fasting in order to superin- duce it.
(3) Fasting was resorted to also that alms might be given out of the savings.
1 If there is among them a man that is poor and needy, and they have not an abundance of necessaries, they fast for two or three days, that they may supply the needy with necessary food ' (Aristides, Apology, xv.). Cf. also Hermas, Sim. v. 3. 7 : ' Reckon up on this day what thy meal would otherwise have cost thee, and give the amount to some poor widow or orphan, or to the poor.'
Origen (horn, in Levit. x.) quotes an apostolic saying which supports this practice :
'We have found in a certain booklet an apostolic saying, "Blessed is also he who fasts that he may feed the poor"' (' Invenimus in quodam libello ab apostolis dictum— Beatus est qui etiam jejunat pro eo ut alat pauperem ').
This saying might legitimately be deduced from such passages as Eph 428 and Ja 216, but the prac- tice easily associated itself with the idea of fasting as a work of merit.
' More powerful than prayer is fasting, and more than both alms.' 'Alms abolish sins' (2 Clem. xvi. 4 ; cf. Hermas, Sim. v,3).
Fasting done out of Christian love to the brethren is noble ; but, when done to gain salvation, it be- comes not only profitless but dangerous. ' Though I give all my goods to feed the poor and have not love, it profateth me nothing' (1 Co 133).
(4) Again, fasting may have been viewed as giving power over demons (cf. Clem. Horn. ix. 9 ; Tertullian, de Jejuniis, 8 : ' Docuit etiam adversus diriora demonia jejuniispraeliandum ' ; cf. Mt 1721, Mk O29). Some find this view in the narrative of the Temptation (see EBi, art. ' Temptation '). This view of fasting, grotesque as it appears to us, is akin to the truth that surfeiting of the body dulls the spiritual vision, and that the spiritual life is a rigorous discipline (cf. 1 Co 9s4'27).
What strikes one in the apostolic writings gener- ally, as contrasted with later ecclesiastical litera- ture, is the scarcity of references to fasting as an outward observance. Nowhere is the tradi- tional Church ascetic held up to imitation in the NT, as Eusebius ( HE ii. 23) holds up St. James, or Clement of Alexandria (Peed. ii. 1) St. Matthew, or the Clem. Horn. (xii. 6, xv. 7) St. Peter, or Epiph- anius (Hasr. Ixxviii. 13) the sons of Zebedee.
In the NT the references to fasting are almost all incidental, and apologetic or hostile. It is regarded as due to weakness of faith, or positive perversion. Neither St. John, St. James, St. Jude, nor St. Peter once mentions it as a means of grace. This silence, it is true, ought not to be unduly pressed ; yet it is surely a proof that they considered fasting as of no essential importance. Its revival in the Christian Church was due to traditionalism and legalism on the one hand, and to ascetic dualism (Orphic, Platonic, Essenic) on the other. In the NT the latter influence is strenuously opposed (Colossians and Pastorals), and the former is as vigorously rejected when it makes itself necessary to salvation, although it is tenderly treated when it is only a weak leaning towards old associations. The whole spirit of apostolic Christianity regards fasting as of little or no importance, and the experience of the Christian Church seems to be that any value it may have is infinitesimal compared with the evils and perversions that seem so inseparably associ- ated with it. According to Eusebius (HE v. 18), Montanus was the first to give laws to the Church on fasting. The NT is altogether opposed to such ecclesiastical laws. The matter is one for the indi- vidual Christian intelligence to determine (Ro 14s).
St. Paul's language in 1 Co Q24*- has been ad- duced in support of self-torture of all kinds ; but, while we must not minimize the reality of Christian
ABSTINENCE
ABSTINENCE
discipline, nothing can be legitimately deduced from this passage or any other in favour of fasting or flagellation as a general means of sanctification, nor is the Apostle's view based on a dualism which looks on matter and the human body as inherently evil. It may be said that interpolations like 1 Co 7" (cf. Ac 1030, Mt 1721, Mk 929) reveal the beginnings of that ascetic resurgence which reached its climax in monastic austerities, and that there is at least a tinge of ascetic dualism in certain Pauline passages (e.g. Ro 81S, 1 Co 55 71"8 O27, 2 Co 41U- ", Col 38) ; but even those who hold this view of these Pauline passages admit 'that there is very little asceticism, in the ordinary sense, in St. Paul's Epistles, while there is much that makes in the opposite direction ' (McGiffert, Apostol. Age, 1897, p. 136). We shall see, however, when we come to deal with the principles of abstinence as unfolded by St. Paul, that even this minimum residuum has to be dropped.
We may conclude, then, that, according to the NT, fasting is not enjoined or even recommended as a spiritual help. The ideal is life with the Risen Christ, which involves not only total renunciation of all sinful actions but self-restraint in all conduct. When the individual Christian finds fasting to be a part of this self-restraint, then it is useful ; but one fails to find any proof in the NT that fasting is necessarily an element of self-restraint. When it is an effect of an absorbing spiritual emotion, or when practised to aid the poor, or involuntarily undergone in the straits of Christian duty, then it is highly commendable.
2. The use of wine. — While drunkenness as well as gluttony is sternly condemned, nowhere is total abstinence, in our sense, enforced. In one passage it has even been contended that St. Paul indirectly opposes it (1 Ti 5™), but his words in our time would be simply equivalent to medical advice to the effect that total abstinence as a principle must be subordinated to bodily health. Thus, while total abstinence is in itself not an obligatory duty, it may become so on the principle that we ought not to do anything by which our brother stumbles, or is offended, or is made weak (1 Co 813). This principle, which is equally applicable to fasting, must be considered in deciding the Christian at- titude towards all outward observances. While Christianity recognizes the indifferent nature of these customs, while its liberty frees Christians from their observance, yet cases may arise when this liberty has to be subordinated to love and the interests of Christian unity. In 1 Co 8 the Apostle is dealing with the conditions of his own time ; our conditions did not engage his attention. Christian abstainers can find an adequate defence for their position in the degrading associations of strong drink in our modern life. On the other hand, total abstinence from strong drink is no more a univer- sally binding duty than fasting is, nor are ecclesi- astical rules called for in the one case more than in the other.* Both these customs fall within the sphere of things indifferent, and are to be deter- mined by the individual in the light of the nature of the Christian life, which is 'neither meat nor drink, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost ' (Ro 1417).
3. Marriage and celibacy.— We are not here concerned with the NT doctrine of marriage (q.v.) in its totality, but with the question as to whether celibacy is commanded as a superior grade of living, and as to whether this is based on a dualistic view which regards the sexual functions as in their very nature evil. To begin with, marriage is viewed by St. Paul as being in general a human necessity, as
• The ' water-folk ' found in the Eastern Church in the 3rd cent, (who objected to wine at the Lord's Supper), cannot appeal to NT principles for a Justification of their actions.
indeed a preventive against incontinency. It is a ' part of his greatness that, in spite of his own somewhat ascetic temperament, he was not blind to social and physiological facts' (Drummond, quoted in EGT on 1 Th 44). He recommends those who can to remain single as he is himself. In view of the approaching world-end in which he believed, marriage meant the multiplication of troubles that would make fidelity to Christ more difficult ; and perhaps in this light also the propagation of the race was undesirable. It is possible also that he may have been here influenced unconsciously by his Rabbinical training, and that he interpreted his own case as too generally applicable. He was a celibate for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake (Mt 1910"12), and he may have made the mistake of de- siring to universalize his own exceptional case.
Yet there is no ground for the view that celibacy in itself is a superior form of life. * St. Paul does not say that it can produce that life or is necessary to it, but when it is a consequence of it, then it is of value. It is the supremacy of single-hearted devotion to Christ that ne holds out as an ideal, and his view is that in some cases marriage en- dangers this. Again, marriage is not to him simply a preventive against uncleanness (see art. SOBERNESS). It is also the object of sanctification, and its relations have their own honour (1 Th 44; see MARRIAGE, VIRGINITY). He uses it as an illustration of the highest relationship ; he opposes those who prohibit it (1 Ti 42) owing to a false asceticism. It is true he does not there give reasons, as he does in the case of abstinence from food, because the same principle applies to both cases. While, then, we may admit that on this ques- tion his view was narrow, we may say with Sabatier (The Apostle Paul, Eng. tr., 1891, p. 164) that ' this narrowness, for which he has been so greatly blamed, does not arise from a dualistic asceticism. There is no dualism to be found in Paul's doctrine.'
4. World-flight is not encouraged in the NT. Slaves even are warned to abide in their situations, knowing that they are God's freemen (see art. ABUSE). The necessity of labour is unfolded in the Thessalonian Epistles, against the practice of those who had given up work under escnatological influences. World-flight is not conquering the world, but rather giving up the idea of conquering it, abandoning the battlefield, and, as such, is contrary to the apostolic view. St. Paul did not, it is true, expatiate after the manner of modern moralists on the dignity of labour, t but he did insist on 'the divineness of those obligations and ties which constitute man's social life. . . '.' The institutions of society — 'marriage, the state, the rights of possession — are of Divine appointment, and must De upheld and honoured, however short the time before the order to which they belong shall pass away forever ' (Stevens, Theol. of NT, 1899, p. 454).
II. ASCETIC PRINCIPLES.— Abstinence is wider than fasting or outward observances ; it implies principles by which these external actions are determined, and it keeps in view also the inner reality of which they are the expression. It in- cludes character as well as conduct. Indeed, it is this inward reality which is mainly of value in the Christian ideal of abstinence.
1. The verb OKTKCIV occurs only once in the NT (Ac 2416), in this sense of a life whose activities are explained, in the way both of omission and com- mission, by an inner principle. St. Paul was accused of deliberately offending Jewish legal sus-
* Harnack (on Did. xi. 8) thinks Eph 532 recommend* celibacy as a higher life for the Christian. See, however, Schaff, The Oldest Church Manual, 1885, p. 202.
t See Harnack's What is Christianity? (Eng. tr., 1904, p 123 ff.) for remarks qualifying the idea underlying the phrase, ' the dignity of labour.'
ABSTINENCE
ABSTINENCE
ceptibilities. He denies the charge. While he adheres to the heresy of 'the Way,' he does so without intentionally corning into collision with the customs or prejudices of others. Not only so, but his plan is a studied attempt to conform to all customs of Jew and Gentile, of ' weak ' and 'strong,' consistently with his faithfulness to God and his being under law to Christ. This is his dffK-rjffis for the gospel's sake (1 Co 919'22). His whole life is an illustration of this. He yielded to Jewish susceptibilities (Ac 163 1818 2126), and bore with Gentile immaturity (1 Th 27'12). This con- duct was not due to fickleness or guile (1 Co 216, 1 Th 23), but to love (2 Co 513'-), and it was done in simplicity and godly sincerity of conscience (2 Co I1-, Ac 2416). It was different from the love- less superior liberty of Corinthian liberalism, and from the servile man-pleasing of weak Judaism (Gal 1. 2). It was, in short, a reproduction of that /c^wcrts of self (so different from selfish human ac- quisitiveness) which was the great feature of the life of Christ (Ph 28).
To St. Paul this involved very real asceticism. In striking language he figures himself as in the course of his Christian race undergoing privations, abstinences, and self-discipline as great as any runner for the Isthmian prize or as any pugilist. It is not simply that this asceticism involved abstinence from sin — Christianity demands that from all ; it involved also the giving up of privi- leges and rights, and the denial to self of anything that would hinder his being sure of the prize or that would weaken others or cause them to stumble. It is a warning to Christian liberalism in Corinth not to degenerate into licence and so to fall. Christian asceticism is the remedy against this. We are not to infer that St. Paul practised bodily torture, that he went, as it were, out of his way to invent austerities, self-imposed fastings, or flagella- tions. What he refers to here is the effect on his whole life of his absorbing passion for men's salva- tion. That was the expulsive power which made him an ascetic in this sense, which made him abnegate his rights of maintenance at Thessalonica and Corinth, which made him work at night though preaching through the day, which overcame his bodily weaknesses, which brought him into dangers by land and sea without being deterred by the fear of pain or privation.
Nor was this &rio;<rts of his a superior form of life which was binding only on a few choice souls. St. Paul has no double morality. No one can empty himself too much for Christ or endure too much for Him. In this way must we explain the mani- fold passages where the Christian life is compared to a race, to an athletic contest, to military life and warfare. Just as these involve abstinence, so also does Christianity. This asceticism is, however, not arbitrarily imposed or cunningly invented ; it is the consequence of fidelity to Christ's cause. It arises out of the very nature of the Christian life. Its outward manifestation is accidental. What is essential is the presence of the self-denying spirit, which spends and is spent willingly out of love to Christ. It is a complete perversion to suppose that outward austerities can create this spirit. Out- ward hardships of any sort must be effects, not causes. This Christian asceticism is not due to any disparagement of the body or undervaluation of earthly relationships or a false view of matter. The asceticism born of these is at best only a ffa/j-ariKTi yvnvacria* (1 Ti 47*-), while Christian as- ceticism is one whose end is piety. The one is of little profit, the other of eternal worth. This gymnastic for holiness arises out of the provi-
* This o-ujuariKi) yv/nvowria is not athletics in our sense ; it is a bodily discipline dictated by a philosophico-religious view of the body— a dualistic view o! things (cf. 1 Xi 43).
dential disciplines furnished copiously by a strict adherence to the line of Christian duty. It is the Koiriav KO.I 6veidi£e<r6ai, the exhaustive labouring, and the abuse (or earnest conflict [d.ywifcffBa.i]) of the man who sets his hope on the living God (1 Ti 410).
2. What, then, are the principles that determine the nature and limits of Christian abstinence? We may learn these by considering the general word for ' abstinence ' (a.ir£-)(fa6a.i) in the NT (Ac 1520- M, 1 Th 4s 523, 1 Ti 43, 1 P 2n). These principles did not disengage themselves all at once in the Church's consciousness. The first real attempt at such a disengagement is found in the so-called Apostolic Decree (Ac 15). This was nothing more than a working compromise to ease the existing situation. Attempts have been made often and early to moralize it and so find in it a valid basis for Christian abstinence. Thus ' blood ' was explained as ' homicide,' and ' things strangled ' were omitted, as in Codex D ; but such attempts are beside the point as surely as the attempts to judaize the document completely by making ' forni- cation' mean 'marriage within the prohibited degrees.' For our purpose the Decree is valuable historically rather than morally. It is a land-mark in the liberating of Christianity from ceremonial Judaism, similar to the evangelizing of Samaria by Philip and his baptizing of the eunuch, or the dealing of St. Peter with Cornelius. It does not, however, supply a logical or lasting basis for abstinence. Such a basis is furnished by St. Paul (1 Th 41'8, 1 Co 61'-20, Gal 518 etc. ; cf. 1 P 211). The ground of Christian abstinence is found in the nature of the Christian life, which is a holy calling — a fellowship with the Holy One — whose animat- ing principle is the Holy Spirit. The Christian man — body, soul, and spirit — is in union with Christ. Hence the very nature of the Christian life gives a positive principle of abstinence. Every- thing carnal is excluded. 'The carnal mind is enmity against God, it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be' (Ro 87). This deter- mines positively what is of necessity to be avoided, and lists of these sins are given in the NT (see above, Introduction). These are ' the works of the flesh.' At the very lowest foundation of the Christian life there must be personal purity. ayia<r/j.6s is wholly opposed to aKadapffia (1 Th 47).
Some have maintained that St. Paul tends to regard sanctification as mainly absence from sensual sin (Wernle, Beginnings of Christianity, Eng. tr., 1904, ii. 334), and others that he, possibly from his own bitter experience of this sin, empha- sized this aspect of sanctification (A. B. Bruce, St. PauVs Conception of Christianity, 1894, p. 264). But St. Paul's view of sanctification includes the whole personality. He was keenly alive to the ' inconceivable evil of sensuality, although he himself had the charism of continence (1 Co 77). The reason for his emphasis on personal purity is found in the immoral state of Grecian cities — ' the bottomless sexual depravity of the heathen world ' (Schaff, op. cit. p 202) — and in the sensual bias of human nature. Christians had to learn this grace of purity (1 Th 44).
The Christian life, then, is a positive life — a life that is being sanctified ; and this includes all along a negative element, for Christianity does not deal with innocent men, but with sinners. Hence the crucifying of the flesh, with its affections and lusts, and the mortifying of the bodily members are just the negative side of advance in holiness.
It is sometimes held that at first St. Paul's teaching on this point was tinged with dualism, and that he tended to regard the body itself as essentially evil, and that it was only later on, when the full consequences of his early views were carried into effect, as in Colossians and the Pastorals,
10
ABSTINENCE
ABSTINENCE
that he came to repudiate this dualistic asceticism (Baring Gould, A Study of St. Paul, 1897 [see Index, under 'Asceticism']), or it is maintained that his attitude towards the flesh changes — that at times he views it as something to be extirpated, while at other times and oftener ' his exhortations to his Christian readers have reference commonly not to the Christian's attitude towards his fleshly nature, but to his relation to Christ or the Divine Spirit within him' (McGiffert, Apostol. Age, p. 137 f. ). The truth is that the change was not in St. Paul's principle, but in the circumstances and conditions with which he happened to be at any time dealing, and that this opposition between a negative and a positive attitude is not a contra- diction, but only exhibits the opposite sides of the one Christian principle of sanctification. Abstain- ing and retaining, pruning and growth, are not contradictories but complements. Even McGiffert, as we have seen, admits that ' there is very little asceticism, in the ordinary sense, in Paul's epistles, while there is much that makes in the opposite direction ' (op. cit. p. 136). These distinctions, however, are largely irrelevant. To St. Paul the Christian life was a life of sanctification, and this included both aspects.
This positive principle, then, of Christian abstin- ence is found in the very nature of the Christian life, which includes the affirmation of all the per- sonality and its relationships as instruments of the spirit, and also the negation of the flesh and the world, or of personality and its relationships as alienated from the Spirit of God.
This principle, just because it contained these two moments, was apt to be misunderstood. Its twofold unity was apt to be disrupted, and we may well believe that the later Gnostic dualism and licentious libertinism may both have appealed to the authority of St. Paul. The Apostle, however, had a second principle of abstinence which helps us to correct this antagonism. He clearly distin- guished between those things that in their very nature were hostile to the Christian life and those things that were indifferent. The neglect or abuse of this principle is apt to confuse the whole ques- tion of abstinence. The difficulty is intensified by the fact that in this region of the indifferent we are dealing with the application of a universal principle to changing conditions, so that, to use logical language, while the major premiss is the same, the minor premiss varies, and thus the right con- clusion has to be discovered from the nature of the conditions with which we are for the moment deal- ing. Thus we find that the conditions at Rome and Corinth were not the conditions present in Colossians or the Pastorals, and accordingly St. Paul deals with each according to its merits. His general principle in regard to indifferent things is, 'All things are lawful.' This is universally ap- plicable only inside this universe of discourse. It is not applicable to our relation to those things that by their very nature are inimical to the Christian life. To apply the principle to the latter sphere is to degenerate into libertinism such as St. John, St. Jude, and St. Peter had to face.
While St. Jude and St. Peter are content with combating this libertinism mainly by denunciation and exhortations to Christians, St. John applies St. Paul's positive principle of abstinence to refute it. He points out the inadmissibility of sin ( 1 Jn 228f>)- By this neither he nor St. Paul means per- fectionism, nor yet are they speaking ideally of the Christian life. It is not true, as the Gnostics say, that the gold of Christianity is not injured by the mud of impurity (Irenaeus, c. Hcer. i. 6. 2). Some so explained the saying ascribed to Nicholas (cf. Rev 2*- 15), SeTv ira.pa.\pr)aOa.i. TTJ (rapid ( ' the flesh must be abused'). According to Clem. Alex. (Strom.
ii. 20), ' abandoning themselves like goats to pleasure, as if insulting the body, they lead a life of self-indulgence.' It is this that St. John is con- futing in these perfectionist passages, just as St. Paul confutes ascetic severity towards the body in Colossians, by pointing to the nature of the new life the Christian has in Christ.
This Christian principle of abstinence, then, ' All things are lawful,' does not apply to sin. It has further limitations. These are unfolded in 1 Cor. and Romans. The abstainers in both these cases were in the minority. They did not base their views on a material dualism. They were under the influence of an atmosphere rather than a system, and they were apt to be treated in a high-handed fashion. They were not endangering the very basis of Christianity as a free service of God, as the Galatians were. Hence they had to be defended rather than condemned. St. Paul says all he can in their favour, although he ranges himself in principle on the other side. He tells the advocates of liberty that love is superior to the Christian's freedom towards things indifferent, that it makes liberty look as much on the weakness of others as on its own strength. The interests of brotherly love and Christian unity make liberty impose restraints on itself. This restraint is a noble asceticism. ' The liberty of faith is found in the bondage of love ' (Sabatier, Paul, p. 163). He warns the advocates of liberty also that they may apply this principle to matters that are essential and not indifferent. This warning was necessary, because idolatry was so identified with all social functions that it was difficult to escape it. Why not — to advert to the coming conditions — adore the image of the Emperor ? Why not throw incense into the fire ? Just because by so doing the first and major principle of Christian abstin- ence was destroyed, viz. that it was a holy life in fellowship with the risen Christ ; and its second principle of freedom in things indifferent did not consequently apply.
Yet this second principle was distinctly valuable. It was a great step in advance to have it clearly enunciated. For the weak brother, as in Galatia, might become intolerant ; he might become the victim of false views, which would look on the ob- servance of indifferent rites as a necessary quali- fication of full salvation and Christian privilege. Then Christian liberty in its fullness must be maintained (Gal 51). This liberty — rightly under- stood— contains in itself the real principle of ab- stinence from what is sinful. Nowhere have we fuller lists of the works of the flesh given than in the Galatian Epistle.
Or, again, as in Colossians and the Pastorals, a false asceticism might be present which re- garded matter and body as evil, in which case both principles would be used to destroy such a view.
(a) In regard to indifferent matters like food and drink God has given freedom. The argument is the same as that used by Jesus when He purified all meats (Mk 719). These minutiae of fasting are human inventions, not Divine commands ; and to respect them casuistically is to blur the distinction between the essential and the indifferent. We get what God meant us to get from perishable meats when we joyfully use them with a thankful spirit towards God. They, like the bodily appetites which they satisfy, do not belong to the eternal world, but to the natural. Yet the natural world and its relations to us, our bodies and their re- quirements, are of God and can all be used to His glory. Our bodies, souls, and spirits are His. It is not by using severity towards the body or by abstaining from marriage or leaving our earthly callings that we can gain further sanctification. In
ABUSE, ABUSEES
ABYSS
11
fact, St. Paul says that this d<f>eidla o-w/uaros — severity towards the body — is of little practical value (Col 228). Its aim is to destroy the body, not to fit it for God's service. Logically carried to its issue, this false asceticism would not only enfeeble the soul by debasing the body, but would destroy the body and matter altogether. But God's ideal for the body is different (cf. Ph 321), so that what is to be aimed at by the Christian is the destruc- tion of the flesh (<rdp|), not of the body as such (ffufw.).
But (b) the Apostle uses the primary principle of Christian abstinence to refute this dualistic asceti- cism. He shows that Christianity is not a matter of prohibitions, but of a renewed life — a walking in the Spirit. Asceticism at its best leaves the house empty. It is doubtful from history and physiology if it can even do that, but the new life in Christ has an expulsive power against sin and a construc- tive power of holiness.
These, then, are the principles that govern Chris- tian abstinence: (1) The Christian life as a 'holy calling ' demands abstinence from all sin. This pro- hibits not only sinful actions but sinful thoughts. This is what may be called essential abstinence. (2) Besides this, there may be abstinence in in- different matters, but it rests with the individual conscience to determine when this is necessary for the furtherance of the new life in Christ. This sphere by its very nature is not subject to obligatory ecclesiastical rules, nor must such ab- stinence be made the basis of salvation or of a higher moral platform, nor must it be based on a false view of matter or of the human body or of human relationships.
See also artt. SELF-DENIAL and TEMPERANCE.
LITERATURE. — Consult the books referred to in the article and the various Commentaries. See also J. B. Ligrhtfoot, C'olos- siantf, 1879, p. 397 ff. ; C. E. Luthardt, Christian Ethics before the Reformation, tr. Hastie, Edinburgh , 1889 ; O. Zockler, Kritische Gesch. der Askese, Frankfurt am M., 1897 ; A. Harnack, History of Dogma, Eng. tr., 1894-99; H. J. Holtzmann, NT Theologie, Tubingen, 1911, bk. iv. ch. vii.; A. B. D. Alexander, The Ethics of St. Paul, Glasgow, 1910 ; A. Ritschl, Entstehung der altkathol. Kirche, Bonn, 1857, p. 173 £f. ; E. Hatch, The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church (Hibbert Lecture, 1888), London, 1890, Lecture vi. DONALD MACKENZIE.
ABUSE, ABUSER3. — The Latin abiltor means either (1) ' use badly,' ' misuse,' or (2) ' use to the full.' In this second sense Cicero uses the word of spending one's whole leisure time with a friend (see Lewis and Short, Latin Diet., s.v. ' Abutor ').
The Greek verb Karaxpao/JMi had both these mean- ings. Thus in Plato (Menex. 247 A) it means ' use wrongly ' ; and Clem. Alex. Peed. i. (p. 142, Potter) speaks of ' using fully every device of wis- dom.' In older English the verb had both mean- ings. Cranmer's Bible has ' abuse ' = ' use to the full ' in Col 222. In both 1 Co 7S1 and 918 KaraxpdofMi means ' use to the full.' The RV translates it so in 918 and marginally so in 7S1.
(a) i Co 731. — The connexions (e.g. marriage), circumstances (e.g. sorrow and joy), and concerns (e.g. business and wealth) of life have in Christianity an emotional interest. Stoicism would expel these emotions and leave the soul empty. Christianity determines them eschatologically (cf. 1 Co 729a 3lb). To avoid abuse of the world is to use it sub specie finis. Abuse here borders on our meaning of misuse (cf. French abuser — on abuse celui qui se laisse captiver ; and Mark Pattison's note on Pope's Essay on Man, ii. 14) ; and that perhaps is why RV retains 'abuse.' Texts like this apply in their original freshness and strength to times of crisis (cf. Luther's hymn, ' Gut, Ehre, Kind, und \Veib . . . lass fahren dahin '), when the dissolu- tion of society seems imminent, but in essence they are applicable to all time, as human life is always
uncertain. They do not, however, encourage aloof- ness from or slackness in social duties (cf. St. Paul's attitude towards the non-workers in Thessalonica, 2 Th 3lom).
(6) 1 Co 918. — One phase of St. Paul's accommodat- ing conduct (irvyKardpaffis) for the gospel's sake was the voluntary abridgment of his rights of maintenance by the Corinthians ( 1 Co 97"14, 2 Co II8). This accommodation must be distinguished from men-pleasing (cf. Gal I10). As the height of right may be the height of injury (summum ius summa iniuria), so conversely the abnegation of Christian rights for the gospel's sake enhances the power of both Evangelist and Evangel (cf.. Mk lO2911).
Summary. — A lawful use of the world (1 Co 7S1) or even of Christian rights (918) becomes harmful when dissociated from eternal issues, or pursued without regard to others. The lower planes of life gain significance in subordination to the highest. Rights legally due may, if pressed without regard to love, become injurious.
(c) In 1 Co 69 and 1 Ti I10 apffevoKotrat is translated ' abusers of themselves with mankind ' (cf. Ro I27 written from Corinth). This unnatural vice is that known in Greek literature as ircuSe/jacrWa. In St. Paul's view sins of uncleanness were the inevitable Divine penalty of forgetfulness of God — a view strengthened by the association between unclean- ness and the worship of Aphrodite in places like Corinth.
LITERATURE. — Grimm-Thayer, *.». (caraxpao/iai ; HDD, vol. i. art. 'Abuse'; the Comm. on above passages, e.g. Edwards in EGT and Hand-Corn. ; cf. also C. J. Vaughan, Lemons of Life and Godliness, London, 1870, Sermon xix. ; F. W. Robertson, Sermons, vol. iii. sermon xiv. ; W. G. Blaikie, Present Day Tracts, no. 4, 'Christianity and the Life that now is.' On irauSepaorio. consult W. A. Becker, Charikles, 3 vols., Berlin, 1877-78, voL ii. p. 252 ff.
DONALD MACKENZIE.
ABYSS.— This is the RV rendering of the word <J/3i/er<ros which occurs in Lk 8S1, Ro 107, Rev 9U *• " II7 17820L 3. In Lk. and Rom., A V translates 'deep'; in Rev., ' bottomless pit ' — no distinction, however, being made between rb <f>ptap rijs afifaffov in 91- 2 (RV ' the pit of the abyss ') and i) afivo-cros simply in the remaining passages (RV 'the abyss'). &fiv<rffos (from a intens. and ^3u<r<r6j, Ion. for fivQ&s, ' the depth ') occurs in classical Greek as an adj. meaning ' bottomless,' but in biblical and ecclesi- astical Greek almost invariably as a substantive denoting ' the bottomless place,' ' the abyss.' The word is found frequently in the LXX, usually as a rendering of the Heb. t'hdm, and primarily denotes the water-deeps which at first covered the earth (Gn I2, Ps 103 (104)6) and were conceived of as shut up afterwards in subterranean storehouses (32 (33)7). In Job 3816f- the abyss in the sense of the depths of the sea is used as a parallel to Hades ; and in 4123 (LXX) the sea-monster regards the Tartarus of the abyss as his captive. In Ps 70 (71)20 ' the abyss' is applied to the depths of the earth, and is here evidently a figurative equiva- lent for Sheol, though it is nowhere used in the LXX to render the Heb. word. In the later Jewish eschatology, where Sheol has passed from its OT meaning of a shadowy under world in which there are no recognized distinctions between the good and the bad, the wicked and the weary (cf. Job 317, EC 9*), and has become a sphere of definite moral retribution, the conception of the abyss has also undergone a moral transformation. The Ethiopian Book of Enoch is especially suggestive for the development of the eschatological conceptions that appear in pre-Christian Judaism ; and in the earliest part of that book the fallen angels and demons are represented as cast after the final judgment into a gulf (xdos) of fire (1013-14), while in 217 the chasm (Sia/coTn?) filled with fire (cf. TO <f>p£ap in Rev 91- 3) is described as bordered by the abyss. Apparently
12
ACCEPTANCE
ACCEPTANCE
the abyss was conceived of as the proper home of the devil and his angels, in the centre of which was a lake of fire reserved as the place of their final punishment.
The previous history of the word explains its use in the NT. In Ro 10', where he is referring to Dt 3013, St. Paul uses it simply as the abode of the dead, Sheol or Hades— a sense equivalent to that of Ps 70 (71 P. In Lk 831 the penal aspect of the abyss conies clearly into view ; it is a place of confinement for demons. In Rev. we are in the midst of the visions and images of apocalyptic eschatology. In 91- 2 ' the pit of the abyss ' sends forth a smoke like the smoke of a great furnace. The abyss has an angel of its own whose name is Abaddon (q.v.) or Apoll- yon (v.11). From it 'the beast' issues (II7 178), and into it ' the old serpent which is the Devil and Satan ' is cast for a thousand years (201'3).
LITERATURE. — The Commentaries and Bible Dictionaries ; art- 'Abyss' in ERE. J. C. LAMBERT.
ACCEPTANCE.— The noun itself is not found in the AV of the NT, though we come very near it in 'acceptation' (dirodoxri), 1 Ti I15 49. Instances of the verb and adjective are frequent, and are mostly equivalents of d^xonat and its derivatives, as the following list shows: 3^x°A««, 2 Co 61 817 II4; 5e«T<k, Ph 418; dTrddexros, 1 Ti 23 54 ; Tr/wo-S^o/tai, He II35 ; fv-n-p&ffdeKTos, Ro 1516- 31, 2 Co 62 812, 1 P 25. We also find \a/j.pdvw, Gal 2s ; cMpevTos,* Ro 121- a 1418, 2 Co 5a, Eph 510, Ph 418, Col 3M, Tit 29, He 1321, nndevapdffTus,* He 1228 ; x<i/>is, 1 P 2'20 ; and xapir<5w, Eph I6. It should be noticed that in the RV the adjective ' well-pleasing ' often takes the place of the AV ' acceptable ' ; and that in Eph 1" the familiar expression ' (his grace) wherein he hath made us accepted in the Beloved' gives place to the more correct ' which he freely bestowed upon us,' etc. See the commentaries of Westcott and Armitage Robinson, in loc.
2 Co 817 (Titus 'accepted the exhortation') and He II89 ('not accepting deliverance') do not call for comment. With 2 Co II4 on the non-accept- ance of another gospel than that of Paul, compare 1 Ti 1s and 41, 2 Ti I15 410 ; see also for the ' accepted time' (the day of opportunity for accepting the Divine message) 2 Co 61'2 (cf. Lk 419). In Ro 1531 St. Paul hopes that the collection for the Jerusalem poor may be acceptable to the saints ; and, refer- ring to the same project in 2 Co 812, lays down the principle that contributions are acceptable in pro- portion to the willingness with which they are given.
We are now left with the passages which speak of God's acceptance of man. Christians are ' child- ren of light,' are to 'prove what is acceptable (or well-pleasing) to the Lord' (Eph 510 ; cf. Col 3-'°), to test and discern the Lord's will (Ro 122). They are 'to make it their aim,' whether living or dying, ' to be well-pleasing to him ' (2 Co 59).
What then are the principles and practices that ensure this happy consummation ? We may first notice the familiar negative proposition set forth in Gal 215 and Ac 1034 'God accepteth no man's person ' (i.e. the mere outward state and presence) ; and over against it the comprehensive declaration of Ac 1035 ' In every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is acceptable to him.' This furnishes a starting-point for a detailed enum- eration of the courses which are ' well-pleasing ' to God, and which may be set forth as follows : the offering of our bodies as a living sacrifice (Ro 122) ; the serving of Christ by not putting stumbling- blocks before weaker brethren (1418) ; missionary work — the ' offering up J of the Gentiles ( 1516) ; the gift of the Philippian Church to St. Paul in prison
* On the use of these words in inscriptions see A. Deissmann, Bible Studies, 214 f. The use of ipeords, ' pleasing,' and the verb apeVicw in the NT should also be noted.
(Ph 418 ; cf. Mt 2531'46) ; filial affection to a widowed mother (1 Ti 54) ; supplication and intercession for all men (1 Ti 23) ; undeserved suffering patiently endured (1 P 2-'°). All these may be looked upon as examples of the 'spiritual sacrifices' (1 P 2s), the offering of ' service with reverence and awe ' (He 1228 ; cf. 1316), which are 'acceptable' to God. He it is who ' works in us that which is well-pleas- ing in his sight through Jesus Christ ' (He 13-').
It is interesting and instructive to compare the grounds of ' acceptance ' in the circle of OT thought with those in the NT. In the former these grounds are partly ceremonial (Lv 22*), and partly ethical (Is I12'15, Jer 6'JO etc.), though here and there a higher note is struck (cf. Pr 213, Mic 68, Dt 104) ; in the latter the ceremonial association has entirely vanished except in a metaphorical sense, and be- come purely ethico-spiritual, as the above references prove. It was largely due to the prophets that the old ceremonial ground was gradually ethicized ; and, though it never died out under the earlier ' dispensation ' (which, indeed, reached its most rigid and mechanical development in the degener- ate Pharisaic cult of NT times), the way was effectually prepared for the full proclamation of the spiritual message of the gospel by Jesus, who was Himself the perfect embodiment of all that was acceptable and well-pleasing to God (cf. Mk I11, Mt 175, JnS^etc.).
There is a theological problem of importance raised by these passages — What is it that consti- tutes the ground of our acceptance with God ? The full treatment of this problem must be sought under the art. JUSTIFICATION, but the following considerations may be properly adduced here. Unquestionably the Christian religion is a religion of Grace, as contra-distinguished from Judaism and other faiths, which are religions of Law. Salvation, according to the NT throughout (explicitly in the writings of St. Paul, more or less implicitly else- where), is of God, and not of man ; not our own doings, but willingness to accept what He has done for us, and what He is ready to do in us, is the condition of initial inclusion within the Kingdom of Divine love and life. This is the watershed which determines the direction and flow of all subsequent doctrinal developments in Christian theology ; it is what settles the question whether our thoughts and practice are distinctively Christian or not. There are, however, two alternative perils to be carefully avoided — antinomianism, on the one hand, which assumes our continued acceptance with God irrespective of our moral conduct after- wards ; and the doctrine of salvation by works, on the other, which makes moral conduct the condi- tion of acceptance, thus surreptitiously introduc- ing the legal view of religion once more. This ' Either — Or ' is, however, a false antithesis, from which we are saved by the recognition of the ' mystical union ' of the believer with God in Christ. By that act of faith, in virtue of which the sinner ' accepts ' Christ and appropriates all that He ia and has done, he passes from a state of condemna- tion into a state of grace (Ro 81), and is henceforth 'in Christ' — organically united to Him as the member is to the body (1 Co 1212L), as the branch is to the vine (Jn 151"*). This 'justifying faith' is, however, not an isolated act ; it is an act that brings us into a permanent relation with the source of spiritual life. Now, ' good works ' in the Christian sense are a necessary proof and outcome of this relation, and as such are well-pleasing or ' acceptable' to God, because (a) they are a mani- festation of the spirit of Christ in us (Gal 220 ; cf. v.21) ; and (b) a demonstration of the continuance of the believer ' in Christ' (Jn 158 ; cf. Mt 5'6, Ph jiof.j Tne relation of the believer to Christ, in other words, while it is religious in its root, ia
ACCESS
ACCESS
13
ethical in its fruit, and the quality and abundance of the latter naturally show the quality and potency of the faith-life of which it is the expression and outcome. Thus our ' works ' do not constitute our claim for acceptance with God after entering the Kingdom of Grace any more than before ; but they determine our place within the Kingdom. There is an aristocracy of the spiritual as well as of the natural life ; the saved are one in the fact of salva- tion, but not in the magnitude of their attainments or the quality of their influence ; and they are more or less acceptable to God according to the entireness of their consecration and the value of their service. There is thus an adequate motive presented to us for perpetual striving after perfection, and St. Paul s spiritual attitude — ' not as though I had already attained, but I follow after' (Ph 312) — is the normal attitude of every true believer (cf. Col I10"12, 1 Th 41'3, 1 Jn S22). It was given only to One to be altogether well-pleasing to God ; but it is the unfading ideal, and the constant endeavour of His true disciples to follow in His steps, and in all things to become more and more like Him, as well as ' well-pleasing ' to Him.
See, further, artt. JUSTIFICATION, etc. , and Litera- ture there specified. E. GRIFFITH- J ONES.
ACCESS.— This word in the Epistles of the NT is the translation of the Greek word irpoffayuyti (Ro 52, Eph 218 312 ; cf. IP 318, where the verb is used actively). It has been treated very thoroughly in DCG (s. v. ). Here we shall confine ourselves to —
1. The connotation of the word. — In classical Greek, the term irpo<ray(ayeijs was used primarily for ' one who brings to,' ' introduces to another as an intermediary,' mainly in a derogatory sense (cf. irpoffayuyetis X^/u.yu.d.roH', one who hunts for another's benefit — a jackal [Dem. 750. 21 ; cf. Aristid. ii. 369, 395] ; the spies of the Sicilian kings were called irpocrayuyeis, ' tale-bearers ' [Plut. ii. 522 D]). It was, however, used later in a technical sense, the court irpocraywyeijs being a functionary whose business it was to bring visitors or suppliants into the king's presence, irpoa-ayuy^ came thus to mean access to the royal presence and favour. It is from this association of ideas that the word derives its religious connotation in the NT. God is con- ceived in the kingly relation (as frequently in the OT), as one whose favour is sought and found, and Christ as the irp<xraywyevs who introduces the sinner into the Divine presence. It is thus a form of words representing Him in the light of a Mediator between God and man ; and it throws light on the relation of the three parties in the transaction.
2. The light thrown on the character and attitude of God towards man. — The kingly con- cept represents God as supreme, one to whom all allegiance is due, and who has the power of life and death over all His subjects. In the OT, Jahweh, especially in the Psalms, is often repre- sented as the King of His people Israel (cf. Ps 1016 248-10 444 472 eg* etc-) jt ia noticeable, however, that in most of these passages the Oriental awe in which all potentates were habitually held is suffused with a sense of joy and pride in God as Israel's King ; His power, favour, and victorious character are mainly dwelt on. The idea which lies behind the NT references, however, is rather that of the difficulty of approach to the King's presence, not merely on account of His loftiness and majesty, but of His alienation, which demands a process of reconciliation. It suggests that the normal relation of the King and His subjects has been disturbed by rebellion or wrong-doing. The Divine dignity has been outraged, and His claim to obedience set at defiance. There is thus no longer a right of admittance to the Divine presence, unless the wrong is righted and the lost favour restored ; and, till
that has been secured, the protection and kindly attitude of God can no longer be relied on.
3. The light thrown on the condition and attitude of man towards Gcd.— The suggestion is that man is conscious of being alienated from God by sin ; that he has no confidence in approaching God in consequence, being uncertain of his recep- tion ; that he knows of nothing which he can do to restore the lost relation ; and that he is deeply sensible of the shame and peril of his condition. The conception of the effects of evil-doing as separating God and man is one that runs through the priestly ritual of Judaism (cf. also the pro- phetic declaration in Is 592 ' your iniquities have separated between you and your God '), and corre- sponds to a fact in the consciousness of P1! awakened sinners. In the earlier experience of k,*.. Paul this feeling was evidently poignantly emphasized ; and the sense of deliverance that came to him through the gospel may be taken as the measure of the pain and sorrow from which he had been delivered.
4. The function fulfilled by Christ as the One through whom the renewal of the lost relation between God and man was accomplished. — The word irpoffayuy-f) is insufficient to represent this function. In itself it stands for the work of a functionary whose r61e is to act as a merely official link between the two parties, having no active part in the process of reconciliation, and having therefore no claim to the gratitude of the bene- ficiary in the process. On the other hand, the apostolic use of the word in its reference to the person and work of Christ includes the suggestion that the 'access' to God referred to has been accomplished by Christ Himself, and an over- whelming sense of gratitude is awakened by this fact. This appears in the four passages in which the word is used, especially in the last (1 P 318). According to this, the bringing of man to God is effected through the work of Christ in His Passion ; 'because Christ also suffered for sins once (airaZ, meaning here 'once for all' = a fact accomplished), the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us (ir poo-ay dyy) to God,' i.e. restore us to His favour, and lead us to the benefits of the Divine reconciliation. In Ro 52, again, the ' access ' receives its meaning and privilege through its consummation in and by Christ, 'through whom we have also (ical, ' copulat et auget ' [Toletus], ' answering almost to our " as might be expected " ' [Alford]) got (^ffx^Kafifv) our (ryv) access (introduc- tion) by our (TV) faith, into this grace wherein we stand ' (see DCG i. 13*). Here the Person of the irpoffaytayefo is chiefly thought of ( ' this has come to us through Him ') ; and the resulting benefit is urged as a reason for holy exultation, since it means justification as a ground for ' rejoicing in the hope of glory.' In Eph 218 a slightly different emphasis is suggested : 'for through Him we both (i.e. Jew and Gentile) have our access in one spirit unto the Father.' Here that revelation of God, not as uni- versal King but as the All-Father, which came through Jesus Christ, is included in the benefit secured by Him for mankind at large, and the reconciliation of humanity at variance with itself as well as with God is brought into the circle of mediation (cf. v.14 'for he is our peace [i.e. He is the peace-maker, the irpoirayuyevs between us, Jew and Gentile, who were once far off from each other] who hath made both one' by His blood [v.13]). Through this word we are thus led into the deep places of the gospel as the reconciling agency of God to man, man to God, and man to man.
LITERATURE.— To the literature in the DCG add John Foster, Lectures, 1853, ii. 69 ; R. W. Dale, The Jeurish Temple and the Christian Church, 1877, p. 205 ; A. J. Gordon, The Twofold Life, 1886, p. 175 ; W. M. Macgregor, Jesus Christ the Son oj
God, 1907, p. 175. E. GRIFFITH-JONES.
14
ACCOUNT
ACHAICUS
ACCOUNT. — It will be sufficient merely to mention the use of the verb ' account ' (Xoytfopai) in the sense of ' reckon,' ' deem,' ' consider ' (Ro S36, 1 Co 41, He 1 119, 2 P 3'5). Simple uses of the noun are found in Ac 1940, when the 'town-clerk' (q.v.) of Ephesus warns his fellow-citizens of the difficulty of giving ' account (\6yos) of this concourse ' : and in Ph 417 ' the fruit that increaseth to your account.' The only significant passages where the word is found are those dealing with the Judgment.
The declaration in Ro 1412, ' Each one of us shall give account of himself to God,' must be studied in the light of the paragraph (vv.7-12) of which it is the conclusion. Those who are them- selves liable to judgment must not set themselves up as judges or one another, either to make light or sincere scruples or to reprove laxity. For one man to judge another is to usurp the prerogative of God, to whom alone (as universal sovereign and object of worship) man is answerable. The passage should be compared with 2 Co 510, where the 'judg- ment-seat' is called Christ's; see also 1 Co 46. St. Paul applies this doctrine, which is found in the Synoptic Gospels and was an integral part of primitive Christian teaching, to Jew and Gentile, to himself and his converts, to those who have died before the Parousia and those who are alive at it. The life in the body provides the oppor- tunity for moral action, and by the use they have made of it men are sentenced (cf. Gal 6*). A. Menzies (Com. on 2 Cor.) calls attention (a) to this aspect of the Judgment in contrast with that which represents the saints as judging the world and angels (1 Co 621-; cf. Mt 19'*); (b) to the incon- sistency between the doctrine of justification by faith alone, and the doctrine of final judgment of men according to their actions. There is, however, in the present writer's opinion, no inconsistency here. The NT generally represents the saved as judged as well as the unsaved. The judgment of the latter, however, is retributory and involves rejection ; that of the former is for a place, higher or lower, within the heavenly Kingdom ; and this place is in accordance with the faithfulness and quality of their service while in the body. St. Paul, as the above references prove, is emphatic as to the fact and nature of this judgment (cf. 1 Co 312"15), and shows that, however true it is that salvation is by grace, there will be gradations in standing and in reward in the after-life. This is in harmony with the teaching of our Lord in the Synoptics, especially in the parables of service and reward (Lk 1918'20 etc. ; cf. Mk 1040). Cf. also, as to the fact of the saints having to give an account of their earthly stewardship, He 1317, 1 P 45 : ' [evil- doers and slanderers of Christians] shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead' (in 1" to the Father, in I18 and 54 to Christ). These may be regarded as special instances of the General Judgment already referred to. The expression diro5i56vau \6yov generally im- plies that defence is not easy.
LITERATURE. — See lit. on art. JUDGMENT ; the Comm. in loce. ; W. N. Clarke, An Outline of Christian Theol., 1898, p. 459 ft.
E. GRIFFITH-JONES. ACCURSED.— See ANATHEMA.
ACCUSATION.— See TRIAL-AT-LAW. ACELDAMA.— See AKELDAMA.
ACHAIA. — Achaia ('A^aSa) was, in the classical period, merely a strip of fertile coast-land stretch- ing along the south of the Gulf of Corinth, from the river Larisus, which separated it from Elis, to the Sythas, which divided it from Sicyonia, while the higher mountains of Arcadia bounded it on the south. Its whole length was about 65 miles, its
breadth from 12 to 20 miles, and its area about 650 sq. miles.
The Achaeans were probably the remnant of a Pelasgian race once distributed over the whole Peloponnesus. Though they were celebrated in the heroic age, they rarely figured in the great Hellenic period, keeping themselves as far as possible aloof from the conflicts between the Ionian and Doric States, happy in their own almost uninterrupted prosperity. It is not till the last struggle for Hellenic independence that they appear on the stage of history.
The cities which formed the famous Achaean League became the most powerful political body in Greece ; and, when the Romans subdued the country (146 B.C.), they at once honoured the brave con- federation and spared the feelings of all the Hellenes by calling the new province not Greece but Achaia. As constituted by Augustus in 27 B.C., the province included Thessaly, ^itolia, Acharnania, and part of Epirus (Strabo, XVII. iii. 25), being thus almost co-extensive with the modern kingdom of Greece. As a senatorial province Achaia was governed by a proconsul, who was an ex-prsetor. In A.D. 15 Tiberius took it from the Senate, adding it to Macedonia to form an Imperial province under the government of a legatus ; but in 44 Claudius re- stored it to the Senate. ' Proconsul ' (dvOuwa.™*, Ac 18la) was therefore the governor's correct official title at the time of St. Paul's residence in Corinth. Nero, as ' a born Philhellene,' wished to make Greece absolutely free.
' In gratitude for the recognition which his artistic contribu- tions had met with in the native land of the Muses . . . [he] declared the Greeks collectively to be rid of Roman govern- ment, free from tribute, and, like the Italians, subject to no governor. At once there arose throughout Greece movements, which would have been civil wars, if these people could have achieved anything more than brawling ; and after a few months Vespasian re-established the provincial constitution, so far as it went, with the dry remark that the Greeks had unlearned the art of being free ' (Mommsen, Provinces, i. 262).
To the end of the empire Achaia remained a senatorial province. The administrative centre was Corinth (q.v.), where the governor had his official residence. During a prolonged mission in that city, St. Paul was brought into contact with the proconsul Gallic (q.v.), the brother of Seneca. The rapid progress of the gospel in Achaia is partly explained by the fact that Judaism had already for centuries been working as a leaven in many of the cities of Greece. Sparta and Sicyon are named among the numerous free States to which the Romans sent letters on behalf of the Jews about 139 B.C. (1 Mac 1523), and Philo's Legatio <ad Gaium (§ 36) testifies to the presence of Jews in Bceotia, ./Etolia, Attica, Argos, and Corinth. Only three Achaean cities are mentioned in the NT — Athens, Corinth, and Cenchreaa — but the address of 2 Cor. to ' all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia,' and the liberality of ' the regions of Achaia ' (2 Co 92 1 110), prove that there must have been many other unnamed centres of Christian faith and life in the province. While 1 Co 1616 refers to the house of Stephanas as 'the firstfruits of Achaia,' Ac 1784 rather indicates that the Apostle's brief visit to Athens had already borne some fruit, ' Diouysius, Damans, and others with them' being Achaean believers. Athens (q.v.) was either reckoned by itself or else entirely overlooked.
LITERATURE. — The Histories of Polybius and lavy ; A. Holm, History of Greece, Eng. tr. London, 1894-98, vol. iv. ; T. Momm- sen, The Provinces of the Roman Empire*, Eng. tr., London, 1909, i. 260 ff. ; J. Marquardt, Rom, Staatsverwaltung, newed., Leipzig, 1885, i. 321 f. ; C. v. Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, Eng. tr. 1.2 [London, 1897] p. 303 ff. ; A. C. McGiffert, Apostolic Age, Edinburgh, 1897, p. 256 ff. JAMES STRAHAN.
ACHAICUS. — One of many worthies whose character adorned the early Church, and whose service edified it, but whom we know only by a casual reference in the NT. In 1 Co 16" St. Paul rejoices 'at the coming of Stephanas and Fortu- natus and Achaicus.' Probably they formed a
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
15
deputation from the Corinthian Church ; they may have been bearers of the letter of inquiry which St. Paul answers in ch. 7 ff. His language suggests that their coming somewhat reassured him after the disquieting news brought by Chloe's household, and other ugly rumours (1 Co 51). Perhaps they represented the parties in Corinth ; yet they must have been trusted by the Church and must also have shown themselves loyal to the Apostle. Achaicus is such a rare name that some authorities call it 'Greek,' others ' Koman.' The suggestion that Achaicus was a slave — either of Stephanas or of Chloe — does not comport either with his position as a delegate or with St. Paul's appeal to the Church to 'acknowledge such,' i.e. to recognize the quality of their service and to treat them with becoming deference.
LITERATURE. — Artt. in HDB on 'Achaicus,' and 'I. Corinth- ians,' i. 487» ; Comm. on 1 Cor. by Findlay (.EG Z1), 950, and by Godet, ii. 467 ; C. v. Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, i.2 [London, 1897] pp. 113, 305, 319, ii. [do. 1895] p. 320 ; Expositor, 8th ser. L [1911] 341 L J. E. ROBEBTS.
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES —
L Text—
1. Greek MSS.
2. The Latin Versions.
3. The Syriac Versions.
4. The Egyptian Version*. 6. Secondary Versions.
6. Early Quotations.
7. Textual theories : Westcott and Hort, Rendel Harris,
Chase, Blass, von Soden. II. Tradition as to authorship —
1. In favour of Lucan authorship.
2. Against the tradition.
III. The date of Acts and reception in the Canon —
1. The date of the Lucan Gospel.
2. The abrupt termination of Acts.
3. Knowledge of Josephus in Acts.
4. Reception in the Canon. IV. The composition of Acts —
1. The obvious facts.
2. The purpose of the whole narrative
8. The sources used in Acts.
(1) The we-clauses.
(2) The earlier chapters.
(a) The Antiochene tradition.
(b) The Jerusalem tradition.
V. Historical value of the various traditions—
1. The Gospel of Luke and Ac 1.
2. The Jerusalem and Galilaean traditions.
VI. Chronology of Acts —
1. The death of Herod Agrippa.
2. The famine in Judaea. 8. Gallio's proconsulate.
4. The expulsion of the Jews from Borne. 6. The arrival of Festus in Judasa. VII. The theology of Acts—
1. Christology.
2. Eschatology.
3. The OT and Jewish Law.
4. The Spirit 6. Baptism.
I. TEXT. —The text of the Acts is preserved in Greek MSS, in Latin, Syriac, Sahidic, Bohairic, Armenian, and other secondary Versions, and quoted extensively, though not nearly so fully as the Gospels, by the early Fathers.
1. Greek MSS. — The most complete study of the whole mass of Greek MSS is that of von Soden in his Schriften des Neuen Testaments (Berlin, 1902-10). As his grouping of the MSS is almost entirely independent of his theories as to the early history of the text, and represents facts which cannot be overlooked, it is best to give the main outlines of his classification, dividing the MSS into H, K, and /recensions, and following his numeration ; in the brackets are given the numbers of these MSS in Gregory's Prolegomena to Tischen- dorf's Editio Major octava. It has not seemed necessary to give also Gregory's new numeration, as this is not any better known than von Soden's, and does not belong (and apparently will not belong in the immediate future) to a full critical edition.
(1) B.— This is represented by 61 (B), 82 (X), S3 (C), 64 (A), 86 (i//), 848 (13), 74 (3»9), 1008 (Pap. Amh. 8. saec. v.-vi.), 103 (25), 162 (61), 257 (33). Of these MSS 81 and 82 represent a common archetype 81-2, which is much the best authority for H. 81 is better than 82, which is, however, somewhat better in Acts, apart from scribal errors, than it is in the Gospels. 74 and 162 are specially good representatives of H, but no single witness is free from K or 1 contamination. There is a special nexus be- tween 848 and 257, but 848 is considerably the better of the two.
(2) K.— It is impossible to give here the full list of K MSS ; roughly speaking, 90 per cent of the later MSS belong to this type. Two groups may be distinguished from the purer K MSS : — Kr, a mediaeval revision of K for lectionary purposes, critically quite valueless ; and K", a text with enough sporadic / readings to raise the question whether it be not an 1 text which has been almost wholly corrected to & K standard ; it is called K <= because MSS of this type seem to be represented in the Complutensian edition.
(3) /. — The / recension is found in three forms : /» 7b /«. I*- is best represented by 85 (D= Codex Bezse*), 1001 (E= Codex Laudianus t) ; by three pairs of connected MSS, 7 (Apl. 261)-264 (233), 200 (83)-382 (231), 70 (505)-101 (40) ; and by a few other MSS which have suffered more or less severely from K con- tamination. It is also well represented in the text of the com- mentary of Andreas (AffP). lb is found in two branches, /M and /b2. The best representatives of />>i are 62 (498), 8602 (200), 365 (214=ascr)and a few other minuscules ; the best representa- tives of /*>2 are the pair 78 (' von der Goltz's MS ') and 171 (7) which are almost doublets, and 157 (29). 1^ is also found in two branches ^ci and 1<&. The best representatives of Y<=i are 208 (307X 370 (353), 116(-), 551 (216) ; the best representatives of 1<* are 364 (137) t and a series of other MSS contaminated in varying degrees by K.
2. The Latin Versions. — The Old Latin or ante- Hieronymian text is not well represented. As in the Gospels, it may be divided into two main branches, African and European.
(1) The African is represented by Codex Floriacensis (h), now at Paris, formerly at Fleury, containing a text which is almost identical with that of Cyprian ; it is in a very fragmentary condition, but fortunately the quotations of Cyprian and Augustine (who uses an African text in Acts, though he follows the Vulgate in the Gospels) enable much of the text to be reconstructed. (The best edition of h is by E. 8. Buchanan, Old Latin Biblical Texts, v. [Oxford, 1907].) Accord- ing to Wordsworth and White, a later form of the African text can be found in the pseudo-Augustinian de Divinis Scripturis sive Speculum (CSEL xii. 287-700), but the character of this text is still somewhat doubtful.
(2) The European text is best represented by g (Gigas) at Stockholm, which can be supplemented and corrected by the quotations in Ambrosiaster and Lucifer of Cagliari (see esp. A. Souter, ' A Study of Ambrosiaster,' TS vii. 4 [1905]). A branch of the European text of a Spanish or Provencal type is found in p, a Paris MS from Perpignan, and in w, a Bohemian MS now in Wernigerode, but in both MSS there is much Vulgate contamination. Other primarily European mixed MSS are s, a Bobbio palimpsest (saec. v.-vi.) at Vienna, x in Oxford, and gj in Milan.
A Spanish lectionary of perhaps the 7th cent, known as the Liber Comieus, which has many early readings, has been edited by G. Morin from a Paris MS of the llth cent, and is quoted by Wordsworth and White as t.
(3) Besides these purely Latin MSS, we have the Latin sides of the Grace-Latin MS 85 (D) or d (Codex Bezas), and of the Latino-Greek MS 1001 (E) or e. The latter of these agrees in the main with the European text as established by g-Ambro- siaster-Lucifer, but the text of d is in many ways unique, and may possibly have been made for the private use of the owner of 85, or perhaps of the archetype of 85.
(4) The Vulgate. — It is impossible here to enumerate the hundreds of Vulgate MSS of the Acts. Their study is a special branch of investigation, which has little bearing on the Acts, and for all purposes, except that of tracing the history of the Vulgate, the edition of Wordsworth and White may be regarded as sufficient.
3. The Syriac Versions. — It is probable from the quotations in Aphraates and Ephraim that there existed originally an Old-Syriac Version of Acts, corresponding to the Evangelism da-Mephar- reshe represented by the Curetonian and Sinaitic MSS ; but no MS of this type has survived.
* This MS is adequately described by F. G. Kenyon (Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the XT*, 88 ff.) or in other well- known handbooks.
t Besides the details noted in the handbooks, it should be observed that this MS, after being used by Bede in North- uinbria, passed to Germany, whence it was probably obtained by Laud, who gave it to the Bodleian Library.
t As an instance of the advance in knowledge which von Soden's labours have produced, it should be noted that this MS used to be regarded as one of the principal authorities for the ' Western ' text, and was at one time deemed worthy of a separate edition.
16
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
(1) The oldest Syriac Version of the Acts is therefore the Peshifta, probably made by Kabbula, Bishop of Edessa (411- 435) (see F. O. Burkitt, '8. Ephraim's Quotations from the Gospel,' TS vii. 2 [1901] p. 57 f.). (N.E.— The Peshijjta is quoted by Tischendorf as Syr**.)
(2) Besides the Peshitta we have the Harklean made by Thomas of Heraclea. This was based on an earlier Syriac text, made in 506 by Polycarp for Philoxenus, Bishop of Mabug (Hierapolis, the modern Membij on the Euphrates), which is no longer extant for Acts. Thomas of Heraclea revised the Philoxenian with the help of Greek MSS in the Library of the Enaton at Alexandria, and enriched his edition with a number of critical notes giving the variants of these Greek MSS which often have a most remarkable text agreeing more closely with Codex Bezae than with any other known Greek MS. (N.B.— It is quoted by Tischendorf as SyrP.)
(3) There is also a lectionary of the so-called ' Palestinian ' type, which was probably in use about the 7th cent, in the neighbourhood of Antioch. (On the nature of the ' Palestinian ' Syriac literature see F. 0. Burkitt, JThSt ii. [1901] 174-185.)
4. The Egyptian Versions. — The two Versions, Bohairic and Sahidic, which are extant for the Gospels, exist also for Acts, and there are a few fragments of Versions in other dialects. The re- lative date of these Versions has not been finally settled, but the opinion of Coptic scholars seems to be increasingly in favour of regarding the Sahidic as the older form. The Bohairic agrees in the main with the H text, but the Sahidic has many / readings (see E. A. W. Budge, Coptic Biblical Texts, London, 1912, for the best Sahidic text).
5. Secondary Versions. — Versions of Acts are also found in Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Georgian, Persian, and other languages ; but none of them is of primary importance for the text.
6. Quotations in early writers. — The earliest quotations long enough to have any value for de- termining the text are in Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria, who may be regarded as representing the text of the end of the 2nd cent, in Gaul, Africa, and Alexandria. For the 3rd cent, we have Origen and Didymus, representing the Alexandrian school ; Cyprian for Africa, and No- vatian for Italy. For the 4th cent. Athanasius and Cyril represent the later development of the Alexandria text ; Lucifer, Jerome, and Ambrosi- aster represent the text of Rome and Italy ; Augustine, that of Africa ; Eusebius and Cyril of Jerusalem the Palestinian text, which according to von Soden is /; the later Church writers mostly use the K text, though they sometimes show traces of probably local contamination with H and /.
7. Textual theories. — As soon as textual criticism began to be based on any complete view of the evidence, it became obvious that the chief feature to be accounted for in the text of Acts was the existence of a series of additions in the text in the Latin Versions and Fathers, usually supported by the two great bilingual MSS 55 and 1001 (D and E), frequently by the marginal readings in SyrHarcl, and sporadically by a few minuscules ; opposed to this interpolated text stood the Alexandrian text of 51, 52 (B K), and their allies; while between the two was the text of the mass of MSS agreeing sometimes with one, sometimes with the other, and sometimes combining both readings.
(1) The first really plausible theory to meet even part of the facts was Westcott and Hort's (The New Testament in Greek, vol. ii. [Cambridge, 1882]), who suggested that the later text (K) was a recension based on the two earlier types. They regarded 55 (Codex Bezae) as representing the ' Western ' text, and 51 and 52 as representing as nearly as possible the original text. The weak point in their theory was that they could not explain the existence of the Western text.
(2) Founded mainly on the basis of their work, two theories were suggested to supply this deficiency.
(a) Rendel Harris (' A Study of Codex Bezae in TS ii. 1 [1891], and Four Lectures on the Western Text, Cambridge, 1894) and F. H. Chase (The Old Syriac Element in the Text of Codex Bezce, London,
1893) thought that retranslation from Latin and Syriac would solve the problem ; but no amount or retranslation will account for the relatively long Bezan additions.
(b) F. Blass (Act a Apostolorum secundum formam quae videtur Romanam, Leipzig, 1897, and also in his commentary, Acta Apostolorum, Gottingen, 1895) thought that Luke issued the Acts in two forms : one to Theophilus (the Alexandrian text), and the other for Rome (the Western text) ; but his reconstruction of the Roman text is scarcely satisfactory, and the style of the additions is not sufficiently Lucan.
(3) More recently von Soden (Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, 1902-1910, p. 1834 ff.), using the new facts as to the MSS summarized above, has revived Blass's theory in so far that he thinks that the interpolated text witnessed to by 55 and the Latin Versions and Fathers really goes back to a single original ; but, instead of assigning this original to Luke, he attributes it to Tatian, who, he thinks, added a new recension of Acts to his Diatessaron. The weak point in this theory is that the only evidence that Tatian edited the Acts is a passage in Eusebius * which states that he emended ' the Apostle.' This may refer to Acts, but more probably refers to the Epistles. Accord- ing to von Soden, the / text did not contain all the interpolations, K contained still fewer, and H contained none. He thinks that in the 2nd cent, there existed side by side the Tatianic text and a non-interpolated text which he calls I-H-K. From these two texts there arose the Latin Version — predominantly Tatianic — and most of the early Fathers were influenced by Tatian. Later on, in the 4th cent., three revisions were made : (a) H, by Hesychius in Alexandria, which preserved in the main the texit of I-H-K without the Tatianic ad- ditions, but with a few other corruptions ; (b) K, by Lucian, in Antioch, which had many Tatianic corruptions, as well as some of its own ; (c) /, in Palestine, possibly in Jerusalem, which preserved many Tatianic additions, though in a few cases keeping the I-H-K text against H. 55 (D) is the best example of this text, but has suffered from the addition of a much greater degree of Tatianic corruption than really belongs to the / text, owing to Latin influence.
The general relations of the various forms of the text, according to von Soden, can be shown roughly in the following diagram :
I-U-K
i A A
Obviously this complicated theory cannot be dismissed without much more attention than it has yet received. It may prove that the 'text with additions ' is not Tatianic but is nevertheless a single text in origin. It is also very desirable to investigate how far it is possible to prove that there was an / text, derived from I-H-K, which
* TOW 8' airo<rr6Aov <£a<rt TO\HTJ<r<il nvaf aMtv firrai^paa-ai <!><avdt W? eiriSiopSovfitvov avrotv T^V Trjs <£p<wrecos tnJiraf iv (Eus. HE iv. 29. 6). This scarcely sounds as though a series of interpolation! was intended.
AUTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
17
nevertheless did not possess, in its original state, all the ' Bezan ' interpolations.* If it were possible to say that the interpolations were a connected series (whether Tatianic or not is of minor im- portance), the text in which they are imbedded would become extremely valuable, and we should have no right to argue, as is now often done, that, because the interpolations are clearly wrong, there- fore the text in which they are found is to be condemned. For instance, in Ac 1528 the Latin text interpolates the Golden Rule into the Apos- tolic decrees. That is no doubt wrong. But it does not follow that the text omitting WIKTOV, in which this interpolation is placed, is not original.
LITERATURE.— The general textual question can be studied in H. von Soden, Die Schri/ten des NT, Berlin, 1902-1910, esp. pp. 1649-1840 ; F. G. Kenyon, Handbook to the Textual Criti- cism of the NT*, London, 1912 ; E. Nestle, Einfuhrung in das griecfi. NTS, Gottingen, 1909 (the Eng. tr. is from an older edition of the period before von Soden) ; K. Lake, The Text oj the NTS, London, 1911. Important for the study of the Latin are von Soden, ' Das lat. NT in Afrika zur Zeit Cyprians,' TU xxxiii. [Leipzig, 1909]; and Wordsworth- White, Nov. Test. Dom. nost. les. Christi secundum edit. S. Hieronymi, vol. ii. pt. i. [Oxford, 1905] which also gives a clear statement of the best editions of the separate MSS of the Old Latin and the Vulgate (pp. v-xv).
II. TRADITION AS TO AUTHORSHIP.— So far back as tradition goes, the Acts is ascribed to St. Luke, the author of the Third Gospel, and com- panion of St. Paul (see, further, LUKE). This tradition can be traced back to the end of the 2nd cent. (Clem. Alex. Strom, v. 12; Tertull. de Jejuniis, 10; Iren. adv. Hcer. I. xxiii. 1, in. xii. 12 ff., IV. xv. 1 ; and the Canon of Muratori). If the connexion with the Third Gospel be accepted, as it certainly ought to be, the fact that Marcion used the Gospel is evidence for the existence of Acts, unless it be thought that the Gospel was written by a contemporary of Marcion who had not yet written Acts. Farther back tradition does not take us : there are no clear proofs of the use of Acts in the Apostolic Fathers (see The New Testa- ment in the Apostolic Fathers, Oxford, 1905) or in the early Apologists. (For the later traditions concerning Luke and his writings see LUKE. )
The value of this tradition must necessarily de- pend on the internal evidence of the book itself. The arguments can best be arranged under the two heads of favourable and unfavourable to the tradition.
1. In favour of the tradition of Lake's author- ship is the evidence of the ' we-sectibns,' or pass- ages in which the writer speaks in the first person. These are Ac 1610"17 204 2118 271 2818. They form together an apparent extract from a diary, which begins in Troas and breaks off in Philippi, on St. Paul's second journey ; begins again in Philippi, on his last journey to Jerusalem ; and continues (with only the apparent break of the episode of St. Paul and the Ephesian elders [2018"38] which is told in the third person) until Jerusalem is reached and St. Paul goes to see James ; then breaks off again during St. Paul's imprisonment in Jerusalem and Csesarea ; begins again when St. Paul leaves Csesarea ; and continues until the arrival in Rome, when it finally ceases.
It is, of course, theoretically possible that these sections are merely a literary fiction, but this possibility is excluded by the facts (a) that there is no conceivable reason why the writer should adopt this form of writing at these points, and these only, in his narrative ; (b) that by the general consent of critics these passages have all the signs of having really been composed by an eye-witness of the events described. It is, tnere-
* The de Rebaptismate has not yet been sufficiently studied from this point of view. A monograph analyzing its evidence on the lines of F. C. Burkitf a Old Latin and the Itala might be valuable.
VOL. I. — 2
fore, only necessary to consider the other possi- bilities : (1) that we have here from the writer of the whole work the description of incidents which he had himself seen ; (2) that the writer is here using an extract from the writing of an eye-wit- ness and has preserved the original idiom.
The only way of deciding between these two possibilities is to make use of literary criteria, and this has been done in recent years with especial thoroughness by Harnack in Germany and Hawkins in England. For any full statement of the case reference must be made to their books ; the prin- ciple, however, and the main results can be summarized.
If the writer of Acts is merely using the first person in order to show that he ia claiming to have been an eye-witness, the writer of the ' we- clauses' is identical with the redactor of the Gospel and Acts. Now, in the Gospel we know that he was using Mark in many places, and, by noting the redactorial changes in the Marcan sec- tions of Luke, we can establish his preference for certain idioms. If these idioms constantly recur in the ' we-clauses,' it must be either because the ' we-clauses ' were written by the redactor, or be- cause the redactor also revised the 'we-clauses,' but without changing the idiom. As a fact we find that the ' we-clauses ' are more marked by the characteristic phraseology of the redactor than any other part of the Gospel or Acts. We are, therefore, apparently reduced to a choice between the theory that the redactor of the Gospel and Acts wrote the ' we-clauses,' and the theory that he redacted them with more care than any other part of his compilation, except that he allowed the first person to stand. The former view certainly seems the more probable, but not sufficient attention has been paid to the observation of E. Schiirer (ThLZ, 1906, col. 405) that the facts would also be ex- plained if the writer of the ' we-clauses ' and the redactor of Acts came from the same Bildungs- sphdre. It would be well if some later analyst would eliminate from both sides the idioms which are common to all writers of good Greek at the period, for undoubtedly an element of exaggera- tion is introduced by the fact that in the Marcan source there were many vulgarisms which all re- dactors would have altered, and mostly in the same way. It should also be noted that there are a few ' Lucanisms* which are not to be found in the 'we-clauses.'
The details on which this argument is based will be found best in J. C. Hawkins, H orce Synopticce*, Oxford, 1909, pp. 174- 193; A. Harnack, Lukas der Arzt, Leipzig, 1906, pp. 19-85. There is also a good resume in J. Moffatt, LNT, p. 294 ff.
2. Against the tradition it is urged (1) that the presentment of St. Paul is quite different from that in the Pauline Epistles, (2) that on definite facts of history the Acts and Epistles contradict each other ; and it is said in each case that these facts exclude the possibility that the writer of Acts was Luke the companion of St. Paul.
(1) The presentment of St. Paul in the Epistles and in Acts. — It has been urged as a proof that the writer of Acts could not have been a companion of St. Paul, that whereas St. Paul in the Epistles is completely emancipated from Jewish thought and practice, he is represented in the Acts as still loyal to the Law himself, and enjoining its observ- ance on Jews. The points which are really crucial in this argument are (a) St. Paul's circumcision of Timothy (Ac 163), as contrasted with his teaching as to circumcision in the Epistles ; (|3) his accept- ance of Jewish practice while he was in Jerusalem (Ac 2121ff<), as contrasted with his Epistles, espe- cially Galatians and Romans ; (7) the absence of ' Pauline ' doctrine in the speeches in Acts ; (S) St. Paul's acceptance of a compromise at the Apostolic
18
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
Council (Ac 15), as contrasted with the complete silence of the Epistles as to this agreement.
If these four propositions were sound, they would certainly be strong evidence against the Lucan authorship of Acts. But there is much to be said against each of them on the following lines.
(a) In Ac 163, St. Paul circumcises Timothy, but the reason given is that he was partly Jewish. There is no evidence in the Epistles that the Apostle would ever have refused circumcision to a Jew : it was part of the Law, and the Law was valid for Jews. The argument in the Epistles is that it is not valid for Gentiles ; and, though logic ought perhaps to have led St. Paul to argue that Jews also ought to abandon it, there is no proof that he ever did so. It is also claimed that the incident of Titus in Gal 23 shows St. Paul's strong objection to circumcision ; but in the first place it is emphatically stated that Titus was not a Jew, and in the second place it is quite doubtful whether Gal 23 means that Titus, being a Greek, was not compelled to be circumcised, or that, being a Greek, he was not compelled to be circum- cised, though as an act of grace he actually was circumcised. (£) It is quite true that in Ac 2121ff> St. Paul accepts Jewish custom : what is untrue is that it can be shown from his own writings that he was likely to refuse, (y) There certainly is an absence of ' Pauline ' doctrine in the speeches in the Acts, if we accept the reconstructions which are based on the view that in the Epistles we have a complete exposition of St. Paul's teaching. But, if we realize that the Epistles represent his treat- ment by letter of points which he had failed to bring home to his converts while he was with them, or of special controversies due to the arrival of other teachers, there is really nothing to be said against the picture given in the Acts. (5) If the exegesis and text of Acts be adopted which regard the Apostolic decrees as a compromise based on food-laws, it is certainly very strange that St. Paul should have said nothing about it in Galatians or Corinthians, and this undoubtedly affords a reasonable argument for thinking that the account in Ac 15 is unhistorical, and that it cannot have been the work of Luke. But it must be remembered that there is serious reason for doubting (i.) that the text and exegesis of Ac 1528 point either to a food-law or to a compromise, (ii.) that Galatians was written after the Council (see G. Resch, 'Das Aposteldecret,' TU xxviii. [1905] 3 ; J. Wellhausen, ' Noten zur Apostel- geschichte,' in GGN, Gb'ttingen, 1907 ; A. Harnack, Apostelgeschichte, Leipzig, 1908, p. 188 ff. ; K. Lake, Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, London, 1911, pp. 29 ff., 48 ff.).
(2) Rather more serious are the objections raised to the accuracy of certain definite statements, in the light of contrasting statements in the Epistles, and the conclusion suggested that the writer of Acts cannot have been a companion of St. Paul. Many objections of this kind have been made, but the majority are trivial, and the serious ones are really only the following : (a) the description of glossolalia in Ac 2 as compared with 1 Co 12 ff. ; (b) the account of St. Paul's visits to Jerusalem in Acts as compared with Gal 2 ; (c) the movements of St. Paul's companions in Macedonia and Achaia in Ac 1715 185 as compared with 1 Th 3lf-«.
(a) The account given of glossolalia in 1 Co 14 shows that it was in the main unintelligible to ordinary persons. ' He that speaketh in a tongue edifieth himself, but he that prophesieth edifieth the congregation ' (1 Co 144 ; cf. vv.6- "• *) ; 'If any man speaketh in a tongue let one interpret' (1 Co 1427). On the other hand, the narrative in Ac 2 describes the glossolalia of the disciples as a miraculous gift of speech that was simultaneously
intelligible to foreigners of various nations, each of whom thought that he was listening to his own language. It is argued that this latter glossolalia is as unknown to the historian of psychology as the glossolalia described in 1 Cor. is well known ; and it is suggested that Luke or his source has given a wrong account of the matter. In support of this it must be noted that the immediate judg- ment of the crowd, on first hearing the glossolalia of the disciples, was that they were drunk, and Peter's speech was directed against this imputa- tion. It is not probable that any foreigner ever accused any one of being drunk because he could understand him, and so far the account in Acts may be regarded as carrying its own conviction, and showing that behind the actual text there is an earlier tradition which described a glossolalia of the same kind as that in 1 Co 12-14. But, if so, is it probable that a companion of St. Paul would have put forward so ' un-Pauline ' a descriptioi of glossolalia ? There is certainly some weight in this argument ; but it is to a large extent discounted by the following considerations. (a) It is not known that Luke was ever with St. Paul at any exhibition of glossolalia. Certainly there is no- thing in Acts to suggest that he was in Corinth. (8) In all probability we have to deal with a tra- dition which the writer of Acts found in existence in Jerusalem more than twenty years after the events described. Let any one try to find out, by asking surviving witnesses, exactly what happened at an excited revivalist meeting twenty years ago, and he will see that there is room for considerable inaccuracy. (7) To us glossolalia of the Pauline type is a known phenomenon and probable for that reason ; it is a purely physical and almost patho- logical result of religious emotion, while glossolalia of the ' foreign language ' type as described in Acts is improbable. But to a Christian of the 1st cent, both were wonderful manifestations of the Spirit, and neither was more probable than the other.
The whole question of glossolalia can be studied in H. Gun- kel, Die Wirkungen des neiligen Geistes, Gottingen, 1899 ; H. Lietzmann's Commentary on 1 Cor. in his Handbuch zum NT, iii. 2, Tubingen, 1909 ; J. Weiss, ' 1 Cor.' in Meyer's Krit.-Exeg. Kommentar, Gottingen, 1910 (9th ed. of ' 1 Cor.1).
(b) The accounts given in Acts and Galatians of St. Paul's visits to Jerusalem. — The points of divergence, which are serious, are concerned with (a) St. Paul's actions immediately after the con- version ; (B) his first visit to Jerusalem ; (7) his second visit to Jerusalem.
(a) St. PauVs actions immediately after the con- version.— The two accounts of this complex of in- cidents are Ac 910'80 and Gal I16-24. The main points in the two narratives may be arranged thus in parallel columns : —
GALATIANS,
1. Visit to Arabia immediately
after the conversion.
2. A ' return ' to Damascus.
8. A visit to Jerusalem ' after three years.'
4. Departure to the 'districts of Syria and Cilicia.'
The difference between these accounts is obvious, and it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Acts is here inaccurate. It should be noted, however, that the inaccuracy apparently consists in tele- scoping together two visits to Damascus and omit- ting the Arabian journey which came between them. St. Paul, by spealking of his ' return ' to Damascus, implies that the conversion had been in that city, and in 2 Co HS2f- ('in Damascus the ethnarch of Aretas the king guarded the city of the Damas- cenes to take me, and I was let down in a basket through a window ') we have a corroboration of the
ACTS.
1. Visit to Damascus immedi-
ately after the conversion.
2. Escape from Damascus and
journey to Jerusalem.
3. Retreat from Jerusalem to
Tarsus in Cilicia.
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
19
escape mentioned in Acts, though it clearly must come after the visit (probably of a missionary character) to Arabia, in order to account for the hostility of Aretas. Thus, so far as the enumera- tion of events is concerned, the inaccuracy of Acts resolves itself into the omission of the Arabian visit, and the consequent telescoping together of two visits to Damascus along with a proportion- ate shortening of the chronology.
(/3) St. Paul's first visit to Jerusalem. — The de- tails of this visit are a more serious matter, and Acts and Galatians cannot fully be reconciled, as is plain when the narratives are arranged in parallel columns.
Ac 926-30.
' And when he was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples : and the? were all afraid of him, not believing that he was a disciple. But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how at Damascus he had preached boldly in the name of Jesus. And he was with them going in and coming out at Jeru- salem, and he spake and dis- puted against the Hellenists ; but they went about to kill him.'
GAL 118-28.
' After three years I went up to Jerusalem to become ac- quainted with Cephas, and tarried with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. Now touching the things which I write to you, before God, I lie not. Then I came into the districts of Syria and Cilicia. And I was still unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ : but they only heard say, He that persecuted us once now preacheth the faith of which he once made havoc.'
No argument can alter the fact that Acts speaks of a period of preaching in Jerusalem which attracted sufficient attention to endanger St. Paul's life, while Galatians describes an essentially private visit to Peter ; probably both documents refer to the same visit, as they place it between St. Paul's departure from Damascus and his arrival in Cilicia, but they give divergent accounts of it.
(7) St. Paul's second visit to Jerusalem. — It is possible that the difficulties here are due to a mis- taken exegesis rather than to any real divergence between Acts and Galatians. If we start from the facts, it is clear that St. Paul describes in Gal 21'10 his second visit to Jerusalem. In the course of this he held a private interview with the apostles in Jerusalem, in consequence of which he was free to continue his preaching to the Gentiles without hindrance. It is also clear from Ac H27ff- 1225 that St. Paul's second visit to Jerusalem was during the time of the famine. If we accept the identi- fication of the second visit according to Acts with the second visit according to Galatians, there is no difficulty beyond the fact that Acts does not state that St. Paul and the other apostles discussed their respective missions when they met in Jerusalem ; but, since this discussion altered nothing — the Gentile mission had already begun — there was no special reason why Luke should have mentioned it. Usually, however, critics have assumed that the visit to Jerusalem mentioned in Gal 21'10 is not the second but the third visit referred to in Acts, so that the interview with the apostles described in Gal 2 is identified with the ' Apostolic Council ' in Ac 15. Great difficulties then arise : it is obviously essential to St. Paul's argument that he should not omit any of his visits to Jerusalem, and it is not easy to understand why, if he is writing after the Apostolic Council, he does not mention the decrees. There would seem to have been a party in Galatia which urged that circumcision was necessary for all Christians ; this point had been settled at the Apostolic Council. If the Council had taken place, why did St. Paul not say at once that the judaizing attitude had been condemned by the heads of the Jerusalem Church ?
These difficulties have been met in England since the time of Lightfoot by assuming that the Apos- tolic decrees had only a local and ephemeral import- ance, in which case it does not seem obvious why they are given so prominent a place in Acts. In Germany this difficulty has been more fully ap- preciated, and either the account in Ac 15 — iaenti- fied with Gal 2 — has been abandoned as wholly unhistorical, or the suggestion has been made that the account in Gal 2 is really a more accurate statement of what happened during St. Paul's interview with the apostles, which probably took place during the famine, while the ' decrees ' mentioned in Acts really belong to a later period — perhaps St. Paul's last visit to Jerusalem — and have been misplaced by Luke.
All these suggestions (and a different combination is given by almost every editor) agree in giving up the accuracy of Ac 15. On the other hand, if the view be taken that Gal 2 refers to an interview between St. Paul and the Jerusalem apostles during the time of the famine, and that it settled not the question of circumcision, but that of continuing the mission to the Gentiles which had been begun in Antioch, there is no further diffi- culty in thinking that Ac 15 represents the dis- cussion of the question of circumcision which inevitably arose as soon as the Gentile mission expanded. It is, therefore, desirable to ask whether the reasons for identifying Gal 2 and Ac 15 are decisive. The classical statement in Eng- lish is that of Lightfoot (Epistle to the Galatians, p. 1 23 ff. ), who formulates it by saying that there is an identity of geography, persons, subject of dispute, character of the conference, and result. Of these identities only the first is fully accurate ; and it applies equally well to the visit to Jerusalem in the time of the famine. The persons are not quite the same, for Titus and John are not mentioned in Acts. The subject is not the same at all, for in Galatians the question of the Law is not discussed (and was apparently raised only by St. Peter's conduct later on in Antioch), but merely whether the mission to the uncircumcised should be continued,* while in Acts the circum- cision of the Gentiles is the main point. The character of the conference is not the same at all, for in Galatians it is a private discussion, in Acts a full meeting of the Church ; and the result is not the same, for the one led up to the Apostolic decrees, while the other apparently did not do so. Lightfoot to some extent weakens these objections by suggesting that St. Paul de- scribes a private conference before the Council, but in so doing he weakens his own case still more, for he can give no satisfactory reason why St. Paul should carefully describe a private conference, but omit the public meeting and official result to which it was preliminary.
Thus, if the identification of Gal 2 and Ac 15 be abandoned, the objections which are raised against the account in Acts fall to the ground, and the resultant arguments against the identi- fication of the writer of Acts with Luke are proportionately weakened.
The question may be studied in detail in C. Clemen, Paulus, Giessen, 1904 ; A. C. McGiffert, A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age, Edinburgh, 1897 ; A. Haruack, Apostel- gesch., Leipzig, 1908; J. B. Lightfoot, Galatians, Cambridge, 1865 ; K. Lake. Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, London, 1911 ; C. W. Emmet, Galatians, London, 1912.
(c) The movements of St. Paul's companions in Macedonia and Achnia in Ac 1716 185 compared with 1 Th Slt-6. — The difference between these narratives is concerned with the movements of Timothy and Silas. According to Acts, when St.
* From the context it is clear that TO evayye'Aioi/ TTJJ d/cpo/3vorta{ . . . TTJS irepiTo/iiTJs means the gospel for the Uncircumcision (t.*. the Gentiles) and the Circumcision (i.e. the Jews).
20
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
Paul went to Athens he left Timothy and Silas in Bercea, and sent a message to them either from Athens or from some intermediate point, asking them to rejoin him as soon as possible, but they did not actually join him until he reached Corinth (Ac 18s). This arrival of Timothy at Corinth is mentioned in 1 Th 36, but, according to the im- plication of 1 Th 3"-, Timothy (and Silas ?) had already reached Athens and been sent away again with a message to Thessalonica. In this case Acts omits the whole episode of Timothy's arrival at and departure from Athens, and telescopes together two incidents in much the same way as seems to have been done with regard to St. Paul's visits to Damascus immediately after the conversion. This is the simplest solution of the question, though it is possible to find other conceivable theories, such as von Dobschiitz'ft suggestion that 1 Th 31 need not mean that Timothy came to Athens, as the facts would be equally covered if a message from St. Paul had intercepted him on his way from Beroea to Athens and sent him to Thessalonica.
The best account of various ways of dealing with the question is given by E. von Dobschutz, ' Die Thessalonicherbriefe,' in Meyer's Krit.-Exeget. Kommentari, Oottingen, 1909.
Summary. — The general result of a consideration of these divergences between Acts and the Epistles suggests that the author was sometimes inaccurate, and not always well informed, but it is hard to see that he makes mistakes which would be im- possible to one who had, indeed, been with St. Paul at times but not during the greater part of his career, and had collected information from the Apostle and others as opportunity had served. On the other hand, the argument from literary affini- ties between the ' we-clauses ' and the rest of Acts remains at present unshaken ; and, until some further analysis succeeds in showing why it should be thought that the ' we-clauses ' have been taken from a source not written by the redactor himself, the traditional view that Luke, the companion of St. Paul, was the editor of the whole book is the most reasonable one.
III. DATE OF ACTS AND RECEPTION IN THE CANON. — The evidence for the date is very meagre. If the Lucan authorship be accepted, any date after the last events chronicled, i.e. a short time before A.D. 60 to c. A.D. 100, is possible. The arguments which have been used for fixing on a more definite
Kint are : (1) the date of the Lucan Gospel, which v the evidence of Ac I1 is earlier ; (2) the abrupt termination of Acts ; (3) the possibility that the writer knew the Antiquities of Josephus, which cannot be earlier than A.D. 90.
1. The date of the Lucan Gospel.— 1 1 has usually been assumed that this must be posterior to the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, but it is doubtful whether there are really any satisfactory proofs that this was the case. The only argument of importance is that in the apocalyptic section of Mark (ch. 13) expressions which might be supposed to refer to the fall of Jerusalem have been altered to correspond with the real facts of the siege. Actually, however, the most striking change is merely that the vague Marcan reference to Daniel's ' abomination of desolation ' has been replaced by a description of Jerusalem surrounded by armies. Of course, if we knew that Luke was later than the fall of Jerusalem, it would be a rational assumption to think that the change was due to the influence of the facts on the writer ; but the force of the argument is not so great if we reverse the proposition, for to explain ' the abomination of desolation ' as a prophecy of a siege is not specially difficult. The most, therefore, that can be said is that this argument raises a slight presumption in favour of a date later than A.D. 70.
2. The abrupt termination of Acts. — Acts ends
apparently in the middle of the trial of St. Paul : he has been sent to Rome, and has spent two years in some sort of modified imprisonment, but no verdict has been passed. From this Harnack has argued (Neue Untemuchungen zur Apostel- geschichte, p. 65 ff.) that the Acts must have been written before the end of the trial was known.
This argument would be important if it were the only explanation of the facts. But two other possibilities have to be considered. In the first place, it is possible, though perhaps not very probable, that Luke wrote, or intended to write, a third book beginning with the account of St. Paul's trial in Rome. In the second place, it is possible that the end of Acts was not so abrupt to the ears of contemporaries as it is to us, for the two years may be the recognized period during which a trial must be heard, and after which, if the prosecution failed to appear, the case collapsed. The case of St. Paul had been originally a prosecution by the Jews, and probably it still kept this character, even though the venue was changed to Rome. But the Jews, as Luke says in Ac 2821, did not put in an appearance, and therefore the case must have collapsed for lack of a prosecution, after a statutory period of waiting. What this period was we do not know, but a passage in Philo's in Flaccum points to the probability that it was two years. According to this, a certain Lambon was accused of treason in Alexandria, and the Roman judge, knowing that he was dangerous, but that the evidence was insufficient to justify a condem- nation, kept him in prison for two years (dieriav), which Philo describes as the ' longest period ' (rbv n.i]Kiarov xp6vov). If this be so, Luke's termination of Acts is not really so abrupt as it seems, but implies that St. Paul was released after the end of the two years, because no Jews came forward to prosecute ; it is easy to understand that, as this was not a definite acquittal, Luke had no interest in emphasizing the fact.
3. The knowledge of Josephus shown in Acts. The evidence for this is found in the case of Theudas. The facts are as follows. In Ac 5s5 Gamaliel is made to refer to two revolts which failed — first, that of Theudas, and after him that of Judas the Galilaean in the days of the Census (i.e. A.D. 6). Both these revolts are well known, and are described by Josephus ; but the difficulty is that Judas really preceded Theudas, whose re- volt took place in the procuratorship of Fadus (c. A.D. 43-47).
The revolt of Theudas was thus most probably later than the speech of Gamaliel, and the refer- ence to it must be a literary device on the part of Luke, who no doubt used the speeches Avhich he puts into the mouths of the persons in his narrative with the same freedom as was customary among writers of that period. But the remarkable point is that Josephus in Ant. XX. also mentions Judas of Galilee after speaking of Theudas ; * and the suggestion is that Luke had seen this and was led into the not unnatural mistake of confusing the dates. He apparently knew the correct date of Judas, and remembered only that Josephus had spoken of him after Theudas, and was thus led into the mistake of thinking that Theudas must have been earlier than Judas.
If the case of Theudas be admitted, it is also possible that in the description of the death of Herod Agrippa some details have been taken by Luke from the description of the death of Herod the
* After describing Theudas' revolt, Josephus continues : jrpbs TOUTOIS 6e KOI oi TrtuSes 'lovSa TOV PoAiAaiou a.trjx6ri<ra.v, T°v T°v Aabv airb 'Poo/ouu'uii' aTroonyirai'TOs Kvpivi'ov rijs 'lovJat'as rtiiifrt- VOI'TOS, cos tv Toil Trpb TOVTOJV efiijAwtra/nei', 'Idiao/3os (cat ^.ifuav o£f dvaoTavpaxrai TrpotreVafei' 6 'AAe'£av6po« (Ant. XX. V. 2).
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
21
Great as given by Josephus. But the evidence is here much less striking, and, if Theudas be not conceded, has no real strength. The case of Theudas is, however, very remarkable ; it falls short of demonstration, but not so far short as the other arguments for dating the Acts.
So far it has been assumed that Luke was the writer of Acts ; and in this case the probable length of his life gives the terminus ad quern for dating his writings, i.e. c. A.D. 100. If his author- ship be disputed, the terminus ad quern is the earliest known use of the book or of its companion Gospel. This is to be found in the fact that Marcion (c. A.D. 140) used the Gospel of Luke. It is, of course, possible that some of the isolated Evangelical quotations in the Apostolic Fathers may be from Luke ; but no proof of this can be given. As, however, Marcion's text is a redaction of the canonical text, and Luke's Gospel was taken into the Four-Gospel Canon not long after- wards, it must have been in existence some time previously, so that, even if the Lucan authorship be doubted, A.D. 130 is the latest date that can reasonably be suggested. Even this appears to be very improbable if attention be paid to some of the characteristics of Acts. For instance, Acts never uses the triadic formula : baptism is always in the name ' of the Lord,' or ' of Jesus' ; there is no trace of the developed Docetic controversy of the Johannine Epistles or of Ignatius ; xPlffT^ is habitually used predicatively, and not as a proper name, and in this respect Acts is more primitive than St. Paul.
On the other hand, the weakening of the eschato- logical element, and the interest in the Church, as an institution in a world which is not immediately to disappear, point away from the very early date advocated by Harnack and others. The decennium 90-100 seems, on the whole, the most probable date, but demonstrative proof is lacking, and it may have been written thirty years earlier, or (but only if the Lucan authorship be abandoned) thirty years later.
4. Reception in the Canon. — There is no trace of any collection of Christian sacred books which included the Four-Gospel Canon, but omitted the Acts. That is to say, throughout the Catholic Church within the Roman Empire, Acts was uni- versally received as the authoritative and inspired continuation of the Gospel story.
It appears also probable that in the Church of Edessa Acts was used from the earliest time as the continuation of the Diatessaron, for the Doctrine of Addai specifies as the sacred books 'the Law and the Prophets and the Gospel . . . and the Epistles of Paul . . . and the Acts of the Twelve Apostles,' of which the last item probably means the canon- ical Acts (see F. C. Burkitt, Early Eastern Chris- tianity, London, 1904, p. 59).
Moreover, the Marcionites and other Gnostic Christians do not appear to have ever used the Acts. Later on the Manichaeans seem to have used a corpus of the five Acts of Paul, Peter, John, Andrew, and Thomas, as a substitute for the canonical Acts ; and the Priscillianists in Spain so far adopted this usage as to accept this corpus as an adjunct to the canonical Acts. (For the more detailed consideration of these Acts, both as a corpus and as separate documents, see ACTS OF THE APOSTLES [Apocryphal]. )
IV. THE COMPOSITION OF ACTS.— The ques- tion of the composition of this or any other book is one partly of fact, partly of theory. In the sense of determining the arrangement of the sec- tions, and the relations which they bear to one another, it is a question of fact and observation ; but, when the question is raised why the sections are so arranged, and how far they represent older
sources used by the writer, it becomes a question of theory and criticism.
1. The obvious facts. — The first point, there- fore, is the establishment of the facts, and in the main these admit of little discussion. Acts falls immediately into two chief parts — the Pauline, and the non-Pauline parts — with a short inter- mediate section in which St. Paul appears at in- tervals. The Pauline section, again, falls into the natural divisions afforded by his two (or three) great journeys ; and a cross-division can also be made by noting that the author sometimes uses the first person plural, sometimes writes exclu- sively in the third person. The earlier sections in tne same way can be divided — though the division is here much less clear — into those in which the centre of activity is Jerusalem, and those in which it is Antioch, while a further series of subdivisions can be made according as the chief actor is Peter, Philip, or Stephen. Finally, still smaller subdivisions can be made by dividing the narrative into the series of incidents which com- pose it.
The table on p. 22 serves to give a general conspectus of the facts ; a somewhat more minute system of subdivision has been adopted in the earlier chapters, which are especially affected by the question of sources, than in the — from this point of view — more straightforward later chap- ters. This analysis is sufficient to show that the writer must have been drawing on various sources or traditions for his information, and we have to face three problems : What was the purpose with which the writer put together this narrative ? How far is it possible to distinguish the sources, written or oral, which he used ? What is the relative value of the sources which he used ?
2. The purpose with which the whole narrative was composed. — It is, of course, clear that the writer has not attempted to give a colourless story of as many events as possible, but is using history to commend his own interpretation of the facts. This is corroborated by his own account at the beginning of the Gospel, in which he defines his purpose as that of convincing Theophilus of the certainty of the ' narratives in which he had been instructed ' ('iva. ^TTLJVI^S irepl &v KaTijx1?^* \6ywv ryv dff<f>d\fiav [Lk I4]). In other words, he wishes to tell the story of the early days of Christianity in order to prove the Christian teaching.
If we consider the narrative from this point of view, we can see several motives underlying it. (a) The desire to show that the Christian Church was the result of the presence of the Spirit (irvevfia, rb irvevfM, rb dyiov Trj/eC/xa are the usual expressions, but Trvev/M KvpLov in 59 839 [the text is doubtful], ri> TTvevfj.a 'lrj<rov in 167), which is the fulfilment of the promise of Jesus to send it to His disciples (Ac I5ff- ; cf. Lk 316 24481-). The Spirit manifested itself in glossolalia, in the working of miracles of healing, and in the surprising growth of Christi- anity. This is perhaps the main object of Luke's writings, and to it is subordinated, both in the Gospel and in Acts, the eschatological expectation which is most characteristic of Mark and Matthew ; though many traces of this still remain. — (b) The desire to show the unreasonableness and wicked- ness of Jewish opposition is also clearly marked, and is contrasted with the attitude of Roman officials. It is, therefore, not impossible that the writer desired to dissociate Christianity from Judaism, and to defend Christians from the im- putation of belonging to a sect forbidden by the State. If we knew the time when Christianity was, as such, first forbidden and persecuted, this might be a valuable indication of date, but at present all that is known with certainty is that (cf. Pliny's correspondence with Trajan) it wae
22
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
forbidden by the beginning of the 2nd cent., and that in 64 it was probably (but not certainly) not forbidden, as the Neronic persecution was not of the Christians as such, but of Christians as suspected of certain definite crimes. It is, how- ever, in any case clear that this feature of Acts supports the view that one purpose cherished by the writer was the desire to protest against the view that Christians had always been, or could ever be, regarded as a danger to the Empire. — (c) As a means towards the accomplishment of his other purposes, the writer is desirous of showing how Christianity had spread from Jerusalem to the surrounding districts, from there to Antioch, and from Antioch through the provinces to Rome. He also explains in what way the Christians came
Church, and the early history of the Church in Jerusalem. In discussing them it is simplest to begin with the most marked feature — the ' we- clauses ' — and then work back to the earlier chapters.
(1) The ' we-clauses.' — As was shown above, the balance of evidence seems at present to be strongly in favour of the view that the writer of these sections intended to claim that he had been a companion of St. Paul, and that he was himself the editor of the whole book. If this be so, we have for the rest of the ' Paul ' narrative a source ready to our hand — the personal information obtained by Luke from St. Paul himself, or from other companions of St. Paul whom he met in his society. This may cover as much as Ac 91'30 ll27-30
|
BEFKRENCE. |
PLACB. |
GENERAL DESCRIPTION. |
CHIEF ACTORS. |
|
11-11. |
Jerusalem. |
The Ascension and promise of the Spirit. |
Jesus and the Twelve. |
|
112-26. |
_~ |
Choice of Matthias. |
Peter and the Twelve. |
|
21-47. |
Speech of Peter. Gift of the Spirit. |
Peter and the Twelve. |
|
|
Glossolalia. |
|||
|
Speech of Peter. |
|||
|
81-28. |
m |
Healing miracle by Peter and John. |
Peter [and John]. |
|
Speech of Peter. |
|||
|
41-23 |
ti |
Imprisonment of Peter and John. |
Peter [and John]. |
|
Speech of Peter. |
|||
|
433-81. |
ti |
Their release. |
Peter [and John]. |
|
Meeting of the Church. |
|||
|
Gift of the Spirit. |
|||
|
432-518. |
m |
Communism in the Church. |
Peter, Barnabas [Ana- |
|
nias, Sapphira] . |
|||
|
617-48. |
ti |
Imprisonment of Peter and John. |
Peter [and John]. |
|
Speech of Gamaliel. |
|||
|
61-7. |
ti |
Appointment of the Seven. |
The apostles. |
|
68-18. |
Preaching of Stephen. |
Stephen. |
|
|
His arrest. |
|||
|
71-88. |
Speech of Stephen. |
Stephen. |
|
|
His death. |
|||
|
84-28. |
Samaria. |
Philip's preaching. |
Philip, Peter [and John]. |
|
Simon Magus. |
Simon Magus. |
||
|
826-10. 91-81. |
The road to Gaza. The road to Damascus. |
Philip's conversion of the Ethiopian. Conversion of Saul, and extension of |
Philip. Paul. |
|
the Church. |
|||
|
088-1048. |
Lydda, Joppa, Casarea. |
Peter's journey through Lydda, Joppa, |
Peter. |
|
Caesarea. |
|||
|
Conversion of Cornelius. |
|||
|
Speech of Peter. |
|||
|
111-18. 1119.88. |
Jerusalem. Antioch. |
Peter's speech on Cornelius* conversion. Foundation of Gentile Christianity. |
Peter. Hellenistic Jews, Barna- |
|
bas, Paul. |
|||
|
1127-80. |
Collection for Jerusalem. |
Barnabas, Paul. |
|
|
121-24. |
Jerusalem. |
Herod's persecution. |
Peter. |
|
Peter's imprisonment. |
|||
|
Death of Herod. |
|||
|
1238. |
Be turn of Barnabas and Saul to |
Barnabas, PauL |
|
|
Antioch. |
|||
|
181-1438. |
Journey. |
First missionary journey. |
Paul. |
|
151-88. |
Jerusalem. |
Apostolic Council. |
Peter, James, PauL |
|
1536-1822. |
Journey. |
Second missionary journey. |
Paul. |
|
1823—2118. |
Third missionary journey. |
Paul. |
|
|
2117-2311. |
Jerusalem. |
Paul's dealings with James. His arrest. |
PauL |
|
Speech to Sanhedrin. |
|||
|
2313-2633. |
Caesarea. |
Paul's imprisonment in Caesarea. Felix. |
PauL |
|
Festus. Agrippa. |
|||
|
271-2816. |
Journey. |
Journey to Borne. |
PauL |
|
2817-81. |
Borne. |
Paul and Jews in Rome. |
Paul. |
to preach to Gentiles without insisting on the Jewish Law, and how this had been perceived to be the work of the Spirit by the Jewish apostles who recognized the revelation to this effect to St. Paul and to St. Peter (Ac 915ff- 2221 ll18 15lft).
3. The sources used in Acts. — The most super- ficial examination of Acts shows that it is divided most obviously into a ' Peter ' part and a ' Paul ' part ; it is, therefore, not strange that the critics of the beginning of the 19th cent, thought of dividing Acts into narratives derived from a hypothetical ' Acts of Peter ' and a hypothetical 'Acts of Paul.' But further investigation has gone behind this division : it has been seen that important questions are involved in the relation of the ' we-clauses ' to the rest of the narrative relating to St. Paul, the story of the Antiochene
1225-si or even more> There is nothing in these sections which cannot have come from St. Paul or his entourage, and the inaccuracies in the narrative, as compared with the Epistles, do not seem to point to any greater fallibility on the part of the writer than that to be found in other historical writers who are in the possession of good sources. At the same time, this does not mean that the assignment of these chapters to a ' Paul ' source is final or exclusive of others. Some sections within these limits (e.g. Ac 15) may come from some other Jerusalem or Antiochene source, and some sections outside them (e.g. the story of Stephen's death) may have come from the ' Paul ' source.
If, on the other hand, it should ultimately appear that the evidence from style has been
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
exaggerated or misrepresented, it will be necessary to regard the ' we-sections ' as representing a separate source, and consider the question whether the rest of the chapters mentioned above came from one or several sources. At present, however, no one has shown any serious ground for thinking that we can distinguish any signs of change of style, or of doublets in the narrative, to point in this direction.
(2) The problems presented by the earlier chapters are much more complicated. The chief point which attracts attention is that in the first half of these chapters the centre of interest is Jerusalem, or Jerusalem and the neighbourhood, while in the second half it is Antioch. Here again it is easier to begin by taking the later chapters first, and to discuss the probable limits of the Antiochene tradition, together with the possibility that it may have lain before the writer of Acts as a document, before considering the Jerusalem tradition of the opening chapters.
(a) The Antiochene tradition. — The exact limits of this tradition are difficult to fix. It is clear that to it the section describing the foundation of the church at Antioch and its early history (Ac H19ff-) must be attributed ; but difficulties arise as soon as an attempt is made to work either backwards or forwards from this centre, as the later sections, which can fairly be attributed to Antiochene tradition, can also be attributed to the Pauline source, while the earlier sections of the same kind might be attributed to the Jerusalem tradition. It is obvious that the ol /*£>> ofo Siaffiraptvres of Ac II19 picks up the narrative of 81"4. In 81-4 the story of Stephen's death is brought to a close by the statement that tytvero d£ tv ^Keiv-g Ttj i}fdp<?. du*>y/j.bs /j,tyas tiri rty £KK\r)(rlav r^v tv 'lepoffoXtifJUHr irdvres 8t di€fftr<ip-r]ffav KO.TCI ras xdpas . . . ol fiitv oftv diacrwap^vres SiijXdov etia.yye\i£6/j.fvoi rbv \6yov. Then the writer gives two instances of this evangelization by Philip and Peter in Samaria, and by Philip alone on the road to Gaza. Next he explains how the conversion of St. Paul put an end to the persecution, and how the conversion of Cornelius led to the recognition of preaching to Gentiles by the Jerusalem community. Finally, he returns to where he started from, and picks up his story as to the Christians who were dispersed after the death of Stephen, with the same formula — ol ptv oZv SiacriraptvTes in II19.
Thus there is an organic unity between 84 and II19. But 84 is the end of the story of the Hellenistic Jews, their seven representatives, and the persecution which befell them ; and the begin- ning of this story is in 68. Between 66 and 84 there is no break — unless it be thought that the whole speech of Stephen is the composition of the editor, as may very well be the case. Is, then, 66-84 to be regarded as belonging to the Antiochene tradi- tion ? Harnack thinks so, and it is very probable. But it is also true that 66-84 might have come either from Jerusalem or from St. Paul himself, and it is hard to see convincing reasons why the Antiochene source which Harnack postulates should not have come from the ' Paul ' source.
The same sort of result is reached by considering the sections following II19'24. Is ll26'30 ' Pauline' or ' Antiochene ' ? The following section, 121'24, is clearly part of the Jerusalem tradition, but what follows, ^^-IS3, might again be either Pauline or Antiochene, and the same is true of 151'35, in which the account of the Council might be Antiochene or Pauline, but is less likely to represent Jerusalem tradition. These exhaust the number of the passages which are ever likely to be attributed to the Antiochene source. To the present writer it seems that, unless it prove possible (so far it has not been done) to find some
literary criterion for distinguishing between the ' Pauline ' and ' Antiochene ' sources, it will remain permanently impossible to draw any line of de- marcation between what Luke may have heard about the early history of Antioch from St. Paul and what he may have learnt from other Antiochene persons. It also seems quite impossible to say whether he was using written sources. This, of course, does not deny that the so-called ' Antiochene source ' represents Antiochene tradition. All that is said is that this Antiochene tradition may have come from St. Paul quite as well as from any one else. On the merits of the case we can go no further (for the possibility that Luke was himself an Antiochene see LUKE).
(b) The Jerusalem tradition. — It is obvious that Ac P-542 represents in some sense a Jerusalem tradition, and it is scarcely less clear that 85'40 931- II18 121'24 represent a tradition which is divided in its interests between Jerusalem and Csesarea. It is, therefore, necessary to deal first with the purely Jerusalem sections, and afterwards with the Jerusalem-Csesarean narrative, before considering Avhether they are really one or more than one in origin.
(a) The purely Jerusalem sections. — The most important feature of Ac P-542 is that 21'47 seems to contain doublets of S1^35, and that the suggestion of a multiplicity of sources is supported by some linguistic peculiarities.
21-13 The gift of the Spirit, accompanied by the shak- 4*1 ing of the house in which the Apostles were.
214-36 A speech of Peter. 31-26
237-41 The result of this speech is an extraordinarily 44 large number of converts (5000, 3000).
242-47 The communism of the Early Church. 434. SB
Of this series of doublets the twice-told story of the early ' communism ' of the first Christians and the repetition of the shaking of the house at the outpouring of the Spirit are the most striking, but the cumulative effect is certainly to justify the view that we have two accounts, slightly varying, of the same series of events.
This result finds remarkable corroboration in certain linguistic peculiarities of Ac 3 f . as com- pared with ch. 2. In the former the word dpcwnfa-as is used in the sense ' raised up to preach ' (S26 ; cf. S22), and ijyeipe is used of the Resurrection, but in the latter d^acmjo-as is used of the Resurrection. In Ac 3 f. Jesus is described as a TTCUJ 8eou (313- 26 427. 30^ kuk in cfo 2 as &vdpa dirodedety/jL^vov cbr6 rov Oeov. In Ac 3 f. Peter is almost always accompanied by John (31- 8-4> u 419), but in ch. 2 he appears alone or 'with the other apostles.'
That Ac 2 and 3 f. are doublets is thus probable ; moreover, as the linguistic characteristics of 3 f . are peculiar and not Lucan, it is more probable here than anywhere else in Acts that we are dealing with traces of a written Greek document under- lying Acts in the same way as Mark and Q underlie tlie Lucan Gospel. To this branch of the Jerusalem tradition Harnack has given the name of ' source A,' and to Ac 2 the name of ' source B.' According to him, the continuation of A can be found in 51'16, and he also identifies it with the Jerusalem- Csesarean source (see below). B is continued in 517-42 AC i more probably, he thinks, belongs to B than to A, but may have a separate origin.
If A be followed, we get a clear and probable narrative of the history of the Jerusalem Church, but it begins in the middle. According to it, Peter and John went up to the Temple and healed a lame man ; in connexion with the sensation caused by this wonder Peter explained that he wrought the cure in the name of Jesus, whom he announced as the predestined Messiah. As the result of this missionary speech a great number of converts were made (about 5000 [44]). Peter and John were arrested, but later on released after a speech by