Paul and his interpreters

Sabatier, A., 22, 32, 35
Schettler, A., 152, 172 n.
Schläger, G., 117
Schlatter, A., 152
Schleiermacher, F. E. D., 1, 7 f.
Schmidt, Ernst, 182 n.
Schmiedel, P. W., 24, 63, 88, 103
Schnedermann, G., 45 n.
Schniewind, J., 153, 172 n.
Scholten, J. H., 117, 134 n.
Schopenhauer, 118
Schöttgen, C., 48 n.
Schrader, Karl, 2, 10 n.
Schürer, Emil, 24, 45
Schwartz, E. E., 180, 219
Schwegler, A., 12, 16
Schweitzer, A., 170
Seeberg, R., 152, 173
Semler, J. S., 1, 4 f., 148
Seneca, 95 f., 122
Siegfried, K., 24, 91 n.
Simon, Theodor, 24, 96 n.
Smith, W. B., 180, 234 f.
Sokolowski, E., 151, 160 n.
Soltau, W., 180, 189 n.
Spiegelberg, W., 212 n.
Spitta, F., 52 n., 118, 149
Steck, Rudolf, 117, 125, 128 n., 129 ff., 140, 141, 153
Sulze, E., 118, 143
Surenhus (Surenhuys), W., 48 n.

Teichmann, Ernst, 24, 74 ff.
Tertullian, v, 95, 128, 129, 200
Titius, Arthur, 151, 156 ff., 165

Usener, H., 180, 181 Usteri, L., 2, 9 f.

Vischer, E., 152, 153, 172 n.
Volck, W., 26 n., 41 n.
Volkmar, G., 23
Vollmer, H., 24, 48 n., 88, 91
Völter, Daniel, 118, 143 ff.
Volz, Paul, 152, 162 n.

Walther, W., 152, 170 n.
Weber, F., 24, 45
Weinel, Heinrich, 151, 154 f., 165 n.
Weiss, Bernhard, 22, 27 n., 35, 41, 54, 64, 66, 69
Weiss, Johannes, 152, 170 n.
Weisse, C. H., 24, 28, 118, 141 f.
Weizsäcker, Karl von, 23, 35, 64, 65 f., 69, 128 n.
Wellhausen, J., 46 n., 152, 159 n.
Wendland, P., 180, 189 n.
Wendt, H. H., 23, 30 n.
Wernle, P., 24, 60 n., 151, 154 f., 180, 210 f.
Wieseler, K., 12, 15
Windisch, H., 152, 161 n.
Wobbermin, G., 180
Wolf, J. C., 1, 3
Wrede, William, 100, 152, 166 ff., 177
Wünsch, R., 187 n.

Zahn, Theodor, 22, 25, 96 n.
Zeller, E., 20 n.
Ziegler, Theobald, 24, 95 n.
Zwingli, 33

THE END

Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited, Edinburgh.

FOOTNOTES

• PREFACE Notes
• CHAPTER I Notes
• CHAPTER II Notes
• CHAPTER III Notes
• CHAPTER IV Notes
• CHAPTER V Notes
• CHAPTER VI Notes
• CHAPTER VII Notes
• CHAPTER VIII Notes

NOTES FOR PREFACE

1 Sub-title: “Eine Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung.” English translation “The Quest of the Historical Jesus.” London, A. & C. Black, 1910, 2nd ed. 1911.

NOTES FOR CHAPTER I

2 In the Amsterdam edition of the whole in 1679, the Annotationes on the Pauline Epistles (1009 pp.), with those on the other Epistles and the Apocalypse, form vol. iii.

3 1723, 822 pp.

4 1st ed. 1742; 2nd, 1745, 232 pp. (For title see head of chapter.)

5 Bâle, 1741. Five vols., covering the whole of the New Testament. The Pauline Epistles are treated in the 3rd (820 pp.) and 4th (837 pp.). The full title is: Curae philologicae et criticae . . . quibus integritati contextus Graeci consulitur, sensus verborum ex praesidiis philologicis illustratur, diversae Interpretum Sententiae summatim enarrantur et modesto examini subjectae vel approbantur vel repelluntur.

6 135 pp. Later editions 1765, 1774, 1792, 1809. The last two were brought out under the care of Ammon.

7 Four parts. Parts i. and ii. form the first volume (424 pp.), part iii. = vol. ii. (396 pp.), part iv. = vol. iii. (396 pp.). Part i. is occupied with the general principles of exegesis, part ii. with the text of the Old Testament, parts iii. and iv. with that of the New Testament.

8 Four volumes. The first (in the reprint of 1776, 333 pp.): On the natural conception of Scripture. The second (in the first edition, 1772, 608 pp.): On Inspiration and the Canon, Answers to criticisms and attacks. Third (1st ed., 1773, 567 pp.): On the History of the Canon, Answers to criticisms and attacks. The fourth (1775, 460 pp.) is wholly occupied by an answer to the work of a certain Dr. Schubert.

This often mentioned but little read work does not therefore present exactly the appearance that might be expected from its title. The polemical replies occupy a much larger space than the original arguments.

9 298 pp. A striking and brilliantly written work.

10 Paraphrasis Epistolae ad Romanos . . . cum Dissertatione de Appendice, capp. xv. et xvi., 1769, 311 pp. (Dedicated to Johann August Ernesti.)

Paraphrasis in Primam Pauli ad Corinthios Epistolam, 1770, 540 pp. (Dedicated to Johann David Michaelis.)

Paraphrasis II. Epistolae ad Corinthios, 1776, 388 pp. Each of these works contains a preface of some length on the principles of historical exegesis. As a specimen of the paraphrase we may quote that of Rom. vi. I: Jam si haec est Evangelii tam exoptata hominibusque cunctis tam frugifera doctrina, num audebimus statuere, perseverare nos tamen posse in ista peccandi consuetudine, ut quasi eo fiat amplior gratiae divinae locus?

11 Johann David Michaelis, Einleitung in die Schriften des Neuen Bundes, 1st ed., 1750. In its successive editions this work dominates the theology of all the latter half of the eighteenth century; at the beginning of the nineteenth it is superseded by Eichhorn’s Introduction. The third edition (1777) contains 1356 pp. The Pauline Epistles occupy pp. 1001-1128.

12 Übersetzung des Neuen Testaments, 1790, 566 pp. Anmerkungen für Ungelehrte zu seiner Übersetzung des Neuen Testaments, 4 vols., 1790-92. The Pauline Epistles are treated in vols. iii. and iv.

13 Friedrich Ernst David Schleiermacher, Über den sogenannten ersten Brief des Paulus an den Timotheus. Ein kritisches Sendschreiben an Joachim Christian Gass, 1807. In his complete works this is to be found in the second volume of the first division, 1836, pp. 223-320.

14 Johann Gottfried Eichhorn, Historisch-kritische Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 1st ed., vol. iii., second half (1814), pp. 315-410.

Eichhorn points out that he had recognised the spuriousness of the three Pastoral Epistles, and had expressed his conviction in his University lectures before Schleiermacher published his criticisms of the First Epistle of Timothy.

15 Leonhard Usteri, Die Entwicklung des paulinischen Lehrbegriffs, 1824, 191 pp. The editions of 1829, 1830, and 1832 were revised by the author, who died in 1833. After his death two more appeared (1834, 1851). Reference may be made also to Usteri’s “Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians,” 1833, 252 pp.

16 The first work which undertook to give an account of the Apostle’s system of thought as such is Gottlob Wilhelm Meyer’s Entwicklung des paulinischen Lehrbegriffs, 1801, 380 pp. The author has collected the material well, but does not know in what direction Paul’s peculiarity lies.

17 Of the works which criticise Usteri and mark an advance in Pauline study the following may be named:—

Karl Schrader, Der Apostel Paulus; vols. i., 1830 (264 pp.), and ii., 1832 (373 pp.), deal with the life of the Apostle Paul; vol. iii., 1833 (331 pp.), with the doctrine; vols. iv., 1835 (490 pp.), and v., 1836 (574 pp.), contain the exposition of the Epistles.

August Ferdinand Dähne, Entwicklung des paulinischen Lehrbegriffs, 1835, 211 pp.

Mention may also be made of the chapter on Paulinism in J. A. W. Neander’s Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche durch die Apostel, 1st ed., 1832; 2nd ed., 1st vol., 1838 (433 pp.). Paul is treated in pp. 102-433; 4th ed., 1847; 5th, 1862. As typical of the exegesis of the period prior to Baur may be mentioned the Commentaries of W. M. L. de Wette on Romans (2nd ed.), 1838; 1 and 2 Corinthians, 1841; Galatians and Thessalonians, 1841.

18 H. E. G. Paulus, Des Apostels Paulus Lehrbriefe an die Galater- und Römer-Christen, 1831, 368 pp.

NOTES FOR CHAPTER II BAUR AND HIS CRITICS

19 Albert Schwegler, Das nachapostolische Zeitalter in den Hauptmomenten seiner Entwicklung (“The Post-Apostolic Age in the main Features of its Development”), 1846, vol. i. 522 pp., vol. ii. 392 pp. In the writings which mark the course of the development of Paulinism three groups are distinguished. To the first, the apologetic group, belongs the First Epistle of Peter; to the second, the conciliatory writings, are to be reckoned the Gospel of Luke, the Acts of the Apostles, the First Epistle of Clement, and the Epistle to the Philippians; the third is represented by the catholicising writings, the Pastorals, the Letter of Polycarp, and the Ignatian Letters.

20 Albrecht Ritschl, Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche, eine kirchen- und dogmengeschichtliche Monographie, 1850, 622 pp.; 2nd ed., 1857, 605 pp.

21 Gotthard Viktor Lechler, Das apostolische und das nachapostolische Zeitalter mit Rücksicht auf Unterschied und Einheit in Lehre und Leben ( . . . with special reference to their difference and unity in life and doctrine), 1st ed., 1852; 2nd ed., 1857, 536 pp. The portion dealing with Paul is pp. 33-154; in the 3rd ed., 1885 (635 pp.) Paul is treated on pp. 269-407.

In the first two editions the whole of the Pauline epistles are regarded as genuine; in the third the author no longer ventures to treat the Pastorals as on the same footing with the other Epistles. The very clearly and comprehensively stated problem is printed at the beginning.

22 Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 1853, 219 pp.

23 In 1850, Beiträge zur Erklärung der Korinthesbriefe, pp. 139-185. Continued in 1852, pp. 1-40 and 535-574. In 1855, Die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher; ihre Achtheit und Bedeutung für die Lehre der Parusie Christi, pp. 141-168 ( . . . their genuineness and their significance for the doctrine of the parousia of Christ). In 1857, Über Zweck und Gedankengang des Römerbriefs nebst der Erörterung einiger paulinischen Begriffe, pp. 60-108 and 184-209 (“On the Purpose and the Argument of Romans, with a Discussion of certain Pauline Conceptions.”)

24 Paulus der Apostel Jesu Christi, 2nd ed., edited by Zeller, 1866-1867, vol. i. 469 pp., revised by Baur; vol. ii. 376 pp. contains a reprint of the chapter on Paul’s doctrine from the first edition.

25 Vorlesungen über neutestamentliche Theologie. Published by Ferdinand Friedrich Baur, 1864, 407 pp. Pages 128-207 deal with the doctrinal system of Paul.

NOTES FOR CHAPTER III FROM BAUR TO HOLTZMANN

26 Die Pastoralbriefe kritisch und exegetisch behandelt, 1880, 504 pp. Adolf Harnack (in Die Chronologie der altchristlichen Literatur bis Eusebius, vol. i., 1897, 732 pp.—on Paul, 233-239) is disposed to regard the personal notices of the Pastorals as genuine with the aid of the hypothesis of the second imprisonment.

27 Kritik der Epheser- und Kolosserbriefe, 1872, 338 pp.

28 Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 1885; 2nd ed., 1886; 3rd ed., 1892. Second Thessalonians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles, spurious; Colossians, worked over. A similar critical stand-point is occupied by Adolf Jülicher, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 1894, 404 pp. The Pauline Epistles are treated in pp. 19-128.

A mediating position is taken up by E. Reuss, Geschichte der heiligen Schriften Neuen Testaments (5th ed., 1874, 352 pp.; 6th ed., 1887). All that can be said in favour of the genuineness of the Pastorals and 2 Thessalonians is set forth with the greatest completeness, since the author is very reluctant to give up these writings. See the same author’s Histoire de la théologie chrétienne au siècle apostolique (1852; 2nd ed., 1860, 2 vols., i. 489 pp., ii. 629 pp. Paulinism is treated in vol. ii., 3-262; 3rd ed., 1864). Mild polemic against Baur. Another mediating work is Willibald Beyschlag’s Neutestamentliche Theologie, 1891; 2nd ed., 1896. Only the Pastorals spurious.

A conservative stand-point is occupied by Bernhard Weiss, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 1886, 652 pp. Paul and his Epistles occupy pp. 112-332. The Pastoral Epistles are saved by the hypothesis of the second imprisonment. 2 Thessalonians and Ephesians are held to be genuine (3rd ed., 1897, 617 pp.). Conservative also is Theodor Zahn, Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 1st ed., 1897, vol. i., 489 pp. Pauline Epistles, pp. 109-489. Ch. K. v. Hofmann in his Einleitung (pt. ix. of “Die Heilige Schrift,” edited by Volck, 1881, 411 pp. Pauline Epistles, 1-200) proposes by means of the hypothesis of a liberation of the Apostle from his first imprisonment to make not only the Pastorals, but also the Epistle to the Hebrews genuine. That 2 Thessalonians and Ephesians are genuine is for him self-evident. Frédéric Godet too (Introduction au Nouveau Testament, 1893, 737 pp.) regards all thirteen Epistles as genuine.

29 Typical in this respect is the procedure of Bernhard Weiss in his Neutestamentliche Theologie (1868). He treats the doctrine of the Epistles of the imprisonment and that of the Pastorals by themselves after he has developed that of the main Epistles, although he regards them all as Pauline.

30 Kritik der paulinischen Briefe, 3 pts., 1850, 74 pp.; 1851, 76 pp.; 1852, 129 pp.; Christus und die Cäsaren, 1877, 387 pp.

31 Beiträge zur Kritik der paulinischen Briefe an die Galater, Römer Philipper und Kolosser. Edited by E. Sulze, 1867, 65 pp.

32 Lüdemann was opposed by H. H. Wendt in his work Die Begriffe Fleisch und Geist im biblischen Sprachgebrauch, 1878, 219 pp.

At the suggestion of Ritschl he undertook to prove that the meaning of these two words confined itself “within the boundaries set by Old Testament usage,” and that therefore the assumption of Greek influence was unnecessary.

33 Otto Pfleiderer, Das Urchristentum, 1887.

34 Auguste Sabatier, L’Apôtre Paul, esquisse d’une histoire de sa pensée, 1870, 296 pp. (2nd ed., 1881; 3rd ed., 1897).

35 Das Evangelium des Paulus, pt. 2 (edited by Mehlhorn), 1898, 172 pp.

36 P. 31.

37 Zum Evangelium des Paulus und des Petrus, 1868, 447 pp. In this work the author collects some of his earlier and later essays. The following are its component parts, “Paul’s Vision of Christ” (1861), “Peter’s Vision of the Messiah” (1868), “Contents and Argument of the Epistle to the Galatians” (1859), “The Significance of the word σάρξ (flesh) in Paul’s System of Doctrine” (1855). The collection is dedicated to F. C. Baur, “who though dead yet lives.” In the first part of the work Das Evangelium des Paulus, 1880, 498 pp., Holsten deals with the Epistle to the Galatians and the First to the Corinthians. The second part was intended to give an exposition of Romans and 2 Corinthians and to close with a systematic account of the Pauline theology. At Holsten’s death only the closing section was found to be ready for printing. It was published in 1898 under the editorship of Carl Mehlhorn, and bears the title “Carl Holsten, Das Evangelium des Paulus, part ii., Paulinische Theologie,” 173 pp. What was thus published is based on a manuscript prepared for his lectures in the winter session of 1893-1894, and on students’ notes.

38 Albrecht Ritschl, Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung, 1874, vol. ii. 377 pp. On Paul, pp. 215-259 and 300-369.

39 Lehrbuch der biblischen Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 1st ed. 1868, 756 pp. On Paulinism, pp. 216-507; 6th ed. 1895, 677 pp. On Paulinism, 201-463.

40 Neutestamentliche Theologie, 1st ed. 1891; 2nd ed. 1896, vol. ii. 552 pp. On Paul, pp. 1-285.

41 Ch. K. v. Hofmann, Biblische Theologie (vol. xi. of “Die heilige Schrift Neuen Testaments”; edited by Volck), 1886, 328 pp.

42 Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Kirche, vol. v., 1888, part iv. Alfred Resch, “Agrapha. Ausserkanonische Evangelienfragmente gesammelt und untersucht,” 480 pp. The “logia” numbered 13-46 he holds, on the evidence of echoes in the letters, to have been known to Paul. See pp. 152-243.

43 Die paulinische Lehre vom Gesetz (“The Pauline Doctrine of the Law”). Based on the four main Epistles, 1884, 26 pp. The second edition (1893, 33 pp.) is a revision of the first, but in the results arrived at both agree.

44 Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte. In the second edition the work bears the title Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (English Translation: “History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ,” Edinburgh, 1885). The second volume deals with the literature and the various currents of thought. There have since appeared a third and fourth edition.

45 System der altsynagogalen palästinensischen Theologie aus Targum, Midrasch und Talmud dargestellt, 399 pp. (Edited after the author’s death by Delitzsch and Schnedermann.)

The second edition (1897, 427 pp.) bears the title Jüdische Theologie auf Grund des Talmud und verwandter Schriften (“Jewish Theology described on the Basis of the Talmud and cognate Writings”).

The earlier literature is referred to in Hans Vollmer’s Die alttestamentlichen Zitate bei Paulus (1895), 81 pp.

46 A typical utterance is that of J. Wellhausen (Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte, 6th ed. 1907, 386 pp.), “Paul has not been able to free himself from the Rabbinic methods of exegesis. He employs it in his arguments, especially in connexion with justification by faith. But the inner essence of his religious conviction was not affected by it.”

47 Paulus des Apostels Brief an die Römer in das Hebräische übersetzt, und aus Talmud und Midrasch erläutert, 1870, 122 pp.

At the beginning the author gives an interesting review of previous Hebrew translations of the whole New Testament or of single books. He also refers to the Rabbinic reasoning in the apostle’s arguments. The illustrations from the Rabbinic literature, pp. 73-100, follow the translation.

He expects as a result of this translation that it will bring into prominence the Old Testament, Rabbinic, and Hellenistic elements in the early Christian modes of thought and expression.

Earlier attempts to point out Rabbinic parallels to Pauline ideas were made by Lightfoot, Surenhus, Schöttgen, Meuschen, and Nork. Information about this literature will be found in Hans Vollmer’s work (Die alttestamentlichen Zitate bei Paulus, 1895, pp. 80, 81).

48 A good general idea of the Rabbinic literature as a whole is given by Bousset in his work Die Religion des Judentums im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, 1903, 2nd ed., 1906, pp. 45-53.

49 Among the few scholars who stem the tide of conventional stupidity Frederick Spitta deserves a foremost place. In his printed works, no doubt—those in question are Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas (1885, 544 pp.) and the studies Zur Geschichte und Literatur des Urchristentums (vol. i. 1893; vol. ii. 1896)—he is chiefly engaged in maintaining the general thesis that the earliest Christian literature shows much more dependence on the Late-Jewish than is generally admitted. A detailed proof of this kind for the Pauline letters has only been given in his exegetical lectures, which have not been published. The stimulus which he gave to others is clearly apparent in the literature of the nineties. Kabisch’s study of the eschatology of Paul (1893) is partly based on the foundation which he had prepared.

50 Die paulinische Angelologie und Dämonologie, 1888, 126 pp.

51 Die Eschatologie des Paulus in ihren Zusammenhängen mit dem Gesamtbegriff des Paulinismus ( ... in its relations with the general conception of Paulinism), 1893, 338 pp. The work is dedicated to Friedrich Spitta. After a historical introduction, the principal passages which come into question are examined. After that the eschatology is developed according to its contents and motives, and in the process its relations with the various doctrines of the Pauline theology come up for discussion.

52 He did not, unfortunately, follow it up with the work on the Ethics.

53 The eschatological character of the Pauline mysticism is also pointed out by Paul Wernle in his suggestive study Der Christ und die Sünde bei Paulus (1897, 138 pp.), but he does not follow out the idea in all its consequences.

A certain recognition of the “physical” character of the doctrine of redemption is also arrived at by Adolf Deissmann. In his study, Die neutestamentliche Formel “in Christo Jesu” (1892, 136 pp.) he comes to the conviction that Paul had created the formula on the analogy of a linguistic usage already obtaining in non-biblical Greek, and intended in using it to indicate the relation to Christ as an existence within the pneumatic Christ which was to be locally conceived. He does not, however, think of explaining it from eschatology.

The old psychologising and spiritualising methods are in no way departed from by W. Brandt. In his work, Die evangelische Geschichte und der Ursprung des Christentums (“The Gospel History and the Origin of Christianity,” 1893, 591 pp.; on Paul, pp. 515-524), he maintains that it was the visions of the disciples which first made Jesus into the Messiah. Paul, he thinks, “in his profound reflexion over his conversion, came to think of this revolution in his life as a dying and rising again of his inner man.”

54 Georg Heinrici, Auslegung der Korintherbriefe (I Cor., 1880, 574 pp.; 2 Cor., 1887, 606 pp.).

55 P. W. Schmiedel, “Auslegung der Briefe an die Thessalonicher und Korinther,” in Holtzmann’s Handkommentar, vol. ii. section i.; 1st ed., 1891; 2nd ed., 1892.

56 Dogmengeschichte, 3rd ed., 1894, vol. i. On Paul, pp. 83-95. Friedrich Loofs in his Dogmengeschichte (1890, 443 pp.) takes up no definite attitude towards the Pauline problem. Reinhold Seeberg, too (Dogmengeschichte, first half, 1895, 332 pp.), does not go into the doctrine of the Apostle.

57 R. A. Lipsius, “Auslegung der Briefe an die Galater, Römer und Philipper,” in Holtzmann’s Handkommentar, vol. ii. section i. 1st ed., 1891; 2nd ed., 1892. This commentator’s position is indicated by the following remarks: “The great antithesis between flesh and spirit gradually forces out the Jewish conceptions one after another, though it is not right to say that Hebrew ideas are driven out by Hellenic ones. When Paul goes outside the circle of Old Testament views he does so in consequence of a deeper ethical grasp of the originally Hebrew antithesis between flesh and spirit, not by a borrowing of Greek ideas.”

58 Das apostolische Zeitalter, 1886, pp. 105-151.

59 It is most clearly developed by Holsten on pp. 37 and 38 of the second part of his Evangelium des Paulus, 1896.

60 Vol. i., 1880; vol. ii., 1887. See especially the Introduction and the Epilogue to vol. ii.

61 In Phil. i. 21 f. the reference is to an inner struggle which the Apostle experiences. He desires to depart and be with Christ, which, indeed, would be much better, but he knows that to remain in the flesh is more needful for the sake of his churches. From this conviction he draws the confident conclusion that he will remain with them for their progress and joy in the faith.

In Phil. iii. 8 he declares that he has counted all things but loss in order to win Christ and be found in Him, to know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, to be conformed unto His death, if so be that he might attain (?) to the resurrection of the dead.

Both passages are certainly obscure, and do not to a literal interpretation yield any satisfactory meaning. One feels that the logic of these close-packed assertions is not self-evident, but must somehow depend on presuppositions of which the basis is not here given. It cannot, however, be maintained that the assumption of a spiritualising hope regarding the future makes all clear.

62 An allusion to the passage in Faust, “Zwei Seelen wohnen, ach, in meiner Brust.”—TRANSLATOR.

63 Ernst Teichmann, Die paulinischen Vorstellungen von Auferstehung und Gericht und ihre Beziehung zur jüdischen Apokalyptik (“The Pauline Conceptions of Resurrection and Judgment and their relation to Jewish Apocalyptic”), 1896, 125 pp. Akin to Teichmann’s study is that of C. Bruston, “La Vie future d’après St Paul” in the Revue de Théologie et de Philosophie (Lausanne), 1894, pp. 506-530. The author maintains that Paul had never really held the conceptions connected with the resurrection of the dead at the parousia, but had always thought “spiritually” and assumed a passing into glory immediately after death. But while in his earlier writings he still used certain expressions borrowed from the “Rabbinic eschatology,” later he quite abandoned these.

64 Hermann Gunkel, Die Wirkungen des Heiligen Geistes nach der populären Anschauung der apostolischen Zeit und nach der Lehre des Apostels Paulus (“The Manifestations of the Holy Spirit according to the Popular View of the Apostolic Age and according to the Doctrine of the Apostle Paul”), 1888, 110 pp. Shortly before that appeared the purely biblico-theological treatment of it by Johannes Gloël, Der Heilige Geist in der Heilsverkündigung des Paulus (“The Holy Spirit in Paul’s Preaching of Salvation”), 1888, 402 pp. It keeps entirely to description and does not enter into the question regarding the origin and innermost essence of the Pauline doctrine. Pfleiderer’s view is, however, called in question.

65 Urchristentum, 1887. Similarly Heinrici in his commentary on 2 Corinthians.

66 F. C. Baur, Vorlesungen über die christliche Dogmengeschichte (“Lectures on the History of Dogma”), vol. i. From the apostolic period to the synod of Nicaea, 1865 (edited by Ferdinand Friedrich Baur).

67 Dogmengeschichte, 1885, vol. i.; 3rd ed., 1894; 4th ed., 1909. Wilhelm Karl, too, in his Beiträge zum Verständnis der soteriologischen Erfahrungen und Spekulationen des Apostels Paulus (“Contributions to the Understanding of the Soteriological Experiences and Speculations of the Apostle Paul,” 1899, 116 pp.), does not feel obliged to have recourse to Greek thought in order to explain the Apostle’s doctrine. He offers a thorough and independent analysis of the system which in many points is much superior to the ordinary view.

68 Edwin Hatch, Hibbert Lectures on “The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church.” The work was translated into German by Erwin Preuschen in 1892. Its divisions are: (i.) Introductory, (ii.) Greek culture, (iii.) Greek and Christian Exegesis, (iv.) Rhetoric, (v.) Philosophy, (vi.) Ethics, (vii.-ix.) Theology, (x.) Mysteries, (xi.) Corpus doctrinae, (xii.) The Transformation of the basis of Christian Unity: Doctrine in the Place of Conduct.

69 i.e. as used in this connexion, here and later, the belief in the universal destination of the Gospel, not in universal salvation.

70 Paulus in Athen. Collected Essays, vol. ii., 1894, pp. 527-543 In this essay the author seeks to exhibit with some fulness the view, which seems to him self-evident, that the Apostle was filled with the Hellenic spirit.

71 Preface to his Exposition of 2 Corinthians, 1887.

72 Holtzmann’s Handkommentar, 2nd ed. The Epistles to the Corinthians, p. 92.

73 Emil Friedrich Kautzsch, De veteris Testamenti locis a Paulo Apostolo allegatis, 1869, 110 pp.

74 Hans Vollmer, Die alttestamentlichen Zitate bei Paulus . . . nebst einem Anhang über das Verhältnis des Apostels zu Philo, 1895, 103 pp. (“The Old Testament quotations in Paul . . . with an Appendix on the Apostle’s relation to Philo”).

75 The author has had occasion to observe this in Alsatian theologians and in himself. One who is equally familiar with French and German will never, either in preaching or in conversation, give his own version of Biblical passages, but will without exception keep to the traditional form in the language which he is using, and this even where he would be capable of giving a more exact rendering. And in preaching he will turn to account the peculiarities of the wording of the version, if it lends itself to his thought, and will even perhaps use an argument which goes against the sense of the original, which he is supposed to be acquainted with—exactly as Paul does.

76 Eduard Grafe, Das Verhältnis der paulinischen Schriften zur Sapientia Salamonis (“The Relation of the Pauline Writings to the Book of Wisdom”), in the Theological Essays dedicated to Carl von Weizsäcker on his seventieth birthday, 1892, pp. 251-286.

77 Über das Verhältnis des Apostels zu Philo, an appendix to his work on Die alttestamentlichen Zitate bei Paulus, 1895, pp. 80-98. See also Carl Siegfried, Philo von Alexandria als Ausleger des alten Testaments an sich selbst und nach seinem geschichtlichen Einfluss betrachtet (“Philo of Alexandria as an Expositor of Scripture, considered both in Himself and in Regard to his Historical Influence”), 1875, 418 pp. In pp. 304-10 thoughts and passages are cited from Paul which are supposed to show affinity with Philo. The resemblance is, however, so general and colourless that it cannot be considered as proving anything. The author quotes the passages without drawing any conclusion.

78 Ernst Curtius in the essay cited above defends the historicity of Acts xvii.

79 W. Gass, Geschichte der christlichen Ethik, 1881, vol. i. 457 pp. On Paul, pp. 34-38. Theobald Ziegler, Geschichte der christlichen Ethik, 1886, 593 pp. On Paul, pp. 72-90.

80 Fr. Th. L. Ernesti, Die Ethik des Apostels Paulus, 1868, 155 pp.; 3rd ed., 1880.

81 The Christian character of Seneca’s thought was remarked as early as Tertullian, who in de Anima, xx., when he quotes a phrase from him, describes him as “saepe noster.” Augustine and Jerome know of a correspondence between Seneca and the Apostle. From the literature we may mention the following works: Amédée Fleury, Saint Paul et Sénèque. Recherches sur les rapports du philosophe avec l’apôtre et sur l’infiltration du Christianisme naissant à travers le paganisme, 2 vols., 1853, 404 and 383 pp. Seneca is supposed to have drawn on Paul. At the end of the second part the correspondence between them is printed. The work is uncritical in character. Johann Kreyher, L. Annaeus Seneca und seine Beziehungen zur Urchristentum ( . . . and his relations with early Christianity), 1887, 198 pp. Seneca is supposed to have had some relations with Christianity in Rome even before the Apostle’s coming, and thenceforward to have entered into a close relationship with him. Charles Aubertin, Étude critique sur les rapports supposés entre Sénèque et St Paul, 1857, 442 pp. All connexion between Seneca and Christianity is denied. In the work of Michael Baumgarten, Lucius Annaeus Seneca und das Christentum (1895, 368 pp.) no connexion between Seneca and Paul is admitted.

82 See Theodor Zahn, Der Stoiker Epiktet und sein Verhältnis zum Christentum. A Rectorial address at Erlangen, 1894, 27 pp. The lecture offers proof that in spite of many resemblances of expression and in spite of his acquaintance with Christianity, the teaching of Epictetus contains nothing which really connects it with the new religion.

Inconceivable as it may appear, even the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius—of the second half of the second century—have been sometimes cited to prove the Greek character of Paul’s religious thought.

83 Theodor Simon, Die Psychologie des Apostels Paulus, 1897, 118 pp. A leisurely analysis of the material.

NOTES FOR CHAPTER IV H. J. HOLTZMANN

84 In connexion with the following remarks on questions of principle, see also W. Wrede, Über Aufgabe und Methode der sogenannten Neutestamentlichen Theologie, 1897, 80 pp.

The essay discusses the plan and arrangement of Holtzmann’s work. On p. 32 Wrede remarks: “The treatment is far too much influenced by the desire to include all kinds of opinions from other writers. To a large extent my objections have to do with these methodological questions.”

85 Holtzmann, p. 111.

86 Cf. 2 Cor. xi. 6, where Paul speaks of himself as “inexpert in speech, but not in knowledge” (τῇ γνώσει). See also I Cor. i. 5, viii. I; Phil. i. 9, etc. “Gnostic” is used above in the general sense of one who lays stress on theoretic religious knowledge.—TRANSLATOR.

NOTES FOR CHAPTER V CRITICAL QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

87 Die Apostelgeschichte, 1850, 143 pp. Acts, it is argued, is a work of “free reflexion” in which various hands have had a part.

Kritik der paulinischen Briefe, part i., The Origin of Galatians (1850, 74 pp.); part ii., The Origin of I Corinthians (1851, 76 pp.); part iii., 2 Corinthians, Romans, the Pastoral Epistles, Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philippians (1852, 129 pp.). The greater part of the epistles were not written until after Acts. Certainly Galatians is later. I Corinthians is earlier than Acts, and is doubtless drawn from common sources.

The first to venture an attack on one of the main Epistles was Edward Evanson, The Dissonance of the four generally received Evangelists, and the evidence of their respective authenticity examined (translated into Dutch, 1796), who holds Romans, as well as Hebrews, Colossians, and Ephesians, to be spurious. Further information regarding this, as it seems, rather rare book would be desirable. Whether any great critical importance is to be attached to it remains questionable. [Evanson (1731-1805), a Cambridge graduate, vicar of Tewkesbury, adopted Unitarian views, and resigned his living in 1778. His grounds for rejecting Romans are, the difficulty about the existence of a church at Rome prior to Paul’s visit, the number of greetings in chapter xvi., and supposed references to the destruction of Jerusalem in xi. 12, 15, 21, 22. The treatment of the Epistles is much slighter than that of the Gospels, where he shows some insight into the difficulties of what is now known as the Synoptic problem. The Dissonance made some stir, and was answered by Joseph Priestley in Letters to a Young Man, 1792-93, and by T. Falconer, Bampton Lecture, 1810.—TRANSLATOR.]

88 See A. Schweitzer, Von Reimarus zu Wrede, pp. 137-159 (Eng. trans., The Quest of the Historical Jesus, pp. 137-160).

89 Christus und die Cäsaren, 1877, 387 pp. What the diffusely told story of the Roman court has to do with the origin of Christianity has certainly never been quite clear to any reader. In attempting to describe its contents one is never quite certain whether the author’s meaning has been rightly represented.

90 A spiritual descendant of Bauer’s who writes on popular lines is Albert Kalthoff (Die Entstehung des Christentums, 1904, 155 pp.). But neither as regards the problem nor its solution has he contributed anything to Pauline scholarship.

91 Allard Pierson, De Bergrede en andere synoptische Fragmenten, 1878, 260 pp.; on Paul, 98-112. With his doubt of the Epistles the author associates a doubt of the Gospels, and asks whether Christianity as they represent it can have been founded by a historical Jesus.

92 A. Pierson and S. A. Naber, Verisimilia. Laceram conditionem Novi Testamenti exemplis illustrarunt et ab origine repetierunt, 1886, 295 pp. The work gives a running analysis of the letters in the course of which very interesting questions are thrown out. Why is nothing said about the earthly life of Jesus? Why is no trace of the influence of this Paul’s thought to be found in history? Do the various characteristics and actions of his which are recorded show us a character which is at all intelligible?

The authors assume that the Jewish movement which led up to “Christianity” at first had only to do with the Messianic belief in general. Only later, through the blending of Greek myths with Isaiah liii., did the belief arise that the expected Messiah had already come and had passed through death and resurrection.

The analysis of the Pauline Epistles is followed by essays upon the Paul of Acts and some chapters on the Fourth Gospel. The close is formed by an essay on the gradual origin of the conception of Christ in the New Testament.

The theory that Christianity developed out of an already existing Jewish movement is maintained also by M. Friedländer in his popular and unimportant work, Das Judentum in der vorchristlichen griechischen Welt, a contribution towards explaining the origin of Christianity (1897, 74 pp.). The opposition between a conservative and a freer tendency as regards the law, which appear in the primitive Church, are here held to have appeared previously in the Judaism from which Christianity originated.

93 A. D. Loman, “Quaestiones Paulinae,” Theol. Tijdschrift, 1882, pp. 141-185, 302-328, 452-487; 1883, pp. 14-51. 1886, 42-113 (Dutch). In the prologue he tells us about the first impression which Bauer’s criticism of the Pauline epistles made upon him: “With an Apage Satana! I took leave of this antipathetic critic, firmly resolved to take no further notice of him.” The order followed is to treat first the relation of Acts to Galatians, then to discuss the “necessary proofs” of the genuineness of this work, while the witnesses from the literature, and the history of the Canon, are examined later, in the second part, 1886.

94 Rudolf Steck, Der Galaterbrief nach seiner Echtheit untersucht nebst kritischen Bemerkungen zu den paulinischen Hauptbriefen (“The Epistle to the Galatians examined with Reference to its Genuineness, with critical Remarks on the main Pauline Epistles”), 1888, 386 pp. The examination of Galatians goes only as far as p. 151; the remaining chapters deal with the order of the main Epistles, the relation of Paul to the Gospels, the quotations from the Old Testament found in the Epistles, the affinities with Philo and Seneca, the marks of later authorship, the external evidences from the New Testament and from early Christian literature. In conclusion, a hypothesis of the origin and development of Paulinism is sketched. The author tells in the preface the story of his conversion to the Dutch heresy. At first he dissented from Loman, but in the course of repeatedly treating the Epistle to the Galatians in his lectures he found to his dismay that he was gradually arriving at the theory of its spuriousness.

The views of Pierson, Loman, and Steck are critically examined by J. M. S. Baljon in his Exegetisch-kritische Verhandeling over den Brief van Paulus an de Galatiërs, 1899, 424 pp.

95 W. C. van Manen, Paulus, 3 vols. (see head of chapter for particulars). The author describes on pp. 9-11 how he came to reject the Pauline Epistles.

96 The first epistle of Clement mentions (xlvii. I) “the letter of the blessed Paul” to the Corinthians, has a direct borrowing from Romans (xxxv. 5 = the catalogue of vices in Rom. i. 29-32), and in other respects also frequently shows dependence on the main epistles. For the detailed attempt to place it at a later date see Steck, 294-310.

97 2 Peter iii. 15-17, “And count the long-suffering of the Lord as salvation, as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote to you, as in all his Epistles when he mentions these things, in which no doubt occur some things which are difficult to understand, which the unlearned and unstedfast wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.” (The German follows Weizsäcker’s rendering.)

98 As in the present context this phrase might possibly be misleading, it may be worth pointing out that it is simply an allusion to the famous “timeo Danaos et dona ferentes,” Aen. ii. 49.—TRANSLATOR.

99 The puzzle in the case of Justin is that he uses Pauline phrases, and therefore seems to know the Epistles, but never mentions their author. According to Steck the explanation of this silence lies in the fact that the Epistles are, for the author of the Apology and the Dialogue, mere literary works and not as yet Church books. The Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Epistle of Barnabas show no certain evidence of acquaintance with the Pauline Epistles.

100 Tertullian adversus Marcionem, bk. v., goes through the Epistles of Paul as used by Marcion in those “Antitheses” which are now lost to us.

101 Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1887, pp. 382-533. “Marcions Brief van Paulus aan de Galatiërs.” The text thus arrived at is given on pp. 528-533.

Van Manen is also inclined to hold that early Church witnesses may be found for a shorter recension of Romans. See Die Unechtheit des Römerbriefs, 94-100.

A reconstruction of the Marcionite text of Galatians had already been undertaken by Adolf Hilgenfeld, Der Galaterbrief, 1852, 239 pp., pp. 218-234. He holds that it was not the original but a mutilated form.

102 Even the letter consisting of chapters i.-viii. is not, according to van Manen, all of a piece, as is evident, he thinks, from the complicated opening salutation, the vacillating use of “Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus,” and other peculiarities of detail. One or more treatises—on justification by faith, on the equal importance of the Gospel for Jews and Gentiles, on the significance of the law, on the sense in which believers are entitled to call Abraham their father even if they are not by birth of his posterity—may have formed the basis of the longer writing. Its close was probably formed by Rom. xv. 14-33. Later on, the essays which we have in chapters ix.-xi., xii.-xiv. and xv.-xvi. were worked in. The Epistle is supposed to have undergone several successive redactions.

103 Steck in the introduction to his work gives references to the articles which had appeared up to 1888. The chronicles of the following years appear in van Manen. At the head of the counter-movement among critics in Holland stood J. H. Scholten. His work, Historisch-critische Bijdragen naar Aanleiding van de nieuweste Hypothese aangaande Jesus en den Paulus der vier Hoofdbrieven (“Contributions to Historical Criticism with Reference to the latest Hypotheses regarding Jesus and the Paul of the four main Epistles”), 1882, 118 pp., is directed against Loman’s arguments.

From the German literature we may cite G. Heinrici, Die Forschungen über die paulinischen Briefe: ihr gegenwärtiger Stand und ihre Aufgaben (“The Study of the Pauline Letters; its present Position, and Task”). Lectures given before the theological conference at Giessen, 1886, pp. 69-120. Wilhelm Brückner, Die chronologische Reihenfolge, in welcher die Briefe des Neuen Testaments verfasst sind (“The Chronological Order in which the Epistles of the New Testament were written”), 1890, 306 pp. (An essay which received the prize offered for the treatment of this question by the Teylerian Society of Haarlem.) “On the Chronological Order of the Four main Epistles, pp. 174-203. Carl Clemen, Die Chronologie der paulinischen Briefe, 1893, 292 pp. By the same writer, Die Einheitlichkeit der paulinischen Briefe (“The Integrity of the Pauline Epistles”), 1894, 183 pp.

In these writings Clemen makes some concessions to the Ultra-Tübingen critics. Thus, for example, he is prepared to put Galatians after Romans and Corinthians. The mediating views here offered, though sometimes interesting, need nevertheless no longer occupy us, as Clemen has in the meantime completely recovered his confidence and has contradicted himself. In the first volume of his Paulus (1904, 416 pp., examination of the sources) he pronounces that the four main epistles are to be regarded as entirely genuine, if only we may divide the second Epistle to the Corinthians into four. In addition to I Thessalonians and Philippians, even Colossians and 2 Thessalonians are to be regarded as from the Apostle’s pen.

In the preface the author begs that he may not be held accountable for his views prior to his Damascus.

The second volume of the work, Paulus. Sein Leben und Werken, 1904, 339 pp., is in biographical form, and does not enter further into the problems of the doctrine.

A writer who takes the “Ultra-Tübingen” side is J. Friedrich (Maehliss). In his work entitled Die Unechtheit des Galaterbriefs (“The Spuriousness of Galatians”), 1891, 67 pp., he defends both the rights of radical criticism and of a “simplified orthography.”

104 See p. 128, sup.

105 See p. 128, sup.

106 See p. 129, sup.

107 See pp. 114 and 115 of the work cited above, p. 134.