| ¡¡
From the late AD 40s and until his
martyrdom in the 60s, Paul wrote letters to the churches that he founded
or guided. These are the earliest Christian writings that the church has,
and in them he refers to "the gospel"
(euangelion). In Romans, chapter
1, verse 1, he says: "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be
an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God
. .
." and goes on to describe this "gospel" in what was
already by that time traditional language, such as: "promised
beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, the gospel
concerning his Son, who was descended
. . . our Lord" (Rom. 1:1-4). This gospel is the power of God for
salvation to everyone who has faith ".
. . for in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith
. . ." (1:17). In I Corinthians Paul had reminded his congregation in
stylized terms of "the gospel" he had brought to them. It
consisted of the announcement that Jesus had died and risen according to
the Scriptures.
Thus, the "gospel" was
an authoritative proclamation (as announced by a herald, keryx), or the kerygma (that which is
proclaimed, kerygma). The
earthly life of Jesus is hardly noted or missed, because something more
glorious--the ascended Lord who sent the Spirit upon the church--is what
matters.
In the speeches of Peter in Acts,
the transition from kerygma to creed or vice versa is almost
interchangeable. In Acts 2 Jesus is viewed as resurrected and exalted at
the right hand of God and made both Lord and Christ. In Acts 3 Peter's
speech proclaims Jesus as the Christ having been received in heaven to be
sent at the end of time as judge for the vindication and salvation of
those who believe in him. Here the proclaimed message, the gospel, is more
basic than an overview of Jesus' earthly life, which in Acts is referred
to only briefly as "his acting with power, going about doing good,
and healing and exorcising" (10:38ff.). Such an extended kergyma can
be seen as a transition from the original meaning of gospel as the
"message" to gospel meaning an account of the life of Jesus.
The term gospel has connotations
of the traditions of Jesus' earthly ministry and Passion that were
remembered and then written in the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
John. They are written from the post-Resurrection perspective and they
contain an extensive and common Passion narrative as they deal with the
earthly ministry of Jesus from hindsight. And so the use of the term
gospel for Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John has taken the place of the
original creedal-kerygmatic use in early Christianity. It is also to be
noted that, in the Evangelists' accounts, their theological
presuppositions and the situations of their addressees molded the
formation of the four canonical Gospels written after the Pauline Letters.
The primary affirmations--of Jesus as the Christ, his message of the
Kingdom, and his Resurrection--preceded the Evangelists' accounts. Some of
these affirmations were extrapolated backward (much as the Exodus event
central in the Old Testament was extrapolated backward and was the
theological presupposition for the patriarchal narratives in Genesis).
These stories were shaped by the purpose for their telling: religious
propaganda or preaching to inspire belief. The kerygmatic, or creedal,
beginning was expanded with material about the life and teaching of Jesus,
which a reverence for and a preoccupation with the holy figure of Jesus
demanded out of loving curiosity about his earthly ministry and life.
The English word gospel is derived
from the Anglo-Saxon godspell ("good
story"). The classical Greek word euangelion
means "a reward for bringing of good news" or the "good
news" itself. In the emperor cult particularly, in which the Roman
emperor was venerated as the spirit and protector of the empire, the term
took on a religious meaning: the announcement of the appearance or
accession to the throne of the ruler. In contemporary Greek it denoted a
weighty, authoritative, royal, and official message.
In the New Testament, no stress
can be placed on the etymological (root) meaning of eu ("good"); in Luke, chapter 3, verse 18 (as in other
places), the word means simply authoritative news concerning impending
judgment.
In the Pauline writings, as noted
above, gospel, kerygma, and creed come close together from oral to written
formulas that were transmitted about the Christ event: Jesus' death and
Resurrection. In the apostolic Fathers (early 2nd century), the transition
was made from oral to written tradition; the translation of the presumed
Aramaic traditions had taken place before the Gospel material had been
committed to writing. By the time of Justin Martyr (c.
155), these writings were called Gospels and referred to in the
plural; they contain the words, deeds, and Passion narratives--i.e.,
the present four Gospels compiled and edited by the Evangelists
according to their various needs and theological emphases. Justin also
referred to these as "memoirs of the Apostles."
Such a Gospel began with a
missionary announcement concerning a cosmic divine figure, a man with
divine characteristics who would bring salvation and hope to the world.
The earthly historical Jesus, however, was the criterion of the
proclamation--being both the content of the church's proclamation and the
object of its faith.
The identification of basic
patterns in the history of oral and written traditions--the stage of
tradition prior to any literary form and particularly as the traditions
passed from an oral to a written form--and the determination of their
creative milieu, or their situations and functions in various places and
under various circumstances, are tasks of form criticism. Through such
study, small independent units may be isolated in a postulated more
primitive form than they were before being incorporated into more extended
accounts. The term Sitz-im-Leben refers
to the "Sitz im Leben der Kirche"--i.e., the situation in the life of the church in which the material
was shaped and adjusted to the needs at hand. Only through such studies is
it possible to progress tentatively to an assessment of a "Sitz im
Leben Jesu."
Both Jews and Gentiles could use
"biographies," often for propaganda purposes. Philo and Josephus
recounted the wonderful lives and deeds of Old Testament heroes such as
Moses; and there are miraculous tales of the prophets Elijah and Elisha
told in order that faith might be inspired or justified. A miracle worker
(theios aner, "divine
man") and stories about him comprised an aretalogy (from arete, "virtue"; also manifestation of divine power,
miracle). Aretalogies were frequently used to represent the essential
creed and belief of a religious or philosophical movement. The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, a Neo-Pythagorean philosopher and
wonder-worker (transmitted by the Greek writer Philostratus), was widely
read. He was depicted as having performed miracles and as being possessed
of divine cosmic power not as an exception but as an example to men who
have the possibility of sharing such power (cf.
Matt. 9:8). There were tales of Heracles, the Greek hero, and a whole
literature of Alexander the Great as wonder-workers, divine men.
Though the pericopes (small units)
of which the Gospels are constituted include many forms, or genres, they
are mainly divided into narratives (including legends, miracle stories,
exorcisms, healings, and tales) and sayings (prophetic and apocalyptic
sayings, proverbs and wisdom sayings, parables, church discipline and
rules for the community, Christological sayings, such as the socalled
"I am" sayings [e.g., "I
am the bread of life"] in John, revelations, and legal sayings). Some
stories may simply be the background for a pithy saying; these latter are
sometimes called paradigmatic sayings, and the pronouncement stories are
their vehicles of transmission. The forms have many different names, but
form criticism started with Homeric form analysis (taking oral tradition
into account), which was applied to Old Testament studies by Hermann
Gunkel, a German biblical scholar, and applied to the New Testament, on
the basis of the German classical philologist Eduard Norden's stylistic
studies, by such biblical scholars as Rudolf Bultmann and Martin Dibelius.
Form criticism asks and answers
questions about what shaped the preliterary tradition and the earliest
written traditions into blocks as they are found in the Gospels. This may
be a historical context (as a missionary situation), a need for admonition
(as church-discipline sections), or for the transmission of teaching in a
faithful way (as in a "school," be it Matthean, Pauline, or
Johannine). One large block of the material, however, is to all intents
and purposes the same (although differing in details) in all four
canonical Gospels: the Passion narrative. In the Synoptic Gospels there is
also a basic nucleus in the sayings about Jesus that are mysterious,
prophetic, and apocalyptic and that point to the significance of Jesus as
the Christ who has come in history in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.
Such form-critical studies were
centred on the smaller units of tradition (pericopes) that make up the
Gospels, and their intention was partly to assess relative age and
authenticity of such traditions. In more recent times the tools of form
criticism have been applied to a more synthetic method that could be used
to determine the relation between a genre of literature and the
Christological and theological perspectives that made such genres natural.
A presentation of Jesus material in the form of more or less disconnected
sayings (as in the so-called Q Source, composed of independent sayings,
behind Matthew and Luke, and in the Gospel of Thomas; see below The
two- and four-source hypotheses ) tends to fit a Christology in
which Jesus is viewed as a teacher of Wisdom, an envoy of Wisdom, or as
Wisdom herself. The collections of wonder stories (aretalogies) grew out
of a Christology of Jesus as the divine man. Another type of Jesus
material with independent existence seems to have been
"revelations," or "apocalypses," in which Jesus Christ
speaks to his followers. This is seen, for example, in Mark 13, I
Thessalonians, chapter 4, the canonical book of Revelation to John, and
the noncanonical Didache 16.
These genres of material now
represented in the canonical Gospels are amply represented also in the
noncanonical writings from the first Christian centuries. The discovery of
a Gnostic library of Coptic writings at Naj'
Hammadi, in Egypt, in the 1940s gave scholars a new opportunity to
compare the canonical Gospels with the Jesus material of these various
types, some of them having been called and used as gospels (such as the Gospel
of Thomas). In the light of such a wider spectrum of material, it
appears that the gospel form for which Mark is the earliest witness became
a criterion for the orthodox transmission of the Christian message about
Jesus. By making the confession of Jesus as the crucified and risen Lord
(the earliest kerygma and "gospel" as found in Paul and Acts)
the form of an extensive Passion account prefaced by a limited amount of
narrative and teaching, Mark set the stage for a faith that anchored faith
in Jesus Christ in the events of the earthly life of Jesus. This form of
the "gospel" became the standard within which the other commonly
accepted Gospels grew. It became the criterion for later creedal
statements concerning Jesus Christ as true God and true man. By such a
criterion, gospels that seemed to disregard his humanity (e.g.,
Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of
Peter) were judged heretical.
Since the 1780s, Matthew, Mark,
and Luke have been referred to as the Synoptic
Gospels (from synoptikos, "seen
together"). The extensive parallels in structure, content, and
wording of Matthew, Mark, and Luke make it even possible to arrange them
side by side so that corresponding sections can be seen in parallel
columns. John Calvin, the 16th-century Reformer, wrote a commentary on
these Gospels as a harmony. Such an arrangement is called a
"synopsis," or Gospel harmony, and, by careful comparison of
their construction, compilation, and actual agreement or disagreement in
wording or content, literary- or source-critical relationships can be
seen. Augustine, the great 4th-5th-century
Western theologian, considered Mark to be an abridged Matthew, and, until
the 19th century, some variation of this solution to literary dependency
dominated the scene. It still recurs from time to time.
The Synoptic problem is one of
literary or of source criticism and deals with the written sources after
compilation and redaction. Matthew was the Gospel most used for the
selections read in the liturgy of the church, and other Gospels were used
to fill in the picture. One attempted solution to the problem of priority
was the proposed existence of an Aramaic primitive gospel, which is now
lost, as the first Gospel from which a later Mark in Greek was translated
and arranged. The Greek Mark would thus be first based on a prior Semitic
Matthew, and later both Mark and Matthew would be translations dependent
on Matthew, and Luke dependent on both. The preservation of an
ecclesiastical priority of Matthew breaks down because of the literary
word-for-word agreement in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This agreement occurs
to far too great an extent to be accounted for in translations and
revisions, not to mention the agreement in the order of the various
pericopes as they are viewed in a synoptic parallel arrangement.
For similar reasons, a fragment
theory holding that the Gospels were constructed of small written
collections brought together in varying sequences cannot stand the test of
actual structure--but it has the merit of stressing compilation of
sources.
In 1789 J.J.
Griesbach, a German biblical scholar, hypothesized that the
Synoptics had not developed independently, but in his
"usage-hypothesis" he recognized that there must be literary
dependency. He thought that Mark used Matthew as well as Luke, but this
could not account for the close relationship of Matthew and Luke. His
basic concept of literary dependency, however, paved the way for K.
Lachmann, who observed in 1835 that Matthew and Luke agree only
when they also agree with Mark and that, where material is introduced that
is not in Mark, it is inserted in different places. This, it is held, can
only be explained on the basis of the priority of Mark and its use as the
patterning form of Matthew and Luke. This insight led to a so-called
two-source hypothesis (by two German biblical scholars, Heinrich Holtzmann
in 1863, and Bernhard Weiss in 1887-88), which, with various modifications
and refinements of other scholars, is the generally accepted solution to
the Synoptic problem.
The two-source hypothesis is
predicated upon the following observations: Matthew and Luke used Mark,
both for its narrative material as well as for the basic structural
outline of chronology of Jesus' life. Matthew and Luke use a second
source, which is called Q (from German Quelle,
"source"), not extant, for the sayings (logia)
found in common in both of them. Thus, Mark and Q are the main components
of Matthew and Luke. In both Matthew and Luke there is material that is
peculiar to each of their Gospels; this material is probably drawn from
some other sources, which may be designated M (material found only in
Matthew's special source) and L (material found only in Luke's special
source). This is known as the four-document hypothesis, which was
elaborated in 1925 by B.H. Streeter, an
English biblical scholar. The placement of Q material in Luke and Matthew
disagrees at certain points according to the needs and theologies of the
addressees of the gospels, but in Matthew the Marcan chronology is the
basic scheme into which Q is put. Mark's order is kept, on the whole, by
Matthew and Luke, but, where it differs, at least one agrees with Mark.
After chapter 4 in Matthew and Luke, not a single passage from Q is in the
same place. Q was a source written in Greek as was Mark, which can be
demonstrated by word agreement (not possible, for example, with a
translation from Aramaic, although perhaps the Greek has vestiges of
Semitic structure form). A diagram might thus be:
In approximate figures, Mark's
text has 661 verses, more than 600 of which appear in Matthew and 350 in
Luke. Only c. 31 verses of Mark
are found nowhere in Matthew or Luke. In the material common to all three
Synoptics, there is very seldom verbatim agreement of Matthew and Luke
against Mark, though such agreement is common between Matthew and Mark or
Luke and Mark or where all three concur.
The postulated common saying
source of Matthew and Luke, Q, would account for much verbatim agreement
of Matthew and Luke when they include sayings absent from Mark. The fact
that the sayings are used in different ways or different contexts in
Matthew and Luke is an indication of a somewhat free way in which the
editors could take material and mold it to their given situations and
needs. An example of this is the parable in Matthew and Luke about the
lost sheep (Matt. 18:10-14, Luke 15:3-7). The basic material has been used
in different ways. In Matthew, the context is church discipline--how a
brother in Christ who has lapsed or who is in danger of doing so is to be
gently and graciously dealt with--and Matthew shapes it accordingly (the
sheep has "gone astray"). In Luke, the parable exemplifies
Jesus' attitude toward sinners and is directed against the critical
Pharisees and scribes who object to Jesus' contact with sinners and
outsiders (the sheep is "lost").
Another example of two passages
used verbatim in Luke and Matthew is Jesus' lament over Jerusalem. In Luke
(13:34-35; the lament over Jerusalem) Jesus refers to how they will cry
"Blessed be the King who comes in the name of the Lord" when he
enters Jerusalem (Lk. 19:38). In Luke, the passage is structured into the
life of Jesus and refers to his triumphal entry into Jerusalem,
"Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord"). In Matthew
(23:37-39) this same lament is placed after the entry into the city (21:9)
and thus refers to the fall of Jerusalem and the Last Judgment.
Apparently, Luke has historicized a primarily eschatological saying.
Since the 1930s, scholars have
increasingly refined sources, postulated sources behind sources, and many
stages of their formation. The premise of the two- (or four-) source
hypothesis is basic and provides information as to literary sources;
further refinement is of interest only to the specialist. Another movement
in synoptic research--and also research including John--is that which
concentrates rather on the treatment of gospels as a whole, formally and
theologically, with patterns or cycles to be investigated. It may be
significant that the latest and best regarded Greek synopsis is that of
the German scholar Kurt Aland, Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum (1964; Synopsis of the Four Gospels, 1972), which includes the Gospel
According to John and, as an appendix, the Gospel
of Thomas, as well as ample quotations from noncanonical gospels and
Jesus' sayings preserved in the Church Fathers.
The Gospel
According to Mark is the second in canonical order of the Gospels
and is both the earliest gospel that survived and the shortest. Probably
contemporaneous with Q, it has no direct connection with it. The Passion
narrative comprises 40 percent of Mark, and, from chapter 8, verse 27,
onward, there is heavy reference forward to the Passion.
Though the author of Mark is
probably unknown, authority is traditionally derived from a supposed
connection with the Apostle Peter, who had transmitted the traditions
before his martyr death under Nero's persecution (c.
64-65). Papias, a 2nd-century bishop in
Asia Minor, is quoted as saying that Mark had been Peter's amanuensis
(secretary) who wrote as he remembered (after Peter's death), though not
in the right order. Because Papias was from the East, perhaps the
Johannine order would have priority, as is the case in the structure of
the Syrian scholar Tatian's Diatesseron (harmony of the Gospels).
Attempts have been made to
identify Mark as the John Mark mentioned in Acts 12 or as the disciple who
fled naked in the garden (Mark 14). A reference to "my son,
Mark," in I Peter is part of the same tradition by which Mark was
related to Peter; thus the Evangelist's apostolic guarantor was Peter.
The setting is a Gentile church.
There is no special interest in problems with Jews and little precision in
stating Jewish views, arguments, or terminology. Full validity is given
the worship of the Gentiles. In further support of a Gentile setting and
Roman provenance is the argument that Mark uses a high percentage of
so-called Latinisms--i.e., Latin
loanwords in Greek for military officers, money, and other such terms.
Similar translations and transliterations, however, have been found in the
Jerusalem Talmud, a compendium of Jewish law, lore, and commentary, which
certainly was not of Roman provenance. The argument from Latinisms must be
weighed against the fact that Latin could be used anywhere in the
widespread Roman Empire. In addition, for the first three centuries the
language of the church of Rome was Greek--so the Gentile addressees might
just as well have been Syrian as Roman. The Latinisms--as well as the
Aramaisms--are rather an indication of the vernacular style of Mark, which
was "improved" by the other Evangelists.
Mark is written in rather crude
and plain Greek, with great realism. Jesus' healing of a blind man is done
in two stages: first the blind man sees men, but they look like trees
walking, and only after further healing activity on Jesus' part is he
restored to see everything clearly. This concrete element was lost in the
rest of the tradition. It is also perhaps possible that this two-stage
healing is a good analogy for understanding Mark theologically: first,
through enigmatic miracles and parables in secret, and only later, after
recognition of Jesus as the Christ, is there a gradual clarification
leading to the empty tomb. In chapter 3, verse 21, those closest to Jesus
call him insane ("he is beside himself"), a statement without
parallel in the other Gospels.
In Mark, some Aramaic is retained,
transliterated into Greek, and then translated--e.g., in the raising of Jairus' daughter (5:41) and in the healing
of the deaf mute (7:34). The well-known abba,
Father, is retained in Mark's account of Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane.
In the two miracle stories, the Aramaic may have been retained to enhance
the miracle by the technique of preserving Jesus' actual words. And a cry
of Jesus on the Cross is given in Aramaized Hebrew. (see also Index: Aramaic language)
The stories in Mark are woven
together with simple stereotyped connectives, such as the use of kai euthus ("and immediately," "straightway"),
which may be thought of as a Semitic style (as a typical simple connective
in the Old Testament narrative style). More likely, however, this
abruptness indicated that the compiler-redactor of Mark has used geography
and people simply as props or scenes to be used as needed to connect the
events in the service of the narrative.
Except for the Passion narrative,
there is little chronological information. References in chapters 13 and
14 appear to presuppose that the Jerusalem Temple (destroyed in AD 70)
still stood (in Matthew and Luke this is no longer the case); but the
context of chapter 13, the "Little Apocalypse," is so interwoven
with eschatological traditions of both the Jewish and Christian
expectations in the 1st century that it cannot serve with certainty as a
historical reference. To some extent, however, chapter 13 does help to
date Mark--the priority of which has already been established from
literary criticism--because it is in good agreement with the traditions
that Mark was written after the martyrdom of Peter. Mark may thus be dated
somewhere after 64 and before 70, when the Jewish war ended.
The organization and schematizing
of Mark reveals its special thrust. It may be roughly divided into three
parts: (1) 1:1-8:26--the Galilean ministry--an account of mighty deeds (an
aretalogy); (2) 8:27-10:52--discussions with his disciples centred on
suffering; and (3) 11:1-16:8--controversies, Passion, death, the empty
tomb, and the expected Parousia in Galilee.
"The beginning of the
Gospel" in the first words of Mark apparently refers to John the
Baptist, who is clearly described as a forerunner of the Messiah who calls
the people to repentance. Jesus never calls himself the Messiah (Christ).
After Jesus' Baptism by John, the heavens open, the Spirit descends, and a
heavenly voice proclaims Jesus as God's beloved son with whom He is well
pleased. Already in this account there is a certain secrecy, because it is
not clear whether the onlookers or only Jesus witnessed or heard. Jesus
was then driven by the Spirit into the wilderness, the place of demons and
struggle, to be tempted by Satan, surrounded by wild beasts (the symbols
of the power of evil and persecution) and ministered to by angels. Here
again he is in secret, alone. The opening of the struggle with Satan is
depicted, and the attendance by angels is a sign of Jesus' success in the
test.
Many references to persecution in
Mark point toward Roman oppression and a martyr church that was
preoccupied with a confrontation with the Satanic power behind the world's
hostility to Jesus and his message. There was stress on the underlying
fact that the church must witness before the authorities in a hostile
world. Much of the martyrological aspect of Mark's account is grounded in
his interpretation of the basic function of Jesus' Passion and death and
its implication that the Christian life is a life of suffering witness.
What Jesus preached in Galilee at
the beginning of his ministry was that the time is fulfilled and the
Kingdom of God is "at hand"; i.e.,
very very near--therefore repent! (1:15). In Matthew this same message
is that of both John the Baptist (3:2) and Jesus (4:17). This sets the
stage; and the miraculous ministry in Galilee about which the followers
are enjoined to secrecy points not so much to Jesus as the wonder-worker
as to the great scheme of pushing back the frontier of Satan. Toward the
end of this first section, the Pharisees ask Jesus for a sign, and he
answers in no uncertain terms that no sign will be given (8:12). In the
Synoptic Gospels the miracles are never called "signs" (as in
John); and no sign is to be given prior to the cosmological,
eschatological signs from heaven that belong to the end: darkening of the
Sun and Moon and extreme tribulations that in postbiblical Jewish
eschatology--the mood of the first Christian century--is a sign of the
coming of the heavenly Son of man to judge the world.
Parables are a revelatory mode of
expression; they are not just illustrations of ideas or principles. Jesus,
the revealer, tells his disciples that the secret of the Kingdom of God is
given to them but that to the outsider everything is in parables (or
riddles) in order that they may
not hear and understand lest they repent and be forgiven (4:10-12). This
mystery and hiddenness is particularly related to the parables about the
coming of the kingdom. Yet, even Jesus' disciples did not recognize him as
the Messiah, although his miracles were such that only a messianic figure
could perform them: forgiving sins on earth, casting out demons, raising
the dead, making the deaf hear and the stammerer (the dumb) speak, and the
blind to see--all fulfillments of Old Testament prophecy concerning the
Messiah. Only the demons, supranatural beings, recognize Jesus. There is a
constant campaign against Satan from the temptation after Jesus' Baptism
until his death on the Cross, and, in each act of healing or exorcism,
there is anticipated the ultimate defeat of Satan and the manifestation of
the power of the new age. In all this Mark stresses the need for secrecy
and Peter's confession of Jesus as the Christ (8:29) is told in Mark as
the opportunity to motivate an acceptance of the admonition "not to
tell" by reference to the necessity of suffering. (see also Index:
New Testament)
This strong emphasis on the
necessity of suffering--in the life of
Jesus and in the life of the disciples--before the hour of victory gives
the best explanation to what scholars have called the secrecy motif in
Mark--i.e., the constant stress on not telling the world about Jesus'
messianic power. (see also Index:
messiah)
According to William
Wrede, a German scholar, the messianic secret motif was a literary
and apologetic device by which the Christological faith of the early
church could be reconciled with the fact that Jesus never claimed to be
the Messiah. According to Wrede, Mark's solution was: Jesus always knew it
but kept it a secret for the inner group. After Peter's confession at
Caesarea Philippi, Jesus began to speak of a suffering
Son of man. The Son of man in Jewish apocalyptic was a glorious,
transcendent, heavenly figure who would come victorious on clouds of glory
to judge the world at the end of time. Suffering was not part of this
picture. E. Sjöberg (1955) has interpreted the messianic secret not
as a literary invention but as an understanding both that the Messiah
would appear without recognition except by those who are chosen and to
whom he reveals himself and that he must suffer. For outsiders, then, he
remains a mystery until the age to come. Even his disciples did not
understand the necessity of suffering. Only in the light of Resurrection
faith--the hope of the Parousia and final victory over Satan--could they
understand that he had to suffer and die to fulfill his mission and how
they, too, must suffer.
Martyrological aspects in Mark can
be noted from the beginning. Already according to 2:20 Jesus' disciples
are not to fast until "when the bridegroom is taken away from them
and then they will fast . . . ." In Mark 8 to 10, there is great
concentration on discussions with the disciples. The theme is suffering,
and repeatedly they are reminded that there is no way of coming to glory
except through suffering. Three Passion
predictions meet either with rejection, fear, or confusion. In the Transfiguration
(9:2-13; in which three disciples--Peter, James, and John--see Jesus
become brighter and Elijah and Moses, two Old Testament prophets, appear)
there is the same emphasis. The tension between future glory and prior
suffering is the more striking when the Transfiguration is recognized as a
Resurrection appearance, placed here in an anticipatory manner. The
disciples are reminded of an association of Elijah with John the Baptist
and his fate. This is also a hidden epiphany (manifestation)--the
triumphal enthroned king closely juxtaposed with suffering and death.
After the third Passion
prediction, in chapter 10, two of the disciples ask for places of honour
when Jesus is glorified. He reminds them that suffering must precede glory
for "The Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to
give his life as a ransom for many." It is worth noting that this is
the only reference to the death of Christ as a ransom or sacrifice but
that Mark does not dwell on the Christological implications, but uses the
saying for ethical purposes. Even so, the Marcan text gives one of the
important building blocks for Christological growth and reflection on the
suffering Son of man.
Just as Jesus' public ministry in
Mark started with the calling of disciples, so the central part of the
Gospel calls them to participate through suffering in his own
confrontation with the power of Satan.
In the last section of the Gospel,
the scene is shifted to Jerusalem, where Jesus is going to die. His entry
is described as triumphal and openly messianic and is accompanied by
acted-out parables in a judgment of a barren fig tree, casting money
changers out of the Temple, and in a parable of a vineyard in which the
beloved son of the owner is killed. There is an increasing conflict and
alienation of the authorities. Chapter 13, the "Little
Apocalypse," made up of a complex arrangement of apocalyptic
traditions, serves as instruction to the disciples and thence to the
church that they must endure through tribulation and persecution until the
end time. Thus, although the setting is Jerusalem, the orientation is
toward Galilee, the place where the Parousia is expected. The Holy
Spirit will come to those who must witness in the situation of
trial before governors and authorities (13:11); in the final
eschatological trials only by God's intervention can anyone endure unless
the time be shortened for the elect. Because this chapter is shaped as a
discourse that precedes the Passion narrative, it serves as a farewell
address, a type of testament including apocalyptic sayings and warnings to
the messianic community at the end of the "narrative" before the
Passion--as do most testament forms (admonitions given before death to
those beloved who will remain behind).
The Cross
is both the high point of the Gospel and its lowest level of abject
humiliation and suffering. A cry of dereliction and agony and the cosmic
sign of the rending of the Temple veil bring from a Gentile centurion
acknowledgment of Jesus as Son of God. The disciples reacted to the
scandal of the Cross with discouragement, although already the scene is
set for a meeting in Galilee. There are no visions of the risen Lord,
however, in the best manuscripts (verses 9-20 are commonly held to be
later additions), and Mark thus remains an open-ended Gospel. The
Resurrection is neither described nor interpreted. Not exultation but
rather involvement in the battle with Satan is the inheritance until the
victorious coming in glory of the Lord--a continual process with the empty
tomb pointing to hope of the final victory and glory, the Parousia in
Galilee. The Gospel ends on the note of expectation. The mood from the
last words of Jesus to the disciples remains: What I say to you, I say to
all: Watch!
Matthew is the first in order of
the four canonical Gospels and is often called the
"ecclesiastical" Gospel, both because it was much used for
selections for pericopes for the church year and because it deals to a
great extent with the life and conduct of the church and its members.
Matthew gave the frame, the basic shape and colour, to the early church's
picture of Jesus. Matthew used almost all of Mark, upon which it is to a
large extent structured, some material peculiar only to Matthew, and
sayings from Q as they serve the needs of the church. This Gospel expands
and enhances the stark description of Jesus from Mark. The fall of
Jerusalem (AD 70) had occurred, and this dates Matthew later than Mark, c. 70-80.
Although there is a Matthew
named among the various lists of Jesus' disciples, more telling is the
fact that the name of Levi, the tax collector who in Mark became a
follower of Jesus, in Matthew is changed to Matthew. It would appear from
this that Matthew was claiming apostolic authority for his Gospel through
this device but that the writer of Matthew is probably anonymous.
The Gospel grew out of a
"school" led by a man with considerable knowledge of Jewish ways
of teaching and interpretation. This is suggested by the many ways in
which Matthew is related to Judaism. It is in some ways the most
"Jewish" Gospel. Striking are 11 "formula quotations"
("This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet . . .")
claiming the fulfillment of Old Testament messianic prophecies.
The outstanding feature of Matthew
is its division into five discourses, or sermons, following narrative
sections with episodes and vignettes that precede and feed into them: (1)
chapters 5-7--the Sermon on the Mount--a sharpened ethic for the Kingdom
and a higher righteousness than that of the Pharisees; (2) chapter 10--a
discourse on mission, witness, and martyrological potential for disciples
with an eschatological context (including material from Mark 13); (3)
chapter 13--parables about the coming of the Kingdom; (4) chapter 18--on
church discipline, harshness toward leaders who lead their flock astray
and more gentleness toward sinning members; and (5) chapters
23-25--concerned with the end time (the Parousia) and watchful waiting for
it, and firmness in faith in God and his Holy Spirit. Each sermon is
preceded by a didactic use of narratives, events, and miracles leading up
to them, many from the Marcan outline. Each of the five sections of
narrative and discourse ends with a similar formula: "now when Jesus
had finished these sayings. . . ." The style suggests a catechism for
Christian behaviour based on the example of Jesus: a handbook for teaching
and administration of the church. This presupposes a teaching and acting
community, a church, in which the Gospel functions. The Greek word ekklesia,
("church") is used in the Gospels only in Matthew (16:18 and
18:17).
The discourses are preceded by
etiological (sources or origins) material of chapters 1-2, in which the
birth narrative relates Jesus' descent (by adoption according to the will
of God) through Joseph into the Davidic royal line. Though a virgin birth
is mentioned, it is not capitalized upon theologically in Matthew. The
story includes a flight into Egypt (recalling a Mosaic tradition). Some
"Semitisms" add to the Jewish flavour, such as calling the
Kingdom of God the Kingdom of the Heaven(s). The name Jesus (Saviour) is
theologically meaningful to Matthew (1:21). Chapter 2 reflects on the
geographical framework of the Messiah's birth and tells how the messianic
baby born in Bethlehem came to dwell in Nazareth. (see also Index:
infancy narrative)
After the five narrative and
discourse units, Matthew continues from chapter 26 on with the Passion
narrative, burial, a Resurrection account, and the appearance of the risen
Lord in Galilee, where he gives the final "great commission,"
with which Matthew ends.
Matthew is not only an original
Greek document, but its addressees are Greek-speaking Gentile Christians.
By the time of the Gospel According to Matthew, there had been a
relatively smooth and mild transition into a Gentile Christian milieu. The
setting could be Syria, but hardly Antioch, where the Pauline mission had
sharpened the theological issues far beyond what seems to be the case in
Matthew. Matthew has no need to argue against the Law, or Torah, as
divisive for the church (as had been the case earlier with Paul in Romans
and Galatians, in which the Law was divisive among Gentile Christians and
Jewish Christians), and, indeed, the Law is upheld in Matthew (5:17-19).
For Matthew, there had already been a separation of Christianity from its
Jewish matrix. When he speaks about the "scribes and the
Pharisees," he thinks of the synagogue "across the street"
from the now primarily Gentile church. Christianity is presented as
superior to Judaism even in regard to the Law and its ethical demands.
The Matthean church is conscious
of its Jewish origins but also of a great difference in that it is
permeated with an eschatological perspective, seeing itself not only as
participating in the suffering of Christ (as in Mark) but also as
functioning even in the face of persecution while patiently--but
eagerly--awaiting the Parousia. The questions of the mission of the church
and the degree of the "coming" of the Kingdom with the person
and coming of Jesus are handled by the Evangelist by a
"timetable" device. The Gospel is arranged so that only after
the Resurrection is the power of the Lord fully manifest as universal and
continuing. Before the Resurrection the disciples are sent nowhere among
the Gentiles but only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel; and the
end time is expected before the mission will have gone through the towns
of Israel. Even in his earthly ministry, however, Jesus proleptically,
with a sort of holy impatience, heals the son of a believing Roman
centurion and responds to the persistent faith of a Canaanite woman--whose
heathen background is stressed even more than her geographical
designation, Syro-Phoenician, given in the parallel in Mark--by healing
her daughter. The Jewish origins of Jesus' teaching and the way the
Evangelist presents them do not deny but push beyond them. The prophecies
are fulfilled, the Law is kept, and the church's mission is finally
universal, partly because the unbelief of the pious Jewish leaders left
the gospel message to the poor, the sick, the sinner, the outcast, and the
Gentile.
In Matthew, because of the use of
Q and Matthew's theological organization, there is stress on Jesus as
teacher, his sharpening or radicalizing of the Law in an eschatological
context; and Jesus is presented not in secret but as an openly proclaimed
Messiah, King, and Judge. In the temptation narrative Jesus refuses
Satan's temptations because they are of the devil, but he himself later in
the Gospel does feed the multitude, and after the Resurrection he claims
all authority in heaven and on earth. By overcoming Satan, Jesus gave
example to his church to stand firm in persecution. Messianic titles are
more used in Matthew than in Mark. In the exorcism of demoniacs, the
demons cry out, calling him Son of God and rebuking him for having come
"before the time" (8:29). Again, this shows that Jesus in his
earthly ministry had power over demons, power belonging only to the
Messiah and the age to come; and he pushed this timetable ahead. Yet, as
in Mark, the miracles are not to be interpreted as signs. When asked for a
sign, the Matthean account gives only the sign of Jonah, an Old Testament
prophet--i.e., the preaching of
the gospel--which in later tradition took on an added interpretation as
presaging the Son of man (Jesus) being three days and nights in the tomb
(12:40, a later addition to Matthew).
Even the antitheses in the Sermon
on the Mount are not new but demonstrate a higher ethic--one that is
sharpened, strict, more immediate because the end time is perceived as
coming soon. People who took this intensification of the Law upon
themselves dared to do it as an example of "messianic license"--i.e.,
to use the ethics of the Kingdom in the present in a church still
under historical ambiguity and in constant struggle with Satan.
At such points the peculiar nature
of Matthew comes into focus. The sharpening of the Law and the messianic
license for the disciples are clearly there. At the same time Matthew
presents the maxims of Jesus as attractive to a wider audience with
Hellenistic tastes: Jesus is the teacher of a superior ethic, beyond
casuistry and particularism. Similarly, in chapter 15, he renders maxims
about food laws as an example of enlightened attitudes, not as rules for
actual behaviour.
According to Matthew, the
"professionally" pious were blind and unhearing, and these
traits led to their replacement by those who are called in Matthew the
"little ones"; in Final Judgment the King-Messiah will judge
according to their response to him who is himself represented as one of
"the least of these." The depiction of Jesus as Lord, King,
Judge, Saviour, Messiah, Son of man, and Son of God (all messianic titles)
is made in a highly pitched eschatological tone. The Lord's Prayer is
presented in this context, and, for example, the "temptation"
(trial, test) of "Lead us not into temptation" is no ordinary
sin but the ordeal before the end time, the coming of the Kingdom for
which the Matthean church prays. Martyrdom, though not to be pursued, can
be endured through the help of the Spirit and the example of Jesus.
The Passion
narrative is forceful and direct. Pilate's
part in sentencing Jesus to be crucified is somewhat modified, and the
guilt of the Jews increased in comparison with the Marcan account. In
Matthew the Resurrection is properly witnessed by more than one male
witness so that there can be no ambiguity as to the meaning of the empty
tomb. The risen Lord directs his disciples to go to Galilee, and the
Gospel According to Matthew ends with a glorious epiphany there and with
Jesus' commission to the disciples--the church--to go to the Gentiles,
because the risen Jesus is Lord of heaven and earth for all time.
Luke is the third in order of the
canonical gospels, which, together with Acts, its continuation, is
dedicated by Luke to the same patron,
"most excellent" Theophilus. Theophilus may have been a Roman
called by a title of high degree because he is an official or out of
respect; or he may have been an exemplification of the Gentile Christian
addressees of the Lucan Gospel. The account in Luke-Acts is for the
purpose of instruction and for establishing reliability by going back to
the apostolic age. The very style of this preface follows the pattern of
Greek historiography, and thus Luke is called the "historical"
Gospel. Historically reliable information cannot be expected, however,
because Luke's sources were not historical; they rather were embedded in
tradition and proclamation. Luke is, however, a historian in structuring
his sources, especially in structuring his chronology into periods to show
how God's plan of salvation was unfolded in world history. That he uses
events and names is secondary to his intention, and their historical
accuracy is of less importance than the schematization by which he shows
Jesus to be the Saviour of the world and the church in its mission (Acts)
to be part of an orderly progress according to God's plan.
The sources of the Gospel are
arranged in the service of its theological thrust with definite
periodization of the narrative. Approximately one-third of Luke is from
Mark (about 60 percent of Mark); 20 percent of Luke is derived from Q
(sometimes arranged with parts of L). Almost 50 percent is from Luke's
special source (L), especially the infancy narratives of John the Baptist
and Jesus, and parables peculiar to Luke (e.g.,
the prodigal son, the good Samaritan, the rich fool). L material is
also interwoven into the Passion narrative. While Matthew structured
similar teaching materials in his five discourses, Luke places them in an
extensive travel account that takes Jesus from Galilee to Judaea via
Jericho to Jerusalem. This is similar to the ways in which Acts is
structured on the principle of bringing the word from Jerusalem to Rome
(see below).
The author has been identified
with Luke, "the beloved physician," Paul's companion on his
journeys, presumably a Gentile (Col. 4:14 and 11; cf. II Tim. 4:11,
Philem. 24). There is no Papias fragment concerning Luke, and only
late-2nd-century traditions claim (somewhat ambiguously) that Paul was the
guarantor of Luke's Gospel traditions. The Muratorian Canon refers to
Luke, the physician, Paul's companion; Irenaeus depicts Luke as a follower
of Paul's gospel. Eusebius has Luke as an Antiochene physician who was
with Paul in order to give the Gospel apostolic authority. References are
often made to Luke's medical language, but there is no evidence of such
language beyond that to which any educated Greek might have been exposed.
Of more import is the fact that in the writings of Luke specifically
Pauline ideas are significantly missing; while Paul speaks of the death of
Christ, Luke speaks rather of the suffering, and there are other differing
and discrepant ideas on Law and eschatology. In short, the author of this
gospel remains unknown.
Luke can be dated c. 80. There is no conjecture about its place of writing, except
that it probably was outside of Palestine because the writer had no
accurate idea of its geography. Luke uses a good literary style of the
Hellenistic Age in terms of syntax. His language has a
"biblical" ring already in its own time because of his use of
the Septuagint style; he is a Greek familiar with the Septuagint, which
was written for Greeks; he seldom uses loanwords and repeatedly improves
Mark's wording. The hymns of chapters 1 and 2 (the Magnificat, beginning
"My soul magnifies the Lord"; the Benedictus, beginning
"Blessed be the Lord God of Israel"; the Nunc Dimittis,
beginning "Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace") and
the birth narratives of John the Baptist and Jesus either came from some
early oral tradition or were consciously modelled on the basis of the
language of the Septuagint. These sections provide insight into the early
Christian community, and the hymns in particular reflect the Old Testament
psalms or the Thanksgiving Psalms from
Qumran. Though on the whole Matthew is the Gospel most used for the
lectionaries, the Christmas story comes from Luke. The "old age"
motif of the birth of John to Elizabeth also recalls the Old Testament
birth of Samuel, the judge. All the material about John
the Baptist, however, is deliberately placed prior to that of
Jesus. When Mary, the mother of Jesus, visits Elizabeth, Jesus'
superiority to John is already established. The Davidic royal tradition is
thus depicted as superior to the priestly tradition.
Writing out of the cultural
tradition of Hellenism and that of Jewish 'anawim
piety--i.e., the piety of
the poor and the humble entertaining messianic expectations--Luke has
"humanized" the portrait of Jesus. Piety and prayer (his own and
that of others) are stressed. Love and compassion for the poor and
despised and hatred of the rich are emphasized, as is Jesus' attitude
toward women, children, and sinners. In the Crucifixion scene, the
discussion between the robbers and Jesus' assurance that one of them would
be with him in Paradise, as well as the words, "Father, into thy
hands I commit my spirit!"--which are in contrast to the cry of
dereliction in Mark and Matthew--all point toward the paradigm of the
truly pious man. Parables peculiar to Luke--among which are those of the
good Samaritan, the importunate friend, the lost coin, and the prodigal
son--have an element of warmth and tenderness. Thus, Luke
"civilizes" the more stark eschatological emphasis of Mark (and
Matthew), leading the way, perhaps, to a lessening of eschatological hopes
in a time in which the imminent Parousia was not expected but pushed into
the distant future.
The interplay between Luke and
Acts reveals Luke's answer to the coming of the Kingdom. Once the church
has the Holy Spirit, the delay of the Parousia has been answered for a
time. Thus, Luke divides history into three periods: (1) the end of the
prophetic era of Israel as a preparation for revelation, with John the
Baptist as the end of the old dispensation; (2) the revelation of Jesus'
ministry as the centre of time--with Satan having departed after the
temptation and, until he once again appears, entering into Judas to betray
Jesus; and (3) the beginning of the period of the church after Jesus'
Passion and Resurrection.
Consistent with this
schematization, John the Baptist's arrest occurs before Jesus' Baptism,
though it is placed later in Mark and Matthew. From the beginning, the
rule of the Spirit is a central theme, important in healing, the ministry,
the message, and the promise of the continued guidance of the Spirit in
the age of the church, pointing toward part two of Luke's work, the book
of Acts of the Apostles, in which Pentecost (the receiving of the Holy
Spirit by 120 disciples gathered together the 50th day after Easter) is a
decisive event.
Just as Luke arranges his Gospel
to show the divine plan of salvation in historical periodization, so he
orders its structure in accordance with a geographical scheme. Chapter 1
(verse 8) of Acts provides the framework: after the coming of the Spirit,
the church will witness in Jerusalem, in all Judaea and Samaria, and then
to the end of the inhabited world. These places foreshadow the church's
mission. The end of the old dispensation takes place in Jerusalem and its
environs. The Resurrection appearances in
Luke are placed in Jerusalem (Mark, Matthew, and John point toward
Galilee). Jerusalem is also the place of
the beginning of the church, and the old holy place thus becomes the
centre of the new holy community. The necessity of suffering
was made clear and interpreted as the fulfillment of prophecy. Rejection
by people from his old home, Nazareth, and by Jewish religious leaders
corresponds to the beginning of the ministry to the Gentiles--to the end
of the earth.
Luke's account of the Crucifixion
heightens the guilt of the Jews, adding a trial and mockery by Herod
Antipas. The Crucifixion in Luke is interpreted as an anticipatory event:
that the Christ must suffer by means of death before entering into glory.
Jesus' death, therefore, is not interpreted in terms of an expiatory
redemptive act. The centurion who saw the event praised God and called
Jesus a righteous man, thus describing his fate as that of a martyr, but
with no special meaning for salvation. The link between past salvation
history and the period of the church is through the Spirit; salvation
history continues in Acts.
John is the last Gospel and, in
many ways, different from the Synoptic Gospels. The question in the
Synoptic Gospels concerns the extent to which the divine reality broke
into history in Jesus' coming, and the answers are given in terms of the
closeness of the new age. John, from the very beginning, presents Jesus in
terms of glory: the Christ, the exalted Lord, mighty from the beginning
and throughout his ministry, pointing to the Cross as his glorification
and a revelation of the glory of the Father. The Resurrection, together
with Jesus' promise to send the Paraclete (the Holy Spirit) as witness,
spokesman, and helper for the church, is a continuation of the glorious
revelation and manifestation (Greek epiphaneia).
Irenaeus calls John the beloved
disciple who wrote the Gospel in Ephesus. Papias mentions John the son of
Zebedee, the disciple, as well as another John, the presbyter, who might
have been at Ephesus. From internal evidence the Gospel was written by a
beloved disciple whose name is unknown. Because both external and internal
evidence are doubtful, a working hypothesis is that John and the Johannine
letters were written and edited somewhere in the East (perhaps Ephesus) as
the product of a "school," or Johannine circle, at the end of
the 1st century. The addressees were Gentile Christians, but there is
accurate knowledge and much reference to Palestine, which might be a
reflection of early Gospel tradition. The Jews are equated with the
opponents of Jesus, and the separation of church and synagogue is
complete, also pointing to a late-1st-century dating. The author of John
knows part of the tradition behind the Synoptic Gospels, but it is
unlikely that he knew them as literary sources. His use of common
tradition is molded to his own style and theology, differing markedly with
the Synoptics in many ways. Yet, John is a significant source of Jesus'
life and ministry, and it does not stand as a "foreign body"
among the Gospels. Confidence in some apostolic traditions behind John is
an organic link with the apostolic witness, and, from beginning to end,
the confidence is anchored in Jesus' words and the disciples'
experience--although much has been changed in redaction. Traces of
eyewitness accounts occur in John's unified Gospel narrative, but they are
interpreted, as is also the case with the other Gospels. Clement
of Alexandria, a late-2nd-century theologian, calls John the
"spiritual gospel" that complements and supplements the
Synoptics. Although the Greek of John is relatively simple, the power
behind it (and its "poetic" translation especially in the King
James Version) makes it a most beautiful writing. Various backgrounds for
John have been suggested: Greek philosophy (especially the Stoic concept
of the logos, or
"word," as immanent reason); the works of Philo of Alexandria,
in which there is an impersonal logos
concept that can not be the object of faith and love; Hermetic
writings, comprising esoteric, magical works from Egypt (2nd-3rd centuries
AD) that contain both Greek and Oriental speculations on monotheistic
religion and the revelation of God; Gnosticism, a 2nd-century religious
movement that emphasized salvation through knowledge and a metaphysical
dualism; Mandaeanism, a form of Gnosticism based on Iranian, Babylonian,
Egyptian, and Jewish sources; and Palestinian Judaism, from which both
Hellenistic and Jewish ideas came. In the last source there is a Wisdom
component and some ideas that possibly come from Qumran, such as a
dualism of good versus evil, truth versus falsehood, and light versus
darkness. Of these backgrounds, perhaps, all have played a part, but the
last appears to fit John best. In the thought world of Jewish Gnosticism,
there is a mythological descending and ascending envoy of God. In the
prologue of John, there is embedded what is proclaimed as a historical
fact: The Logos (Word) took on new meaning in Christ. The Creator of the
world entered anew with creative power. But history and interpretation are
always so inextricably bound together that one cannot be separated from
the other.
In John there is a mixture of long
meditational discourses on definite themes and concrete events recalling
the structure of Matthew (with events plus discourses); and, although the
source problem is complex and research is still grappling with it, there
can be little doubt that John depended on a distinct source for his seven
miracles (the sign [or semeia]
source): (1) turning water to wine at the marriage at Cana; (2) the
healing of an official's son; (3) the healing of a paralytic at the pool
at Bethzatha; (4) the feeding of the multitude; (5) Jesus walking on
water; (6) the cure of one blind from birth; and (7) the raising of
Lazarus from the dead. In chapter 20, verse 30, the purpose of the signs
is stated: "Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the
disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that
you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that
believing you may have life in his name."
A major part of John is in the
form of self-revelatory discourses by Jesus. Some would assign these to a
distinct source, but they may rather be the work of the author.
Jesus' coming
"hour"--the hour of his glorification--could not come about at
any bidding but only according to a divine plan, and Jesus is obedient to
it. The Paraclete is promised to come to the disciples, and it is
necessary that Jesus go away in order that the Paraclete may come to the
church. In John, Christ is depicted as belonging to a higher world, and
his kingship is not of this world. He is said to have come into this world
to his own people, and they rejected him, but this is but another example
of the church's mission having passed both historically and theologically
to the Gentile milieu.
The Christology
in John is heightened: though the Synoptics have Jesus speaking about the
Kingdom, in John, Jesus speaks about himself. This heightened Christology
can be seen in many of the "I am" sayings of Jesus (e.g., "I am the bread of life") in the context of their
discourses and accompanying signs. This type of discourse is a
concentration in terms and titles of the way in which the Messiah openly
reveals his identity by a striking phenomenon: in the Old Testament the
association with "I am" is the revelation of the name of God in
the theophany (manifestation of God) to Moses (Exodus), and this
theophanic interpretation carries over in John. Jesus says "I
am" with regard to his function as Messiah, as divine. These sayings
are self-revelatory pronouncements: (1) bread of life, (2) light of the
world, (3) door of the sheepfold, (4) good shepherd, (5) resurrection and
life, (6) way, truth, and life, and (7) true vine. Such theophanic
expressions are heightened in other sayings: "I and the Father are
one"; "Before Abraham was, I am"; "He who has seen me
has seen the Father"; and Thomas' cry after the Resurrection "My
Lord and my God."
John 14 is a farewell speech, one
of a series, before the Passion. In testament form, it is the bidding of
farewell by one who is dying and giving comfort to those he loves. In
John, however, the eons (ages) overlap. The significance of the farewell
address, thus, is in the teaching that Jesus is God's representative. The
fact that he must go to the Father means that the eschatological era
already started in Jesus' presence as the Christ and will be intensified
at his death and manifested further in the coming of the Spirit to the
church. The times shift; the eschatology--here and still to come--also
shifts but remains on the whole realized in John, although there is still
a tension between the "already" and the "not yet."
John's allegorical thought is
shown by his ending of the miracle of Jesus' walking on the sea. The
frightened disciples took him into their boat, "and immediately the
boat was at the land." This fits the pattern of John's Gospel, namely
that, when Jesus is with his church, the new era has already arrived, and,
where Jesus is, there is the Kingdom fulfilled. Similarly, the raising of
Lazarus in chapter 11 is to demonstrate that the power of the
Resurrection, of the fulfilled "eschaton" (last times), is
already present in Jesus as Christ now, not only in some future time.
Thus, there would appear to be a "realized eschatology" in John;
i.e., the last times are
realized in the person and work of Jesus. The coming of the Spirit, the
Paraclete, however, is still to come, so, even in this most eschatological
Gospel, there is a building up, a crescendo, of glorification. In chapter
12, verse 32, Jesus is depicted as saying, "I, when I am lifted up .
. . will draw all men to myself"--again an exaltation and
glorification that points to the Cross. At the point of death on the
Cross, Jesus' words "It is finished" are interpreted to mean
that part of the "eschaton" is consummated, fulfilled. After the
finding of the empty tomb, there is a Resurrection appearance to the
disciples. This includes the "doubting Thomas" pericope, which
teaches that those who have to depend on the witness of the Gospel are at
no disadvantage.
In an appended chapter, 21, there
is a touching story of the Apostle Peter, who, having denied his Lord
thrice, is three times asked by Jesus if he loves him. Peter affirms his
knowledge that Jesus knows what love is in his heart and is given the care
of the church and a prediction that he himself will be persecuted and
crucified.
The numerous differences between
the Synoptics and John can be summed up thus: in John eternal life is
already present for the believer, while in the Synoptics there is a
waiting for the Parousia for the fulfillment of eschatological
expectations. This Johannine theology and piety has great similarities to
the views that Paul criticizes in I Cor. 15 (see below). The contrast
between Paul and John is even more striking if one accepts the most
plausible theory that John as we have it includes passages (added later)
by which the realized eschatology has been corrected so as to fit better
into the more futuristic eschatology that was stressed in defense against
the Gnostics. John 5:25-28 is such a striking correction.
The Johannine chronology also
differs from the Synoptic. John starts the public ministry with the
casting out of the money changers: the Synoptics have this as the last
event of the earthly ministry leading to Jesus' apprehension. The public
ministry in John occupies two or three years, but the Synoptics telescope
it into one. In John Jesus is crucified on 14 Nisan, the same day that the
Jewish Passover lamb is sacrificed; in the Synoptics Jesus is crucified on
15 Nisan. The difference in the chronologies of the Passion between John
and the Synoptics may be because of the use of a solar calendar in John
and a lunar calendar in the Synoptics. Nevertheless, the actual dating is
of less importance than the fact that John places the Crucifixion at the
time of the Passover sacrifice to emphasize Jesus as the Paschal lamb.
There is no celebration of the Last Supper in John, but the feeding of the
multitude in chapter 6 gives the opportunity for a eucharistic discourse.
Because Jesus is regarded as the Christ from the very beginning of John,
there is no baptism story-- John the Baptist
bears witness to Jesus as the Lamb of God--no temptation, and no demon
exorcisms. Satan is vanquished in the presence of Christ. Each of the four
Gospels presents a different facet of the picture, a different theology.
Although in all the Gospels there is warning about persecution and the
danger of discipleship, each has the retrospective comfort of having
knowledge of the risen Lord who will send the Spirit. In John, however,
there is a triumphant, glorious confidence: "In the world you have
tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world."
As indicated by both its
introduction and its theological plan (see The Gospel According to Luke ), Acts is the second of a
two-volume work compiled by the author of Luke. Both volumes are dedicated
to Theophilus (presumably an imperial official), and its contents are
divided into periods. In the Gospel, Luke describes first the end of the
old dispensation and then the earthly life of Jesus. Near the end of the
Gospel, the stage is set for the next period: the "new
dispensation" of the church as presented in Acts. After the Ascension
of the risen Lord in Jerusalem (Acts 1), there is Pentecost, called
Shavuot in Hebrew (i.e., "the 50th day" after Passover). This Jewish festival
of the revelation of the Law on Mt. Sinai becomes the day when the Spirit
is poured out. For Acts this event marks the beginning of a new era (Acts
2): as in Luke, Jesus, endowed by the Spirit, was led from Nazareth to
Jerusalem, so in Acts, the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost leads the
church from Jerusalem to Rome.
Although the title, Acts of the
Apostles, suggests that the aim of Acts is to give an account of the deeds
of the Apostles, the title actually was a later addition to the work
(about the end of the 2nd century). Acts depicts the shift from Jewish
Christianity to Gentile Christianity as relatively smooth and portrays the
Roman government as regarding the Christian doctrine as harmless. This
book is the earliest "church history," viewing the church as
guided by the Spirit until a future Parousia (coming of the Lord).
Probably written shortly after
Luke (c. 85) as a companion
volume, in no manuscripts or canonical lists is Acts attached to the
Gospel.
Luke edited his history as a
series of accounts, and thus Acts is not history in the sense of accurate
chronology or of continuity of events but in the ancient sense of rhetoric
with an apologetic aim. The author weaves strands of varying traditions
and sources into patterns loosely clustered around a nucleus of past
events viewed from the vantage point of later development.
The structuring of the material by
time and geography may account for the unique way in which both the
Ascension of Christ to heaven (40 days after the Resurrection) and the
outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost (50 days after the Resurrection)
became fixed and dated events.
The redactor (editor) of Acts
composed speeches with primary primitive material within them; about
one-fifth of Acts is composed in this way. This manner of using speeches
was part of the style and purpose of the work and was not unlike that of
other ancient historians such as Josephus, Plutarch, and Tacitus.
In the latter part of Acts are
several sections known as the "we-passages" (e.g., 16:10, 20:5, 21:1,8, 27:1, 28:16) that appear to be extracts
from a travel diary, or narrative. These do not, however, necessarily
point to Luke as a companion of Paul--as
has been commonly assumed--but are rather a stylistic device, such as that
noted particularly in itinerary accounts in other ancient historical works
(e.g., Philostratus' Life of
Apollonius of Tyana). Though the pronoun changes from "they"
to "we," the style, subject matter, and theology do not differ.
That an actual companion of Paul writing about his mission journeys could
be in so much disagreement with Paul (whose theology is evidenced in his
letters) about fundamental issues such as the Law, his apostleship, and
his relationship to the Jerusalem church is hardly conceivable.
Acts was written in relatively
good literary Greek (especially where it addresses the Gentiles), but it
is not consistent, and the Koine (vernacular) Greek of the 1st
century was apparently more natural to the writer. There are some
Semitisms, especially when stressing Jewish backgrounds; thus, Paul is
called Saul in accounts of his conversion experience on Damascus road. In
chapter 17, Paul's speech on the Areopagus, a hill in Athens that
traditionally was the meeting place of the city's council, for an
intellectual Athenian audience is in good Greek, assimilating Gentile
thought patterns, but is expressed in Old Testament universalistic terms.
The outline of Acts can be roughly
divided into two parts: the mission under Peter,
centred in Jerusalem (chapters 1-12); and the missions to the Gentiles all
the way to Rome (cf. chapter 1,
verse 8), under the leadership of Paul (chapters 13-28). The earlier
sections deal with the Jerusalem church under Peter and the gradual spread
of the gospel beyond Jewish limits (in chapters 10-11, for example, Peter
is led by the Spirit to baptize the Roman centurion, Cornelius).
References to Peter are abruptly ended in chapter 12; James, the brother
of the Lord, has become the head of the Jerusalem church, and Philip, a
Greek-speaking missionary, is commanded by the Spirit to baptize an
Ethiopian eunuch.
Paul's missionary journeys are
traditionally separated into three: (1) 13:1-14:28; followed by the
Council of Jerusalem c. AD 49
(15:1-35); (2) 15:36-18:22 with a stop at Antioch; and (3) 18:23-21:14.
After that, Paul is imprisoned and sent to Rome where Acts leaves him
witnessing openly and unhindered in the capital of the Empire. These
journeys may be seen as a part of the writer's "theological
geography," because they form one continuous circuit--with stops on
the way--between the geographical poles of Jerusalem and Rome. After the
Council of Jerusalem c. AD 49, the situation was changed, and Paul became the spokesman
for the whole Christian mission.
The earliest chapters of Acts
contain some primitive traditions important both for any study of the
early church and its preaching and for the church's own development of its
understanding of itself and of Jesus. After Peter healed a lame man, he
made a speech, in chapter 3, in which Jesus is proclaimed as the one
appointed but who is now in heaven and who will come as the Christ at the
Parousia (Second Coming). In his Pentecost speech in chapter 2, Peter
preached that God made Jesus Lord and Christ at his Resurrection.
The titles used for Jesus show
both a preservation of primitive tradition and theology and a clear
differentiation made by the writer between Jesus in his earthly life (in
Luke) and reflection on him in Acts. Christ (Messiah) is consciously used
as the title of Jesus; the title Son of man, used frequently in Luke, is
used only once in Acts, at the death of the martyr Stephen, when he is
granted a vision of the Lord in glory. Early titles, "servant"
and "righteous one," reflect the Old Testament background of
God's "suffering servant." The Hellenistic term saviour (soter)
is used in Acts in chapters 5 and 13. The more primitive Christologies and
titles show not only a flexibility of traditions but also the functional
nature of New Testament Christology.
Acts presents a picture of Paul
that differs from his own description of himself in many of his letters,
both factually and theologically. In Acts, Paul, on his way to Damascus to
persecute the church, is dramatically stopped by a visionary experience of
Jesus and is later instructed. In his letters, however, Paul stated that
he was called by direct revelation of the risen Lord and given a vocation
for which he had been born (recalling the call of an Old Testament
prophet, such as Jeremiah) and was instructed by no man.
The account of Paul's relation to
Judaism in Acts also differs from that in his letters. In Acts, Paul is
presented as having received from the Jerusalem apostolic council the
authority for his mission to the Gentiles as well as their decision--the
so-called apostolic decree (15:20; cf.
15:29)--as to the minimal basis upon which a Gentile could be accepted
into fellowship with Jewish Christians. According to this decree, Gentile
converts to Christianity were to abstain from pollutions of idols (pagan
cults), unchastity, from what is strangled, and from blood (referring to
the Jewish cultic food laws as showing continuity with the old Israel).
Circumcision, however, was not required, an important concession on the
part of the Jewish Christians.
In Acts Paul is not called an
Apostle except in passing, and the impression is given, contrary to Paul's
letters, that he is subordinate to and dependent upon the twelve Apostles.
When Paul entered a new city, he went first to the synagogue. If his
message of the gospel was rejected, he turned to the Gentiles. According
to Paul's missionary practice and theology, the message had first to be
spoken to the Jews as a reminder that Christianity is grounded in
redemptive history; this prevents the connection with the old Israel from
being forgotten. Because most Jews rejected Paul's message, the author
proclaimed that salvation thus passed to the Gentiles.
Roman authorities are depicted as
treating Paul (and other Christians) in a just manner. The author
repeatedly stressed that the Roman authorities did not find fault with the
Christians but rather viewed Christian-Jewish antagonisms merely as one
problem among Jewish factions. While in Corinth, during a conflict with
the Jews, the Roman proconsul of Achaea in Greece, Gallio, refused to hear
the charges brought against Paul because, according to Roman law, they
were extralegal. On a later occasion in Ephesus, during a conflict with
the silversmiths who derived their income from selling statuettes of the
goddess Diana, Paul was protected from local antagonisms and a riot by
Roman authorities. Toward the end of his career, after having been in the
protective custody of the Judaean procurator Felix, Paul was heard by
Felix's successor, Festus, and the Jewish king Agrippa II, and, had he not
appealed to Caesar as a Roman citizen, he could have been set free. He
thus had to go to Rome to be tried, and that is the last that is heard
about him in Acts.
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit is
a dominant theme in Acts, as it is in the Gospel According to Luke. Just
as Jesus started his public ministry in Luke by reading from the Book of
Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me . . ." so also in
Acts the new age of the Spirit began at Pentecost, which is viewed as the
fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel that in the new age the Spirit would
be poured out on all men. That persons from many nations heard in their
own tongues the mighty works of God has been viewed as a reversal of the
Tower of Babel narrative, with languages no more confused and people no
longer scattered.
Although Peter, Stephen, and Paul
are central figures in Acts, the piety of the humbler members of the
church also permeates the book. Church structure and organization, with
apostles, disciples, elders, prophets, and teachers, exhibits great
fluidity. Paul, in bidding farewell at Miletus to the elders from Ephesus,
exhorted them to "take heed . . . to all the flock in which the Holy
Spirit made you guardians (bishops) to feed the church. . . ."
Offices may be conveyed by prayer and laying on of hands but there is
little stress on distinction of office or succession, thus indicating a
very early period in the life of the church.
Because Peter "departs and
goes to another place" and Paul is left under house arrest awaiting
trial, the readers appear to be left in suspense concerning the fates of
these two leaders. The readers, however, probably knew what had happened
to them--i.e., that these
Apostles had eventually been martyred sometime in the 60s before Acts was
written. What is more, the interest in Acts is not in the fates of Peter
and Paul; the gospel has finally reached Rome, the center of the oikoumene
("the inhabited world"), and thus the ending is suitable to
the book--Paul is left "preaching the kingdom of God and teaching
about the Lord Jesus Christ quite openly and unhindered."
In the New Testament canon of 27
books, 21 are called "letters," and even the Revelation to John
starts and ends in letter form. Of the 21, 13 belong to the Pauline
corpus; the Letter to the Hebrews is included in the Pauline corpus in the
East but not, however, in the West. Three letters of this corpus, the
Pastoral Letters, are pseudonymous and thus are not considered here. Of
the remaining 10, the Letters to the Colossians and Ephesians are from the
hand of a later Pauline follower and II Thessalonians is spurious. How
this Pauline corpus was collected and published remains obscure, but
letters as part of Holy Scripture were an early established phenomenon of
Christianity.
The church was poor and
widespread, and, in the early stages, expected an imminent Parousia. More
formal sacred writings were thus superseded in importance by letters (e.g.,
those of bishop Ignatius of Antioch) that answered practical questions
of the early churches.
The letters of Paul, written only
about 20-30 years after the crucifixion, were preserved, collected, and
eventually "published." In general, they answered questions of
churches that he had founded. When all the Pauline Letters as a corpus
were first known is difficult to determine. Because Pauline theology and
some quotations and allusions were certainly known at the end of the 1st
century, the Pauline Letters probably were collected and circulated for
general church use by the end of the 1st century or soon thereafter. A
disciple of Paul, possibly Onesimus, may have used Ephesians as a covering
letter for the whole collection.
The letters Galatians and Romans
both contain an extensive discussion about the Law (Torah) and justification
(in language not found in the other letters) to solve the problem of the
relation of Christianity to Judaism and of the relationship of Jewish
Christians with Gentile Christians. Galatians is older and differs from
Romans in that it deals with Judaizers--i.e.,
Gentile Christians who were infatuated with Jewish ways and championed
Jewish ceremonial law for Gentile Christians. On the other hand, Romans
speaks to the question of the Jews and the Christian faith and church in
God's plan of salvation.
In I and II Corinthians (which may
include fragments of much Corinthian correspondence preserved in a
somewhat haphazard order), there is no preoccupation with either Jews or
Judaizing practices. They deal with a church of Gentile Christians and are
therefore the best evidence of how Paul operated on Gentile territory.
The earliest book in the New
Testament is I Thessalonians, which is concerned with the problem of
eschatology. Though II Thessalonians is obvious in its imitation of the
style of I Thessalonians, it reflects a later time, elaborates on I
Thessalonians, and is thus not viewed as genuine.
Philippians may be a composite
letter in which various themes of Pauline teaching are held together by a
testament form. Thus, it is a compendium without too specific a focus on
the Philippian situation. Philemon, although addressed to a house church,
is uniquely concerned with the fate of a slave being returned to his
master, with the hope that he will be forgiven and be sent back to help
Paul in prison, an example of manumission in Paul's name.
Ephesians appears to be dependent
on Colossians, and both, although using the Pauline style, reflect a time
and imagery sometimes different from and later than Paul's genuine
letters. Ephesians covers the content of Colossians in more compact form
and may be a covering letter for the entire Pauline corpus by a disciple
or other later Paulinist.
The style of Paul's letters is an
admixture of Greek and Jewish form, combining Paul's personal concern with
his official status as Apostle. After his own name, Paul names the
addressees or congregation being addressed and adds "grace and
peace." This is often followed by thanksgivings and intercession that
are significantly adapted to the content and purpose of the letter.
Doctrinal material usually precedes advice or exhortation (parenesis),
and the letters conclude with personal news or admonition and a blessing:
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you." Paul's letters
were probably dictated to an amanuensis (who might be named, for example,
Sosthenes, I Cor. 1:2), and some greetings were written at the end of the
letters in his own hand. They were obviously meant to be read aloud in the
church, however, and thus their style is different from that of purely
personal letters.
Romans differs from all the other
Pauline letters in that it was written to a congregation over which Paul
did not claim apostolic authority. He stressed that he was merely going to
Rome in transit, because it was his principle not to evangelize where
others had worked. Because his apostolic ministry appeared to be completed
in Asia Minor and Greece, Paul planned to go to Spain via Rome, a city
that he had never visited. Before going westward, however, he first had to
go to Jerusalem to deliver to the church there a collection of money.
Because Paul was going to a church
he had not founded, his writing to the Roman Christians offered him an
opportunity to present his theological views in a systematic way, which he
had not done in other letters. Paul reflected on how his special mission
fitted into God's plan for the salvation of mankind, of both Jews and
Gentiles--a theme that reached its climax in chapters 9-11. Chapters 1-8
unfold with great specificity how the coming of Jesus the Messiah has made
it possible for the Gentiles to become heirs to God's promises. His
argument is at first negative, stating that neither Gentile nor Jew could
effect his own salvation. He then shows a
new way in which eventually both can be delivered from the bondage of sin
by being justified--i.e., made
"right with God"--not through acceptance of the Law but by faith
in the crucified Lord.
The theological section (chapters
1-11) is followed (as is often the case in Pauline letters) by ethical
instructions. There is little doubt about the integrity of Romans 1-15;
the letter was written from Corinth c.
56. Chapter 16, however, seems to be a later addition. It contains
numerous salutations to individuals (which is unusual in that Paul had
never been to Rome) and an antinomian (antilegalistic) tone that would be
more appropriate to the situation in Asia Minor. The doxology (16:25-27)
is rhetorical and its vocabulary is not in keeping with that of Paul's
usual thought. Because the doxology occurs in different manuscripts in
varying positions in the course of textual transmission, it is probably
secondary. Chapter 16 may thus preserve portions of a letter or letters
from some other time or to some place other than Rome, possibly Ephesus.
In chapter 1, verses 1-17, there
are greetings and thanksgivings leading to the main theme of the letter:
the gospel is
the power of God for salvation to
every one who has faith (i.e., that
Jesus is the Messiah), to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it
the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is
written, "The righteous shall live by faith."
Paul took this sentence from the
Old Testament Book of Habakkuk, chapter 2, verse 4, not as a principle but
as a prophecy now fulfilled. Thus, the translation should read "will
live" rather than "shall live." This does not refer to
God's faithfulness but rather to the believer's trust. Justification by
faith is not, however, the answer to the question of man, plagued by
conscience, about his salvation nor is it deep theology. It is rather an
argument totally grounded in the problem of the relationship of Jews and
Gentiles--i.e., how it will be
possible for the Gentiles to be fellow heirs with Jews and how both Jews
and Gentiles can be members of the church. In chapters 2-3 both Gentiles
and Jews are demonstrated to have fallen short of the glory of God and to
be under condemnation. A turning point, however, is emphasized in chapter
3: "But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from
law. . . ." Justification is a gift through Jesus Christ and his
expiating death for the salvation and vindication of all who believe in
him. Because all this is through Christ and not by works of the Law,
salvation is equally available to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews. For
both, the means is the same: faith in Jesus the Christ.
The central problem after chapter
8, which describes the glory of the new dispensation in Christ and the
Spirit (presented in chapters 9-11), centres on the mystery revealed to
Paul, namely, that the Gentiles should be incorporated and be fellow heirs
with the Jews. This is what Paul yearned for with respect to his fellow
Jews. What makes it equally possible for Jew or Gentile to come to Christ
is justification by faith, with the Law viewed as obsolete because Christ
is the end of the Law (chapter 10, verse 4). Thus, there are, in effect,
no distinctions between Gentile and Jew. Paul viewed his ministry as
having made possible the inclusion of the Gentiles; as an apostle to the
Gentiles he never urged them to carry on a mission to the Jews. He
envisaged the Jewish acceptance of Christ as a mystery beyond human
planning and effort, a divine event that will be the climax of history.
The ethical section (12:1-15:13)
has no special reference to a situation in Rome. A close analysis shows
that Paul here repeats thoughts and admonitions that are more specific in
other letters. A metaphor of the church as a body (12:5), for example, is
stylized and compressed as compared with the fuller use of the same in I
Corinthians, chapter 12, and the pattern of weakness and strength in
matters of food is best understood in the light of the fuller exposition
in I Corinthians, chapters 8 and 10.
This letter is part of Paul's
correspondence with the Corinthian congregation founded by him and
composed of Gentile Christians. The problems of Galatians and Romans,
written to Christians with Jewish and Roman legal concepts, are different
from those of I Corinthians, and, thus, the justification language is
absent.
Except for the brief communication
with Philemon (see below), I Corinthians is the most specifically
practical, situation-oriented of Paul's letters. No other Pauline letter
is so directly devoted to the consideration of practical and theological
problems, many of them apparently communicated by the congregation through
correspondence or by delegations. The letter, therefore, does not tend to
stand as a unit and it is not uniform in its treatment of the varying
situations.
Literary criticism--or
redaction--has traditionally split the letter into several fragments with
a presumed historical development within a relatively short period in the
Corinthian church. Paul's reference to a previous letter of his in chapter
5, verse 9, has been the object of scholarly efforts to restore the
earlier letter. The fragmentary and not-too-uniform nature of both I and
II Corinthians, however, precludes much probability of success in such
searches.
Writing from Ephesus c. 53 or 54 upon hearing from a certain Chloe's people that the
church was rent by party factions, Paul tried to bring unity to the
congregation. Whether these factions actually represented outside
interference (e.g., Cephas
[Peter], Apollos, or others) or were factions of the congregation under
the influence of a widespread heresy of the time is a question perhaps
best answered by the fact that the factions do not come up again after I
Corinthians, chapter 1, and that I Corinthians, chapter 3, reduces the
factions to Apollos and Paul, who claims he is head of no party. The
Christ "party"--i.e., those who claim no party at all--(1:12; cf. 3:23) may be the only "party" Paul advocated because
Christ is not divided. Paul warned that Christians should not fashion
themselves into parties under various leaders, because all these leaders
are servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God through whom
Christians come to belief. The church is not a society with competitive
philosophical schools.
The letter is a response to
difficulties caused or increased by a relatively strong group in Corinth
that may be described as "enthusiasts." This group of
enthusiasts may have been proto-Gnostics (early religious dualists not yet
organized into definite sects). The Corinthian enthusiasts did, however,
have some characteristics that would later be found in 2nd-3rd-century
Gnosticism: a belief in salvation through spiritual knowledge or wisdom
communicated by a revealer (not a redeemer); an otherworldliness that
could lead either to licentiousness (scorn) or asceticism (withdrawal);
and a basically dualist and deliberately syncretistic system of beliefs
using the mythical speculations and magical ideas of their time.
The Corinthian problems might well
be traced to such enthusiasts. Their gnosis
("esoteric knowledge") was a religious knowledge that gave
them the feeling of superiority over more pedestrian Christians. This gnosis Paul identified as false wisdom. In chapter 14 Paul describes the
views and related practices of those maintaining that they have spiritual
gifts of inspiration, especially speaking in tongues (glossolalia) and gnosis.
Such enthusiasts prized eloquent or secret wisdom; they sought a revealer
who had come into the world hidden from the evil powers and known only to
those, the pneumatikoi, or the spiritual elite, who recognize him; and they
tolerated gross immorality by claiming anything to be lawful for them
(especially their slogan quoted by Paul: "for me all things are
lawful"). These enthusiasts also rejected marriage because it
furthered the propagation of the present evil world; they claimed to
possess knowledge that made them indifferent to the world; and they
believed that their salvation was guaranteed by ritual and rites. Though
they prized spiritual gifts, they scorned the ordinary Christian services
for the community; and they did not believe in a future resurrection of
the dead, which in their system had no place or was nonsense.
The main Pauline answer (e.g.,
as emphasized in chapter 13) was that love, namely concern for the
building up of the community, surpasses all knowledge or spiritual gifts
and that love is a corrective because it demands service, edification (i.e.,
building up) of the church, and involves Christians
with one another. Those Corinthians whom Paul viewed as opponents
emphasized gnosis over against
love. The discussion of the resurrection in chapter 15 sheds further light
on this. The opponents did not deny the Resurrection of Jesus Christ about
which there was common agreement, but rather they debated about the future
resurrection of Christians from the dead. Their view was perhaps similar
to that reported as heresy in II Timothy, chapter 2, verse 18--i.e.,
the believer already had eternal life and that a future resurrection
of the body was meaningless. In holding such a view, Paul's opponents
claimed they were faithful to the received kerygma (proclamation).
Another indication that some
Corinthians had no disagreement with tradition but interpreted it too
enthusiastically is found in I Corinthians, chapter 11. The liturgical
formula pertaining to the Lord's Supper is sound:
The Lord Jesus on the night when
he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and
said "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of
me." In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This
cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in
remembrance of me." (11:23-25.)
In a discussion of the sacraments
in chapter 10, however, the enthusiasts probably believed in a rather
magical efficacy of Baptism and the Eucharist, though Paul qualified such
an interpretation and took exception to it. The misunderstanding of the
enthusiasts points to a special reinterpretation of Scripture and
tradition (which resembles that of the 1st-century Jewish philosopher
Philo and also the later Gnostics)--taking Scripture, tradition, and
liturgical practices as effectively bringing about an otherworldly,
spiritual reality immediately for those who really understand (i.e.,
those who have gnosis). Paul
also criticized these spiritualists for their disregard of the poor
members of the congregation, who found no food left when they came from
their work.
Discussions about Christian and
apostolic freedom (in chapters 5, 6, 7, 9, and 11) and also a discussion
about being free to eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols and
leftovers of pagan sacrifices sold in the marketplace were caused by
conflicts with the enthusiasts who paraded their spiritual freedom,
strength, and superiority at the expense of their weaker brothers in the
faith, who were not ready for this freedom. A shift in the discussion in
chapter 12 (the body and its members are equal in Christ)--from a very
speculative idea of the body of Christ to a more metaphorical one that is
reminiscent of Stoic philosophical ideas about society as an organism--can
best be understood if it is assumed that the enthusiasts actually pressed
for a mythical understanding of Christianity, in which one became
literally incorporated into Christ, otherworldly, and divine. Paul added
some qualifications that brought the church into concrete everyday life
and even provided a source of political reality. A somewhat drastic
understanding of spiritual gifts that was presupposed and criticized by
Paul in chapters 12-14 fits well into such a pattern.
Permeating all the discussion of
individual topics in I Corinthians is the theme of Christian unity and
edification, a topic introduced and underscored in the preface and
thanksgiving of this letter and in its introduction. Such unity is
defended as being very inclusive, real, and concrete--as over against the
enthusiastic attempt to speak in terms of spiritual reality and
achievement, in which the true life of the spirit is only for the few (i.e.,
the Gnostic elitists). (see also Index:
ecumenism)
Paul viewed the necessity of unity
in the wisdom of God as it is evinced in the scandal of the cross. In
order to deflate the exalted and to make foolish the destructive
(speculative) wisdom established by men, God showed his wisdom in the
"foolishness" of Jesus' crucifixion. Here, although hidden, is
God's true wisdom. The opponents hailed their ideal teachers as bringers
of hidden wisdom. To this Paul said that it is Christ who is the Wisdom.
In chapters 5 and 6 Paul dealt
with certain ethical scandals and difficulties in the congregation: incest
and fornication; the use of pagan courts for settling disputes among
Christians; traffic with prostitutes--all for the demonstration of
Christian "freedom." These wrongs might have been the direct or
indirect consequences of the spiritual "powers" of the
enthusiasts. According to Paul, however, such immorality was impossible
for the Christian because of the concreteness of his allegiance to Christ
and of inspiration (with the idea of the body as the temple of the Holy
Spirit).
Because Paul expected an imminent
Parousia (Second Coming of Christ), he suggested (chapter 7) the unmarried
state as the preferable one, but conceded that marriage can prevent
fornication. Paul even advised against breaking up mixed marriages between
baptized Christians (both Jews and Gentiles) and unbaptized Gentiles. He
advocated the practice of ascetics living together as "virgins,"
male and female, although he took this as a strain that is hard to bear
and thus suggested marriage in unbearable cases. Not only the imminence of
the Parousia but also radical change ("the form of this world is
passing away") caused Paul, on the whole, to affirm the social status
quo--whether it concern circumcision, slavery, or other matters. Everybody
is advised to remain--for the short time ahead--in the state in which he
finds himself. Such eschatological fervour caused Paul to argue against
any worldly anxiety, fear, or worries stemming from them. This is
reflected in the ethical criterion of possessing things as though one did
not have them.
In chapter 9, Paul used his own
conduct, in contrast to that of the enthusiasts who flaunted their freedom
in such a way that it often had destructive influences, as a paradigm for
an understanding of responsible freedom. Here he showed by various
examples from his own life-style that he had never made use of his
rightful privileges to the fullest, that he has, rather, been guided by
what serves the weaker brothers and sisters. It is in this sense that he
subdued his body and that he urged the spiritual "snobs" to
imitate him.
In chapters 11-14, Paul turned to
problems of corporate worship. Paul did not question the right and ability
of prophetically gifted women to make inspired statements in Christian
worship, but he pointed out that women need protection. Arguments about a
veil or long hair for a woman are in the context of the church's worship
before God himself, in which the congregation worships in the presence of
the angels. Paul stressed the subordination of women in chapters 11 and
14; they are forbidden to speak in worship. In chapter 14 Paul stated
(perhaps) a general principle that would allow for exceptions in cases of
clear prophetic inspiration of women (cf.
however, Galatians, chapter 3, verse 28).
In discussion of proper restraint
and mutual regard in celebrating the Lord's Supper,
Paul seemed to presuppose a prior common meal (possibly an agape meal) as
part of the eucharistic celebration. This common meal, however, had
apparently been devalued because of the interest of the enthusiasts in the
sacrament itself. As a result, the communal aspect showed up social
differences in the community; and some brought ample food, whereas others,
of lower station, had nothing. In view of this, Paul again used the
criterion of love and suggested that people eat their meal at home and
then come together, being sensitive to each other's needs. The Lord's
Supper would then be what it is, a proclamation of the death of Christ in
anticipation of his return; mutual and corporate concern and
responsibility thus become a part of the Eucharist.
Similarly, mutual edification and
love are linked in chapter 13 as the appropriate centre of the discussion
of spiritual gifts, manifested particularly in public worship (chapter
14).
The emphasis on the communal
aspect of the church is continued in chapter 15. Paul did not dwell on his
own vision of Christ nor on his role in founding the church at Corinth but
rather argued for the resurrection of all as a future experience, not as
though each person had already had this experience. Paul viewed the
resurrection as a collective phenomenon in the expectation of an end-time
resurrection from the dead, with Christ as the first fruits of those who
have died.
That love is to extend beyond the
immediate community and be shared with all the saints (members of the
church) is demonstrated in chapter 16, the closing chapter, by the
collection for the Jerusalem church. The keynote might be: "Let all
that you do be done in love." The final passage--including the cry:
"Our Lord, come!"--may reflect or repeat a eucharistic formula
or setting. (see also Index: Christianity)
This letter, as is I Corinthians,
is composed of a collection of fragments of Paul's correspondence with the
Corinthians about a year later (i.e.,
c. 55) from Macedonia. The diversity of I Corinthians was caused by
the variety of problems discussed, but the diversity of II Corinthians was
the result of a reflection of the underlying, rather turbulent history of
Paul and his congregation. A pattern of fragments that make up II
Corinthians can be understood in terms of a development that can be
reconstructed. Gaps and editorial seams in this pattern are more
recognizable and abrupt than those in I Corinthians, and a more original
order for II Corinthians can be restored by fitting together blocks of
material that obviously belong with one another in terms of context and
unity of thought.
Though historical settings can be
reconstructed with a high degree of validity to account for the fragments
of II Corinthians, later editorial processes account for the order in
which the fragments appear in the letter as it is now written. Based on
both internal and external evidence, II Corinthians probably was later
than I Corinthians, which was written after Paul's first trip to Corinth.
Not long before the composition of II Corinthians, Paul was in mortal
danger in Asia and travelled to Macedonia, where he remained.
New apostles and heresies had
apparently invaded the Corinthian congregation and Paul sent his companion
Timothy to try to bring them back to the true gospel as Paul had preached
it. This mission was apparently unsuccessful, and Paul, in chapters 2 to
7, wrote to the church with a defense of his apostolic office, still
counting on the loyalty of the Corinthians. His letter apparently did not
change things, and there is some dispute as to whether Paul himself made
an intermediate second visit to Corinth that was abruptly cut short by
conflict with a member of the Corinthian church who violently opposed him.
He considered such a second visit, but, according to chapter 2, verse 4,
and chapters 10 to 13, he sent Titus to
Corinth with a strongly polemical "letter of tears" and
anxiously awaited his return, going from Troas to Macedonia to meet him.
Paul had almost been in despair
over the Corinthians, but Titus and the letter seemed to have restored the
Corinthian church to order. Titus and some of his companions were then
sent to take up the collection for the church at Jerusalem, a sign of
Christian mutual love and unity. He took with him Paul's "letter of
reconciliation," which was written from Macedonia and which can be
noted in chapter 1, verse 1, to chapter 2, verse 3; chapter 7, verses 5
and 6; and chapter 8. In chapter 8 the Macedonians are held up as an
example of generosity. A similar section regarding the collection is in
chapter 9, and the Achaeans (and probably their capital city, Corinth)
were cited as an example to the Macedonians for generous giving. This was
probably sent shortly before Paul's third (and last) visit to Corinth.
From Corinth Paul wrote to the Roman church a letter that shows no sign of
difficulties with the Corinthians and that presumed the conveying of the
collection to Jerusalem.
If the Corinthian controversy had
been smoothed out, a question is raised as to why II Corinthians ends in
the "letter of tears" rather than in the "letter of
reconciliation." This may be understood if the literary order of the
several sections was arranged by a redactor who collected the fragments
probably in the last decade of the 1st century. The redactor may have used
a "form" amply illustrated in Christian writings of the late 1st
and early 2nd century; one of the end-time expectations was that
"false prophets would show signs and wonders to lead the elect
astray," and chapters 10-13 deal with "false prophets" and
"servants of Satan." Such warnings were placed at the end of
writings of that time.
Several abrupt editorial seams
that resulted from an arrangement of a letter of reconciliation, an
apology on the nature of Paul's apostolic authority, a polemic against
opponents, two letters concerning the collection, and a possible
non-Pauline insertion (in chapter 6, verse 14, to chapter 7, verse 1) can
thus be understood. The reconciliation of chapters 1 and 7 is hardly in
agreement with Paul's elaborate defense of his ministry in chapter 2. Even
more jarring to such a reconciliation is the polemic of chapters 10-13.
These latter chapters are viewed as a substantial fragment of Paul's
"letter of tears," after which the Corinthians disengaged
themselves from outside agitators and caused them to leave. Such
opponents, who are mentioned in chapter 11, verse 4, and who tried to
attract the congregation away from Paul's ideas, were probably Hellenized
Jewish Christians from Palestine.
The outside agitators (who
provoked the response of chapters 10-13) probably were Christians who
imitated the Hellenistic-Jewish missionaries and had developed an
elaborate propagandizing missionary theology and practices analogous to
the missionary movements in the pagan world. Their goal was to prove the
spiritual power of their own religion in conscious and aggressive
competition with other religions, thus hoping to attract others and
convert them to Christianity.
The major criteria for successful
competition were affinity or identity with the ancient Mosaic traditions
and objective manifestations of the current power of that tradition in the
form of miraculous demonstrations. The link between the ancient traditions
and the current careers of the itinerant missionaries was the record of
Jesus as understood from the miracle stories of the Gospels--a
demonstrated epiphany of the powers of the Spirit. These missionaries were
seen as "divine men," as were the heroes of old. Their miracles
were to be imitated. Such traditions about Jesus as a wonder-worker might
have been used by Paul's opponents, with over-emphasis on such works as
criteria of power.
That which Paul attacks as
"bragging" or "boasting," particularly the preaching
of the so-called "super-apostles," in chapter 11, verse 5, was
probably understood by his opponents as no more than faithful testimony
to, and a demonstration of, the spiritual powers of tradition as they
perceived it in their own experiences. To them faithfulness to Jesus was
primarily the acknowledgment of Jesus' being the most powerful
"divine man" and, secondarily, their establishment and
maintenance of relationship to him through imitation in their powerful
demonstrations and wondrous acts.
Paul (who in I Corinthians,
chapter 1, had advocated the dialectic of the cross) would thus be
discredited by miracle-working men like the opponents in II Corinthians.
Paul's credibility and validity as an Apostle came into question along
with his Christology, which was a "theology of the cross."
Confronted with the challenge of the powerful "super-apostles,"
Paul's message could be distorted as hiding his own inability or
incapacity--an apostle who dared not take money because, being an
ineffective speaker and a weak person, he had nothing for which to ask
payment. His defense was Paul's first attempt to deal with these new
problems caused by invading opponents who had undercut his authority.
Paul centred his defense around
the issue most debated; true apostleship and his own sufficiency. Because
he derived his ministry from God himself as a servant preaching not
himself but Jesus Christ as Lord, no "peddler of God's word or
selling or recommendation is called for, but only the living record--i.e.,
the people brought to believe in Christ. Paul quickly alluded to his
own weakness and "carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that
the life of Jesus may also be manifested . . ." (chapter 4, verse
10). Paul found his weakness one of the things that made him one with the
Lord and that made his ministry a true ministry of Jesus Christ, who was
crucified through weakness but lives by the power of God--as does his true
apostle. This weakness seems to refer to a physical handicap of Paul's
(epilepsy?), the "thorn in the flesh" that interfered with his
travel plans.
Paul placed his own apparent
weakness, in which he proclaimed that God had manifested himself, against
the boastings of the "super-apostles." Unlike them, he strikes a
non-heroic note. It is confidence in the power of Jesus' Resurrection
that produces glory for the Gospel message and final (eschatological)
reward and recognition for the Apostle.
Though Paul may himself sound
"enthusiastic," his statements are made with a realistic
assessment of the world, as demonstrated not least in the sufferings of
Paul himself. Emphasis on God's act of grace, however, makes Paul urge the
Corinthians to accept him and to reach out to the promise of God's
salvation even in the present.
Paul's defense of his apostleship
and a following visit did not succeed. Agitation from outside opponents
apparently increased and solidified. The "letter of tears"
reflects this situation. Paul revealed himself personally, coming close to
autobiographical statements. Paul spoke of himself only with theological
purpose and as part of his tactical argument with his opponents concerning
attitudes and conduct. His point was that a style of life is a reflection
of an underlying theology. He demonstrated to his opponents that his work
for the church is constructive, and that though he boasted of his
ministry, he boasted only "of the Lord," of the work Christ had
done through him.
In his so-called fool's speech, in
which he blatantly asked the Corinthians to "bear with me in a little
foolishness," Paul adopted the technique of the mime of the street
theatres of his times, consciously drawing on the laughter and mockery of
his audience, but then he successfully reversed the scene and made his
audience realize that in laughing at him they mocked themselves, thus
revealing the perversion of their criteria of superiority. Paul used
metaphorical images, identifying the congregation with the bride, Jesus as
the bridegroom, himself as the best man, and Satan (the opponents) as the
adulterer. The plot assumed a successful seduction, and the best man who
recommended the bride stands disproven. Paul then pretended to try to
shift this balance by bragging about himself and scolding both seducers
and the seduced. He accepted no inferiority to the opponents--the seducers
("super-apostles")--and claimed that they preached another
Christ than the true Christ and brought another spirit and that he would
accept no support from the church that was led astray.
In chapter 11, Paul continued to
boast "as a fool," claiming to have all the qualifications of
his opponents, but that he was more truly a representative of Christ. This
he explained ever more intensely in an ironic and almost sarcastic trend
in the dialectic of the so-called fool's speech. He boasted not of
strength but of weakness--though he could boast of ecstatic experience as
his opponents had--and that he had learned through bitter experience
(possibly a chronic illness) that he must not exalt himself, but rather
that he has been told through a word of Christ that his power is made
perfect in weakness. In the enumeration of his qualifications, Paul has
jested "as a fool" concerning his suffering, visions, miraculous
heavenly travels, and oracles. Yet, it is clear that through Christ these
modes of experience and communication have been transformed. Thus, Paul
establishes that he is a true apostle and not inferior to the
"super-apostles."
Paul expressed his intention of
visiting the congregation and told them that he desired to come not as a
judge but as a father. Neither he nor Titus had or would deceive or take
advantage of them. At this, the end of the "letter of tears,"
Paul announced his possible third visit and revealed a definite fear that
he might be forced to act as a judge of the congregation, which was
increasingly falling away from the apostolic gospel. Paul, however, still
hoped that reconciliation might be accomplished, that truth would prevail,
and that his authority could be used for building up rather than
destruction. He exhorted the community to keep peace and blessed them.
The "letter of
reconciliation," found in chapters 1, 2, and 7, assumed that Titus
had returned with good news of the Corinthians, their eagerness to prove
that they had amended their ways. Paul responded with a report of the
consolation this had brought him and of the grave danger he had escaped
(in prison in Ephesus). He exhorted the church at Corinth to remember the
Christian message in love--of Paul for them and of the congregation for
him. The shadow between Paul and the Corinthians had been dispersed, and
Paul reaffirmed his constant and continuous concern for them and God's
love in Christ manifest in Baptism and the gift of the Spirit. Paul
interceded for a man who had offended him and forgave him. Paul then told
the Corinthians of his eagerness for Titus' news of them that occasioned
his special trip to Macedonia. This news brought joy and consolation;
therefore, Paul urged the Corinthians again to forgive the man who had
offended him.
Fragments of two letters
concerning the collection for Jerusalem, a sign of unity of the church
(chapter 8 especially being close to the "letter of
reconciliation" and chapter 9, a fragment probably later than chapter
8), are signs that Paul's relation to the Corinthians again became close
and joyful. The collection was a bond of mutual and reciprocal
relationship that reached its climax in thanksgiving and praise of God.
For the whole church he exclaimed: "Thanks be to God for His
inexpressible gift!"
Paul's Letter to the Galatians is
a forceful and passionate letter dealing with a very specific question:
the relation of Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians in the church,
the problem of justification through faith not works of the Law, and
freedom in Christ. Paul probably wrote from Ephesus c.
53-54 to a church he had founded in the territory of Galatia in Asia
Minor.
This congregation had been
"unsettled" since his last visit to Galatia. Gentile Christians,
Judaizers who were fascinated with Jewish customs and festivals and who
asserted that Gentiles must adhere to the Law, the Torah,
had attempted to undermine Paul's message and effectiveness. The Judaizers
believed that Gentile Christians should be circumcised and keep the Jewish
food laws. There were probably some Jewish Christians in this church, but
the majority were Gentile Christians. Paul attacked the Judaizers
vigorously by defending his own call and the independence of the
revelations of his personal apostolate. This is supported by reports of
agreement between him and the Jerusalem church and by argument from
Scripture. In these, he proved that the Law was given only a limited role
in the total history of salvation. The letter ends with Paul pointing out
that through the Spirit the Christian in faith is admonished to good
behaviour and brotherly love. He admonishes faith in the cross of Christ,
wishes peace upon his followers, and prays for mercy on Israel.
This Pauline letter is the only
one without either kindly ingression, thanksgiving, or personal greetings
appended to the final blessing. It is very specific in dealing with the
problems concerned. In chapter 1, an account of Paul's call, he defended
his apostolic office, having received it directly from God in the
revelation of Christ. He provided autobiographical data concerning his
former persecution of the church and zeal in his Jewish tradition. He
referred to his call on the model of that of the Old Testament prophets
called by God in order that they may serve him and said that his mission
had been revealed to him to be the apostle to the Gentiles. Paul viewed
himself as being chosen to be an instrument to take the message of God and
Christ to the Gentiles, a call rather than a "conversion
experience." Handpicked as God's servant (slave), he received a
revelation--not from men but by secret knowledge from God--that the
Gentiles will come to the Christian faith without the Law, the Torah of
the Jews. He himself could bear the Law, but he was told that the Gentiles
do not need the Law in order to be accounted righteous. The conviction
that the Gentiles stand equal before God was reinforced by his visit to
James, Cephas (Peter), and John in Jerusalem, who confirmed his mission,
enjoining him only to remember the poor (probably reference to the
Jerusalem collection). Faith in Christ has thus superseded righteousness
of works, and the Law is no longer needed.
The freedom of the gospel is the
theme developed in chapters 3-4 in a series of allegorical-typological
interpretations based on the Law. Paul first recalled the covenant promise
to Abraham: that he "believed God and it was reckoned to him as
righteousness" and that through Abraham all nations would be blessed.
In chapter 3 there is a complex
line of thought: Christ has redeemed men from the curse of the Law by
becoming a "curse" for men; Christ has taken away this curse by
accepting it himself in order that all men by faith might receive the
Spirit that was promised. But the promise had already been made to Abraham
and his seed (singular), the Messiah, Christ; the Law had come only 430
years later, a sign that it is not eternal. In this chapter, Paul
constructed arguments against the Law. First, the Law was added because of
transgressions committed first by the people who caused Moses to shatter
the first tablets of the Law and was thus not ultimate but rather
time-bound, limited, and tainted by the evil reality it had to counteract;
secondly, the Law was given only for a restricted time, from Moses
"till the offspring should come to whom the promise had been
made" (i.e., Christ);
thirdly, the Law came "ordained by angels through an
intermediary," who is not God and thus is neither something glorious
in itself nor the absolute manifestation of the salvation of God. Paul
expanded on the Law in the image of a paidagogos
(instructor or custodian). Such a custodian is now not needed and
served only as a restraint so that in God's timetable of salvation the
Gentiles could be delivered after the Law has been "outgrown."
Paul then showed the reasoning behind his statement that the Law was
obsolete: in Christ (i.e., in the church) there are no divisions between Greek and Jew,
slave or free, male or female--all divisions or partitions are broken
down.
Paul's arguments are bold. He even
claimed that, as heirs through Christ, men were no longer bound under the
elemental powers of the universe, which were apprehended as negative, as
was the Law, in Paul's mind. In chapter 4 the Judaizers are said to keep
themselves, like many Greeks, under astrological powers--not unlike the
Jewish calendar of feasts--which kept man, according to Paul, enslaved by
cosmic order. But to those free from the Law and possessing the Spirit,
sonship and inheritance can come by adoption. Thus, Paul was negative in
Galatians concerning the Law, and taught that freedom from it brings unity
and the fruits of the Spirit.
In chapters 5-6 Paul listed
catalogs of virtues and vices, fruits of the Spirit or the flesh, and
stressed mutual forgiveness in the church. This is an exhortatory section
that leads to the closing of the letter in Paul's own hand and to his
stress on seeing his only glory in the cross of Christ.
The authenticity of Ephesians as a
genuinely Pauline epistle has been doubted since the time of the Dutch
Humanist Erasmus in the 16th century. It is most reasonable to consider it
as "deutero-Pauline"--i.e.,
in the tradition of Paul but not written by him. The problem of
Ephesians cannot be solved apart from that of Colossians, because many
similarities are noted in the style and development of Pauline thought
into cosmic imagery; yet they treat different problems. In both, the
heritage of Paul is preserved by a "Paulinist," and it is on
this basis that Ephesians and Colossians were accepted into the canon.
Both are "captivity epistles," ostensibly written by Paul from
prison. Of the 155 verses in Ephesians, 73 have verbal parallels with
Colossians; and when parallels to genuine Pauline letters are added, 85
percent of Ephesians is duplicated elsewhere. It would appear that
Ephesians is dependent on an earlier, more specifically oriented
Colossians, and it may be that Ephesians uses, combines, and condenses the
material of Colossians for its own needs.
Though Colossians is directed
explicitly and strongly against a particular Judaizing proto-Gnostic
heresy--i.e., an incipient form
of a religious dualistic system that emerged as a very attractive
heretical movement in the 2nd century--Ephesians is not polemically
oriented and is not clearly connected to a particular congregation, its
problem, or its individuals. Though Ephesians uses a letter style with an
introduction, greeting, and closing benediction, the only person mentioned
in it is Tychicus, already mentioned in the same context in Colossians.
The doctrinal section shows that the whole world--not only the Jews--is in
a cosmic sense subjected to Christ, and Jew and Gentile are reconciled and
united through him. This is the mystery of God's plan revealed to the
church through Paul but expanded in scope. All are saved and reconciled
through Christ, who has made both Jew and Gentile one and has "broken
down the dividing wall of hostility," bringing peace and unity. The
author of Ephesians continues Pauline language and makes it more Pauline
than Paul himself.
After the address--which,
according to the best manuscripts, lacks a reference to Ephesus--there is
a hymn of praise to God in terms of a cosmic plan of redemption. Through
the ascended Christ, salvation is for all, and he is the head of the body,
his church. Because the address and thanksgiving are to the church in
general (the place name, Ephesus, being an early gloss), it is possible
that Ephesians was meant as an encyclical, to be distributed, perhaps, as
a covering letter for the whole Pauline collection. The "mystery of
God's will" (chapter 1, verse 9) is spelled out in chapter 2 as the
reconciling act of Christ for both Gentile and Jew. In chapter 3 Paul's
role in giving knowledge of this mystery in his ministry leads to a
doxology. After this semi-epistolary form, the general admonitions follow
in terms of gifts of grace with stress on unity: one hope, one Lord, one
faith, one baptism, one God for all. A warning against a heathen way of
life is given in contrast with the Christian's old nature as opposed to
his new being in Christ. In chapter 6, verses 10-20, the Christian is
enjoined "to put on the whole armor of God" as defense against
evil and Ephesians ends as a letter, with a blessing.
The Christology and ecclesiology
imply a background of a Christianized, mythological proto-Gnosticism, or a
strongly Hellenized Judaism. Perhaps one of the best clues to the lateness
and pseudonymity of Ephesians in comparison with the genuine Pauline
letters, however, is the phrase "revealed to his (Christ's) holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit." Such an expression
is certainly later than Paul and looks back on the apostolic age as a time
in the past.
A possible date is shortly after
Colossians, in the early 2nd century. Because there are so many
similarities to Colossians, Asia Minor might be the place of composition,
but this is merely conjecture. The non-Pauline use of the term mystery to
denote that Gentiles are fellow heirs with Jews, the uniting of all in
Christ, and an analogy between marriage and Christ's relation to the
church, all point to a different and later time than that of Paul. The
style of Ephesians builds up long, almost unmanageable, unpunctuated,
excited, and abundant sentences, even longer than those of Paul when he is
most provoked or, perhaps, absentminded and does not finish sentences that
he begins. A comparison of the table of duties of Colossians 3 and
Ephesians 5 and 6 also shows a strong development in the direction of
making the relationship of Christ and his church the basis for all other
relationships.
The eschatology of Ephesians is
attenuated, if not far in the background, and a continuation of the church
is implied. In chapter 1, verse 13, the writer sees the Spirit as the
guarantee (down payment) of the Christian's inheritance--a present
indication through the Spirit that the Christian can live in faith in the
world looking for the Kingdom but already sure he can draw on the powers
thereof without an imminent expectation of the end-time. Ephesians gives
hope for universal salvation, grace as a gift of God, strength in
patience, and an example of unity for the church as well as freedom in the
Spirit to attain maturity as a Christian.
In its present canonical form
Philippians is, according to several scholars, a later collection of
fragments of the correspondence of Paul with the congregation in Philippi
that was founded by Paul himself. The first of the two major difficulties
leading to this conclusion concerning redaction of the letter is created
by a discrepancy between chapters 2 and 3--i.e.,
an entirely unexpected polemic in chapter 3 after a calm second
chapter. Another major difficulty is the relationship of chapter 4, verses
10 and following, with Paul's joyful acceptance of his suffering, and the
remainder of the present letter that deals with the collection the
Philippians had made and sent to Paul in prison. The place of the
expression of Paul's gratitude at the end of the letter is odd,
particularly because Epaphroditus, the Philippian delegate conveying the
gift, is thanked as though he had just arrived; yet he has already been
described as ill when he was with Paul (who apologized in chapter 2 for
not having told about Epaphroditus' illness sooner and the delay in
sending him back). Yet, Epaphroditus is obviously back and the sequence of
events is, indeed, confusing.
The following rearrangement of the
parts of the letter is probably acceptable. Chapter 4, verses 10-20, shows
Paul reacting to the gift of the Philippians and the arrival of its
bearer, Epaphroditus, and seems to be the earliest fragment, written
probably during Paul's imprisonment (c.
53-54). The portions of the letter that treat of the theme of mutual
joy (1:1-3, 4:4-7, and probably 4:21-23 that refers back to chapter 1) are
best taken together as fragments of a second and somewhat later letter.
The third section is 3:2-4:3 and possibly 4:8-9, which addresses the
danger caused by outsiders and opponents who had started to penetrate the
Philippian congregation with a theology Paul considered heretical and
against which he aimed his polemic. Because this is an entirely new
situation, it is probably a third letter, of which only the preface is
missing. This arrangement also attempts properly to account for the fact
that chapter 4 actually comprises endings of several letters. Thus,
chapter 3, verse 1, which is itself a summation and ending, fits in.
The reference to frequent visits
between Paul and the Philippians referred to in the correspondence makes
its origin in Rome unlikely and points rather toward Ephesus as the place
of imprisonment. Paul's reaction to the gift of the Philippians is almost
rude (although he accepted gifts from no other congregation but preferred
to support himself during his apostolic mission). He actually avoided
expressing direct gratitude and attempted to divert the significance of
the gift from its material side to its spiritual meaning. He emphasized
the sympathy proven by the Philippians, the importance of the value of the
gift for them as a spiritual sacrifice for God.
The "letter of joy"
section describes Paul's enthusiasm in his mission efforts--and their
success--and his joy in the energy and growth of the mission in Philippi,
which Paul shared with his congregation. Paul's address to "bishops
and deacons," terms unique in Paul's letters except here, are,
perhaps, circumlocutions for missionaries active in Philippi, a
congregation that had become a strong and stable Christian community. Paul
had traditionally remained there about one week and, in chapters 1 and 2,
encouraged and praised the Philippians for continuing in their faith in
his absence. This is part of the thanksgiving in Philippians--an emphasis
on the participation, cooperation, collaboration, and empathy of the
Philippians with respect to the preaching of the gospel. Thus, the terms
bishop and deacon may belong to the language of a self-supporting mission
church with its own overseers (bishops) and workers (deacons) and does not
carry the connotations of later ecclesiastical structures. Paul expressed
his confidence in the fine beginning of this young church that sought
"to become pure and blameless for the day of Christ," the final
judgment.
Paul then turned to his own
experience of imprisonment, which he viewed as advancing the gospel.
Though he considered that not all preachers of Christ preach on the basis
of selfless motives, the fact that Christ is proclaimed is a most
important cause for rejoicing. Paul then exhorted the Philippians to work
hard for the sake of the gospel, not minding any opposition, and to do
this in a sense of unity and mutual support.
This exhortation toward a strong
and active sense of community was reinforced by quoting an early Christian
hymn that described the humiliation (kenosis)
and exaltation of Jesus who is made the Lord of the universe and confessed
by all cosmic powers. A part of Jesus' humiliation, his death on the
cross, can be taken as part of his manifest glorification. The verses
following the hymn make clear that the incorporation of the hymn with its
triumphal ending also has a missionary purpose, because Paul emphasized
again the need to responsibly act out one's own calling even before
non-Christians. Thus, active responsibility continuously exercised in the
perspective of the approaching Parousia merges with Paul's own readiness
to sacrifice himself.
In chapters 3-4 the situation may
be totally different. Paul reacted to the threat of the appearance of
Jewish-Christian missionaries who are rather close in theology to the
Galatian Judaizers. Paul's polemic indicates that in addition to Jewish
tradition, they must have emphasized the Law in particular. Reference is
made to circumcision, and Paul emphatically claimed that he could compete
with heretics boasting of their Jewish tradition and, in elaborating on
that, emphasized his former pious righteousness under the Law, in which he
was blameless. He then stressed categorically that for him the experience
of Christ has terminated his former piety completely and that he has left
it behind as of no value. Such a polemic implies that for his opponents
such was not the case. Paul also argued against libertinistic tendencies,
which indicates that his opponents were not legalists in an ordinary sense
but combined faithfulness to the Law with a strong and fanatical
enthusiasm that could lead toward "mysticism" and easily be
misinterpreted as libertinism. Paul's emphasis on true Christian
experience as not being completed but rather still being in the state of
expectation might be a further polemic against overenthusiasm. In chapter
4, verse 8, Paul reaffirms his own example, making it, in imitation of the
teaching of popular philosophy, the epitome of all positive ethical values
and virtues, and thus the pattern to be imitated. This tendency toward the
paradigmatic, together with warnings and autobiographical material in
chapter 3, verse 2, to chapter 4, verse 3, can be seen as a
"testament" of Paul, consciously written with an awareness of
impending death or martyrdom. Thus Paul presents himself--his life, ideas,
admonitions, and an eschatological section--as his heritage and as an
incorporation of the message he preached and its value.
Colossians presents the problem of
having, on the one hand, numerous (though superficial) affinities with the
circumstances of the Letter of Paul to Philemon while, on the other hand,
being addressed mainly to a different situation. In this new situation he
uses ideas and expressions that seem to be rather a development of Pauline
ideas about the cosmic realm than genuinely Pauline argumentation. In this
latter aspect, Colossians and Ephesians share the heritage of Paul, but a
later "Paulinist" changed details to meet different situations.
Colossians was written ostensibly
by Paul from prison (in Ephesus) to a predominantly Gentile Christian
congregation founded by his co-worker, Epaphras, at Colossae. The
Colossian congregation was endangered by a heresy involving a
"philosophy" that was connected with the elemental spirits of
the universe to which men seemed to be bound, with circumcision, feast
days and food laws, visions, and an asceticism that was not only false in
its piety but foreign to the Christian faith.
To combat these proto-Gnostic,
syncretistic, and Judaizing tendencies, the Paulinist appealed to the
authority of Paul's apostolate and his thought but accented his theology
in a new way, enlarging Paul's theological dimensions, so that they
included the whole universe, the fate of the entire cosmos. This whole
world is depicted as subject to Christ and has its meaning, aim, and goal
in the church, which is Christ's body and over which he is the head. This
transformation of Paul's theology would appear to be somewhat later than
Paul, yet not so much later than Philemon, and its import has been
forgotten. Colossians cannot be dated or placed with certainty, but the
end of the 1st century or the beginning of the 2nd century has been
suggested.
In a first edition, before the
Paulinist changed or added to it, Colossians seems close to the situation
of Philemon. In both letters Paul is in prison. Onesimus
appears in Colossians, chapter 4, and the readers of Colossians are asked
to transmit a special injunction through the church of the Laodiceans to
Archippus--possibly that the former slave, Onesimus, now referred to as a
"beloved brother," be freed for service of the gospel. The same
five names appear in Philemon and Colossians (Col. 4:10 ff.; cf.
Philem. 23), which is unusual because the church at Colossae is
strange to Paul. The lost letter to the Laodiceans may possibly be the
Letter to Philemon, and the request to the slave owner would, by being
read aloud in a neighbouring large church (Colossae), reinforce Paul's
request that the slave be freed.
Later substantial redaction has
obviously taken place, however, and it is the heresy at Colossae rather
than the situation of Philemon that is mainly addressed in Colossians.
Though Paul asserted that he did not preach and exhort where another has
founded a church, here the Paulinist, using and amplifying Pauline
theology, taught, gave thanks, and interceded for a church that he did not
found and that was in danger of accepting heretical Judaizing teachings,
thus falling away from Christ. The doctrinal section of Colossians sets
forth in a hymn Christ's preeminence over the whole cosmos, all
principalities and powers, to bring redemption through the cross and to be
the head of the body, the church.
From this cosmological beginning,
the style and imagery differ from the authentic Pauline letters.
Colossians is wider and broader in scope, with long, almost breathless
sentences. There is a hierarchy in Christ being head of the body, his
church, which differs from the Pauline expression of equality of all the
members, although with differing functions (cf.
I Corinthians, chapter 12, and Romans, chapter 12).
The Christology is applied to the
situation of the church and Paul's role in behalf of the church--his
suffering with Christ and knowledge of God's mystery, Christ--is used to
bolster his defense against heresy. This polemic is based first on
tradition and then proceeds to specific warnings against false teaching,
cult, or practice. An admonition "to set your minds on the things
that are above," because in Baptism the Christian has died and been
raised with Christ, is followed by the conclusion that the Christian's
conduct should be ruled by love and be thus free from all wrongdoing.
Another difference from the
genuine Pauline letters can be noted in this latter section. When Paul
referred to the resurrection of Christians he used the future tense in
most cases, but Colossians, chapter 2, verse 12, and chapter 3, verse 1,
presuppose that because the Christian is risen with Christ, ethical
demands can be made.
In Colossae, such Christian ethics
apparently were lacking, thus the inclusion of a table of duties--i.e.,
a list of household duties and of relations between members of a
household. General exhortations to prayer and right conduct are followed
by the conclusion of the letter with its list of greetings. There are some
similarities in Colossians to Paul's polemic against Judaizers in
Galatians, but Colossians seems to reflect a later time and a more
developed "cosmic" theology of a later deutero-Pauline writer.
In all probability I Thessalonians
is the earliest of Paul's letters, particularly because the memory of the
events that led to the founding of that congregation are still fresh in
the mind of the Apostle. The letter was written from Corinth. According to
I Thessalonians, chapter 3, verse 2, Paul had sent Timothy to Thessalonica
from Athens during his brief stay there, had just experienced the
delegate's return, and had received reports about the congregation to
which he is reacting in this letter. I Thessalonians gives expression to
Paul's surprise over the rapid growth of the Christian mission at
Thessalonica, which was achieved despite immediate persecutions from pagan
contemporaries. Paul acknowledged that the successful development had been
wrought in the Thessalonians by their own acceptance, fully recognizing
the human frailty of the Apostle, their founder (2:1-12), and not by a
mistaken understanding that he himself was divine.
Paul's surprise results,
therefore, in overwhelming gratitude, and the customary Pauline
thanksgivings here exceed the usual limits. A second reason for this
unusually long thanksgiving--which actually makes thanksgiving the theme
of the letter--is Paul's intent to undergird the encouragement he gives in
4:13-5:11. After having dwelt so extensively on his being moved by the
change in the Thessalonians, Paul continues to state that therefore they
have no reason for giving up faith in the face of the death of some fellow
Christians, who had died between their conversion and the expected
imminent Parousia of Christ. Apparently, they had expected the Parousia
and final salvation as the promise of the Christian message. Paul
encouraged his congregation that he had a "word of the Lord"
that the dead and the living in Christ will rise together. "Word of
the Lord" could refer to a word of Jesus known to Paul but could
instead be a direct revelation to Paul.
In chapter 5 there is further
thanksgiving, emphasizing the present gift and power of Christian faith
and corporate Christian life. This emphasis is linked with ethical
applications, with stress on brotherhood, diligence in keeping the faith,
and religious industriousness. The difficulties of balancing the
expectation of the Christian with God's timetable is outweighed by the
hope and joy in what has already been experienced and what is hoped for.
Paul's real emphasis is more on the actual description of Christian life
in the face of coming salvation and vindication than on the preceding
discussion of the fate of those who had died or on the actual
circumstances of Christ's appearance from heaven.
The encouragement of the
Thessalonians was introduced in chapter 4 by a genuinely ethical
exhortation to proceed properly on the way to holiness and sanctification
already begun. The brevity of this rather traditional exhortation is most
unusual in Paul's letters and supports the observation that it was written
in joy and confidence for a new congregation well begun in order to
support it against attacks and doubts as it matured in the faith.
A feature of II Thessalonians that
resembles the otherwise most unusual feature of I Thessalonians is its
excessively long thanksgiving. Within this thanksgiving there is an
excursus dealing with the timing of the Parousia,
but in II Thessalonians Paul aggressively argues against any expectation
of an imminent coming of Christ that might be expected from the things he
wrote in I Thessalonians. II Thessalonians perhaps presupposes I
Thessalonians and intimates that believers had a false understanding of
that communication of Paul. In II Thessalonians, much to the surprise of
the reader of both letters, the statement is made that a letter
"purporting to be from us" is "to the effect that the day
of the Lord has come." II Thessalonians then presents a problem as to
whether it was a self-correction of Paul or directed to the situation of a
later time and thus the writing of a later author in a "Pauline"
tradition. II Thessalonians does have more apocalyptically catastrophic
language than I Thessalonians. Such a description not only underestimates
the positive work of God and Christ for the believer but also says little
about the Parousia. II Thessalonians claims that not all the events
preceding the Parousia have yet occurred. The "mystery of
lawlessness," opposed to the "mystery of godliness," is
still at work in the world, and the full activity of Satan has not yet
unfolded itself. Emphasis in II Thessalonians is on steadfastness as God's
gift and promise in the days of tribulation, which makes the apostle ask
for support in prayer. Criticism of people leading disorderly and idle
lives follows. The perhaps casual admonition to work is thus elaborated
into a major point.
Salvation seems to be sought
almost exclusively in futuristic terms. Incipient or actual Gnosticism in
the church could account both for the assertion that the fulfillment has
already come and for the depiction of disorderly lives (because in
"proto-Gnostic" terms the world is evil and provokes a response
either of total renunciation or libertinism). II Thessalonians may thus
reflect these problems and fit into the late 1st century. Verbal
agreements between the two letters may be evidence of deliberate spurious
writing, as also the suggestion in II Thessalonians that false letters may
be circulating. A later author saw Paul's heritage threatened by too
enthusiastic an understanding of Paul in Thessalonians and composed this
letter to preserve Paul's meaning.
The First and Second Letters
of Paul to Timothy and the Letter of Paul
to Titus, three small epistles traditionally part of the Pauline
corpus, are written not to churches nor to an individual concerning a
special problem but to two individual addressees in their capacity as
pastors, or leaders of their local churches. The purpose of the letters is
to instruct, admonish, and direct the recipients in their pastoral office.
Since the 18th century they have been referred to as a unit, the Pastoral
Letters, and they contain common injunctions to guard the faith, to
appoint qualified officials, to conduct worship, and to maintain
discipline both personally and in the churches. Their similar
peculiarities of style and vocabulary as well as the similarity of the
heresies and other problems they faced place them in a common time and
allow them to be dealt with as a unit. Their content presents a picture of
the post-apostolic church when pastoral offices and tradition came to the
fore and the formerly high apocalyptic tension appears attenuated.
The Muratorian
Canon (a list of biblical books from c.
180) includes references to the Pastoral Letters and notes that they
were written "for the sake of affection and love." They have a
place in the canon because "they have been sanctified by an
ordination of the ecclesiastical discipline." These letters, however,
do not appear among the Pauline letters in P 46, an early-3rd-century
manuscript, and there is no clear external attestation in the primitive
church concerning them until the end of the 2nd century. Not until the
19th century were doubts expressed about the Pastorals as being
authentically Pauline, when German scholars and others noted discrepancies
in style and vocabulary, church organization, heresies, biographical and
historical situations, and theology from those found in the Pauline
letters. The problems of authorship, authenticity, and dating almost
paralyze investigation of the Pastorals unless discussion of these
problems is seen as connected also with the literary character of the
material.
Attempts have been made to apply
the tools of statistical analysis in comparing these disputed letters to
the rest of the New Testament (particularly to the Pauline corpus) for the
purpose of establishing authorship. The studies, utilizing computer
technology, point toward non-Pauline authorship with affinities to
language and style of a later, possibly 2nd-century, date. More refined
and complex analyses, however, are still needed.
Linguistic facts--such as short
connectives, particles, and other syntactical peculiarities; use of
different words for the same things; and repeated unusual phrases
otherwise not used in Paul--offer fairly conclusive evidence against
Pauline authorship and authenticity.
Church offices are more developed
in the Pastoral Letters than in Paul's time. There are presbyters and
bishops, but these are sometimes used interchangeably and the monarchical
episcopate is not yet depicted, although church offices appear to be
heading in that direction. Requirements for office are strict and leaders
are chosen and ordained by laying on of hands. Such leaders must be able
to teach true and sound doctrine and guard what has been entrusted to
them, the paratheke--i.e., the deposit of teaching or the message to be
carried on. They must also be able to stand firm and argue against heresy.
Such offices and aims suggest an expectation of future generations of
faithful witnesses to carry on the traditions, perhaps particularly
necessary as some may be killed for the witness they make.
The heresies referred to appear to
be Gnostic and the arguments are rather mild and reasonable, unlike Paul's
urgency in combatting heresy with strenuous argumentation. The heresies
taught by false teachers are an early partly Encratitic (abstaining)
Gnosticism, with "higher knowledge" that emphasizes
"godless and silly myth," or are statements that the
resurrection has already taken place, which is a denial of future
resurrection and a glorification and spiritualizing of resurrection as a
rebirth, as, for example, in Baptism.
Biographical notes about Paul's
journeys and situations contradict his own letters as well as the accounts
in Acts. The Pauline sense of living in a time close to the end of the age
is missing in these descriptions of churches; they are viewed as settling
down with a succession of tradition with Hellenized expressions of
salvation and a replacement of enthusiasm with bourgeois ethics. This
indicates a period of de-emphasized eschatology and an expectation of a
long community life in which people must live out their lives in Christian
responsibility and moral behaviour.
I Timothy and Titus are more
similar to each other than to II Timothy, but all three exhort to lives of
exemplary conduct and give rules of conduct for church order and
discipline for the group as a whole and for individual parts of
it--sometimes in terms of catalogs of virtues and vices recalling the
Jewish two-way orders: the way of life being good, the way of death
including a list of sins. Each concludes with a final blessing or
salutation. They are all pseudonymous, using Paul as an epistolary model
and using pseudonymous devices, such as naming individuals known to be
Paul's co-workers. Paul's authority is invoked to lend credence to the
teachings contained in the letters: the avoidance of heresy, holding to
sound doctrine, and piety of life. The author is anonymous, the place of
writing and the addressees are unknown, but they probably are later
spiritual children of Pauline teaching. The date of the letters is about
the turn of the 2nd century.
II Timothy uses the background of
Pauline imagery most fully. It is cast at least in part in the testament
form to Timothy as his spiritual heir because Paul is depicted as
suffering, fettered in prison, and awaiting the martyr's crown. He exhorts
Timothy and through him the church to share in these sufferings as they
will eventually share in glory. II Timothy, chapter 2, verses 1-13, is an
exhortation to martyrdom with a faith that Christ, triumphant over death,
will save his faithful witnesses. Recollection of the creed is followed by
a direct application to bearing suffering and its meaning in God's plan of
salvation. The words "faithful is the word" occur in 2:11. This
"word," unlike Paul or any Christian, cannot be bound. It both
confirms salvation described in the preceding verses and introduces a hymn
that may represent liturgical usage in that it is poetic and balanced.
Faithful is the word:
If we have died with him, we
shall also live with him;
if we endure, we shall also reign
with him;
if we deny him, he also will deny
us;
if we are faithless, he remains
faithful--for he cannot deny
himself
(II Tim. 2:11-13)
The hymn preserves within itself a
reflection of sayings of Jesus that those who endure and persevere will
reign with the Lord and that even to those who deny him (as did Peter) God
will remain faithful because Christ cannot deny his own faithfulness. Even
in this hymn there is allusion to a "testament" form, with Paul
already martyred, as a pseudonymous device to spur the Christian on to
endurance and faithfulness as a member of the redeemed community.
Another small poetic hymnic
section serves to demonstrate that the church of the Pastorals, albeit
somewhat de-eschatologized, retains the "mystery" in God's
household, the church--i.e., the
gospel and creed alive in the liturgy in the mystery of piety and worship.
Great indeed, we confess, is the
mystery of our religion:
He who was manifested in the
flesh,
vindicated in the Spirit,
seen by angels;
who was proclaimed among the
nations,
believed in throughout the world,
glorified in high heaven
(I Tim. 3:16)
Here, in miniature form, are creed
and gospel that are somewhat reminiscent of the Gospel According to
Matthew.
From Ephesus, where he was
imprisoned (c. 53-54), Paul
wrote his shortest and most personal letter to a Phrygian Christian
(probably from Colossae or nearby Laodicea) whose slave Onesimus
had run away, after possibly having stolen money from his master. The
slave apparently had met Paul in prison, was converted, and was being
returned to his master with a letter from Paul appealing not on the basis
of his apostolic authority but according to the accepted practices within
the system of slavery and the right of an owner over a slave. He requested
that Onesimus be accepted "as a beloved brother" and that he be
released voluntarily by his master to return and serve Paul and help in
Christian work. Paul appealed to the owner that Onesimus (whose name in
Greek means "useful") is no longer useless because of his
conversion and claimed that the owner owed Paul a debt (as he probably was
also instrumental in his conversion) and that any debt or penalty incurred
by the slave would be paid by Paul. Such manumission is part of Paul's
concept of being an ambassador to further the mission of Christianity,
rather than a judgment on the social framework of slavery, because in the
Lord such social order is transcended.
Philemon, however, is not a purely
personal letter, because it is addressed to a house church (a small
Christian community that usually met in a room of a person's home), and it
ends with salutations and a benediction in the plural form of address. The
body of the letter, however, uses "you" (singular) and is
addressed to the slave's owner, a man whom Paul himself has not met.
Philemon, the first name in the address, is called a "beloved fellow
worker," which implies that he knew Paul, and it has been
convincingly argued that the slave's owner was Archippus (see above The
letter of Paul to the Colossians ), perhaps Philemon's son, who
was called a "fellow soldier," a term usual in business accounts
and suitable for a document on the manumission of a slave. The
thanksgiving contains the main theme of the whole letter: sharing of faith
for the work of promoting knowledge of Christ.
The letter was written from
prison, and Paul apparently expected a release in the near future, because
he requested a guest room, a suggestion that he was not very far from
Colossae or Laodicea, which would be true of Ephesus. Colossae would be
reached from Ephesus via Laodicea, and the letter could be addressed to a
house church there.
In a letter to the Ephesians (c.
112) by Ignatius, bishop of Antioch,
the language is very reminiscent of Philemon, and the name of the bishop
of Ephesus (c. 107-117) was
Onesimus. It has been suggested that the slave was released to help Paul,
that in his later years he might have become bishop of Ephesus, and that
his "ministry" or "service" was the collection of the
Pauline corpus. This is based not simply on the identity of name, but on
similarities to Philemon found in Ignatius' letter to the Ephesians, as
well as two possible plays on words in chapter 2, verse 2 (cf.
Philemon, verse 20), and chapter 4, verse 2 (cf. Philemon 11), relating to the bishop and unity of the church.
Such a prominent position and role for one of Paul's followers might shed
further light on why Philemon, apparently a very personal plea, became a
part of the canon and Pauline corpus. Even if this suggestion cannot be
proved, Philemon still shows Paul in his apostolic ministry, furthering
the message of Christ and seeing beyond the limitations of the social
order of his day, in which both slaves and freemen are servants of God.
The writing called the Letter to
the Hebrews, which was known and accepted in the Eastern church by the 2nd
century, was included also by the Western church as the 14th Pauline
epistle when the canon of East and West was assimilated and fixed in 367.
Hebrews has no salutation giving the name of either the writer or the
addressees, although it does have a doxology and greeting at the end,
which suggest that at some point the writing was sent as a letter to a
community known to the author. There are also numerous admonitions in the
text that appear to be directed to a definite circle of addressees and
some admonitions to the church at large. In chapter 6, verses 4-8, is a
severe warning against the sin of apostasy,
for which there is no second repentance. Even so, Hebrews is essentially
more a theological treatise than a letter. It is homiletical in style and
calls itself a paraklesis, which
has many meanings: consolation, exhortation, sermon, advocacy, and even
intercession.
The thoughts, metaphors, and ideas
of Hebrews are distinct from the rest of the New Testament, with closest
affinities to Stephen's speech in Acts, chapter 7. It attempts to prove
the superiority and ultimacy of the revelation in Christ and the
perfection of his offering of himself once and for all supersedes and
makes obsolete any other revelation. Hebrews gives strength to its readers
through the example of Christ and the hope and promise of free access to
God and to eternal rest, an access in which Christ is High Priest and
mediator forever. Such promise, on the basis of Christological
developments and new covenant hopes, enables endurance in persecution, but
its vocabulary is that of the sacrificial language of the Old Testament.
Another theme is a typological analogy with the wilderness wanderings of
Israel in which, despite their murmurings of unbelief and the hardening of
their hearts in their trials, they persevered. Thus, the church, as the
pilgrim people of God, travels toward the future place of Sabbath rest
with Christ as their pioneer and perfector of faith.
A "word of consolation"
is needed to strengthen faith in time of trouble. Actual persecution
leading to martyrdom is seen as not yet come, but the church is sharply
warned against apostasy, the sin of all sins. Hope during persecution and
trial is expressed in the image of Christ as the perfect everlasting high
priest, one of whose functions is to stand as intercessor and protector.
Hebrews was considered a Pauline
letter in the early Eastern church. Clement of
Alexandria, a theologian of the late 2nd and early 3rd centuries,
held that Paul had written it in Hebrew for the Hebrews and that Luke had
translated it into Greek. Origen, Clement's
successor as leader in the catechetical school at Alexandria, commented
that its thoughts reflected Paul but that it was written at a later time
with a totally different style and phraseology, and he stated "who
wrote the epistle, God knows." Paul, for example, uses the term
mediator only once and in a negative sense, in Galatians, chapter 3, verse
19, but Hebrews uses it several times of Christ as mediator of the new
covenant. In the West, Tertullian, a North
African theologian of the late 2nd and early 3rd centuries, suggested
Barnabas as the author, because Hebrews, called a "word of
consolation," might have been written by Barnabas, whose name is
translated by Luke as "son of consolation" in Acts, chapter 4,
verse 36. After Hebrews' acceptance into the canon in the mid-4th century,
it was considered Pauline, but doubts persisted; and because of basically
different content and style in contradiction to Paul, various authors have
been suggested for Hebrews--e.g., Apollos
(a Jewish Christian Alexandrian), or a follower of Stephen and the
Hellenists, who had come into conflict with those not sharing his
universalistic ideas. Hebrews, however, remains anonymous. The title
"To the Hebrews" is secondary and may reflect either an idea as
to its addressees or that it was influenced by its extensive Old Testament
material.
According to internal evidence,
Hebrews was written in a second or later generation of Christians.
Persecution references suggest a time after Nero's persecution and about
the time of the emperor Domitian but early enough to be quoted or alluded
to in the First Letter of Clement (c.
96), thus suggesting a date of c.
80-90.
The place of the addressees may be
Italy, because 13:24 is understood as a greeting sent home from one
writing from abroad, but this is not certain. The addressees were probably
Gentile Christians who needed instruction in "the elementary
doctrines of Christ" and concerning faith in God.
Hebrews constitutes the first
Christian example of a thoroughly allegorical, typological exegesis
(critical interpretation) of the Old Testament. There were precursors of
such a methodology in Jewish Alexandrian biblical exegesis (e.g., Philo), and Platonic tendencies found in Hebrews can also be
found in Jewish-Alexandrian methods of interpretation of the Old
Testament. The language of Hebrews is extremely polished, elegant, and
cultured Greek, the best in the New Testament. Linguistically and
stylistically, it shows only a slight influence of the Koine (common
Greek). The Attic style is broken only in passages in which Hebrews quotes
the Septuagint. Plays on words and synonyms with similar beginnings for
emphasis show the author's literary craftsmanship.
There are more Old Testament
citations in Hebrews than in any other New Testament book. They are drawn
mainly from the Pentateuch and some psalms.
The church is viewed as being in
danger of discouragement in the face of persecution and possible apostasy.
If faithless, church members risk total loss, for no second repentance is
possible. Through his special Christology, the author seeks to help the
readers by showing that Christ is the saviour superior to any other and
that as Saviour, Son of God, High Priest, pioneer, guide, and forerunner,
he who has already suffered and been glorified will lead the wandering
people of God to their eternal Sabbath rest, an eschatological future
state of peace and renewal.
This high type of Christology is
combined with much stress on Jesus' humanity. He partook of man's nature
and overcame death to destroy the power of the devil in order to deliver
man. Thus, having been made like his brethren he has become a faithful
High Priest to make expiation for the sins of the people. Because he
himself suffered and was tested, he can help those who are tested and
tempted. Through suffering, tears, and obedience Jesus was made perfect
and thus the source of help and salvation, being designated by God a High
Priest after the order of Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of God
Most High in Abraham's time.
Christ and his once for all (ephapax)
sacrifice has superseded and made all Old Testament sacrifices and cultic
practices obsolete. Christ is superior to the prophets because he is a
son, superior to the angels because they worship him, and (in the light of
his cosmic role as apostle and High Priest) superior to Moses,
who brought God's Law to Israel, because Moses was a servant in God's
house and Christ a son. Christ is also superior to Moses' successor Joshua,
because Joshua did not bring the wandering people into a perfect rest;
superior to the Old Testament priesthood of Aaron, because Christ, the
true High Priest, has sacrificed himself once for all and is without sin;
and superior to the patriarch Abraham,
because Abraham paid tithes to the priest of Salem, Melchizedek, who as
the prototype of Christ had no human antecedents. Christ, High Priest
forever by obedient suffering and perfection in that he lives up to the
demand, has become the source of salvation. He is High Priest in the
heavenly tabernacle and mediator for the new covenant. On the basis of
this Christology and ecclesiology, the rest of Hebrews is composed of
injunctions to faithful life in all situations, spiritual or temporal. In
chapter 11, verse 1, Hebrews gives a programmatic statement that should be
translated: "Faith is the Reality [rather than "assurance,"
as in the usual translation] of what is hoped for and the Proof concerning
what is invisible." In Hebrews, Jesus is that Reality and that Proof,
and everything else is unreal or at best an earthly copy or a shadow. The
heroes and martyrs of old were looking toward his coming (chapter 11) and
those now under persecution look toward him and find strength (chapter 12)
as they leave the ultimately unreal structures of this world, seeking the
"coming city" and going out to him who was executed outside the
walls of the city made with hands. Thus, the message of Hebrews is:
Reality versus sham and shadow, Christ's sacrifice (priest and victim in
one) versus the cult of temples, and the real heavenly rest and heavenly
city versus the sabbath and Jerusalem.
As the history of the New
Testament canon shows, the seven so-called Catholic Letters (i.e., James, I and II Peter, I, II, and III John, and Jude) were
among the last of the literature to be settled on before the agreement of
East and West in 367. During the 2nd and 3rd centuries, only I John and I
Peter were universally recognized and, even after acceptance of all seven,
their varying positions in Greek manuscripts and early versions revealed
some conflict concerning their inclusion. The designation Catholic Letters
was already known and used by the church historian Eusebius
in the 4th century for a group of seven letters, among which he especially
mentions James and Jude. The word catholic meant general--i.e., addressed to the whole, universal church as distinguished, for
example, from Pauline letters addressed to particular communities or
individuals. The earliest known occurrence of the adjective
"catholic" referring to a letter is in the account of an
anti-Montanist, Apollonius (c. 197)
in his rebuke of a Montanist writer who "dared, in imitation of the
Apostle [probably John] to compose a catholic epistle" for general
instruction. In the time of Origen (c.
230), the term catholic was also applied to the Letter
of Barnabas as well as to I John, I Peter, and Jude.
In the West, however,
"catholic" took on the meaning in Christian usage as implying a
value judgment as to orthodoxy or general acceptance. Thus, the West used
it for all the New Testament letters that were in the canon along with the
four gospels and Acts. All letters considered authoritative and of equal
standing with those of Paul were therefore
termed canonical in the West. Not until the Middle Ages did both East and
West designate the seven as "catholic epistles" in the sense of
being addressed to the whole Christian Church, in order to distinguish
them from letters with more particular addresses. Had not the main
tradition placed Hebrews in the Pauline corpus, it would perhaps rather
have been counted among the Catholic Letters. Hebrews, however, looked
"Pauline" rather than "Catholic" in that it presented
an extensive theological argument to which the parenesis (advice or
counsel) was applied at the end.
These seven letters are grouped
together despite their disparate authorship and dates because of a number
of characteristics common to all of them. Though the three Johannine
letters, and especially I John, are distinctly Johannine in character, the
four other Catholic Letters are of special interest precisely because they
lack strong personal or peculiar traits both in their theological and in
their ethical statements. This characteristic makes them a good source for
understanding the piety and life-style of the majority of early
Christians. These letters differ from the Pauline letters in that they
seem to have been written for general circulation throughout the church,
rather than for specific congregations. Though Paul wrote as a missionary
responsible for his recent Gentile converts, these letters address
established congregations in more general terms. It is interesting to
note, for example, that in I Pet. 2:12 the word Gentiles refers to
"non-Christians" without any awareness of its older and Pauline
meaning of "non-Jews."
The purpose of the Catholic
Letters is to meet ordinary problems encountered by the whole church:
refuting false doctrines, strengthening the ethical implications of the
Gospel message, sharing in the common catechetical and moral materials,
and giving encouragement in the face of the delay of the Parousia and
strength in the face of possible martyrdom under Roman persecution. They
guide the ordinary Christian in his day-to-day life in the church.
The Catholic Letters preserve a
considerable common legacy of ethical themes and quotations. Such themes
and quotations (from the Old Testament) were handed down traditionally,
though the writers interpreted them independently for their situations.
For example, Proverbs, chapter 3, verse 34, showing God's scorn to
scorners and favour to the humble, is used in James, chapter 4, verse 6,
as a warning against involvement in the world and an exhortation to
submission and humility, but in I Peter, chapter 5, verse 5, it exhorts
Christians to humility and submission in relation to one another in the
church and brotherhood. Because the Catholic Letters represent a common
pool of Christian teaching, there are overlapping points, but these come
from shared tradition rather than literary dependency. The virtues
extolled in the early church are not particularly Christian but often
coincide with those cultivated in Hellenistic culture, sometimes with a
Jewish Hellenistic emphasis. An act of mercy and virtue valued in both
Jewish and Hellenistic tradition is epitomized in hospitality (e.g., I Peter 4:9). Similarly, Hellenistic lists of virtues and
vices occur as needed from the general body of early Gentile Hellenistic
tradition applied to the Christian communities. In these epistles,
theological and credal statements are woven in and used for immediate
ethical application. Thus, they differ from the Pauline style of extensive
theological sections coupled with ethical applications that follow at the
end of the epistle. (see also Index:
Hellenistic Age)
In the Catholic Letters, to be a
Christian was to be in opposition to the world, a member of a minority
church and thus at any time liable to be called as witness to the faith
and perhaps to suffer and die for it. Eschatological trials are coming (e.g., I Pet. 1:6f., 4:12-19; II Pet. 3:2-10; I John 2:18 ff., 4:1-4;
Jude 17 ff.), and the Christian views false
prophecy and heresy as well as hostile encounter with the world as
part of the trials. The theme of joy in persecution, suffering, and the
final trial or ultimate "testing" is based on Christ's victory
over these events and the sense of being a member of his community. Thus,
the Christian should show submission, nonretaliation, humility and
patience, good conduct, and obedience to authorities, because his witness
must be blameless when his faith is tested in the world, in the courtroom,
and in martyrdom.
The Letter of James, though often
criticized as having nothing specifically Christian in its content apart
from its use of the phrase the "Lord Jesus Christ" and its
salutation to a general audience depicted as the twelve tribes in the
dispersion (the Diaspora), is actually a letter most representative of
early Christian piety. It depicts the teachings of the early church not in
a missionary vein but to a church living dispersed in the world knowing
the essentials of the faith but needing instruction in everyday ethical
and communal matters with traditional critiques on wealth and status. In
matters of church discipline and the practice of healing, there is stress
on prayer, anointing, and confession of sin in order that the healing of
the sick may be effected. Steadfastness, even joy, in persecution is based
on pure religion with strong ethical demands, as noted in chapter 1,
verses 2-4 and 19-27.
A debate as to how James'
statement that "faith apart from works is dead" compares with
Paul's "justification by faith without
works" in Romans has a long history. The debate, central to the
history of Christianity, has usually overlooked the simple fact that Paul
speaks about "works of the Law" and does so with reference to
those "works" that divide Jews and Gentiles--e.g.,
circumcision and food laws. James, on the other hand, refers to works
of mercy. Thus, the two statements are not only reconcilable but address
themselves to quite distinct and different issues. Even Paul referred to
mutual support of the brethren by the glorious phrase "the law of
Christ" (Gal. 6:2) and this is the same as James' "royal
law" (James 2:8). The Pauline language presumably was not in James'
mind. In James, chapter 2, the example of Abraham's faith is used to show
justification by works. It is to be noted that Paul also used Abraham as
the paradigm of righteousness to demonstrate justification by faith in
Romans, chapter 4, again showing the difference in purpose and setting of
the two epistles.
In view of the post-apostolic
situation depicted, James, the son of Zebedee, who died as a martyr before
AD 44, could not have been the author. From the content, neither could
James, a brother of the Lord and the leader of the Jerusalem church; his
martyrdom is reported as c. AD
62. Thus, James is pseudepigraphical, with the purpose of gaining
apostolic authority for its needed message. The date of writing is
probably at the turn of the 1st century, and its addressees are the whole
church.
Of James' 108 verses, 54 contain
imperatives--an obvious proof that advice is stressed. Such admonitions
are expressed in the form of general ethical wisdom sayings, Hellenistic
Jewish lists of virtues and vices, and Christian as well as pagan
aphorisms sometimes related to popular preaching of the Stoic Cynic style.
In chapter 5 the community is
enjoined to patience, steadfastness, and good behaviour. The Old Testament
prophets, who spoke in the name of the Lord, are used as examples of
suffering and endurance as they awaited the Judge. Thus, reference to the
Parousia of Christ may have been conflated by the Christian writer to the
coming of the Lord in judgment, an interpretation with "the day of
the Lord" in mind. "Behold, the Judge is standing at the
doors" is accompanied by the admonition, "You also be patient.
Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand,"
(chapter 5, verses 8 and 9).
The purpose of the First Letter
of Peter is exhortation directed to "the exiles of the
Dispersion" in Asia Minor in order that they "stand fast"
in God's grace in the face of persecution. On the one hand, such
persecution is viewed as part of the trials of the end-time that the
community must undergo before the coming of the new age. On the other,
persecution is viewed as a simple fact of Christian community life in the
world. In imitation of Christ, tribulations and testing can be a basis for
joy.
In the address, the author calls
himself "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ," and in chapter 5,
verse 1, a "fellow-elder and witness of the suffering of
Christ." Any Christian, not just a fellow eyewitness, however, might
be such a witness and hope to partake in the future "glory that is to
be revealed." The writer or the redactor of I Peter used Pauline and
gospel theology and terminology both in quotations and in allusions and,
if literary dependency cannot always be demonstrated, there is dependence
on the catechetical traditions known in the post-apostolic church.
The milieu of the letter seems to
reflect the time and temper of the correspondence of the emperor Trajan
with Pliny the Younger, governor of
Bithynia (c. 117). Pliny
requested clarification as to the punishment of Christians "for the
name itself" or for crimes supposedly associated with being a
Christian. I Peter, chapter 4, verse 15, appears to reflect this
situation: that a Christian be blameless of all crime and, if punished, be
persecuted only "as a Christian." Pliny continued that denounced
Christians are executed if they persevere in their belief but that
whatever their creed "contumacy and inflexible obstinacy deserved
punishment"; Trajan's response was that those denounced as Christians
be punished. The warning in I Peter, chapter 3, on a Christian's manner of
defense and submissiveness to authorities points to a date in the first
quarter of the 2nd century. Such a date does not preclude reflection on
earlier persecutions, such as those under Domitian.
The Greek style is hardly in
keeping with a Galilean Peter--described as illiterate or uneducated in
Acts, chapter 4, verse 13. The Greek is fluid, and the Old Testament
citations are from the Septuagint. The addressees appear to be Gentile
Christians portrayed as the new Israel dispersed among the (heathen)
Gentiles, based on the analogy of the old Israel, a diaspora among the
nations.
The work is thus pseudonymous,
attributed to Peter through Silvanus, whose name constitutes a part of the
pseudepigraphic device that strengthens the authority of the epistle. I
Peter is an excellent example of the testament form modelled on the
traditions of an Apostle and the message of his martyrdom. Peter,
whose death and traditions concerning him were known to the readers of the
time of I Peter, gives weight and authority to the letter that is formed
in many ways as a farewell and admonition to those who follow, in order
that they may stand firm.
Warnings are given from the
Apostle's own example along with counter-virtues for vices. Such testament
forms have a mixture of wisdom material, advice, exhortation, hymns for
ethical admonition, and apocalyptic elements with accounts of trials to
come. This mixture is found in strange arrangements, but is perhaps solved
if read as a testament form. Peter had denied that Christ must suffer and
in I Peter suffering is the way of discipleship and even of joy. In Luke,
chapter 22, Peter's denial was prophesied, and Jesus interceded for him in
order that he might repent and strengthen his brethren (cf.
I Peter, chapter 5, verses 10 and 12). In Mark and Matthew the
defection of the Apostles was foretold in terms of the scattering of the
sheep when the shepherd was stricken, and Peter does deny his Lord. In
John, chapter 21, the risen Lord paralleled Peter's threefold denial with
a threefold question as to Peter's love. At each affirmation the Lord
responds with the forgiving command to feed the sheep--to care for the
community. This is a central motif in I Peter. Immediately following the
charge to Peter in John is the prediction of his own martyr death, and in
I Peter the church is urgently admonished to accept trials as nothing
strange, because they are a sharing in the sufferings of Christ. In the
Garden of Gethsemane, Peter in particular was rebuked because he did not
watch, and in I Peter the church is admonished to watch and be vigilant
against the Devil. Prayer against temptation is also stressed.
In the Matthean account, Peter is
delegated to build the church, and in I Peter it is the chief Apostle
(Peter) who points to Christ as Shepherd and Bishop, who through his
suffering collected the wandering sheep to himself. In like manner--on the
model of Christ or perhaps Peter--the elders are exhorted to feed their
flocks humbly and faithfully. Thus, there is a typical testament form:
Peter has failed and repented; and the church is warned, admonished, and
strengthened as by the Apostle, who, on the analogy of Jesus' Passion and
death in innocence, exhorts the church to share in the vocation of
innocent suffering and to do good in innocence. Finally, I Peter, viewed
as a "testament," is in itself an apocalyptic
"witness," and with its admixture of advice, example, and
general address to the faithful living in the Diaspora as sojourners, with
the authority of its martyred "author," it constitutes authority
and strength for the church that faces the persecution of the world.
References in chapter 5 to Rome (called Babylon) and to Mark are then also
part of the pseudepigraphic testament form, as they presuppose the common
tradition of Peter's martyrdom in Rome and his connection with Mark.
There are three Christological
hymnic fragments in I Peter: 1:18-21, ransom by Christ; 2:21-25, with
reference to the Book of Isaiah, chapter 53, used as ethical admonition;
and 3:18-20, Christ's descent into hell. The last is in the context of
Christ's going and preaching to the spirits in prison (a reference to the
apocryphal First Book of Enoch with
Satan chained under the earth but his descendants at work in the world
until the end-time) in order to show that Christ, through his descent, has
overcome the powers that underlie and engender persecution of the
Christians. This is reaffirmed in chapter 5 by encouraging Christians in
their fight against the Devil, for, though suffering will be a part of
this resistance, there will be victory at the end. Imitation of Christ is
a basis for joy even in suffering. The end is viewed as near, and final
salvation can thus be anticipated.
The Second Letter of Peter was
written as a letter to the whole church purporting to be similar in
testament form to that of I Peter. It deals with the problems of the delay
of the Parousia and accounts for it in
terms of God's time being different from that of man and God's patience in
waiting for all men to be better ethically. This letter, the latest of the
New Testament, shows how Christendom dealt with the delay of the Parousia,
discarded older Jewish apocalyptic ideas by substituting those with
Hellenistic emphases, and is clearly in its content and exposition a
methodically worked out artistic product, fictionalizing the older
beliefs, in order to bring them into some agreement with traditional
Christian terminology.
II Peter names Simon Peter as its
author and declares his position by setting down rules for true faith as
he sees it. His work is different in meaning and interpretation from the
earlier tradition and understanding of the church. He regards the
Transfiguration of Jesus on the mountain as the first Parousia and urges
patient waiting for the final coming of the Lord. Although he refers to
his letter as a second letter of Peter, his Hellenistic concepts and
rhetoric could hardly be attributed even to the author of I Peter. II
Peter speaks of "partakers of divine nature," a term from the
mystery religions, and mixes proverbs with familiar quotations from
Hellenistic tradition. Thus, not only is this letter pseudepigraphic, but
it is an even later fiction, probably nearer to AD 150 than the end of the
1st century.
Almost all of Jude is used in II
Peter, but II Peter drops out a quotation from I
Enoch in Jude 14 ff., possibly demonstrating some fear of using
apocryphal writings. Heresies are attacked by criticism of their
interpretation of scripture and misuse of set tradition, another evidence
of the late date of II Peter. Reference is made to "all the epistles
of Paul which contain things hard to understand" and to "other
scriptures," evidence of a New Testament canon well on its way to
being delineated over against the Old Testament. Though skillfully
composed, II Peter cannot hide the Gnosticism
included in its view and much misinterpretation of the traditional body of
faith of the early church. Thus, II Peter is an example of the church at a
relatively late period, de-eschatologized for the most part and brought
near to early institutionalized religion with a ministry but depending on
ideas and a theology so changed that it is almost unrecognizable.
The eschatology of II Peter awaits
a new heaven and a new earth after the dissolution by fire of the old,
evil earth with its unrepentant people. The Parousia no longer is
Christological in nature but anthropologically oriented, with a
vindication of the good and a punishment of the wicked. II Peter presents
a picture of the church at the latest point in the canon and illustrates
the necessity to reevaluate and recall more normative Christian
traditions.
The three epistles gathered under
the name of John were written to guide and strengthen the post-apostolic
church as it faced both attacks from heresies and an ever increasing need
for community solidarity--along with the concomitant love and ethics
necessary to such unity.
I John, though lacking any formal
epistolary salutation or ending, directs itself to a circle of readers
with whom the writer is acquainted. Taking the form of an anonymous
"homily" for admonition against heresy and instruction in faith
and love, it was directed to a wide audience or was to be circulated
beyond a particular congregation. II and III John are brief letters from
an author described only as "the elder," implying a position of
some authority. II John, chapter 1, is addressed to an "elect lady
and her children," probably a designation of a church with
difficulties similar to those found in I John. III John is the most
personal, being addressed by the elder "to the beloved Gaius,"
who has been praised particularly for his hospitality (probably to
missionaries) and his brotherly love. The presbyter (elder), probably the
author of II and III John, apparently was a man who was authoritative
enough to influence and direct mission activities. All three letters,
despite their differences of address, appear to have been accepted among
the Catholic Letters as having been circulated for the church at large.
I, II, and III John share much
common terminology, style, and general situation. They are all called
Johannine because they are loosely related to the Gospel According to John
in style and terminology and could be the outcome of its theology.
The early church attributed I, II,
and III John to John, the Apostle, the son of Zebedee. Although II and III
John may possibly have been written by the same presbyter, this
"elder" is not necessarily the author of I John, although it is
commonly accepted that the three Johannine letters came from a
"Johannine" inner circle. The earliest reference to the
Johannine letters is in the Letter to the Philippians by Polycarp
of Smyrna (7:1). Papias, who was a
2nd-century bishop of Hierapolis, mentions I John and quotes it several
times, but he distinguishes between John, the Apostle, and John, the
presbyter. Polycarp, Papias, and internal evidence point to the region of
Asia Minor as the probable sources of the Johannine literature. These
references and the organization of the churches indicated in the letters,
as well as the lack of signs of persecution, suggest a date for the
letters at around the beginning of the 2nd century.
I John assumes a knowledge of the
Johannine Gospel (the author of I John may be the ecclesiastical redactor
of the Gospel According to John) and adds ethical admonition and
instruction regarding the well-being of the church as it confronts heresy
and stresses the lack of moral concern that springs from it. There is
strong defense against the threat of a type of Gnosticism called Docetism
that denied the reality of Jesus' earthly life and thus the meaning of the
cross. Possessing special spiritual knowledge, the Docetic Gnostics had no
need of the earthly Jesus and the humanity of Christ. This Docetic heresy
led them to reject the Lord's Supper, but not Baptism. Their special
possession of the Spirit had led them erroneously to consider themselves
sinless and to deny the fellowship that has the cleansing of sins. Because
the heresy may have led to libertinism, the ethics of Christians must
accord with their faith and find expression in the love of the brethren in
the church. "He who hears my word and . . . believes has passed from
death to life" (John 5:24) is continued in I John 3:14, "We have
passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren." The
Gnostics separated themselves from the church in schism and have thereby
committed the "sin unto death." They are false prophets and
deceivers described by the term Antichrist. The true Christians, the
"children of God," hold the true faith evidenced by their
loyalty to the church and their charity toward its members.
A constant theme in I John is that
of God's love, which makes Christians the children of God. As children of
God they keep the new commandment of love, which is of light--that of
brotherly love--and resist the world, evil, and false teaching. Because
Christ gave his life for man, the Christian's response is also to be
self-giving. Through obedience and faith, God forgives even when man's
heart condemns him, "for God is greater than his heart." It is
of interest to note that in I John 2:1-2, Jesus is referred to as
paraclete (advocate), but in the Gospel According to John, such references
are to the Spirit. John 14:16, however, refers to "another
Counselor." This discrepancy can be resolved by interpreting Jesus
with his disciples as their advocate with another to come (the Spirit),
and, in I John 2:1-2, the risen Lord becomes the advocate for the
expiation of all sin. Righteousness and faith are emphasized in chapters
4-5, and again these characteristics are those of the children of God, who
will finally in the end-time be like him who gave the promise, the
commandment, and the joy of love. (see also Index:
Christianity)
II John warns a specific church
(or perhaps churches), designated as "the elect lady and her
children," against the influence of the Docetic heresy combatted in I
John, whose proponents lured Christians from "following the truth,
just as we have been commanded by the Father." In II John, as in the
Gospel According to John and I John, the light-darkness images are similar
to those of the Dead Sea Scrolls. To "walk in the truth" in II
John is to reject heresy and follow the doctrine of Christ.
III John, addressed to Gaius,
shows that the writer is concerned about and has responsibility as
presbyter for the missionaries of the church. It is somewhat of a short
note concerned with church discipline, encouraging hospitality to true
missionaries, and thus not unconnected with true doctrine and the command
of love.
The Letter of Jude, after a
salutation that attributes it to Jude, the
brother of James, and addresses itself to the church as a whole, develops
the theme of the short letter--a polemic against heretics who have
abandoned the transmitted traditional faith and who will thus be judged by
the Lord. They deny Christ, and punishment similar to that of Sodom and
Gomorrah in the Old Testament for such a denial is threatened. Heretical
beliefs have led to various sins and libertinism, and the judgment that
will come upon them is cited from Enoch 1:9, demonstrating that this short letter reflects the
postbiblical Jewish apocalyptic train of thought in the early Christian
era.
"Jude, a servant of Jesus
Christ and brother of James" is probably meant pseudepigraphically to
relate this Jude to James the brother of the Lord so that this Jude is
also a brother of the Lord. This, however, is impossible because the
letter reflects a later time. Verse 17 refers to "the predictions of
the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ" concerning mockers and
sinners. Thus, the author is recalling a former time that was prophesied
regarding the heresies and trials of the end-time. Such a bearer of
apostolic tradition is violently attacking heresy in the interest of
transmitted traditional faith. Again, it would appear that the letter is
pseudepigraphic and may have originated in Syria or Asia Minor.
The author struggles forcefully
against heretics who deny God and Christ and attempts to strengthen his
readers in their fight against such heresy that leads to wickedness and
disorder. Libertinism is a characteristic of such heresy, and the
punishment of the heretics will be similar to that which befell the
unfaithful in the Old Testament patriarchal times. Only steadfastness in
faith, true doctrine, and prayer can lead to mercy, forgiveness,
restoration, and final salvation. An attempt to bring the erring to
repentance may save them. The letter concludes with a typical doxology.
The form is less a catholic letter
than a declared position that lays down general rules. The date is
probably near the end of the 1st century and before II Peter, which draws
upon it.
The Revelation (i.e., Apocalypse) to John is an answer in apocalyptic terms to the
needs of the church in time of persecution, as it awaits the end-time
expected in the near future. The purpose of the book is to encourage and
admonish the church to be steadfast and endure. The form of an apocalypse
shows affinities with contemporary Jewish, Oriental, and Hellenistic
writings in which problems of the end of the world and of history are
linked both with prophecy of an eschatological nature and with
"sealed" secret mysteries. Such revelations are traditionally
received in trances, characterized by strange symbols, numbers, images,
and parables or allegories that represent people and historical
situations. Apocalypticism is essentially
dualistic, presenting the present eon as evil and the future as good, with
an ultimate battle between the divine and the demonic to be won only after
one or more cosmic catastrophes. The aim of apocalyptic
literature is to depict in the age of present tribulation a
knowledge of a future glorious victory and vindication, thus giving hope
and assurance.
In Revelation it is God who gives
the revelation to Jesus Christ to be shown
by Christ through an angel to his servant John, in exile on the island of
Patmos, in order that John become his seer and prophet to the church. John
is to write down what he has seen, what is, and what is to come. In
contradistinction to most Jewish apocalyptic works, Revelation is not
pseudonymous and John is to give finally unsealed, clear prophecy related
to the present and to the end-time.
As in the rest of the New
Testament, the starting point of eschatological hope is the saving act of
God in Jesus, a historical centre pointing toward historical developments
that will bring about the establishment of God's kingdom and vindication
of his people, ransomed by the blood of Christ, the Lamb who was slain. It
provides certainty and encouragement with the example of the faithfulness
of those who have already witnessed unto death (martyrs) and their
reward--special inheritance in the eternal kingdom.
After the introduction, Revelation
continues first as a series of seven letters to seven churches in the
province of Asia, thence to the whole church with an epistolary
introduction and, after the apocalypse proper, an epistolary blessing as
the last verse. The letters sent from the heavenly Christ through John
(chapters 2 and 3) exhort, comfort, or censure the churches according to
their condition under persecution or danger of heresy. From chapters 4-22
there are series of visions in three main cycles, each recapitulating but
expanding the former in greater and clearer detail with groups of seven
symbols predominating in each (seals, chapters 6-7; trumpets, chapters
8-10; and bowls, chapters 15-16). This material is interspersed with
visions of God in his heavenly council, various visions of catastrophe and
of Satan, the destroyer, the appearance of
two witnesses and other martyr examples to spur the church to endurance,
the victory of the archangel Michael over the dragon (Satan) by the blood
of the Lamb (Christ), and the representation of the powers of emperor cult
and false prophecy as beasts who bring
destruction to the unfaithful in God's judgment. A heavenly woman who
bears a messianic son is threatened by a dragon. Her child is carried up
to heaven by God, and she escapes by hiding in a place prepared for her by
God. The beasts who appear persecute the Christians and the
"number" signifying the first beast is that of a man,
"666" (or, in a variant reading, "616") probably
indicating the emperor Nero. God's triumph in history is depicted in his
judgment on the harlot Babylon (Rome), and the final consummation portrays
the victory of Christ over the Antichrist and his followers. In chapter 20
the thousand-year reign of Christ with those who witnessed unto death is
depicted. Satan, again loosed, is vanquished by fire from heaven with the
beasts (imperial power and false prophet), and the last
judgment leads to a new heaven and a new earth, the new Jerusalem.
This writing is, thus, a prophetic-apocalyptic work.
In summary, the seer reminds the
reader that the words, because they are of God, are trustworthy and true.
The motif that the Lord is coming soon is again repeated. This reflection
of the early Christian watchword suggests a sacred liturgical style. The
last verse is the closing benediction--perhaps not only of the letters in
the beginning of Revelation but of the whole of Revelation, which was to
be read aloud in a worship setting.
Apocalypticism was introduced into
Asia Minor after AD 70 (the fall of Jerusalem), and c. 80-90 a prophetic circle was formed near Ephesus. Its leader was John,
a prophet, who might well have been the author of Revelation, which is
deeply steeped in apocalyptic traditions. The "Johannine circle"
bearing the tradition of John, the Apostle of the Lord, and from which
emerged the Gospel and letters bearing his name, might have been a
continuation of the prophetic conventicle of Ephesus in which John was
prominent. The various writings do not have to be consistent except in
their basic faith in Jesus Christ; and, as
the situations to which they addressed themselves were different,
different styles and content were required. The seer was probably involved
in an actual historical situation in the late 80s under Domitian, a time
when there was open conflict between the church and the Roman state. There
is a tradition supported by Irenaeus, a 2nd-century bishop of Lyons, that
in this persecution punishment was death or banishment. John's prominence
might have led to banishment to Patmos, an isle off the coast of Asia
Minor, from his homeland in or around Ephesus. From Patmos he wrote a
circular letter to the churches in Asia.
Though the style of Revelation is
certainly eclectic in form and content, containing elements of a heavenly
epistle and with more than three-fourths of the rest made up of
prophetic-apocalyptic forms from varied sources, it reflects a systematic
and careful plan. Even the apocalyptic, however, is
"anti-apocalyptic" in that the seer's message is open and the
mysteries serve not to conceal but to heighten what is seen and to be
expected. Apocalyptic schemata and motifs are, however, used toward this
purpose, and allegorical incorporation of sources is more a demonstration
of the true, ultimate message than a literary device. Blurred images (e.g.,
God, Christ, and angels; chiliastic [1,000-year] eras and temporal
duplications; as well as interpretations) are part of the apocalyptic
style, but a current concrete historical situation is the foundation.
Revelation is written in fantastic imagery, blending Jewish
apocalypticism, Babylonian mythology, and astrological speculation. It is
pictorial, dramatic, and poetic.
Revelation contains long sections
characterized by Greek that is grammatically and stylistically crude,
strangely Hebraized to give a unique, almost Oriental, colour. This may
have been deliberate. Although Revelation is replete with Old Testament
allusions, there are no direct quotations, and this may reflect the seer's
conviction that the work is a direct revelation from God. In other
sections the poetry of Revelation might stem from the seer's experience in
the heavenly throne room of God, from hearing the hymns of the angelic
host, or from his recollection on Patmos of the liturgical practice of the
church. The image of the Bride and wedding feast together with the
"Come, Lord Jesus!" have associations with the eucharistic
liturgy of the early church.
The recapitulations of the seven
seals, trumpets, and bowls may be deliberate schematization. The purpose
of such repetition and increasing revelation can be a way of heightening
enthusiasm to encourage the church.
Mysterious numbers and divisions
(such as 7, 3, 12) recur and are part of the theme of assurance, because
God has numbers in their order as a sign of his plan of salvation, turning
chaos to orderly cosmos. The mysterious name of the first beast, 666, in
13:18, can be calculated by "gematria,"
assigning their numerical values to letters of the word and summing them
up. The most adequate solution is Nero (the
numerical value of the Hebrew letters for Caesar
Neron equals 666), a demonic Nero redivivus
(revived), who returns from the dead as Antichrist. Astronomy and
astrology have also been applied to Revelation in terms of the signs of
the zodiac or a calendar of feasts and seasons as keys to understanding
its structure, because it is God who orders the times and seasons.
Two witnesses described in chapter
11 have been assumed to be Elijah and Moses, Peter and Paul, or simply two
examples of martyrs through whom God shows
his punishment of the wicked and vindication of the righteous to his
glory. There are strong martyrological themes throughout Revelation, and
it seems to stand on the border line of the point at which the word
witness (martys) became a technical term for a witness unto death, or martyr.
The cosmic battle in heaven is fought by those willing to give their
lives, who mix their blood with the blood of the Lamb, whose blood
"ransomed men for God." The writer of Revelation based his hope
for the church on perseverance, on endurance even to death, and on what
the future will bring when the church will live with the glorified Christ,
slain as a lamb. The harlot of Babylon will be destroyed and the church
will endure; Babylon falls and the new Jerusalem, the city of God that is
to come, is depicted in all its glory. These are the hopes to strengthen
the persecuted church, assurance that God will soon triumph. With trumpet
call and heavenly voices there is the joyful promise that "The
kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ,
and he shall reign for ever and ever."
|