« AnteriorContinuar »
and the Bible, pp. 227, 228) suggested that phrases like 110 (o trovdáoate Belaiav úuôv tnv klñolv kai ékoyny troleio Zai) and 38-13 may have really been Petrine phrases which survived and floated in men's memories, though the context had been lost. But this is highly improbable. The phrases are perfectly natural and can be paralleled elsewhere; the words of 21f. follow 121 without serious jolting; and a pseudonymous writer required no hint or occasion, beyond the existence of a genuine 1 Peter and a Petrine tradition, to speak in the apostle's name. Besides, as Chase (DB, iii. p. 814 f.) shows, the coincidences with Apoc. Pet. extend over chap. 1 as well as over chap. 2. Kühl (-Meyer), however, still holds to his hypothesis that a genuine Petrine letter is preserved in this epistle, less 21-32 which represents a later interpolation.
N.B.-In connection with the survey of constructions and analyses on pp. 700—704, it ought to have been observed that Professor B. W. Bacon, in his acute and trustworthy summary of Pauline chronology (E.p.5 x. pp. 351 f., 412–430), already referred to on page 133, approximates in part to Dr. McGiffert, regarding 2 Tim 49. 11-18. 20. 21 a (?), with fragments of 1 Tim as genuinely Pauline material which dated from the period of 2 Corinthians (end of 54 A.D.) and originated in Macedonia; the rest of 2 Tim (less 113. 14 214-317 43-4, which are interpolations) must fall into the period of Philippians, which is the latest of the Captivity-epistles. Fragments from Titus are to be placed, with some hesitation, along with 2 Co 101–1310, which Professor Bacon identifies with the intermediate letter to Corinth (as above, p. 177), written in 54 A.D., perhaps after a visit to Crete (?), but certainly subsequent to the fragment 2 Co 614_71 (as above, pp. 628, 629). On this scheme Galatians is also placed, as in the present edition, between Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians. In regard to the general chronology, however, Professor Bacon proceeds upon rather an independent road (vide above, pp. 134-136). He fixes the conversion of Paul, 31 (34 ?) A.D.; his first visit to Jerusalem, 33 (36?); his first mission tour, 44-46 ; his arrival at Corinth, 50 (early spring); his flight from Ephesus, 54 (July-Aug.); his arrest in Jerusalem, 55 (May); his arrival at Rome, 58 (February); and his defence before Nero, 60. Such an outline of events obviously involves some important modifications of the “new” chronology as well as of the traditional scheme.
PAGE 28 n.-On the relation of this colophon in Matthew to the work
of Papias, which also had a five-fold division (ouyypánuara TÉVTE,
Euseb. HE, 111. 38), see Nestle, 2NW, 1900, pp. 252-254. Page 44 n.-An excellent popular statement of this familiar law may be
found in Dr. E. B. Tylor's Anthropology, chap. xv. (“History and Mythology). As he correctly points out, “it is often possible to satisfy oneself that some story is not really history, by knowing the causes which led to its being invented.” This principle, of course, is
the supreme organon of tendency-criticism. Page 51 n. 1.- Was the public for which the early Christian literature
was intended, exclusively Christian? Or did it embrace an audience such as that contemplated by the author of 2 Macc (224. 25), numbering some who were merely interested, possibly sympathetic-like the father of Maitland of Lethington, “civil, albeit not persuaded in religion”? This legitimate question has been recently raised in several quarters ; by J. Weiss (Ueber die Absicht der Apgeschichte, p. 56), à propos of Acts and Romans ; by Zahn (Einl. ii. pp. 359 f.), who conjectures that Theophilus was a pagan, 'first converted by reading the third gospel; and by Wernle (ŽNW, 1900, pp. 42–65), who brings out a distinct “apologetic” element in the composition of all the gospels. With the scanty data at our command, it is not easy to determine whether such an outside reference existed in all or any of these cases, and if so, to what extent. Early Christianity, as a whole, was neither the life of a sequestered ghetto nor a
crusade appealing to the public mind. Page 242.-In the recently discovered (Greek) fragment of the Ascensio
Isaiae, the death of Peter is connected closely with the Neronic persecution. As restored by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt, the passage runs : ο βασιλεύς ούτος την φυτείαν ήν φυτεύσουσιν οι δώδεκα απόστολοι του αγαπητού διώξει, και των δώδεκα εις ταϊς χερσίν αυτου Tapadodnoetai (Amherst Papyri, pt. I. 1900). For a discussion of this, and of the conjectural Testament embedded in the larger document, see Dr. R. H. Charles' new edition (The Ascension of
Isaiah), which supersedes most previous work upon the subject. Page 258.—It was no imaginary danger which the rise of evangelic stories
averted from the Christian consciousness, from c. 60 A.D. and onwards. In the flush and rush of spiritual phenomena there was always an ecstatic enthusiasm which tended to swamp the historical tradition of Jesus. “That the church surmounted this peril is one of the great deeds of the Providence of God. And what saved the church ? Not spiritual speculation like that of Paul, which could not afford any guarantee that it would keep by the track of the gospel as given in history. It was simply owing to the infinite impression made by the historical Jesus, that the historical character of Christianity did not suffer loss. In this respect, the memory of Jesus paralysed the spiritual phenomena of the apostolic age and survived them for more than a thousand years ” (Gunkel, Die Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, nach der populären Anschauung der apostolischen Zeit und der Lehre des Apostels Paulus,” p. 56).
Page 260 f.— A similar practical motive for authorship is plainly avowed
in the well-known prologue to Ecclesiasticus (also 2 Esdras 1422-152,
Baruch 114). Page 268.—“Non fuit Matthaeo curae historiam ut gesta erat texere sed
Christi doctrinam exprimere” (Maldonatus, a Jesuit of the sixteenth
century, quoted by Jülicher, Gleichnisreden Jesu, i. p. 3). Page 273.–Baljon, in his recent edition (Commentaar op het Evangelie van
Matthaeus, 1900), places Matthew's gospel shortly after 70 A.D., written by a Jew of the Dispersion, who naturally inclined to semi
Jewish forms in exhibiting the gospel-story. Page 416.-In an elaborate textua] study (Der abendländische Text der
Apgeschichte u. die Wir-Quelle, 1900), A. Pott attributes Acts to an editor who worked up, with other materials, a Lucan account of Paul which included the we-journal. Much of the Western text he
explains as due to glosses, existing in two separate textual forms. Page 416 n. 1.-It is not improbable, as Mr. Cross suggests, that simil
arities such as those referred to on p. 272 are due to the fact that these writers all followed a conventional literary form in composing
their prefaces and dedications. Pages 143, 461.-Willrich does his best to fill up these years after 30 A.D.
by assigning to them quite a number of Alexandrian Jewish productions, chiefly pseudepigrapha; he puts Jason of Cyrene not earlier than the reign of Claudius, and 2 Maccabees actually after
70 A.D. (Judaica, 1900, pp. 40–130). Page 463.--I am glad to find these two points (the dual authorship of
the Apocalypse and the fourth gospel, and the literary function of the early Christian prophets) now thrown into sharp relief by Dr. E.
C. Selwyn in his stimulating study of The Christian Prophets (1900). Pages 132, 559.— A diverting example of reconstruction in this depart
ment is furnished by Lisco in his new volume (Vincula Sanctorum, “ Ein Beitrag zur Erklärung der Gefangenschaftsbriefe des Ap. Paulus," 1900). For reasons as precarious in exegesis as in tradition, he places the prison-epistles in an Ephesian crisis and captivity of Paul; after 2 Co A (see page 178, above), Titus and Col-Ephes come, previous to the trial; thereafter 2 Tim and Philippians, fol
lowed by BC (with 1 Co 15) written after his release. Page 606.—Recently, in his latest volunie Clue (1900), Dr. E. A. Abbott
attempts to exhibit a biblical Hebrew original underlying portions
of the synoptic gospels. Pages 145, 626.—The partition-theories applied, especially by Spitta, to
2 Thessalonians are reviewed by Professor G. G. Findlay in Exp.6
(October 1900), pp. 251–261. Pages 259, 645.—This slowness and reluctance to adopt writing for
religious purposes may be illustrated by the remarkable legend of Numa's burial:(Plutarch, Vit. Num. 22). Of the two stone coffins, one contained the Emperor's sacred books, which were composed by him and then buried at his request, in order that the sacred mysteries might duly be preserved in their proper home, i.e. in the minds of living men, not in books without à soul. He had
already taught their contents to the priests as an oral tradition. Page 691 f.-Another rearrangement (1022 before 812) in JTS (1900), v. Pages 30, 694, 695.—The “I” and “we” of authorship actually occur in
the gospel of Peter, where they are plainly introduced to heighten the claim to apostolic authorship and dignity.
Index (a) SUBJECTS AND CONTENTS.
(6) REFERENCES AND AUTHORITIES.
(a) SUBJECTS AND CONTENTS
and function, 412-419; structure, Caesarea, 132, 348, 700 f.
Canon, varying order of NT books in,
“Catholicism” of early churches,
412 f., 466, 695.
Cerinthus, 575, 700.
Christianity, primitive, 668 f., 709.
other NT literature, 537, 683 f., 687 f. Chronicles, books of, 8.
Chronology, limitations and uncer-
and aim, 459-465; analytic criti Colossians, epistle to: date, 131 ;
authenticity and contents, 214–217;
textual condition of, 633, 634.
Compilation in NT literature, 615 f.
Corinth, Paul's relations with, 174–
178, 672, also 700-704.
Corinthian epistles, 126 f. ; criticism
of, 174-178 ; interpolation in, 627 f.
132, 243 f., 463 f., 538, 694 f. DAMASCUS, Paul at, 629 f.
Daniel, 460, 464, 638.
Deuteronomy, 623, 675.
Diotrephes, 536 f.'
Documents, filiation of, xv, xvi.
Doketism, 32, 496 f., 535.
Domitian, reign and persecution of,
343 f., 460 f., 535, 578, 678 f.
615 ; epistle of, 64.
108 ; Blass' theory of, 416, 610-612. Egypt, 349, 591, 598.
Emperors, worship of, 461 f., 687.
Enoch, book of, 590, 620, 686.
ship, and contents, 225-230, 419; 628, 633 f., 649 f., 705 f.
JAMES, epistle of : date, contents, and
607 ; structure of, 618, 704–706.
Jerome, 53, 116, 598.
613, 630, 639 f., 685 f. ; the heavenly,
Jesus, our knowledge of, 9–11 ; person-
ality of, 260 f.; and the Law, 645 f.;
and the church, 646 f. ; universal-
ism of, 266, 647 f. ; birth-narratives
of, 266,651 f.; apostles of, 250 f., 418.
Jews, propaganda of and against, 344 f.,
environment, 35, 36, 269, date, con- John, the apostle, 463, 495, 679, 685,
– the presbyter, 463, 495 f., 536,
124-129; interpolations in, 627. 639, 664.
Jubilees, book of, 60, 605.
Judas, epistle of: date and object,
591 ; to 2nd Peter, 706-708.
Jesus, 13-16, 65 f. ; devotional and Judges, book of, 8.
Logos, the, 355, 492 f., 686.
Luke, gospel of: tendencies of, 23,
contents, 344-351 ; no translation, to Matthew, 266 f. ; origin, 271 f. ;
sources, 617, 651-653; interpolations
in, 651 f.
MACCABEES, 1st, 615, 688.
-- 2nd, 558, 615, 710.
- 3rd, 143, 608, 650.
- criticism, its rights in NT study, Magus, Simon, 669.
Mark, gospel of: its origin, 26 f.,
to Matthew and Luke, 262-266 ;
opening of, 635-637 ; conclusion of,
Mark, gospection, 28 t.: 262-266;