Acts. C. 63, by Luke—the "we" passages identifying him with Paul; probably from Rome. No mention of destruction of Jerusalem, nor release of Paul from prison (61-63). Same plan and style as in Gospel apparent throughout. In Luke we have record of what Jesus "began both to do and to teach;" in Acts, what He continued to do through Holy Spirit, laying down principle of that work. Takes up story just where Gospel leaves it, giving more details of ascension. Constitutes first history of Christian missions, covering about thirty years. Shows fulfillment of 1:8, with gospel planted in ever-enlarging circles.
Book a unit, exhibiting divine plan and wonderful skill in handling varied materials. In first section, Peter prominent, Jerusalem the center, and ministry to Jews; in second, Paul prominent, Antioch the new center, and ministry chiefly to Gentiles. Shows expansion of Christianity from capital of Judaism to center of heathenism. Numerous addresses recorded —seven by Peter, one by James, one by Stephen, seven by Paul. Recent researches vindicate historical data, former points of attack becoming bulwarks of defense. Perfect correspondence with Pauline epistles. Title differs on various manuscripts. Not intended as history of all apostles, nor full recital concerning any. Ends abruptly, possibly because of accession of Tigellinus to prefectorship, compelling withdrawal from Rome.
(Sixteen early witnesses to credibility. Charges of negative critics disproved by recent archeological discoveries.)
Hebrews. C. 65-68, before destruction of Jerusalem and cessation of temple sacrifices (8:13, 10:2, 3, 26); presumably from Italy (13:24). Evidently written for Jewish Christians in Palestine where, close to splendor of Jerusalem temple service, temptation to lapse into Judaism and exposure to persecution from Jews, strongest. Composed during Neronic persecution, likewise against Christian Jews. Designed to confirm Jews in Christian faith by showing Mosaic system had come to end through fulfillment by Christ of entire ceremonial service. Issue sharply drawn between Christianity and Judaism. They decried Jesus; he exalts Him. They extol the ceremonial; lie shows ceremonialism finds only meaning in Christ. They urge invalidity and futility of Christianity; he shows finality of Christianity, that it is the crown of Judaism.
Masterful presentation of very heart of Christianity. Is really the key book of the New Testament, unlocking the symbolism of the entire Old Testament. Has well been compared with sermon on mount. Key word: "better," contrasting good things introduced by Moses with better things provided through Christ. Shows superiority of new over old, the heavenly Priest over the earthly, and the heavenly in contrast to the earthly sanctuary. The past, partial and fragmentary; the present, full and final. The typical no longer needed nor effective. Angels not sources but ministers. Designed to check strong fascination for Jewish ritualism by showing it to be but shadow, now abolished by sacrificial death of Christ.
Has purest diction and most .elegant literary style of all New Testament books. Quotes almost invariably from LXX. Twenty of the twenty-five citations from the Old Testament use the phraseology of the Septuagint, in whole or in part, rather than the Hebrew. Carefully planned and arranged. Writer must have been Jewish, but author unnamed in epistle. Attributed variously to Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Silas, Barnabas, Luke, and Priscilla. Speculation and discussion sharp through the centuries. Arguments for Pauline authorship more weighty than all other considerations together. Viewpoint distinctly Pauline. While thirteen acknowledged epistles explicit in claim, ancient catalogues of authority assign fourteen to Paul—which count must include Hebrews. Anonymity favors Paul. Good reason for withholding name, for Jews hated him fervently. As apostle to Gentiles, inscribing name would interfere with purpose. Paul's solicitude for brethren of the flesh well known (Rom. 9:3). Has seventeen words peculiar to Hebrews and recorded speeches of Paul, not found elsewhere in New Testament; also thirty-four words found only here and in Paul's acknowledged epistles. Expression, "I beseech you brethren" (13:22), occurs twenty-two times in Paul's epistles. "Salute all them that have the rule over you" (13:24) another characteristic Pauline expression, identifying his epistles. (See Phil. 1:23; Titus 3:15; 2 Tim. 4:19; 2 Thess. 3:17; Col. 4:15; Phil. 4: 21; 2 Cor. 13:13; Romans 16, twelve times.)
In our versions is placed after thirteen avowedly Pauline letters, but in Sinaitic, Alexandrian, and Vatican, is placed in midst. Pantaenus of Alexandria (c. 170), head of celebrated theological school, attributes to Paul. From that time on all ecclesiastics of East-
which was undoubtedly more critical than West—accept Pauline authorship without exception, while West challenged it. The thought is unquestionably that of Paul. The beautiful Greek phrasing may have been that of his amanuensis, thought by many to have been Luke. Paul's other epistles written to Gentiles in rugged style. Romans was logical argumentation, and is the hardest Greek in the New Testament. Hebrews is comparative exposition. Its theme: Christ fulfilling all the law. In appealing to Hebrews, Paul would naturally, instructed at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), write as instructed scribe (2 Peter 3:15, 16). Diversity in style in Athenian address, from others. The mention of Timothy in Hebrews 13:23 also determining factor. Such is preponderance of evidence in favor of Paul.
(No book more fully authenticates itself as inspired. Canonical authority questioned only for a time, because of uncertainty as to authorship.)
[General Epistles.—When name first applied, used only for James, 1 Peter and 1 John. Others added afterward for sake of convenience. Ostensibly precepts and principles for church at large, rather than for specific, localized groups. Not addressed to particular church or individual, hence no particular church responsible for preserving or circulating. The term "Catholic Epistles" first employed by Eusebius in fourth century. In the Syrian Peshito, only three recognized—James, 1 Peter, and 1 John. Order varies in different lists, some placing John's first, as beloved disciple; others Peter's, as "prince of apostles." In oldest manuscripts placed between Acts and Pauline Epistles. (See Scholz, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort.) Some put James last, because received late into canon; others first, because written early. Chronological acceptance into canon more a question of use than of inquiry. That some general epistles were not immediately acknowledged shows they were received only after complete and incontestable evidence proved them genuine productions of apostles. No writings accepted have since been proved spurious.
As to formal New Testament groupings, first came collected writings of Paul, then collected Gospels, and lastly general epistles, as distinct from Paul's, the order in listing of four Gospels remaining same from second century onward. Muratorian Canon names Luke "third" and John "fourth." Tatian the Syrian (150 A. n.) made harmonic arrangement, the Diatesseron. Paul's writings, a substantial portion of which were produced before synoptic Gospels, were collected early, and can be traced back as a collection, admitting no possibility of mistake.
The order as found in our Bibles, with the Gospels first, and followed by the epistles, is both logical and desirable for the church at large in its march through the centuries. It is the natural arrangement, for the Gospels give the factual record of the life of our Lord, while the epistles expound those facts. The epistles presuppose an intimate knowledge of those facts, and in the time of Paul's first six epistles this ground was familiar to all through oral teaching and the many uninspired narratives extant at the time. Luke 1:1-4. In the words of the Sunday School Times of January 13, 1934: "No one would assert that the familiar order of the Authorized Version—Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Revelation--represents the order in which the books were written. But that arrangement is simple, logical, and has much to commend it. . . . The epistles presuppose and require for their doctrine the factual basis supplied by the Gospels."]
1 Peter. C. 65 A. D., from Babylon. Addressed to both Jews and Gentiles in five provinces of Asia Minor (1:1). Despised because of their faith, were suffering social ostracism. Christianity had aroused hostility of world; and with its spread, this increased. Written before destruction of temple (4:17). Refers to persecution of Christians (4:16), which locates it about time of Neronic persecutions. Several marked coincidences of expression between Peter's speeches in Acts and in this epistle. Here we catch the mutterings of the storm. Peter himself evidently suffered martyrdom c. 68, in intensity of same persecution. Nero, monster of iniquity, set fire to Rome, and receiving public condemnation, laid blame on Christians. Wound them with tarred linen bandages, and used as torches for gardens at night.
Peter speaks of being in Babylon (5:13), and having Mark with him. How long Mark was with Barnabas (Acts 15:31), before going with Peter, unknown. Word of condition of churches evidently brought by Mark from trip through Asia Minor. Common opinion that by "Babylon" Peter means Rome, seat of oppression, and hence given symbolic name. But no evidence that was ever so used at that time; nor any proof that Peter ever visited Rome, until shortly before death. ("The Acts of the Apostles," p. 537.) Martyrdom at Rome attested not only by Latin, but by Alexandrine and Asiatic Fathers, so virtually universal. Inconceivable that Paul would write to Romans in 58, and not mention Peter if he were there or had been there. Contentions of Romanists as to Peter's residence and bishopric at Rome collapse under scrutiny. The testimony of the Fathers nearest the events alleged are the least positive and conclusive.
In early years Peter, in inner circle of disciples, constantly associated with John. Recognized leader and spokesman, first to Jews and then to Gentiles. Present on mount of transfiguration, and in Gethsemane. Dark page of denial obliterated by full restoration of apostolic office. John 21. Prominent in formation of church (Acts 1), the preacher at Pentecost, and weighty in council at Jerusalem. Acts 15. Later rebuked by Paul. Colossians 2. Latter years very obscure.
Field of labor principally in East, directing epistle to East, and obviously dating it from Babylon in Euphrates Valley. Impossible to tell how long he had been there, for as noted, no evidence that "Babylon" was at that time applied to Rome. Mystical signification came after John wrote Revelation. Literal Babylon, on other hand, was chief center of Eastern dispersion. Term not limited to city, but included province which formed center of Jewish population. Moreover, places mentioned in salutation are enumerated from east to west in order of travel from Babylon to Rome, and not from west to east as one would naturally do in writing from Rome. This view held by Calvin, Bengel, Credner, Neander, De Wette, Briikner, Weisener, Reuss, Hug, Keil, Mangold, Lipsius, Alford, Wordsworth, and others. The churches founded by Paul.
Keynote: "hope," therefore practical rather than doctrinal. Urges courage and faith in face of trials of time. Corrects wrong tendencies. Presents fundamental truths of Christian faith, especially atonement. Has same emphasis as Paul, with practicality of James.
While Jews as nation rejected Christianity, Greeks peculiarly susceptible to influences, as they were dissatisfied with rites and superstitions of paganism. Possibly Silvanus (Silas) was amanuensis as well as bearer (5:12), thus forming link between Peter and Paul.
(Testimony for genuineness unanimous and unhesitating among early Christian writers.
No more strongly attested writing in New Testament. Transmitted by unbroken chain of testimony from apostolic times. In Peshito, old Latin, and most ancient versions.)
Jude. C. 66 A. D., from Palestine or Syria. Stern reproof for serious evils introduced by professed believers, with illustrations from history. Probably written just after 1 Peter, and before 2 Peter. Students puzzled over similarity of two. Resemblances too close to be regarded accidental. Writers evidently in communication, and one had read words of other.
Not to be considered strange, as New Testament writers use manifold quotations from Old Testament without allusion as to source. In Old Testament similar use by Micah of prophecy previously uttered by Isaiah. Possibly Jude and Peter consented together as to which portions of church they would address on same theme, Peter writing for Jewish Christians of dispersion in Asia Minor, Jude writing virtually same thing to those in Palestine and Egypt. Recipients not definitely specified.
Little known of Jude's life and labor. Was brother of James, "brother of the Lord" (Gal.1:9) ; either an older half-brother by Joseph's former wife, or a younger son of Mary and Joseph, and thus a younger half-brother of Jesus. Not so prominent as James, leading spirit in Jerusalem after apostles scattered over world. Acts 15:14; 21:18, Though unbelieving through most of Saviour's earthly life, was converted after His resurrection. Written shortly before destruction of Jerusalem, when some apostles were already fallen asleep, for he says, "Remember the words of the apostles" (vs. 17) ; but before Jerusalem's destruction, because not listed in typical destructions of ungodly. Neither was it at early date, for such heresy as depicted had not then developed. Occasioned by same circumstances calling for 2 Peter. Antinomian Gnosticism, with its speculative theories, and spread of grossly immoral conduct, were challenging purity of faith. These painted in darkest colors. Writes to warn against heretical opinions and to urge defense of faith. No esoteric doctrine that was only possession of the few. Apostasy presented in 2 Timothy and 2 Peter treated as having already begun in incipient form.
Quotes from apocryphal* "Book of Enoch" and "Assumption of Moses." This sharply criticized by some; but surely prophet or apostle can quote sentence from noncanonical book without giving the book sanction as inspired. Supported by Zechariah 3:2: "The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan." No more strange than Paul's allusion in 2 Timothy 3:8 to Jannes and Jambres, secured from Jewish tradition; or his citation of heathen poets Epimenides, Aratus, and Menander. Why could not Jude likewise use statement from rabbinical sources? Some scholars declare, moreover, that "Book of Enoch" was not written until 132 A. n.; so Jude would be quoting a true tradition only. [See Volkner, et al.) In quoting it, Holy Spirit vouches for truth and accuracy. Very limitation of quotation discloses guidance of inspiration, for there are hundreds of irrational state-
Or, more accurately, pecatdepigraphical, the dictionary definition c,f which is here given. showing the distinction between "apocryphal" and "pseudepigraph-
"Pseudepigrapha . . . writings purporting to be produced by Biblical characters or in Biblical times, but never accepted as canonical by any branch of the Christian church. They are of Jewish and Christian origin, and date from the centuries just before and after the beginning of the Christian era."—Webster's .Veic International Dietimutoy.
ments in "Book of Enoch." If used, they would constitute evidence that Jude was not inspired. Delay in canonical recognition accounted for by brevity, and these allusions to apocryphal writings, according to Jerome.
(Considering brevity, and nature of content, is well authenticated in Muratorian Canon. Quoted by Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Jerome, Epiphanius. Jewish church of Palestine and Egypt first to recognize.)
L. E. F.
(To be continued)
