Part 19
istic grounds this great experience of Christ in the
his new creed. There was tremendous pith and point in this statement from Saul. The Jews were amazed (Acts 9 21). This is the core of Paul's message as we see in his later ministry (Acts 13; 17 3). It rests at bottom on Paul's own experience
life of Paul. It has been urged that Paul had an epileptic fit, that he had a sunstroke, that he fell
off his horse to the ground, that he had a nightmare, that he was blinded by a flash of lightning, that he imagined that he saw Jesus as a result of his highly wrought nervous state, that he deliberately renounced Judaism because of the growing conviction that the disciples were right. But none of these explanations explains. Mere prejudice against the supernatural, such as is shown by Weinel in his Paulus, and by Holsten in his able book (Zum Evangelium d. Paulus und Petrus), cannot solve
of grace. "His whole theology is nothing but the explanation of his own conversion" (Stalker, Life
of St. Paul, 45). We need not argue (Garvie, Studies of Paul and His Gospel, 51) that Paul understood at once the full content of the new message, but he had the heart of it right. V. Work.—There was evidently a tumult in Paul's soul. He had undergone a revolution, both intellectual and spiritual. Before he
this problem. One must be willing to hear the
. evidence. There were witnesses of the bright light (Acts 26 13) and of the sound (9 7) which only Paul understood . (22 9), as he alone beheld Jesus.
1. Adjustproceeded farther it was wise to think ment through the most important implications of the new standpoint. Luke gives no account of this personal phase of Paul's
It is claimed by some that Paul had a trance or subjective vision, and did not see Jesus with his
career, but he allows room for it between Acts 9 21 and 22. It is Paul who tells of his retirement to Arabia (Gal 1 17 f) to prove his independence of the apostles in Jerus. He did not go to them
eyes. Denney {Standard Bible Diet.) replies that
it is not a pertinent objection. Jesus (Jn 21 1) "manifested'' Himself , and Paul says that he "saw" Jesus (1 Cor 9 1), that Jesus "appeared" _ (1 Cor 15 8) to him. Hence it was both subjective and
for instruction or for ecclesiastical authority. He did not adopt the merely traditional view of Jesus as the Messiah. He knew, of course, the Christian contention well enough, for he had answered it often enough. But now his old arguments were gone and he must work his way round to the other side, and be able to put his new gospel with clearness and force. He was done with calling Jesus anathema (1 Cor 12 3). Henceforth to him Jesus is Lord. We know nothing of Paul's life in Arabia nor in what part of Arabia he was. He may have gone to Mt. Sinai and thought out grace in the atmosphere of law, but that is not necessary. But it is clear that Paul grew in apprehension of the things of Christ during these years, as indeed he grew to the very end.
objective. But the reality of the event was as
clear to Paul as his own existence. The account is given 3 t in Acts (chs 9, 22, 26) in substantial agreement, with a few varying details. In ch 9 the
historical narrative occurs, in ch 22 Paul's defence
before the mob in Jerus is given, and in ch 26 we have the apology before Agrippa. There are no
contradictions of moment, save that in ch 26 Jesus Himself is represented as giving directly to Paul the
call to the Gentiles while in chs 9 and 22 it is conveyed through Ananias (the fuller and more accurate
account). There is no need to notice the apparent
contradiction between 9 7 and 22 9, for the difference in case in the Gr gives a difference in sense, hearing the sound, with the genitive, and not under-
I3ut he did not grow away from the first clear vision
standing the sense, with the accusative. Findlay (HBD) remarks that the conversion of Paul is a
of Christ. He claimed that God had revealed His Son in him that he might preach to the Gentiles
psychological and ethical problem which cannot be accounted for save by Paul's own interpretation of
(Gal 1 16). He claimed that from the first and
to the very last. The undoubted development in
the change wrought in him. He saw Jesus and
Paul's Epp. (see Matheson, Spiritual Development
surrendered to Him.
Paul, the Apostle THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2280
of St. Paul, and Sabatier, The Apostle Paul) is, howevpr, not a changing view of Christ that nulli-
taking Stephen's place and is disputing against the Grecian .Jews (Acts 9 29). He had days of blessed fellowship (9 28) with the disciples, till the Grecian Jews sought to kill him as Saul had helped to do to Stephen (9 29). It was a repetition of Damascus, but Saul did not wish to run again so soon. He protested to the Lord Jesus, who spoke in a vision to him, and recalls the fate of Stephen, but Jesus bids him go: "For I will send thee forth far hence unto the Gentiles" (Acts 22 17-21). One martyr like Stephen is enough. So the brethren took him down to Caesarea (Acts 9 30). It was an ominous beginning for a ministry with so clear a call. Where can he go now? They "sent him forth to Tarsus" (Acts 9 30). Who would welcome him there? At Jerus he apparently avoided Gamaliel and the
fies Paul's "original Christian inheritance" (Kohler, Zu?n Verstandnis des Apostels Pauliis, 13). Pfleitlerer (Influence of the Apostle Paul on the Development of Christianity, 3d ed, 1897, 217) rejects Col because of the advanced Christology here found. But the Christology of Col is implicit in Paul's
first sermon at Damascus. "It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the significance and value of the Cross became clear to him almost simultaneously with the certainty of the resurrection and of the Messiahship of Jesus" (Garvie, Studies, etc, 57). The narrow Jew has surrendered to Christ who died for the sins of the world. The universal gospel has taken hold of his mind and heart, and it will work out its logical consequences in Paul. The time in Arabia is not wasted. When he reappears in Damascus (Acts 9 22) he has "developed faith" (Findlay, HDB) and energy that bear instant fruit. He is now the slave of Christ. For him henceforth to live is Christ. He is crucified with Christ. He is in Christ. The union of Paul with Christ is the real key to his life. It is far more than a doctrine about Christ. It is real fellowship with Christ (Deissmann, St. Paul, 123). Thus it is that the man who probably never saw Christ in the flesh understands him best (Wernle, Beginnings of Christianity, I, 159). Saul had "increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews that dwelt in Damascus, proving that this is the Christ" (Acts 2. Opposi9 22). Now he not merely "protion claims" as before (9 20); he "proves." He does it with such marvelous skill that the Jews are first confounded, then enraged to the point of murder. Their former hero was now their foe. The disciples had learned to run from Saul. They now let him down in a basket through the wall bynight and he is gone (Acts 9 23 fl). This then is the beginning of the active ministry of the man who was called to be a chosen vessel to Gentiles, kings, and Jews. There was no need to go back to the wilderness. He had gotten his bearings clearly now. He had his message and it had his whole heart. He had not avoided Jerus because he despised flesh and blood, but because he had no need of light from the apostles since "the Divine revelation so completely absorbed his interest and attention" (Garvie, Life and Teaching of Paul, 33). No door was open as yet among the Gentiles. Sooner or later he must go to Jerus and confer with the leaders there if he was to cooperate with them in the evangelization of the world. Saul knew that he would be an object of suspicion to the disciples in Jerus. That was inevitable in view of the past. It was best to go, but he did not wish to ask any favors of the apostles. Indeed he went in particular "to visit Cephas" (m to "become acquainted with," Gal 1 18). They knew each other, of course, as opponents. But Saul comes now with the olive branch to his old enemy. He expressly explains (Gal 1 19) that he saw no other apostle. He did see James, the Lord's brother, who was not one of the Twelve. It seems that at first Peter and James were both afraid of Saul (Acts 9 26), "not believing that he was a disciple." If a report came 3 years before of the doings at Damascus, they had discounted it. All had been quiet, and now Saul suddenly appears in Jerus in a new role. It was, they feared, just a ruse to complete his work of old. But for Barnabas, Saul might not have had that
3. Waiting Sanhedrin. He was with the Christians and preached to the Hellenistic Jews. The Jews regarded him as a turncoat, a renegade Jew. There were apparently no Christians' in Tarsus, unless some of the disciples driven from Jerus by Saul himself went that far, as they did go to Antioch (Acts 11 19 f). But Saul was not idle, for he speaks himself of his activity in the regions of Syria and Cilicia during this "period of obscurity"
(Denney, Standard Bible Did.) as a thing known to the churches of Judaea (Gal 1 21 f). He was not idle then. The way was not yet opened for formal entrance upon the missionary enterprise, but Saul was not the man to do nothing at home because of that. If they would not hear him at Damascus and Jerus, they would in the regions of Syria and Cilicia, his home province. We are left in doubt at first whether Paul preached only to Jews or to Gentiles also. He had the specific call to preach to the Gentiles, and there is no reason why he should not have done so in this province, preaching to the Jews first as he did afterward. He did not have the scruples of Simon Peter to overcome. When he appears at Antioch with Barnabas, he seems to take hold like an old hand at the business. It is quite probable, therefore, that this obscure ministry of some 8 or 10 years may have had more results than we know. Paul apparently felt that he had done his work in that region, for outside of Antioch he gives no time to it except that in starting out on the second tornfrom Antioch "he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches" (Acts 15 41), churches probably the fruit of this early ministry and apparently containing Gentiles also. The letter from the Jerus conference was addressed to "the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia" (Acts 15 23). Cilicia was now part of the Rom province of Syria. So then we conclude that Saul had a gentile ministry in this region. "Independently, under no human master, he learned his business as a missionary to the heathen" (Findlay, HDB). One can but wonder whether Saul was kindly received at home by his father and mother. They had looked upon him with pride as the possible successor of Gamaliel and now he is a follower of the despised Nazarene and a preacher of the Cross. It is possible that his own exhortations to fathers not to provoke their children to wrath (Eph 6 4) may imply that his own father had cast him out at this time. Findlay (HDB) argues that Saul would not have remained in this region so long if his home relations had been altogether hostile. It is a severe test of character when the doors close against one. But Saul turned defeat to glorious gain.
Most scholars hold that the ecstatic experience told by Paul in 2 Cor 12 1-9 took place before he came to Antioch. If we count the years strictly 14 from 56 AD would bring us to 42 AD. Paul had spent a year in Antioch before going up to Jerus
visit of 15 days with Peter. Barnabas was a Hellen-
ist of Cyprus and believed Saul's story and stood by him. Thus he had his opportunity to preach the gospel in Jerus, perhaps in the very synagogues
in which he had heard Stephen, and now he is
2281 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Paul, the Apostle
Galatian theory of the destination of the ep. and of the work of Paul, a theory with strong advocates and arguments, but which is by no means established (see below for discussion at more length). So far as we can gather from Luke, Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerus with John Mark (Acts 12 2.5), "when they had fulfilled their ministration" with satisfaction. The Pharisaic element was apparently quiescent, and the outlook for the future work among the Gentiles seemed hopeful. Ramsay (,S(. Paul the Traveller, 62 ff) argues strongly for identifying the revelation mentioned in Paul's speech in Acts 22 20 f with this visit in 11 30 (12 2.5), rather than with the one in Acts 9 29 f . There is a textual problem in 12 25, but I cannot concur in the solution of Ramsay.
(Acts 11 29 f). Findlay (FIDB) thinks that Paul had the visions before he received the call to come
to Antioch. Garvie {Life and Teach-
4. Opporing of Paul, 41) holds he received the tunity call first. "Such a mood of exaltation would account for the vision to which he refers in 2 Cor 12 1-4." At any rate he had the vision with its exaltation and the thorn in the flesh with its humiliation before he came to Antioch in response to the invitation of Barnabas. He had undoubtedly had a measure of success in his work in Cilicia and Syria. He had the seal of the Divine blessing on his work among the Gentiles. But there was a pang of disappointment over the attitude of the Jerus church toward his work. He was apparently left alone to his own resources. "Only such a feeling of disappointment can explain the tone of his references to his relations to the apostles
Paul had already preached to the Gentiles in
Cilicia and Syria for some 10 years. The work was not new to him. He had had his spe-
5. The cific call from Jerus long ago and had First Great answered it. But now an entirely new Mission situation arises. His work had been Campaign: individual in Cilicia. Now the Spirit Acts 13 and specifically directs the separation of
(Gal 1 11-24)" (Garvie, L?/e and Teaching of Paul, 41). There is no bitterness in this tone—but puzzled surprise. It seems that the 12 apostles are more or less absent from Jerus during this period with James the brother of the Lord Jesus as chief elder. A narrow Pharisaic element in the church was active and sought to shape the policy of the church in its attitude toward the Gentiles. This
14, 47 and Barnabas and Saul to this work (Acts 48 AD 13 2). They were to go together, and they had the sympathy and prayers
of a great church. The endorsement was probably not "ordination" in the technical sense, but a farewell service of blessing and goo4 will as the missionaries went forth on the world-campaign
(13 3). No such unanimous endorsement could have been obtained in Jerus to this great enterprise.
is clear in the treatment of Peter, when he returned to Jerus after the experience at Caesarea with Cornelius (Acts 11 1-18). There was acquiescence, but with the notion that this was an exceptional case of the Lord's doing. Hence they show concern over the spread of the gospel to the Greeks at Antioch, and send Barnabas to investigate and report (Acts 11 19-22). Barnabas was a Hellenist, and evidently did not share the narrow views of the Pharisaic party in the church at Jerus (11 2), for he was glad (11 23 f) of the work in Antioch. Probably mindful of the discipline attempted on Simon Peter, he refrained from going back at once to Jerus. Moreover, he believed in Saul and his work, and thus he gave him his great opportunity at Antioch. They had there a year's blessed work together (11 25 ff). So great was the outcorne that the disciples received a new name to distinguish them from the Gentiles and the Jews. But the term "Christian" did not become general for a longtime. There was then a great Gr church at Antioch, possibly equal in size to the Jewish church in Jerus. The prophecy by Agabus of a famine gave Barnabas and Saul a good excuse for a visit to Jerus with a gen-
It was momentous in its possibilities for Christianity. Hitherto work among the Gentiles had been sporadic and incidental. Now a determined effort was to be made to evangelize a large section of the Rom empire. There is no suggestion that the church at Antioch provided funds for this or for the two later campaigns, as the church at Philippi came to do. How that was managed this time we do not know. Some individuals may have helped. Paul had
his trade to fall back on, and often had resort to it
later. The presence of John Mark "as their attendant" (13 5) was probably due to Barnabas, his cousin (Col 4 10). The visit to Cyprus, the home of Barnabas, was natural. There were alread}' some Christians there (Acts 11 20), and it was near. They preach first in the synagogues of the Jews at Salamis (13 5). We are left to conjecture as to
results there and through the whole island till Paphos is reached. There they meet a man of great prominence and intelligence, Sergius Paulus, the Rom proconsul, who had been under the spell of a sorcerer with a Jewish name—Elymas Bar-jesus
eral collection—"every man according to his
(cf Peter's encounter with Simon Magus in Samaria) In order to win and hold Sergius Paulus, who had become interested in Christianity, Paul has to punish Bar-jesus with blindness (13 10 ff) in the
ability"—from the Gr church for the relief of the poverty in the Jerus church. Barnabas had assisted generously in a similar strain in the beginning
of the work there (Acts 4 36 f), unless it was a
exercise of that apostolic power which he afterward claimed with such vigor (1 Cor 6 4f; 2 Cor 13
different Barnabas, which is unlikely. This con-
10). He won Sergius Paulus, and this gave him cheer for his work. From now on it is Paul, not Saul, in the record of Luke, perhaps because of this
tribution would help the Jerus saints to understand now that the Greeks were really converted. It was apparently successful according to the record in
incident, though both names probably belonged to him from the first. Now also Paul steps to the
Acts. The apostles seem to have been absent,
since only "elders" are mentioned in 11 30.
fore ahead of Barnabas, and it is "Paul's company"
The incidents in ch 12, as already noted, are probably not contemporaneous with this visit, but either prior or subsequent to it. However, it is urged by some scholars that this visit is the same as that of Gal 2 1-10. since Paul would not have omitted it in his list of visits to Jerus. But then Paul is not giving a list of visits, but
(13 13) that sets sail from Paphos for Pamphylia. rhere is no evidence here of resentment on the part
of Barnabas at the leadership of Paul. The whole campaign may have been planned from the start by the Holy Spirit as the course now taken may have been due to Paul's leadership. John Mark
is only showing his independence of the apostles. If they were absent from Jerus at that time, there would be no occasion to mention it. Besides, Luke in Acts 15 does recount the struggle in Jerus over the problem of
deserts at Perga and returns to Jerus (his home), not to Antioch (13 13). Paul and Barnabas push on to the tablelands of Pisidia. Ramsay {Si. Paul
gentile liberty. If that question was an issue at ttie
visit in Acts 11 30, it is quite remarkable that he should have passed it by, esp. if the matter caused as much heat as is manifest in Gal 2, both in Jerus and Antioch. It
the Traveller, 93) thinks that Paul had malaria down
is much simpler to understand that in Acts 15 and Gal 2 1-10 we have the public and the private aspects of the same issue, than to suppose that Luke has slurred the whole matter over in Acts 11 30. The identification
at Perga and hence desired to get up into higher
land. That is possible. The places mentioned in
the rest of the tour are Antioch in Pisidia (13 14), and Iconiiun (13 51), Lystra (14 8), and Derbe
of the visit of Gal 2 with that in Acts 11 30 makes it possible to place Gal before the conference in Jerus in Acts 15 and implies the correctness of the Soutn-
(14 20), cities of Lycaonia. These terms are
Paul, the Apostle THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2282
The matter had to stop. So the Judaizers came up to Antioch and laid down the law to Paul and Barnabas. They did not wait for them to come to
ethnographic descriptions of the southern divisions of the Rom province of Galatia, the northern por-
tion being Galatia proper or North Galatia. So then Paul and Barnabas are now at work in South Galatia, though Luke does not mention that name, using here only the popular designations. The work
Jerus. They might not come till it was too late (cf Barnabas in Acts 11). Paul and Barnabas had not sought the controversy. They had both received
specific instructions from the Holy Sphit to make
is wonderfully successful. In these cities, on one of the great Rom roads east and west, Paul is reaching the centers of provincial life as will be his custom. At Antioch Paul is invited to repeat his sermon on the next Sabbath (13 42), and Luke records at length the report of this discourse which has the character-
this great campaign among the Gentiles. They would not stultify themselves and destroy the lib-
erty of the Gentiles in Christ by going back and having the Mosaic Law imposed on them by the ceremony of circumcision. They saw at once the
gravity of the issue. The very essence of the gospel
istic notes of Paul's gospel as we see it in his epp. Paul may have kept notes of the discourse. There were devout Gentiles at these services. These were the first to be won, and thus a wider circle of Gentiles could be reached. Paul and Barnabas were too successful at Antioch in Pisidia. The jealous Jews opposed, and Paul and Barnabas dramatically turned to the Gentiles (13 45 ff). But the Jews reached the city magistrate through the influential women, and Paul and Barnabas were ordered to leave (13 50 f). Similar success brings like results in Iconium. At Lystra, before the hostile Jews come, Paul and Barnabas have great success and, because of the healing of the impotent man, are taken as Mercury and Jupiter respectively, and worship is offered them. Paul's address in refusal
of grace was involved. Paul had turned away from
this yoke of bondage. He would not go back to
it nor would he impose it on his converts. The church at Antioch stood by Paul and Barnabas. Paul (Gal 2 2) says that he had a revelation to go
to Jerus with the problem. Luke (Acts 15 3) says
that the church sent them. Surely there is no in-
consistency here. It is not difficult to combine the personal narrative in Gal 2 with the public meetings recorded in Acts 15. We have first the general
report by Paul and Barnabas to the church in Jerus
(Acts 15 4 f) to which instant exception was made by the Judaizing element. There seems to have come an adjournment to prepare for the conflict,
since in ver 6 Luke says again that "the apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider
is a fine plea on the grounds of natural theology (14
of this matter." Between these two public meetings we may place the private conference of Paul and Barnabas with Peter, John and James and other teachers (Gal 2 1-10). In this private conference some of the timid brethren wished to persuade Paul to have Titus, a Gr Christian whom Paul had brought down from Antioch (a live specimen!), offered as a sacrifice to the Judaizers ("false brethren") and circumcised. But Paul stood his ground
15-18). The attempt on Paul's life after the Jews came seemed successful. In the band of disciples that "stood round about him," there may have been Timothy, Paul's son in the gospel. From Derbe they retrace their steps to Perga, in order to strengthen the churches with officers, and then sail
for Seleucia and Antioch. They make their report to the church at Antioch. It is a wonderful story. The door of faith is now wide open for the Gentiles who have entered in great numbers (14 27). _ No report was sent to Jerus. What will the Pharisaic party do now?
for the truth of the gospel and was supported by Peter, John and James. They agreed all around
for Paul and Barnabas to go on with their work to the Gentiles, and Peter, John and James would push the work among the Jews (a division in sphere of work, like home and foreign missions, not a denominational cleavage). Here, then, for the first time, Paul has had an opportunity to talk the matter over with the apostolic teachers, and they agree. The Judaizers will have no support from the apostles. The battle was really won in their private conference. In the second public meeting (Acts 15 6-29)
The early date of Gal, addressed to these churches of Pisidia and Lycaonia before the Conference in
Jerus does not allow time for a second
6. The visit there (Gal 4 13), and requires that Conflict at the Judaizers from Jerus followed close Jerusalem upon the heels of Paul and BarnaActs 15; bas (Gal 16; 3 1) in South Galatia. Gal 2, 49 AD Besides, there is the less likelihood that the matter would have been taken a second time to Jerus (Acts 15 2 f) if already the question had been settled in Paul's favor (Acts 11 30) . It is strange also that no reference to this previous conference on the same subject is made in Acts 15, since Peter does refer to his experience at Caesarea (15 9) and since James in Acts 21 25 spe-
all goes smoothly enough. Ample opportunity for free discussion is offered. Then Peter shows how God had used him to preach to the Romans, and how the Jews themselves had to believe on Christ in order to be saved. He opposed putting a yoke on the Gentiles that the Jews could not bear. There was a pause, and then Barnabas and Paul
cifically ("we wrote") mentions the letter of Acts 15
in which full liberty was granted to the Gentiles. Once more, the attack on the position of Paul and Barnabas in Acts 15 1 is given as a new experience, and hence the sharp dissension and tense feeling. The occasion for the sudden outbreak at Antioch on the part of the self-appointed (Acts 15 24) regulators of Paul and Barnabas lay in the reports that came to Jerus about the results of this campaign on a large scale among the Gentiles. There was peril to the supremacy of the Jewish element. They had assumed at first, as even Peter did who was not a Judaizer (Acts 10), that the Gentiles who became disciples would also become Jews. The party of the circumcision had made protest against the conduct of Peter at Caesarea (11 1 f) and had reluctantly acquiesced in the plain work of God (11 18). They had likewise yielded in the matter of the Greeks at Antioch (11 19 ff) by the help of the contribution (11 29 f). But they had not agreed to a campaign to Hellcnize Christianity.
(note the order here: courtesy to Barnabas) spoke again. After another pause, James, the president of the conference, the brother of the Lord Jesus, and a stedfast Jew, spoke. He cited Am 9 llfto show that God had long ago promised a blessing to the Gentiles. He suggests liberty to the Gentiles with the prohibition of pollution of idols, of fornication, things strangled, and blood. His ideas are embodied in a unanimous decree which strongly commends "our beloved Barnabas and Paul," and disclaims responsibility for the visit of the Judaizers to Antioch. The Western text omits "things strangled" from the decree. If this is correct, the decree prohibits idolatry, fornication and murder (Wilson, Origin and Aim of the Acts of the Apostles, 1912, 55). At any rate, the decision is a tremendous victory for Paul and Barnabas. If the other reading is correct, Jewish feelings about things strangled and blood are to be respected. The decision was received with great joy in Antioch (i^cts 15 30-35).
2283 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Paul, the Apostle
mann, Blass, Schiirer, Denney, Chase, Mommsen, Steinmann, etc. There are powerful names with* Ramsay, lilte Hausrath, Zahn. Bartiet, Garvie. Weizsiicker, etc. The arguments are too varied and minute for complete presentation here. The present writer sees some very attractive features in the South-Galatian hypothesis, but as a student of language flnds himself unable to overcome the syntax of Acts 16 6. The minor difficulty is the dropping of Kai, kal, between "Plirygia" and "Galatic region" by Ramsay. It is by no means certain that tliis is the idea of Lul^e. It is more natural to take the terms as distinct and coordinated by kai. In St. Paul the Traveller, 212, Ramsay pleads for the aorist of subsequent time, but Moulton {Proltuompiia, 1.3.3) will have none of it. With that I agree. The aorist participle must give something synchronous with or antecedent to the principal verb. In Expos T for February, 1913, 220 f, Ramsay comes back to the "construction of 16 0." He admits that the weight of authority is against tlie TR and in favor of 6iijA0oi/ .... KujK\>eivrt<;, diHthon
Some time later Peter appears at Antioch in the fullest fellowship with Paul and Barnabas in their work, and joins them in free social intercourse with the Gentiles, as he had timidly done in the home of Cornelius, till "certain came from James" (Gal 2 11 f), and probably threatened to have Peter up before the church again (Acts 11 2) on this matter, claiming that James agreed with them on the subject. This I do not believe was true in the light of Acts 15 24, where a similar false claim is discredited, since James had agreed with Paul in Jerus (Acts 15 19 ff; Gal 2 9f). The new ground for complaint was that they had not settled the question of social relations with the Gentiles in the Jerus conference and that Peter had exceeded the agreement there reached. Peter quailed before the accusation, "fearing them that were of the circumcision" (Gal 2 12). To make it worse, "even Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation"
. . , , koluthSntfis. He now interprets the language thus: " Paul, having in mind at Lystra his plan of going on to Asia from Galatia, was ordered by the Spirit not to preach in Asia. He therefore made a tour through the Phrygio-Galatic region, which lie had already influenced so profoundly from end to end (13 49)." But there is grave difficulty in accepting this interpretation as a solution of tlie problem, Ramsay here makes the narrative in ver 6 resumptive and takes us back to the standpoint of ver 1 at Lystra. The proper place for such a forecast was in ver 1, or at most before ver 4, which already seems to mark an advance beyond Lystra to Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia: "and as they went on their way through the cities."
(2 1.3). Under this specious plea Paul was about to lose the fruit of the victory already won, and charged Peter to his face with Judaizing hypocrisy (2 1 1-14) It was a serious crisis. Peter had not changed his convictions, but had once more cowered in an hour of peril. Paul won both Barnabas and Peter to his side and took occasion to show how useless the death of Christ was if men could be saved by mere legalism (2 21). But the Judaizers had renewed the war, and they would keep it up and harry the work of Paul all over the world. Paul had the fight of his life upon his hands.
Besides, "the Phrygio-Galatic region" lay between Lystra and Asia, and, according to Ramsay, after the prohibition in Lystra, he went straight on toward Asia. This is certainly very artificial and unlike the usual procedure. According to the other view, Paul had already visited the churches in Lycaonia and Pisidia on his former visit. He wished to go on west into Asia, probably to Ephesus, but was forbidden by the Holy Spirit, and as a result turned northward through Phrygia and the regions of Galatia, using both terms in the ethnographic sense. Paul was already in the province of Galatia at Derbe and Lystra. The matter has many "ins and outs" and cannot be argued further here. It is still in debate, but the present interpretation is in harmony with tlie narrative in Acts. See also Galatia; GalaTiANS, Epistle to the.
The impulse to go out again came from Paul. Despite the difference in Gal 2 13, he wished to go again with Barnabas (Acts 15 36), 7. The but Barnabas insisted on taking along Second John Mark, which Paul was not willing Mission to do because of his failure to stick to Campaign the work at Perga. So they agreed Acts 15 : 36 to disagree after "sharp contention" —18:22; 1 (15 39f). Barnabas went with Mark and2Thess, to Cyprus, while Paul took Silas, 49-51 (or "being commended by the brethren 52) AD to the grace of the Lord." Luke follows the career of Paul, and so Barnabas drops out of view (cf later 1 Cor 9 6). Paul and Silas go "through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches" (Acts 15 41). They pass through the Cilician gates to Derbe, the end of the first
By this view Paul had not meant to stop in Galatia proper and did so only because of an attack of illness (Gal 4 13). It is possible that Luke may have come to his rescue here. At any rate, he finally pushes on opposite Mysia and Bithynia in the extreme north and was forbidden by the Spirit from going on into Bithynia. So they came down to Troas (Acts 16 7 f) when Luke ("we," 16 10) appears on the scene and the Macedonian call comes to Paul. Thus Paul is led out of Asia into Europe and carries the gospel successively to Philippi, Thessalonica, Beroea, Athens, and Corinth. The gospel is finally planted in the great provinces of Macedonia and Achaia. In Philippi, a Rom colony and military outpost, Paul finds few Jews and has to go out to a prayer-place to find a few Jewish women to whom he can tell the story of Jesus. But he gains a start with Lydia and her household, and soon arouses the hostility of a company of men who were making money out of a poor girl's powers of divination. But before Paul and Silas leave the
tour, and go to Lystra. Here they pick up Timothy, who more than takes Mark's place in Paul's life. Timothy's mother was a Jewess and his father a Greek. Paul decided therefore to have him circum-
cised since, as a half-Jew, he would be esp. obnoxious to the Jews. This case differed wholly from that of Titus, a Greek, where principle was involved. Here it was a matter merely of expediency. Paul had taken the precaution to bring along the decrees
of the Conference at Jerus in case there was need of them. He delivered them to the churches. It has to be noted that in 1 Cor 8-10 and in Rom 14 and 15, when discussing the question of eating meats offered to idols, Paul docs not refer to these decrees, but argues the matter purely from the standpoint
jail, the jailer is himself converted, and a good church
is established. At Thessalonica Paul has great success and arouses the jealousy of the Jews who gather a rabble and raise a disturbance and charge
of the principles involved. The Judaizers anyhow had not lived up to the agreement, but Paul is here doing his part by the decision. The result of the work was good for the churches (Acts 16 4). When we come to Acts 16 6, we touch a crucial passage in the South-Galatian controversy. Ramsay (Christianity in the Rom Empire, chs iii-vi; Hist and Geofjrapky of Asia Minor; St. Paul the Travtdler, chs V,
it up to Paul. At Philippi appeal was made to prejudice against Jews. At Thessalonica the charge is made that Paul preaches Jesus as a rival king to Caesar. In Beroea Paul and Silas have even more success till the Jews come from Thessalonica and drive Paul out again. Timothy, who has come out from Philippi where Luke has remained, and Silas stay in IJeroea while Paul hurries on to Athens with some of the brethren, who return with the request for Timothy and Silas "to come to him with all speed." Apparently Timothy did come (1 Thess 3 1 f), but Paul soon sent him back to Thessalonica because of his anxiety about con-
vi, viii, ix; Expos, IV, viii, ix, "replies to Chase"; "Galatia," HDB; Coram, on Gal; The Cities of St. Paul; Expos T, 1912, 1913) has become by his 'able advocacy the chief champion of the view that Paul never went to Galatia proper or North Galatia, and that he addressed his ep. to South Galatia, the churches visited in the first tour. For a careful history of the whole controversy in detaU, see Moflatt, Intro to the Lit. of the NT, 90-100, who strongly supports the view of Lightfoot, H. J. Holtz-
ditions there. Left alone in Athens, Paul's spirit
Paul, the Apostle THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2284
was stirred over the idolatry before his eyes. He preaches in the synagogues and argues with the Stoics and Epicureans in the Agora who make light of his pretensions to philosophy as a "babbler" (Acts 17 18). But curiosity leads them to invite him to speak on the Areopagus, This notable address,
is no evidence save that he is with Paul again in Ephesus (Acts 19 22). What became of Silas? Paul "went through the region of Galatia, and Phrygia, in order, establishing all the disciples"
(Acts 18 23), the opposite order to 16 6, "through the region of Phrygia and Galatia." According to the North-Galatian view, here followed, he went through the northern part of the province, passing through Galatia proper and Phrygia on his way west to Ephesus. Luke adds, "Paul having passed through the upper country came to Ephesus"
all alive to his surroundings, was rather rudely cut short by their indifference and mockery, and Paul left Athens with small results for his work. He goes over to Corinth, the great commercial city of the province, rich and with bizarre notions of culture. Paul determined (1 Cor 2 1-5) to be true to the cross, even after his experience in Athens. He gave them, not the flashy philosophy of the sophists, but the true wisdom of God in simple words, the philosophy of the cross of Christ (1 Cor I 17—3 4). In Corinth Paul found fellow-helpers in Aquila and Priscilla, just expelled from Rome by Claudius. They have the same trade of tentmakers and live together (Acts 18 1-4), and Paul preached in the synagogues. Paul is cheered by the coming of Timothy and Silas from Thessalonica
(19 1). The ministry of ApoUos in Ephesus (18 24-28) had taken place before Paul arrived, though Aquila and Priscilla were still on hand. Apollos passed over to Corinth and innocently became the occasion of such strife there (1 Cor 1-4) that he
left and refused to return at Paul's request (1 Cor 16 12). Paul has a ministry of 3 years, in round numbers, in Ephesus, which is full of excitement and anxiety from the work there and in Corinth. He finds on his arrival some ill-informed disciples of John the Baptist who are ignorant of the chief elements of John's teaching about repentance, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit (Acts 19 2-7), matters of which Apollos had knowledge, though he learned more from Priscilla and AquOa, but there is no evidence that he was rebaptized as was true of the 12
(18 5) with supplies from Philippi, as they had done while in Thessalonica (Phil 4 15 f). This very success led to opposition, and Paul has to preach in the house of Titus Justus. But the work goes on till Gallio comes and a renewed effort is made to have it stopped, but Gallio declines to interfere and thus practically makes Christianity a religio licita, since he treats it as a variety of Judaism. While here, after the arrival of Timothy and
disciples of John (Robertson, John the Loyal, 290-
303). The boldness of Paul in Ephesus led in 3 months to his departure from the synagogue to the schoolhouse of Tyrannus, where he preached for 2 years (Acts 19 8-10) with such power that "all they that dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord." It
Silas, Paul writes the two letters to Thessalonica, the first of his 1.3 epp. They are probably not very far apart in time, and deal chiefly with a grievous misunderstanding on their part concerning the emphasis placed by him on the Man of Sin and the Second Coming. Paul had felt the power of the empire, and his attention is sharply drawn to the coming conflict between the Rom empire and the kingdom of God. He treats it in terms of apocalyp-
is not strange later to find churches at Colossae and Hierapolis in the Lycus Valley (cf also Rev 1 11). Paul has a sharp collision with the strolling Jewish exorcists that led to the burning of books of magic by the wholesale (19 11-20), another proof of the hold that magic and the mysteries had upon the Orient. Ephesus was the seat of the worship of Diana whose wonderful temple was their pride. A great business in the manufacture of shrines of Diana was carried on here by Demetrius, and "this Paul" had hurt his trade so much that he raised an insurrection under the guise of piety and patriotism and might have killed Paul with the mob, if he could have got hold of him (19 23-41). It was with great difficulty that Paul was kept from going to the amphitheater, as it was. But here, as at Corinth, the Rom officer (the town clerk) defended Paul from the rage of his enemies (there the jealous Jews, here the tradesmen whose business suffered). He was apparently very ill anyhow, and came near death
tic eschatology. When he leaves Corinth, it is to go by Ephesus, with Aquila and Priscilla whom he leaves there with the promise to return. He goes down to Caesarea and "went up and saluted the church" (Acts 18 22), probably at Jerus (fourth visit), and "went down to Antioch." If he went to Jerus, it was probably incidental, and nothing of importance happened. He is back once again in Antioch after an absence of some 3 or 4 years.
The stay of Paul at Antioch ia described as "some time" (Acts 18 23). Denney (Standard Bible Diet.) conjectures that Paul's brief
8. The stay at Jerus (see above) was due to Third Misthe fact that he found that the Judasion Camizers had organized opposition there paign, Acts against him in the absence of the 18: 23—21: apostles, and it was so unpleasant that 14; 1 and 2 he did not stay. He suggests also that Cor; Gal; the Judaizers had secured letters of Rom, 52 (or commendation from the church for 53)-57 (or their emissaries (2 Cor 3 1) to Corinth 58) AD and Galatia, who were preaching "another Jesus" of nationalism and narrowness, whom Paul did not preach (Gal 1 6; 2 Cor II 4). Both Denney and Findlay follow Neander, Wieseler, and Sabatier in placing here, before Paul starts out again from Antioch, the visit of certain "from James" (Gal 2 12), who overpowered Peter
(2 Cor 1 9). All this seems to have hastened his departure from Ephesus sooner than Pentecost, as he had written to the Corinthians (1 Cor 16 8). His heart was in Corinth because of the discussions there over him and Apollos and Peter, Ijy reason of the agitation of the Judaizers (1 Cor 1 10-17). The household of Chloe had brought word of this situation to Paul. He had written the church a letter now lost (1 Cor 5 9). They had written him a letter (1 Cor 7 1). They sent messengers to Paul (1 Cor 16 17). He had sent Timothy to them (1 Cor 4 17; 16 10), who seems not to have succeeded in quieting the trouble. Paul wrote 1 Cor (spring of 56), and then sent Titus, who was to meet him at Troas and report results (2 Cor 2 12 f). He may also have written another letter and sent it by Titus (2 Cor 2 3 f). The sudden departure from Corinth brought Paul to Troas ahead of time, but he could not wait for Titus, and so pushed on with a heavy heart into Macedonia, where he met him, and he had good and bad news to tell (2 Cor 2 12 ff; 7 5-13). The effect on Paul was instantaneous. He rebounded to hope and joy (2 Cor 2 14 ff) in a glorious defence of the
for the moment. But I have put this incident as mere probably before the disagreement with Barnabas over Mark, and as probably contributing to that breach at the beginning of the second tour.
It is not necessary to suppose that the Judaizers remained acquiescent so long.
Paul seems to have set out on the third tour alone —unless Timothy came back with him, of which there
2285 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Paul, the Apostle
Phoenicia and pass to the right of Cyprus with its memories of Barnabas and Sergius Paulus and stop at Tyre, where Paul is warned not to go on to Jerus. The hostility of the Judaizers to Paul is now common talk everywhere. There is grave peril of a schism in Christianity over the question of gentile liberty, once settled in Jerus, but unsettled by the Judaizers. At Caesarea Paul is greeted by Philip the evangelist and his four daughters (prophetesses). At Caesarea Paul is warned in dramatic fashion by Agabus (cf Acts 11 28) not to go on to Jerus (21 9 ff), but Paul is more determined than ever to go, even if he die (20 13). He had had three premonitions for long (20 22 ff), but he will finish his course, cost what it may. He finds a friend at Caesarea in Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, who was to be the host of Paul in Jerus (21 16). Paul had hoped to reach Jerus by Pentecost (Acts 20 16). He seems to have done so. Luke gives the story of Paul in Jerus, Caes-
ministry of Jesus (of Robertson, The Glory of the Ministry; Paul's Exultation in Preaching), with a message of cheer to the majority of the cliurch that had sustained Paul and with instructions (chs 8 and 9) about the collection for the poor saints in Jerus, which must be pushed to a completion by Titus and two other brethren (possibly also Luke, brother of Titus, and Erastus). Timothy and Erastus had been sent on ahead to Macedonia from Ephesus (Acts 19 22), and Timothy sends greetings with Paul to the Corinthians in a letter (2 Cor) which Paul now forwards, possibly by Titus. The latter part of the ep. (chs 10-13) deals with the stubborn
minority who still resist the authority of Paul as an apostle. On the proposed treatment of these chapters as a separate ep. see the earlier part of this art. Paul seems to wait a while before going on to Corinth. He wishes the opposition to have time to repent. During this period he probably went round about to lUyricum (Rom 15 19). He spent three months in Greece (Acts 20 2 f), probably the winter of 56 and 57.
9. Five area, and the voyage to Rome in Years a much detail. He was with him and Prisoner, considered this period of his ministry Acts 21:17 very important. The welcome from —28:31; the brethren in Jerus was surprisingly Phil; Phicordial (Acts 21 17). On the very lem; Col; next day Paul and his party made a Eph, formal call on James and all the elders 57-62 (or (21 18 f), who gave a sympathetic 63) AD hearing to the narrative of God's dealings with Paul and the Gentiles. He presented the alms (collection) in due form (24 17), though some critics have actually suggested that Paul used it to defray the expenses of the appeal to Caesar. Ramsay's notion that he may have fallen heir by now to his portion of his father's estate is quite probable. But the brethren wish to help Paul set himself right before the rank and file of the church in Jerus, who have been imposed upon by the Judaizers who have misrepresented Paul's real position by saying that he urged the Jewish Christians to give up the Mosaic customs (21 21). The elders understand Paul and recall the decision of the conference at which freedom was guaranteed to the Gentiles, and they have no wish to disturb that (21 25) . They only wish Paul to show that he does not object to the Jewish Christians keeping up the Mosaic regulations. They propose that Paul offer sacrifice publicly in the temple and pay the vows of four men, and then all will know the truth (21 23 f). Paul does not hesitate to do that (21 26 ff). He had kept the Jewish feasts (cf 20 6) as Jesus had done, and the early disciples in Jerus. He was a Jew. He may have had a vow at Corinth (18 18). He saw no inconsistency in a Jew doing thus after becoming a Christian, provided he did not make it obligatory on Gentiles. The real efficacy of the sacrifices lay in the death of Jesus for sin. Garvie (Life and Teaching of Paul, 173) calls this act of Paul "scarcely worthy of his courage as a man or his faith in God." I cannot see it in that light. It is a matter of practical wisdom, not of principle. To have refused would have been to say that the charge was true, and it was not. So far as the record goes, this act of Paul accomplished its purpose in setting Paul in a right light before the church in Jerus. It took away this argument from the Judaizers. The trouble that now comes to Paul does not come from the Judaizers, but from "the Jews from Asia" (21 27). If it be objected that the Jerus Christians seem to have done nothing to help Paul during his years of imprisonment, it can be said that there was
We have placed Gal in the early part of this stay in Corinth, though it could have been written while at Ephesus. Rom was certainly written while here, and they both treat the same general theme of justification by faith. Ramsay (Bjpo.5, February, 1913, 127-45) has at last come to the conclusion that Gal belongs to the date of Acts 15 1 f. He bases this conclusion chiefly on the "absolute independence" of his apostleship claimed in Gal 1 and 2, which, he holds, he would not have done after the conference in Acts 15, wiiich was " a sacrifice of complete independence." This is a curious interpretation, for in Gal 2 1-10 Paul himself tells of his recognition on terms of equality by Peter, John and James, and of his going to Jerus by "revelation," which was just as much "a sacrifice of complete independence" as w^e find in Acts 15. Besides, in 2 Cor 11 5 and 12 11 Paul expressly asserts his equality (with all humility) witli the very chiefest apostles, and in 1 Cor 15 10 he claims in so many words to have wrought more than all the apostles. Perhaps messengers from Galatia with the contributions from that region report the havoc wrought there by the Judaizers. Gal is a tremendous plea for the spiritual nature of Christianity as opposed to Jewish ceremonial legalism.
Paul had long had it in mind to go to Rome. It was his plan to do so while at Ephesus (Acts 19 21) after he had gone to Jerus with the great collection from the churches of Asia, Galatia, Achaia, and Macedonia. He hoped that this collection would have a mollifying effect on the Jerus saints aa that from Antioch had (Acts 11 29 f). He had changed some details in his plans, but not the purpose to go to Jerus and then to Rome. Meanwhile, he writes the longest and most important letter of all to the Romans, in which he gives a fuller statement of his gospel, because they had not heard him preach, save his various personal friends who had gone there from the east (ch 16). But already the shadow of Jerus is on his heart, and he asks their prayers in his behalf, as he faces his enemies in Jerus (Rom 15 30-32). He hopes al.so to go on to Spain (15 24), so as to carry the gospel to the farther west also. The statesmanship of Paul comes out now in great
clearness. He has in his heart always anxiety for the churches that consumes him (2 Cor 11 28 f). He was careful to have a committee of the churches go with him to report the collection (2 Cor 8 19 f). Paul had planned to sail direct for Syria, but a plot on his life in Corinth led him to go by land via Macedonia with his companions (Acts 20 2-4). He tarried at Philippi while the rest went on to Troas. At Philippi Paul is joined again by Luke, who stays with him till Rome is reached. They
celebrate the Passover (probably the spring of 57)
in Philippi (Acts 20 6). We cannot follow the
little to be done in a legal way, as the matter was before the Rom courts very soon. The attack on Paul in the temple was while he was doing honor to the temple, engaged in actual worship offering sac-
details in Acts at Troas, the voyage through the beautiful Archipelago, to Miletus. There Paul took advantage of the stop to send for the elders
of Ephesus to whom he gave a wonderful address
rifices. But then Jews from Ephesus hated him
(Acts 20 17-38). They change ships at Patara for
Paul, the Apostle THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2286
his right of Rom citizenship by appealing to Caesar
so that they imagined that he had Greeks with him in the Jewish court, because they had seen him one day with Trophimus in the city (21 27 ff). It is a splendid illustration of the blindness of prejudice and hate. It was absolutely untrue, and the men who raised the hue and cry in the temple against Paul as the desecrator of the holy place and the Law and the people disappear, and are never heard of more (24 18 f ). But it will take Paul five years or more of the prime of his life to get himself out of the tangled web that will be woven about his head. Peril follows peril. He was almost mobbed, as often before, by the crowd that dragged him out of the temple (21 30 f). It would remind Paul of Stephen's fate. When the Rom captain rescued him and had him bound with two chains as a dangerous bandit, and had him carried by the soldiers to save his life, the mob yelled "Away with him" (21 36 f ) , as they had done to Jesus. After the captain, astonished that "Paul the Egyp assassin" can speak Gr, grants him permission to stand on the steps of the tower of Antonia to speak to the mob that clamored for his blood, he held their rapt attention by an address in Aram. (22 2) in which he gave a defence of his whole career. This they heard eagerly till he spoke the word "Gentiles," at which they raged more violently than ever (22 21 ff ) At this the captain has Paul tied with thongs, not understanding his Aram, speech, and is about to scourge him when Paul pleads his Rom citizenship, to the amazement of the centurion (22 24: S). Almost in despair, the captain, wishing to know the charge of the Jews against Paul, brings him before the Sanhedrin. It is a familiar scene to Paul, and
(25 1-12). This way, though a long one, offered
the only ray of hope. The appearance of Paul
before Agrippa and Bernice was simply by way of entertainment arranged by Festus to relieve his
guests of ennui, but Paul seized the opportunity
to make a powerful appeal to Agrippa that put him
in a corner logically, though he wriggled out a,nd
declined to endorse Christianity, though confirming
Paul's innocence, which Festus also had admitted
(25 13—26 32). Paul was fortunate in the centu-
rion Julius who took him to Rome, for he was kindly
disposed to him at the start, and so it was all the way through the most remarkable voyage on record. Luke has surpassed his own record in ch 2'7, in which he traces the voyage, stage by stage, with change
of ship at Myra, delay at Fair Havens, Crete, and shipwreck on the island of Malta. More is learned about ancient seafaring from this chapter than from any other source (see art. Phoenix, and Smith, Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul, 1866). _ In it all Paul is the hero, both on the ships and in Malta. In the early spring of 60 another ship takes Paul and the other prisoners to Puteoli. Thence they go on to Rome, and enter by the Appian Way. News of Paul's coming had gone on before (his ep. had come 3 years ago), and he had a hearty welcome. But he is now an imperial prisoner in the hands of Nero. He has more liberty in his own hired house
(28 16.30), but he is chained always to a Rom
soldier, though granted freedom to see his friends and to preach to the soldiers. Paul is anxious to remove any misapprehensions that the Jews in Rome may have about him, and tries to win them to Christ, and with partial success (28 17-28). And here Luke leaves him a prisoner for 2 years more, probably because at this point he finishes the Book of Acts. But, as we have seen, during these years
it is now their chance for settling old scores. Paul makes a sharp retort in anger to the high priest Ananias, for which he apologizes as if he was so angry that he had not noticed, but he soon divides the Sanhedrin hopelessly on the subject of the resurrection (cf the immunity of the disciples on that issue when Gamaliel scored the Sadducees in Acts
in Rome, Paul wrote Phil, Philem, Col, and Eph. He still has the churches on his heart. They send messengers to him, and he writes back to them. The incipient Gnosticism of the East has pressed upon the churches at Colossae and Laodicea, and a new peril confronts Christianity. The Judaizing controversy has died away with these years (cf Phil 3 1 ff for an echo of it), but the dignity and glory of Jesus are challenged. In the presence of the power of Rome Paul rises to a higher conception than even that of the person of Christ and the glory of the church universal. In due time Paul's case was disposed of and he was once more set free. The Romans were proverbially dilatory. It is doubtful
5). This was turning the tables on his enemies, and was justifiable as war. He claimed to be a Pharisee on this point, as he was still, as opposed to the Sadducees. The result was that Paul had to be rescued from the contending factions, and the captain knew no more than he did before (23 1-10)
That night "the Lord stood by him" and promised that he would go to Rome (23 11). That was a blessed hope. But the troubles of Paul are by no means over. By the skill of his nephew he escaped the murderous plot of 40 Jews who had taken a vow not to eat till they had killed Paul (23 12-24). They almost succeeded, but Claudius Lysias sent Paul in haste with a band of soldiers to Caesarea to Felix, the procurator, with a letter in which he claimed to have rescued Paul from the mob, "having learned that he was a Roman" (23 26-30). At any rate he was no longer in the clutches of the Jews. Would Rom provincial justice be any better? Felix follows a perfunctory course with Paul and shows some curiosity about Christianity, till Paul makes him tremble with terror, a complete reversal of situations (cf Pilate's meanness before Jesus). But love of money from Paul or the Jews leads Fehx to keep Paul a prisoner for two years, though convinced of his innocence, and to hand him over to Festus, his successor, because the Jews might make things worse for him if he released him (ch 24). The case of the Sanhedrin, who have now made
if his enemies ever appeared against him with formal charges.
The genuineness of the Pastoral Epp. is here assumed. But for them we should know nothing
further, save from a few fragments 10. Further in the early Christian writings. As it Travels is, some few who accept the Pastoral Epp. seek to place them before 64 AD, so as to allow for Paul's death in that year from the Neronian persecution. In that case, he was not released. There is no space here to argue the question in detail. We can piece together the probable course of events. He had expected when in Corinth last to go on to Spain (Rom 15 28), but now in Rome his heart turns back to the east again. He longs to see the Philippians (1 23 S) and hopes to see Philemon in Colossae (Philem ver 22). But he may have gone to Spain also, as Clement of Rome seems to imply (Clement ad Cor 5) , and as is stated in the Canon of Muratori. He may have been in Spain when Rome was burned July 19, 64 AD. There is no evidence that Paul went as far as Britain. On his return east he left Titus in Crete (Tit 16). He touched at Miletus when he left Trophimus sick (2 Tim 4 20) and when he may have met Timothy,
it their own (or at least the Sadducean section), though pleaded by the Rom orator TertuUus, had
fallen through as Paul calmly riddled their charges. Festus is at first at a loss how to proceed, but he soon follows the steps of Felix by offering to play
into the hands of the Jewish leaders by sending Paul back to Jerus, whereupon Paul abruptly exercises
2287 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Paul, the Apostle
if he did not go on to Ephesus (1 Tim 13). He stopped at Troas and apparently expected to come back here, as he left his cloak and books with Carpus
has the same message in each group, though with varying emphasis due to special exigencies. The same essential notes occur all through. The more common method, therefore, is to study his gospel
(2 Tim 4 13). He was on his way to Macedonia (1 Tim 1 3), whence he writes Timothy in 65-67 a letter full of love and counsel for the future. Paul is apprehensive of the grave perils now confronting Christianity. Besides the Judaizers, the Gnostics, the Jews and the Romans, he may have had dim visions of the conflict with the mystery-religions. It was a syncretistic age, and men had itching ears. But Paul is full of sympathy and tender solicitude for Timothy, who must push on the work and get ready for it. Paul expects to spend the winter in Nicopolis (Tit 3 12), but is apparently
topically, using all the epp. for each topic. A measure of historical development may still be observed. Only the chief notes in Paul's gospel can be mentioned here. Even so, one must not turn to
his epp. for a complete system of doctrine. The epp. are "occasional letters, pihces de circonstance"
(Findlay, HDB), and they do not profess, not even Rom, to give a full summary of Christian doctrine. They are vital documents that throb with life. There is no theological manual in them. But Paul's gospel is adequately stated repeatedly. Paul's message is Christocentric. Jesus as Messiah he preached at once on his conversion (Acts 9 20.22). He knew already the current Jewish Messianism
still in Macedonia when he writes to Titus a letter on lines similar to those in 1 Tim, only the note ia sharper against Judaism of a certain type. We catch another glimpse of Apollos in 3 13. Paul hits off the Cretans in 1 10 with a quotation from Epimenides, one of their own poetic prophets.
to which Jesus did not correspond. The acceptance of Jesus as He was (the facts about Him and
teachings) revolutionized his Messianic conceptions,
When Paul WTites again to Timothy he has had a winter in prison, and has suffered greatly from the
his view of God, and his view of man. "When he takes and uses the Messianic phraseology of his day, he fills it with a meaning new and rich" (Ros-
cold and does not wish to spend another 11. Last winter in the Mamertine (probably) Imprisonprison (2 Tim 4 13.21). We do not ment and know what the charges now are. They Death in may have been connected with the Rome, 68 burning of Rome. There were plenty (or 67) AD of informers eager to win favor with Nero. Proof was not now necessary. Christianity is no longer a religio licita under the shelter of Judaism. It is now a crime to be a Christian. It is dangerous to be seen with Paul now, and he feels the desertion keenly (2 Tim 1 15ff; 4 10). Only Luke, the beloved physician, is with Paul (4 11), and such faithful ones as live in Rome still in hiding (4 21). Paul hopes that Timothy may come and bring Mark also (4 11). Apparently Timothy did come and was put into prison (He 13 23). Paul is not afraid. He knows that he will die. He has escaped the mouth of the lion (2 Tim 4 17), but he will die (4 18). The Lord Jesus stood by him, perhaps in visible presence (4 17). The tradition is, for now Paul fails us, that Paul, as a Rom
tron, Christology of St. Paul, 31). Paul was not merely a new creature himself, but he had a new outlook: "Wherefore we henceforth know no man
after the flesh : even though we have known Christ
after the flesh, yet now we know him so no more. Wherefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new
creature: the old things are passed away; behold, they are become new. But all things are of God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto
himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses, and having committed unto us the word of recon-
ciliation" (2 Cor 5 16-19). Perhaps no single passage in Paul's Epp. tells us more than this one
of the change in Paul's theological conceptions wrought by his conversion. His view of Christ as the revealer of God (God in Christ) and the mani-
festation of love for men (of God, who reconciled us to Himself, reconciling the world to Himself) and the means (through Christ) by whom God is able
to forgive our sins ("not reckoning unto them their
citizen, was beheaded on the Ostian Road just outside of Rome. Nero died June, 68 AD, so that Paul was executed before that date, perhaps in the late spring of that year (or 67). Perhaps Luke and Timothy were with him. It is fitting, as Findlay suggests, to let Paul's words in 2 Tim 4 6-8 serve
trespasses") on the basis of the atoning death of Christ ("wherefore"; for this see vs 14 f just before ver 16) with whom the believer has vital union ("in Christ") and who transforms the nature and views
of the believer, is here thoroughly characteristic. Paul's passion is Christ (2 Cor 6 14; Phil 1 21). To gain Christ (3 8), to know Christ (3 10), to be found in Christ (3 9), to know Christ as the mystery
for his own epitaph. He was ready to go to be with Jesus, as he had long wished to be (Phil 1 23).
VI. Gospel.—I had purposed to save adequate space for the discussion of Paul's theology, but that
of God (Col 2 2 f), to be hid with Christ ui God
(3 3)—this with the new Paul is worth while. Thus Paul interprets God and man, by his doctrine
is not now possible. A bare sketch must suffice. Something was said (see above on his epp. and equipment) about the development in Paul's conception of Clirist and his message about Him. Paul had a gospel which he called his own (Rom 2 16). I cannot agree with the words of Deissmann (St. Paul, 6): "St. Paul the theologian looks backward toward rabbinism. As a religious genius St. Paul's outlook is forward into a future of universal history." He did continue to use some rabbinical methods of argument, but his theology was not rabbinical. And he had a theology. He was the great apostle and missionary to the heathen. He was a Christian statesman with far-seeing vision. He was the loving pastor with the shepherd heart. He was the great martyr for Christ. He was the wonderful preacher of Jesus. But he was also "Paul the theologian" (Garvie, Life and Teaching of Paul, ch v) . There are two ways of studying his teaching. One is to take it by groups of the epp., the purely