CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY GIFT OF Alfred C. Barnes Cornell University Library BS2651 .G24 Studies of Paul and his gospei, by Alfre olin 3 1924 029 293 219 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029293219 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL BY THE SAME AUTHOR A GUIDE TO PREACHERS. Crown 8vo, cloth, 5 s. STUDIES IN THE INNER LIFE OF JESUS. 7s. 6d. net. THE CHRISTIAN CERTAINTY AMID THE MODERN PERPLEXITY. 7s. 6d. net. London : Hodder & Stoughton STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL BY ALFRED E. GARVIE, M.A., D.D. PRINCIPAL OF NEW COLLEGE, LONDON HODDER AND STOUGHTON LONDON NEW YORK TORONTO TO THE COUNCIL, TEACHERS, AND STUDENTS OF NEW COLLEGE, LONDON PREFACE These Studies have appeared in the pages of The Expositor^ and are reprinted with the kind per- mission of the Editor. The intention is not to give an exhaustive or systematic account of Paul's theology, but to present the man and his message as distinctly as the writer himself has been im- pressed by them. In one of the Century Bible Handbooks, published by Messrs. T. C. & E. C, Jack, the writer has already dealt with The Life and Teaching of Paul; but necessarily in the briefest possible way. In this volmne he attempts to discuss in greater detail, with more constant reference to modern diflBculties, the main features . of Paul's Gospel. While not unacquainted with what scholars have written on the theme, he has not thought it necessary or desirable to confuse the reader by the reproduction of a mass of con- flicting opinion ; but having gone to the sources, viii STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL and having thought out the problems for himself, he has ventured to submit the results of his own labours as simply and clearly as he can. He has tried not only to expound, but also where necessary to defend and commend, as he believes that the Christianity of to-day still needs the enlightenment and quickening which do come from Paul and his Gospel. ALFRED E. GARVIE. Vancotjvbb, July SI, 1911. CONTENTS PART I.— THE MAN I PAGE Paul's Inheritance . , . . i II Paul's Development . . , .20 III Paul's Experience . . . -37 IV Paul's Personality . . . . 68 V Paul's Bequest , . , . -85 X STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL PART II.— THE MESSAGE VI PAGE The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ . 105 VII The Guilt and the Power of Sin , . 134 VIII The Righteousness of God . . . 153 IX The Sanctification of Man . . . 173 X The End of the Law 192 XI The Victory over Death . . . 211 XII The Purpose of God .... 230 CONTENTS xi XIII PAGE The Work of the Spirit . . . 249 XIV The Body of Christ ... 267 XV The Heavenly Citizenship . . . 288 Index of Authors and Subjects . . 308 Index of Scripture References , . 309 PART I THE MAN PAUL'S INHERITANCE 1. The aim of some scholars seems to be to rob every great thinker of his originahty, and to show his teaching as a patchwork of odds and ends from the opinions of others. Heredity or environ- ment are held to count for far more than individu- ality. No man shall be allowed to excel other men beyond certain arbitrarily fixed limits, and if his actual achievement is not explicable by what others have thought or done before him, much which history ascribes to him must be denied as his. An extreme form of this tendency is the attempt to reduce the personalities of the Old Testament and the New to variant forms of some ancient myth. More moderate, but not histori- cally justified, is the effort to track all the truths Jesus uttered to some Jewish source, literary or traditional. Paul has been subjected to this kind of mental analysis by many scholars, and the impression that is often left upon one is that Paul's theology is not in its main features the free and full expression of a deep and wide ex^ 2 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL perience of the truth and grace of Christ, but a cunningly planned and skilfully wrought mosaic of ideas borrowed from many sources, Jewish and Gentile. This treatment of the apostle is not a matter of indifference for Christian faith ; for by means of it first one and then another truth he has taught can be represented as alien to his Christian faith, and so the witness he bears to Christ as Saviour and Lord can be narrowed and lowered. 2. We should be betrayed into quite as great an error if, in our zeal to defend his originality, we ignored all that he owed to his heredity and environment. For this would be to ignore facts, and still more to misconceive originality. Origin- ality does not consist in irreceptivity or un- responsiveness to the thought and life of the past or the present. He who freely receives is more likely freely to give. The original man will enrich his own personality from many sources, and the range of the influences which affect him vitally will be the measure of the reach of his achievements. But we must be careful to make a distinction between mechanical appropriation and vital assimilation. A man may know very much, and may think very little ; for him the thoughts of others are like the goods on the shop-shelves, which can be displayed on demand, and not like the food which is itself changed that it may nourish the body for health and PAUL'S INHERITANCE 3 strength. Another man may know far less, but what he knows has so become his own that it enables him to think more truly and wisely. This is the difference between the scholar who transmits, and the sage and seer who transforms the thoughts of men. If we study Paul's writings we shall surely come to the conclusion that his was a mind so active in the service of an experience so intense that he did not merely borrow in order to display the thoughts of others. All that came to him from his heredity or his environment was so appropriated by his individuality that we have not said the last word needing to be said about any of his ideas when we have labelled it with its place of origin. 3. The fear of the charge of over-subtlety should not deter us from insisting on a further distinction, as a true apprehension of all the data to be considered forces it upon us. We should separate in Paul's theology what essentially constitutes his Gospel, and what accidentally accompanies it. Paul received and expressed many ideas which did not enter into the substance of his Christian faith. To give one illustration of this distinction from each of the two most important groups of epistles as they are usually arranged, the Soteriological and the Christo- logical. As a Jew, Paul had views about law and righteousness which he carried with him into his Christian experience, and with which in 4 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL stating his Gospel against the Judaisers he had to reckon ; and yet we cannot but feel that in his own life these views no longer lay at the centre as formerly, but gave place to convictions of personal union with Christ which were far more vital to him. In Romans vi. we are surely nearer the core of the personality of Paul than in Romans iii. Again, in Colossians and Ephesians we have a more developed angelology and demon- ology than in most of Paul's writings. But do we need, therefore, to assume that the reality of such existences was as important to Paul as the supremacy of Christ in God's redemptive purpose for the whole world ? Not what Paul borrowed is of primary interest to us, but what he worked into his Gospel as a needful part of it. His originality lies in his using all his knowledge to give an interpretation of his life in Christ the Lord. 4. Keeping these general considerations before us, we may now consider some of the ideas which Paul is held to have borrowed. It has been usual to deal first with his Jewish, and especially Pharisaic, inheritance as the more important, and to treat any Gentile influences as altogether secondary. But Sir William Ramsay appears to challenge that assumption, at least in so far as he insists that the Gentile influences were far more potent factors in Paul's development than has hitherto been generally recognised. His boy- PAUL'S INHERITANCE 5 hood in Tarsus before he was sent up to Jerusalem for his Rabbinic training is held to have exercised a permanent influence on his personality. " The crowning glory of Tarsus," says Ramsay, " the reason for its undying interest to the whole world, is that it produced the Apostle Paul ; that it was the one city which was suited by its equipoise between the Asiatic and the Western spirit to mould the character of the great Hellenist Jew ; and that it nourished in him a strong sense of loyalty and patriotism as ' the citizen of no mean city ' " (The Cities of SL Paul, p. 235). These early impressions were probably confirmed and extended by the time spent by the apostle in Tarsus after his conversion before he began his first mission from Antioch. It must be conceded that the Jewish boy, however carefully his parents must have tried to guard him against pagan in- fluences, must have been affected by the sights and sounds around him, and have come to know something of the beliefs and habits of the Gentiles which tended to modify his Jewish exclusiveness. But Sir Wm. Ramsay claims much more than this. He maintains that the Pauline thought is " wholly inconceivable in a mere narrow Hebrew, and wholly inexplicable without an education in Greek philosophy " (p. 34). While not pursuing the inquiry into " the re- lation between the philosophy of the Greeks and the philosophy which may be traced as the basis 6 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of Paulinism," he yet maintains that Paul has taken up into his thought two Hellenic ideas, for " Hellenism showed how the freedom of the in- dividual should be consistent with an ordered and articulated government, and it organised a system of State education," and Paul insists on freedom and on education as essential to the Christian life. But Sir Wilham Ramsay himself affirms that as regards the first " we can trace this Pauline idea back to its origin in the teaching of Christ" (p. 38), and surely the phrase of James, "the law of liberty," shows that the idea of freedom is involved in the distinctive Christian conception of salvation. Paul's own experience in Christ was one of spiritual freedom, and any influence of Hellenism on this idea must be regarded as altogether subordinate. Again, the second idea, the necessity of education in the Christian life, is surely not so peculiar as to need so special an ex- planation. The Jews, too, cared for education ; Jesus had given much pains to the training of His disciples ; the primitive community by the instruction of the apostles sought to foster the life of the new converts. But we may press the question, When did those Helleuic ideas so affect his mind ? He himself speaks of being born in Tarsus, but brought up in Jerusalem (Acts xxii. 3), and it is probable that his training in the school of Gamaliel began when he was twelve or thirteen. Was a youth, even PAUL'S INHERITANCE 7 a precocious one, likely to think much about liberty or education ? It is most unlikely, from what is recorded by himself of his subsequent career up to his conversion, that he allowed him- self to come under other than Jewish influences. If these two features of Greek civilisation influenced him at all during his visit to Tarsus subsequent to that event, there was here no contribution of a new element to his thought, only a confirmation and, it may be, expansion of what was his already as a Christian believer. There is still another characteristic of Paul's thought which Sir William Ramsay traces to his Tarsian environment. In the Roman Empire, owing to Hellenistic influences, national and civic exclusiveness was giving way to universalism. " Philosophy followed hard on the heels of fact. Greek thought, and especially the Stoic philosophy, was not insensible to this wider and nobler idea of a unity and brotherhood that transcended the limits of a city or a tribe ; but the conception of universal brotherhood remained as yet an abstract and ineffective thought, devoid of driving-power to move the world " (p. 47). " The greater idea seized on Paul, penetrated and ruled his whole nature, and made him on a sudden able to see the whole truth, and compelled him to live in it." What is here suggested is that Paul owed his universalism to the fact of his living as a Roman citizen amid Greek culture. But on the 8 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL same page the same author says that " the teaching of Jesus rose high above such a narrow idea " as that of Jewish exclusiveness. May not Paul have learned rather from Jesus ? Nay, did not the Christian salvation, as Paul understood it, necessarily involve universalism ? Here again a secondary influence is represented as primary.^ 5. In his essay on St Paul and Seneca, Light- foot very fully discusses the relations of Paul to Stoicism. He first of all affirms that " St. Paul found in the ethical language of the Stoics expres- sions more fit than he could find elsewhere to de- scribe in certain aspects the duties and privileges, the struggles and the triumphs of the Christian life," but he also recognises that " the Stoic expressions, describing the independence of the individual spirit, the subjugation of the unruly passions, the universal empire of a triumphant self-control, the cosmopolitan relations of the wise man, were quickened into new life, when an un- failing source of strength and a boundless hope of victory had been revealed in the Gospel, when all men were proclaimed to be brothers, and ^ The writer most gratefully recognises the great debt New Testament scholarship owes to Sir William Ramsay for the illu- mination his extensive and varied knowledge has cast on the life and thought of the world in which Paul did his work. He does not claim the competence to criticise any of Sir William Ramsay's statements about Greek or Roman thought or life ; but, with all due deference to so great an authority, he ventures to question some of the conclusions drawn, as overstating the influence of the Gentile environment on Paul's development. PAUL'S INHERITANCE 9 each and every man united with God in Christ " {Philippians, pp. 302, 303). As he admits the probabihty that " Stoic philosophy had leavened the moral vocabulary of the civilised world at the time of the Christian era," the use of the Stoic terms by Paul does not prove that he had specially studied Stoic writings, or had been taught by any of the Stoic teachers who were ornaments of the University of Tarsus, his birthplace. If the first argument is not conclusive, a second claims our consideration. " The speech on the Areopagus, addressed partly to Stoics, shows a clear appreciation of the elements of truth con- tained in their philosophy, and a studied coin- cidence with their modes of expression. His one quotation, moreover, is taken from a Stoic writing, the Hymn of Cleanthes, the noblest expres- sion of heathen devotion which Greek literature has preserved to us " (p. 304). The force of this argument must be recognised ; but what the fact proves is not that Paul before his conversion was familiar with Stoic philosophy, but that as a Christian apostle he sought to know the beliefs of those whom he was striving to win for Christ, so that he might become all things to all men. Had Stoicism vitally influenced his religious thought, its traces would have appeared elsewhere than in this avowedly apologetic discourse. The third argument is that we can find in Paul's letters " traces of the influence of Stoic diction," 10 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL and two instances of this influence are given : " The portrait of the wise man, the ideal of Stoic aspiration . . . has suggested many expressions to the Apostle of the Gentiles." The contrast is, however, greater than the coincidence between the Christian and Stoic ideal ; the one is attained by dependence on Christ, the other by self-suffi- ciency. The cosmopolitanism of Stoicism has " its Christian counterpart in the heavenly citizenship of St. Paul " (pp. 306-7), but " the idea is trans- figured and glorified." Are not these two features of Stoicism, we may ask, just those which could not be confined to the schools, but would be familiar to the common culture of the Grasco- Roman world ? That Paul was familiar with the doctrines and the terms of Stoicism need not be doubted for a moment. What we may ask, however, is : is his knowledge so intimate as to prove that he made a special study of it ? And further, did the influence in any way modify his conception of the Gospel ? To the writer it seems that both questions can be answered in the negative. 6. Lightfoot recognises that " it is in the doctrines of the Platonist and the Pythagorean that the truer resemblances to the teaching of the Bible are to be sought " (p. 294). Dr. James Adam, in his book, The Religious Teachers of Greece, has given a number of instances of " the real kinship of thought between Plato and St. Paul " (p. 360) PAUL'S INHERITANCE 11 without claiming the indebtedness of the apostle to the philosopher. For both " the visible is an image of the invisible," and from the invisible both drew their inspiration ; but in this there is nothing peculiar to the two thinkers, it is the general attitude of religion. Again, he points out " the parallel between Plato and St. Paul in respect of their conceptions of man " (p. 381). Paul's 'TrvsvfJija. corresponds to Plato's povg as the higher principle in man, which relates him to God ; and Paul's capl to Plato's (tSijuoc as the lower principle warring against the higher. Paul's use of -^pv^iX'Og in contrast to 'TrnviLanzog suggests that his -^vxtj corresponds to Plato's " mortal part of soul." If we take account of the antecedents and develop- ment of Paul's doctrine of man, the resemblance will be seen to be less close than it appears, and there will be no question of dependence. Paul's use of '7rvev(Jba has its explanation in the Old Testa- ment use of n^"i, and his capl has a moral connota- tion that (rSf/jo. in his use of the word has not. His dualism is an ethical, and not a metaphysical one as is Plato's. Apart from his use of the adjective -^vxtpcog with an acquired moral reference, the term -^^y^?? does not express any antagonism to '7rmi(/joc. Of the third instance also it may be said that the resemblance is more, apparent than real. Paul did not think of the body as " a kind of prison " (p. 385) for the soul ; for he shared the 12 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL common Christian hope of a resurrection when the natural would be exchanged for the spiritual body. If in 2 Corinthians v. 1-4, which Dr. Adam quotes in part, he groans, " being burdened in this tabernacle " of the present mortal body, it is not disembodiment he desires, as did the Greek thinker with his metaphysical dualism of matter and mind ; nay, he shrinks from being unclothed and so found naked, and longs to be " clothed upon with the habitation which is from heaven." On this point Greek and Jewish thought are antitheses. Paul is not consistent with his general use of the word when in another passage quoted by Dr. Adam, Romans viii. 12, 13, he uses the phrase " the deeds of the body " as equivalent to the " flesh." For he both regarded the body as capable of sanctification, and ascribed a body to the sinless Christ ; nor did he regard immortality as escape from the body, but the exchange of one body for another. That both Plato and Paul use the symbol of marriage to express " the relation of the soul to the divine " (p. 395) is an interesting coincidence which requires no further explanation. That Plato's conception of " conversion " (p. 412) should come so near to Paul's shows his moral insight ; but what Paul has to say is not borrowed from any other thinker; for it is the expression of his own personal experience. What for Plato was a philosophical idea, was for Paul an historic reality. PAUL'S INHERITANCE 13 The next example claims somewhat fuller notice. According to Plato " ideal justice or righteousness is ' present ' in a human soul just to the extent to which that soul participates in the perfection at which it aims. In other words, the ' presence ' of the Idea in the particular means the resemblance of the particular to its Idea" (p. 435). As Christ in the New Testament holds the same place as Plato's Idea of Right- eousness, "it is consequently more than a merely verbal or superficial analogy when the relationship between the believer's soul and Christ is described in the New Testament by the formula of participation or communion." " If the idea of Tcoimvia or fellow- ship is common, that of immanence is even more so " (p. 436), As in Plato the immanent idea of Righteousness makes righteous, so " the indwelling Christ, " Christ in you ' produces the Christian or Christlike character " (p. 437). The resem- blance is most suggestive ; only we must not allow it to lead us into two possible errors. It is not Plato's immanent idea that suggested to Paul or any Christian the indwelling Christ. He is per- sonal reality in personal experience. Nor must we attempt to explain Paul's doctrine of justifica- tion by faith in some such way as this, that we are held righteous, because righteousness is in the person of Christ immanent in us. We should thus be led quite away from Paul's distinctive thought. The last illustration Dr. Adam uses 14 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL needs only mention. Just as for Plato " the whole of nature ceaselessly aspires " (p. 450) towards the Good, so Paul thinks of the whole creation groaning and travailing for the fulfilment of the Christian hope. But Paul had a certainty of fulfilment to Plato unknown. 7. Not one of these instances requires us to assume that Paul was influenced by Platonism, and the influence of Stoicism, so far as he was reached by it, did not determine any of the distinctive features of his Gospel. Can a more potent influence be claimed for his Roman citizenship than for the Greek culture with which he came into contact ? It is not at all improbable that his Roman citizen- ship did modify his Jewish exclusiveness, and that it afforded him indications both of the largeness of the opportunity and the urgency of the obliga- tion to preach the Gospel throughout the Roman Empire. It is possible also that his appreciation of Roman government, the peace it secured, and the order it maintained, quickened his sense of the operation of God's will as unchanging law in the Universe. But as a Jew and a Pharisee he did not need to borrow from Rome the august conception of inexorable moral law, which even God maintains in His dealings with men. Of Roman law he knew probably enough for the dis- charge of his duties, and the claim of his privileges as a Roman citizen ; but his Gospel was not affected by that knowledge. His doctrine of adoption PAUL'S INHERITANCE 15 rests not on Jewish, but on Grseco-Roman usage ; but the sonship toward God he teaches is not merely legal relation, but a real moral likeness to and religious fellowship with God, and is essentially the same as Jesus Himself offers to men. That the legal facts used in illustration in Galatians are not Roman, but " Greek in character or slightly modified from the Greek type to suit the Grsecised parts of Asia " (Ramsay's Historical Commentary on the Galatians^ p. 370), shows Paul's alertness of mind, but has no special significance for our understanding of his Gospel. 8. While the influence of the Gentile world on Paul in confirming and developing tendencies inherent in his Gospel, such as his emphasis on the universality of God's grace, and the liberty of the believer in the Spirit, must be fully recog- nised, yet it is certain that none of the distinctive features of his Gospel can be traced to a Gentile origin. Had he not been a Roman citizen, and had he not had some contact with Greek culture, it is probable that the impulse to be the Apostle of the Gentiles would not have been so strong, and that he would not have known how most effectively to discharge the vocation to which he thus felt himself impelled. But, as he himself again and again declares, he was to his conversion " a Hebrew of Hebrews, as touching the law, a Pharisee," and in the Christian apostle we are constantly meeting the Jewish scribe. It was what 16 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL he learned in the school of Gamaliel that had the greatest influence on his theology, next to his personal experience of the grace of Christ. His recognition of the authority of the Old Testament Scriptures for even the Christian believer, and his method of quoting and expound- ing these Scriptures, were an inheritance from his Pharisaism, although at the same time it must be recognised that his Rabbinism shows itself only when, as in Galatians and Romans, he is engaged in the Judaistic controversy and so is fighting his opponents with their own weapons, whereas when he is expressing his own Christian experience he does not quote the Old Testament so often, or interpret it so like a scribe. His theology as a scribe of the Pharisees was not one of the old things that altogether passed away when he became a Christian. One instance has already been given. His conception of " the righteousness of God " has its roots in his former Pharisaism, although at the same time it must be insisted that the doctrine is thus restricted in form and not in substance. God is moral per- fection ; to be conformed to it is the destiny and obligation, and to be opposed to it is the con- demnation, of every moral personality. This is a truth for every moral religion. That there is a moral order which must be maintained is a con- viction not of Pharisaism only, but of the human conscience. In Paul's argument in Romans PAUL'S INHERITANCE 17 ix.-xi, his Jewish conception of God as absolute Will appears, although it is taken up into his Christian idea of God as universal grace. In studying Paul's letters we must be careful to distinguish the surviving Jewish from the living Christian belief in God; for the one is not quite absorbed into, or transformed by, the other. In his cosmology, angelology, and demonology, as well as his eschatology, he remains essentially Jewish. The element his Christian faith contri- butes is this, that Christ is for him both agent and purpose of Creation, that He is superior to all angels and has triumphed over all demons, that it is the Second Advent in power and glory which will usher in the general resurrection and the final judgment of mankind. The stage and most of the scenery are the same as in Jewish belief ; but Paul confesses the Christ whom Judaism rejected as the chief actor in the divine drama of revelation and redemption. His doctrine of man and sin has its roots in the Old Testament. His psychology, as has already been mentioned, is the Old Testament psychology with this differ- ence, that in his doctrine of the flesh he emphasises man's bondage to sin, and in his doctrine of the spirit the intimacy of the believer's relation to God. The story of the Fall in Genesis iii. he takes literally, and regards Adam's disobedience as the reason for the entrance of sin and death into the world ; but he does not prove the reality and 18 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL universality of sin, and so the necessity of the atonement, by any allusion to this story. His argument in Romans i.-iii. is completed before he introduces the reference to the Fall in chapter v. It is not true, therefore, that his Gospel loses the foundation he gives it, if we cannot with him share this Jewish tradition. He fully accepted the Messianic hope of Juda- ism ; but for him it was transformed by its fulfil- ment in Christ, What he believed and taught about Christ had its basis in his own personal experience of the grace of his Saviour and Lord, and thus his doctrine of Christ is in its distinctive features an interpretation of that experience. It is not merely a development of Jewish theology. Paul taught the pre-existence of Christ, and in the famous Christological passage in Philippians ii. he seems even to represent the historical personality as so pre-existing. This teaching is not accounted for merely by showing that there was a belief in the pre-existence of all objects or persons of special religious value in some of the Jewish schools of thought. For on closer scrutiny it does appear that Paul's valuation of Christ as divine is such that the assertion of His pre-exist- ence seems inevitable, Paul takes up into his Christology from the Jewish Messianic doctrine what is congruous with his own estimate of the person of Christ as realised in his own experience of Christ. PAUL'S INHERITANCE 19 In what is essential to his Gospel of the free salvation of men by the rich sacrifice of God in Christ Paul is expressing the realities of his own Christian faith. Of this he truly said, " that it is not after man. For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came to me through revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal. i. 11, 12). And our inquiry has, it is hoped, confirmed the claim that his Gospel was not borrowed. For much that is more or less closely attached to his Gospel as its theological context he was debtor both to Greek and Jew ; but, if we are to be guided by the contents of his letters and his own allusions to his former life, more to the Jew than to the Greek. But whatever he may have borrowed of Jewish belief or Gentile culture, all was brought into captivity to Christ, whose bond-slave it was the apostle's boast to confess himself. II PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 1. There are fashions in thought which sometimes become almost superstitious. About the value of the idea of evolution for modern knowledge there can be no doubt or question. In nature and in history alike it enables us to think things together. In every department of science the static view is being replaced by the dynamic^ the world and man are being interpreted as not at rest, but in movement. At present at least we cannot conceive a category which is likely to supersede this dominant conception. Nevertheless, there is a twofold danger in the universal application of the idea. On the one hand, the thinker is liable to ignore the permanent elements in recognising the progressive stages in any object of study. On the other, all change tends to be conceived as necessarily more gradual than it actually is. The catastrophic cannot be altogether banished from nature, nor the revolutionary from history. Two instances of the misapplication of the idea of evolution in Christian theology may be mentioned, 20 PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 21 although for the present purpose it is necessary to examine only one of them more closely. It is a common opinion that in the ministry of Jesus we can trace a gradual development of His own view of His vocation. He began as a teacher, hoping to win the people by the truth which He offered, and only slowly did He come to know that not by success, but by His suffering, would He fulfil His calling. That there was the unfold- ing of a purpose in the work of Jesus may be fully acknowledged. There was change of method with change of circumstance. But the writer feels sure that there was no change of purpose in the mind of Jesus. In his Studies in the Inner Life of Jesus he has endeavoured to show that even in the Baptism Jesus already dedicated Him- self to the realisation of the ideal presented to His conscience in the suffering servant of Jehovah. From this instance we may, however, turn to examine more closely the general assumption that we can distinctly trace an evolution of Paul's Gospel in his letters. 2, The proof of this statement appears to the writer to involve reasoning in a circle. First of all the letters are arranged in the order in which such an evolution is apparent, and then the evolution is proved from this order of the letters. It is usual to arrange Paul's letters in four groups : (1) 1 and 2 Thessalonians ; (2) 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans ; (3) Colossians, with 22 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Philemon, Ephesians, and Philippians ; (4) 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus. The first group may be called the Eschatological, the second the Soteriological, the third the Christological, and the fourth the Pastoral ; and each group is supposed to show an advance in the thought of Paul. To carry out this idea of evolution consistently, a certain arrange- ment within the groups themselves seems to be necessary. Although there are good reasons for placing Galatians before 1 and 2 Corinthians, yet from this point of view it would seem necessary to place this epistle as near to Romans as possible, as both letters move in the same circle of thought. Similarly, all the indications are that Philippians was written after Colossians (with Philemon) and Ephesians, and yet there is a passage in this epistle that brings it nearer to Romans than these other epistles, and again consistency in applying the theory would seem to require that all the other evidence should be set aside, and that the earlier date should be chosen. A study of the Pauline theology has led the writer to the con- viction that this assumption of an evolution in Paul's thought has resulted in forcing an order, which is not the historical, on his letters, and that, setting aside the assumption, we get a more satisfactory arrangement ; and further, that the assumption itself as commonly held is unwarranted. We may first consider how this view affects the position assigned to the letters, and then discuss PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 23 the argument which can be advanced against the view itself. 3. The wide acceptance of the South Galatian theory ^ as a result of the strenuous advocacy of it by Sir William Ramsay makes it possible to assign to the Epistle to the Galatians a much earlier date than the North Galatian theory allowed. But most scholars are deterred by this assumption from placing it before 1 and 2 Thes- salonians, in which the earliest phase of Paul's Gospel is supposed to be presented. The explana- tion of the peculiar contents of 1 and 2 Thes- salonians may be deferred till we have fixed the date of Galatians. The writer finds himself in entire agreement with Dr. Bartlet {The Apostolic Age, pp. 84, 85) in assigning Galatians to the close of the first missionary journey, and prior to the Council in Jerusalem ; but thinks it less likely that it was " written when en route for Jerusalem " than that it was sent oft before the decision to refer the question to the Church in Jerusalem had been made. Once Paul consented to that course, the matter was sub judice ; and it would not have been becoming in him to discuss it as he does in the Epistle. Surely the circumstances amid which the letter was written are well described in Acts ^ Dr. Moffatt's opposition in his Introduction to this tendency has not led the writer to any change of view ; but it would carry the discussion too far into the region of literary and his- torical criticism, which it is the purpose of this volume, as far as possible, to avoid, to argue this complicated issue here. 24 STUDIES OP PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL XV. 1, 2. The reasons for assigning this date to Galatians are the following : (i.) Despite all the ingenuity which scholars have displayed in proving the identity of the visit to Jerusalem described in Acts XV. with that of which Paul gives an account in Galatians ii. l-IO, the writer cannot persuade himself that Paul would have been dealing honestly with his readers had he described only the private conferences, and kept silence altogether about the public assembly with its important decision affecting the relation of Jews and Gentiles within the Church, (ii.) If it be conceded that Paul and Luke are not referring to the same visit, but that Paul is writing in Galatians about the visit Luke refers to in Acts xi. 30, it seems still less possible to place Gala- tians after the Council, as total silence regarding a visit of such primary importance would have been disingenuous in the extreme, (iii.) The action of Peter and Barnabas at Antioch, which Paul so severely rebuked (Gal. ii, 11-21), is much more improbable after the Council, when a decision on the question had been reached, than before, when there was still uncertainty. Does not Peter's speech (Acts xv, 7-11) at the Council show how thoroughly he had taken to heart the lesson Paul had given him on that occasion ? (iv.) The mood of Galatians i. and ii., with its vehement assertion of independence, appears more credible before the Council than after, when Paul had acquiesced in these negotiations with the mother Church, PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 25 The indications which the history in Acts affords us suggest that at first Paul was treated with such suspicion as aroused his resentment, and that his mood at first was not as conciUatory as it after- wards became. Conscious of his own distinctive Gospel, and his vocation as the Apostle of the Gentiles which this involved, he was for a time impatient of any interference, and was only slowly brought to see that for the unity of the Christian Church he must make some concessions. But if Galatians was written after the Council we must assume that Paul relapsed from this more con- ciliatory mood, (v.) Could Paul honestly have asserted such independence as he does in Galatians after he had consented to the question being submitted to the Church in Jerusalem ? (vi.) The early date of Galatians enables us to assign their plain sense to the words in i. 6 : "I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different Gospel," whereas the later date involves a tortur- ing of the language, (vii.) The contrast of tone and thought between Galatians and Romans is an argument against bringing them closely together. It is not likely that Paul would deal with the topic as vehemently as he does in the one letter, and soon after discuss it as calmly as he does in the other. The one was written in the very heat of the conflict, the other when the worst of the danger was past, (viii.) A more general consideration may be added. 26 STUDIES OP PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Would not the question of the intercourse between Jew and Gentile in the Christian Church emerge almost as soon as Gentiles began to enter the Church ? And would not Paul as a Pharisee have been forced to face the question for himself as soon as he himself began to preach among the Gentiles ? The fiercest controversy was likely to be at an earlier rather than a later date, (ix.) The one objection to the early date is that the theology of Galatians appears more developed than that of 1 and 2 Thessalonians. But this objection can be met by showing, as the writer believes can be shown, that it was this Gospel of justification by faith alone which Paul reached as a result of his meditation on his conversion before he began his missionary labours, and that had he not reached this distinctive Gospel, but only such common Christian teaching as we find in 1 and 2 Thessalonians, he would never have realised his own unique vocation as the Apostle to the Gentiles. This was the constant element in all his preaching. It appears in Philippians near the close of his ministry as in Galatians at the beginning. 4. Much more briefly need we deal with 1 and 2 Thessalonians. The difference between these two letters has led some scholars to deny the authen- ticity of the second ; but Harnack's recent sugges- tion that the first epistle was addressed to the Gentile, and the second to the Jewish section of PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 27 the Church, would relieve the difficulty. Without pronouncing an opinion on this suggestion, the writer would point out the wider principle in- volved, namely, that the contents of Paul's letters were not determined by what he himself was thinking at the time, but by the needs of those whom he was addressing. In Thessalonica there was no problem of the relation of the Law and the Gospel, and so it was not necessary to present the distinctive Gospel which for Paul himself had solved the problem. Further, the eschatological teaching of the letter cannot be regarded as a temporary phase of Paul's theology ; it is a constant element. His mood of expectancy that he would survive to the Second Advent might give way to his mood of acquiescence in death as the way home to his Lord, but his conception of the last things was too deeply rooted to be overthrown. In Philippians, written in a mood in which to die seems to him gain (i. 21), he still expresses the common Christian hope, "we wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ " (iii. 20). The doctrines which are most prominent in his writings are not successive phases of a theological development, but constant elements in a theology, made up of many parts, not all entirely harmonious, because derived from different sources. 5. There is no good ground for regarding the eschatological as prior to the soteriological stage of Paul's thought. If the former was what he owed 28 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL to the common Christian tradition, and usually preached, the latter was his own distinctive Gospel, and as such was not only the satisfaction of his own personal need as a converted Pharisee, but also the impulse to his vocation as preacher to the Gentiles. Must we, however, recognise a fresh theo- logical development in the Christological teaching of Colossians and Ephesians ? Here we must concede that two new influences did affect Paul's thinking, (i.) In the first place, the heresy which is dealt with in Colossians supplied Paul with the weapons that he handled so skilfully in his warfare against it. The writer cannot find, however, that a new conception of Christ emerges in the letters. The recognition of Jesus' Lordship, which we find in the early letters, involved that His claim to supremacy over all other powers in the Universe would be asserted as soon as challenged. To the modern man, to whom nature means much more than grace, a cosmic function may appear greater than Saviourhood, but we may be sure that for Paul Saviourhood was the ultimate fact about Christ, to which all other assertions even if made in its defence against any rival claims were subordinate. In 2 Cor- inthians viii. 9 we have a pregnant Christological statement, of which Philippians ii. 5-11 is but a development. Paul's valuation of Christ did not alter, although error might lead him to be more explicit and emphatic at one time than another PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 29 in expressing that value in doctrine. Still less did any Christological interest divert his mind from the soteriological. In Philippians (iii. 1-16), which was written after Colossians and Ephesians, we have in a description of his own experience a summary of the teaching of Romans and Galatians. One may venture the suggestion even that had it not beenfor the Colossian heresy, Paul's own interest would not have led him into these paths at all. (ii.) As regards what may be called the ecclesi- astical interest, especially in Ephesians, while the vocabulary is borrowed from heresy, yet a real interest of Paul's finds expression. It is the reconciliation of Jew and Gentile in Christ which is the surpassing glory of the Church of Christ, and is not this interest continuous with the soterio- logical in Galatians and Romans ? The contro- versy that evoked the first, and has still its echoes in the second epistle, was at an end when Ephesians was written ; but had the controversy not ended in the emancipation of the Gentiles, for which these earlier epistles contended, this later epistle could not have presented to us a united Church as the body of the Lord. Of course Paul did learn from history ; and he could in Ephesians conceive the Church of Christ as at an earlier stage in his career it would have been impossible for him to do ; but in asserting the sufficiency of Christ for salva- tion to Jew and Gentile alike he was laying the foundation of his later doctrine. What has to 30 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL be insisted on is, that Paul did not add one doctrine to another, but that in his distinctive Gospel there was already implicit the moral and spiritual appreciation of Christ, and the Christian salvation which was on necessary occasions made more explicit, now in one respect and then in another. 6. We may for our purpose exclude the Pastoral Epistles from our consideration, as even if they are in their present form Paul's, they present to us no theological progress on his previous writings.^ If Galatians be the first and Philippians the last of the letters to be taken into account, if 1 and 2 Thessalonians present to us teaching specially adapted to the temporary and local circumstances, and if Colossians and Ephesians differ in their doctrine in form rather than in substance from Paul's other writings, we need not admit an evolution of Paul's Gospel. This does not mean that there was no progress in his religious life and thought, that Christ did not become to him always more precious as the object of his faith, hope, and love, that he made no advance in moral insight and spiritual discernment as regards the contents and applications of his distinctive Gospel ; but it does mean that the Gospel of free grace for faith alone was no temporary phase, but the constant element, and the most potent 1 The interesting series of articles which Sir WiUiam Ramsay- is contributing to The Expositor in support of the Pauline author- ship of the Pastoral Epistles has failed to convince the writer. PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 31 factor, in his personal development. For this assertion we may now offer positive evidence. In the first place, Paul's own personality makes such an evolution of his Gospel improbable. Dr. Percy Gardner maintains that we must recog- nise in history " a great force, which is not, so far as we can judge, evolutional, and the law of which is very hard to trace — the force of personality and character " {A Historic View of the New Testament, p. 13), Not every personality advances by a gradual development ; and there are per- sonalities which we may describe as catastrophic or explosive rather than slowly progressive. On the crises in personal history Browning delights to dwell, and has well described such experiences in the lines — " Oh we're sunk enough here, God knows ! But not quite so sunk that moments. Sure tho' seldom, are denied us, When the spirit's true endowments Stand out plainly from its false ones, And apprise it if pursuing Or the right way or the wrong way. To its triumph or undoing. There are flashes struck from midnights, There are fire-flames noondays kindle. Whereby piled-up honours perish, Whereby swollen ambitions dwindle, While just this or that poor impulse Which for once had play unstifled Seems the sole work of a lifetime, That away the rest have trifled." ("Cristina.") 32 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL If we consider the whole history of Paul as it is disclosed to us in his letters, are we not forced to the conclusion that his was a catastrophic or explosive rather than a slowly progressive per- sonality ? That he was converted from the persecutor to the preacher of the Gospel was not contradictory of, but consistent with, his peculiar disposition and temperament. He was not melan- cholic or phlegmatic, but sanguine or choleric. So intense and passionate was he, that sudden and thorough change was characteristic of him. His conversion dominated his whole subsequent career. Sir William Ramsay well interprets the mind of Paul in words he, as it were, puts upon his lips : " In the divine reckoning my life begins from the conversion and call to the Gentiles. . . . If you would understand my life, you must refer every act in it to that primary revelation of the will of God in me" (Historical Commentary on the Galatians, p. 272). This applies to his ideas as well as his actions. His Gospel was included in his conversion, and it was his meditation that made explicit in doctrine what was thus implicit in experience. When did this explication take place ? 7. Assuming that the writings display an evolu- tion of his Gospel, it must have been during his ministry that he became more fully aware of what his conversion meant. The writer, however, is convinced that the explication took place soon PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 33 after the conversion itself, probably before the ministry began. An intellect, acute and dis- ciplined as was Paul's, could not have left the miracle and the mystery of his conversion unex- plored. Truth had for him not a theoretical interest, but a practical. In the contrast between his experience as a Pharisee and his experience as a Christian resulting from his conversion, in which the old things had passed away and all things had become new, he had the data for his distinctive Gospel, and his equipment and dis- cipline as a Roman citizen and a Jewish scribe enabled him to elaborate the data as he did. It was not after his conversion that he acquired the Jewish learning or the Gentile culture which he possessed, but it was his at his conversion, available for an immediate application to the many questions which such an event at once started in so fertile and keen a mind. Doubtless it was in Arabia that he reached certainty and lucidity of conviction, and soon after his return he discovered that while he was in general agree- ment with the common teaching of the Christian Church, yet God had in a special way revealed His Son in him (Gal. i. 16), and that he had a Gospel which he could call his own, given him by God, and not by man. It was the possession of this distinctive Gospel which impelled him to become the Apostle of the Gentiles. If 1 and 2 Thessalonians had represented all his Gospel 3 34 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL at the time, there would have been no reason in his convictions for his sense of a call of God to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, It is surely more reasonable to suppose that it was not in any- mysterious impulse that he discovered his unique vocation, but that the Gospel implied in his con- version by its distinctive features was the urgent motive of his calling, 8, An examination of that Gospel supports the conclusion that it was all involved in his conversion. His sense of moral helplessness and hopelessness, as expressed in Romans vii,, was his before his conversion, and prepared him for it. The impotence of the law to make man righteous before God, while pronouncing the condemnation of the sinner, and even by its restraints provoking to sin, had been discovered by him as a Pharisee seeking peace for his soul by entire obedience. The Resurrection, of which the appearance to him brought him absolute certainty, compelled him to recognise Jesus as Messiah, and the confession of the Messiahship made imperative an explanation of His death by crucifixion consistent with the Messianic dignity. In such statements as that Christ had done what the law could not do because of its weakness (Rom. viii. 3), or that God made Him who knew no sin to become sin for us (2 Cor. v. 21), or that He became a curse (Gal, iii. 13), we have surely the answer Paul gave to his own question- PAUL'S DEVELOPMENT 35 ings regarding the meaning of the Messiah's death. This salvation, as apart from the law impotent to save, dethroned that law from its authority over the sinner's soul. And with the abrogating of the law for the believer, the barrier between Jew and Gentile fell. The pardon of guilt and the power of renewal which Paul had found in living fellowship with Christ belonged to the early days of his experience. There is nothing in the content of his distinctive Gospel, as presented in Galatians, Romans, and Philippians iii., which cannot be thus shown as implicit in his conversion and capable of such explication as he has given to it by the resources at his command at the beginning of his career. Before he began his ministry as the Apostle to the Gentiles, he was possessed of the distinctive Gospel that was his impulse to it, and his warrant for it.^ 9. An examination of the relevant dates supports this conclusion. Between the conversion and the first missionary journey a period of about fifteen years elapsed ; between the first missionary journey and the final visit to Jerusalem a period of about ten years ; yet during the first period we are asked to believe (on the common assump- tion of an evolution of Paul's Gospel within the writings we possess) that Paul practically made no advance beyond the common Christian tradition, ^ This subject is worked out in greater detail in the next Study, on "Paul's Experience." 36 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL the eschatological teaching of 1 and 2 Thessa- lonians, whereas during the second he advanced from this position to his distinctive Gospel in Romans. Is a man between thirty and forty-five, after an- experience which transformed his whole inner world, and regarding the meaning of which he had leisure for meditation, more likely to have advanced theologically, or a man between forty- five and fifty-five subject to a constant strain of travel, labour, and service ? Between Romans and Ephesians only about five years at most can have elapsed, and Paul was then a man over fifty. Can any marked change of theological view at that age in so short a time, without any inward crisis which would compel re-consideration of long- held convictions, be regarded as at all probable ? In dealing with Paul's letters we may conclude that we must recognise differences due to his adaptation of his message to local and temporary conditions and necessities, but it is not possible to distinguish successive stages of theological development, or to demonstrate any evolution of his Gospel. Ill PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 1. The cry, "Back to Christ," on many lips to-day expresses not only appreciation of Christ Himself, but also depreciation of Paul, It is often supposed that the simple Gospel of Jesus has been obscured and perverted by the Apostle to the Gentiles. The historical function of Paul in delivering the Christian Church from its imminent danger of becoming merely a Jewish sect, and in forcing the door open for it to become a world-wide religion, is ignored. For if his significance in this respect were fully recognised, it would be impossible to suppose that the man who secured for the Gospel its widest extension was guilty of its most thorough per- version. It is at least probable that the mind that perceived most clearly the scope of the revela- tion of God in Christ conceived most fully its contents. As a study of the experience of Paul will show, he himself was conscious of his absolute dependence on, his intimate communion with, and his loyal submission to, his Living Lord ; and, unless we are to judge him as self-deceived or as 37 38 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL deceiving others, we must regard his Hfe which was hid with Christ in God as a continuation of the ministry of Jesus. God was still revealing His Son in Paul, If this be so, and in this volume the endeavour is being made to show that this is so, then the antithesis so commonly assumed between the teaching of Jesus and the doctrine of Paul is false ; and we are concerned only with different, but not contradictory, modes of the same divine manifestation. 2. It is with Paul's experience in Christ as the source and the warrant of his doctrine that we are primarily concerned ; and in constantly relating his doctrine to his experience we are following the now generally approved method of investigation. The religious-historical method, which in Germany at least is being advocated as the only legitimate method in the inquiry regarding the nature of Christianity, insists that the fruits of religion in doctrine, worship, polity, should always be traced back to their root in the religious life itself. Religious psychology is now coming to be recog- nised as a necessary organon of theology. There is no reason for distrusting, but every reason for heartily welcoming, this demand. Theology as the expression of religious life is invested with a personal interest in which it has too often been altogether lacking. The theology of Paul, con- ceived as the struggle and the victory of a soul, appeals to the imagination and the affections as it PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 39 cannot when presented as an abstract system, divorced from an individual experience. This is not a reduction of his theology to subjectivity ; for sin, sacrifice, and salvation are objective realities, and are subjectively reahsed as such in his experience. May we not even say that we do not possess any other record so full as his letters are of an experience so intense as his was ; and accordingly nowhere else can we find a subjective realisation of the objectivities of the Christian experience which can compare with his ? 3. While in dealing with the doctrines of Paul there must be constant reference to his experience, it seems desirable at this early stage of the dis- cussion to form as distinct a conception as possible of that experience as a whole. What the stages in his personal development were he has himself revealed to us in his letters. There are auto- biographical references scattered throughout his writings, which, brought together and wrought into a unity, present to us a living likeness. While it is possible that he may have sometimes used the first personal pronoun for rhetorical effect, yet many of the passages would lose their fullest meaning if we could not regard them as confessions of his own inmost life. The passages for which we can claim this distinctive character bring before us every stage of his personal development, and throw light on all the essential elements of his theology. The change which Christ wrought in him, 40 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL and the growth in the knowledge, love, and service of Christ which he displayed, offer one of the most striking evidences of the constant presence and prevailing power of Christ in his life. While it is not maintained that Paul's experience affords the only valid type of Christian life, yet that experience, interesting as it is as a " human document," does distinctly establish the conclusion, that this type, which reappears in Augustine, Luther, and Wesley, must be adequately accounted for by any theology which can prove its title to the Christian name. 4. According to his own testimony we must, prior to his conversion, regard Paul as a Jew of the narrowest type. It is surely his own actual con- dition as a Pharisee which he describes in his out- burst against the Judaisers, who were threatening even a Church so dear and so devoted to him as that of the Philippians (iii. 4-6), This is not merely rhetorical argument ; it is a vivid reminiscence and a frank confession. These things had once been gain to him, and to become a Christian he had to count them loss (ver, 7). How ardent was his renunciation of this spiritual condition is surely indicated in his vehement phrase, " I suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung " (ver, 8), Such detestation implies a corresponding appreciation. He was a complete, consistent, and for a time at least a contented Pharisee. His treatment of the law both in Galatians and Romans betrays the Pharisaic standpoint. The burden, the PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 41 bondage, and the curse of the law were not felt by the common people, but by the conscientious Pharisee. The dishonest Pharisee discovered and practised the arts of evasion, and thus succeeded in easing the yoke and lightening the burden of the law. He who honestly and seriously accepted the Pharisaic attitude to the law did labour and was heavy-laden, and nevertheless could persuade him- self that he was so wearing the yoke and carrying the burden as by his merits to secure God's favour. Paul could not have so vehemently opposed and con- fidently conquered the Judaisers had the battle not been previously fought to a finish in his own soul. While, as will afterward be shown, there is a permanent and universal element in Paul's con- ception of the law, yet that conception is distinctly coloured by his Pharisaic experience. We have no reason for believing that Jesus' denunciations of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees would have applied to Paul's character as a Pharisee ; yet, on his own confession, the ceremonialism, formal- ism, legalism, and exclusiveness of Pharisaism were at one period at least characteristic of him. This fact is in no way to his discredit. However mistaken the Pharisaic point of view may now appear to us, it was generally regarded as the fairest flower and the ripest fruit of Judaism. Men of moral earnestness and religious seriousness were attracted and attached to it. The levity or the laxity of youth was never seen in Paul's life ; but, 42 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL so far as our evidence carries us, from his earliest years morality and religion asserted their para- mount claim on him. 5. It was not from this condition, however, that Paul at once passed to Christian faith. There seems to have been a transition period, in which his Pharisaic content left him, and his own ex- periences presented a problem which Pharisaism could not solve. It seems to the writer that we are fully justified in assuming that the passage in Romans vii. 7-25 is an autobiographical refer- ence. This conclusion is contested on two grounds : (i.) It is said that the first personal pronoun is merely rhetorical, and that Paul is not here giving his personal experience, but is simply individual- ising for literary effect the common Christian experience. But surely the form of the appeal to the common Christian experience in the sixth chapter disproves this. There too a question is asked, and answered in the same form of words. But in the former case Paul goes on to say, " We who died to sin, how shall we any longer live therein ? " (vi. 2) ; and in the latter, " Howbeit I had not known sin, except through the law." If the individualising of the common Christian ex- perience secures rhetorical effect, it surely sacrifices argumentative force. If Paul could say your experience as well as mine proves this, his argu- ment would gain in cogency. To appeal to himself alone when he might have appealed to his readers PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 43 as well would have shown greater feebleness in reasoning than we have any right to ascribe to him. (ii.) Further, it is assumed that it is a Christian experience which is appealed to, and the reason given is this : that the unregenerate man cannot in mind approve and in will desire the law of God ; but this is dogmatism ruthlessly trampling on experience, theory distorting fact. Paul before his conversion was a serious and earnest man morally and religiously. He had both a sensitive conscience and an honest purpose. He was seeking to serve God according to the light that he had. He does not in this passage claim for himself more than we should be prepared to assign to many a man who has not yet tasted how gracious the Lord is. It was his religious belief and not his moral aim that needed to be changed. Even of his persecuting frenzy he says, " Though I was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and in- jurious : howbeit I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief " (1 Tim. i. 13), It is evident that the rough-and-ready distinctions of regenerate and unregenerate do not apply to so complex a case. The position of the passage in the argument of the epistle is against this reference to Christian experience, Paul is expounding the Christian salvation and his own distinctive Gospel of salva- tion by God's free grace apart from the works of 44 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL the law. He is meeting objections to his view. That the law cannot save from moral impotence, but Christ can, is surely a truth that refers to the unsaved and not the saved. It is not a descrip- tion of Christian experience ; but an argument for abandoning the fruitless way of the law, and entering on the fruitful path of faith. Is not Paul's distinctive view of Christian experience just this, that as he lives in the Spirit, he is dead to the law ? Yet here the law still holds dominion, and makes demands that cannot be fulfilled. For these reasons the writer holds that Paul is here describing his own experience before conversion. 6. As such a description the passage deserves closer study. To the writer it seems that the more abstractly we explain any saying of Paul's, the more likely we are to miss its meaning, and the more concretely we interpret it, the nearer we shall get to his mind and heart. Accordingly, he believes that Paul is here describing not his experience generally, but a distinct inner event that had burned itself into his memory. Just as we may suppose that in Isaiah vi, the record of the prophet's call is coloured by subsequent ex- perience, so it is possible that here Paul describes a crisis in his own inner life as it appeared more clearly to him in the light of what he afterwards passed through. With this qualification we may, however, affirm that verse 7 describes a moral discovery which he made either in one flash of PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 45 moral insight, or in the brightening light of grow- ing moral knowledge. So long as he thought of righteousness as external conformity to the law of God, he remained a contented Pharisee, for he could confidently maintain that "as touching the righteousness which is in the law " he was " found blameless." But when it was brought home to him that the law was not confined to outward acts, but included inward dispositions, that one of the Commandments forbade evil desire as well as action, then the battlefield of his moral life was changed. In the realm of action he had hitherto believed himself victorious ; in the dominion of the inner life he found himself defeated. This extension of the scope of the law he could not but approve, even although it brought him self-con- demnation instead of self-satisfaction. 7. Two questions in this connexion press for an answer : (i.) Did Paul make this moral discovery independently without any external influence, or did the suggestion come to him from one of his teachers, or even indirectly from Jesus Himself ? Within Judaism itself the inwardness of religion and morality were in theory recognised, although in practice largely ignored. We need not, then, look beyond its borders for an outward source of this moral discovery. One cannot but ask, however, whether discussion in the Jewish schools, or at least among the serious and earnest young men who were disciples in these schools, was not 46 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL stimulated by such teaching as Jesus gave in the Sermon on the Mount. It is an attractive idea that ultimately from Jesus Himself came the wound to the soul of Paul, which He and He alone was afterwards able to heal. (ii.) Does Paul refer to the prohibition of evil desire generally, or has he any definite desire in his view ? The word sTtdviJbTjaBtg " has a wider sense than our ' covet ' ; it includes every kind of illicit desire " (Sanday and Headlam's Romans, p. 179). It is used by Jesus in regard to the lustful look (Matt. v. 28). In the tenth com- mandment there is the clause, " Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife " (Ex. xx, 17). The repeated reference in this passage to the flesh would at first sight appear to lend some countenance to the supposition that it is some form of sensual desire to which Paul is here alluding. Dr. Bruce maintains that "ftody Sind flesh, so far as obstruct- ing holiness is concerned, are for the apostle synonymous terms." " He speaks in so serious a tone because he knows the formidable nature of the foe from present, chronic, personal experi- ence. This we know from that extremely signifi- cant autobiographical hint in 1 Corinthians : ' I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage ; lest by any means, after having preached to others, I myself should become a rejected one ' (ix. 27). He found it necessary for spiritual safety to be in effect an ascetic, not in any superstitious sense, PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 47 or on a rigid system, but in the plain, practical sense of taking special pains to prevent the body with its clamorous passions from getting the upper hand." In defending this suggestion Dr. Bruce makes a statement the truth of which we cannot challenge. " There is a mysterious, subtle, psycho- logical connexion between spiritual and sensual excitements, which some of the noblest men have detected and confessed " {The Expositor^ Fourth Series, vol. ix. pp. 190, 191), The characteristics of Paul's genius do lend probability to this view of the evil desire, which he found himself unable to quench. If, even after his conversion, such severe self-discipline was necessary, how hopeless must have appeared the struggle when no help seemed near ! It is a condition of acute misery and even comfortless despair which is described in the cry, " wretched man that I am ! who shall deliver me out of the body of this death ? " (Rom. vii. 24). 8. Although there is no distinct autobiographical reference to the next stage of his inner life, yet we do not appear to be indulging in baseless conjecture when we connect his persecuting frenzy with his moral despair. One may be excused the exercise of " psychological divination." There may be two links between the inward mood and the out- ward deed, (i.) Paul may have imagined that he could compensate for his failure in keeping the whole law by this display of devotion to it in the 48 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL persecution of those who appeared to him violators of it in recognising as Messiah one whose manner of death the law pronounced as accursed. An uneasy conscience has often been the motive of persecution. His madness against the Christians (Acts xxvi. 11) may have been the measure of the misery he experienced in himself ; nay, even the frenzy of his wrath and hate against them may have eased a little the strain of the self-despair. Had he been a contented Pharisee, there is nothing in his disposition as revealed to us in his letters to explain the madness he himself confesses. He had begun to feel the goad, and in his ignorance and unbelief he was kicking against it (Acts xxvi. 14). Because his own heart was so ill at ease, the joy and peace and hope their faith gave to those whom he was persecuting would still more exasperate him. How could they, the blasphemers, be so happy when he, the defender of the law, was so miserable ? (ii.) But another motive of his action may be conceived. Doubtless he, as a pious and patriotic Jew, was looking forward eagerly to the Messiah's coming ; probably even he may have cherished the hope that the Messianic age might bring him individually some relief from his pain. How angry then he must have felt at the Christians who declared that the Messiah had come, and had been rejected by the people to save whom He had come, and had even been put to the accursed death of the cross. The words quoted in Galatians iii. 13 PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 49 from Deuteronomy xxi. 23, " Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree," were full of significance for Paul even before his conversion. For him the Christians appeared guilty of blasphemy of the deepest dye in maintaining that the Messiah had died under the curse of God. They must be forced themselves to pronounce accursed Him whom now they were proclaiming as the Messiah. " Punishing them oftentimes in all the synagogues, I strove to make them blaspheme " (Acts xxvi. 11). This is his own confession of his purpose in perse- cuting. At any cost the judgment of the law must be maintained. Is it possible that the doubt sometimes visited him. What if they were right after all ? What if the chosen people in their blindness had themselves, by inflicting such a death on their Messiah, quenched their only hope ? Could it be possible that God had fulfilled His promise, and that this was the result ? If such doubt ever came to him, as he witnessed the joy of martyrdom in Stephen (Acts viii. 1) and others, he doubtless flung it from him with his vehement " God forbid." He was still kicking against the goad. If it were indeed true that Jesus had risen from the dead, then he might have admitted to himself that Jesus might be the Messiah, how- ever difficult it would be to explain the manner of His death. 9. There was some preparation for his conver- sion. He must at least have been in such a 4 50 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL spiritual condition as would make it possible for him to accept the appearance of Christ to him on the way to Damascus as a convincing evidence that He was indeed the Messiah, Had there been no such preparation, there could not have been the immediate submission, " What shall I do, Lord ? " (Acts xxii. 10). The issue between Paul and the Christians seems to have narrowed itself down to this — Had Jesus risen from the dead ? If he could be convinced of that, then he recognised that the Messiahship necessarily followed, as they so confidently affirmed. The recognition of this fact does not, however, make less surprising and wonderful the conversion it- self ; it does not cast any doubt on the objective reality of the appearance of Jesus as the necessary cause of the evident change in Paul. So incredible did the fact of the rising again of one who had died the accursed death appear to him, that only the overwhelming manifestation of the living Lord Himself could overcome his unbelief. His own description of his conversion proves this : layjirm Sg Tai^r^j' fiJcTgpg/ r^ k^rpatfjuccTt a}fj(jC6 is chosen to express the suddenness, the violence, in short, the abnormality of the change thus brought about in him. At this point his experience PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 51 was not evolutionary but revolutionary. The mode of his conversion colours his conception of the Christian life as the absolute antithesis of the previous life. It is his own experience he general- ises in the statements, " Wherefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature : the old things are passed away ; behold, they are become new " (2 Cor. V. 17). " For neither is circumcision any- thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature" (marg. " creation " ; Gal. vi. 15). It is probable that the whole range and the full content of the change was not at once realised. The Messiahship of Jesus became a certainty to him, and this was the burden of his testimony in the synagogue at Damascus (Acts ix. 20-22). In the first account of his conversion in Acts the divine intention that he should be the Apostle to the Gentiles is conveyed to Ananias. " He is a chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel : for I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name's sake " (ix. 15, 16). But to Pauf Ananias defines his mission in the words, " that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost " (ver. 17). His being filled with the Holy Ghost, " a holy enthusiasm," as Dr. Bartlet describes it (Century Bible, Acts, p. 386), was consequent on the certainty of Jesus' resur- rection and His Messiahship. In the account Paul gives of his conversion to the multitude in Jeru- 52 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL salem he ascribes to Ananias this speech : " The God of our fathers hath appointed thee to know His will, and to see the Righteous One, and to hear a voice from His mouth. For thou shalt be a witness for Him unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard " (xxii. 14, 15). In his speech before Agrippa he ascribes to the Living Lord Himself the command, " Arise, and stand upon thy feet ; for to this end have I appeared unto thee, to appoint thee a minister and a witness both of the things wherein thou hast seen Me, and of the things wherein I will appear unto thee ; delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I send thee, to open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in Me " (xxvi. 16-18). This summary of his message and mission, even if it comes to us from the lips of Paul himself (the possibility of this being a free report by Luke can- not be excluded) is antedated. All psychological probability points in the direction of a gradual realisation by the apostle both of the work he had to do and the faith he was to teach. He himself, in the previous account of his experience, places the command to go to the Gentiles as part of the speech of Christ to him when he was in a trance in the temple at Jerusalem (xxii. 21). The prob- ability would appear to be that he began as a PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 53 witness to the Jews of the resurrection and the Messiahship of Jesus, and that he was gradually- led by outward events and inward experiences to the full disclosure both of his message and mission. In the narrative of the outward events after his conversion there is, however, a discrepancy be- tween the record in Acts (ix. 19-25) and his own report in Galatians (i. 11-20), which makes it difficult for us to trace his inward development. 10. The record in Acts would suggest the following view : After his conversion Paul asso- ciated himself with the Christian community in Damascus, and for a time taught in the synagogue no other doctrine than was usually delivered by the Christian witnesses ; but he pressed his argu- ment against Jewish unbelief with such fervour and force as to provoke an antagonism which less fiery preachers escaped. As his life was threatened in Damascus, he fled from it to Jerusalem ; there, after the suspicions against him had been allayed, he associated himself with the primitive Church, over which the apostles presided, and continued his preaching among the Greek-speaking Jews with the same result as at Damascus. Evidently there was something provocative either in the matter or the manner of his preaching which was not, at least in equal degree, characteristic of the other apostles. As has already been noted, according to his own account, it was a direct command of Christ to cease from his vain efforts among the Jews, and 54 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL to depart to the Gentiles, which led to his leaving Jerusalem (Acts xxii. 18-21), a step which the author of Acts ascribes rather to the anxiety of the Christian community in Jerusalem for his safety. If we had only the record in Acts, we might con- jecture that Paul used the opportunity of this visit to Jerusalem to acquaint himself with the words and works of Jesus and with the beliefs current in the primitive Church ; that for a time at least he himself did not advance beyond this stand- point ; that at last his own distinctive experience forced on him a consciousness of difference and even alienation ; and that this stage of experience is alluded to in the words, otherwise difficult to interpret, " 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 " (2 Cor. v. 16). It does not seem improbable that for a time Paul did not realise fully the communion of the Living Lord, and relied on such knowledge of Jesus as the Christian community preserved ; that in agreement with that community he at first thought of Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, and was content to bear witness to His resurrection as a proof of His Messiahship to Jews only. The abandonment of the knowledge of Christ after the flesh, and the summons to the mission to the Gentiles would in that case stand in close connexion. The unbelief with which the Jews met his testimony would recall his own unbelief. The way in which PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 55 that unbelief had been overcome in his own case would suggest that it was only the consciousness of the Living Lord that could save. The fact that the law, by the curse which it pronounced on the death on the cross, had so long hindered his belief in Christ, would shatter his attachment to the law. The importance that the Church in Jerusalem attached to the earthly life of Jesus and His devotion to the law would estrange Paul. As the Living Lord had by His manifestation of Himself sufficed for his conversion, and the law had been only a hindrance, Paul's view both of the content and the scope of the Gospel would thus gradually be changed. Such a view of his experience, psychologically probable, would be consistent with the report in Acts, 11. When we turn to Paul's own report in Galatians (i. 15-20) doubt may assert itself, and it seems almost impossible to harmonise these two accounts. Why does the record in Acts omit all reference to the sojourn in Arabia, and the three years which elapsed between the conversion and the visit to Jerusalem ? The impression the narrative gives is that it was very soon after his conversion, before the Jerusalem Church could convince itself of the reality, that Paul paid his visit. Why does the report in Galatians omit all mention of the preaching of Paul in Damascus and in Jerusalem, with the persecution in both cities which followed, and also of the intervention of 56 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Barnabas to secure a welcome for Paul from the Church in Jerusalem ? Are we to insert the preaching in Damascus recorded in Acts partly before and partly after the visit to Arabia reported in Galatians ? Are we to identify the visit recorded in Acts with that reported in Galatians ? Without exhaustively discussing these questions, we may state the conclusion that it is more probable that Luke was not fully informed than that Paul's memory misled him about a matter in respect of which he assigned so great importance to the ab- solute accuracy of his own statement, even although psychological probability is rather on the side of the record in Acts than the report in Galatians. It does not seem at all natural that from the very beginning of his Christian discipleship he should take up this attitude of indifference to, and inde- pendence of, the teaching of the apostles ; one is almost inclined to add that it seems even un- gracious. The abnormality of his spiritual birth, the absolute certainty of the objectivity of Christ's appearance, and the complete revolution in his thought and life, alone can account for his not seeking to confer with flesh and blood and his being satisfied with the revelation God made in him of His Son. There are moments that are more pregnant in the soul's history than years may be ; and it is, therefore, possible that even in a few days so much was revealed to Paul regarding the crucified Saviour and the risen Lord as convinced him that, PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 57 God having so taught him, he had no need of the witness of ncian. His withdrawal into Arabia, which need not have lasted much more than a year, does, however, appear to prove that he felt his need of solitary and silent reflexion to make fully and firmly his own all that had been revealed to him in these hours or days of vision. 12. It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the significance and the value of the Cross became clear to him almost simultaneously with the certainty of the resurrection and of the Messiah- ship of Jesus. We have already noted that he describes his conversion as an abortive birth and also as a new creation. As complete a change in his thought and life as these terms connote is ascribed by him to the Cross : " Far be it from me to glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world hath been crucified unto me, and I unto the world " (Gal. vi. 14), A judgment of and breach with all that he had hitherto held dear and had once made his boast (Phil. iii. 5, 6); the scorn and hate unto death of all his former companions ; that was what the Cross of Christ meant to him : but great as in itself the loss might appear to be, in comparison with the gain it was so little loss that in the Cross alone he would now make his boast. What, then, did the Cross bring to Paul ? The offence of the Cross was transformed into its glory. The death on the Cross was regarded by the Jews, and by Paul 58 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL himself, as accursed. Paul does not cast away this view of it ; but he gives a content to it undreamed, unguessed before. " Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us ; for it is Yi^ritten, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree " (Gal. iii. 13). But why should the Messiah become a curse for His people ? Because, an- swered Paul, they all were sinful, and to save them from their sin He must needs suffer for their sin. " Him who knew no sin He made to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him " (2 Cor. v. 21). There can be no doubt that for Paul as a conscientious Pharisee the guilt of sin was a reality, and its removal a problem. He had failed in getting peace of conscience in the two ways he had tried — blamelessness in regard to the law, and persecuting zeal. In the Cross of Jesus he found the forgiveness, the assurance of acceptance before God — to use his own word, the righteousness he had vainly sought before. It is necessary to-day to insist on this element in Paul's experience, for it is a common assumption that guilt is an unreality and the sense of guilt an illusion, and that all man needs to be saved from is the power of sin. It was not as a Pharisee merely that Paul had this sense of guilt, for it is the universal conscience of mankind, which, when unsophisticated by theological speculation, bears testimony to the reality of guilt. Even Pharisa- ism was not all falsehood, and its concern about PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 59 man's righteousness before God was a true expres- sion of man's moral and religious life. In a subsequent discussion this subject will be pursued further ; but meanwhile stress must be laid on the fact that for Paul salvation necessarily meant cancelling of guilt. A second element in salvation was moral power. The divine answer from the heights of power to the human cry from the depths of weakness is given in Jesus Christ. " I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord " (Rom. vii. 25). Christ's victory is shared by those who are one with Him (Rom. viii. 2-4). Christ's own resistance of sin condemns man's compliance ; the sacrifice of Christ for man's salvation increases that condemnation. The mind that approves the law of God is thus strengthened against the flesh that wars against the mind. But it was not merely such a reinforce- ment of his own conscience that Paul experienced in Christ. There was an invigoration of will ; the Spirit of God he experienced as sufficient and effective energy to overcome the power of the flesh. Salvation as the cancelling of guilt Paul seems to connect especially with the Cross, and salvation as the deliverance from the bondage of sin with the Resurrection. " If while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life " (Rom. v. 10). Yet, on the other hand, the divine dynamic of the Cross is recognised, consisting, 60 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL we may infer, in the hatred of sin and the love of Christ it stimulates. "Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." Christ, as the preceding verse shows, is here thought of as crucified (1 Cor. i. 23, 24). That Paul connected sin in man with powers of evil beyond man is unquestionable ; he too conceived the Cross of Christ as a victory over these evil powers (Col. ii. 15), This belief was neither so prominent or so dominant in his life as to give any distinctive character to his religious experience. The third element in the Christian salvation filled a larger place in his thought. Not only did he teach others that " the wages of sin is death" (Rom, vi. 23) ; but a shrinking from death seems to have been a feeling that was very strong within him, and the Christian salvation was so precious to him because of the sure hope it offered, not only of immortality, but of resurrection (2 Cor. v, 1-4). How quickly or how slowly these elements of the Christian salvation were clearly and fully disclosed to him we cannot discover ; but all were implicit in his conversion, and the probability is that a man of his genius, temperament, and character very soon after the crossing of his Jordan entered into the full possession of his Promised Land. 13. The life which was begun at his conversion was distinctively a " life hid with Christ in God" (Col. iii. 3). What has unfortunately been called his faith - mysticism is the most characteristic PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 61 feature of his experience. He realised the constant presence ; he cultivated the intimate communion ; he possessed the abounding spirit of his Living Lord. This oneness with Christ he describes figuratively as analogous to the two events which we may say for him well-nigh constituted the whole history of Jesus, even the Crucifixion and the Resurrection. " I have been crucified with Christ, yet I live ; and yet no longer I, but Christ liveth in me : and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself up for me " (Gal, ii. 20). This individual experience he generalises, and assumes that all Christians must share it. This oneness with Christ has a religious and a moral aspect. Paul was crucified with Christ because Christ had been crucified for him ; he was risen with Christ, because Christ's life in His Spirit was being imparted to him. Con- sequently he separated himself from world, sin, self, and dedicated himself, body, soul, and spirit, to God even as Christ had done in the obedience of His Cross and the service of His Risen Life to God. What must be emphasised as distinctive in Paul's experience is the loving relation to the Living Person of Christ. " The love of Christ constraineth us ; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died ; and He died for all, that they which live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto Him who for their sakes 62 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL died and rose again " (2 Cor. v. 14, 15). The love of Christ fixed the bounds and guided the course of the current of the apostle's thoughts, feelings, wishes, and deeds. It was gratitude, intense and potent, for the grace of Christ in His Cross ; and what such gratitude can accomplish in changing a life the case of the woman that had been a sinner proves, Jesus Himself being the witness (Luke vii. 50), Yet this gratitude for a past sacrifice was being ever sustained by a close communion with, and a rich communication of, the grace of the Living Lord. It was this real, though invisible, presence that filled Paul's life, " To me to live is Christ" (Phil, i, 21), 14. The continuous ministry of Christ in counsel and comfort and succour was much needed by Paul. His outward life was one of hardship, toil, persecution, and affliction. He describes the paradox of his own experience in words that touch our hearts, " In everything commending ourselves, as ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in imprison- ments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings ; in pureness, in knowledge, in long- suffering, in kindness, in the Holy Ghost, in love unfeigned, in the word of truth, in the power of God ; by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by glory and dis- honour, by evil report and good report ; as deceivers, and yet true ; as unknown, and yet well PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 63 known ; as dying, and, behold, we live ; as chas- tened, and not killed ; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing ; as poor, yet making many rich ; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things " (2 Cor. vi. 4-10). After an enumeration of his outward perils and pains, he adds, "Besides those things that are without, there is that which presseth upon me daily, anxiety for all the churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak ? who is made to stumble, and I burn not ? " (xi. 28, 29). In fellowship with the Lord, who was made sin and a curse for mankind, Paul so completely identified himself with the churches he had founded, that he grieved for their sin and unbelief as for his own faults. While he had occasion to rejoice in the fidelity and devotion of some of his converts, more frequently he had to mourn their failures. The false charges that the Judaisers brought against him in order to undermine his influence and so to discredit his Gospel among the Gentile churches stung him to the quick ; but even more deeply moved was he by the peril that thereby his converts might fall away from their faith, and so his labour on their behalf might be in vain. His passionate affection for his spiritual children was the measure of his vehement indignation against those who would seduce them from the simplicity that was in Christ. It is love that explains the anger which blazes out in the taunt, '' I would that they which unsettle you would 64 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL even cut themselves off" (marg. R.V. "mutilate themselves " ; Gal. v. 12). Sometimes, too, he seems to have been haunted^by the ghost of his dead self. The apostle could never quite forget the persecutor of Christ. There is a pang of pain in the paean of praise, " Faithful is the saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief ; howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me as chief might Jesus Christ show forth all His longsuffering, for an example of them which should hereafter believe on Him unto eternal life " (1 Tim. i. 15, 16). When he remem- bered how " exceedingly mad " he had been against the Christians, how he " strove to make them blaspheme," how in all this he had been persecuting Christ Himself (Acts xxvi. 11, 14), it was in all sincerity of spirit and contrition of heart that he thought of himself as chief of sinners. Even although the grace of God had been magnified in his forgiveness, he must in his genuine humility think of himself as " less than the least of all saints " (Eph. iii. 8), and " the least of the apostles, and not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God " (1 Cor. xv. 9). Did he sometimes meet with or hear of some whom he had made to blaspheme, whom he had separated from the love of God in Christ Jesus ? One wonders whether " the stake in the flesh " was con- nected either with " the body of this death," " the PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 65 flesh warring against the law of his mind, and bring- ing him into captivity under the law of sin in his members " (Rom. vii. 23, 24), or some permanent results of his persecuting frenzy. The writer has no ambition to enter the lists in which scholars have broken many a lance in the contests about " the stake in the flesh." But it does seem to him as probable that it was a recurrence of an old violent temptation, or a recall of some former distressful relationship, as that it was some form of physical infirmity. Would Paul, who endured so many bodily hardships and pains, have been so disturbed by disease ? Would he have described it so vividly as " a messenger of Satan to buffet me that I should not be exalted overmuch " (2 Cor. xii. 7) ? Would not the resurrection of some ghosts of the guilty past be more terrible to Paul than any bodily pain ? How intimate and confident was his relation to Christ, when even that could be brought to Him in prayer, and the assurance could be distinctly received, " My grace is sufficient for thee, for My power is made perfect in weakness ! " So blessed to Paul was his absolute dependence on Christ, that he could welcome any affliction that made him " lean hard " on his ever- present Saviour and Lord. " Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my weaknesses, that the strength of Christ may rest upon me." Never did he lean too hard for Christ's strength. " When I am weak, then am I strong " (vers, 9 and 10). 5 66 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL 15. His union with Christ, however, was promise, and not fulfilment ; he declares his aspirations rather than his achievements. His life purpose is fully expressed in a passage which deserves the closest study (Phil. iii. 8-14). The goal to which he pressed, the prize for which he strove, was " the resurrection from the dead," with the clearer vision, dearer communion, and closer resemblance to his Lord. Sometimes he seems to have hoped that he would survive till the Parousia (1 Thess. iv. 15 ; 1 Cor. xv. 51). At other times he anticipates death as bringing him still nearer to Christ, and that hope conquers his natural shrinking from death (2 Cor. v. 6-8). Yet this desire to be with Christ he strives to restrain in view of the need of him that his converts still feel (Phil. i. 23-25). It may surprise us that one who so realised the presence of the Living Lord should have spoken of the life in the body as an absence from the Lord, and of death as gain because introducing the soul to its home in the Lord. Such a confession does not depreciate his present experience, but reveals how large and lofty were the expectations that grew up out of his experience ; great as was his faith, it begat a still greater hope. When death becomes for him a near certainty, he can welcome it as a part of the sacrifice unto God which is being offered in the labours of the churches he has called into fellowship with Christ (ii. 17, 18). He can PAUL'S EXPERIENCE 67 look forward so confidently, for he can now look back on a trust — the Gospel of the free grace of God — kept, on a task — the preaching of that Gospel to the Gentiles throughout the Roman Empire — done, and a warfare — against the Judaisers who would have brought that Gospel under the fetters of the Jewish law — waged. "For I am already- poured out as a drink-offering, and the time of my departure is come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith : henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give to me at that day ; and not only to me, but also to all them that have loved His appearing " (2 Tim. iv. 6-8). There was no moaning at the bar when he put out to sea, and he saw his Pilot face to face. IV PAUL'S PERSONALITY 1. Not only did Jesus teach that the tree is known by its fruits (Matt. vii. 16), that creed is tested by character, but Paul himself submitted his own apostolate to the test that his converts were living epistles, known and read of all men (2 Cor, iii. 2, 3). We prove Paul's Gospel, as he would have desired that it should be proved, by the testimony of his own character. Did he in word and deed commend his Gospel ? In answering this question we must avoid two extremes. Paul's apostolate has, on the one hand, led many Christian scholars to substitute indiscriminating panegyric for a judicious estimate, and to resent even the suggestion that Paul was a man of like passions with ourselves, and had not already attained unto perfection (Phil. iii. 12). It is certain that Paul himself would not have welcomed such flattery. Antagonism to Paul's Gospel has, on the other hand, led some scholars to an unqualified depreciation, to an exaggeration of the influence of his Pharisaism and Rabbinism on the substance and the exposition of his Christian belief, to an unwarranted emphasis on the abnormal features 68 PAUL'S PERSONALITY 69 of his Christian experience in order to discredit the significance and value of that experience as a whole, to a failure to realise the essential greatness of the man, whether his Gospel be accepted or rejected. The purpose of this study is not to write a literary appreciation, but to give as accurate a psychological analysis of the personality of Paul as the data afforded by his letters will allow. 2. As Paul was a Jewish scribe before he became a Christian preacher, we must first of all recog- nise and estimate him as a scholar^ In a pre- vious study the writer has endeavoured to show that he was not influenced by the Grseco-Roman environment of his early years to the extent that some scholars have tried to make out ; but that his contact with this wider civilisation and culture did, when once he had escaped the bondage of his Pharisaism, impart a greater breadth to his intellectual outlook and personal sympathies than would have been probable in a Palestinian Jew. His scholarship was in the main Rabbinic ; and his Gospel was, and could not avoid being, affected by his previous training. Not only had he as a Pharisee worked out in his own experience the inefficiency of the law for the life of the soul in God, but his knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures and his mastery of the scribal methods of interpretation enabled him to give a scriptural basis to his argument for the sole sufficiency of grace. It is the living experience that now 70 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL appeals to us, and there is much in the argument that appears strange to our modes of thought ; but it was of the utmost importance in the contro- versy of the apostoHc age that the cause of eman- cipation was advocated by one who was so fully equipped with the weapons which the opponents of the cause wielded, and who could use the weapons more effectively than they could. To the writer there seems to be very much in the late Dr. Bruce's suggestion that the gracious invitation of Matthew xi. 28-30 was addressed to such as Paul, because Jesus had a longing for disciples who were not in the matters of the mind and the soul " babes," but, while "wise and prudent," were yet saved from Pharisaic self-satisfaction by having found the higher life both a labour and a burden, as to them He could have imparted a deeper satisfaction than the " babes " were able to receive. As the scholar, Paul brought more questions to, and so found more answers in, the Gospel of Jesus. It is interesting in this respect to compare Paul and John. John is a thinker, but not a scholar. His reference to the Logos in the prologue of his Gospel does not prove any minute knowledge of any current system of philosophy, and the rest of the Gospel is evidence of spiritual meditation rather than scholarly resource. By reflexion a comparatively few ideas are presented in varying aspects and manifold relations. There is nothing like the wealth of knowledge or thought that PAUL'S PERSONALITY 71 we find in Paul's letters. Paul's scholarship is worth insisting on as, while scholarship by itself without moral effort and religious aspiration will not make the religious genius, and not even fit a man to be an influential teacher in the things of God, yet on the other hand it is a fact of signi- ficance that the Christian faith did gain possession of a mind so richly endowed as was Paul's, and that it was commended and defended so effectively by abounding learning of the age. 3, The scholar is not often the man of affairs ; but in Paul there was the combination of qualities. Sir William Ramsay has so fully dealt with Paul as the statesman that little need be said to prove this claim* As Roman citizen he was led to recognise more clearly than any other Christian leader of the age the opportunity that the Roman Empire offered for the spread of the Gospel, and to make use more fully of the security and the facility of travel and intercourse that it afforded. Yet not every Roman citizen had so wide a vision of the Roman Empire as God's preparation for the Church of Christ on earth ; and thus that fact alone does not account for Paul's aspiration and achievement. But this is not the only instance of what we may without exaggeration call statesmanship of the highest order. Surely the conviction for which he had to wage so severe a conflict, that the Gentile must not have the burden of the Jewish law imposed upon him, is 72 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL also proof of practical genius. When the emanci- pation of the Gentiles was secured, does not the same excellence appear in his organisation of the churches he founded, and in the means he took for maintaining unity of spirit and purpose in these churches, and still more in his zealous endeavour to bring Jew and Gentile into the one body of Christ, the middle wall of partition having been removed in his Cross ? In Ephesians we have an ideal of the Christian Church, the motive of Paul's labours and sacrifice, which has not yet been realised. 4. Of this practical genius of Paul another instance may be found in his treatment of the questions of morals that were submitted to him. We may call him a sage as well as a statesman and a scholar. He had the practical reason of Kant, the Christian conscience enlightened and quickened by the Spirit of God in eminent degree. The virtue of wisdom was richly bestowed on him ; it was indeed the philosopher of Plato's ideal who guided the churches he had founded in their practical affairs. We may illustrate this quality of Paul in his treatment of two difficult questions — the exercise of the spiritual gifts in the church at Corinth, and the relation of the " weak " and the " strong " brethren in the church at Rome. Not only does he in 1 Corinthians xii. anti- cipate the modern conception of human society as organic, as a living body of which the members discharge different functions, and so must be PAUL'S PERSONALITY 73 mutually dependent, but in the following chapter he formulates the ultimate principle of all Christian morality not only with the wisdom of the philo- sopher, but with the beauty of the poet. In treating narrow scruples in Romans xiv., and plead- ing for consideration from those who do not share them, he asserts the complementary moral prin- ciples of individual liberty and mutual responsi- bility. We have in the letter to Philemon the wisdom that discerns and claims the recognition of the worth of the slave even as the Christian brother, combined with the prudence that does not attempt the overthrow of the institution of slavery. It is possible, we must admit, that Paul's dealing with this institution as he did was less due to prudence, the quality which we now discover in his action, than to his detachment from the exist- ing order of society by reason of his absorption of interest and desire in the Kingdom of God, the establishment of which on earth he antici- pated ere long at Christ's Second Advent. In some minds such an expectation produced, as we see in 2 Thessalonians iii. 6-15, an impatience with and a revolt against the present conditions that were a peril to the influence of the Church in the world, and we may in contrast lay stress on the sobriety of Paul in regard to human institutions. Paul is worthy of the highest honour as a sage when he deals with morality, but there is a lower realm of human conduct where casuistry tries to lay 74 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL down precise rules of behaviour. Here one can- not but recognise that Paul is not so successful. Undoubtedly it was prudent in the society in which the Christian Church had to bear its testi- mony that the women should not assert the spiritual liberty they had won in Christ by too rash a disregard of social conventions in appear- ing in public unveiled (1 Cor. xi. 2-16), or in speaking in the congregation (xiv. 34-36)j and we may even now endorse Paul's counsels of expedi- ency ; but the arguments Paul uses to support his commands betray the Jewish scribe rather than the Christian apostle. His views on marriage too, as expressed in 1 Corinthians vii., do not rise to the height of the Christian ideal, as do his exhorta- tions in Ephesians v. 22-33. But it would be unreasonable to expect that even one so great as Paul should at once rise above all his limitations.^ 5. But in the scholar, the statesman, and the sage we have not what is most distinctive of Paul. We must think of him as the seer, to whom the supersensible, the spiritual, and the divine was a reality, of the glory of which he did not catch glimpses only now and then, but which we may claim was the light of all his seeing, a splendour that fell on his daily path. We need not now dwell on those charisms, of which only when driven by calumny and depreciation he 1 For a fuller treatment of this topic, see the fifteenth Study, " The Heavenly Citizenship.'* PAUL'S PERSONALITY 75 boasted, and yet felt himself foolish in boasting (2 Cor. xii. 1-10), his speaking with tongues (ecstatic utterances), his " visions and revela- tions," his trances, in which he seemed to him- self transported into Paradise. To us now these abnormal accompaniments of intense religious emotion do not appear as valuable as they appeared to Paul's contemporaries ; and it is not of any of these experiences we think when we speak of him as a seer. It is surely a proof of Paul's own spiritual discernment that he assigned to all these charisms a subordinate place, and that he recog- nised, as he does in ver. 7, the spiritual peril of being "exalted above measure" that these pos- sessions involved. While we cannot now in our estimate of Paul lay any stress on these gifts, yet we must not make the opposite mistake of assuming that Paul was spiritually abnormal, not to say morbid, and that therefore his vision of the invisible is to be discredited. His " visions and revelations " do not deprive of its supreme significance the appearance of Christ to him on the way to Damascus, which changed him from the persecutor to the apostle. The way in which he appeals to this incident as the seal of his apostle- ship forbids our regarding it as no more object- ive than were these other experiences. That an objective reality was then manifested to him alone explains not only his conversion, but his subse- quent course also. What gives him his place 76 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL as the seer is his vivid and intense realisation of the presence of Christ with himself. One cannot read his letters without being brought as directly into the presence of the Christ of faith as the Gospels bring us into the presence of the Jesus of history, Paul impresses us as an eye-witness, if the paradox may be excused, of the invisible Saviour and Lord. To him the supersensible has the reality of the sensible, and is even more dominant in his life. As he himself confesses, " We look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen : for the things which are seen are temporal ; but the things which are not seen are eternal " (2 Cor. iv. 18), While for Paul the light and heat of the eternal realm are as it were focused in the Christ, whom he so clearly perceived in spiritual vision and com- munion, yet this capacity is of still wider range. He always visualises the invisible. We may call it imagination if we will, so long as we do not under- stand by that any fiction ; but for Paul spiritual reality is not abstract as it is for most men, but con- crete. In his conception of the Church in Ephesians he makes us see reality ; so also of the last things, he has not an idea but an image. So real to him is Christ, and all Christ brings with Him, that he has a distinct and certain perception of that which to most men is little more than conjecture. This characteristic of Paul has often been called his mysticism ; but it is undesirable that a word PAUL'S PERSONALITY 77 so ambiguous in its meaning as currently used, and having in its stricter historical sense such misleading associations, should be employed in this connexion. For there are two features of Paul's spiritual vision of, and communion with, Christ that distinguish his experience from such as may be properly called mystical. On the one hand, his experience depended on history ; and on the other hand, it issued in character. For Paul the Christ of faith was identical with the Jesus of history. It may be that Paul was not much interested in the details of the earthly life and ministry of Jesus, although even that is by no means certain ; but there can be no doubt or question that he believed in a revelation of God and a redemption of man in facts of time, and not merely in eternal ideas and ideals. That Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. xv. 3, 4), is the historic reality on which rested his experience. His union with Christ was not merely contemplation of, and satisfaction in, Him, but moral transformation. His crucifixion and his resurrection with Christ were the two aspects of the new creation which in Christ he experienced — his dying unto sin and his living unto God. If this be mysticism, then all deep and strong Christian life is mystical. 6. As has just been indicated, Paul the seer was also Paul the saint It is certain that Paul himself 78 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL would not have welcomed the title " saint " as con- ferred on him by the Catholic Church, for on the one hand it distinguishes him from his Christian brethren as he was far too great to desire to be distinguished, and on the other hand it includes him in a company in which for the most part he would not have felt at home. To saintship in this artificial use of the word he would have made no claim. When, however, we call him saint, we must use the term with a fuller meaning than when Paul himself addresses all believers as called to be saints, for we do gratefully and admiringly recog- nise that he realised that ideal to a degree that few others have attained. To call him a saint is not, however, to assert his sinlessness. It shows no lack of reverence for his greatness and his goodness, but is the tribute that even in estimating the hero or the saint we ought to pay to truth, to admit that he was a man of a fiery temper, which on occasion blazed with a scorching heat (1 Cor. V. 5, xvi. 22 ; Gal. i. 8, v. 12 ; Phil. iii. 2 ; Acts xxiii. 3) ; that he asserted his own qualifica- tions as an apostle with a confidence for which he himself makes an apology (2 Cor. xi. 17) ; that he did not place himself at the point of view of those with whom he was engaged in controversy, and so failed to do justice to their position or to recognise their difficulties ; that he felt that he himself ran the risk of undue severity in demanding the punishment of a wrong-doer (2 Cor, ii. 5-11) ; PAUL'S PERSONALITY 79 that in dealing with some practical questions his inherited prejudices got the better of his Christian enlightenment (1 Cor. xi. 2-16) ; that he did not show his usual courage or faith in agreeing to the compromise with Jewish prejudices proposed to him on his last visit to Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 23-26), or in playing on the rivalry of Sadducees and Pharisees in the Council (xxiii. 6). It is true that Paul was exposed to exceptional provocation ; that in defending himself as an apostle he was contending for his Gospel and the freedom of the Gentile churches ; that his opponents were most unscrupulous in their methods of undermining his authority, and appeared to him to challenge what was most essential in his Christian faith ; that interests, for which he was willing to lay down his life, were at stake ; that when he came to Jeru- salem he was anxious at any cost to conciliate the Jewish Christians, and to realise his ideal of a Christian Church in which Jew and Gentile should be one in Christ — all this must in fairness be argued. In such a situation, amid such difficulties and perplexities, with so great perils and antagonisms, we should probably marvel rather that Paul bore himself with a self-control which was so seldom broken down. But the instances we have noted show clearly that his was not that good-nature in which control of temper is no virtue, but rather a passionateness of disposition which only a strong will reinforced by abounding grace could subdue. 80 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL 7. There is one question regarding the character of Paul which, however uninviting, cannot, in such an estimate of his personaHty, be passed over in silence. With Paul's doctrine of the flesh we are not at present concerned, but Dr. Bruce has suggested that Paul's use of this term for sin may- be due to his own liability to the temptation of sensuality {The Expositor, Fourth Series, vol. ix pp. 190, 191). If in Romans vii. 7-25 Paul is describing his own inward struggle before his con- version, as is almost certain ; and if, as is probable, we should render iTndvfjufjffsig by " lust " rather than "covet"; if further in 1 Corinthians ix. 27 he is referring to an asceticism which for his own safety he continued even after his conversion, then much can be said in support of this view.^ Even if animal appetite was naturally strong in him, he retained self-mastery, and thus the excellence of his character is enhanced by the strength of the temptations he resisted and overcame. And can there be any doubt that this form of temptation is more likely to assail the man of intense emotion and passionate affection, as Paul was ? His letters palpitate with feeling. Many instances could be given of the sudden changes of his moods ; but 2 Corinthians best serves as an illustration. He was utterly cast down by the troubles and perils of the church in Corinth, where his authority had been defied, and probably he had himself been ^ See the previous Study for fuller discussion of these questions. PAUL'S PERSONALITY 81 personally insulted (ii. 5-11) ; to quote his own description, " we were weighed down exceedingly, beyond our power, insomuch that we despaired even of life " (i. 8). But when Titus brought the good news that the church had been won back to its loyalty, he at once exults with joy ; the relief to him was like a resurrection from the dead, " Thanks be unto God, which always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest through us the savour of His knowledge in every place " (ii. 14). This intensity of his emotions made his changeful experience a blended tragedy and triumph. " We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the exceeding greatness of the power may be of God, and not from ourselves ; we are pressed on every side, yet not straitened ; perplexed, yet not unto despair ; pursued, yet not forsaken ; smitten down, yet not destroyed ; always bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus, that the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our body " (iv. 7-10). That Paul suffered much from bodily weakness and pain, as well as from the perils of his journeys, the weariness of his labours, and the persecution of his foes, is certain. Whatever his " stake in the flesh " may have been, it caused him acute misery (xii. 7).^ The intensity of his emotional life makes it all the more wonderful that he fought his fight, finished his course, and kept his faith as he did (2 Tim. iv. 7). ^ See the previous Study for some suggestions regarding this subject. 6 82 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Closely allied with his intense emotion was his passionate affection. How great he was in loving appears not only in 1 Cor. xiii., the perfect hymn of love, but in every one of his letters. In 2 Corinthians we have the passion of wounded affection ; in Philip- pians^the praise of a love that was satisfied. The anger of Galatians is love enflamed by solicitude for its beloved. The personal greetings and commen- dations in the epistles show the discrimination of a tender and great heart. What gracious courtesy and consideration of love for slave and master alike pervades the Epistle to Philemon. This love was always desiring, praying for, and seeking to bestow only the highest, the life in Christ, on all who were its care. It was willing to win blessing for others by sacrifice of self. "Yea, and if I am offered" (Gr. "poured out as a drink-offering") "upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy, and rejoice with you all ; and in the same manner do ye also joy and rejoice with me " (Phil, ii, 17, 18). Gentle- ness, tenderness, forbearance, and forgiveness — love's manifold graces — are found in him. 8. Such emotionality and affectionateness are often regarded as signs of effeminacy rather than as accompaniments of virility. But Paul was as strong and brave as he was full of feeling and love. His conflict with the Judaisers for the freedom of the Gentiles, his assertion of his authority in Galatia and in Corinth, when its overthrow meant the abandonment of the Gospel, his quiet and PAUL'S PERSONALITY 83 steadfast endurance of all the perils and persecu- tions that his ministry involved, his readiness to face the raging mob in Ephesus (Acts xix, 30), his self-command in his several trials (xxii.-xxvi.), his own calmness and power to inspire confidence in others on board ship (xxvii.), all show the man of heroic mould. Just because his temptations were so keen, his experiences so trying, his emotions so lively, and his affections so intense, does his self- mastery in his self-surrender to Christ in the fulfil- ment of his calling show a strength of will which is the glory of his manhood. It would be difficult indeed to conceive a stronger or braver man. 9. Yet in Paul we see more than the glory of manhood ; there is in him the glory that excelleth of the grace of God. It is his absorption in, and submission to, Jesus Christ that gives him the place he holds in the Christian Church. In his humility he describes himself as " chief of sinners " and " least of saints," and " not meet to be called an apostle," because his standard of judgment is not his fellow-men, but Christ Himself. We may call him scholar, statesman, sage, seer, saint, but his proudest title is slave of Jesus Christ. The soul's last peril in its moral progress is self-sufficiency. Pharisaism is the sin that dogs the steps of piety and morality. To be satisfied with one's own goodness is its defeat in the moment of victory. From this Paul was saved by his clear vision of, his close communion with, and his complete surrender 84 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL to, Christ. At the height of his soul's achievement he rested not in his own greatness, but was caught up into the surpassing grace of Christ as his Saviour and Lord. To Paul's conviction of man's in- sufficiency in himself, and his need of depending on divine grace, there is to-day opposed a tendency to the subtle form of Pharisaism in which man feels himself satisfied in his own sufficiency. Professor M'Giffert gives as an instance of " the vicious consequences of universalising an individual experience " the statement, " Because one man feels his need of divine grace, therefore all men must need it ; or because one man feels sufficient unto himself, therefore all men are " {Protestant Thought before Kant, p. 253 note). He seems to regard both statements as equally legitimate within proper limits. But it can be said without hesitation that the first is the Christian view, and the second the Pharisaic. There can be no doubt that Paul would have regarded dependence on divine grace as the truth for all, and self-suffi- ciency as error for all who cherished it. When we consider what he became by the grace of God, by dependence and not self-sufficiency, we may surely conclude that his message is one not only for men constituted as he himself was, but for all men, so that they may accomplish more than man's unaided effort can, and may find as he did that he could do all things, Christ strengthening him (Phil. iv. 13). PAUL'S BEQUEST 1. There is a widespread feeling even within the Christian Church that the Christianity of the future, if it survive the present distress, will not be a copy of the Christianity of the past. Science, philo- sophy, and criticism are supposed to have been so fatal to its present form, that a renovation seems altogether imperative. The study of comparative religion and the enterprise of foreign missions have brought Christianity and other religions into so close contact, that a transformation of Chris- tianity by the influence of other faiths is con- fidently anticipated by some ; and it is expected that the future religion for humanity will be not Christianity alone, but an amalgam of what is truest and best in the religions of the world. In this faith for the coming days the dominant, if not exclusive, influence is assigned to the teaching and example of Jesus Christ. Whatever is dismissed as temporary and local in Christianity, His truth and grace are commonly acknowledged of per- manent value and universal significance. Not so is 85 86 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL it, however, with His servant Paul ; there seems to be even an indecent haste to rid Christianity of the accretions supposed to be due to him. What in his teachings and writings is of his own age and surroundings is so emphasised as to make it appear that there is little, if anything, of his Gospel which deserves preservation. The writer desires to give his reasons for holding the contrary opinion. 2. In a previous Study it has already been ad- mitted that in Paul's letters we must distinguish the kernel and the husk, the abiding and the fleeting, the Jewish and the human. The circum- stances under which Paul taught, the purposes for which he wrote, make inevitable that his message should be closely adapted to local con- ditions and temporary necessities. In his con- troversy with the Judaisers, or his correction of incipient Gnostic heresy, he had to use the language of the hour, to adopt the mental fashion of the age. Otherwise he could not have served his day and generation, and have secured the emancipation from bondage and the preservation from error of the Church which still lives and labours. We cannot exaggerate the importance of the service rendered by Paul in even what to the superficial observer may appear most ephemeral in his thought and speech. But when we look a little more closely we shall surely discover that his reasoning is not merely an argumentum ad hominem, PAUL'S BEQUEST 87 ad tempora et loca ; he was so victorious in his conflicts because he did see, as his opponents did not, the situation sub specie ceternitatis. We can easily penetrate, if we will, into the core of experi- ence and conviction which gives life and force to the enclosing Rabbinic lore or Greek learning. What Paul was contending for was Christ as Saviour and Lord, and so his contention is not superseded unless Christianity has emptied its shrine. 3. Interesting and profitable as it might be to examine Paul's theology in detail, so as to separate what still belongs to living Christian faith from all that has now only historic interest, in such an enterprise there would be the risk of not seeing the wood for the trees. The purpose will be better served by singling out the three outstand- ing features of Paul's Gospel, and concentrating attention on them to discover what meaning and worth they have for us to-day. The first place must be given to Paul's experience of Christ. While all religions which have a historical founder assign to him a unique position, Christ holds a place of sufficiency and supremacy in His religion as no other founder does. This, if the Gospels are substantially correct historical records, is en- tirely in accord with His own wishes and claims. He called disciples to come to Him, learn of Him, follow Him, take His yoke, be with Him, That relationship He did not expect or intend to be ended by death ; and the apostolic Church 88 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL lived in the consciousness of the presence of the Saviour and the Lord. For the author of the Fourth Gospel Jesus is not only the Word In- carnate, but as such for men the Bread from Heaven, the Water of Life, the Light of the World, the Door of the Sheep, the Good Shepherd ; and the relation of the disciple to the Master is that of a mutual abiding, Paul is not singular in his ex- perience of the presence of Christ with himself, as that was the common conviction of the Christian Church ; but there is a distinctness of conscious- ness, an intensity of emotion, and a potency of influence in this union with Christ that is excep- tional. The author of the Fourth Gospel has also the sense of the presence of Christ ; but it does not seem quite so vivid and vital. He has the remembrance of the earthly life of Jesus, as Paul has not ; and it is meditation on the historical reality which had made so deep an impression on his soul which makes the spiritual presence real to him. For Paul the two facts of the Crucifixion and Resurrection focused the signi- ficance and value of the historical reality of Jesus. While it is probably going too far to say that he was either ignorant of, or indifferent to, the details of the earthly ministry, yet it was the Incarnation as a whole, as an act of self-emptying (Phil. ii. 5-11) or a sign of grace (2 Cor. viii. 9) that his thought dwelt upon. It is true that of the appearance of Jesus to him on the way PAUL'S BEQUEST 89 to Damascus he could say that he had seen Jesus (1 Cor. ix. 1), and yet one would not expect such a transitory vision to make as deep an impression as did the continued and intimate companionship enjoyed by the beloved disciple. To the writer at least it does seem remarkable that one who had not been an eye-witness of the earthly life of Jesus reached so distinct a consciousness of the presence of the risen and living Saviour and Lord, a certainty which, as one reads his letters, becomes contagious. 4. This consciousness did not, however, displace another common feature of the Christian faith in the apostolic age, the eager and almost im- patient expectation of Christ's Second Advent. To many Christians to-day this appears an incon- sistency. If we here and now possess Christ's spiritual presence to save and bless, why should we desire His manifestation in power and glory ? Should not the realisation of the one make us indifferent to the expectation of the other ? It is probable that the majority of the Christian believers in the apostolic age had no such keen sense of Christ's spiritual presence as Paul had, and it need not excite our surprise, therefore, that, as in Thessalonians, there was felt the need of the hope of future salvation as supplementing the faith in present salvation in Christ. But it does at first sight seem strange that Paul should not have felt the sufficiency of his crucifixion 90 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL with Christ, his resurrection with Christ — in short, his life in Christ. It is true that Paul's expectation of surviving to the Second Advent, for which he longed, wavers ; his certainty (1 Thess. iv. 15 ; 1 Cor. XV. 51, 52) sometimes gives place to doubt whether his own death may not anticipate that event (2 Cor v. 1-10 ; Phil. i. 23-25) ; but even death is welcomed because it will bring him a clearer vision, and a closer communion, than is possible in this life in fellowship with Christ here and now. How can Paul, crucified and risen with Christ, declare that '' whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord " ? Why, if to live for him is Christ, can to die be gain ? Is not this aspiration for the future gain a depreciation of the present good ? We do not solve the problem by asserting that here there is a survival of the lower view, when the higher had been attained. If Paul did not feel full satisfaction in his vivid and intense realisation of the spiritual presence of Christ, should we not ask ourselves rather, whether it be not a defect in so many Christians to-day that faith does not seek its complement in hope ? Do we possess Christ in the present mode of our union with Him so com- pletely that we can regard this relation as final, and so do not need to anticipate a clearer vision and closer communion ? In such an expectation John is at one with Paul. " Beloved, now are we children of God, and it is not yet made manifest PAUL'S BEQUEST 91 what we shall be. We know that, if He shall be manifested, we shall be like Him ; for we shall see Him even as He is " (1 John iii. 2). The ex- perience of the spiritual Christ carries in its bosom the expectation of the glorified Christ. Thus Paul, who himself possessed this experi- ence, and by his testimony and influence sustained it in others, corrects the exaggerations and extravagances into which a mysticism which claims the authority of his name has sometimes been carried. This vision is not by sight, but by faith ; it has neither the sensible evidence of the historical reality of the earthly life, nor yet that supersensible manifestation which we long and hope for under future conditions. 5, Nevertheless, though held with the sobriety with which Paul held this conviction of the pres- ence of the spiritual Christ, it appears to many claiming the Christian name a subjective illusion. Jesus is regarded by many as an historical reality of the receding past, who has left behind only the posthumous influence of His teaching and example. This is not, however, the common faith of the Christian Church, the faith that was once delivered to the saints ; and for the belief that Christ is a present gracious and mighty reality there is not only the experience of a multitude of Christians whom He has saved and blessed, but this experience can, the writer holds, be confirmed by a reasonable argument. If Christ 92 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL personally is the Revealer of God and the Re- deemer of men, as He offered Himself to men in the historical reality of His earthly life, it is reasonable that His personal presence and influence should not be confined to one age and one people, but should be universal and permanent. An appre- ciation of His significance and value to mankind, adequate to the historical reality, seems to involve as an inevitable conclusion such permanence and universality of His personal presence and influence. We have no such exclusive knowledge of the spiritual realm in which He dwells with us as need render incredible this conviction regarding Him. Such reasons can be given for the convic- tion, when assailed, but it springs not from reason- ing. It is an experience such as Paul's that encourages the venture of faith by which a man can gain the experience for himself. 6. While the Crucifixion in time preceded the Resurrection, yet in Paul's experience the Risen Lord came before the Crucified Saviour. It was the certainty of the rising again from the dead of the Messiah that made tolerable for Paul the fact of the death on the Cross. This was also the path followed by the apostolic Church. Because God had approved Jesus of Nazareth, not only by " miracles, wonders, and signs," but supremely by raising Him up from the dead, it was made manifest that, although He was " crucified and slain by wicked hands," yet He was " delivered " PAUL'S BEQUEST 93 to such a death " by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God" (Acts ii. 22-24). How was this divine necessity for the death of the Messiah to be explained ? This approach to the Cross by way of the Empty Grave has not had the place in the testimony and influence of the Christian Church since that it ought to have. Too often have men been asked to accept a plan of salvation or a theory of atonement as the first step in drawing near to Christ, and so a stumbling-block has been laid in the path of many. The historical reality of Jesus as continued in the spiritual presence and influence of the Christ, one and the same with Him, may surely be so presented in the testimony and influence of the Church that He will call forth the soul's- trust, love, and obedience ; and when He is so known, not only will the necessity of understanding His death in some measure be felt, but there will be a possibility of understanding such as apart from this knowledge would not exist. 7. The need for such explanation of the Cross was felt by the apostolic Church generally ; but Paul's personal experience as a Pharisee, his varied learning as a scribe, his critical controversy with the Judaisers, both fitted and forced him to give a fuller and clearer exposition of the Cross than has been given by any other apostolic writer. In this has he conferred a benefit, or inflicted an offence, on the Christian Church ? There are 94 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL scholars and thinkers in the Christian Church who hold that the simplicity of the Gospel of Jesus needs saving from the perversions of Paul's theology. The Parable of the Prodigal Son is the Christian creed, the Sermon on the Mount is the Christian code, and the Lord's Prayer is the Christian ritual ; and what more do we need ? This is the position stated at its baldest. But even those who would not go quite so far are very doubtful whether Paul's view of the atonement can have any claim for our acceptance to-day. This challenge of the worth of Paul's exposition of the Cross must be met by a twofold argument. It must be shown, on the one hand, that the servant does not contradict the Master, and on the other, that Paul is not dealing merely with the abstract conceptions of the Rabbinic or any other schools, but with the moral and religious realities of the soul of man in relation to God. (i.) Jesus does not formulate a theory of the atonement, and to force any theory on His words is to do violence to them. But, if it can be shown that He does assign a saving efficacy to His death, and if His experience does suggest that for Him His death was not merely a martyrdom, then His sacrifice does offer a problem for which a solution may be sought. The attempt to seek a solution does not itself deserve condemnation, although its adequacy needs to be tested. If Jesus conceived His vocation in accordance with the PAUL'S BEQUEST 95 prophecy (Isa. liii.) of the suJEfering servant of Jehovah, if He regarded the giving of His life as a ransom for many, if He desired His death to be remembered as the sacrifice of the New Covenant, if the foretaste of the desolation of His Cross, and not any fear of physical dissolution merely, was His agony in Gethsemane, if He the Son of God even for a moment felt Himself for- saken by His Father, He Himself regarded His death as more than martyrdom, and connected it in some way with the forgiveness of sin, the redemption which He offered to mankind. If it be asked. Why did Jesus not give the explanation Himself ? it may be answered : For the reality of His sacrifice the limitation of His knowledge was necessary ; He must walk by faith, and not sight ; He must be able to conceive the possibility of the removal of the cup, and must learn its necessity, not through a demonstration of the mind, but by the obedience of love. But even if Jesus had much to communicate, the Gospels show that His disciples were both intellectually and morally unfit as yet to receive any such self-disclosure. The general terms in which the predictions of the Passion are given at least suggest that the disciples did not care to remember all that Jesus taught them on this theme, (ii.) Some solution of the problem thus forced upon us is necessary. Did Paul give the solution in such a form as has permanent and universal 96 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL value ? We need not attempt to vindicate the validity for all time and all men of all the argu- ments Paul uses ; he had to fight the Judaisers with their own weapons, he had to show that the Christian believer was freed from the Jewish law by reasonings that would appeal to those for whom the law was supreme in authority for thought and life. If the exposition in Romans i.-v. takes a forensic form, it is because Paul was seeking to prove that Christ had secured for the believer in Him emancipation from, because He had rendered satisfaction to, the authority of the law. That this legal standpoint is not exhaustive or final, Paul himself recognises when, in order to ward off Antinomianism, which he admits as a possible inference from the previous exposition of the atonement, he falls back on the standpoint of a personal experience of the personal influence on the believer of Christ Himself. When we are dealing with the exposition of the Cross given by Paul, it is unjust to him to confine our regard to the statement that the Judaistic contro- versy forced upon him, and to ignore the com- pletion of the doctrine which his own personal experience afforded. It is not suggested that the first statement was merely an accommodation on the part of Paul : as a Jew, a scribe, a Pharisee, he himself needed to see in Christ's death this vindication of the law in order to get emancipation from it ; but we may surely hold PAUL'S BEQUEST 97 that it is the second statement that is more vital for us. 8. If we are not concerned, as was Paul or the Judaisers, about the vindication of the Jewish law in order to secure our emancipation from it, yet there belongs permanently and universally to mankind the moral and religious problem : How shall a man be good so as to please God ? While it cannot be said that in all religions God is conceived as holy, and so there is the religious conception of sin as distrust of, and disobedience to, God ; yet it may surely be affirmed that the highest development, both of religion and morality, depends on their being brought into closest mutual relations. God must be thought of as moral perfection, and man's duty and destiny must be regarded as the effort for, and attainment of, moral perfection. We may prefer to speak of the will rather than the law of God for man, as empha- ising that the relation is personal ; but if the will be a uniform and permanent will, not arbitrary or variable, these characteristics are better expressed by the use of the term law. On the one hand, there is a moral order, and, if God be holy, we must think of Him as maintaining that moral order. On the other hand, if man is made for fellowship with and likeness to God, his sin, his distrust of and disobedience to God, is a disturbance of that moral order, and surely involves an estrangement from the holy God whose will that moral order 7 98 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL expresses. God cannot be indifferent to man's atti- tude to His will, and His relation to man cannot remain unaffected thereby ; while He has pleasure in man's conformity, can we doubt or deny His displeasure with his transgression ? In Christ God approaches man in grace, and offers forgive- ness of sin — that is, the restoration of the relation to Himself sin has disturbed. But if this forgive- ness were offered without any indication of God's judgment on the sins He forgives, and without any recognition on man's part that sin deserves this judgment, would the moral order be maintained, and the holiness of God's will be made manifest ? As far as the writer himself is concerned, his own conscience not only demands that he shall in penitence judge the sin in himself, but also cannot find any satisfaction in a forgiveness from God which does not also express God's judgment on sin. That judgment might be expressed in the continuance of the penalty of sin on mankind, or, as Paul puts it with a justifiable anthropo- morphism, if God be personal, by allowing man- kind to remain under His wrath. If, however, the revelation of wrath is to give place to the revelation of grace, surely the moral equivalent, and far more, of such a retributive order as express- ing God's judgment is the sacrifice of Christ in His Cross. God in Christ Himself suffers with and for man sin's doom in submission to death, not merely as physical dissolution, but with the PAUL'S BEQUEST 99 accompanying darkness and desolation of soul with which the consciousness of sin invests death. Thus is God's moral order maintained, His holy- will affirmed even in the grace that brings forgive- ness. To-day we may find it needful to express the truth in other terms than Paul used ; but to the writer at least, Paul's exposition of the Cross appears as a necessary truth for Christian faith. ^ 9. As Paul held that the death of Christ was for all men, and the life of Christ can be in all men, he realised that human faith in divine grace is the sole condition of salvation. He himself had been saved not by the works of the law, but by faith alone in the Crucified and Risen Saviour and Lord. The Jewish law had not only con- demned, but even provoked, sin in him, and had been not a help, but rather a hindrance to his salvation. This salvation was not by means of, but apart from, the Jewish law. Hence accept- ance of this law could not be made a condition of receiving the Christian salvation. When we have made the fullest allowance for the influence of Paul's Roman citizenship in explaining his universalism — his claim that the Gospel was for Jew and Gentile alike — when even we have recog- nised his statesmanship in his keen perception that a Church to embrace Jew and Gentile could not be reared on the narrow basis of circumcision 1 A further discussion of this subject will be found in the eighth Study, on " The Righteousness of God." 100 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL and observance of the Jewish law, yet the source of his conviction that the Jewish law must not be imposed on the Gentile believers was in his own experience. It was his experience of Christ and his exposition of the Cross tha;t led him to his expansion of the Church to include Gentile as well as Jew. It is true that Paul's work in this respect was prepared for by others. While Jesus confined His ministry to the " lost sheep of the house of Israel," yet His welcome of Gentile faith in the Roman centurion (Matt. viii. 10), the Syro- phoenician mother (xv. 28), and the inquiring Greeks (John xii. 23), and His references to the Samaritans (Luke x. 30-37, xvii. 18) show that He was not bound by Jewish exclusiveness. There is His express statement that "the sons of the king- dom shall be cast forth," and their places will be taken by many who " shall come from the -east end the west " (Matt. viii. 11, 12). In the Parable of the Great Supper (Luke xiv. 16-24) there is also the suggestion of this wider ministry of the Gospel. Whether the Great Commission in Matthew xxviii. 18-20 be a post-resurrection utterance of Christ or not, it at least expresses the consciousness of the Church of a world-wide mission. In Stephen's speech the note of universalism is struck (Acts vii.). The admission of Cornelius was an opening of the door to the Gentiles (x. 47), but it was regarded as an exceptional case, a justification of which Peter was required to offer (xi. 3). The preaching PAUL'S BEQUEST 101 to the Greeks at Antioch (xi. 20) was a more sig- nificant departure in the pohcy of the apostolic Church. Yet who can doubt that the genius of Paul was necessary not only to the extension of the Church among the Gentiles, but also to the emancipation of the Christian Church from the bondage of Judaism ? As far as the human agency of the divine purpose goes, it was Paul who changed a Jewish sect into a world-wide religion, although the promise and potency of such universality was in the divine-human Founder of the Christian Church. In Ephesians he reveals the large and lofty ideal of the one body of Christ, which in- spired both his labours and his struggles. 10. This is a service to the Christian Church of which this age should be specially appreciative. We are now engaged in a world-wide enterprise, in the pursuit of which we are recognising the influence on religious life and thought of racial peculiarities, national characteristics, historical associations. The cry is for a Christianity adapt- able to the genius and ethos of different peoples. We are told that we must not take our Occidental Christ to the Orient ; we must not impose our English type of piety on the Hindu or Chinaman ; we are to leave the native Church free to develop in accordance with the distinctive features of each people. What is this but an echo of Paul's plea for the freedom of the Gentile from the Jewish yoke ? So far is the Gospel of Paul from imposing 102 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL any bondage on the mind and soul of man, that in it Hes the charter of moral and spiritual liberty. We are having visions of one Church of Christ on earth, not a uniformity, but a unity-in-difference ; and Paul too had that vision. His outlook was actually not world-wide as ours to-day can be ; but in principle his universalism was as absolute as ours can ever hope to become. After centuries of enslavement to narrower views and aims, the best minds of to-day are recovering Paul's ideal of the Christian Church. This universalism, of which the churches still fall so far short, was not accidental, but essential to Paul's Gospel. So far from being out of date, that Gospel is still rich in promise for the coming days, and future growth will depend on our apprehending the Christ, His Cross, His Church, as revealed in the life and teaching of PauL PART II THE MESSAGE 103 VI THE GRACE OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST 1. Paul's knowledge of Jesus began with the sight of the Risen Lord on the way to Damascus. This appearance he regards as of the same kind as those to the other witnesses of the resurrection (1 Cor. XV. 8). One of his claims to apostleship is that he has seen Jesus (ix. 1). The attempt to treat this appearance as of the same kind as " the visions and revelations of the Lord " in an ecstatic state, of which Paul elsewhere speaks, is unjustified (2 Cor. xii. 1). The conditions for a subjective vision were absent in Saul the persecutor; the striking and sudden change wrought in him by the sight of Jesus is a proof of its objectivity. The emphasis Paul lays on the burial of Jesus indicates that for him the body of Jesus was included in the resurrection. A continuance of the spirit after death would not have been described in the words, " He hath been raised on the third day." The description Paul gives of the general resurrection is evidently applicable to Christ as "the first-fruits of them that are asleep " (1 Cor. xv. 20), If the 105 106 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL body buried was natural, the body raised was spiritual (ver. 44). The possibiUty of the trans- formation of the one into the other is assumed regarding those who may survive until the general resurrection : " We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye " (vers. 51 and 52). It is probable that Paul considered the body of Jesus as having undergone a similar transformation. It is as risen that Christ is " the second man from heaven," whose heavenly image those who are raised from the dead in Him will bear (vers. 46-49). It is as risen also that He is the " life-giving spirit," in contrast with Adam, the " living soul," This contrast is not between Adam as he originally was, and Christ in His pre-exist- ence ; it is as subject to mortality, the mortality he brought on himself and mankind (Rom. v. 12), that Adam is contrasted with Christ, as by His own resurrection the victor over death, and the giver of immortality to all who are His. Any reference to the pre-existence of Christ as a heavenly man antecedent to the Incarnation would have been quite irrelevant to the argument in this passage ; and it is quite a mistake to suppose that Paul is here borrowing this notion from Jewish speculation. It is certain, however, that the Risen Lord is for him endowed with corporeality. " In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" {(TojihDcrr^ojg, Col. ii. 9). The body of humiliation of believers is to be fashioned anew into conformity " to the THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 107 body of His glory " (rS aoj(/juri T?jg ho^rig ccvrov, Phil. iii. 21). Glory is perfection outwardly mani- fested. " We all, with unveiled face reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit " (2 Cor. iii. 18). It is an outcome of this glory that Christ is "the image of the invisible God " (upcaou rov deov rov oiopdrov, Col. i. 15). This glory is evidently thought of as light of a dazzling brightness, so dazzling that Paul when he beheld it was blinded by it (Acts xxii. 11). Although our present experience may afford us no data in confirmation of Paul's statements regarding the corporeality of the Risen Christ, or the transformation of the natural into the spiritual body, it would be rash to base a denial on our ignorance. 2. The Risen Lord with His body of glory is life-giving spirit {'Trnvijijoc Z^ci)07roiovu, 1 Cor. xv. 45), If we are to understand Paul's doctrine of Christ we must rid ourselves of the current conception of spirit as abstract consciousness, detached from and even opposed to body. In accordance with the Old Testament conception, spirit is the divine energy, which not only gives knowledge, skill, wisdom, but is the sovirce even of physical life. To say that it is substance rather than subject is to impart into Paul's thought later distinctions of which he was not aware. The conception does not exclude the mental, but is wider. Divine life 108 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL is in the Spirit imparted to man, and as the divine hfe is marked by moral perfection, the spirit is holy. But the moral transformation wrought by the spirit is not distinguished from, or opposed to, the invigoration of the entire personality of man, including even his physical organism. For Paul the Risen Lord was such divine energy, for he had himself experienced a complete inward renovation. While, as in the apostolic benediction, the Lord Jesus Christ is distinguished on the one hand from the Father, and on the other from the Spirit, yet the Lord is also identified with the Spirit : " Now the Lord is the Spirit," " the Lord the Spirit " (2 Cor. iii. 17, 18). The power to produce a new creation, a sinless and immortal humanity, is what Paul on the basis of his own experience ascribes to Christ. Christ is the power of God as well as the wisdom of God (1 Cor. i, 24). Paul can do all things, Christ strengthening him (Phil. iv. 13), for Christ's strength is perfected in weakness (2 Cor. xii. 9). It is the omnipotence of God Himself which, manifested in the resurrection of Christ, is mediated by Christ. " What the exceeding greatness of His power to us-ward who believe, according to that working of the strength of His might which He wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead, and made Him to sit at His right hand in the heavenly places " (Eph. i. 19, 20). Christ wields this power because He, by His resurrection, is invested with divine authority. THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 109 3. For Paul the Resurrection was of the utmost significance for Christ Himself. It raised Him to a position, invested Him with an authority, and furnished Him with a power which had not during His earthly ministry been His. It was an exalta- tion after humiliation ; and an exaltation which appears to have been conceived as not merely a restoration of prerogatives and privileges laid aside in the humiliation, for the exaltation was a reward for the humiliation. We must return to Paul's teaching about the pre-existence of Christ in the famous Christological passage in Philippians ii. 5-11; but at this stage of the discussion we must note that it teaches that God bestowed on the Risen Lord what He had not before possessed. " Where- fore also God highly exalted Him, and gave unto Him the name which is above every name ; that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father " (vers. 9-11). What the con- fession of Jesus as Lord implies will immediately engage our attention. But we must first of all notice another passage which teaches this same truth regarding the resurrection of Jesus. In the opening verses of Romans Paid defines the Gospel of God as " concerning His Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was declared to be the Son of God with power according 110 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead " (i. 3, 4). The word opt^diurog is inadequately- rendered by the R.V. " declared," as the verb op/|g/i/ means "to set a boundary" (opog). Hence Christ was marked off, set apart by the Resurrec- tion as the Son of God with power. There was not merely a proclamation, but an investiture, ordination, enthronement. The writer may be allowed to quote the note in his commentary on Romans (p. 83). " The Greek word means either ' designated ' or ' ordained ' (Acts x. 42, xvii. 31) ; but Paul's meaning cannot be decided by the sense of one term. As Paul taught the pre-existence of Christ as divine (2 Cor. iv, 4, viii. 9 ; Col. i. 15-19) he cannot mean that Christ became Son of God at His resurrection ; yet, as he regarded the Incarna- tion itself as an act of self-humiliation by Christ, so he represented the Resurrection as an exaltation of Christ by God (Phil. ii. 5-11). We must take the words rather in the second sense, but must understand, not an assumption of divine nature at the Resurrection, but the entrance by Christ into the full possession and free exercise of the dignity and authority not merely which belonged to Him as pre-existent ' in the form of God,' but which was conferred on Him as Son of God as the reward of His obedience unto death. We empty Paul's argument in the Epistle to the Philippians of its distinctive significance, as well as this passage here of its more probable meaning, if THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 111 we assume that Christ's exaltation at His resur- rection was merely a return to His pre-existent state." 4. " The earliest creed of Christendom," says Stevens ( The Theology of the New Testament, p. 389), "consisted of two words, xvptog'Irjffovg — Jesus is Lord " (1 Cor. xii. 3 ; Rom. x. 9), When Christ appeared on the way to Damascus, Paul is representing as asking, " Who art thou, Lord ? " (Acts ix. 5) and, "What shall I do, Lord?" (xxii. 10). As the apostle of Christ he preached not himself, but " Christ Jesus as Lord " (2 Cor. iv. 5) as a saving message for all men, " There is no distinction between Jew and Greek ; for the same Lord is Lord of all, and is rich unto all that call upon Him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved " (Rom. x. 12, 13). This quotation from Joel ii. 32 illustrates Paul's practice of referring to Christ passages in the Old Testament which refer to Jehovah (cp. 1 Cor. X. 22 : " Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?" from Deut, xxxii. 21). Paul prayed to Christ as Lord : " Concerning this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me " (2 Cor. xii. 8). He assumes this as a general practice among believers, describing them as " all that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ " (1 Cor. i. 2), This title Lord is evidently " the name above every name " (Phil. ii. 9). God has subjected all things to Christ (1 Cor. xv. 27), 112 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL In opposition to polytheism and idolatry Paul confesses his monotheism in the words : "To us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto Him ; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through Him" (1 Cor. viii. 6). How can the Lordship of Christ be reconciled with the unity of the Godhead ? We are not warranted in assuming that Paul ignored that problem ; for Judaism represented with ardent conviction the creed of monotheism in antagonism to the prevalent polytheism. The passage just quoted indicates the subordination of the Lord Jesus Christ to God the Father. The Father is the ultimate source (g| o5) and the final purpose {eig avrov) ; Christ is the mediating agency {hi' ov and S/' ccvrov). It is by the free will of the Father (evhopc^^ffBp) that the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him (Col. i. 19). The name above every other name is His by the gift of the Father (g;^ap/(7aro, Phil. ii. 9). His resurrection is ascribed to God's act of power, " God both raised the Lord, and will raise up us through His power " (1 Cor. vi. 14). The subordination of Christ to God is compared to the subordination of man to Christ. " Ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's" (1 Cor. iii. 23). When all has been subjected to Christ, then He Himself will be sub- jected, that " God may be all in all " (1 Cor. xv. 28) The interpretation of Romans ix. 5 is much disputed. Even if the construction favours the THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 113 ascription to Christ Himself of the clause, " Who is over all, God blessed for ever," rather than the rendering as a doxology, " He who is God over all be blessed for ever " (R.V. margin), yet the utterance of passionate emotion cannot be regarded as qualifying the distinctly expressed doctrine of the subordination of the Son to the Father. This must be kept in mind in reviewing the passages in which divine prerogatives and functions are ascribed to Christ. 5. One of the most significant passages is in Colossians i. 13-17, in which Christ is described by three epithets : (1) " The Son of His love " ; (2) " The image of the invisible God " ; and (3) " The first-born of all creation." As the false teachers against whom this epistle is directed assigned dignity and authority to angels, the term Son is intended here to assert Christ's absolute superiority to the angels, as in the opening argument of the Epistle to the Hebrews (i. 1-ii. 8). In this con- nexion it is especially appropriate, as the whole clause, " Son of His love," defines Christ as both the object and the medium of the love, which is the essence of the Father. As absolutely possess- ing the nature of God, Christ perfectly reveals it. This is asserted in the second epithet, " the image of the invisible God." As this manifestation of the nature of God is the final purpose of the Universe, He in whom it is made is prior to, as well as supreme in, the Universe ; for the clause, " the 8 114 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL first-born of all creation," does not include Christ among the created. The phrases, " the first-born from the dead" (i. 18) and '' the first-born among many brethren," are not strictly parallel, as the reference in them is to the state of humanity after the Resurrection, of which Christ's victory over death was both pledge and pattern. Further, in the immediate context Christ is described as the divine agent in creation. " In Him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth ... all things have been created through Him and unto Him ; and He is before all things, and in Him all things consist " (Col. i. 16, 17). While the passage does not allow us to think of Christ as a creature, yet the relation of the Son of God to the Creation is not exhaustively or ade- quately stated when His priority and superiority are simply insisted on. Both as the Son of God's love and as the image of the invisible God He is the first-born in the Creation in a sense not altogether dissimilar to that in which He is the first-born in the Resurrection. He is as Son of God eternally the reality of self-expression and self-communica- tion in which is rooted the possibility of the Creation. In the Son is the eternal pledge and pattern of the truth and grace of God expressed and communicated temporally in nature and history. Our judgment of the truth of Paul's statements regarding the cosmic significance of Christ will depend on our sense of the worth of the THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 115 salvation in Him. If man's relation to God is the supreme interest of the Universe, we can accept this view. 6. Still more deeply does Paul cast the plummet of his thought into the abysmal depths of the personality of Christ in the classic passage on the Kenosis in Philippians ii. 6-8. This passage brings before us the Incarnation of the Son of God as a voluntary act of self-emptying. It has been in every phrase and almost every word the battle- ground of scholars, as though Paul were here giving definitions with the precision of dogmatics, and not in impassioned language presenting a sublime moral example for human imitation. " Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus " (ver. 5) might have warned the scholastic theologian off the ground. The questions which must be briefly discussed are : (1) the meaning of the phrase h ^op-p^ hov, "in the form of God." Does it mean essence or accident ? (2) The refer- ence of the phrase ro ilmi hoc 6&co, "to be equal with God," either backward to the " existing in the form of God," or forward to " the name above every name." (3) The action implied in the word apTa/jW/ov, " a prize." (4) The consequent content of the Kenosis, or self-emptying, the divine nature itself, or the state of equality with God. As regards the first point, it may be admitted that Paul did think of Christ as essentially divine, as possessing the divine natm'e, and not merely 116 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL as exercising divine functions or enjoying divine privileges. As regards the second point, it seems to the writer more probably true that the equality with God is not identical with the form of God, but means position rather than essence. Nature is not that which can be held fast, or snatched at, but dignity or authority is. But this granted, the further question arises : Is this equality with God the position already held by the Son of God as the agent of God in Creation, or the position attained by the exaltation to lordship at the Resurrection ? The answer to this question de- pends on how we deal with the third point. Is the prize already possessed and to be held fast, or is it as yet unattained, and to be snatched at ? The word itself does not decide the matter. We must consider the passage as a whole. The choice of Christ does appear more significant as an example to be imitated, if the prize was some- thing yet to be attained, and in the attaining of which two courses of action seemed open to the Son of God : He might have claimed the position as of right ; but He preferred to receive it by free gift of His Father as a reward for His humiliation unto sacrifice. The lordship is the prize ; this is the equality with God. The Kenosis, to pass to the fourth point, does not mean the surrender of divine essence, but the surrender of divine functions and privileges in order that the sacrifice to be thus rewarded might become possible. So THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 117 far we may go in the exposition of Paul's thought. Can we form a distinct conception of the process here described ? It is obvious that here Paul has left the solid ground of experience, and that he has essayed a bold flight of speculation into a sublime region that lies beyond our ken. It is the Risen Lord whom he projects into the pre- existent state. This he conceives as similar, if not identical with, the exaltation after the Resur- rection. Between the two lies the earthly life, which in comparson with the one or the other must be regarded as a humiliation. The descent into it is described metaphysically as a self -empty- ing. A sober exegesis can find in this Kenosis no more than is involved in the contrast between the outward conditions conformable to the essential divinity and the outward conditions involved in the Incarnation of Christ. But it is not a meta- physical process which concerns Paul ; it is a moral motive. The glory of the Risen Lord has not been grasped by ambition, but earned as a reward of humility. The metaphysical process here described involves insoluble problems for our thought. In the first place, the historical indivi- duality of Christ is transferred to the pre-existent Son of God ; and thus the unity of the Godhead is made incomprehensible, for the Son cannot be conceived as a distinct personality from the Father. We must candidly admit that here Paul is exer- cising his imagination rather than his intellect ; 118 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL that, before we can appropriate his thought and fit it into a credible conception, we must translate his Vorstellung into a Begriff. It was the divine mode or principle (it is difficult to find an approprate term since the word "person" has acquired so different a connotation from that it had when first used in the creeds) of the Son in the Godhead that became a concrete indi- viduality, a distinct personality only through the process of Incarnation. In the second place, to the Son of God, thus conceived, is ascribed a single temporal act of self-emptying. Expositors have made much of the aorist l%,sm(Tsv ; but it is doubtful wisdom to emphasise the niceties of Greek grammar in regard to a pre-temporal act. It seems to the writer much more intelligible that the Incarnation should be the consummation of a process of divine self-expression and self -communi- cation in human history, and that this process should involve as the ground of its possibility an eternal act of self-emptying in the Godhead, The Son Himself is this Kenosis of the Deity, this self -emptying for self-expression and self -com- munication. For a concrete individuality and a temporal action we must substitute an eternal act in the Godhead, which we call Word or Son, which is the necessary condition of not only the Incarnation, but of the whole process of divine im- manence in the Universe of which the Incarnation is the consummation. In the third place, it is the THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 119 moral significance of the Incarnation as self-sacrifice about which Paul is primarily concerned here, as in 2 Corinthians viii. 9. '' For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might become rich." The different metaphysics, which our thinking leads us to, does not at all lessen the worth of the In- carnation in this respect. " The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ " we conceive even more distinctly than Paul does in this passage as the historical manifestation and communication of the eternal nature of God as love. Doubtless Paul was affected in some degree by the current Jewish belief in the pre-existence of whatever has value, as the temple, the Messiah, etc. But this Jewish belief does not adequately account for his doctrine of the pre-existence of Christ as the Son of God, taught in this passage, as also in those passages in which the coming of Christ into the world is described as His being sent by the Father (Gal. iv. 4 ; Rom. viii. 3). It was the absolute value of Christ to Paul in his experience that com- pelled him to regard Christ as essentially divine. Christ had done for him, and was to him, all that God could be, and what God alone could be. TJiis confession of divinity involved the beilef in pre- existence ; as the divine eternally is, and does not come into being in time. That Paul thought of the Son of God as eternally existing in the 120 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL concrete individuality of the Risen Lord was inevitable ; it did not require any external sug- gestion. He knew the Risen Lord, and thought of Him as eternally the same. The modifica- tion which we have suggested as necessary in Paul's doctrine does not make the pre-existence of the Son of God ideal ; for there is eternally in God as the reality of His nature as love this Kenosis, which we call Word and Son, and which became incarnate in the Lord Jesus Christ. 7. The earthly life of Jesus was, in contrast both to the pre-existent state and the risen glory, a humiliation. It was throughout a proof of the grace of the choice of poverty instead of wealth. The Synoptists see the glory of the Son of God in the words and works of Jesus ; the author of the Fourth Gospel as an eye-witness beholds in the Incarnate Word " the glory of the only- begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth " (i. 14). While it would be an unwarranted use of the argument from silence to infer that Paul was ignorant of the facts of the ministry of Jesus, and that the Gospel-story had no place in his preaching, yet we do seem entitled to argue that the earthly life cannot have meant to him as much as to the writers of the Gospels, even as much as to the modern reader of the Gospel, for, if it had, he could hardly have avoided more frequent allusions to the facts than we find in THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 121 his epistles. We must frankly recognise that so distinctive and intense an experience as Paul's brings with it its own limitations. He was so absorbed in the Crucified and Risen Lord, that much which now appears to us of primary im- portance in the complete revelation of God in Christ was to him comparatively indifferent. Apart from the appeals to the teaching and example of Jesus for practical purposes, the facts about the earthly life of Jesus which are of importance for him are the following. The human birth of Jesus is referred to in the phrases, " born of a woman, born under the law " (Gal, iv. 4), and " born of the seed of David according to the flesh " (Rom. i. 3). In both of these passages a contrast is presented ; in the first it is God's own Son who is thus sent forth ; in the second He is instituted Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness. Without any desire to find evidence in Paul's letters for the virgin-birth, the writer cannot altogether escape the impression that in the first passage there is an allusion to it. The participle yspofjUBi^ov, " made " or " became," does not require the mention of the mother any more than of the father ; it is a neutral word. Why then the phrase &%, yvmiKogi " of a woman " ? Does not the preceding phrase, o 6sog rov vlov avrov, " God His own Son," exclude a human paternity, but admit an entrance into the world of the Son on His mission through human motherhood ? The 122 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL allusion to the Davidic descent in the second passage does not contradict the virgin-birth. The Gospels which record the virgin-birth also give the genealogy of Joseph. The legal and putative paternity of Joseph is an adequate explanation of this claim of Davidic descent for Jesus. It is to be noted that this Davidic descent is not mentioned as the reason for claiming the Messiah- ship for Jesus. What the pious and patriotic Jew regarded as one of the brightest glories of the Messiah, Paul deliberately uses to describe what he regarded as the lower side of the person- ality of Jesus. As a Jew Paul was proud that " Christ as concerning the flesh " was of Israel (Rom. ix. 5) ; yet in his doctrine of Christ the Jewish nationality and the Davidic descent both belonged to the temporal and local conditions, in contrast with the divine, eternal, and universal import of the person of Christ. 8. It is possible that the phrase, " born of a woman," had no more significance for Paul's doctrine regarding Christ than the Davidic descent ; it is certain, however, that the phrase, "under the law," was of the greatest importance. Although the R.V. renders, and our English idiom demands, the rendering under the law, yet the Greek is without the article. Paul has undoubtedly the Jewish law mainly in view, as it was to it that the Judaisers were seeking to bring the Gentiles into bondage, but the context shows that the THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 123 reference is wider. It is the legal relation to God which is contrasted with the filial. The end of the deliverance from the law is the adoption as sons of God. The principle of redemption Paul here states is presented to us, as we shall see, in various forms ; its rationale must be reserved for a subsequent discussion ; meanwhile we are concerned only with Paul's conception of the earthly li,fe of Jesus as determined in its distinct- ive character by this principle. The principle may be briefly stated thus. Jesus became what men were that men might become what He was. He took to Himself man's lot that He might give to man His life. For mankind the moral relation to God is that of subjection to His law. As long as human wishes and the divine will are not coin- cident, the righteousness of God presents itself to man as command or restraint. Of this legal relation Judaism presented the classic example, both objectively in the extensiveness and minute- ness of the code imposed, and subjectively in the spirit of legalism which was characteristic of Phari- saism, the logical outcome of this conception of the relation of God to man. That Jesus shared the spirit of legalism Paul does not affirm ; but he does teach that Jesus submitted Himself to this code, which He did experience as a contra- diction to His own spirit of Sonship. The Gospel record offers us a commentary on this statement of Paul's in the incident of the temple-tax, with 124 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Jesus' comment, " The sons are free. But, lest we cause them to stumble . . . give unto them for Me and thee" (Matt. xvii. 26, 27). But is Paul's meaning in the phrase adequately explained by this external conformity ? Must we not ask further: Did Jesus ever Himself experience the strain of the divine will in His wishes ? His saying to the rich young ruler, " Why callest thou Me good ? There is none good save one, even God " (Mark x. 18), seems to be the con- fession of one who felt that He had not yet reached the goal, but was still in the labour of the race. Was not His warning to the disciples in Geth- semane, " The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak " (Mark xiv. 38), uttered out of His own troubled soul ? It may be doubtful whether Pauj knew these sayings or not, or, knowing them, found in them the meaning they suggest to us ; but it does seem to the writer that this principle of the Pauline theology — Christ's self-identifica- tion with the sinful race — must have led him to the conclusion that in His earthly life Jesus, too, sometimes felt the will of God as command and restraint, and thus, inwardly as well as outwardly, was, in spite of His filial consciousness, " under law." 9. This conjecture gains confirmation from the next statement regarding the earthly life of Jesus which calls for examination. Paul's use of " flesh " for the lower side of Christ's nature has already been THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 125 noted. In neither of these passages is there any- moral reference in the term "flesh," and so they throw nolight on Paul's conception of the experience of Jesus. It is otherwise with Romans viii. 3 : " For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of flesh of sin and for sin (as an offering for sin) condemned sin in the flesh." The impotence of the law to restrain man from sinning in conse- quence of the sin which has its seat and vehicle in the flesh has been proved by an appeal to Paul's own experience in the preceding chapter (vers. 7-25). The phrase, " flesh of sin," does not mean that the flesh as material substance is necessarily evil, but that " there is as a matter of fact a close and constant connexion between sin and flesh." That connexion it is not necessary here to define more exactly. There being such general connexion, but not necessary identity, between flesh and sin, the whole clause, " in the likeness of sinful flesh," may be taken as asserting not merely a similarity with some difference, but even a sameness of human nature in Christ and mankind. To Christ is assigned a material organism, and all which that necessarily involves in man's moral experience, — liability to temptation, and conflict with evil, — but in Christ's case it does not involve that the flesh is the seat and the vehicle of sin. The following phrase, "for sin," is rendered in the text of the R.V. " as an offering for sin." 126 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL This is not a translation, but an interpretation, for which, however, a good deal can be said. "This phrase is found constantly in the Greek Old Testament as an equivalent for the ' sin- offering.' " As such Paul regards the death of Christ in chap. iii. 25. But the context seems to point to a wider meaning. The Son of God came to deal effectively with sin as the law had failed to do. Exposed to temptation. He resisted it ; beset by evil, He overcame it. His sinlessness is the proof that for mankind, whose nature He made His own, sin is unnecessary and unjustified. The condemnation of sin lies in His conquest of it as man. While this does appear to be the interpretation suggested by the immediate context, yet it must be admitted that Paul's mind was so concentrated on the Cross, that it is not improbable that for him the condemnation of sin lay not so much in Christ's victory over temptation as in His endurance of the consequences of sin in His death. He has not the same interest as the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the moral experience of Jesus as making Him perfect as the High Priest who can offer Himself as the efficacious sacrifice. Nevertheless, if the last clause, " for sin," does refer to the death of Jesus as a sin- offering, the preceding clause, " the likeness of sinful fiesh," cannot but refer to the moral experi- ence of Jesus. It is with Christian experience Paul is in this passage dealing, and there can be no THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 127 doubt that he does here appeal to Christ's conquest of evil as typical, 10. The relation of Christ to sin is further defined in 2 Corinthians v. 21, " Him who knew no sin He made to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him," The first clause affirms unequivocally the absolute sin- lessness of Jesus, and not merely as a fact, but as the fact on which depends the efficacy of His sacrifice for sinners. We are not warranted in assuming that Paul inferred the sinlessness from the value he assigned to the death of Christ. Where so much depended on the fact, we may assume that, as in regard to the Resurrection of Christ, he made sure of the sufficient evidence ; but whether he simply accepted the general testi- mony of the eye-witnesses, or drew his own con- clusion from the traditions he received of the words and works of Jesus, we have not the means of deciding. That God made the Sinless sin can mean nothing else than that God willed that the Sinless on behalf of sinners should be treated as a sinner, that is, should Himself experience the consequences of sin. To avoid misunderstanding, it is better not to use such phrases as " He was held guilty " or " He was punished " ; but, never- theless, it must be insisted that Paul regarded Christ's death as an endurance by the Sinless of the death which is the penalty of the guilty. The contrasted phrase, " the righteousness of God," 128 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL clearly indicates that it is not moral character, but relation to God's law that is here in question. Paul here is concerned only with God's appoint- ment ; how it was possible for the Sinless to be made sin is a question which must meanwhile be reserved. 11. From this passage it is easy to pass to Gala- tians iii. 13, " Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us ; for it is written. Cursed is every one that hangeth upon a tree," In aprevious Studyit hasbeenarguedthatthe common Jewish belief that death by crucii&xion was accursed had been one of the greatest hindrances to Paul's belief in the Messiahship of Jesus. That hindrance had been removed only by the conviction that Jesus had risen from the dead. But Paul does not altogether abandon this Jewish belief ; he transforms it to become an element in his Christian faith. All explanations of these words seem to be far-fetched, which discover in them a condemnation of the law which thus condemned Jesus the Christ, and as a consequence an emanci- pation of believers from the claim of the law so discredited. To Paul the mode of the death of Jesus may have been significant, owing to this saying in Deuteronomy xxi. 23, as it is not to us ; but the curse Jesus endured has the wider reference of the quotation in ver. 10 from Deuteronomy xxvii. 26, " Cursed is every one which continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 129 them." The penalty of the transgression of the law — death, and death viewed as a curse — is what Christ endured on our behalf, and what we in Him are saved from. Doubtless Paul conceived the death of Christ as invested on account of this its distinctive character with unique terror, dark- ness, and desolation, as the story of the Passion would not be unknown to him. 12. In all these respects Jesus put Himself in the place of man. He was subject to law, liable to temptation, endured the consequences of sin, although Himself sinless, and suffered even the extreme consequence, death, as divine condemna- tion. It was through death, however, that He was Himself delivered from all relation to sin. " The death that He died He died unto sin once ; but the life that He liveth He liveth unto God " (Rom. vi. 10). Until the Crucifixion, sin with all its consequences was His environment ; at His Resurrection God became wholly His home. This final separation from sin was not an involun- tary consequence of His death, but He Himself freely willed His death as such a condemnation and execution of sin. He so absolutely willed the perfect fulfilment of the holy will of God in His sacrifice that His relation to sin in any form of necessity ceased. The next verse, in which Christ's example is applied to the Christian, " Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus," shows that in the 9 130 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus we are concerned not with physical events merelyj but with physical events as the expression and conse- quence of moral processes. Christ died because He absolutely condemned and executed sentence on sin ; Christ rose again, because He absolutely consecrated Himself to the will of God. It is one moral decision in its negative and in its positive aspect which is manifested in His death and rising again. 13. This moral act is more fully discussed in Romans v. 12-21. Christ is contrasted with Adam, not as in 1 Corinthians xv. 45-49 in respect of nature as the Risen Lord and the Life-giving Spirit, but in respect of character as obedient to the will of God. Sin, with its consequence death, entered into, took possession of, gained dominion over mankind through the disobedience of Adam. Grace, with its gift of eternal life, has come into the world, and is more exceedingly abounding through the obedi- ence of Christ. Paul's teaching regarding sin, death, the fall of man, will be discussed in a sub- sequent Study, and must now be passed over. For the present purpose what alone claims attention is Paul's conception of the sacrifice of Christ as an act of obedience, and one of so immeasurable value that it is more than a compensation morally for the loss involved in Adam's transgression. It is not in the penalty of sin endured by Christ instead of sinners that the virtue of His sacrifice THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 131 lies, but in His obedience to the will of God in submitting Himself to the consequences of sin on behalf of sinners. If Paul does not make as prominent as does the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews the moral quality of the sacrifice of Jesus as that which alone gives it efificacy, this passage shows that this conception was not absent from his mind. We may even conjecture that to a man of his moral seriousness it was thoroughly congenial, and only the necessity of meeting the Judaisers on their own ground forced him to give greater prominence to the more legal aspect of the sacrifice. 14. The Cross is not only an act of obedience, it is also a gift of grace ; and injustice has often been done to the teaching of Paul by not adequately emphasising what he teaches on this subject. The apostolic benediction sums up what Christ is and does in the phrase, " the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ " ; and Paul has himself given us a concise description of grace in the words, " For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might become rich" (2 Cor. viii. 9). Self-sacrifice for the salva- tion of others is what grace means. The heights from which, and the depths to which love as grace stoops are vividly presented in the passage already discussed in connexion with Paul's doctrine of the pre-existence of Christ (Phil. ii. 5-8). The self- emptying in the Incarnation of the Son of God has 132 STUDIES OP PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL its culmination in the obedience unto death, yea, the death of the Cross. Grace toward man has its fulfilment in obedience to God. It is in submit- ting to the will of God that He should endure the consequences of sin, that Christ perfects His grace for the saving of men ; in Him love and law are one, for " all's love and all's law." Why the will of God required this sacrifice is a question to be answered in dealing with Paul's doctrine of the atonement. What has here to be emphasised is that in Paul's conception of Christ it is grace, self-sacrifice for the salvation of others, which is the supreme moral quality. 15. It is the grace of Christ which explains the inner life of Paul.^ For him the Son of God, the Risen Lord, the Life-giving Spirit, is the close and constant companion, nay, is more than any human companion could be, for Christ Himself is Paul's own inmost self (Gal. ii. 20). This intimate communion is, however, no mystical absorption, in which personal distinctness is lost, Paul con- ceives Christ as a distinct personality, and he does not lose his sense of his own individuality. Christ's experience of separation from sin (in His death), and dedication unto God (in His rising again) has its counterpart and consequence in Paul's own experience and character. It is personal affection inspired by gratitude which is the motive of his consecration (2 Cor. v. 14). He ^ See the third Study, on " Paul's Experience." THE GRACE OF JESUS CHRIST 133 is confident that Christ is still interested in him ; for the sorrows he endures are " the sufferings of Christ" (2 Cor. i. 5: "As the sufferings of Christ abound unto us, even so also our comfort aboundeth through Christ "). Christ's self-identi- fication with him of which he was conscious is surely the clue to the voluntary substitution of Christ for mankind in His death. As Christ so loved Paul as to make his sorrows His own (see the Expositor's Greek Testament on Colossians i. 24), so He loved sinful mankind so much as to become one with it in its sin and curse. It is true Paul does not himself make this application ; probably because he did not pereive that in vicarious suffering there is a problem to be solved.^ 1 Two questions wMch the previous discussion raises ; (i) Was Paul's Christology original or derived ? and (2) Was there development in his own conception of Christ ? have already been answered in the first and second Studies, on *' Paul's Inherit- ance " and "Paul's Development." VII THE GUILT AND THE POWER OF SIN 1, The question with which we are in this Study concerned is this : What need of Paul did Christ so fully meet as to become the object of his faith ? It was from sin that Christ saved Paul. But sin is presented to us in two aspects in his teach- ing — as it affects a man's own nature, and as it affects his relation to God. While for modern thinking there can be little doubt the former is most important, for Paul's thought it is certain the latter held the foremost place. To distinguish these two aspects we may use the terms guilt and power ; the first belongs specially to the religious consciousness, the second to the moral character. We may follow the order in which these topics are dealt with in the Epistle to the Romans. 2. Paul did not hold, as some modern revisers of Christian theology maintain, that God is, either because of His infinite transcendence of the world and man, or because of His absolute identification with the cosmic process, so indifferent to man's 134 THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 135 sin that man's relation to Him is not, and cannot be, affected by wrong-doing. Paul inherited not only the ethical monotheism of the prophets, who taught a God so holy that He punishes iniquity, and shows pardon only to the penitent ; but also the rigid legalism of the Pharisees, for whom man's relation to God depended wholly on his keeping of the law. But it is not only as Jew and as Pharisee that Paul is concerned about the guilt of mankind, or his own guilt. He claims — and rightly — that the human con- science is upon his side. There is a witness to God and a witness to right and wrong in the breast of man ; and both the moral standards men apply to themselves and the moral judgments they pronounce on others imply the recognition of a more righteous Will, and the anticipation of a more searching judgment (Rom. i. 28-32, ii. 14-16). It was a fundamental article of Paul's creed that " the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteous- ness of men, who hold down the truth in un- righteousness " (i. 18). From this universal divine judgment the Jew is not exempted. By his failure to keep the law, of the possession of which he makes his boast, he too is condemned, " that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the judgment of God " (iii. 19). As the objects of the wrath of God, His punitive justice, men are His enemies 136 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL {ixdpoh Rom. V. 10, xi. 28) — that is, not only hostile to Him, but, as the context in each case seems clearly to show, exposed to His hostility. The readers of the Epistle to the Ephesians are described as ''by nature children of wrath, even as the rest " (ii. 3). In order that God and man might be mutually reconciled " by God's not reckoning unto them their trespasses " (that is, by His not treating them as they as sinners deserved to be treated), " He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf " (that is, He treated Him as a sinner) (2 Cor. v. 19-21). On those who do not continue " in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them " there rests a curse ; and from that curse there is redemption only because Christ has become " a curse for us " (Gal. iii. 10-13). Whether Paul ascribed to God the passion of wrath, the emotional disturbance, or not, it is certain that he was sure that sin in- volved guilt — that is, so changed the relation of the soul to God that it became liable to divine punish- ment as expressing divine displeasure. Although in the autobiographical passages in Romans vii. 7-25 it is the other aspect of sin which is emphasised, yet there can be little doubt that the wretched- ness he there confesses was due not only to the sense of his moral weakness, but also to the dread of the death, that is, God's judgment on sin, in which this weakness involved him. He found the wrath, the enmity, the curse of God, towards THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 137 sin in his own soul, nay, it is not improbable that what he met in the microcosm of his own experience he saw writ large in the macrocosm of human history. 3. Before we go further with our discussion we must ask ourselves whether in this representation of God's relation to sin Paul is simply reproduc- ing the opinions of his own time and people, and not expressing truth of permanent and universal validity. The most important consideration is that Jesus, who taught the Fatherhood of God, also spoke of the divine judgment on sin and unbelief. " It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than for you " (Matt. xi. 22). This he declared of " the cities wherein most of His mighty works were done." How pathetic is His appeal and solemn His warn- ing to Jerusalem (Matt, xxiii. 37-39). That judg- ment of Jesus finds confirmation in the human conscience. Remorse is one of the realities of human experience. Shakespeare's Macbeth and Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter cannot be charged with theological prejudice. Even where there is no explicit recognition of God there is the sense that suffering will and must follow sin. Does not human history — the course of events — bear the same testimony ? The lot of individual men and the fate of nations alike declare that penalty falls on wrong-doing. The scientific tendency of to- day, with its emphasis on the invariable sequence 138 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of cause and effect, is here in accord with conscience and faith. It is the opinion of many who would reject Paul's terms, the wrath, the hostility, or the curse of God as Rabbinisms, that forgiveness cannot prevent the consequences of wrong-doing, that payment must always be to the uttermost farthing. But if the divine immanence is to be understood as personal, can we detach this moral order of the world, with its mirror in the soul of man, from the reason and the purpose of God ? It may be granted that Paul's terminology is liable to misunderstanding, that under cover of it unworthy human passions may be ascribed to God ; but what those terms seek to express is not an illusion, but a reality. There is an opposi- tion of God to sin, which is felt by the sinner as guilt, and falls on him as punishment ; and it is probable that we do err in trying to conceive this antagonism too abstractly. If we may invest God's love with emotional content, may we not also His wrath, remembering always, however, that this is not inconsistent with, but a necessary element in, holy love ? The need Paul felt then of being saved from guilt was a real need for him, and is a real need to-day. 4. The second aspect of sin which Paul presents to us is its power. The classic passage on this subject is Romans vii. 7-25. It has been in- dicated in the third Study that the writer must regard this as a confession of Paul's experience THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 139 before he found deliverance in Christ. Although after his conversion Paul was still subject to temptation, and had to exercise a rigid discipline over himself lest he should fall from grace (1 Cor. ix. 27), yet it is certain he, as united by faith to Christ, never passed through such despair of soul because of his moral impotence, as he there describes (Rom. vii. 22-24). He lays bare to us the inward conflict which Christ alone was able to bring to an end with His peace. On the one hand, there is his mind, which knows, approves, and delights in the law of God as holy, righteous, and good ; and on the other, there is the flesh, in which sin dwells and works, the law in his mem- bers. The antagonists are not equally matched, for the lower gains ever the victory over the higher, so that he, identifying himself with his mind as his real self, and distinguishing himself from his flesh though his own, yet alien to him, is morally impotent both negatively and posi- tively ; he does not what he would do, and does what he would not do (ver. 15). Two questions in connection with this passage have already been discussed. In vers. 7 to 13 is Paul describing a particular occurrence, a moral crisis in his life, when he discovered his moral impotence, and so lost his Pharisaic complacency ? Is his use of the term flesh as the seat and vehicle of sin to be explained by a personal peculiarity, a special liability to sensual temptations ? The affirmative 140 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL answer was in the first case regarded as certain, in the second as probable, and the results of this previous discussion may be here assumed. 5. What Paul meant by the flesh is one of the most hotly debated questions in regard to his theology. As a fact of experience he was conscious of appetites, passions, desires, tempers, or am- bitions contrary to the law of God, but so strongly entrenched in his nature that he could not of his own will withstand, overcome, and expel them. Had he thought as some modern thinkers do, he would doubtless have found an explanation in his heredity or his environment, and would not have felt the shame, or taken the blame of these tendencies towards evil ever passing into actualities, as he surely did. It is true that he appears to deny his moral responsibility in the words, " So now it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwelleth in me" (ver. 17); but in the verse that follows he identifies himself with the flesh in which this sin dwells, although elsewhere he distinguishes himself from it. This is not scientific psychology, nor dogmatic theology, but personal experience passionately and vividly ex- pressed. In all his vain struggles against the temptation, whatever it was, which so overcame him, he always felt that his true and abiding self did not consent to this bondage, did not find any satisfaction in the surrender to evil. Had Paul regarded himself as naturalism would have us THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 141 regard man to-day, as the necessary resultant of the forces of heredity and environment, his subjection to sin would not have been the misery it was to him. Such a confession shows a sensi- tive conscience and a religious passion for which liberty and responsibility are real. As he has him- self told us in his reviwe of his life in Philippians, he was " as touching the righteousness which is in the law, found blameless " (iii. 6), we may infer that his failure was not in outward conduct, in the standard morality. His reference in this confession in Romans to the commandment, " Thou^ Shalt not covet" (marg. R.V. "lust"), if combined with this statement in Philippians, seems to indicate that it was sin in the inward parts which was his torment. If this be so, the intensity of his pain shows the loftiness and largeness of his moral ideal ; he thought and felt about sin as Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount. That he could not subject feeling and desire to God's holy law, that was his real moral need. 6. His moral experience, which is common to all morally vigorous natures, explains Paul's doctrine of the flesh without any assumption of the influ- ence of Greek dualism. The arguments need not here be repeated by which it has often been shown that for Paul it is not flesh as material substance which is evil, but that he uses flesh as a compendious term for the nature of man as a 142 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL creature, who not only in weakness as destitute of the indwelling power of God, but in wilful- ness opposing himself in his individuality to the holy will of God, becomes in this very nature the seat and the vehicle of sin. On the one hand, the works of the flesh are not confined to sensual sins; and on the other, the flesh itself is repre- sented as capable of sanctification. Paul's view of this condition of inward conflict in which man finds himself, apart from any explanation he offers of its cause, is not in necessary opposition to more modern views of the moral problem. Mr. Tennant, who seems to have set himself the task of disproving the traditional views of original sin and total depravity, and of demon- strating the scientific view of man's moral life, writes : " The moral life is a race in which every child starts handicapped. The pleasures of forms of conduct which are destined to be forbidden him have been tasted and known ; pleasure- giving actions have already become forged into chains of habit ; the expulsive power of the new affection which is to establish another rule cannot at first be strongly felt. When will and con- science enter, it is into a land already occupied by a powerful foe. And, in the opening stages of the moral life, higher motives cannot, from the very circumstances of the case, appeal so strongly as the lower and more accustomed already in possession. Into the ' seething ' and tumultuous THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 143 life of natural tendency, of appetite and passion, affection and desire, is introduced the new-born moral purpose, which must struggle to win the ascendancy" {The Child and Religion, p. 178). This is a description of the moral experience at its commencement. Paul's confession refers to a much later stage, when, while on the one hand the conscience has become more sensitive, yet on the other the yielding of the will to desire has lessened its powers of resistance, and when as a consequence there is a keen sense of blame- worthiness as well as of weakness. Whether, as in the older view, the foe in possession at the beginning of the conflict is any inherited tendency towards evil, or, as in this view, natural and, till opposed to conscience, non-moral desires, the reality of the conflict remains the same, unless, as will not be the case in any sound moral con- sciousness, the naturalness of the desires be used as an argument against the authority of the conscience that forbids them. This danger Mr. Tennant does not adequately recognise ; and certainly the older view of these desires as not merely natural for man, whatever they may be for the lower animals, but as already morally affected by the sin of previous generations, does guard against this peril. What now may be noted, however, is this, that personal blameworthiness is not represented as less in the newer than the older view, as a man is not personally more re- 144 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL sponsible for inherited tendencies than for natural desires. 7. In his representation of the two aspects of sin, as guilt towards God, as power in man, Paul cannot be regarded as antiquated, but as correctly interpreting universal and permanent realities. This cannot be maintained, however, regarding his explanations of the origin of sin in man. It seems to the writer to be quite unreasonable to ascribe to Paul two distinct explanations of the origin of sin by altogether disconnecting his doctrine of the flesh from his doctrine of the Fall. It is not only a legitimate, but seems even a necessary assumption that he did " think things together " so far as to explain the entrance of sin into, and the operation of sin in, the flesh by the disobedience of Adam. But we must not draw hastily the conclusion that the account he gives of the origin of sin is the ground of his belief in the sinfulness of mankind. Because we cannot now accept the story of the Fall as literally history, that does not throw any doubt on the reality of Paul's experience of his bondage to the flesh, or of the wrath of God against sin. The Gospel of Paul does not rest on his view of the origin of sin, but on his own knowledge of man's double need of deliverance from the guilt and the power of sin. Looking more closely at the passage in Romans v. 12-21, we must observe that it is not introduced in the course of the argu- THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 145 ment to prove either man's sinfulness or even the universality of that sinfulness, for that proof ends at ver. 20 in chapter iii. ; but to demon- strate the efficacy for all mankind of the recon- ciliation in Jesus Christ (v. 20). The first step in the argument is the universality of sin and death as the effect of Adam's disobedience. The second is the necessarily greater effect for man's salva- tion of the obedience of Christ, as the act of a greater person. The last is the more exceeding abundance of grace than of sin. In this passage Paul sets forth an adequate moral cause for the stupendous moral effect of man's universal sin- fulness. Hence he emphasises the voluntary character of Adam's act. It is disobedience. The edge of the argument is blunted in the attempt to find in 1 Corinthians xv. 47 (" The first man is of the earth earthy ; the second man is of heaven ") an extenuation of Adam's fault. Paul is not contrasting Adam before the Fall with the risen Christ ; but Adam as the head of sinful and mortal humanity with the first-born from the dead among many brethren, the head of the redeemed humanity. We have no warrant to assume that Paul thought of Adam as subject to the flesh as his posterity is. Without assigning to him the extravagant notions of later dogmatics about the perfection of Adam, we must admit that this passage indicates that he thought of Adam as possessing a liberty and responsibility 10 146 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL greater than any of his descendants. The animal, just emerging into the human consciousness with a rudimentary conscience and will, as modern anthropology represents the primitive man, has no resemblance whatever to the Adam of Paul's thought. A childlike ignorance and innocence even as the moral condition of the ancestor of the race could not invest his moral act with the significance and consequence which Paul in this argument assigns to it. Let us frankly admit that his view of the origin of sin leaves the problem for us unsolved. 8. There are two questions dealt with in this passage which, however, deserve further notice. Paul represents death as the consequence of sin. Now it is generally admitted that death is a natural necessity for animal organisms such as man's, and that before man was in the world death prevailed. It seems vain to justify Paul by speculations such as these : that God anticipating sin introduced death into the natural order as a penalty already prepared for sin, or that had man preserved his innocence, he might have risen above this natural necessity. Paul's interest is primarily in the moral character and the religious consciousness. What he was concerned with was man's sense of the mystery and dread of the desolation of death, man's looking for judgment after death. In such totality, including what man thinks of, and feels about, death, surely THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 147 Paul's view of the connexion between sin and death is not altogether false. It is man's sense of guilt that invests death with its terror (1 Cor. XV. 56), Nor are we warranted in saying that conscience here is playing tricks on man, frighten- ing him with illusions. If there be indeed, as has been argued in a previous section of this discussion, a moral order in the world, an antagon- ism of God to sin, and if, as there is reason to believe, there is a moral continuity between this life and the next, such a change as death is may be conceived as fraught with moral significance, as introducing the soul into such conditions as have been determined by the judgment of God on the moral character of this life.^ 9. It seems clearly to be Paul's intention to represent both sin and death as introduced into the world by Adam, and as passing from him to all his descendants ; but in his statement he obscures his meaning by an ambiguous clause. We might have expected him to write : " As through one man sin entered the world and death through sin, and so sin and death passed unto all men " ; but he changes the structure of the latter half of the sentence, and writes : " And so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned " (Rom. V. 12). In what sense did all sin ? Some ^ In this connexion it is interesting and instructive to com- pare the Hindu doctrine of Karma, in which each successive Ufa in the soul's transmigration is regarded as the result of the moral character of the previous life. 148 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL hold that all sinned in Adam as the physical source or as the moral representative of the whole race : his sin was also theirs as included physically in him or represented morally by him. Others maintain that Paul simply affirms that all men have by personal choice sinned, and conse- quently shared Adam's doom of death. But he goes on to argue that in the absence of law sin could not be imputed, and, therefore, the sin of Adam's descendants until the law came could not in his view involve the same personal guilt and consequent penalty as Adam's. The com- parison with Christ would be incomplete unless Adam's disobedience had some causal relation to the sin of his descendants. Accordingly we are driven to conclude that Paul represents Adam's sin as the source of the sin of the human race. Without expressly stating it, he assumes the doctrine of original sin in the sense of an inherited tendency to sin, for he does undoubtedly affirm here that both the sin and the death of man- kind result from Adam's transgression. Does our modern knowledge allow us to find any truth whatever in this view ? It is very often assumed that the whole matter may be dismissed without any further inquiry. It is said, for instance, that breeding means more than birth — ^that is, education is a more potent factor in develop- ment than inheritance. That is not at all improb- able, but it does not prove that inheritance is THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 149 not a factor. And in the education the social inheritance of religious beliefs, moral standards, social customs, which constitute the environment, is potent. If that has been tainted by sin, can the individual life be unaffected thereby? The sin of the race is thus perpetuated and diffused along all the channels of the relations of men to one another. This consideration is too often ignored. But are we compelled to concede that heredity, in the stricter sense the physical heredity, does not affect at all the moral development of the individual ? Granted that it is not a strictly correct use of words to speak of original sin, and still less of original guilt, as there is sin or guilt only where there has been free personal choice, and granted that what is inherited is only the raw material for moral choice, is it not likely that the appetites and passions, which may be natural, have been increased in their intensity by the self-indulgence of previous generations ? Children do resemble their parents mentally and morally, however we may explain the resem- blance. Is not sensuous desire likely to be more ardent in the offspring of the sensualist than of the chaste ? Does not the drunkard bequeath to his children a greater liability to succumb to the temptation from strong drink ? Our modern knowledge does not disprove Paul's view, although it may necessitate a change in the form of statement. For it is an assumption that 150 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL mental and moral heredity is subject to exactly the same laws as physical, 10. There is one statement of Paul's on this subject of sin which demands closer scrutiny. He regards the moral corruption of paganism as the result of its idolatry. Because they " changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the like- ness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things, God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to un- cleanness, that their bodies should be dishonoured among themselves " (Rom. i, 23, 24). " Even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting " (ver. 28). We must first of all recognise the Hebraic mode of speech. Paul describes as direct divine action what we should regard as necessary moral conse- quence. As God is the Author of the moral order, these consequences are willed by God in that order ; but it does relieve our moral diffi- culties to regard God's action as mediated and not immediate. Secondly, it is now impossible for us to hold with Paul that polytheism and the accompanying idolatry were a deliberate choice of a lower religion when a higher religion was equally possible. We regard these as stages in the develop- ment of the religious consciousness of the divine. This, however, is not to affirm that human sin did not adversely affect that development. Evolu- THE GUILT AND POWER OF SIN 151 tion is not uniform progress. There were dark shades in the picture of paganism which we cannot confidently affirm to have been inevitable. As an ethical monotheist, who was not conscious of the slow growth by which the race to which he belonged had reached this faith, Paul prob- ably painted paganism in darker colours than it altogether deserved, although his qualifications of his description in his recognition of moral standards and judgments, and of life according to the inner law known even among the Gentiles, must not be overlooked. But lastly, that poly- theism, and especially the mythology of Greece and Rome, exercised an adverse moral influence can scarcely be doubted. The moral conscience was often in advance of the popular religion. Plato's care about the selection of the tales to be told in the education of the citizens in his model state is one evidence that immoral views about the gods might inflict moral injuries. Is not Lucretius' passion against the wrongs religion had inflicted another proof that religion may cor- rupt morals ? Can we wonder, then, that Paul connected the gross immorality of paganism with its debased religion ? In this statement the prin- ciple is recognised that sin itself may be punitive of previous sin, that one consequence of wrong- doing is a tendency towards worse doing, that sin grows from the less to the greater. Here, as in other statements of Paul regarding sin, we 152 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL are not concerned merely with speculations of the schools, but with realities of man's life. There is the husk of traditional views, and we should freely cast that away ; but there is also the kernel of real experience of himself and of the world. The guilt and the power of sin were facts for him ; these are facts for us. In these facts is to be found the need of the salvation in Christ, with the nature of which the next Study will deal. VIII THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 1. In the last Study the need of salvation was shown to be due both to the guilt and to the power of sin. Man's conscience witnesses against him that in his sin he is estranged from, and opposed to, God, and that he, therefore, needs the forgive- ness of God. He is also conscious of his weak- ness to withstand temptation, and to discharge duty, and seeks from God deliverance from the bondage of sin. It was argued, in criticism of current theological tendencies, that the one need is as real as the other. The sense of guilt is not an illusion, and the feeling of weakness only an actuality. For Paul even the first need seems to be greater than the second. But it is not at all necessary thus to compare them ; for the salvation which cancels guilt is conceived as also renewing strength. It is the one act of God in the death and rising again of His Son, which offers forgiveness and breaks the fetters of evil habit. This needs to be insisted on, as there has been a tendency in a good deal of theological speculation on the theory of the atonement to 153 154 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL dissever justification and sanctification, the for- giveness of sin and the holiness of the forgiven. It is necessary to show, on the one hand, that both the divine grace which offers and the human faith which receives pardon are pregnant with moral pur- pose and power ; and on the other, that Christian holiness has its roots in, and draws its nourishment from, the forgiveness presented in Christ's Cross. 2. Having recognised the close bond between the religious good and the moral task of the Christian salvation, we may venture, for clearness of state- ment, to treat them separately. The need which man feels of forgiveness because of the guilt of his sin is met in the righteousness of God, a character- istic Pauline phrase about which there has been much dispute, Luther's explanation is " the right- eousness valid with God " ; while it is imparted to the sinner by God, it is the ground on which God receives him again to His fellowship. There can be no doubt that Paul was as much concerned as Luther about the sinner's acceptance with God ; and, therefore, we may be sure that this meaning is included in the term. But we want to go a little deeper than this ; we want to know of what content is the righteousness which is valid with God. Baur seems to take us a step further : he renders the phrase, " a righteousness agreeable to the nature of God." That only can be valid in God's judgment which is in accord with His nature. Over against theories of acceptation which regard THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 155 the death of Christ as the condition of man's forgiveness by an arbitrary appointment of God, it is necessary to emphasise that God in forgiving sinners is true to Himself, The view now gener- ally held is that the righteousness of God is the state of pardon and acceptance before God, which is the gift of God's grace and is welcomed by man's faith, and which has been provided by God for mankind in the work of Christ in His Crucifixion and Resurrection, There is no doubt whatever that this view explains many of the passages in which the term is used, 3. In Romans x. 5, 6, it is contrasted with " the righteousness which is of the law " as " the righteousness which is of faith." It is not a reward earned, but a gift bestowed. In x. 3 the Jews' failure is thus explained : " Being ignorant of God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God." It is not the result of man's efforts, but contrasted with them. Com- ing from God to man, it claims man's submission. In the exercise of the faith which receives God's gift there is obedience to God in turning from the path of establishing one's own righteousness to the way God commands of accepting what He bestows. In Philippians iii, 9, Paul seeks to put his meaning beyond all doubt. " Not having a righteousness of mine own, even that which is of the law, but that which is through faith in 156 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith." In Romans v. 17, " the gift of righteous- ness " is conjoined with " the abundance of grace," and in ver. 21 grace is described as reigning " through righteousness unto eternal life." The grace of God, the desire and purpose of God to save mankind, is the ultimate cause ; eternal life is the final result ; the righteousness of God is the historical reality through which this cause effects this result. The difference between the grace of God and the righteousness of God is this, that in the righteousness of God this grace saves man, not in contradiction of, but in con- formity with " the wrath of God which is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unright- eousness of men " (Rom. i. 18). The wrath of God against sin, and His love for the sinner, are moments in the righteousness of God ; in other words, God judges the sin He forgives. It is because Paul attached so great importance to God's condemnation of sin in His forgiveness of it, that he did not use the simpler term forgive- ness for this gift of God's grace, as many who do not share and cannot understand his moral seriousness would have preferred him to have done. The righteousness of God means forgive- ness, but forgiveness coming in such a way as adequately to express God's condemnation of sin, and so fully to satisfy the conscience which in the sense of guilt echoed that condemnation. THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 157 4. Our conception of the righteousness of God will be superficial, however, unless we connect immediately the gift to the Giver. What God does shows what God is. Hence it has been maintained that the phrase means, " God's attri- bute of righteousness," There are several con- siderations which can be advanced for this view. It is in accord with Old Testament teaching, as in Psalm xcviii. 2, "The Lord hath made known His salvation, His righteousness hath He openly shewed in the sight of the nations." Paul himself uses the term of God's character. " But if our unrighteousness commendeth the righteousness of God " (Romo iii. 5). The contrast of the revela- tion of the righteousness to that of the wrath of God (i, 17, 18) at least suggests a quality of God shown in His action. It may be objected, how- ever, that God cannot in His grace confer His own perfection on man as a gift to be received in faith. But surely the phrase may be elastic enough to embrace both the divine cause and the human effect, even as grace means both God's favour and the state of man which that favour confers. As the forgiveness of sins means the restoration to fellowship with God, participation in the divine life, God gives Himself in His gift. There is a moral continuity between God, Christ, and man. God's whole attitude to sin and sinners finds its expression in Christ's experience in the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, and the believer as crucified 158 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL and risen with Christ is put in the same attitude. The sinner is saved from God's wrath against sin in his sense of guilt, which expresses only one moment in God's disposition and dealing with sinful men, by coming to share God's righteous- ness, the full expression of God's will. If Paul does not himself clearly and fully state this view of the phrase, " the righteousness of God," it is implied in his conception of saving faith as such moral unity with Christ in the act in which this righteousness of God is revealed. 5. Having thus connected the gift with the character of God, we may press the further question, What is the content we must give to this attribute of God ? Is it judicial, governmental, and penal only, or is it' more ? It has already been suggested that the wrath of God, the antagonism of God to sin and His infliction of penalty on sin, is in- cluded in it. This is proved by Romans iii. 25: " Whom God set forth to be a propitiation (or propitiatory), through faith, by His blood, to shew His righteousness, because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God ; for the shewing, I say, of His righteous- ness at this present season, that He might Himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus." To this verse we must afterwards return ; but the one point to be noted at this stage of the discussion is that Paul assumes here that God's revelation of His righteousness must THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 159 include both the wrath and the grace of God ; the term propitiatory cannot mean the one with- out the other, for the revelation must show adequate reason why God's punishment of sin did not always exactly correspond with man's trans- gression. Judgment on sin is included in God's righteousness. But something more ; and that something more is suggested in the last clause, which, to bring out the close connexion with the term under discussion, would be better rendered, " righteous and reckoning righteous." This does not mean that God, in spite of His being righteous, reckons righteous the believer ; but rather that He reckons righteous just because He is righteous. His righteousness is not merely protective and punitive, but expansive and reproductive. As righteous God does not merely condemn and punish sinners ; it is His righteousness, His moral perfection, v/hich prompts Him to seek their salvation, so that they too may become righteous even as He Himself is. This they cannot be unless they judge sin even as He Himself does, and, therefore, the penal is necessarily included in the redemptive energy of the character of God in the Cross of Christ. It may seem that we have read more into the phrase than Paul as a Pharisee could mean ; but (1) surely Paul's conception of God was one of the things made new in the conversion, although much of the old survived; and (2) are we not entitled to put into the object 160 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of faith the fuller content which Paul himself suggests in Romans vi. in his revision of the concep- tion of faith ? 6. If we rightly conceive the gift offered to faith " the righteousness of God," we shall be in a better position to deal with another much-disputed question : Does justification mean making righteous or reckoning righteous ? As regards the meaning of the term there is a growing agreement among scholars that it means reckoning righteous. For this view four reasons can be advanced. The whole class of Greek verbs formed in this way supports this meaning, and is opposed to the other. No instance of the other meaning has been yet cited from classical literature. This is the usual sense in the Septuagint, the extra-canonical Jewish literature, and the New Testament, includ- ing the passages in Paul's writings where he is not dealing with this distinctive doctrine. Paul gives a definition in Romans iv. 5 which seems to be intended to put this sense beyond doubt : " But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness." His teaching on this point clearly is that the ungodly are reckoned or treated by God as righteous, because He reckons as their righteousness the faith which has Christ, especially His propitiatory death, as its object, and which grows to such a union with Christ as to become a being crucified and risen with Him. But can THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 161 we leave the question at this stage ? If Paul's doctrine is to be made " worthy of acceptation " to-day, it seems to the writer we must show that it is not merely forensic, and that Antinomi- anism or even moral indifference in the slightest degree is not a justifiable conclusion from it. We must avoid handling merely Paul's abstract theological definition instead of getting into as close touch as we can with the concrete moral and spiritual reality of his experience, which he was trying to express and explain in his doctrine. It is the righteous God who forgives in judging sin in the Cross of Christ, with whom the sinner through faith in Christ is brought into personal contact and communion. To be received into fellowship in being forgiven by such a God, to be thus brought under the direct itifluence of moral perfection, is surely to be treated as righteous in such a way as cannot but make righteous. The religious good received is of such a kind as to produce the correspondent moral change. The conclusion which it is desired to reach at this stage of the discussion may be put in this way ; Will a taskmaster who rewards only those who have properly done their tasks, and punishes all others in strict proportion to their failure, secure by inspiring the best service ; or will a Father who, while making plain to His children the holiness which He Himself is, and which as His children He desires them to become, treats them as His II 162 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL children even when they fail and fall short ? To reckon as righteous in the way in which the righteousness of God is offered to men in Jesus Christ, is to make righteous far more effectively than to leave men to win the divine favour by their own deserts. What needs emphasis is, to vary the terms, the impulse to holiness which forgiveness brings with it. We may thus connect" "the righteousness of God," which seems at first only a legal conception, with moral character in God and in man. 7. The righteousness of God is manifested in the Cross of Christ. It needs no elaborate demon- stration that Paul's thoughts about Christ centred in the Cross (Gal. vi. 14 ; 1 Cor. i. 18, ii. 2). That death he closely connects with man's sin (uTsp rm at/jOcpTiSi/ ^[jijcUp, 1 Cor. xv. 3 ; ^gpi r. a. ^., Gal. i. 4 ; Tsp} ai/^ocpriag, Rom. viii. 3 ; S/a ra TocpocTT&fiMccroc ^(JjSv, Rom. iv. 25 ; Trept or i5Tgp ^f^Sif, 1 Thess. v. 10 ; VTlp ^fJbSu 'Tcdvrojv^ Rom, viii. 32 ; vmp 'ttocvtcov, 2 Cor. V. 15). If we are not warranted in saying that Jesus died instead of us as well as on our behalf, in our interest, yet we may recall at this point the statement in the sixth Study, that Paul conceived Christ as assuming man's condition because of sin, as sent in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom. viii. 3), born under the law (Gal. iv. 4), made sin (2 Cor. v. 21), and become a curse (Gal. iii. 13). While we must carefully avoid any attempt at estimating a quantitative equivalence between the suffering of THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 163 Christ and the punishments of men, or even at describing His passion as qualitatively the same, that is, as penal, we do not interpret Paul's teaching adequately unless we lay due stress on this fact, that Christ took upon Himself the full conse- quences of human sin. It was not a legal substitu- tion of one victim of divine judgment for another, but a voluntary identification by Christ of Himself in love with the sinful race so as to share completely its condition. What purpose, we must ask, did this sacrifice serve ? There can be no doubt that for Paul's thought Christ's sacrifice served the same end in God's moral order as the punishment of sinners, as well as effected their salvation. 8. There are three words which must be ex- amined more closely to justify this conclusion : Skaarri^iov (Rom. iii. 25), k'Kokbr^tkiaif; (Col. i. 14 ; 1 Cor. i. 30), TtaraXKotyyj (Rom. v. 10, 11 ; and 2 Cor. V. 18, 20). As regards the first of these terms, it is not at all likely that Paul meant by (Xa(TTyjpiov the lid of the ark of the Covenant, as the allusion would have been too obscure. More probable is the view that Paul meant the propitia- tory victim, although no distinct evidence of such a use of the term has been produced. His references to the Old Testament ritual system are not so frequent as might have been expected, yet here he need not have been thinking of any of the Levitical sacrifices at all. He had mixed enough among Romans and Greeks to know about the human 164 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL sacrifices offered to turn away the anger or to secure the blessing of the gods. This allusion, even if it were certain, would not help us in our inter- pretation of the passage. As there is some proof of the use of the word as an adjective, it is best to take the term in the widest sense possible. Paul does not directly afi&i'm that the blood of Christ propitiates God — that would be an altogether pagan thought ; but just as in Galatians iii. 13 he says that Christ became a cmrse, not accursed, so here he represents Christ's death as propitiatory in the sense that in it God reveals both His wrath against sin and His grace to the sinner, carries out judg- ment on sin as well as offers forgiveness to the sinner. The emphasis on the blood of Christ forbids our omitting this element of wrath or judgment, and the context absolutely demands it. The previous argument is intended to show how the revelation of the wrath of God is super- seded by the revelation of the righteousness of God. This is not effected merely by the cessation of the former revelation, but by the fulfilment of it in the latter revelation. Whatever necessity for the revelation of wrath there was is fully recognised in the revelation of righteousness which takes its place. Nay, even more than this. The revelation of wrath had not been in times past adequate to moral requirements. God had in His patience not exacted from men all the penalty they had brought upon themselves^by their wrong-doing. Before for- THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 165 bearance could be changed into forgiveness, the passing over of sins into the blotting out, it was necessary that what the revelation of wrath had but imperfectly accomplished shouldbe perfectly accom- plished in the revelation of righteousness in the Cross. How does the Cross meet this demand ? Possibly Paul did not ask himself the question. He was convinced that, on the one hand, sin must be punished ; on the other, that God in Christ offered forgiveness: he solved the problem by assuming that in the Cross the moment of punishment is taken up into the moment of forgiveness. The Cross has a moral value for God and a moral efficacy for man far transcending all that punishment could effect for the expression and maintenance of God's moral order; as an act of moral obedience by Christ it more than compensates for the moral disobedience of Adam and of the human race (Rom. V. 12-21). The obedience of Christ so transcends the disobedience of Adam that the grace which comes through Christ abounds more exceedingly than the sin brought in by Adam (vers. 19, 20). If we compare with this statement by Paul the others in which he describes Christ as entering into man's condition, we are warranted in affirming that the value for God and the efficacy for man morally of the Cross of Christ lies in His voluntary acceptance as required by the divine will of, if not the punishment, yet the consequences of sin, which for mankind are penal. The grace of 166 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL God which in Christ bestows forgiveness confirms, approves, vindicates the wrath of God against sin by enduring the conditions imposed on sinful mankind. May we not say that in the obedience of the Son of God in enduring these final con- sequences of sin, God's moral order in the world which necessarily expresses this moral perfection is fulfilled, expressed with a completeness and finality that the continuance of mankind under these penal conditions cannot reach ? If, as the Psalmist believed, the broken and the contrite heart is a more acceptable sacrifice to God than the sacrifices of burnt-offerings (Ps. li. 16, 17), if peni- tence for sin is an element in the faith which claims God's forgiveness, then this judgment of sin may be fitly regarded as necessarily included in the act of forgiveness. Antagonism to and condemnation of sin is an essential feature of moral perfection, and of its manifestation in word and deed. If man's moral nature is that in him which has most affinity with God, our thought does not presume too far in the conclusion that for God in revealing Himself it is absolutely necessary that His attitude to sin should be adequately and conclusively expressed. 9. We must next inquire whether Paul's use of the idea of redemption carries us any nearer an understanding of the truth of the Cross. In the passage we have been discussing, the term k%ok{)' Tpotjorig is used, " Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus " THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 167 (Rom, iii. 24); but the idea is not made any clearer. In Colossians i. 14 "our redemption" is equivalent to " the forgiveness of our sins." In 1 Corinthians i. 30 it is conjoined with righteous- ness {hipcocioffvpy}) andsanctifieation {aytccfffjuog), andwe seem entitled to assume that it is used as com- bining both ideas. In Christ man is delivered from the guilt of sin by God's righteousness (hiKcciOffvvy}), and from its power by the sancti- fication {aytocffi^og) of His Spirit. Redemption is presented as deliverance from the law itself in Galatians iv. 5, " that he might redeem them which were under the law " ; and from its curse or penal consequences in death in iii. 13, " Christ re- deemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us." The last passage shows that Paul did think of a ransom paid for the redemp- tion, and this is definitely stated in 1 Corinthians vi, 20, " Ye were bought with a price." Without committing ourselves to any judgment on the authorship of the Pastoral Epistles, we may com- pare 1 Timothy ii. 6, " Christ Jesus, who gave Him- self a ransom for all," and Titus ii. 14, " Who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a people for His own possession, zealous of good works." What the ransom consisted in has been made plain already : it was Christ's acceptance of man's lot, not only to deliver man from all consequences of sin as well as sin itself, but also 168 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL by so doing, as the last three verses quoted state, to bring men under such obligation to Himself as to make them His absolute possession. The means of justification is the motive of sanctification. 10. Christ having been set forth as propitiatory, and man having been redeemed from sin by the Cross, there is reconciliation between God and man. That the reconciliation is mutual, of God to man and man to God, is taught by the two passages in which the doctrine is most fully stated. In Romans v. 10, 11, the removal of the enmity between God and man is declared. " For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life ; and not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation" (;caraXXay^v). God is reconciled to man not in the sense that His disposition to man is changed from an adverse to a favourable, but that the revelation of His wrath is, as we have already seen, taken up into the revelation of His righteousness in Christ as propitiatory. In 2 Corinthians v. 18-20 the de- claration of God's reconciliation to man is the reason for an appeal to man to become reconciled to God — that is, to lay aside his distrust, estrangement, and enmity to God. " But all things are of God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation ; THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 169 to wit, that God was in Christ reconcihng the world unto Himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses, and having committed unto us the word of reconciliation. We are ambassadors therefore on behalf of Christ, as though God were entreating by us : we beseech you on behalf of Christ, be ye reconciled to God." It is only a very superficial interpretation of Paul's teach- ing which can assume that the reconciliation is only of man to God. The reconciliation takes place first as an objective fact through Christ ; Christ propitiatory declares God reconciled to man. To men who have in faith accepted this divine gift is committed its proclamation to their fellows. The reconciliation of God to man con- sists in His "not reckoning unto them their tres- passes." Men are entreated to accept this ob- jective fact so as to be changed in their subjective feelings to God. It is God's forgiveness, which does not exclude, but includes, as we have again and again shown, judgment on sin, which casts out fear or hate of God, and awakens trust and love. It is not necessary for the present purpose to dis- cuss Paul's extension of this idea of reconciliation in Colossians i. 20-22 to all things, and in Ephesians ii. 16 to the relation of Jew and Gentile. This con- ception of reconciliation forms the link between justification and sanctification ; and we may here note how the means of the one is fitted to be the motive of the other. It is not only the love of 170 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL God shown in the Cross which awakens man's love. If there were no more in this reconciHation, it would be a sentimental and not a moral re- lation which would be constituted between God and man. God's love has a moral content in the Cross inasmuch as sin is judged as well as forgiven, and therefore it exercises a moral con- straint ; the human love responding to it is humble and contrite, as well as grateful and devoted. It is the objective fact of God's reconciliation that gives its character to the subjective feeling of man's reconciliation. 11. This doctrine of an objective atonement, a righteousness of God revealed in Christ propiti- atory for the redemption of man from sin and evil, and the reconciliation of God and man, is to many Christian thinkers foolishness and a stumbling-block. To avoid intellectual and moral offence, it is necessary that it should be stated with the utmost care. So widely spread and deeply felt is the need of such a statement that the writer ventures to add here a series of proposi- tions in which he has tried to express briefly and clearly what seem to him the essential features of a doctrine of objective atonement. (1) We must avoid speaking of Christ aspunished^ or as held guilty, for the terms are only applicable to the sinful ; or seeking for any quantitative equivalence between the Passion of Christ and the punishment of sin. THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 171 (2) We must avoid thinking of a substitution in the external sense of a transfer of penalty, and should conceive it as the self -identification of love, whereby the Sinless One took into His own consciousness the suffering and sorrow, shame and desolation, of the sinful race. (3) We must avoid representing the satisfac- tion of Christ's death as offered to an abstract attribute of righteousness or justice ; but con- ceiving the love of God as holy love we must recognise that that love itself, as the self-giving of the morally perfect, by necessity of its very nature must include, and also express, hostility to and condemnation of sin in its very purpose of forgiveness. (4) We must maintain that the moral order of the world, expressing God's holy love, con- joins sin and pain; that the guiltless suffer with the guilty, although their suffering is not penal, but vicarious ; that Christ so loved mankind as thus to suffer with and for it vicariously, and suffered all the more keenly as His vision of God's holy love intensified for Him both the heinousness of sin and the horror of its consequences. (5) We must maintain that in enduring in Him- self these consequences of sin, even unto the deso- lation of death, He was conscious of fulfilling His Father's will ; and thus His sacrifice becomes an expression of God's judgment on sin ; for the Son by His submission confirms the moral order, 172 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL which conjoins sin and suffering, as a revelation of His Father's holy love, and even completes that moral order, as His Passion expresses more fully and clearly than all man's suffering could, the reaction of God's moral perfection on human sin. (6) We must maintain that just as penitence by moral necessity expresses man's condemna- tion of his own sin when he seeks God's forgive- ness, so it is but the human echo of the necessary divine judgment of the Cross, in which forgive- ness is offered to mankind. (7) We must maintain that human conscience can be fully satisfied only by a forgiveness which expresses fully the holy love of God in condemning the sin that is forgiven. In thus stating this doctrine it is not necessary for us to depart from anything essential in Paul's teaching, although we may modify his modes of expounding the truth, for his was as vigorous a moral conscience and as intense a religious con- sciousness as any modern Christian theologian can aspire to attain. This doctrine of the righteous- ness of God in the sacrifice of the Cross is not of the husk which the Christian faith can without loss strip off, but of the kernel itself ; for, however theories of the Atonement may have varied, religious revival and consequent moral reformation have in the history of the Church ever had their source in the presentation of Christ Crucified as the power and wisdom of God unto salvation. IX THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 1. The Christian salvation is from the guilt and the power of sin. The guilt is removed, as was shown in the previous Study, by the righteousness of God. How the power of sin is broken in the sanctification of man we have now to consider. Although we may for convenience distinguish these two aspects of the deliverance in Christ, they are not to be separated. As has been already shown, the righteousness of God is so revealed in the Cross of Christ that the means of forgiveness is also the motive of holiness. The cancelling of the guilt of sin is the first step towards the break- ing of its power. A troubled conscience goes with a baffled will. Until the burden of distrust of, and estrangement from, God in the expectation of His judgment is lifted off, the bondage of evil habit cannot be broken. The sense of guilt paralyses moral effort. The pardon of sin conveys the assurance, inspires the anticipation, of the conquest of sin. The man who knows himself forgiven can say, If God is for me, sin cannot at 173 174 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL ast overcome me. The forgiveness of sin brings peace with God (Luke vii. 47, 50) ; and this recon- ciliation with God is promise and pledge of complete emancipation. Paul has clearly stated the soul's assurance. " If, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life" (Rom. v. 10). Without at this point considering the new power that enters into the life in fellowship with God through Christ, we may here note that the removal of the sense of helplessness and consequent hopelessness is already the beginning of deliverance from the oppression of sin. There is moral reinforcement in the spirit of adoption. " Ye are all sons of God, through faith in Christ Jesus " (Gal. iii. 26). " Be- cause ye are sons, God sent forth the spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father " (Gal. iv. 6). Although the phrase, " the Hghteous- ness of God," may suggest the law-court, the reality that it expresses is the restoration by the forgiveness of sin of the fellowship of God as Father with man as son. This sonship as it gains certainly gives courage and confidence in the moral struggle. The despairing cry, " O wretched man that I am ! who shall deliver me out of the body of this death ? " (Rom. vii. 24) has already found its answer in the man, who, as justified by faith, is gaining peace with God (v. 1). As fear weakens and hope strengthens, pardon is the beginning of power. THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 175 2. But the worth of this gift of forgiveness, and even more, the cost to God of its bestowal in the Cross of Christ, brings a new motive into the life, and a motive which in its persistence and efficiency excels any other motive. "The love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died; and He died for all, that they which live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto Him who for their sakes died and rose again " (2 Cor. V. 14, 15). The love, and especially the sacrifice endured, gives Christ an absolute claim, " Ye are not your own ; for ye were bought with a price " (1 Cor. vi. 20 ; compare 1 Peter i. 18 : " Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things . . . but with the precious blood of Christ"). If we compare one passage with another, it will become evident that it is no legal right that the apostle thinks of, but the constraint of love, a claim more absolute than any legal right could be ; the generosity of Christ's love, or of God's love in Christ, calls forth the love of gratitude in man. It is not necessary to give proofs of Paul's dominant mood of thankfulness to God. It runs like a golden thread through all the varied pattern of his writings. He answers his own despairing cry with his triumphant thanksgiving, " I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord " (Rom. vii. 25). He faces sin, law, and death with the song on his lips, " Thanks be to God, which giveth us the 176 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL victory through our Lord Jesus Christ " (1 Cor. XV. 57). Such gratitude has a moral potency. Appetites, ambitions, tastes, interests, pursuits which would enter into rivalry or conflict with such a motive are consumed in its glowing fervour : " Far be it from me to glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world hath been crucified unto me, and I unto the world " (Gal. vi. 14). To this motive Paul appeals in exhorting the Corinthian believers to generosity: " Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might become rich " (2 Cor. viii. 9). Gratitude for grace, that is the new motive of the Christian life. Can we doubt its efficiency ? Although it was not the new motive alone which made Paul a new creature in Christ Jesus, yet it was a potent factor in his moral transformation. There are not a few to-day who find it difficult to understand what are often called his more mystical doctrines, the fellowship of the living Christ and the in- dwelling of the Holy Spirit ; but surely all Chris- tians can understand this gratitude for grace as the dominating motive for the new life. It is true that a popular revivalism has often been accompanied by moral superficiality, if not laxity ; but that is surely due to the fact that the grace of God in Christ has not been adequately pre- sented in its essentially moral character. A plan THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 177 of salvation for man's safety and happiness here and hereafter may be so presented as, even when accepted, to prove morally impotent ; but the historical reality of Christ on His Cross in its moral significance and value as the revelation of the righteousness of God, when apprehended and appreciated, cannot but evoke a love which, as its object is holy, will inspire the desire for, and sustain the effort after, holiness in the subject. Even in the Epistle to the Romans the danger of an abstract statement of the way of salvation is illustrated. The question with which Paul passes from his treatment of the doctrine of justification to that of sanctification, " Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound ? " (vi. 1), shows the danger of any theory of atonement that is not charged with moral content. That in the Cross sin is judged as well as forgiven by holy love is the presentation of the grace of God necessary if the response of gratitude in man is to prove a potent moral motive. 3. It has seemed desirable to place in the fore- front in regard to the Christian salvation, to prove its moral efficacy, these two considerations, which make the widest appeal ; but it is scarcely necessary to say that here we do not get the characteristically Pauline doctrine. The gratitude for grace is not for Paul the most potent factor of the new creation he experienced. Not an event of the past, however pregnant with promise for man's deliverance, was 12 178 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL the source of the new life in him. It was in a constant and intimate personal communion with Christ that he experienced the sufficiency of the grace of God, the perfecting of God's strength in his weakness. If in Galatians ii. 20 he expresses this living union with the Living Lord in an individual form as his own personal experience, he does not claim it as a spiritual monopoly, for in Romans vi. 3, 4 he makes a general statement on the assump- tion that this experience is common to all Christians. " Are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death ? We were buried, therefore, with Him through baptism into death ; that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life." In dis- cussing this passage it is necessary to make a concession and a distinction. We must admit that this union with Christ is not realised in the common Christian experience in the same degree as in Paul. His moral passion and his spiritual vision combined to make the Christ of faith a reality to him as He is but to a comparatively few souls. But even where there is no such certain and vivid consciousness of Christ's presence there may be such trust in His promise, fulfilled in the experience of such as Paul, as will enable the moral struggle to be waged with courage and confidence, due to the assurance that the human strength is not left unaided, but is sustained by the THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 179 divine power of the Saviour, whose working is not limited by the soul's consciousness of His presence. It is indeed a blessing to be greatly desired that now and again, if not always, that presence may be felt ; but what is to be remembered is that the power worketh even where the presence is not recognised. Down in the valley there is help even for those who have not beheld the glory of the mountain-top. Christian experience, both in its moral endeavours and its spiritual visions, confirms the truth that the soul's deliverance from the power of sin is not accomplished by the impression made, or even the motive awakened, in man by Christ and His Cross as an event of past history, but by a constant and potent living and saving presence. It is a personal influence which is being universally and perman- ently exercised, and exercised even when its reality is not fully recognised. Nevertheless, as intimate communion increases the efficacy of personal in- fluence, so the practice of the presence of Christ is a condition of moral progress. It is a pity that this phase of Paul's teaching has so often been called mystical^ as the term seems to warn off those who are most concerned about the moral issues of Christian faith. It is spiritual in character, because independent of sense, but is also moral in content, because man's holiness is its end. 4. We may make a distinction between the general fact of this personal union with Christ and the particular content which Paul gives to it. It 180 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL is not the historical Jesus as He is represented for us in the Synoptic Gospels on whom Paul meditates and with whom he communes. His attention is almost exclusively concentrated on the Crucifixion and the Resurrection ; and to enter into personal union with Christ is to be crucified and risen with Him. Although he claims " visions and revelations of the Lord," a rapture into paradise, a hearing of " unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter " (2 Cor. xii. 1-4), yet his moral progress did not depend on these ecstatic experi- ences. It was his meditation on the death and rising again that was the condition of, and gave content to, his personal communion with Christ. The thought of many devout and earnest believers is to-day withdrawn from the Cross and the Grave. It is in the words and works of Jesus in His earthly ministry that they find that " inner life " which is to them the revelation of the grace of God. Jesus' absolute devotion to God, on the one hand, and His intense compassion for sinners on the other, present to them that blending of mercy and judgment, that " righteousness of God," which Paul saw in the Cross of Christ. If the " inner life " of Jesus so conceived does convey to them the condemnation as well as the pardon of sin, and so the salvation from sin, we have no right to forbid them this way of approach to the grace of God. Nevertheless, we may still believe that it is in the sacrifice of Jesus that the moral energy of THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 181 God in bringing men to repentance as well as assur- ing them of pardon is most effectively exercised. It is not necessary, however, to consider these as alternative courses. The death and rising again need not be detached from the earthly ministry. As we become familiar with the Jesus of the Synoptic Gospels the moral conscience and the religious consciousness of the Christ Crucified and Risen become more intelligible to us. His attitude to God as Son and His attitude to man as Brother are made plain and sure to us in His words and works. We can thus penetrate a little further into His " inner life," and so interpret His experience in the Crucifixion and Resurrection to give to it a fuller spiritual and ethical content. How far Paul did thus give meaning to the death and rising again by such contemplation of the concrete reality of the historical Jesus we cannot now tell ; but there can be no doubt that for us his teaching of persona] union with Christ as crucifixion and resurrection with Him gains in significance and value in the measure in which the historical Jesus is concrete reality to us, and not a theological abstraction. We must not, however, ignore what such an experience as Paul's teaches, that it is in the Cross that the moral purpose of Christ has its fulfilment. His revelation both of the compassion and the severity of God, of God's love as holy, is not complete until we see sin judged as well as forgiven in the revelation of the righteousness of God in 182 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Christ propitiatory in His blood. Here is focused the light and the warmth of the grace of God, 5. The content of the personal union with Christ is for Paul crucifixion and resurrection with Christ. But how shall we understand this experience ? Shall we interpret it in terms of the substitution of Christ for man, or of the identification of man with Christ, or are the two conceptions but com- plementary ? In the previous Study it was shown that what Christ suffered or did was on behalf of man ; He took man's lot that He might give man His life. Doubtless Paul's thought was this, He was crucified for me, and so I was crucified with Him ; He endured on my behalf what He saves me from enduring, God's judgment on my sin. He rose again for me, and I rose with Him ; what He achieved was for my gain that I might live in fellowship with God through Him. " One died for all, therefore all died." While we must care- fully guard our statement against misconception, it seems to the writer impossible to explain Paul's experience, or Christian experience generally, with- out the recognition of such a substitution : Christ's suffering on our behalf, to rescue us from the suffering that our sin would have brought upon us. Are not Mrs. Browning's words in her poem " Cowper's Grave " true ? — " Yea, once Immanuers orphaned cry His universe hath shaken ; It went up single, echoless, * My God, I am forsaken ! ' THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 183 It went up from the Holy's lips amid His lost creation, That, of the lost, no son should use those words of desolation." Herrmann regards this truth as the necessary- confession of Christian experience, '' The behever then says to himself spontaneously, looking back on the work of Christ, What we should have suffered, He suffers " {Verkehr des Christen mit Gott, p. 107). That is not all that Paul means. This statement regarding Crucifixion and Resurrection is made by Paul to define clearly the moral atti- tude of the Christian ; and so our crucifixion and resurrection with Christ means our conscious voluntary identification of ourselves with Christ in the moral purpose of His work for us. Christ offers Himself to us as our substitute, that we may choose Him as our representative. He identifies Himself with us that we may identify ourselves with Him. Paul did mean that we made our own Christ's condemnation of sin on the Cross, and His consecration of Himself to God in His Resurrection. " Our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to sin ; for He that hath died is justified from sin " (Rom. vi. 6, 7). There is an absolute separation from sin freely willed by the man who in Christ accepts the pardon of his sin. He con- demns and executes it in himself as it was judged in the Cross of Christ. Repentance is not only 184 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL change of mind in regard to sin, but a new direc- tion of the will ; consent becomes antagonism. Al- though there are difficulties in speaking of Christ's death as the offering of a perfect penitence for humanity to God, yet the penitence of the believer is his crucifixion with Christ, and the more fully he realises what the death of Christ involved for Him, and lets the mind of Christ concerning sin be reproduced in himself, the more adequate will his repentance become. Thus the faith that accepts the grace of God in the Cross accepts also the judgment of sin the Cross involves, and accordingly it has an essential moral influence in severing men from sin. This crucifixion with Christ is not a single act at the beginning of the Christian life, but needs in face of constant tempta- tions to sin to be continuously maintained. It is the negative phase of moral progress, the repudiation and expulsion of moral evil from the renewed life. The Resurrection of Christ, too, has a moral meaning which can be reproduced in the believer : " The death that He died. He died unto sin once ; but the life that He liveth. He liveth unto God. Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus " (vers. 10, 11). Until His death on the Cross Christ Himself, though sinless, stood in relation to sin. He was liable to tempta- tion, subject to the contradiction of sinners, sub- mitted Himself in His vicarious sacrifice to the THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 185 consequences of sin. By His death He was once for all released from His relation to sin. He, who had found His meat and His drink in doing His Father's will, at His Resurrection entered into a life so free of all the conditions that had on earth opposed His sense of God, that He could henceforth live unto God, and God alone. The believer who is united to Christ, in Him enters on a life of such complete dedication unto God. Of course Paul knew well that neither he himself, nor any other believer, was so entirely dead to sin and alive to God as crucifixion and resurrection with Christ indicated. It was in this, however, that he saw the aim set before himself and others, and an aim the attainment of which was not hopeless, because of the sufficiency of the grace of Christ which the faith of man could ever claim. Faith was for him the condition of perfectness. 6. We do not recognise all that Paul means when he so describes the Christian experience unless we lay the emphasis on the divine grace and the human faith. While faith calls into exercise, and free and full exercise, the whole personality of man, it is not understood as Paul understood it, if it is regarded as a task to be done by man's strenuous effort. If faith were this, salvation would be of works, and grace would not be grace. The stress in Paul's doctrine is on the objective facts of Christ's Crucifixion and 186 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Resurrection; the subjective states of being crucified and risen with Christ are the necessary effects of these facts, where a man submits himself to Christ. Faith is not a productive, but a receptive energy. It is the greater personality of Christ which inspires and sustains that dependence on, communion with, and submission to Him which results in a man's moral transformation. In these days, when on the one hand the Jesus of history is receding into the distant past, and on the other the Christ of faith is being sublimated into a moral and religious ideal, the identity of both needs to be insisted on to make the one present and the other real. It is the real presence of the personal Saviour and Lord which alone explains Paul's own experience, and the experience which he assumed to be common to all believers. The moral passion and power of the apostle can be recovered by the Christian Church to-day only as it recognises the moral meaning of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ, and repro- duces that moral content in personal union with Him. 7. This is not, however, all that Paul has to teach us in regard to the sanctification of man. We find in his writings what may at first sight appear an alternative explanation of the Chris- tian life, but what may on closer scrutiny prove but a complementary representation. Paul speaks of salvation through sanctification of the Spirit THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 187 (2 Thess. ii. 13). The work of making holy {aytocfffji^og) cannot but belong to the Holy Spirit {Trvevfjija aytov). It is not intended in this Study to discuss the doctrine of the Spirit generally, for that subject must be reserved for subsequent discussion ; only the function of the Spirit in the deliverance of man from the power of sin. One feature of Paul's teaching must, however, be mentioned. What may be called the popular view of the Spirit's presence and power in the apostolic Church was closely connected with the Old Testa- ment conception. In the earlier portions of the Book of Acts dealing with the primitive Church the work of the Spirit is generally recognised in the miraculous and the marvellous. The ec- static charismata, such as speaking with tongues and prophesying, are especially regarded as the gift of the Spirit. Paul shared the popular view, for in such a matter he was a man of his own age and surroundings, but only in admitting the supernatural character of these manifestations. In two important particulars he rose above it. In the first place, he formed a much more moderate estimate of the value of these exceptional pheno- mena than was current, and he not only demanded that the exercise of these gifts should be subordin- ated to the edification of the Christian community, but even gave a higher place to the three graces of faith, hope, love (1 Cor. xii. and xiii.). Secondly, for him the Spirit's work was seen in man's moral 188 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL purification and elevation. The Spirit was for him the antithesis of the flesh. As the flesh was the seat and vehicle of sin, so the Spirit was the source of holiness. " Now the works of the flesh are manifest . . . but the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, good- ness, meekness, temperance " (Gal. v. 19-26). The Christian lives, is led, walks by the Spirit (vers. 18, 25), and thus crucifies " the flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof " (ver. 24). The being crucified and risen with Christ is the same as living, being led, walking by the Spirit. The Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, and no man is Christ's who has not His Spirit (Rom. viii. 9). Even although Paul speaks of the Lord the Spirit, and expressly says the Lord is the Spirit (2 Cor. iii. 17, 18), we should solve the problem too easily were we simply to identify Christ and the Spirit. The work of Christ and of the Spirit is one ; there is no union with Christ that is not possession and habitation by the Spirit ; and yet there can be no doubt that Paul distinguishes the Spirit and Christ in the apostolic benediction (2 Cor. xiii. 14) : " The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all" (compare 1 Cor, xii. 4-6, and Eph. iv. 4-6). The love of God is revealed in the grace of Christ, and this grace is realised in the communion of the Spirit ; but while there is one divine work in men, the Spirit THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 189 is no more the same as Christ than Christ is the same as the Father. 8. How shall we relate the working of the Spirit to the work of Christ ? It seems to the writer that in so far as Paul was not conscious of the personal presence of Christ in his experience, and yet had evidence of divine activity in his religious certainty and moral progress, he described that action of God as the indwelling (Rom. viii. 9), working (1 Cor. xii. 11), leading (Rom. viii. 14), bearing witness (ver. 16), help (ver. 26), and teach- ing (1 Cor. ii. 13) of the Spirit. The whole of his "inner life" was not covered by his conscious- ness of personal communion with Christ. These were experiences which he could not assign to the exercise of his own personality alone, but for which he must find a divine cause. To discuss the question whether Paul conceived the Spirit as a power or a person is quite beside the mark. For him the Spirit did indeed mean power, an enthusiasm and an energy which human person- ality could not account for ; but as the power of the personal God it was necessarily conceived and described as personal. Yet we seem war- ranted in affirming that he could not so distinctly distinguish the operations of the Spirit from the exercise of his own personality as he could dis- tinguish himself from Christ even in the most intimate personal communion. The demand sometimes made that the Spirit is to be conceived 190 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL as a person is self-contradictory, for the Spirit is God in His most intimate working within the soul of man, least distinguishable from human aspiration and effort. This working of the Spirit, while it may be distinguished from the personal communion with Christ, is not to be detached from the revelation of God or the redemp- tion of man in Him. We must avoid, however, representing the working of the Spirit as only the subjective effects of the objective facts of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection of Christ as the means of man's salvation. Only where the grace of Christ is received in faith is the fellowship of the Spirit enjoyed, and yet the fellowship of the Spirit is more than the impression and influence of His grace. We do justice to Christian experi- ence only as we recognise that God as Spirit Himself becomes progressively immanent in those to whom He reveals Himself and whom He redeems in His Son. The God who is in all, and through all, and over all, does in measure conceal His presence, but in the spiritual life that presence in the thoughts, feelings, desires, deeds of the spiritual man, is known and felt. The connexion between justification and sanctification is not merely human gratitude for divine grace as the motive of a new life ; it is not only a conscious personal communion with a Divine Saviour and Lord, a communion that must be potent in con- forming man to His moral perfection ; but it is, THE SANCTIFICATION OF MAN 191 even when there is no consciousness of the personal presence of Christ, so long as faith claims grace, a habitation and operation in man of God by His Spirit, the very life of God become the life of man. X THE END OF THE LAW 1. This Christian salvation, the deliverance of man from both the guilt and the power of sin in Christ Jesus, Paul offered to Jew and Gentile alike, for the necessity for it was as universal as the sufficiency of it. The right to make this offer to the Gentiles without any other condition than its acceptance in faith was, however, quickly challenged. When Paul and his companions returned from their first missionary journey to Antioch, " they rehearsed all things that God had done with them, and how that He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles " (Acts xiv. 27) ; but very soon after " certain men came down from Judaea and taught the brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved" (xv. ]). The issue thus raised was this : Was submission to the Jewish law a necessary condition of acceptance of the Christian salvation ? Must a man be circumcised in order to be forgiven and made holy in Christ ? The assembly of the Church 192 THE END OF THE LAW 193 in Jerusalem decided in favour of Gentile freedom with certain restrictions (ver. 20) intended to make easier social intercourse between Gentile and Jewish believers. Regarding the limitations of freedom in regard to food, Paul asserts in prin- ciple absolute liberty, but in practice recommends renunciation of liberty in the interests of charity (Rom. xiv. ; 1 Cor. viii.). The propaganda of the view condemned in Jerusalem among the Pauline Churches compelled Paul to take up the question of the relation of the law to the Gospel. 2. In expounding and estimating his treatment of this subject it seems necessary to keep three facts in view. First of all, Paul was not engaged in an academic discussion regarding the moral and religious function of the law in the history of the Jewish people, or even the significance of law generally in man's moral development, but he was contending against a present, serious danger to the Churches which by the Gospel had been won from paganism. The victory of the Judaisers would have been the reduction of Christianity from a world-wide religion to a sect within Judaism. In the circumstances we need not be surprised if his judgment is not alto- gether so impartial as the modern scholar would desire. Secondly, Paul was a Pharisee before his con- version, and so the law had weighed upon his own life as the heavy burden which Pharisaic inter- ns 194 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL pretations and applications of it made it. It had been not a help, but a hindrance to his recognition and acceptance of Jesus as Messiah. As long as he was under its authority he had felt himself condemned ; it was apart from the law that he himself had found salvation. Here the personal equation must not be overlooked. Lastly, the passage in Galatians iii. 10 seems to indicate that it was the curse the law pronounced on the mode of death which Christ endured which for a time stood in the way of Paul's recognition of the Messiah, confirmed his unbelief, and stimu- lated his persecuting zeal. If the words do not mean exactly that the law condemned itself in condemning Christ, yet the distinctive character of the law as inflicting on mankind a curse only is writ large in its sentence on Christ. Christ's Cross made Paul feel a repulsion to the law. 3. What Paul had primarily in view when he was dealing with the relation of the law to the Gospel was the Mosaic law. Thus when he describes the Gentiles as those who have no law (Rom. ii. 14), he is thinking only of the Jewish law. The refer- ence in V. 13, " Sin is not imputed when there is no law," might appear more general, were not Moses expressly mentioned in the next verse. When he speaks of the operation of the law in his own experience, he is referring to the Jewish law in its Pharisaic interpretation (vii. 7). He did, however, recognise a moral law beyond the Mosaic. The THE END OF THE LAW 195 Gentiles who have not the Mosaic law are a law unto themselves, in that their conscience excuses or accuses them (ii. 15). Christ is the end of the law not in the specific sense only, but also in the general. The rite of circumcision was what the Judaisers were most concerned about ; and it was from the ceremonial law of Judaism, including the precepts regarding clean and unclean, that it was Paul's main purpose to assert the freedom of the Gentiles. In discussing the question of the obligation of the law on the Christian, it is clearly the moral law that is prominent in Paul's mind ; for his problem is a moral problem. How can man be forgiven and made holy ? We should, however, be introducing our modern points of view in emphasising the distinc- tion between the ceremonial and the moral law ; for Paul there was but one law. We must, how- ever, note carefully that it is not the abolition of rites and ceremonies only or mainly that Paul has in view, but that from his Christian standpoint morality as law has yielded to something higher. 4. Although his argument to disprove the claim of the law on the Christian requires him to demon- strate its moral ineffectiveness, its inevitable result in the condemnation of men, and its subordinate function in the divine purpose, yet he remains sufficiently the Jew to regard it as of divine origin and authority, and consequently as deserving honour. The law is " holy, just, and good," and " spiritual " (Rom. vii. 12, 14). With indignation 196 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL he repudiates the suggestion that his view of the relation to sin of the law is intended to place it on the same moral level. " Is the law sin ? God forbid ! " (ver. 7). He is careful to explain that he is so far from making the law of none effect through faith, that he establishes the law (iii. 31), Compare with this Jesus' saying, " Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets : I came not to destroy, but to fulfil " (Matt. v. 17). There is no opposition between the law and the promises of God (Gal. iii. 21). It is doubtful whether Paul regards it as a proof of the dignity and authority of the law that it " was ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator," for the next verse suggests that there is a more direct and uncon- ditioned action of God possible. " Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one " (vers, 19 and 20), and this he sees in the promise to Abraham, fulfilled in Christ. It is certain that with all his honour and praise of the law he does not recognise fully the function it served in the moral development of the nation, nor has he the delight in it the saints of old had (Ps. cxix. 97). 5. The law is inferior to the promise of God ; it comes in between the promise and the fulfilment " because of transgressions " (either to restrain or to provoke, probably the latter), so that all things may be shut up under sin when the promise is fulfilled (Gal. iii. 19-21). "The law came in beside " (-rapg/ff^^ec, Rom. v. 20), as an "after- THE END OF THE LAW 197 thought," or " parenthesis." The term seems to be chosen thus to emphasise the temporary and subordinate character of the law, although other interpretations have been suggested. Meyer and Weiss give the prosaic explanation, " It entered alongside of sin," but this seems to contradict Paul's express statement that there was an interval of time between the entrance of sin into the world and the introduction of the law (ver. 13). When Pfleiderer expands the meaning of the words thus, " It entered between sin and redemption, as a means to the end of the latter," he certainly does not import a meaning foreign to the context, for Paul did regard the law as so provoking transgression that by it the sin did abound which was the occasion of the more exceedingly abounding grace, but he does not give its full force to the word Tocpeiff^hp, A comment of Chrysostom is quoted in Sanday and Headlam's Romans (p. 143), which brings this out : " Why did he not say the Law was given, but the Law entered by the way ? It was to show that the need of it was temporary, and not absolute or claiming precedence." The law is of God ; but it is not God's highest abiding revelation of Himself. 6. The law given by Moses is inferior to the promise made to Abraham, and Abraham obtains the promise not as a reward of any legal righteous- ness, but because faith is reckoned to him for righteousness. " The works of the law " and " the 198 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL hearing of faith " are opposed to one another ; and Abraham is cited as an instance of the latter : " Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness." To him was the Gospel preached beforehand (Gal. iii. IS- IS). The promises made to him could not be disannulled by " the law which came four hundred and thirty years after " (ver. 17). Abraham was not justified by his works, but by his faith ; and the promise came to him not by the law, but even while he " was still in uncircumcision " (Rom. iv. 10). However Rabbinic the argument in its details may now appear to us, the essential idea may be detached from the antiquated forms of speech in which it is presented to us, and it is simply this ; The legal relation between God and man — God as the lawgiver and judge, and man as incurring penalty by disobedience, or securing reward by his merit — is not the ultimate and permanent one. As it does not meet the needs of man, so it does not fulfil the will of God. Man is by his nature dependent on God, and cannot live his best life without God. God is by His nature gracious to man, and cannot withhold from man the help which he ever needs. The legal relation may be more prominent in certain stages of human development ; but it must give place to a relation more satisfying to God and to man. 7. Such a relation has been revealed in the Cross of Jesus Christ. The problem for the Christian Church in Paul's age was not the abandonment of THE END OF THE LAW 199 the legal relation for a lower ; but the attempt to perpetuate that legal relation when another was possible. For Paul there was, as for the Judaisers there was not, an essential and, therefore, inevitable opposition between the law and the Gospel. They were rivals, and could not be companions. If in the Cross man is saved both from the power and the guilt of sin, he needs nothing else or more ; and to claim that he does, as the Judaisers did, is to deny the sufl&ciency of the Cross. The Cross was vainly endured if it cannot efficiently save without the observance of the law. " If righteousness is through the law, then Christ died for nought " (Gal. ii. 21), If men look to the law to save them, they disown the salvation the Cross offers. " Ye are severed from Christ, ye who would be justified by the law ; ye are fallen away from grace " (v. 4). It is because in Paul's experience the Cross has proved to him absolutely the power and wisdom of God unto salvation that he cannot tolerate any other relation between God and man than that of grace on God's part and faith on man's as constituted by the Cross. Christ is sufficient for holiness as for forgiveness ; and the desire to add any prop or bond of the moral life is the denial of that sufficiency. Can we suppose that law with its rewards and punishments can serve either as substitute for, or supplement to, the Gospel which offers the grace of God to men's faith ? 8. Paul's experience had made him certain that 200 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL the Gospel could do what the law could not ; for he had known both the impotence of the latter and the efficacy of the former. An important link in his chain of argument is the proof of the purpose of the law. So far is it from restraining sin that it rather provokes it. (i.) In the first place, it is the law that awakens the consciousness of sin. " Through the law cometh the knowledge of sin " (Rom. iii. 20). A man becomes aware that his impulses, appetites, or actions are wrong when he gets to know the law which forbids and condemns them. Paul had probably in a very acute moral crisis become aware of this opposition between desire and duty, " I had not known sin, except through the law ; for I had not known lust (R.V. margin) except the law had said, Thou shalt not lust " (vii. 7). Whatever the natural desire may have been, it was not known as sin until its con- demnation was found in the law. (ii.) In the next place, the knowledge that a wish or a deed is thus condemned, instead of restraining from indulgence or commission, rather provokes thereto. " But sin, finding occasion, wrought in me through the commandment all manner of lusting ; for apart from the law sin is dead " (ver. 8). " When the commandment came, sin revived " (ver. 9). The commandment itself is like a challenge, which sin at once accepts. The sin, which unrestrained had been inactive, is aroused to violent disobedience. The appetites THE END OF THE LAW 201 become more clamorous when their gratification is forbidden ; the passions more vehement when a restraint is put upon them. That this is assuredly not the purpose of the law, Paul recognises in this passage : " The commandment was unto life," for it is " holy, righteous, and good." But never- theless it is, he holds, the result. Elsewhere Paul speaks as if the law were given for this very end. " The law came in beside, that the trespass might abound " (v. 20). The law " was added because of transgressions " (Gal. iii. 19). Although the phrase is vague, yet probably the meaning is not to check, but to provoke, transgressions. We have in ex- planation of this inconsistency to remind our- selves that a Jew would regard such a result as not accidental, but as intended by God. But Paul himself expressly indicates this intention. The character of sin could not be fully revealed, and its condemnation be completely expressed, until it had realised the utmost possibility, until it had reached the last stage of its development. That the law which was intended to restrain should result in pro- voking sin put beyond doubt or question the essential and permanent antagonism of the law and sin. " Sin, that it might be shown to be sin, by working death to me through that which is good ; that through the commandment sin might become exceeding sinful " (Rom. vii. 13). Why should it be necessary that " sin might become exceeding sinful " ? Paul has an answer to this question also. 202 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Man must become conscious to the uttermost of his moral depravity and impotence in order that he might fully discover his need of the divine grace ; and the law in thus both condemning and provok- ing sin was a preparation for the Gospel. Sin was made by the law to abound in order that grace might abound more exceedingly. The moral issue between human sin and divine law had to be fully worked out before God's solution of the problem could be desired or welcomed. '' God hath shut up all unto disobedience that He might have mercy upon all " (Rom. xi, 32). (iii.) Lastly, that the law provokes the transgres- sion is due to the nature of sin, but that it fails to restrain it has a reason in the nature of the law itself. It is an outward precept, and not an inward power. It is written on tables of stone, and not on tables that are hearts of flesh (2 Cor. iii. 3) ; it is not spirit, but letter (ver. 6). It can condemn the transgres- sion, but cannot secure obedience ; it is thus the letter that killeth, and not the spirit that giveth life. Its inefficacy through its externality is shown in the moral and religious condition of the Jews, who made of it their boast. " Thou who gloriest in the law, through thy transgression of the law dis- honourest thou God ? " (Rom, ii. 23). A man might profess his allegiance to the law, and yet withhold his obedience. " He is not a Jew, which is one outwardly ; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh : but he is a Jew, THE END OF THE LAW 20S which is one inwardly ; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter ; whose praise is not of men, but of God " (vers. 28 and 29), In the flesh, the law had an antagonist with which it was unequally matched. It could not bring into the field of choice motives as potent as the flesh could ; and only the grace of God in Christ could be a match for the flesh. " What the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh ; that the ordinance of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit " (viii. 3, 4). 9. In this proof of the purpose of the law it must be frankly admitted there is a great deal that is foreign to our modes of thought. Paul was arguing against Judaisers, and he had to use the terms and modes of proof that they could understand. With- out entering into any justification of the details of the argument, we must face the question whether there is any reality in our moral experience corresponding to that which is here depicted. As regards the first point, it is when the conscience, which reproduces the moral judgments of the human environment, awakens in the child that some of his actions and desires are first of all recognised by him as wrong ; in this sense by the law is the knowledge of sin. In respect of the second point, that the law provokes, and does not prevent, sin, are we not reminded of the proverb, 204 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL " Stolen fruit is sweet " ? Even in the child restraint does stir up opposition. There is in man a self-will, a self-seeking, and a self-sparing that resists control, limitation, and obligation. Con- science may be met with defiance. That law always provokes and never restrains sin would be an unwarranted generalisation ; but that mere pro- hibition, unless accompanied by an adequate motive to obedience, does irritate and excite, cannot be doubted. More difficult is it to follow Paul when he maintains a divine purpose in allowing sin to run its full course as a condition of man's welcome of God's grace. In the twelfth Study, on " The Purpose of God," Paul's interpretation of the ways of God will be more fully discussed. Meanwhile we have but to try to answer the question, whether there is any advantage in the realisation of the possi- bility of sin in its completeness. Is it good that sin might become exceeding sinful ? It is a fact that the higher moral life does not begin in some men until they have passed through a moral crisis in which the opposition of desire and duty was most acutely experienced, until they realised how much there was in themselves at war with their higher aims. Nay, even a fall into some sin which conscience condemns has made a man at once aware, as he had not been before, how empty of moral worth his whole life has been. Gross sins are not necessary conditions of moral development ; but an intense experience of the inward opposition seems to be. Concerning THE END OF THE LAW 205 the third point, the absence in the law of constrain- ing motive, and its consequent impotence, we must admit that Paul's view is abstract. Law as law is no match for passions : but as a rule law does not come alone. God's goodness to Israel enforced the claim of the law on the Jew ; the family affections reinforce the commands of the home. Fear of its penalties and hope for its rewards do give the law some influence. Paul is arguing in vacuo, 10. But if the law has failed to make men righteous, if its result has been to provoke and multiply transgressions, yet it has remained as a witness against sin, although not a victor over it. It has made it impossible for the man who knows the law to be at ease in his sin. It has secured the reverence of the better elements in man. It has driven to self-despair. It has made the soul in its helplessness and misery eager for, and ready to welcome, the deliverance which comes in the Gospel. Paul's description of his own inner life in Romans vii. 7-25 justifies his confession, " For I through the law died unto the law, that I might live unto God " (Gal. ii. 19). Without the moral discipline of the law Paul would not have dis- covered as he did either the law's insufficiency or the Gospel's efficacy. He had not been a Pharisee altogether in vain. His more intense moral experience gave him a more penetrating moral insight, which has enabled him to give an inter- pretation of the Gospel which has appealed most 206 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL convincingly not to men of moral commonplace, but of moral genius. His own experience Paul confidently generalises. Addressing the Galatians, he declares, " The law hath been our tutor to bring us unto Christ " (iii. 24). But here a doubt arises : Had the Galatians passed through such an experi- ence as Paul's ? Had they worked out the moral problem as he had ? If not, were they able to understand aright what freedom from the law meant ? One cannot but ask whether the legal discipline may not be necessary as a preparation for the evangelical freedom ; and whether the faith in Christ which has behind it no moral experience is yet fit for the freedom which implies moral maturity. 11. Be that as it may, Paul was sure that in Christ he had died unto the law ; the relation to God which that stood for he had once for all left behind, because he had entered on a relation to God entirely different. He was now a son ; he had put on Christ, because he had been baptized into Christ (Gal. iii. 26, 27), and that means that he had been crucified and had risen again in Christ (ii. 20). He requires all Christians to pass through the same change. " Wherefore, my brethren, ye also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ, that ye should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God " (Rom. vii. 4). To be dead to the law THE END OF THE LAW 207 might mean moral licence, did it not in the Christian result from death to sin and life unto God. He is free from the restraints of the law and from its commands only because he has renounced sin and consecrated himself to God. In his freedom he is " under law to Christ " {mofjuog XpitTTov, 1 Cor. ix. 21) ; " Christ is the end of the law {riXog vof/jov) unto righteousness to every one that believeth " (Rom. x. 4). " We are not under law, but under grace " (vi. 15). Grace delivers from the power as well as the guilt of sin, and therefore the man under grace is free, not to sin, but from sin. It is necessary to insist on all these quali- fications, as Paul's doctrine can be so easily mis- understood, as it has been in Antinomianism ; it may even be misrepresented as a plea for libertinism. The claim for freedom is made only for those who are dead unto sin, and live unto God alone. 12. We must again test the truth and prove the worth of this teaching. It will be generally conceded that Paul was absolutely right in claim- ing the freedom of the Gentiles from the Jewish law as a national code, ritual, polity. Circum- cision and the complex system of ceremonial purity could not be imposed on the Gentiles. " Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath day " (Col. ii. 16). Who now would challenge such a claim ? But the Jewish law enshrined moral principles and precepts of permanent and 208 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL universal value, the expression of a severe moral discipline and long moral development. Did Paul mean to reject these, or to refuse the Gentiles the moral guidance and guardianship which these might offer ? Surely not. " Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honourable, whatsoever things are just, what- soever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report ; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things " (Phil. iv. 8). Even if he was thinking of Gentile standards and customs, what he says of them he doubtless would have applied to the treasures the Holy Scriptures contained. His own letters abound in counsels, commands, exhortations, and prohibitions. He discusses moral problems in detail, and offers his own solution with confidence that he is inter- preting the mind of God. By Christian freedom he does not mean that each man is thrown back on his own conscience, and that he must exercise his moral judgment in isolation. As Paul's teach- ing might in this respect be misunderstood, it must be insisted that there is a moral inheritance and a moral environment by the aid of which alone the moral individuality can be developed. While the morally immature are not to be subjected to a bondage of commands merely, they must be kept under a guidance of moral counsels. The spirit of Jesus in the individual conscience is not inde- THE END OF THE LAW 209 pendent of, or opposed to, the spirit in the Christian community. The insight of to-day is not sepa- rated from the garnered wisdom of the ages. Necessary as was Paul's claim for freedom from the law, we must not misapply it, as has sometimes been done, into a justification of an individualistic mysticism which substitutes its own impulses for the ideals and standards of the Christian society. That the individual conscience may and must challenge the judgment even of a Christian society is to be fully admitted. This is the condition of progress. But the conscience which makes this claim must be instructed, sympathetic, responsible. What one does miss in Paul's discussion is a re- cognition of the different stages of moral develop- ment, and the varying degrees of spiritual maturity. It is an ideal rather than an actuality he describes. He regards his own experience as more generally typical than it is. If a man has died to sin, and if he is alive unto God, if he is crucified and risen with Christ, he is dead unto law ; he can live in the freedom of the Spirit. But if he is but slowly rising from the lower to the higher life, he still needs constraints and restraints, counsel and command, guidance and guardianship from more advanced Christians, or from the Christian society. As long as he is a child morally and religiously he must be under guardians and stewards. While we must respect the individual conscience, while we must recognise the presence and operation of the 14 210 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL enlightening and quickening Spirit of God, while we must gratefully acknowledge that even the simple soul that is in communion with Jesus Christ is endowed with a moral insight which often puts to shame the wisdom of the learned, yet there seems to be an urgent necessity that the Christian society should give its members moral guidance and guardianship. Casuistry, or the attempt to regulate the moral life of each Christian by a re- cognised rule in every case, instead of encouraging the exercise of an instructed individual conscience, must be avoided as a moral plague. But the application of the Christian moral ideal to the com- plex moral requirements of society to-day is a task which requires a wider knowledge and a keener insight than most individual Christians possess ; and it therefore belongs to the Christian society as such, to be discharged on behalf of all by such of the members as have the special competence. To use freely the help thus offered is not for the Christian a return to the bondage of the letter, but is an exercise of the freedom of the Spirit, which will secure the common good. Paul's practice in his moral instruction of his converts supplied the necessary qualification of his abstract discussion of the relation of law to Christian life ; and thus in urging these considerations we are not departing from him, or opposing ourselves to him, but only guarding his truth against errors that have sought shelter under the cover of his great name. XI THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 1. The Christian salvation for Paul included not only the removal of the guilt of sin by God's forgiveness, the destruction of the power of sin by Christ dwelling and working in the believer by His Spirit, the abolition of the authority of the law over the man living in the Spirit ; but also the victory over death. It is usual to deal with Paul's eschatology as the last section of his doctrinal system ; but the point of view of these Studies is different from that of the exponent of the Pauline theology as a system. Starting from the centre of Paul's personal experience, we are seeking gradually to move outward to the circumference of his thought ; and even although in this Study, for the sake of complete- ness of treatment, it may be necessary to refer to matters which do lie near the circumference, yet we should quite mistake Paul's standpoint if we thought that questions of the hereafter, about which many Christians to-day seem to be altogether indifferent, were so regarded by him. 211 212 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL That Christ delivered from death, having Himself conquered death, was not for Paul a secondary opinion, it was a primary conviction. He clothed that conviction in the traditional eschatological language, much of which has now lost its signifi- cance ; but surely the faith of Paul in the Christian's victory over death has an abiding interest, 2. In dealing with Paul's personal experience it was pointed out that at times, if not always, the shrinking from death was very strongly felt by him ; especially unwelcome to him was the thought of the spirit's disembodiment. Hence for him the Christian hope was not of immortality only, but of resurrection, the restoration of the complete personality. " For we know that if the earthly house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For verily in this we groan, longing to be clothed upon with our habitation which is in heaven ; if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For indeed we that are in the tabernacle do groan, being burdened ; not for that we would be un- clothed, but that we would be clothed upon, that what is mortal may be swallowed up of life " (2 Cor. V. 1-4). He inherited and retained the Jewish conception of death as helpless, cheerless, hopeless existence in Sheol ; and the hope which some of the Hebrew saints reached of a blessed immortality in fellowship with God had for him THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 213 its fulfilment only in Christ. Death so conceived he regarded as the penalty of sin, the punish- ment of Adam's disobedience, which the race shares even as his sin. " Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin ; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned" (Rom. v. 12). In the seventh Study all has been said which need be said in regard to Paul's view of the connexion of sin and death as physical dissolution, and the entrance of both through Adam, Only one point may be more fully explained. The impression which the passage makes is that God attached death as a penalty to sin, and that the connexion depends altogether on the will of God. Paul comes nearer our modes of thinking in two other passages. In Romans vi. 15-23, when he sums up his argument in the declaration, " The wages of sin is death ; but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord," he suggests the connexion of ante- cedent and consequent ; by its nature and opera- tion in man sin inevitably results in death. The end of uncleanness and iniquity is, and cannot but be, death. The same inevitable relation is suggested in Galatians vi. 7, 8 : " Be not deceived ; God is not mocked : for whatever a man soweth that shall he also reap. For he that soweth unto his own flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption ; but he that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life eternal." The figures of speech 214 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL used do represent the connexion as one which from our modern standpoint we should call natural^ although Paul as a Jew does lay stress on the divine will as the cause. If we look closely at the description of the effect of sin in the individual man in the division and disturbance of his person- ality as it is represented in Romans vii. 7-25, it will appear at least probable that for Paul also in the nature of sin itself lay the explanation why it should be followed by death. Death for Paul was not merely physical dissolution; it involved man's moral character and his communion with God. Its very core was separation from God's grace and exposure to God's judgment. 3. The deliverance from death which Paul hoped for was by resurrection — that is, by restora- tion of the whole personality, body, soul, and spirit. He held the Hebrew view of man as living soul because God has breathed the spirit of life into the form fashioned out of dust (Gen. ii. 7), and not the Greek view of the soul as imprisoned in the body ; and, therefore, for him the survival of the soul alone released from the body would not have been a satisfying hope. There are two questions which arise in regard to the resurrection, its date and — dependent on this — its nature. The Second Coming of Christ would be followed by the resurrection of the dead. The apostolic Church lived in the confident and intense expectation of a speedy return of the Lord in THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 215 power and glory ; and Paul seems to have shared that hope. He is himself looking for the Lord's appearing. He had taught his converts to hold themselves in readiness for that great event. " Yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so Cometh as a thief in the night " (1 Thess. V. 2). So expectant was the first generation of believers of surviving till the Lord came that it was a distressing problem to some of the Thessa- Ionian converts when some of their number died, and so seemed to be robbed of the fulfilment of their hope. Paul assures the mourners that as soon as " the Lord shall descend from heaven, the dead in Christ shall rise first " ; and thus will not be at any disadvantage in comparison with the survivors at that day (iv. 15-17). Among these survivors he reckons himself, " We that are alive, that are left unto the coming of the Lord . . . shall together with them be caught up in the clouds." At a later date he had still this hope : " We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed " (1 Cor. xv. 51, 52). It is not necessary by forced interpretations to prove Paul incapable of making a mistake in this respect. His authority as an apostle did not include in- fallibility as regards the date either of the Parousia or of his own death. If not even the Son knew " of that day or that hour " (Mark xiii. 32), need we shrink from admitting an apostle's ignorance ? Even in the letters written during his Roman 216 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL captivity, although the dominant mood has changed, yet the old phraseology reappears. " When Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested, then shall ye also with Him be manifested in glory " (Col. iii. 4). "The Lord is at hand" (Phil, iv. 5). 4. This confident expectation of a speedy advent of Christ and his own survival was, how- ever, modified in two ways. On the one hand, he recognised an historical process which must run its course before the Parousia ; and on the other, he realised that he himself was not likely to live so long. According to the " Pauline apocalypse" in 2 Thessalonians ii. 1-12 the Jewish " apostasy," the opposition of Judaism to the Christian Church, though now restrained by the Roman power, which in Paul's personal experience was offering protection from Jewish persecution, would at last culminate in " the man of sin, the son of perdition," probably a false Messiah, for the destruction of whom the true Messiah would in the end appear. This is a bit of speculation on the line of the Jewish apocalypses, which has only an historical interest for us now, but no authority as part of Paul's witness to Christ. That at the time the Jewish opposition to Chris- tianity was its most formidable hindrance, and that the Roman tolerance was its most valuable help, was a true reading of facts. What is distinct- ively Christian in this Pauline apocalypse is the THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 217 conviction that Christ will at last triumph over all foes. As to the hope of the Parousia, we may hold either that in the fall of Jerusalem the apostasy of Judaism in refusing its Messiah was judged, and so His claim was historically vindicated ; or that the historical process Paul recognised has necessarily lasted very much longer than he, limited by the horizon of his own age, could possibly anticipate, and that the coming of Christ in power and glory still lies in the future, and will in its historical conditions transcend the apostolic ex- pectations as did Jesus' Messiahship the prophetic predictions. That the cause of Christ will at last triumph in the world is surely a permanent Christian conviction, but when or how each age will have its own conjectures ; and the conjecture of the apostolic age has no permanent authority for the Christian Church. 5. Paul's hope of the Parousia was qualified also by the growing conviction of his later years that he would not live long enough to see that day. Yet he looked forward to death itself with hope. The passage we have already quoted from 2 Corinthians v. 1-4 shows his shrinking from a disembodied state, and his desire for the full restoration of his personality. Whether he ex- pected this immediately after death, if he died before the Parousia, or anticipated an inter- mediate state between his death and the general resurrection at the Parousia, his words here do 218 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL not clearly indicate, and we may reserve the ques- tion for subsequent discussion. What is note- worthy is that even in anticipation of death his faith inspired hope : " Being therefore always of good courage, and knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord (for we walk by faith, not by sight) ; we are of good courage, I say, and are willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be at home with the Lord" (2 Cor. v. 6-8). The Hebrew saint feared that his communion with Jehovah would be interrupted in death ; but Paul, what- ever he may have thought of the intermediate state, was sure of closer and fuller fellowship with Christ. In this mood death appears to him an advantage, to be desired. " To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if to live in the flesh, — ^if this is the fruit of my work, then what I shall choose I wot not. But I am in a strait betwixt the two, having the desire to depart and be with Christ ; for it is very far better : yet to abide in the flesh is more needful for your sake " (Phil. i. 21-24). For our present purpose it is not necessary to discuss the varying interpreta- tions of ver. 22 (R.V. margin, " Bui if to live in the flesh be my lot, this is the fruit of my work : and what I shall choose, I wot not. Or, What shall I choose? Or, I do not make known^^), as the main thought is quite clear. Paul would prefer to die to gain the fuller life in Christ, but be is THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 219 willing to remain on earth for the sake of his converts. 6, From the date we can pass to the nature of the resurrection. In the classical passage on the subject in 1 Corinthians xv. Paul distinguishes those who will be alive then from those who have previously died. When Christ comes, the dead will be raised up ; but it is a sheer perversion of Paul's teaching to assert that they will be raised up with the same bodies, identical, as some theologians have argued, even as to their constitu- ent atoms. For Paul expressly distinguishes the natural from the spiritual body in a series of striking contrasts. "It is sown in corruption ; it is raised in incorruption : it is sown in dishonour ; it is raised in glory : it is sown in weakness ; it is raised in power : it is sown a natural (psychic) body; it is raised a spiritual body" (vers. 42-44). Adam as living soul is type of the one body, Christ as the life-giving spirit is the type of the other (ver. 45). The two bodies are related as the seed and the grain which springs from it. By what process the continuity is maintained, and yet the transformation effected, Paul expressly refuses to say, but ascribes the mystery to the divine power. " God giveth it a body even as it pleased Him, and to each seed a body of its own " (ver. 38). It is not a body of flesh and blood, for these cannot inherit the Kingdom of God (ver, 50). To suggest, as has been done, that the identity 220 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL is secured by the bony skeleton is to show a stupidity which disquahfies for any opinion on this theme. Even those who are living will need to undergo the change. " We shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye " (ver. 52). A gradual process in the one case, an instantaneous act in the other, is asserted. It need hardly be said that here we are quite out of the region of Christian experience, and have soared into the realm of theological speculation. That personal identity is preserved in death, that there is a continuity of moral character and religious disposition in this and the future life, that its conditions shall allow of the fullest and freest exercise and development of the whole personality, that some organ for the expression and activity of the self may with some probability be expected, and that for the Christian life Christ will be hereafter, as He is here, the Mediator of the life of God — these are expectations which may be reasonably grounded in the Christian faith. That this passage in 1 Corinthians is to be taken as literal prediction, history written beforehand, is a view which cannot be maintained. As the Hebrew prophets' declarations fell far short of their fulfilment in Christ, so may we expect that the Christian apostle's expectations will be transcended. Paul spoke as a man to whom Jewish apocalypse was familiar, and he clothed Christian aspirations for a blessed and glorious THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 221 immortality in Christ in similar forms of thought. His certainty of victory over death in Christ we can share, however insuperable may be for us the difficulty of the conception of the resurrection he here presents. That Jesus Himself conquered death we know from our own experience, even as Paul did, because we now live in Him ; and that death cannot destroy this life in Him, but can only set it free from present limitations, we are sure, because this life of Christ in us now is the pledge and pattern of our life in Him hereafter. 7. A question already mentioned but left over for subsequent discussion must now be faced. What did Paul think of the condition of the dead, who had fallen asleep in Christ, prior to the resurrection ? His description of death as a sleep in Christ (1 Thess. iv. 14 ; 1 Cor. xv. 6, 18-20) must not be pressed into the service of a theory of an unconscious or semi-conscious con- dition, of a depressed vitality until the awakening and vivifying of the resurrection. When he has given up, if only temporarily, the expectation of survival to the resurrection, and is facing what seems imminent death, he looks for an immediate entrance into clearer vision of, and closer com- munion with, Christ. In 2 Corinthians v. 6-8, a passage already quoted, absence from the body is being at home with the Lord ; so in Philippians i. 23 to depart is to be with Christ. If this be so, then he may possibly have thought that the 222 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL clearer vision and the closer communion would produce the greater resemblance. "As we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly " (1 Cor. xv. 49). " The Lord Jesus Christ shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of His glory, according to the working whereby He is able even to subject all things unto Himself" (Phil. iii. 21). Although these passages occur in a context in which the resurrec- tion at Christ's Second Coming is being spoken of, yet surely if Paul had thought out the question, as he does not seem to have done, he would have attached the same expectation to this departing to be at home with Christ. Even in this earthly life the contemplation of Christ results in resem- blance to Him. " We all, with unveiled face re- flecting as a mirror" (R.V. margin, "beholding as in a mirror ") " the glory of the Lord, are trans- formed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit " (2 Cor. iii. 18). This present process of transformation by the Spirit in the contemplation of Christ is the pro- mise of the final transformation. " Now He that wrought us for this very thing is God, who gave unto us the earnest of the Spirit " (v. 5), As the body of the resurrection is a spiritual body, and the Lord is the life-giving Spirit, it seems to be implicit in Paul's thought, although he never states it explicitly, that when the Christian at last is at THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 223 home with Christ, he will bear His image of glory. Thus the resurrection, from being an event of the distant future, would become the immediate present experience of him who falls asleep in Jesus, To the writer at least this appears a con- ception more distinctively and consistently Chris- tian than that of a general resurrection in the distant future. Christians generally, who probably would repudiate the charge of doubting the New Testament teaching on this subject, nevertheless do assume that their loved ones have gone at death to the blessedness and glory of heaven, and do not think of them as in some intermediate state of less complete and satisfying life. Why should Christian theology not frankly acknowledge that even Paul had not in his thinking quite freed his Christian hope from Jewish limitations ? 8. May we not apply the same line of reasoning to Paul's expectation of the final judgment ? " Wherefore also we make it our aim, whether at home or absent, to be well-pleasing unto Him. For we must all be made manifest before the judg- ment-seat of Christ ; that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad " (2 Cor. v. 9-10). "We shall all stand before the judgment- seat of God " (Rom. xiv. 10). In a very vivid picture of the burning of a house Paul presents this process of judgment : whatever is morally and religiously valuable (gold, silver, costly stones) 224 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL is preserved ; whatever is valueless (wood, hay, stubble) is consumed. In that judgment the soul itself may escape, but may lose all its work and its reward. " If any man's work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss ; but he himself shall be saved ; yet so as through fire" (1 Cor. iii. 12-15). This image, as well as that used in Galatians vi. 7, 8, of the seed and the harvest, suggests that the judgment of God is the inevitable consequence of the character and the disposition of a man. Probably Paul never quite set aside the picture of the law court and the judge receiving evidence and pronounc- ing sentence ; but he himself does point us be- yond this inadequate pictorial representation. The transformation of the believer into the like- ness of Christ by the Spirit is God's judgment, and it may be assumed to take effect at death ; for why should we suppose the continuity of moral and spiritual development to be arrested in an intermediate state ? God executes His judgment through Christ, for it is in the contemplation of, and communion with, Christ that the believer develops his character and determines his dis- position towards God. So modified, the expecta- tion is not a relapse to legalism. It is the relation of faith to the grace of Christ which issues in the works which God thus approves. To be with Christ, and so like Christ, is heaven, and the measure of THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 225 communion and resemblance is the measure of glory and blessedness. It is not maintained that Paul had thought out the problem to this solution, but only that he offers some suggestions of it. But it may be objected: Is there then no kernel of Christian truth in the husk of the Jewish apocalyptic conceptions of a visible manifestation of the Messiah, of a physical resurrection of the dead, and of a final judgment of all men ? It seems to the writer that there is, and it is this. It is not a saying of Paul's which suggests it ; but one of the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews : *' God having provided some better thing con- cerning us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect " (xi. 40). As the saints of the Old Covenant found the fulfilment of their hopes in the New Covenant, so even those who fell asleep in Christ, and who now live in blessedness and glory in Christ, will be made perfect, will gain the full fruition of their wishes and their hopes, when God's purpose in Christ is on earth wholly accomplished. The Church in heaven is interested in the Church on earth, and will be perfectly Triumphant only when the Church Militant has gained its final victory. 9. One problem remains before this discussion can be brought to a close, and that is the saddest which can engage Christian thought. Does this Christian hope embrace all men ? While in his argument regarding the resurrection Paul is 15 226 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL concerned only with believers, and their resurrec- tion in incorruption, glory, power, is represented as the result of their union with Christ the life- giving Spirit, yet he seems to have believed that the wicked, too, would be raised. In the Epistles there is no definite statement to this effect, but in Acts xxiv. 15 Luke represents him as declar- ing " that there shall be a resurrection both of the just and the unjust." It is, of course, possible that Paul did not use these very words, and that the idea may have been suggested to Luke by Daniel xii. 2, " And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and ever- lasting contempt." But Paul does assume a universal judgment, " Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world ? " (1 Cor. vi. 2). " When we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world " (xi. 32). According to his mode of think- ing in regard to the righteous, resurrection from the dead must be assumed as preceding the judg- ment of the wicked. It is then probable that he thought of all men being raised to be judged ; but whether divine power acting punitively raises them as the redemptive power of God raises the righteous, he does not state. This is a subject involved in obscurity, and the Christian hope does not require that we should have any certainty regarding it. If he that soweth to the flesh THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 227 shall of the flesh reap corruption, we might rather expect that there would be no resurrection of the wicked, but that they would remain under the power of death. That God should restore to fuller vitality in the resurrection the wicked only that they might suffer the more the penalty of sin, is for Christian love an intolerable thought. If Paul did affirm the resurrection of the wicked for judgment, we need not follow him in this opinion ; for it is not bound up with the hope our faith in Christ inspires, and lays a burden on Christian love grievous to be borne. But is this Paul's last word on the matter ? 10. Some scholars maintain that Paul held " the larger hope " of universalism. He does affirm after the Parousia, the resurrection, and the judgment, the absolute triumph of the Mediatorial Kingdom of Christ. " Then cometh the end, when He shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father ; when He shall have abolished all rule and all auth- ority and all power." ..." And when all things have been subjected unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subjected to Him that did subject all things unto Him, that God may be all in all " (1 Cor. xv. 24-28). Is this dominion to be understood as involving the salvation of all men, or only the suppression of their opposition ? The former alternative is suggested by Colossians i. 19-20 : " For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in Him should all the fulness dweH ; and 228 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL through Him to reconcile all things unto Himself, having made peace through the blood of His Cross ; through Him, I say, whether things upon the earth, or things in the heaven," A universal adoration and confession of Christ is affirmed in Philippians ii. 10, 11 : " That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." If these utterances are to be taken literally, we have in them Paul's boldest speculation and most generous aspiration, and the Christian mind and heart can but wish that they expressed a certainty. There are, however, difficulties. How, without voluntary acceptance of the divine re- conciliation and vital oneness with the Christ as life-giving Spirit, can we conceive all to be saved ? And what incontestable evidence is there that sin's resistance and refusal of grace shall finally in every case be overcome ? So long as man's relation to God is conceived as one of faith in grace, as freely accepted as it is freely offered, not even an apostle's foresight can give us assur- ance that all men shall be saved because all men will believe. But it is very doubtful whether this question to which we seek an answer was in Paul's thoughts at all. He was concerned about God's glory in Christ in a universal reconciliation, a universal submission, a universal dominion, and THE VICTORY OVER DEATH 229 inquired, not too curiously, whether this neces- sarily involved that every man should be saved. We must return to this subject in the next Study, when dealing with Paul's interpretation of "The Purpose of God." XII THE PURPOSE OF GOD 1. When Paul became a Christian he did not lose his Jewish belief in God as the ultimate cause and the final purpose of all things, his in- heritance of the " ethical monotheism " of the prophets. The Christian salvation, which brings forgiveness, holiness, freedom, blessedness to man, and which comes through the person and work, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ, is rooted in and springs out of the absolute and perfect will of God. In each believer in Christ, as in the Church of Christ as a whole, the purpose of God is being fulfilled. Paul knew and gloried in knowing that his life in Christ had its source in the very being of God Himself. Hence his tone of certainty, confidence, courage. ' ' We know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to His purpose. For whom He fore- knew. He also foreordained to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first- born among many brethren : and whom He fore- 230 THE PURPOSE OF GOD 231 Drdained, them He also called : and whom He called, them He also justified : and whom He justified, them He also glorified " (Rom. viii. 28-30). The same conviction is expressed in Ephesians i. 3-14, a passage in which the verbal structure altogether breaks down under the weight of the profound and comprehensive thought which the apostle is seeking to express. These two passages may serve to remind us that Paul's views about the purpose of God are not a specu- lative curiosity, but are closely related to his own personal experience. He could work out his own salvation with fear and trembling only because he was sure that it was God who was working in him both to will and to work for His good pleasure (Phil. ii. 12, 13). Doubtless in developing his conception of the divine purpose in relation to nature and history, to answer the questions of an intellect which was dominated by the necessity of thinking things together, he went far beyond the bounds of personal experience, and some of his conclusions cannot be invested with the certainty which belongs to that personal experience. Yet in all his thinking he was not indulging in abstract speculation, but was driven by the practical necessity to meet the objections which might be offered to the Gospel which he believed and preached, and so to remove doubts and difficulties to which his own faith or the faith of others was exposed. It was in the interests 532 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of the Christian's certainty of salvation in Christ that he developed his conception of the purpose of God. 2. The purpose of God expresses His nature. How then did Paul conceive God ? It was not necessary for him to formulate any doctrine of God ; for he could take for granted the concep- tion of God which he believed to have been given in the Old Testament revelation of God. He assumed also the revelation of God given in Christ. God is Father. It is in Christ God so reveals Himself ; it is in Christ men receive this revelation of God. A question which has much interest for many thinkers to-day would probably have seemed meaningless to him. If he had been asked. Is God's Fatherhood universal or not ? he would doubtless have answered, It is only in Christ that God has made Himself known to me as Father, and it is only in Christ that I can live the life of the child of God. This is the only answer which Christian faith can give. As Father God is love {kyd'Trri), That love is shown in and proved by the sacrifice of Christ : " God com- mendeth His own love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us " (Rom. V. 8). From that love no power can separate the believer. '' I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall THE PURPOSE OF GOD 233 be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord " (viii. 38, 39). The disposition of the love of God in relation to sinners is mercy (gXso?). " God, being rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, quickened us together with Christ" (Eph. ii. 4). The scope of that mercy is universal ; God so works in history, so deals with men, that all may share it. " God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that He might have mercy upon all " (Rom. xi. 32). This merciful love of God becomes personally effective in each man in God's grace (%ap/?). "By grace have ye been saved " (Eph. ii. 5). This grace is the free action of God in man for his salvation, and it is always through Christ, " Being justified freely by His grace through the redemp- tion that is in Christ Jesus " (Rom. iii. 24). So completely is God's grace identified with Christ that in the apostolic benediction the love of God is represented as coming in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and bringing the communion of the Holy Ghost (2 Cor. xiii. 14). 3. If we ask why the grace of God must thus express itself in the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, the answer lies in Paul's conception of the divine wrath (oyp^). This doctrine has already been discussed in the seventh Study, on "The Guilt and the Power of Sin." All that needs now to be noted is that Paul conceived that the revela- 234 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL tion of God's displeasure with, and antagonism to, sin had in previous human history been partial and inadequate. In his forbearance God had passed over the sins done aforetime (Rom. iii, 25 ; compare Acts xvii. 30, " The times of ignor- ance therefore God overlooked "). Now He reveals His wrath (Rom. i. 18). This wrath is finally and perfectly expressed in the sacrifice of Christ which brings salvation. Mercy and wrath, grace and judgment, are expressed by God in the one act of the sacrifice of Christ which redeems man- kind. The righteousness of God includes both mercy and wrath, grace and judgment, as has already been shown in the eighth Study. It does not bear merely a judicial and penal sense, although it does include wrath and judgment^ but is subordinated to, because harmonised with, mercy and grace. We should avoid many a mis- conception if we used, instead of this phrase right- eousness of Godf the phrase holy love, which makes explicit the two elements implicit in it. The holy love of God is holy because it expresses wrath and visits judgment on sin ; but it is love, because it endures the wrath and judgment itself, that it may forgive and save. The purpose of God in human history is consummated in this revelation of the righteousness of God, or, to use the simpler and clearer phrase. His holy love. 4. The first question which at once presses for an answer is : How is this revelation related THE PURPOSE OF GOD 235 to God's former revelation ? From our modern standpoint the problem is not as acute as it was for Paul, who approached it not only with his Jewish, but even his Pharisaic, presuppositions. For us there is only the difference between the lower and the higher stage of moral and religious development ; for Paul there was the antithesis of the law and the Gospel. He asserted the continuity of God's purpose, and so justified the consistency of God's character, by offering two considerations. First of all, the Gospel was the fulfilment of the promise made to Abraham, which was antecedent to, and so could not be superseded by, the law. " A covenant confirmed beforehand by God, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of none effect " (Gal. iii. 17). Not only so, but Abraham himself, the recipient of the promise, was by his faith in the promise of God saved in the same way as are those who by faith accept its fulfilment in Christ. " Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness " (Rom. iv. 3), Secondly, the law which " came in beside " dis- charged a necessary historical function in relation to the fulfilment of the promise. In provoking and condemning sin it made man more fully aware of his need of the grace of God, and so the law was a preparation for the Gospel (see the tenth Study, on " The End of the Law "). In this 236 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL argument there is much that is remote from our present modes of thought. The mere priority in time of the promise to the law, for us proves nothing. That the law was intended to provoke and multiply transgression is for us an altogether doubtful assumption, although we may admit that restraint of itself may be morally hurtful. The argument, translated into modem terms, is this: that moral discipline is necessary to fit men for the filial relationship to God, and that it is this re- lationship which is the end of God's dealings with men, while the preparatory discipline is but a means. If God be holy love, that is, the personal perfection which seeks self - communication to man, then His ultimate relation to man, which is only finally realised after much preparation, is expressed not in the law, but in the Gospel. 5. Granted that the Gospel as antecedent to the law must supersede it, when it has discharged its preparatory function, the second question which emerges is this. The law was the exclusive possession of God's chosen people : the Gospel is being offered to all mankind. How can such an extension of the divine purpose be explained ? Paul is again ready with his answer. " Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also ? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteous- ness. How then was it reckoned ? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision ? Not in THE PURPOSE OF GOD 237 circumcision, but in uncircumcision : and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while he was in uncircumcision : that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be in uncircumcision, that righteousness might be reckoned unto them; and the father of circum- cision to them who not only are of the circum- cision, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision" (Rom. iv. 9-12), What does this mean ? Surely that the moral and spiritual dis- position which welcomes the Gospel, and receives the grace of God offered in the Gospel, is not in- separable from any national organisation or racial peculiarity. All men are capable of faith, and so the Gospel of the grace of God can be offered to all men. The Rabbinism of the form of Paul's argument should not hide from us its essential soundness ; it was as man, not as Jew, that Abraham believed. The Gospel appeals to a universal human capacity. 6. An objection may suggest itself, which was not present to Paul's mind, and yet to meet which he offers us the materials. If Abraham had this capacity of faith, and the Gentiles too possess it, why in the case of Abraham's descendants according to the flesh was any interposition of the law necessary ? or if necessary for them, how can it be shown unnecessary for the Gentiles ? Among the Gentiles too Paul recognised a pre- 238 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL paration for the Gospel similar to, if far less adequate than, that of the law for the Jew. The revelation of God was universal. Paul rebuked the idolatry of the people at Lystra by summon- ing them to " turn from these vain things unto the living God," who " left not Himself without witness, in that He did good, and gave you from heaven rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness " (Acts xiv. 15-17). At Athens he declared God's immanence in and affinity with man as the reason for man's feeling after God that he might find Him (xvii. 27, 28). In the first chapter of Romans he describes God's revelation of Himself in nature (vers. 19, 20), and in the second His revelation in conscience (vers. 14, 16). He maintains that revelation to have been full enough to leave no excuse for the idol- atry and corruption of heathenism, and adequate to produce the conviction of sin in the Gentiles which the law was intended to produce in the Jew. The bondage to the rudiments (or elements) of this world of the Gentiles was a state of tutelage even as that of the Jews under the law, the tutor unto Christ (Gal. iv. 1-3, iii. 24). The study of the religions of the world does not bear out Paul's assertion of so full a revela- tion of God, and therefore of so inexcusable an ignorance of man. It does present to us a religious evolution, in which the conception of the divine becomes more personal, spiritual, and ethical, THE PURPOSE OF GOD 239 and in which even there is a tendency to conceive the divine as unity. The modern missionary enterprise has, however, proved conclusively that no race is incapable of the moral and religious response which the Gospel of the grace of God not only demands, but evokes. We may, although on other grounds, share Paul's conviction of the universality of the Gospel, the world-wide scope of God's purpose. 7. While recognising a preparation for the Gospel among the Gentiles, Paul, as a pious and patriotic Jew, does not ignore or deny the his- torical privileges of the Jew. He answers his own question clearly and boldly : " What advantage then hath the Jew, or what is the profit of circum- cision ? Much every way : first of all, that they were intrusted with the oracles of God " (Rom. iii. 1, 2). The authority of the Old Testament as the revelation of the mind and will of God is throughout assumed. A fuller statement of the privileges of the Jew he gives in a passage in which the impassioned patriotism bursts into a doxology. " For I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh : who are Israelites ; whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises ; whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. 240 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Amen " (ix. 3-5. It is not necessary for the present purpose to discuss whether the doxology is in this rendering rightly ascribed to Christ or not. See the sixth Study). The appUcation of the Higher Criticism to the Old Testament need not lead us to deny this appreciation of the unique vocation and function of Israel. That this people, so blessed of God, should be refusing the Gospel, and so running the risk of their rejection by God — this was the saddest and hardest problem of the divine providence for Paul. He boldly wrestles with it in Romans ix.-xi. The writer craves the indulgence of the reader for quoting a few sentences he has elsewhere written on this subject: " The Gospel which Paul preached had been accepted by many Gentiles, but had been rejected by most Jews ; this might seem a serious objection against it. If the people to whom the promises were given had not welcomed it, surely it could not be their fulfilment as it claimed to be. Or, if the Gospel was indeed the fulfilment of the promises, had not God failed to keep His word to His chosen people, whose place was now being taken by the Gentiles? If God were faithful. His fulfil- ment of His promises would be surely of such a kind as would commend it to those who had received the promises, and would not, as Paul's Gospel did, arouse their antagonism. But if God Himself allowed His people to be thus offended by the Gospel, His character seemed compromised. THE PURPOSE OF GOD 241 Paul seeks to show both that his Gospel is true, even although the Jewish people as a whole had rejected it, and that their rejection does not involve God's unfaithfulness to His promises. The argument consists of three main propositions : (1) God is absolutely free to elect or reject indi- viduals or nations according to His own will (ix. 1-29) ; (2) the Jewish people by its unbelief has deserved its present exclusion from the bless- ings of the Gospel (ix. 30-x. 21) ; (3) this ex- clusion is partial and temporary, as it is God's purpose ultimately to include both Jew and Gentile in His grace (xi.) " {Romans (in Century Bible), pp. 205-6). 8. In the first part of his argument, after affirm- ing his impassioned patriotism in a passage already quoted, he shows how in the history of the chosen people the principle of God's unconditional election has been again and again asserted, and repels the charge of injustice by appealing to God's own words, in which He claims freedom in all His acts. While rebuking the arrogance of the creature in questioning the acts of the Creator, he blunts the edge of his argument somewhat by showing that God has used His freedom to show mercy rather than judgment. The form of the argument is not beyond criticism ; Paul's exegesis cannot be accepted as strictly historical. We must confine ourselves to the substance of it, and ask ourselves whether we can accept i6 242 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL such a doctrine of election even on his authority. We do not escape the difficulties by the assump- tion that Paul is here dealing with the part played by nations in history, and not the fate of individ- uals hereafter. The problem is undoubtedly the temporal rejection of the Jewish nation ; but in his argument Paul asserts God's freedom in elect- ing or rejecting individuals. In his phrases, " vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction," and " vessels of mercy which He afore prepared unto glory," he is concerned with individuals ; it is certain he would not have accepted the limitation of the divine freedom which his modern apologists seek to impose. What we must not forget, how- ever, is that the whole passage is an argumentum ad hominem. Jewish arrogance is rebuked by an appeal, not only to the Scriptures recognised as authoritative, but to the conception of God, supposed to be derived from these Scriptures, which was accepted as orthodox. It is not the Christian conception of God which dominates the discussion. It must be noted also that the argument itself breaks down. Paul has to admit that God does not use His freedom as, according to the argument. He might. He shrinks from affirming that God fitted the vessels of wrath unto destruction, and admits that God endured them with much long-suffering. He expressly declares that God prepared unto glory the vessels of mercy, and that it was to make known the THE PURPOSE OF GOD 243 riches of His glory upon these that He suffered those (vers. 22, 23). The metaphor of the potter itself cancels the argument. The potter does not use the clay wilfully, but makes of each lump what it is fitted to become. The subsequent stages of the argument really set aside its com- mencement. Not the will of God arbitrarily exer- cised is the cause of Israel's present condition, but its own unbelief. But God's purpose is not merely to punish sin or reward goodness (the ethical conception) ; it is to bless all (the evangelical conception). Thus does Paul himself escape from " the Jewish entanglements " by which his pre- vious thought had been held, and into which he was sometimes forced back, to meet the thought of his opponents, into the genuinely Christian conception of God. We do not need to burden his Gospel, still less our reason and conscience, with a doctrine which sprang from and bears the marks of controversy, which he himself could not con- sistently maintain, and which he abandoned as he advanced to the hope his Christian faith in- spired. 9. Paul's proof that the Jews have failed through unbelief may be very briefly stated. The fact of their unbelief is due to their mistaken zeal to establish their own righteousness instead of accept- ing the righteousness God freely offers to Jew and Gentile alike in the Gospel, which supersedes the law, on the simple and easy condition of faith. 244 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL This mistaken zeal, is, however, blameworthy, as the Jews have refused to listen to the Gospel itself, and to take heed to the prophetic warnings against unbelief. It may be, if Paul had remem- bered how signal an act of the grace of Christ was necessary to convert himself from unbelief to faith, his judgment of his own people might have been kinder and gentler. He who is firmly con- vinced himself finds it hard to make due allowance for the difficulties others feel ; and we may even, in regard to the apostle's argument, remind our- selves of the Master's warning, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." Especially if we recall the intolerable wrongs which Christians have inflicted on Jews, shall we gladly turn from Paul's judg- ment on, to his hope for, God's chosen people. 10. This hope, which his piety and his patriotism alike inspired, he supports by an argument in four parts, (i.) " At this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace " (xi. 5). Not all have fallen through unbelief, (ii.) " The casting away of them is the reconciling of the world " (ver. 15). It was the unbelief of the Jews which led Paul to turn from them to the Gentiles. It is not at all improbable that, if the primitive Church had been more successful in Judaism, not only would the Gentile mission have been delayed, but Jewish exclusiveness would have so asserted itself as to make that mission more difficult, (iii.) " If the first-fruit is THE PURPOSE OF GOD 245 holy, so is the lump : and if the root is holy, so are the branches " (ver. 16). For Paul the ancestry of the Jewish people appeared a guarantee of their ultimate recovery. While, on the one hand, the persistency of Judaism in its racial characteristics, its constancy in belief and custom, seems to lend some force to their argument; on the other hand, the antagonism between Jew and Christian has so intensified, the absorption of the Jew in secular gains has so increased, that the present condition of Judaism appears rather to contradict Paul's expectations. If Israel as a whole is saved, it will not be due mainly to its heredity, (iv.) "God hath shut up all unto dis- obedience, that He might have mercy upon all " (ver. 32). Paul assumes the universality of God's purpose of grace : to its fulfilment the present rejection and the final restoration of the Jews are both necessary. The disobedience of the Jews was necessary that the Gospel might be offered to the Gentiles ; the faith of the Gentiles will be the means of overcoming the unbelief of the Jews. Here is prophecy which we can neither confirm nor deny. That God should desire the salvation of all mankind is a conviction rooted in our Christian faith. However improbable from our present standpoint the conversion of the Jews may appear, it is not an unreasonable hope that the nation, to which in the highest things mankind owes so much, will not as a whole be 246 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL shut out from the Kingdom of God. The condition of that conversion may at first sight seem even less probable. Will Christendom ever be so truly and fully Christian in its relation to the Jews as to remove probably the greatest hindrance to their faith ? A Christian Church in which God's purpose is perfectly fulfilled will surely irresistibly attract God's ' ' ancient heritage." Whether Paul's hope, which we may make our own, will be literally fulfilled or not, it is one which springs, not from his Jewish patriotism alone, but also from his Christian faith, 11, As God had chosen the Jewish people, and would not repent of His choice, so Paul believed God had chosen the Christian Church, and in the membership of that Church the Christian believer. Paul mentions as a cause of thanks- giving " that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth " (2 Thess. ii. 13), Christians are foreknown and foreordained (Rom. viii. 29), elect (ver. 33), and " called according to God's purpose " (ver. 28). This is " the eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord " (Eph. iii. 11) " before the foimdation of the world " (i. 4). This truth is taught to give assurance to Christian faith. The relation in which the believer stands to Christ is not " the fleeting fashion of an hour," but has its source in the very being of God. It is a perversion of Paul's intention THE PURPOSE OF GOD 247 to infer from his teaching, for the sake of logical consistency, that as God elects some, so He repro- bates others. It has already been shown how the argument of Romans ix,, in which he does assert God's unconditional freedom to accept or reject individual men, breaks down, and how he himself modifies and corrects it. According to his plain teaching, as in the tenth chapter, failure to be saved is due to unbelief. The individual believer's certainty that he has been chosen of God unto salvation is not to the exclusion of any other man, for God's purpose of salvation is universal. " The living God " is " the Saviour of all men " (1 Tim. iv. 10) ; God " willeth that all men should be saved, and come to the know- ledge of the truth " (ii. 4) ; " God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that He might have mercy upon all " (Rom. xi. 32). This is Paul's final conclusion in regard to the purpose of God. Will that purpose be absolutely accomplished ? In the previous Study an answer was offered to that question. There are passages in Paul's writings that, taken apart, appear to teach " the larger hope " of universalism. But this hope cannot, even by an apostle's authority, even if we were sure Paul meant to teach it, be turned into a dogma, for there are difliculties in holding it. Nevertheless, the interpretation Paul does give to the purpose of God may inspire certainty, con- fidence, courage. 248 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL It is infinite and eternal Love which is and works in all, and through all, and over all. Human history is not left to the confusions and con- flicts of men only, but is controlled by a wise, holy, and gracious will. In Jesus Christ God is made manifest, and it is His grace that is the clue to the labyrinth of life. A family of God is in the making, and even nature, with all its miseries and pains, will be transformed by the glory of God's fulfilled promise. " The creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God " (Rom. viii. 21). How and when we know not ; for we walk by faith, not sight. Yet even here and now we can, as Paul did, keep our trust, and do our task better and more bravely because we have this hope. Such practical rein- forcement is the justification of such speculative thought. XIII THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 1. The purpose of God is fulfilled in the individual believer by the presence and the power of the Holy Spirit, This conception is not new in the Christian revelation, still less new in the teaching of Paul ; although the filial relation between God and man constituted in Christ gives to this immanent activity of God a fresh content, and Paul, sharing the com- mon Christian tradition in regard to this doctrine, gives it a fresh interpretation. In the Old Testa- ment the Spirit represents God's manifold activity in nature and in man. Any special endowment of strength, skill, wisdom, or insight is attributed to the work of the Spirit in man. While generally the emphasis is laid on what are conceived to be supernatural endowments, yet the working of the Spirit of God in the moral and religious life is recognised. The Psalmist prays for inward renewal — " Create in me a clean heart, O God ; And renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from Thy presence ; And take not Thy Holy Spirit from me." (Psalm li. 10, ii.) 250 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL The prophet complains of Israel that " they re- belled and grieved His Holy Spirit " (Isa. Ixiii. 10). The naore characteristic Old Testament doctrine is found, however, in Joel ii. 28, "I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh ; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions." The prophet rather than the saint is the man filled with the Spirit. 2. In the Book of Acts the doctrine of the Holy Spirit receives great prominence. While we may detect Luke's personal peculiarity in the representa- tion given, yet there can be little doubt that in this respect he was in close sympathy with the primitive Church, and its distinctive experience was congenial to him. The passage just quoted from Joel, to which Peter refers in his defence on the Day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 14-21), strikes the keynote of this experience. It is the extraordinary, miracu- lous, supernatural which receives almost exclusive attention. The speaking with other tongues is the characteristic evidence of the Spirit's operation at Pentecost (ver. 4). By the " laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given " to the converts in Samaria, and Simon thought that the gift to endow with such supernatural power could be bought (viii, 18, 19). " The Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more " (ver. 39). The disciples whom Paul met at Ephesus not only had not in believing been THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 251 conscious of this supernatural endowment, but were even ignorant of its bestowal. But " when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came upon them ; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied " (xix. 1-7). Generally the work of the Spirit is connected with the charismata, such as speaking with tongues and prophesying. A guidance of the Church by the Spirit, however, is asserted in the separation of Paul and Barnabas for missionary work (xiii. 2). Paul and his com- panions are represented as controlled in their movements by the Holy Ghost, called also " the Spirit of Jesus " (xvi. 6, 7). The psychological study of religious revivals makes intelligible and credible some of the phenomena. Dr. Bartlet, in his Commentary on Acts (Century Bible), has suggested that, when the term Holy Spirit is used without the article, it is intended to describe the human condition and not the divine agency, and that the human condition might be fitly expressed by the term " holy enthusiasm." The certainty of the Risen Lord and of the salvation assured in Him filled the primitive community with such abounding religious vitality as is often witnessed in a religious revival. There was an intense emo- tional disturbance ; and this was then, as it has often been since, accompanied by unusual pheno- mena, such as ecstatic utterances, impassioned prayer and praise, visions. The extraordinary features are not, there is good reason to hold, of 252 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL an essentially supernatural or miraculous character, although they must appear so to all who have not investigated the abnormal psychological conditions on which these depend. What is supernatural is the reality of the contact of the human spirit with the Divine Spirit, which gives to the religious revival its value and efficacy in changing human lives. That the Holy Spirit of God was present and potent in the primitive Christian community, as He has again and again been in the history of the Christian Church, is a fact which need not be doubted or denied. The apostolic Church laid emphasis on those features which seem to us now less significant ; and Luke, who was a man of his own time, has in his record possibly even exaggerated this emphasis. 3. Paul too shared the common belief of the time and place. For him too speaking with tongues, prophesyings, visions, were the distinctive gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. xii, 9, 10). Although he is reluctant to make the claim, yet he knew him- self to be '7rpBV[jijccTiz6g (1 Cor. ii. 15 ; Gal. vi. 1), a Spirit-filled man in this respect also. He had " visions and revelations of the Lord " (2 Cor. xii. 1). He knew " such a man (whether in the body, or apart from the body, I know not ; God knoweth), how that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter " (vers. 3 and 4). He thanks God that he can speak with tongues more than all the THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 253 Corinthian converts, who were so proud of their endowment (1 Cor. xiv. 18). Among the things Christ wrought through him he reckons what was done " in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Holy Ghost " (Rom. xv. 19). Great as Paul was, he did not so transcend his environ- ment as to be unaffected by it. He not only shared the " holy enthusiasm " of the primitive community, as he shared the common faith in the Crucified and Risen Christ, which was its source ; but he too caught the contagion of the abnormal psychical conditions which were its accompani- ments. This does not show any such mental instability in him as justifies any suspicion or distrust of his general mental sanity. We need not assume any disease or defect in him to explain this religious sensibility. Nor need it surprise us that he did not reach the modern scientific view of these phenomena. 4. He does display an exceptional moral and religious insight, however, in the estimate he formed of the value of these charismata. It is to our great advantage that the condition of the Church in Corinth led him to discuss this question fully (1 Cor. xii.-xiv.). First of all, he insists that it is in the confession and not the denial of Jesus as Lord that the Spirit is manifested (xii. 3). Secondly, he recognises the diversities of gifts of the same Spirit, and reckons among these wisdom, knowledge, faith, as well as gifts of healing, work- 254 biUUlES OF TAUL AND HIS GOSPEL ings of miracles, prophecy, divers kinds of tongues, etc. (vers. 4-11). He thus at the outset corrects the overestimation of the one class of gifts current in Corinth. Thirdly, he shows, by the analogy of the body with its many members and their varied functions, the mutual dependence of all believers in the Christian Church, whatever their gifts may be, and their duty of reciprocal service (vers. 12-31). Fourthly, he offers " a still more excellent way " than even the use of the gifts for the common good. This is love, without which no service has any value, which alone is capable of meeting every demand that can be made upon it, which is not imperfect, and so temporary, as many of these gifts are, and which with faith and hope alone abides, while it is greatest of the three (xiii.). To this general principle that love is better than any gifts, and alone gives worth to their use, Paul gives a special application, due probably to the local cir- cumstances (xiv.). He compares speaking with tongues, or ecstatic utterances, with prophecy, or impassioned speech for illumination, edification, correction of the hearers. As the first, unless interpreted, is not generally intelligible, and so sdifies only the speakers, it is always to be subordi- nated to the second, which brings advantage to ill. There is to be such self-restraint in the use of the gifts as will secure in the common worship the greatest usefulness for all. " Let all things be lone decently and in order " (ver. 40). While in THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 255 the popular opinion within the Church, probably not in Corinth alone, the value of a spiritual gift depended on its unusual character, on the wonder it excited, the test Paul applied was the purpose served ; that is best which does most good to all. It is further to be observed that even when Paul is driven by the depreciation to which he was exposed by his enemies to assert his abundant possession of these gifts, he is apologetic in his tone : " I must needs glory, though it is not ex- pedient " (2 Cor. xii. 1). He recognises that there is a danger of pride in the possession, that he might have been exalted overmuch, had God not taken a means of keeping him humble (ver. 7). He does not base his apostolic authority on any of these endowments ; he does not derive his message from any of these visions and revelations ; he seems expressly to distinguish the appearance of Jesus to him on the way to Damascus, which called him to and fitted him for his ministry, from these subsequent experiences ; he appeals in his teaching to the words of the Lord Jesus, or to his own possession of the Spirit of the Lord. His spiritual discernment saved him from any perilous over-valuation of the charismata, 5. This is, however, only the negative aspect of his doctrine of the Spirit; the positive has still greater value. It is in sanctification (aytufffji^og) that the characteristic work of the Holy Spirit {^nvfJbcc aytov) is to be found. Believers are 256 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL chosen of God "unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit " (2 Thess. ii. 13). In the ninth Study, on " The Sanctification of Man," it was necessary to give a brief summary of Paul's teaching on this subject ; but here his doctrine may be somewhat more fully expounded. No man is a Christian who does not possess the Spirit. " If any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His" (Rom. viii. 9), As the Spirit is described as of Christ as well as of God, not only are the functions of the living Christ and of the indwelling Spirit not always clearly distinguished, but even in one passage Christ and the Spirit appear to be identified. Christian theology has with great subtlety defined the order of salvation, and assigned to each person in the Godhead His share in the work, but Paul shows no such care. He mentions sanctification before justification, and joins Christ and the Spirit as fellow-workers in both. " But ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God " (1 Cor. vi. 11). The operation of the Spirit in the inward transformation of man is so inseparable from, follows so inevitably on, the contemplation of Christ with the eye of faith, that Christ may be said to possess the Spirit, even to be the Spirit. " Now the Lord is the Spirit ; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 257 same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit " (2 Cor. iii. 17, 18). There is no formal identification here of Christ and the Spirit, as Paul elsewhere clearly distinguishes the one from the other ; but what is asserted is the in- variable sequence of faith in Christ and renewal by the Spirit. 6. As closely as the Spirit is connected with Christ, so clearly is His activity in man dis- guished from the flesh. This opposition is fully described in Galatians v. 16-26. To walk by the Spirit is not to " fulfil the lust of the flesh" (ver. 16) ; to be of Christ Jesus is to " have crucified the flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof " (ver. 24), " For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh ; for these are contrary the one to the other " (ver. 17). This is not, however, a metaphysical dualism of the spiritual and the material ; for on the one hand the works of the flesh are not merely sensual sins, but include " enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, divisions, heresies, envyings " (vers. 20, 21), and on the other, the fruit of the Spirit embraces temperance, or self- control in respect of the animal appetites. We need not here consider the works of the flesh ; but in the fruit of the Spirit we may see Paul's sketch of the ideal Christian character : " love, joy, peace, long- suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meek- ness, temperance " (vers. 22, 23). If we fill the first word " love " with the content Paul gives I? 258 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL to it in 1 Corinthians xiii., we shall realise how large an ideal this is. The spiritual man has insight into the mind of Christ. " He that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man " (1 Cor. ii. 15). His is the highest wisdom. The spiritual man has sympathy for, and gives succour to, the weak. " Brethren, even if a man be overtaken in any trespass, ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of meekness, looking to thyself, lest thou also be tempted " (Gal, vi. 1). He fulfils the law of Christ in bearing the burden of others (ver. 2). As he will also bear his own burden (ver. 5), surely to his temperance and wisdom he adds justice of the most exacting character. The courage of the spiritual man is in a sublime form expressed in Paul's confident con- fession in Romans viii. 37-39. To these virtues of pagan ethics are joined the three Christian graces, all of which, and not love only, Paul reckoned as fruit of the Spirit. As a metaphysical dualism has been ascribed to Paul, it is necessary to lay special emphasis on what he has to say about the sanctification of the body. To the sensuality of heathenism, from which even Christian believers found it hard to gain deliverance, Paul opposes the consecration of the body to Christ. " The body is not for fornication, but for the Lord " (1 Cor. vi. 13). He asks the Corinthians with, one cannot but feel, some warmth of feeling, " Know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Ghost which THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 259 is in you, which ye have from God ? " (ver. 19). As the temple of God by His Spirit, '\the body is holy " (iii. 17). Sanetification by the Spirit em- braces the whole personality. 7, It is by the operation of the same Spirit that the sanctified personality is placed in a social environment appropriate to its nature. In 1 Corinthians xii. we have already the con- ception of the Church as a body, endowed with a diversity of gifts for the common good by the one Spirit, This idea is more fully developed in Ephesians. In Christ Jesus the ancient enmity of Jew and Gentile is removed ; their reconciliation to God is also their reconciliation to one another. " We both have our access in one Spirit unto the Father " (ii. 18). " Upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets " in " Christ Jesus " as " the chief corner-stone," " each several building, fitly framed together, groweth into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom also ye are builded together for a habitation of God in the Spirit " (vers. 20-22). Such a reconciliation of men in God may be fully regarded as the crown of the Spirit's work in the sanetification of in- dividual men. By the Spirit the sanctified per- sonality will at the resurrection be endowed with its proper body. The present operation of the Spirit in the moral and religious change in man is the promise and the pledge of this change of the natural to the spiritual body. " If the 260 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, He that raised Christ Jesus from the dead shall quicken also your mortal bodies through His Spirit that dwelleth in you " (Rom. viii. 11). That this transformation of " the body of our humiliation that it may be conformed to the body of His glory " is elsewhere ascribed to the Lord Jesus Christ (Phil. iii. 21) is but another instance of the close connection in Paul's thought between the work of Christ and of the Spirit. 8. Turning from the operation of the Spirit in the moral character, the social environment, and even the physical organism of man, we must fix our attention on what was for Paul possibly of primary importance, the religious consciousness. The characteristic of the Christian religious con- sciousness is that of sonship ; the Spirit of God is connected with this filial consciousness, not as the cause of the relation, but as the evidence and assurance of the fact in consciousness. What constitutes a man a son of God is faith in Jesus Christ. " Ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus " (Gal. iii. 26). An immediate consequence of the relationship is the conscious- ness of it through the Spirit. " Because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father " (iv. 6). A certain evidence of the relationship is the guid- ance of the Spirit. " As many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God " (Rom. THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 261 viii. 14). The Spirit so guiding is, amid all fears, doubts, and questions of the soul, a constant assurance of sonship. " The Spirit Himself bear- eth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God " (ver. 16). This life of sonship is exer- cised and maintained by prayer ; and even in this most intimate communion of man with God, the Spirit's help is experienced. " In like manner the Spirit also helpeth our infirmity ; for we know not how to pray as we ought ; but the Spirit Himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered ; and He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because He maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God " (vers. 26, 27), The Christian himself cannot clearly understand, cannot fully express the yearnings and strivings of this new life in God ; but God's Spirit does understand, and can express in His immediate relation to and intimate communion with God all that baffles human powers. God satisfies the aspirations He by His own Spirit inspires. How constant is the presence and varied the activity of the Spirit in the believer may be proved by considering the terms applied. " The Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin and death " (ver. 2). Chris- tians " walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit" (ver. 4). "The Spirit of God dwelleth in you" (ver. 9). The sons of God "are led by 262 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL the Spirit of God " (ver. 14). " The Spirit Him- self beareth witness with our spirit " (ver. 16). The spiritual man speaks, " not in words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Spirit teacheth " (1 Cor. ii. 13). All the varied gifts in the Church " worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as He will " (xii. 11). This Spirit in its manifold present workings is the promise of the fulfilment of the Christian's hope; we "have the first-fruits of the Spirit " (Rom. viii. 23). It is evident that the whole " inner life " of the believer is embraced by " the communion of the Holy Ghost," through which is realised in each man " the love of God " which has been revealed to mankind in " the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ " (2 Cor. xiii. 14). 9. There are three questions regarding the Holy Spirit to which we must seek an answer — the nature of the Spirit, the relation of the Spirit to Christ, and the distinction of the Spirit from the spiritual life of man. Paul conceives man as body, soul, and spirit ; but soul and spirit are not as distinct as body and soul. Man is soul in his individuality, he is spirit as dependent on God. There is one passage in which Paul appears to think of the Holy Spirit as being in God what spirit is in man. " For who among men knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of the man, which is in him ? even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God " (1 Cor. ii. 11). THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 263 At first sight the words seem to describe the Spirit as God's self -consciousness ; but the context shows that it is no such speculative question about which Paul is concerned. What the wisdom of the world could not discover, "the deep things of God," the Spirit reveals to believers; for, as a man knows himself better than any other can know him, so the Spirit of God knows God better than any human sages can. Speculative con- structions of the Trinity can find no apostolic support in this passage. 10. It must be admitted that the word spirit is used sometimes in a vague sense. When Christ is described as TrvBufjua, ZfooTCOiovv (1 Cor. xv. 45) He is not identified with the Holy Spirit ; but is thought of as the spiritual in contrast with Adam the natural or the psychical man. So also when the covenant of the spirit is contrasted with the covenant of the letter (ypa///|U;a, 2 Cor. iii. 6) it is not the Holy Spirit that is directly referred to ; but rather a covenant inward in the higher life of man, as opposed to a covenant outward controlling only his acts. In the closing verses of this passage (17 and 18) this vaguer sense of the term is abandoned, and the Holy Spirit is referred to as the power of the new life in man, but is not, as has been already shown in the previous discussion, actually identified with Christ. But the passage does raise the question : Is the Spirit's operation anything else than the working 264 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of the Risen Christ Himself ? for so closely are the gifts and fruits of the Spirit connected with faith in His grace. It is impossible for us to distin- guish in our experience the workings of the Spirit and of the Living Christ ; and it seems irreverent for us to attempt to go beyond what experience testifies to speculate about the differences of the persons in the Godhead ; but the language used by Paul about the manifold workings of the Spirit forbids the assumption that he thought of the Spirit as merely the subjective influence and impression of the truth and grace of Christ. It is God Himself, in this activity distinguished both from the Father revealed and the Son reveal- ing, who enters with fulness of power into the innermost life of all who receive this revelation, so that the intimate communion of the soul with Christ becomes an immediate habitation and operation of God Himself in man. The fellow- ship of the Spirit makes the love of God through the grace of Christ the very life of God Himself in man. 11. As it is impossible to separate the work of the Spirit and of Christ, so we cannot distinguish the Spirit's action from the spiritual activities of man. Those who think they do honour to the Spirit by attempting to conceive the person- ality of the Spirit seem essentially to misconceive the Spirit's work. By the Spirit God's life be- comes man's, and man's life is in God ; and the THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT 265 attempt consciously to objectify the Spirit is to exclude Him from His habitation in the soul of man. But, on the other hand, we must avoid the still greater error of supposing that in the Christian life there is no Spirit's action — only man's spiritual activity. At its truest, tenderest, holiest, the soul is most conscious of its insuffi- ciency, and that its sufficiency is only in God. It is surely to misconceive God as well as man to doubt or deny His personal immanence in His Spirit in the higher life of man. Wherever truth is thought, or love cherished, or holiness willed, there God is and works. This does not mean quietism, human inaction that God may act- As Ritschl has properly taught, there is no spiritual good without spiritual desire and effort ; God's best gifts do not fall into folded hands. Paul, who often speaks as if God by His Spirit did all, in his own example displayed a spiritual energy which most Christian men can admire rather than imitate. 12. Because Paul describes the Spirit as power from God working in man, we are not warranted in holding, as some expositors do, that he con- ceived the Spirit as a physical energy, or even a material substance of the same kind, though in operation opposed to the flesh. For Paul God is personal, and man is personal, and God's working in man cannot be conceived as less than personal. As has already been indicated, the Spirit is so related 266 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL both to God and man that it is impossible to em- phasise distinct personality. Mistaken, however, is the view that the Spirit can be simply identified with the common consciousness of the Christian community, or the motives which result from that consciousness. For Paul the Spirit is an objective divine reality, however intimately related to the Christian's subjective human experience. Once more, as has been fully shown, while Paul shared the common belief regarding the super- natural gifts of the Spirit, this is not the distinctive feature in his teaching. The Spirit as the Spirit of God is supernatural, but He works not only or mainly in extraordinary phenomena, but in the inward renewal of the soul. That Paul held explicitly the doctrine of the Spirit formulated in the oecumenical creeds we have no warrant to maintain. That he was dependent both on the teaching of the Old Testament and the belief of the primitive community may be freely conceded. What must not be overlooked, and needs to be emphasised, is that so intense and original an ex- perience as his was gave him an insight which has enabled him to contribute something fresh, and true and worthy as it is fresh, to Christian thought on this theme. XIV THE BODY OF CHRIST 1. The love of God the Father through the grace of Christ the Saviour and the Lord in the fellow- ship of the Holy Spirit is received and is responded to by man in faith, hope, and love. Over against Pharisaic Judaism Paul maintained the thesis that man is justified, not by the works of the law, but by faith ; over against Judaisers in the Church he asserted that man is justified by faith alone. Works as a condition of salvation are neither alternative nor complementary to faith. What he understands by the righteousness of God which faith accepts we have already seen ; now, we must consider the nature of faith itself. It does mean trust in God's grace as revealed in Christ, an accept- ance of the forgiveness of sin that has come to man in His Cross. It might thus appear to be only " a passive acquiescence in a vicarious righteous- ness." The weakness of Evangelism has at certain periods of its history been that this was the current conception of faith, Antinomianism, moral laxity, or even licence, has been the consequence, wherever 268 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL faith has been emptied of moral content, and has been impoverished to mean assent to a plan of salvation, acceptance of the safety and the comfort the assurance of God's forgiveness gives without any corresponding and resulting moral change. Even at the Reformation and in Protestant dog- matics generally there has been the danger of such a view. What saves Paul's conception from such a peril is that he conceives faith as a personal relation to a personal Saviour, It is not a doctrine on the one hand, or assent thereto on the other hand, which saves ; it is man's dependence on, communion with, and submission to Christ as Saviour. The whole personality of man is exer- cised in faith ; mind, heart, and will alike claim, enjoy, and use what God in Christ offers. Man's inmost life is therein expressed. ' ' With the heart man believeth unto righteousness " (Rom, X. 10). When the inward man is strengthened with power through the Spirit of the Son of God, Christ dwells in the heart by faith, and man is rooted and grounded in love (Eph. iii, 16, 17). Faith energises in love (Gal. v. 6). There is a " work of faith " as well as a " labour of love," and an " endurance of hope " (1 Thess. i. 3) ; and the " work of faith " is companion to the " good pleasure of goodness " (2 Thess. i. 11). What the Gospel demands is " obedience of faith " (Rom, xvi. 26), The guilt of the Jews was that they did not subject themselves to the righteous- THE BODY OF CHRIST 269 ness of God which faith receives (x. 3). Disbelief is due to pleasure in unrighteousness (2 Thess. ii. 12). Faith begins in the centre of the person- ality, the heart (Rom. x. 10) ; it reaches out to the circumference of the whole life, for in the Christian man " whatsoever is not of faith is sin " (xiv. 23). It is the whole personality of Christ which this faith receives, the Risen Lord as well as the Crucified Saviour, for it is both crucifixion and resurrection with them ; it is such a union that life itself is nothing else than Christ (Phil. i. 21). 2. In apparent contradiction to this representa- tion of faith as the union of the whole man to the whole Christ, so that the human is taken up into, without being lost in, the divine, is the prominence given to hope in Paul's letters. If the Christian lives in Christ, because he has been crucified and has risen with Christ, surely he has all he can desire or expect. It is not only at the close of his Christian experience that Paul so identifies his life with Christ's. The declaration of Philippians i. 21 : " To me to live is Christ," has its counterpart in Galatians ii. 20 : "I live; and yet no longer I, but Christ liveth in me." Such a faith must surely be sufficient ; yet Paul affirms : " For by hope were we saved " (Rom. viii. 24). This state- ment is not sufficiently explained by the fact that Paul cherished the common apostolic expectation of the Second Coming of Christ. He never aban- doned that expectation, although he became less 270 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL certain of his survival in the fiesh to witness that great day ; for him that expectation meant the full deliverance of the believer from sin's penalty in death through the resurrection, and also the victory of Christ Himself over all His foes. For many believers to-day the spiritual presence of Christ, as Paul so intensely experienced it, and the gradual progress of the Kingdom of God on earth, which is suggested by some of the parables of Jesus, but of which neither Paul nor any of the other apostles had any conception, have entirely supplanted this apostolic expectation. Not so with Paul. There is no evidence whatever that he ever thought of the spiritual Presence as a fulfilment of the promise of the Second Advent in power and glory. Much as that spiritual Presence was to him, it did not give him all he hoped for in Christ ; for does he not say, " Whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord," and, " We are willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be at home with the Lord " (2 Cor. v. 6, 8) ? It is for this reason that even though for him to live was Christ, to die was gain. A clearer vision, a closer communion, a fuller service, was what he looked for. He felt very keenly the pains, sorrows, losses, and mysteries of this earthly life. For him the creation was " subjected to vanity," and waited to be " de- livered from the bondage of corruption." This earth was not for him the treasure-house or the pleasure-ground it is for so many ; for what he THE BODY OF CHRIST 271 witnessed was " the whole creation groaning and travaihng in pain together " (Rom. viii. 18-22), and even the behever groaned within himself, waiting for his adoption, the redemption of his body (ver. 23). It is difl&cult for us to realise how great a problem human mortality was to Paul, and how bright a hope the assurance of resurrec- tion. It is with reference to this deliverance from death that believers are described as the children who have not yet entered into the full possession of their inheritance. They are now heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ, now suffer- ing with Him in order afterward to be glorified (vers. 17). Thus Paul's faith was necessarily com- pleted by his hope ; for the perfect Christian good still lay in the future. 3. With faith and hope Paul allies love, and gives to it the first place. Why he declares love the greatest is a question not hard to answer. Both faith and hope are receptive graces ; love is the com- municative grace. Because " it is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts xx. 35), love is the greatest. God is love, and love makes man likest God. Faith energises in love ; love is its expression and exercise (Gal. v. 6). What need to repeat what Paul has said in 1 Corinthians xiii. of the manifold virtues and services love inspires ? But even a loftier height is reached in Ephesians iv. 31-v. 2 : " Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and railing, be put away from you, with 272 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL all malice ; and be ye kind to one another, tender- hearted, forgiving each other, even as God also in Christ forgave you. Be ye therefore imitators of God, as beloved children ; and walk in love, even as Christ also loved you, and gave himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for an odour of a sweet smell." This is surely an echo of Christ's teaching in the Sermon on the Mount : " Ye there- fore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect " (Matt. v. 48). Just as Jesus presented the precept, " Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself " (Mark xii. 31), as the summary of human duty, so Paul argues that "love is the fulfilment of the law," because " love worketh no ill to his neighbour " (Rom. xiii. 10), His conception of Christian duty is the best ancient Jewish morality vitalised by love, and does not here demand any detailed discussion. Some of the social problems of the age, for the solution of which Paul found it necessary for the guidance of his converts to apply this principle, will engage our attention in the next Study. It is noteworthy that Paul, who writes so much about love as the expression ~^f faith, only twice expressly mentions love to God. In the one pas- sage he seems to be freely quoting Isaiah Ixiv. 4, and renders the characteristic Hebrew phrase " him that waiteth for Him," by the more distinct- ively Christian " them that love Him " (1 Cor. ii. 9). In the other, he has contrasted the knowledge that THE BODY OF CHRIST 273 puffeth up, and the love that edifieth; and over against the man who is confident of his knowledge, and so displays his ignorance, he sets the man who loveth God, and therefore is known of God (1 Cor. viii. 1-3). The implicit argument of this passage may be thus made explicit. He who has the highest kind of love, love for God, will also have the love for another which builds him up in the Christian faith and life. He who is the object of the highest kind of knowledge, that is, of God's, will himself be the subject of the best kind of knowing. Thus love and knowledge, at first con- trasted, are shown to be, when at their best, insepar- able. The writer cannot recall a passage in which love to Christ is expressly mentioned, for the phrase "the love of Christ" in 2 Corinthians v. 14 does undoubtedly mean Christ's love for the Christian ; and yet what is described as the con- straint of Christ's love is surely equivalent to love for Christ — not a romantic attachment, or a senti- mental devotion, but a personal submission. No longer to live unto self, but only unto Christ, is nothing else than love. It is the love of God faith receives as grace now, hope awaits as glory here- after. This love reproduces itself first as grateful love to God in Christ, and then as generous love to all men, especially to those that are of the house- hold of the faith (Gal. vi. 10). 4. It is from the standpoint of Christian life, as faith, hope, and love, that we must look at Paul's i8 274 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL conception of the Christian Church. As faith is living union with Christ Himself, the community of believers in any place, however few in number or feeble in resource, is assured of His presence and power. Accordingly, every local congregation is His Church, equipped with the gifts and fitted for the duties of His people. Paul in his letters habitually applies the term Church to every gathering of Christians for the worship or work of Christ, But as it is the same Saviour and Lord to whom all believers are united by faith, all these Churches have their unity in Him, and so Paul can apply the same term to the whole body of believers, scattered in these local congregations over the Roman Empire. As it is Christ's presence and power that constitutes His Church, so wherever and everywhere He is and works His Church is. It is not strictly correct then to say that Paul uses the term Church in two senses, the local and the catholic or universal, for the same conception of faith as making one with Christ underlies both. The local congregation is not a part of the universal community, for that would be to deny its sufficiency as the Church of Christ ; nor is the universal com- munity merely the sum of the local congregations, for that would be to deny the unity of the Church of Christ. Just as God's omnipresence means that God is not only everywhere, but whole in evex'y point of space ; so for Christian faith, wherever believers are, the Church is, and yet each gathering THE BODY OF CHRIST 275 of believers is the Church. This is not a merely- verbal refinement ; but the writer believes that only thus can we pierce to the core of the concep- tion of Paul regarding the Church. He did not distinguish the local congregation from the univer- sal community as a church and the church, as part and whole or as unit and sum ; but it is the very same Church that is in every spot, and embraces all believers, because it is the one Christ who is in all and over all. It is this conception we must assume in Paul's description of the Church as a body in 1 Corinthians xii. It is with the exercise of the spiritual gifts in the Church in Corinth with which he is concerned to begin with ; but towards the close of his argument he mentions as God's gifts to the Church " apostles, prophets, teachers," who were the itinerant ministry of the universal com- munity, and did not confine their labours to a local congregation. The same figure of the body is applicable to both. We can retain Paul's con- ception of the Church then only as we combine the independence of the local congregation, because sufficient in Christ for the privileges and functions of the Church, with the unity of the universal com- munity as in the one Lord. 5. If we apply ourselves to the Christian grace of hope in the same way as to the grace of faith in order to discover what light it throws on the con- ception Paul had of the Church, we shall reach two conclusions, (i.) Does Paul's eager anticipation 276 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of the future as alone giving the Christian full possession of his whole inheritance in Christ not explain his indifference to, and neglect of, compact organisation ? This is not the place to discuss the varied forms of organisation which were adopted according to local circumstances, as our present purpose is the study of the Gospel of Paul. This fact must, however, be noted, that, constructive as was Paul's mind in the realm of doctrine, he formed no theory of the government of the Church ; no polity can claim his apostolic authority. He approved and, when necessary, provided some form of organisation, but his interest was elsewhere, in the consummation of God's purpose so long expected and so much desired. Although it is necessary for him to write much about the Church, it is not a just criticism of him or any of the apostles to afl&rm that they supplanted the kingdom by the Church ; for what was their expectation of Christ's Second Advent but the hope of the coming of the Kingdom of God ? As an earthly institution the Church was for them altogether secondary to this heavenly consumma- tion. Order, discipline, government in the Church on earth there must be, and so far as is necessary Paul deals with these matters in his letters. What was to him most valuable in the life of the Church was the inspiration of its members, the manifold gifts in which the one Spirit manifested His presence and power in the Church. This enthusiasm and THE BODY OF CHRIST 277 energy of the Church was sustained, not only by the faith fixed on the Risen Lord, but also by the hope cherished of His coming in power and glory, (ii.) In another direction also may we look for the influence of Christian hope on Paul's conception of the Church. When we distinguish the reality of the Church on earth and its ideal in heaven, the Church as fact in history and as object of faith, and then ascribe the distinction to Paul, we prob- ably just miss an understanding of his thought. In Ephesians there is present to his inner vision the Church as the body of Christ, the fulfilment of Him that filleth all in all (i. 23), in which not only were the Gentiles who had been far off made nigh, but in which also the middle wall of partition had been broken down between Jew and Gentile, so that in Christ the twain had been made one new man (ii. 12-15) ; the Church as a holy temple in the Lord, in whom all believers are builded together for a habitation of God (vers. 21, 22) ; the Church as the Bride of Christ, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but holy and without blemish (v. 27). If we think of what the Churches according to his testimony actually were, we cannot but be sur- prised at these ideals. That for Paul they were no vain imagination, no mocking illusion, is due to this, that the Christian hope was clear and strong within him. In regard to the Church he looked not at the things seen, but at the things unseen, for to him ever the things seen were temporal, and 278 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL only the things unseen eternal. While Paul was not only a founder of churches, but knew also how to build them up, he was no ecclesiastic in the sense of being absorbed in creed or code, polity or ritual. His upward and forward look seized the ideal and future as real and present ; and so even in the imperfect copy on earth he sees the perfect pattern in heaven. The Church is, and not merely will be, Christ's body, His Bride, God's temple, the Spirit's habitation. 6. The figure of the body and its members which Paul repeatedly applies to the Church has meaning only as the place he assigns to love in Christian life is remembered and recognised. Any attempt to make this ideal a reality by means of a compact organisation is simply a caricature of his picture. The close connexion between 1 Corinthians xii. and xiii. is for most readers destroyed by the chapter division. Love alone can give to the Church that conscious common life which alone explains the constant and intense sympathy of the members of the Church described in the words, "Whether one member suffereth, all the members suffer with it ; or one member is honoured, all the members rejoice with it " (xii. 26). It may be said that the unity of the Church is in the same Spirit, the same Lord, and the same God, amid the diversities of gifts, ministrations, and workings (4-6) ; but this unity is consciously and voluntarily realised in the individual members only by love. THE BODY OF CHRIST 279 The divine unity can be reproduced only in the human union of affection, sympathy, service. If it is true that where Christ is the Church is, it is as true that where there is no love there is no Church. Sacrament and hierarchy do not constitute the Church one body, but love exercised in the use of the gifts faith receives for the common good does. Spencer denies that human society is an organism in the sense of having a corporate consciousness ; for Paul the Church was perfectly a living body,because he saw its common consciousness in the love which Christians had for one another, from the motive and after the manner of Christ's love. The unity of the Church is constituted by its common faith in Christ, and the common love of the members for one another, and through hope this unity is prophetic of the unity of all mankind in Christ ; the divine reconciliation has its full effect in a society in which human antagonisms are reconciled. This Pauline conception of the Church is an ideal which judges the reality of a divided Christendom. 7. The ministry of this Church is not an office conferring rights, but a gift imposing duties. What were the arrangements for the management of the Pauline Churches, by elders, or by bishops and deacons, is of quite subordinate significance for the Christian Church, as local custom and temporary necessity were determining elements. What has permanent value is Paul's view of the ministry. In Romans xii. and 1 Corinthians xii. 280 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL that view is fully stated. The ministry does not belong to any restricted order in the Church, but all the members are called to it according to the gift that has been bestowed on them. Spiritual endowment, and that alone, determines function in the Christian Church, and the only limitation on the use of any gift is the good of the whole com- munity. It is to be noted that these gifts embrace not only the abnormal features of apostolic life, the speaking with tongues, working of miracles, prophecy, or impassioned utterance ; but also the more usual activities of relieving the needs of the poor, teaching, exhorting, giving, and ruling. For Paul there was no such distinction as we incline to make between the supernatural charisms and the natural powers ; all for him were alike supernatural as the working of the same Spirit of God. The recognition of the supernatural character of all the gifts did not, however, lead Paul to commend or approve their unrestrained exercise. It is surely a distinct evidence of the moral insight of Paul that he should have insisted as he did that the exercise of each of those gifts was to be altogether controlled by the interests of the whole community, and that even, when so controlled, there was the more excel- lent way of love (1 Cor. xiii.). In this conception of the Church as a body, each member of which is by the one Spirit endowed for a different function, Paul does anticipate the modern view of society as pro- gressively organic. There is not only more need, but THE BODY OF CHRIST 281 alsogreater promise of integration, to use thecurrent terms, where there is more differentiation of organs and their corresponding functions. The com- plexity of an ecclesiastical organisation need not be a danger to the spiritual unity so long as the differentiation is not artificial, but the working of the Spirit of God, who worketh all things in all ; and the integration is not by human devices, but by the love which uses every gift for the common good. That the abnormal features of the apostolic age should be reproduced is by no means to be desired as necessary to the realisation of Paul's ideal of ministry. In a society so complex as ours the Church needs, and should exercise, a very varied ministry ; if there were the enthusiasm and energy of the apostolic Church, would not faith secure and love exercise as varied gifts ? 8. When we turn from Paul's views on the Church and its ministry to his references to the sacraments, as these have been interpreted by many scholars, we seem to be going down to a lower standpoint. On the one hand, he does depreciate baptism in comparison with the preach- ing of the Gospel. He thanks God that he has himself baptized so few of the Corinthian converts, and declares, " Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel" (1 Cor. i. 17). But on the other hand, he is reported by Luke as requiring the rebaptism of the twelve disciples of John the Baptist, and as accompanying the ordinance by th 282 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL laying on of his hands so as to secure for the bap- tized the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts xix. 1-7). Should it be objected that Luke may be affected in his record by the current beliefs, one must reckon with Paul's statement in Romans vi. 3, 4, in which he connects directly with his baptism the believer's inward change of dying unto sin and rising again unto newness of life to God with Christ. In our interpretation of the passage we must avoid two extremes. On the one hand, we cannot dismiss the reference to baptism as casual and so insignifi- cant ; and on the other, we must not assume that the form of the rite must be immersion, so as to sustain the analogy between baptism and burial. It is with the fact and not the form of baptism that Paul in this passage is concerned. If it were but a passing illustration Paul had intended, would he have introduced it into so^serious an argument and so solemn an appeal ? Probably his own baptism had been to him a pregnant experience (Acts ix. 17-19), not only of the recovery of sight and of the possession of the Holy Spirit, but of absolute submission to the truth and grace of Christ. If it had not meant much to the converts he is address- ing, would he not have lessened the force of his argument by such a reference ? From this fact, however, we are not justified at once in inferring that Paul held views about the efficacy of the ordinance which should now appear to us super- stitious. There is no suggestion in the passage THE BODY OF CHRIST 283 that he held that it was the ordinance itself that altered the relation of believers to Christ. It is a conscious and voluntary process of repentance and faith accompanying the ordinance he has in view, as his appeal to the converts to make their baptisms a constant reality shows. " Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus " (Rom. vi. 11). For unimaginative and unimpressionable minds there may be a great distinction between a sacrament as as a sign and pledge of divine grace and as a vehicle thereof ; but in an intense religious ex- perience there is not ; for the assurance of divine grace received is the possession of divine grace experienced. It is thus we must understand Paul's reference. 9. In the account of the Lord's Supper which he had received he not only preserves the common tradition, but includes the spiritual interpretation, which, as he believed himself to possess the mind of Christ, he did not distinguish from it (1 Cor. xi. 23-34). It is primarily commemoration of Christ's death, but also a proclamation until His Second Advent. That death is remembered and declared as sacrificial, the sacrifice of the New Covenant xmto forgiveness of sin. There is no sug- gestion of any transubstantiation or consubstantia- tion of the wine and the bread. As the context shows, the eating of the bread and the drinking of the cup unworthily is not any failure to discover 284 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL in the elements the actual body and blood of Jesus ; but the neglect and denial of the signifi- cance of the death for all, so remembered and pro- claimed, by excess and class-separation in the membership of the Church. To be "guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord " is to treat profanely, without due reverence and gratitude, the death for man's salvation ; and this is done when the feast of commemoration and remem- brance is turned into a common meal disgraced by selfishness and greed. " Not to discern the body " is to fail to understand what the ordinance signifies. A worthy observance would, through the remem- brance and declaration of Christ's death, bring a communion with the Living Lord full of blessing. Here as in baptism we must suppose Paul had found a vehicle as well as a sign and pledge of divine grace. There is here nothing inconsistent with a genuinely moral and spiritual standpoint. When Paul adds, however, " For this cause many among you are weak and sickly, and not a few sleep " (ver. 30), he draws a conclusion in which we may hesitate to follow him. That disease and death were the Lord's punishment of the unworthy observance of the Lord's Supper is an interpreta- tion of divine providence from the Jewish rather than the Christian standpoint. We must insist, however, that there is no reason for assuming that he held the superstitious notion that in the ordi- nance itself there was a noxious efficacy for the THE BODY OF CHRIST 285 unworthy partakers, as well as a beneficent in- fluence for those who worthily partook. We should not ascribe magical notions to him without much more conclusive evidence than any we now possess. In 1 Corinthians x, 14-22 he describes the Supper as a communion of the blood and the body of Christ ; but the context shows that he does not mean that it is the body and the blood that are literally partaken of. Verse 17 describes the Church itself as one bread and one body, be- cause all the members partake of the one bread. This forbids a prosaic literalness of interpretation. Such an interpretation would involve that the sacrifices to idols become the body and the blood of demons. What Paul does affirm is that in the Lord's Supper the believer enters into communion with Christ, his life becomes one with Christ's, His judgment on pagan sacrifices, that they involve such communion of the worshippers with demons, may be explained by the excess and licentiousness that marked not a few religious rites of the heathen ; but he himself asserts this view as one-sided in recognising even in idolatry a seeking after the God who is near each one, which even in its errors God in " times of ignorance overlooked " (Acts xvii. 27-30). The belief in demons and the judgment of idolatry Paul brought with him into his Christian faith from Judaism ; but his experience of Christ's presence with him in the Supper in no way depends on the conclusion regarding pagan sacrifices. 286 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL 10. In dealing with Paul's conception of the Church, ministry, and sacraments, it is probably more difficult than in any other subject to maintain a strictly objective standpoint, as the personal equation is likely to obtrude. The writer has tried at least to avoid this peril. Possibly, as many modern scholars are insisting, Paul was more thoroughly a man of his own people and age, with all the limitations which that involved, than Christian theologians generally have been prepared to concede. But that he held not spiritual and moral, but often magical views of the sacraments seems to the writer to require far more conclusive evidence than yet has been furnished. That he was a sacramentarian in the modern sense of the word, the treatment of the Jewish law, and especi- ally of circumcision, in the Epistle to the Galatians makes it quite impossible to believe. How could the man who declared that both circumcision and uncircumcision availed nothing, only faith ener- gising in love, assign superior efficacy for the Christian life to any " weak and beggarly rudi- ments " (Gal. iv, 9) ? It is surely to miss his intention to suppose that his argument is not directed against ritualism generally, but against the combination of Jewish with Christian ritualism. He who laid all emphasis on the sufficiency of faith alone to bring each believer into living union with God in Christ, thus giving the spirit of adoption and freedom of access, was no sacerdotalist. What THE BODY OF CHRIST 287 would he have said of the figment of apostoHc succession, who so vehemently claimed that he was an apostle, " not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father" (Gal. i. 1). We do best to view the Church, with Paul, from the standpoint of the faith, hope, and love that are in Christ the Lord. XV THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 1. When we come to study closely what Paul has to say about the influence of the Church on the world, the life the Christian is to live among men, we are likely to meet with surprise and disappoint- ment, for his standpoint is so different from that which is general to-day. To-day we seem to be more concerned about the soil than the seed of the Kingdom, about the meal than about the leaven, about the flesh to be preserved than about the savour of the salt ; or, to use the modern fashion of speech, about the environment than about the organism. Human society — how it is to be purified and perfected — that is our concern, and the Christian Church is valued as it serves as a means to that end. It is no misrepresentation of Paul to say that his interest was exactly the reverse. The Church as the body of Christ was his primary concern, and the world appealed to him only as in need, and capable of being brought into the Church. The characteristic note is struck in the words : " Our citizenship is in THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 289 heaven ; from whence also we wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ " (Phil. iii. 20). " Where- fore we faint not ; but though our outward man is decaying, yet our inward man is renewed day by day. For our light affliction, which is for the moment, worketh for us more and more exceedingly an eternal weight of glory ; while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen : for the things which are seen are temporal ; but the things which are not seen are eternal. For we know that if the earthly house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens " (2 Cor. iv. 16-v. 1). " For the earnest expectation of the creation waiteth for the revealing of the sons of God " (Rom. viii. 19). Paul was a man ot faith according to the definition of Hebrews xi. 1 ; " Faith is the giving substance to things hoped for, the proving of things not seen." " He looked for the city which hath the foundations, whose builder and maker is God " (ver. 10). He confessed that he was a stranger and a pilgrim on the earth (ver. 13), " He endured, as seeing Him who is invisible " (ver. 27). He had " tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come " (vi. 5). The invisible was for him the more real world ; the future was the object of his desire. Accord- ingly, when he is dealing with human institutions, these are not important to him on their own 19 290 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL account : marriage, property, industry, are not in themselves a good. Only in so far as social relationships affect Christian character have they any meaning or worth for him. All that relates to the outer man is good or bad as it helps or hinders the growth of the inner man. A man's relations to his fellow-men are absolutely sub- ordinate to his relation to Christ. As Paul looked for a speedy coming of Christ to establish the kingdom of God, he did not hope or work for a progressive evolution of manners or morals, rela- tions or institutions. 2. Paul was, to use the phrase Lord Rosebery applied to Oliver Cromwell, a practical mystic. As we follow him in his travels, we see how wisely and skilfully he uses the dispersion of the Jews and the synagogues scattered over the length and breadth of the Roman Empire as the bridge by which he, a Jewish scribe, can, with his message that Jesus is the Christ, pass over to the Gentiles ; how ready he is to seize the advantage for the spread of the Gospel to be gained from the security and facility of intercourse the Roman Empire with its order and arms affords, and from the protection of the law which as a Roman citizen he himself can claim. As we witness him founding Churches, directing their organisation, and counsel- ling them in their manifold affairs, we recognise not a visionary, but what to-day is so much admired, an efficient business man. That Paul THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 291 was practical, the results of his labours prove. But this must not hide from us the fact that, however practical, he was a mystic still. The world might be his workshop, or market, or battlefield ; but his home was in the invisible and the eternal. If we do not recognise this, we shall run the risk of imposing on Paul ideas that were not present even to his mind, because we assume in him interests that had no place at all in his heart. How can the Christian be a saint in the world ? is his problem, while ours is, How can society be Christianised ? 3. As regards the individual life, it is the best Jewish and even Gentile morality simplified, unified, and vitalised by love, which he com- mends in his moral precepts. The Christian is to be an epitome of all the recognised excellences : " Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honourable, whatsoever things are just, what- soever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are gracious ; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, take account of these things " (Phil. iv. 8). There is nothing so original in his moral counsels as to call for special study, ^ But his treatment of social relations does present some peculiar features which claim fuller discussion. As regards the State, Paul was proud of his Jewish nationality ; and in spite of all the persecution which he suffered at the hands of the unbelieving ^ The subject has been recently dealt with in Alexander's The Ethics of Paulf to which the reader may be referred. 292 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL Jews, and which provoked him to utter some vehement denunciations (1 Thess. ii. 15, 16), he remained loyal to his people. " I could wish," he says, " that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh " (Rom, ix, 3), His love inspires the hope, " All Israel shall be saved " (xi. 26). He was not less proud of his Roman citizenship ; and his estimate of the providential function of the Roman Empire was very much more favourable than that which immediately after his death became current in the Christian Church. In his experience the Roman Empire was not the persecutor, but the protector. There seems to be very little doubt that in the apocalyptic passage in 2 Thessalonians ii, 1-12 the restraint on the final manifestation of the Jewish apostasy is exercised by the Roman Empire. Paul did anticipate the removal of that restraint, but in what way he does not indicate ; and probably he did not even ask himself the question. That Christ might be manifested to overthrow "the man of sin, the son of perdition," the removal of the restraint on the development of Jewish wickedness to this consummation was necessary. He viewed events not from the stand- point of historical causality, but of divine teleology. As long as the Roman Empire lasted, however, Paul's sole counsel to his converts was submission to its authority — recognised as of God, and as exercised for the punishment of evil-doers, and for THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 293 the benefit of those who did well (Rom. xiii. 1-7). To base on this passage any general or permanent theory of the relation of the Christian to the State is an altogether unjustified proceeding. Who can doubt that, if Paul had been dealing with converts on whom the Roman officials were forcing the demand to worship the emperor, he would have approved an attitude similar to that of Peter and the apostles towards the Jewish rulers, " We must obey God rather than men " (Acts v. 29) ? One thing his counsel does prove, however, that he had no expectation that the Christian Church would be able to influence the Roman Empire to improve its laws. In the preservation or purification of that society the Christian Church of the apostolic age had no interest, as the object of its desire was the Kingdom of God to be estab- lished at Christ's Second Coming, on the ruins of every earthly kingdom. 4, That Paul had not the aim of the doctrinaire reformer appears very clearly in his treatment of the relation of the " strong " and the " weak " in the Christian Church (Rom. xiv. ; 1 Cor. viii.). One delighting in moral abstractions would have argued that either the use or the abstinence was right, and that the Church must do its utmost to secure the adhesion of all its members to the proper course. But Paul agrees with the " strong " ; and yet counsels them to consider the scruples of the " weak," and limit their liberty in love lest 294 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL a brother for whom Christ died should perish. Whether this or that custom prevailed in the Church was to him a matter of entire indifference, even when he himself distinguished the one as reasonable from the other as over-scrupulous ; what he did care for was that no man should act against his own conscience under the pressure of the common opinion, and that all should have a tender regard for one another, so as to be willing to surrender rights the claim of which might do injury to others. That each Christian should realise as fully as possible his personal relation to Christ as Saviour and Lord, and that whatever he said or did should be of faith, determined by that relation, was his guiding purpose. That the members of the Church in their mutual relations should only help and never hinder one another in reaching this goal was his constant concern ; for this end he, who was the fearless champion of Christian liberty, was the pleading advocate of the surrender of liberty for the sake of love. 5. It is this practical expediency, which is consecrated by the motive of love, which explains his treatment of the " woman " question. He regards all racial, social, or physical distinctions among men as transcended in Christ. " There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female ; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus " (Gal. iii. 28). An absolute spiritual equality of the sexes in the THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 295 Christian Church is what he thus affirms. But when some women in the Church of Corinth drew what seemed to be the legitimate and almost inevitable practical inferences from the principle, Paul was found in opposition, and proved himself a thoroughgoing defender of convention. He insists on women appearing in the public assembly of the church veiled (1 Cor. xi. 2-16), and on their keeping silence in the churches (xiv. 34-36). (i.) His argument for the first demand must be confessed to be an instance of his Rabbinism at the worst. His declaration, " that the head of every man is Christ ; and the head of the woman is the man ; and the head of Christ is God " (xi. 3), cannot by any exegetical ingenuity be tortured into any- thing else than a relapse from the Christian stand- point of Galatians iii. 28 to the lower Jewish, which insisted on the inferiority and subjection of woman. Why " the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head because of the angels " (ver. 10), whatever Paul may have exactly meant, does not now appear at all self-evident. Nor is the teaching of nature as to the proper length of the hair either of a man or a woman quite so in- fallible for our judgment as it seems to have been for Paul's (vers. 14, 15). If Paul did not himself feel the unreality of the whole argument, it but shows that he had not escaped altogether from his Jewish prejudices as a Pharisaic scribe when he became a Christian. The first and the last verses 296 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL give the real reason. He wanted his converts to " hold fast the traditions " (ver, 2). Conscious probably that his argument could be challenged, he falls back on a last line of defence : "If any man seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God " (ver. 16). (ii.) The second demand is supported by an assertion of woman's subjection (xiv. 34), an appeal to the current sense of propriety ("it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church," ver. 35), and an insistence on the authority of common custom. " What ? was it from you that the Avord of God went forth ? or came it unto you alone ? " (ver. 36). While we must admit this reasoning to be unconvincing, we may now recognise that the apostle was guided by a sound instinct for the expedient when he thus tried to repress innovations in which Christian women were asserting their liberty at the risk of losing their reputation for propriety and modesty, and of thus bringing a reproach even on the whole Christian community. These sentiments of what is fitting in women have their moral value ; and although it is needful that they should be modified as moral progress is made in defining the relation of the sexes, yet the hasty and reckless disregard of them does most injury to the woman's cause. That Paul should so unreservedly insist on conventions must, however, be regarded as showing that his interests lay elsewhere than do those of the doctrinaire reformer of to-day, who, THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 297 having got hold of the principle of the spiritual equality of the sexes, would work out the principle to its remotest consequences, and would insist that custom and sentiment should be conformed to the principle. Had Paul had any anticipation of a permanent Christian society on earth, one cannot but suppose that he would have felt the necessity of looking at the relation of the sexes from the Christian standpoint to discover what modifications in custom or sentiment might be necessary. That he never faced this issue is no reason why the Christian moralist of to-day, free of his preoccupa- tion, should not frankly and boldly inquire whether woman has in modern society the position to which this spiritual equality entitles her, undeterred by his arguments, which cannot claim to be rooted in Christian faith at all. But even the modern reformer, if he is wise, will learn from Paul that common custom, as it cannot be suddenly changed, must not be recklessly disregarded. The " other- worldliness " of Paul, as we may describe his attitude, made it more important for him that no reproach should be brought upon the Christian Church which would in any way hinder its influence with those without to save them from sin for God, than that the abstract rights of the women members should be recognised ; nay, even his absorption in this one interest probably is the reason why he, who saw so clearly on many moral issues, did not even recognise their abstract rights. 298 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL 6. In Paul's treatment of the questions of marriage and divorce there is the same spiritual detachment from social relations. He fully re- cognises the moral lawfulness of marriage, and even insists in certain cases on its moral necessity. " But because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband " (1 Cor. vii. 2). "If they have not continency, let them marry ; for it is better to marry than to burn " (ver. 9). Here he seems to regard it as a moral expedient against sensual in- dulgence ; but even in this chapter he recognises that marriage may be a personal union, in which a holy influence may be exercised. " The unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbeliev- ing wife is sanctified in the brother ; else were your children unclean ; but now are they holy " (ver. 14). But that such influence will be effectively exercised he is not certain. " How knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband ? or how knowest thou, O husband, whether thou shalt save thy wife ? " (ver. 16). Accordingly he ex- presses his own decided preference for celibacy, and even desires that it should be universal (ver. 7). He lays down the general principle : "It is good {;caKov, not merely profitable or advantageous, but simply and morally good) for a man not to touch a woman " (ver. 1); but qualifies the state- ment in recognising that his own preference for celibacy may be a gift from God which others do THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 299 not share (ver. 7). From this standpoint he gives detailed counsels to the married as well as to the unmarried. (i.) Where both husband and wife are believing, he assumes the permanence of the relation (vers. 1, 2), and insists on the mutual obligations which it imposes (vers. 3, 4), but appears to commend a living apart for a time that both partners may give themselves to prayer. While he would himself think more highly of a permanent self-denial, he advises a resumption of these relations as a con- cession to natural infirmity ("that Satan tempt you not because of your incontinency "). That Paul regarded the normal relation of husband and wife as a hindrance to devotion, and as a concession to moral weakness, must be frankly pronounced a defect of moral insight in regard to this human relationship. (ii.) Where one partner was a Christian, and the other not, another question arose. Did the difference of faith justify separation, to be followed by marriage ? As long as the heathen partner desires the relationship to continue, it is to be maintained and used for the exercise of a sanctify- ing influence (vers. 12-14), But the Christian partner must not insist on its continuance, but may welcome release from bondage, as there is no certainty that this influence will be effectual. " If the unbelieving departeth, let him depart ; the brother or the sister is not under bondage 300 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL in such cases ; but God hath called us in peace " (ver. 15). One cannot but ask, whether, if Paul had fully realised the sanctity of this relation as Jesus conceived it, he could have given such advice. Is the Christian partner walking worthy of his or her calling in showing no further solicitude for the salvation of one so intimately related, or in welcoming so readily escape from a difficult situation ? Does the failure of one partner in duty end the obligation of the other ? Would Christian effort of the most devoted and heroic quality be discouraged by the uncertainty of success ? But a further question is involved. Does Paul mean that the Christian thus released is at liberty to marry again ? Nothing is expressly said, but the phrase " is not under bondage " {ov he^ovXctfras) suggests a complete emancipation from all the obligations of the previous relation. If this be so, it seems impossible to reconcile the advice with Jesus' emphatic declaration about marriage as indissoluble (Matt. v. 32 ; xix. 9). (iii.) The unmarried Paul advises to continue as they are, unless they cannot restrain their sexual desires (ver. 9). The disadvantages of the married are these : (1) they " shall have tribulation in the flesh " (ver. 28) ; (2) they are " careful for the things of the world " (ver. 33), to please each other, and so cannot be as careful as the unmarried can " for the things of the Lord " THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 301 (ver, 32). This advice is doubtless, if not alto- gether due to, yet partly suggested by Paul's vivid expectation of Christ's Second Coming, in view of which an absolute detachment from the present order appeared the appropriate attitude (vers. 29- 31). So different is our position to-day that we cannot feel that Paul's counsels come to us now with the authority of the Spirit of God (ver. 40). 7. But this is not Paul's last word on mar- riage. In the Epistle to the Ephesians Paul re- affirms his belief in the authority of man and the subjection of woman ; but he insists on the duty of the husband to love his wife, just as Christ loved the Church, even unto self-sacrifice, " that He might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, that He might present the church to Himself, a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing ; but that it should be holy and without blemish " (v. 26, 27). There is surely imphed the thought that the love of the husband for his wife should have as its end also her perfecting in grace and goodness. A reason on a lower level follows : the love of the wife is the same as the love of self, for so closely and indissolubly are husband and wife bound together (vers. 28, 29) The words which Jesus quoted in proof of the divine intention of a lifelong bond are also quoted by Paul in confirmation of this argument (ver. 31). The comparison of the marriage relation to that 302 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of Christ and the Church raises the institution into a far higher ethical region than that in which the passage in 1 Corinthians moves. Character- istic of Paul's limitation, however, is it that he requires of the wife, not that she love, but " that she fear her husband." The command which follows to children to " obey their parents in the Lord," and to fathers not " to provoke their children to wrath, but to nurture them in the chastening and admonition of the Lord," show that a common Christian faith was already begin- ning to purify and sanctify the home (vi. 1-4), 8. On the question of slavery Paul is guided by the same principle as he applies to the question of marriage : " Let each man, wherein he was called, therein abide with God " (1 Cor. vii. 24). (i.) For the Christian life the outward condition is indifferent. In whatever position a man finds himself at his conversion, married or unmarried, bond or free, let him be content to remain in it, and make the best of it he can by God's grace. A slave is not to be troubled because he is a slave ; for he is the Lord's freedman. A freeman is not to forget that he is Christ's bondservant (ver. 22). The redemption by Christ, to be His possession, is the supreme good, in comparison with which the difference between slave and free- man is nothing. So far does Paul carry this *' other- worldliness," that he advises the slave who has the opportunity of freedom not to snatch THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 303 at it, but to show that a Christian can make the best of slavery. This is the interpretation of the ambiguous phrase (juaXkou %p^(Tai (ver. 21), which the context demands. Paul would contra- dict himself, if, after laying down the principle, *' Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called " (ver. 20), he went on to advise the slave to become a freeman whenever he got the chance. As irrelevant to such advice would be the assurance which follows that the bond- servant is the Lord's freedman (ver. 22). The spiritual privilege in Christ more than compensates for any social disadvantage the slave suffers. Could detachment from the present world be carried further ? (ii.) How a slave might prove himself a Christian in that calling wherein he was called, Paul's coun- sels in Ephesians vi, 5-8 show. All the service to the earthly master is to be rendered from the same motive, in the same spirit, and with the same diligence and fidelity as service to Christ; and such service will be rewarded by Christ Him- self. On the Christian master also rests the obliga- tion to treat his slave in like manner, recognising that he himself serves the same Master in heaven, with whom " there is no respect of persons " (ver. 9). (iii.) The fullest treatment of the question is found, however, in the letter to Philemon. The lawfulness and Tightness of the institution of 304 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL slavery is there taken for granted. That Onesimus belongs to Philemon, that even the apostle himself has not a right to retain his services, however much he may desire them, without the master's consent, that Philemon would be justified in inflicting some punishment on his runaway slave, all this is re- cognised in the letter. But, on the other hand, Paul freely confesses his love for Onesimus, and the value of his services to himself, earnestly pleads not merely for mercy to him in the remission of any penalty he had incurred, but for a welcome to him as " a brother beloved," and tenderly urges his own claim on Philemon as a reason for granting this request, Whfen in Christian households the relation between master and slave was thus trans- formed, as Paul pleaded and hoped that in this case it would be, then the institution itself was likely to be soon abolished, for the inconsistency between such moral obligations and the legal status would become increasingly evident to the enlightened Christian conscience. But, just as in the " woman " question, so in the " slave " question, Paul does not think at all about abstract rights, about the inferences that might be legitimately drawn, nay, even must be inevitably drawn, from the general principle of the spiritual equality of all men in Christ. We altogether miss Paul's point of view, and assign to him our modern standpoint, when we suggest as the reason for his treatment of this and other questions, prudence, THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 305 a recognition of the disastrous consequences to the Christian Church itself of any revolutionary feeling in respect to marriage, or the status of women, or slavery. We can now see that the Christian Church would have perished had it advocated a general emancipation, had it insisted that the moral rights of slaves should at once change their legal position. We can now see that to insist that the slave could be a Christian, and that the Christian master should treat his slave as a brother, was the surer way of securing at last the abolition of slavery. But not such were the con- siderations which guided Paul. He was not a modern evolutionary philosopher. He did not believe in and expect a gradual progress of human society, and so he did not in his teaching give such counsels as would enable the Church to prove itself a potent factor in that development. He looked not for a change in the world around, but tried to show how the believer, whatever his lot, might live with Christ in the world. 9. Paul had no occasion in any of his letters to discuss expressly the question of private property ; but that he never challenged its Tightness is shown by two classes of allusions, (i.) On the one hand, he urges the duty of each man to work for his own living (1 Thess. iv. 11) ; and although as a preacher of the Gospel he claims that he has a right to support from the Churches to which he preaches (1 Cor, ix. 4-14), yet he gives an example 20 306 STUDIES OF PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL of such industry (1 Thess. ii. 9 ; 2 Cor. xii. 13, 14). Vivid as were his expectations of the Lord's Second Coming, he was never carried away by fanaticism to the neglect of the lowliest earthly duty ; and he severely rebukes such unhealthy excitement in the Church at Thessalonica : " Even when we were with you, this we commanded you, If any will not work, neither let him eat. For we hear of some that walk among you disorderly, that work not at all, but are busy bodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread " (2 Thess. iii. 10-12). (ii.) On the other hand, he appeals for liberality in giving (1 Cor. xvi. 2 ; 2 Cor. viii. 7 ; Gal. vi. 6). Possibly it is for this liberality, or at least for the grace which prompts it, that he gives praise to God in the cry, " Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable gift " (2 Cor. ix. 15). He insists that God loves such a gift only when it is freely and gladly given (ver. 7) ; and that it has value only as its motive is love (1 Cor. xiii. 3). He attached such importance to the collection of the Gentile Churches for the saints in Jerusalem, not as a legal due, but as love's free gift, that he was ready to risk his life in conveying this token of the reconciling of Jew and Gentile, 10. If Paul's counsels and entreaties to his con- verts do not afford direct guidance to us in our present practical perplexities, and even if we are compelled THE HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP 307 to admit that an enlightened Christian conscience to-day cannot solve some of the common problems as he did, yet on the other hand we must not rashly assume that his treatment of such questions has no value for us whatever. For, in the first place, his absorption in Christ and the Kingdom of God, the invisible and the future, remains the dis- tinctive Christian attitude. As Christians we too must walk by faith and not by sight. Secondly, this dominant interest does still mean a detach- ment and an independence from the world ; there must be no such fear of its frown, or hope for its smile, as would supplant the Christian desire to be in all things well-pleasing unto the Lord ; only those whom the world cannot influence to turn them from their duty can influence the world for its good. Thirdly, as Paul was guided in his counsels and entreaties by the existing conditions of the world as he understood them, so must we in determining our duty, although our outlook on the world may be altogether different from his. Lastly, as for him the fact of fullest meaning and highest worth determining all his estimates and expectations was that Christ had redeemed him from sin by His blood, and that he was being re- conciled in Christ to God, so for the Christian Church to-day this is the one thing needful, for a Church of the saved alone can work for the saving of the world INDEX OF AUTHORS AND SUBJECTS Abraham, T97, 235, 237. Acceptation, 154. Adam, 106, 130, 145, 213. Adam (Dr. Jas.), 10. Adoption, 15, 174. Alexander, 291. Angelology, 4, 17. Anthropology, 146. Antinomianism, g6, 161, 207, 267. Apocalypse, 216, 220. Atonement, 94, 132, 154, 170, 177. Augustine, 40. Autobiography, 39. Baptism, 281. Barnabas, 24, 56. Bartlet, 23, 51, 251. Baur, 154. Body, II, 46, 106, 258, 262. Browning (E. B.), 182. Browning (R.), 31. Bruce, 46, 70, 80. Casuistry, 74, 210. Celibacy, 298, Charisms, 74, 187, 251, 280. Christology, 28, 105. Chronology, 35. Chrysostom, 197. Church, 29, 100, 274. Circumcision, 192, 237. Citizenship (Heavenly), 288. Cleanthes, g. Colossians^ 22, 28. Communion, 178, 284. Conscience, 209. Conversion, 12. / Corinthians^ 22. 2 CorinihianSy 22, 82. Cosmology, 17. Cosmopolitanism, 10. "Covet," 46. Cromwell, 290. Cross, 57, 154, 162, 165, 181, 192. Custom, 296. David, 60. Death, 146, 211. Demonology, 4, 17, 285. Divorce, 298. Dualism, 12, 141, 258. Education, 6. Election, 241. Environment, 141. Ephesians, 22, 28. Epistles (order of)f 21- Escbatology, 17, 27, 211. Evolution, 20, 305. Faith, 159, 185, 268. Fall, 17, 144. Fanaticism, 306 I Flesh, II, 46, 80, 124, 139, 188. j Freedom, 6, 208, 294, Galatianst 22, 82. Gamaliel, 6, 16. Gardner, 31. God, 230. Grace, 238. Gratitude, 175. Greek philosophy, 5. Guilt, 135. Harnack, 26. Hebrews^ 126, 131. Hellenism, 6. Heredity, 141, 143, 149. Herrmann, 183. History, 77. Hope, 269. Imagination, 76. Immanence, 12, 265, Intermediate state, 218, 221. Isaiah, 44. James, 6. Jerusalem, 6, 217. Jewish exclusiveness, 14. John, 70, 88. Joseph, 122. Judaisers, 41, 63, 96, 131, 193, 199, 267. Judaism, 123, 216, 267. Judgment, 223. Justification, 160, 267. Kant, 72. Karjna, 147 note. Kenosis, 115. Koinonia, 13. Law, 3, 14, 27, 40, 96, 122, 192, 235. Legalism, 123, 133. Liberality, 306. Lightfoot, 8. Logos, 70- Lord's Supper, 283. Love, 237, 271, 294. Lucretius, 151. Luke, 24, 52, 56, 226, 250, 252, 281. Luther, 40, 154. M'GiflFert, 84. Marriage, 74, 298. Mercy, 238, Messiah, 18, 48, 216. Meyer, 197. Ministry, 279. Moffatt, 23 note. Monotheism, 151. Morality, 272. Motive, 175. Mysticism, 61, 76, 91, 132, 209. Mythology, 151. 308 INDEX OF AUTHORS AND SUBJECTS 309 Onesimus, 304. Organisation, 276. Original sin, 148. Originality, 2. Paganism, 150, 238, 285. Parousia, 66, 214, 325. Pastoral Epistles^ 30. Paul as Sage, 72. Paul as Saint, 77. Paul as Scholar, 6g. Paul as Seer, 74. Paul as Slave, 83. Paul as Statesman, 71. Paul's baptism, 281. Paul's Bequest, 85. Paul's conversion, 32, 50, 75. Paul's Development, 20. Paul's Experience, 37, 87. Paul's Inheritance, i. Paul's Personality, 68. Paul's persecuting frenzy, 47. Paul's "stake in the flesh," 65. Penitence, 184. Personality, 31, Peter, 24. Pfleiderer, 197. Pharisaism, 16, 58, 83, 123. Pharisee, 14, 40, 58. Philemon^ 22, 73, 8z, 304. PhilippianSy 22, 26, 82. Plato, II, 72, 151. Platonist, 10. Polytheism, 151. Pre-existence, 18, 106, 117. Property, 305. "Propitiatory," 159, 163. Prudence, 304. Psychology, 17, 38, 262. Pythagorean, 10. Quietism, 265. Rabbinism, 16, 13B, 237, 295. Ramsay, 4, 8 note, 23, 30 note, 32, 71. Ransom, 167. Reconciliation, 168, 259. Redemption, 166. Religions, 238. Religious-historical method, 38. Reprobation, 247. Resurrection, 50, 66, 214, 259. Revelation, 235, 238. Revivals, 251, Righteousness, 13, 16, 153, 164, 234. Ritschl, 265. Roman citizenship, 14, 280. Roman Empire, 7, 14, 71, 216, 290. Romans, ^2^ 25. Sacraments, 281. S anctifi cation, 174, 255. Sanday, 46, 197. Seneca, 8. Sheolf 212. Slavery, 73, 302. Sotenology, 27, 162. Soul, n, 263. Spencer, 279. Spirit, II, 107, 263. Spirit (Holy), 187, 249. State, 291. Stevens, iir. Stoicism, 7. "Strong," 293. Substitution, 182. Tarsus, 5. Tennant, 142. Theodicy, 231. / Thessalonians, 23, 26. 2 Tkessalonians, 23, 33. Universalism, 7, 102, 227, 238, 248. Virgin-birth, 121. "Weak," 293. Weiss, 197. Wesley, 40. Woman, 294. Wrath, 134, 156, 164, 238. INDEX OF SCRIPTURE REFERENCES Gen. ii. 7 . Ex. XX. 17 . Deut. xxi. 23 xxvii. 26 . xxxii. 21 . Ps. li. 10, II li. 16, 17 . xcviii. 2 . cxix. 97 Isa. liii. Ixiii. 10 Ixiv. 4 Dan. xii. 2 . PAGE . 214 Joel ii. 28 . . 46 ii. 32 49. 128 Matt. V. 17 . . 128 V. 28 . Ill V. 32 - 249 v.>8 . 166 vii. 16 157 viii. 10-12 . 196 xi. 22 9S xi. 28-30 . . 250 XV. 28 272 xvii. 26, 27 226 xix. 9 PAGE . 250 . Ill . 196 46 ■ 300 . 272 . 68 . 100 • 137 70 100 . 124 . 300 310 INDEX OF SCRIPTURE REFERENCES PAGE) PAGE Matt, xxiii. 37-39 . 137 Rom. ii. 28, 29 . . . 203 xxviii. 18-20 . . 100 iii. I, 2 . . • 239 Mar]cx. j8. . 124 iii. 5 . ■ 157 xli. 31 . 272 iii. 19 • 135 xiii. 32 . . . . 215 iii. 20 , . 200 xiv. 38 . . 124 iii. 24 . 167, 238 Luke vii. 47 . 174 iii. 2S . 126, 158, 163. 234 vii. 50 . . . . 50. 174 iii. 31 . . 196 X; 30-37 ■ . 100 iv. 4 . . . • 23s xiv. 16-24 . 100 IV. 5 . . 160 xvii. 18 . 100 iv. 9-12 237 John i. 14 . 120 iv. 10 . . 198 xii. 23 . . . 100 iv. 25 . 162 Acts ii. 5, 14-21 . 250 v. I . 174 ii. 22-24 ■ . 93 V. 8. • 232 V. 29 . 293 V. 10, 1 1 . . 163, 168 vii. 2-53 . 100 V. 10 • 59. 136, 175 VIU. I 49 V. 12-21 . 130, 144, 163 viii. 18, 19 . 250 V. 12 . 106, 147) 213 yiii. 39 . 250 V. 13 194, 197 IX. 5 . . no V. 17 . 156 IX. IS, 16. 51 V. 20 196, 200 ix, 17, ig 51. 282 V. 21 • iSS IX. 19-25 . . S3 vi. I • 177 ix, 20-22 . 51 vi. 2 . 42 X. 42 no vi- 3. 4 - 178, 282 x. 47 100 VI. 6, 7 . 183 XI. 3 . 100 vi. 10, II . . 129, 184, 283 XI. 20 . 101 vi. 15-23 . 213 xi. 30 24 VI. 15 . . 207 xiii. 2 . . . 251 vi. 23 . 60 xiv. 15-17 238 vii. 4 . . 206 xiv. 27 . . . 192 vii. 7-25 - 42, 80, 125, 136, 138, 214 XV. I, 2 . 24 192 vu. 7-9 . . . 200 XV. 7-11 . 24 vii. 7 194, 196 XV. 30 . 193 vii. 12-14 . 195 xvi. 6, 7 . . 251 vii. 13 . 201 xvii. 27, 28 . 238 vii. 23, 24 . 65 xvii. 30 . 234 28s vii. 25 . 59) 174, 175 xvii. 31 . no viii. 2-4 . 59. 203 xix. 1-7 251 2S1 viii. 3 34, T19. 125, i6z xix. 30 . . . 83 viii. 4 . 261 XX. 35 ■ • • 271 viii. 9 188, 189, 256, 261 xxi. 23-26 . 70 viii. II . . 260 xxii. 9 . . . . so viii. 12-13 12, 189, 261 xxii. 10 . . III viii. 16 . 189, 261 xxii. II . . 107 viii. 17 . 271 xxii. 14, 15 . 52 viii. 18-23 . 271 xxii. 18-21 . 54 viii. 19 . • ^^% xxii. ax . , S2 viii. 21- . . 248 xxiii. 3 , . . . 78 viii. 23 . 262 xxiii. 6 . 79 viii. 24 . . 269 xxiv. 15 . . 32d viii, 26, 27 261 xxvi. II, 14 . 48, 64 viii. 26 . . 189 xxvi. 16-18 S2 viii. 28-30 231, 246 Rom. i. 3, 4 . 109 121 viii. 32 . . 162 i. 17 . ^57 viij. 33 . . 246 i. 18 i34» 156 Z34 yiii. 37-39 . 233. 258 i. 19, 20 . 238 IX. 1-29 . 241 I. 23, 24 . 150 ix. 3-5 • . 240 I. 28-32 . . 135 150 IX. 3 . 292 ii. 14-16 . . 135 238 IX. 5 113, 122 ii. 14 194 IX. 30-x. 21 ■ 243 11. IS , 195 X. 3 • 154. 269 Ji. 23 . , . . 202 X. 4 . . 2Q7 INDEX OF SCRIPTURE REFERENCES 311 PAGE PAGE Rom. X. 5, 6 . • 154 I Cor. XV. 18 . 221 X. 9 . . Ill XV. 20 106, 221 X. lO 268, 269 XV. 24-28 . 227 X. 12, 13 . . . Ill XV. 27, 28 . 112 xi. . . • 244 XV. 42-52 . 210 xi. 26 . . 292 XV. 44 . . 106 xi. 28 . . 136 XV. 45-49 . 104, 130 xi. 32 202, 238, 247 XV. 45 . 107, 263 xii. . . . 280 XV. 47 . • 145 xiii. 1-7 . . 293 XV. 49 . . 222 xiii. 10 . . . . . 272 XV. 51, 52 66, 90, 106, 21S xiv. 73. 193, 293 XV. 56 • 147 xiv. 10 . . 223 XV. 57 . . . . 176 xiv. 23 . . 269 XVI. 2 . 306 XV. 19 . 253 xvi. 22 . 78 xvi. z6 . . . 268 2 Cor. i, 5 • 133 I Cor. i. 2 . Ill i. 8 . . . 81 !• ^l . 281 ii. 5-11 . . . 78, 81 i. 18 . . 162 ii. 14 . 81 |. 23, 24 60, 108 lii. 2, 3 . . 68 1. 30 163, 167 111. 3-6 202 11. 2 . . . 162 iii. 6 . 263 ii. 9 . . 272 iii. 17, 18 . 108, 188, 257, 263 U. It . 262 iii. 18 . 107, 222 li. 13 . 189, 262 iv. 4 . no H: ^5 252, 258 IV. s . Ill 111. 12-15 . . . 224 IV. 7-10 . 81 iii. 17 259 iv, 16-18 . . 289 iii. 23 112 iv. 18 . 76 V. 5. . 78 V. I-IO . . 90 vi. 2 . 226 V. 1-4 . . 12,60, 212, 217 vi. li . 256 V. I . . 289 vi. 13 258 V. 5- . 222 vi. 14 • 112 V. 6-8 66, 2t8, 221, 270 VI. ig ■ 259 V. 9, 10 . . 223 vi. 20 • 167, 173 V. 14, 15 • 61, 132, 175 vii. . 74, 298 V. 14 . 273 vii. 20-24 - 302 V. IS 162 viii. . . 193, 293 V. 16 • 54 viii. 1-3 . . 273 V. 17 5^ viii. 6 . 112 V. 18-20 . 163, 168 ix. I 89, 105 V, 19-2 1 . - . - 136 ix. 4-14 . • • 305 V. 21 . 34, s8, 127, 162 ix. 21 . . 207 vi. 4-10 . . 62 ix. 27 . 4^ , 80, 138 viii. 7 . . . . 306 X. 14-22 . - 285 viii. 9 . 2 8, 88, no, 119, 131, 176 X. 22 . . Ill ix. 7. IS - . 306 xi. 2-16 7-1 1 79) 295 XI. 17 78 xi. 23-34 ■ - 283 XI. 28, 29 . 63 XI. 32 . . 226 xii. i-io . 75 Xll. . 73) 253> 259. 275, 280 xii. 1-4 . . 180, 2S2 xii. 3 . . Ill xii. I 105, 2SS xii. 4-6 . 188, 278 xii. 7 65, 81, 25s xii. II . 262 xii. 8 III xii. 26 . . 278 xii. 9, 10 . 6s, 108, 2S2 xiii. . • 73, 82, 253, 280 xii. 13, 14 . . . 306 xiii. 3 . . 306 xiii. 14 . . 188, 238, 262 xiv. . . • 254 Gal. i. I . 287 xiv. 18 . . • 253 i. 4 . . 162 xiv. 34-36 74. 295 i. 6 . 25 XV. 3, 4 . . ■ 77 i. 8 . 78 XV. 3 . 162 i. 11-20 . 53 XV. 6 . . 221 i. II, 12 . 19 XV. 8 50, 105 i. 15-20 • 55 XV. 9 . 64 i. 16. • 33 312 INDEX OF SCRIPTURE REFERENCES PAGE PAGE Gal. ii. i-ic . 24 Phil. ii. 10, II . 2Z8 ii. II-2I . 34 ii. 12, 13 . . 231 ii. 19 . . 205 ii. 17, 18 . 66, 82 ii. 20 61, 132, 179, Z05, 206, 269 iii. 1-16 . . 29 ii. 21 . . 199 iii. 4-6 . 40 iii. 10-13 . . 136 iii. 5, 6 . • 57. 141 iii. 10 . . 194 111. 8-14 . . 66 iii. 13 34, 48, 58, 128, 162, 164, 167 iii. 9 - . 156 iii. 15-18 . . 198 iii. 12 . . 68 iii. 17 . • 235 iii. 20 27, 289 iii. ig-2i . . 196 iii. 21 . 107, z6o iii. 19 . 201 iv. 5 . 216 iii. 24 . 206, 238 iv. 8 208, 291 iii. 26, 27 . . 206 iv. 13 84, 108 iii. z6 174, a6o Col. i. 13-17 . 113 iii. 28 . • ^9i i. 13. 14 ■ . 107, 163, 167 iv. 1-3 . - 238 I. 15-19 . . 110 iv. 4 . 118, 121, 162 i. 18 . 114 iv. 5 167, 174, 260 i. 19, 20 227 IV. 9 . 286 I. 19 . 112 V. 4 . . • 199 1. 20-Z2 . . 168 V. 6 . 268, 271 i. 24 . 133 V. 12 . 64,78 11. 9 . . 107 V. 16-26 • 257 11. 15 60 V. ig-26 . . 188 ii. 16 . 207 vi. I . 252, 258 iii. 3 . . 60 vi. a . . 258 111. 4 . 216 vi. 5 . 258 I Thess. i. 3 268 vi. 6 . 306 ii. 9 . . . 306 vi. 7. 3 . 213, 224 11. 15, 16 . 292 vi. 10 . . 273 iv. II • 305 vi. 14 57 162, 176 iv. 14 221 vi. 15 • 51 iv. 15-17 • 215 Eph. i. 3-1^ 231, 246 IV. J5 . . 66. 90 i. 19, 20 . 108 V. 2 . . 215 ii. 3 . . 136 V. 10 . . . . 162 ii- 4. S . 238 2 Thess. i. u . 268 ii. 13-15 . 277 ii. 1-12 . 216, 292 ii. 16 . 169 ii. 12 269 ii. 18-22 259 ii. 13 . 187, 247, 256 ii. 21, 32 • 277 III. 6-15 . 73 iii. 8 . 64 iii. 10-12 . . 306 iii. II . . 246 I Tim. i. 13 • 43 iii. 16, 17 . . 268 i. IS. 16 . . 64 IV. 4-6 . . 188 11. 4 . • 247 iv. 31-V. 2 . , . . 271 ii. 6 . . . . 167 V. 22-33 . 74, 301 iv. 10 . 247 V. 27 . ■ 277 2 Tim. iv. 6-8 . • 47 VI. 1-4 . . 302 ^.^^•.7 . . . . 81 «,X'- 5-9 . • 303 Tit. 11. 14 . . . 167 Phil. I. 2i-a 4 . . . . . 218 Heb. i. i-ii. 8 . 113 i. 21 27, 62, 269 vi. 5 . . . aSg i. 23-25 . 66, 90 XI. I . 10, 13, 271, 289 I. 23 . . 221 xi. 40 225 n. 5-11 . 28, 88, 109, no, 131 1 Pet. i. 18 . • 17s ii. 6-8 . • "5 I John iii. 2 . 91 ii. 9. ■ • III, 112 N.B. — No subject is included in the first Index which can be easily traced through the Scripture Reference.