Paul the Interpreter of Christ - A. T. Robertson

8/12/2019 Paul the Interpreter of Christ - A. T. Robertson

1/159


2/159


3/159
http://www.forgottenbooks.org/redirect.php?where=it&pibn=1000165727http://www.forgottenbooks.org/redirect.php?where=es&pibn=1000165727http://www.forgottenbooks.org/redirect.php?where=fr&pibn=1000165727http://www.forgottenbooks.org/redirect.php?where=de&pibn=1000165727http://www.forgottenbooks.org/redirect.php?where=co.uk&pibn=1000165727http://www.forgottenbooks.org/redirect.php?where=com&pibn=1000165727


4/159


5/159


6/159

PROFESSOR A. T. ROBERTSON

THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST.HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS FOR STUDENTS OF THE LIFE

OF CHRIST. In press.AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF CHRISTIANITY (Exposi

tion of James).SHORT GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.Fifth Edition. Translation into Dutch, French, German, Italian.

GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT IN THELIGHT OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH. Fourth Edition, Revised.

THE LOYAL: A SKETCH OF JOHN THE BAPTIST.IN THE LIFE OF JESUS.IN THE LIFE OF PAUL.

PHARISEES AND JESUS. The Stone Princeton Lecturesfor 1916.

THE HISTORIAN IN THE LIGHT OF RESEARCH.STUDENT'S CHRONOLOGICAL NEW TESTAMENT.GLORY OF THE MINISTRY.DIVINITY OF CHRIST IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN.

JOY IN CHRIST: STUDIES IN PHILIPPIANS.NG GOOD IN THE MINISTRY: A SKETCH OF JOHN

MARK.NEW CITIZENSHIP.

ON MATTHEW: The Bible for Home andSchool.

IN MARK'S GOSPEL.

IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.


7/159

THE INTERPRETEROF CHRIST

BY

T. ROBERTSON, M.A., D.D., LL.D., LITT.D.PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT INTERPRETATION,

SOUTHERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY

That I May Know Him.'


8/159

COPYRIGHT, I92I.BY GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY


9/159

T

T M O

M S

ANNABEL R. SARTIN


10/159


11/159

PREFACE

The new books on Paul will never cease and they

not to cease. If we stop studying Paul, wemiss much of Christ. The world has never had

man more wholly Christ-filled than Paul. In the

volume no effort is made to tell Paul's life, as

done in my Epochs in tJw Life of Paul and in

of other books by many writers. I attempt

merely to look at various angles and corners in

life and teaching that have a keen present-dayPaul was the most forward-looking man of

generation. We have not yet caught up with his

vision of Christ and of the Kingdom of God.

A. T. ROBERTSON.

Louisville, Kentucky.


12/159

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Author makes grateful acknowledgment to the

of the following periodicals for permission

include in this volume these chapters or parts of

which first appeared in their several issues.

The Review and Expositor, The Expositor (Lon

The Methodist Review, The Home and Foreign

The Homiletic Review, The Moody Monthly,

The Baptist World, and to further record that this

of Paul grew from the seed sown inthe

lecture of the fall term at the Southern Baptist

Seminary, October ist, 1911.


13/159

CONTENTS

PAGE

I PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST. 13

II THE VERSATILITY OF PAUL 40

PAUL AND THE DEITY OF CHRIST...

50

IV PAUL NOT A SACRAMENTARIAN...

59

V PAUL AS CHURCH ARCHITECT IN CORINTH 62

PAUL'S ECCLESIASTICAL INDEPENDENCE.

71

PAUL AND PATRIOTISM 80

PAUL'S MISSIONARY STATESMANSHIP. .

92

X PAUL'S INTEREST IN YOUNG MINISTERS.

106

X PAUL'S PREACHING IN THESSALONICA. .

117

PAUL AS PASTOR IN EPHESUS....

126

PAUL IN THE CENTER OF GREEK CULTURE 141


14/159


15/159

P T I

O C


16/159


17/159

CHAPTER I

PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST

I do not try to get away from the Charm of Paul,use Sir W. M. Ramsay's felicitous phrase. He was

personality, and a real man is always atBut, great as Paul was, our chief interest in

lies in his relation to Jesus Christ. This in itself isa new theme. The Christology of Paul has re

adequate treatment at the hands of Alexander,Du Bose, Dykes, Everett, Holsten, Lucas, Mon-

l, Paterson, Pfleiderer, Schmidt, Somerville, Stevens,B. Weiss. I do not purpose to enter the realm

Biblical Theology in this discussion. My aim is anarrower one than that of Paul's theology, orhis Christology. I mean to keep close to theof the historical and exegetical and show howcame to be the Interpreter of Christ that he was,his heritage and environment contributed to his

apprehension, how the Epistles necessarilyPaul's actual experience which served to re

new aspects of Christ to Paul. Matheson hasportrayed the Spiritual Development of St.

and Sabatier has made a brilliant Sketchthe Development of His Doctrine. What I have


18/159

PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRISTmind is rather a combination of these two pointview.It is hardly worth while to pause long to lay one's

foundations for such a study. To-day everyis challenged by somebody. Dr. T. K. Cheyne

the tame and labored conclusion that, afterand unbiased research, he lias come to the

iberate conviction that such a man as Paul realled. We are very grateful for this comforting

from the Oxford scholar. No doubt Paulis relieved to think that he can now claim

toric existence. There is raging at present in Gera fierce controversy as to whether Jesus ever

ed. The Christ-Myth, by Drews, has gonea dozen editions. He claims to show that

had no historical realityand is pure myth. Evenical German scholars like Von Soden and J. Weiss

gone into the fray to show that after all Jesuslive in Palestine. Last January, Prof. ShirleyJ.

of the Divinity School of the University of Chivigorously argued in the Biblical world agains

delusion of attributingdivinityto Jesus. But hesteps forth to prove againstall comers The Hisof Jesus. Jesus did live. For this we are

Both Paul and Jesus have historic careers


19/159

PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST 15

a mere theologicalinvention, the attribution to theJesus of qualitieswhich he did not possess, the

of the real man Jesus. Prof. W. B. Smith,New Orleans, has even undertaken to show us theJesus, the man strippedof all the later

vagaries, the man as he was. Otherrise above the confusion and boldlycharge Paul

being responsibleor having led the world astraythe simple Jesus of the Gospels. He is even

led the creator of Christianity,or the perverter,one may choose. We have justpassed through theof this conflict. The big German guns have ex

and Paul still remains as the InterpreterofThe effort to find a different conception of

ist in the Gospels has failed. Even the Synoptihave been dubbed Pauline in spiritand the

sources of the life of Jesus known to us (QMark) place Jesus on as high a pedestalas does

Let us then assume the facts in the Gospels and Actsthe Epistlesof Paul. That to some will be a

assumption, but some men have a spasm atstatement of fact. Let us follow Paul in his

to and apprehension of Christ. He waspressingon, after he began, to apprehend that


20/159


I. Paul Knowing Christ after the Flesh. Whenl first heard of Jesus we do not know. It is

probable that he saw Jesus when a student atseminary of Gamaliel in Jerusalem. Paul hadall likelihood finished his course before the publi

of Jesus began. He may have remained inbut more likelyreturned to Tarsus. It

a fascinatingtheory of some men that Paul cameto Jerusalem in time to see Jesus die on the

But we have no evidence of that. When he(2 Cor. 5:16) that he had once known Christ

er the flesh (Kara trdp/ca) he almost certainthat he once looked on Christ from the flesh

dpoint, yet now we have known him so noHe recognizedJesus on the road to Damascus

the explicitstatement, I am Jesus whom thouSo then Paul's first approach toward

was along the line of his prejudices. He wasto hate the new claimant for the Messiahship

had been justlycrucified to avoid an insurrection.brilliant,ultured young Jew had all the patriot

of Judas Maccabeus and the religiousprideoftypicalPharisee. He was in touch with the Helistic life of the time and had a broader outlookthe world than many Palestinian Jews by reason of


21/159


Every step that he takes in the persecun of the Christians is away from Christ. He be

the very antithesis of Christ.

II. Paul Seeing Christ Face to Face. It was arevulsion in Paul's whole nature when he looked

o the face of the Risen Christ. It was the supremeof his life,like a collision of a steel train. Hegoing at full speed against Christ and was ab

halted. The shock was very great to Paul'snature. It was even greater to his spiritu

He was thrown to the earth, and blindedhis eyes. But he had seen Jesus,the one whom he

come to hate most of all, though he had notupon His face before. He scorned Him for

pestilenteresy caused by His unfortunate life.In great moments the mind is abnormally active

the essential facts are stamped upon the brainclearness and vividness. The salient features of

climacteric event never faded from Paul's memory.speech and letter he repeatedlytold of the revoluin his own heart and life. In all essentials thenever varied. It was not of his doing. JesusHimself to Paul. It was not of Paul'snor with his consent. But the undoubted pres


22/159
http://www.forgottenbooks.org/in.php?btn=3&pibn=1000165727&from=pdfhttp://www.forgottenbooks.org/in.php?btn=2&pibn=1000165727&from=pdfhttp://www.forgottenbooks.org/in.php?btn=1&pibn=1000165727&from=pdf


23/159


any endorsement to him as a discipleof Christ.was known as the chief foe of the disciplesf

and he had come to Damascus to arrest thosehad fled thither to escape his clutches in JerusaHe had with him the official papers of the San-for the arrest of the Christians. Paul wason the defensive. The Jews would regard him

a renegade. He was without a friend save AnaniasJudas who were doubtful. He would not get a

from Jew or Christian. And yet Paul wouldbe silent. Straightway in the synagogues he

Jesus, that He is the Son of God (ActsHe must give his witness. It is a sure mark

the new convert that he must tell others of hisjoy. Paul was a novice in Christ,but not in

equipment. He was already a man of high culgreat genius, and much experience in publiclife

comparatively young. He was trained in pubdiscourse, but his voice must have sounded strangehis own ears as he heard it deliver powerful reasons

Jesus is the Son of God. He was refuting allold arguments as successfullys Stephen had done.

all that heard him were amazed (Act 9:21). Itthe voice of a lamb where they had usuallyheard

voice of the wolf. They were uneasy even now for


24/159


seen Jesus Christ in His risen state. He graspeonce the two-fold nature of Christ,His humanityHis deity. Paul was wise enough to begin withhe knew by experience. He stuck to that and

creased the more in strength,and confounded thethat dwelt in Damascus, proving that this is

Christ (Acts 9:22). Paul's first interpretatJesus sounded the keynote of his entire ministrywill never get beyond this truth whatever else helearn hereafter.

IV. Paul Adapting Himself to His New Environ It was clear to Paul that he needed a season

retirement in order to take stock of his situation.rebuffs at Damascus made it all the easier forto follow his judgment to spend a few years in

bia. He must make adjustment and take his bearThe call had come to him from Christ through

at Damascus to go far hence to the Gentiles.had ended the three days of darkness and doubt

to his future. But even so, Christ had not told himgo at once. The way was not now open nor were

Jews anxious to hear him. He had his call,butto hear. Besides, there was needed a delimita

n between his old Judaism and his new Christianit


25/159


any rate it was the ancestral home of the SemiticHe went back to the old haunts of his ancestors

ther he actuallyjourneyed as far as Mount Sinainot. There was in his heart the conflict betweenand grace. He was a master in rabbinic lore and

law, though as yet unskilled in the grace ofBut Christ had looked' upon him and he

gaze steadfastlyinto that face till he couldnd law and grace. Arabia was the melting pot for

theology. He was probably not wholly alonethis period,but meditations and reflections were

He comes back to his work with a clearion of the cardinal doctrines of grace. He has

to see how a new Israel is to supplantthe old.new is rooted in the old and is the true realizaof the hopes of his people. Paul perceivesthatMessianic longings of the Jews have come true

Jesus. It is his task to convince the Jews of thisfact and to help them see the wider outlook of the

Israel which is to include Gentiles as well as Jews.life in Tarsus had prepared him for this revolu

n. The experience of Peter on the housetop atproves how difficult it was for a Jew to conof a Gentile in the Kingdom of God except inof Jewish racial bonds. So far from the years


26/159

PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRISTPeter had said at Pentecost that the mes

was to them that were afar off, but he laterthat he understood that to mean that Gentiles

ld become Jews. Stephen had seen the matter morein its true spiritualature as Jesus had taughwoman of Samaria that the worship of God wasbound by temple or tribe. And now Paul was

up this largerconception of Stephen as his ownWould he meet the fate of Jesus and ofThe liberalizingf social and religio

is a perilousundertaking for any man. Butpath is clear before him. He will heed the

of Christ to bear the message to the Gentiles. Healso that he must suffer for Christ in so doing.

the vision has come to him and he will not beto it whatever befall him. It is good for

that as he returns to Damascus he does not knowdetails of his future career. God mercifullyveiledfrom him. He will take up his burden day byHe is conscious of a richer experienceand fuller

as he expounds anew the things of ChristDamascus. There is proof of his fresh power inplotof the Jews to kill him. He is not a negligibPaul had taught the Jews how to kill peoplthe crime of being Christians. They are now prac


27/159


ho planned his escape. It was a desperatand a lonelyretreat, but Paul was unafraid.

went straight on to Jerusalem. He would telnew story in the presence of Gamaliel himself if he

ld hear it. If Paul had been fainthearted,he wouldhave hesitated to come back to Jerusalem. Once

had been the joy and pride of the Sanhedrin; nowis the victim of their scorn and hate. Once the dis

had fluttered and fled with dread at his approachis cut to the quick to note how they shrink fromstill. The smell of fire is on him yet. There wassympathy in Jerusalem for Paul, no ear for his

It was enough to throw a weak nature intoPaul was sensitive and felt it keenly, as anydoes who finds his person and his message

It is an honor to Barnabas that he hadinsightand the courage to see what was in Paul.this endorsement Peter and John opened their

to the new recruit. Paul had two weeks offellowship with Peter (iaropriaai). Peter

at any rate that Paul was a man of parts. Hemade the disciplesfeel his steel. It is no dis

to Peter to say that he could not have foreseengreat a man he was dealing with at this juncturhow Paul would one day become the chief apostl


28/159


of Jerusalem. He did it with such powerStephen had done before that the Grecian Jews

about to kill him. The Lord Jesus had to appearPaul in a trance in the temple and bid him departthe Jews there would not hear him.

VI. Paul Pleading the Case with the Jews. Wenot followingcloselythe story of Paul's life. The

at Tarsus were not wasted. The opportunitat Antioch for which Paul had long waited.again was due to Barnabas. Paul and Barnabas

e had a specificall of the Holy Spiritto go on acampaign to win the Gentiles to Christ. They

not found the task easy. In order to get atGentiles,they find it wise to preach to the Jews.

Gentiles had business connections with the Jews.attended worship in the synagogues. Besides,

re had been no command to slightthe Jews forGentiles. At Antioch in Pisidia Paul had the

to plead the cause of Christ before Jewsdevout Gentiles. Fortunatelywe have preservenotes of this discourse, which is the earliest statewith any fullness of Paul's conceptionof Christ.

accuracy of Luke in his reports of Paul's speechewell vindicated by Maurice Jones, in his book St.


29/159


was true at Damascus and Jerusalem. The wholeof his sermon is to show that Jesus is the prom

made to David. He speaks from the Jewish standabout the Jewish Messiah. Paul shows clear

of John the Baptist and his relation toHe states the facts of Christ's death and resur

tion and expounds the significancef both of theseevents. He givesthe core of his system of thewhich is justificationy faith in Christ, who

on the cross for the remission of our sins. Hews that the law of Moses could not justifythe Jewsore God. It was all very wonderful and strange andvery attractive. They wanted to hear more aboutOn the next Sabbath the jealousyof the Jewis

ders led Paul to turn to the Gentiles instead of theBut we have caught a glimpseof Paul's point of

and method with Jews. We see his skill in thisalso as he speaks to the mob from the steps of

tower of Antonia, and later before Agrippa inHe is thoroughly at home in all Jewish

and seems the man of all men to speak withJewish people about Christ. In the last chapte

Acts we see Paul pleadingwith the Jews of Romeaccept the Kingdom of God as revealed in Jesusand the partialsuccess obtained there. In


30/159


31/159

PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST 27reared in Tarsus, the home of a great Greek uni

and of philosophersalso,a center of Greek andan life. The tides of the Roman world ran through

and Paul is never greater than in his powertake the very language of the various cults of the

and charge it with Christian meaning. He doess time and again. Thus he gets a hearing from

man in the street. He was a man of the schools.he knew how to talk in the tongue of his time.could be understood. A typicalexample of Paul'sin this respect is seen in the wonderful address

Mars Hill. In the midst of all that was great inens and before Epicureans and Stoics, Paul made

persuasivestatement of the gospel of Christ ina way as to turn to his advantage all his sur

and yet to bring out many of the fundatal doctrines. He made some impressionalso uponfickle Athenians. How well Paul succeeded withGentiles is seen in the long line of churches plantehim in Asia and Europe. In his Epistleshe will

in the power of the Cross of Christ. It wasto the Greeks at first,but to many it be

the wisdom of God.

VIII. Paul Looking for Christ's Return. In


32/159


ween the Kingdom of Christ and the Kingdom ofHe foresaw the inevitable grapple between

two great forces for the mastery of the world.found hope in the coming of Jesus to claim hisIt was natural that this hope should be brighte

the earlier stages of the apostolichistory. The subwas left in doubt by Christ Himself as to the time.disciplesere charged to be ready. There is no

bt that this steady hope cheered them through theyears of separationfrom Him. Some came to

k for Him at once. It was hard to preach on thewithout creatinga false impression. Hope would

easilybecome certainty.So it happens that the verygroup of Paul's Epistlesdeals with last things

is to the fore in the beginning in theof the time, but it gradually re

as time went by. Paul never lost his convictionChrist would come again nor should we, buttopicscame to occupy his heart more as the yearsby. Indeed, the two Thessalonian Epistlesare

chieflyto correct misapprehension about whatl had said on this subject. It is so easy to be

Some had understood him to say thatalready dead would have no share in the secondOthers drew the inference that since Christ


33/159

AUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST 29

mentions various items about His life and deathaspects of faith in Him as Lord, on a par withthe Father. He is the Son of God, raised from

dead, who will surely come back again. Salvationthrough the atoning death of Christ. The Christianlives in Christ as the sphere of his activit

the ground of his hope. These are not doctrinalbut Paul's great doctrines are here in the

incidental form. To understand Paul's standpoinone must look back across the eighteen years

t have passed since he met Jesus on the Damascusd. It is all a matter of course with Paul now, but

fire of love and faith burns bright. He is notChristianityis not stale nor is preaching per

He meets every new situation with the alertof youth and finds Christ adequate for everything

IX. Paul Justifyingthe Cross of Christ. Paul'smay not be a complete pictureof his concep

n of Christ. We have very few of Paul's manyHe may have written other letters. He knew

about Christ which it was unlawful to utter.so far as they go, the letters do justly revealapprehension of the mystery of Christ, as he

said (Eph. 3:3f.). They go very far indeed.


34/159

is some four years later that Paul writes Firstinthians. He is in Ephesus, and is cut to the heart

the troubles in the church at Corinth. He hasto see the sad sight of a church splitover theof various preachers, includinghimself. They

appealed to Paul for help and he has to speakdivisions led to or helped on various vices and

knesses. Paul feels called on to defend his styleofin Corinth. Cephas had not been there and

was acknowledged to be eloquent. Paul makesdefense by showing how he did right in deterto preach only Christ Jesus and Him crucified.

was bad enough as it was. If Paul had panderedthe false tastes and low standard of the Corinthiansflashyoratory and superficialphilosophy, he could

e made a greater name for himself and ruined therch. As it turned out many scoffed at the foolish

of his preaching the Cross of Christ. But hisjoy in it all is that he laid no other foundation

Corinth than Christ Jesus. The Cross of Christ istruest wisdom for it is God's wisdom. It is aapologetic for the Cross that Paul makes in that

and one that is extremely pertinentnow. Theof Paul's message is the Cross and the resurrec

of Christ as proving His power over death onCross. Paul apparently moves in a new realm


35/159

AUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST 31

X. Paul Beholding the Glory of God in Christ. Corinthians is the most personalof all Paul's

He is at white heat. The crisis has come atinth. Paul is in flightfrom Ephesus. He has

Titus in Philippi,ith much agitationof spiriwrites with heart all aglow with emotion. He

to catch a fresh glimpse of the face of Jesuslifts the whole discussion of the ministry out ofsordid atmosphere of Corinth, and places it onpinnacleof spiritualommunion with God in Christ.eternal relation of the soul with God in Christ

here seen with marvelous clearness. This Epistla Pierian spring for every preacher who is racked

cares and ecclesiastical worries. Paul is ablesing so nobly because he is sure of the presence ofist with him. He has real rapture with Christ.

else reallymatters now. He is the slave ofist in God's triumphal march through the ages.is an incense-bearer with the sweet savor of ChristGod, whatever men may think. So he is confident

Christ with unveiled face before the whole world.lightof God is in his heart through Christ, andJesus' sake he will endure anything. He isto be at home with the Lord, but meanwhileendeavor to be well-pleasingunto Him as His


36/159


37/159

THE INTERPRETER OF CHRIST 33of rabbinism. That message is good for al

as a protest against the bondage of mere tradiand ritual. It is vital union with Christ that Paul

Christ lives in Paul and he is crucified with

XII. Paul Expounding Redemption in Christ. condensed statement can do justiceto Paul's rea

expositionof the varied relations of Christ tothe phases of the work of redemption as wroughtin the Epistle to the Romans. It is not merelyPaul is here seen at his best, in the prime of his

powers, on the greatest of themes, and withspace to give play to his great genius. Paul

Romans gives his gospel. In a true sense Paul'sis the full and finest evangel of all (cf.Whyte,Shepherd, p. 18). It is not a new gospel

is the one that Paul had joyfullypreached to thetiles. Nowhere does Paul make it clearer thatist is the center of all his thinking and actions.

heart of his argument turns on the fact thatmade propitiatoryofferingfor our sins by Hison the cross, which offeringis mediated to usfaith in Christ as our Redeemer so that God freel

s and declares us righteousand will ultimatel


38/159


39/159


chase, for the goal is Christ, who is never outsight,ever beckoning him on. He sees the fore-

of the riches of glory in Christ.

XIV. Paul Showing the Supremacy of Christ. InPaul is made aware of a new heresy in Asia

ch he had foreseen in his address to the elders ofat Miletus. This hybrid philosophyand spec

tive Essenism degraded Christ to the rank of anor angel. The Pauline Christology is now at

at the center and Paul steps out into the openshow that Jesus and Christ are one and the samethe Jesus or Christ controversy in The Hibbert

that Jesus was a real man and died on thefor our sins, that Christ is the very image of

and the First-born before all creation,that Christthe author of creation,and the sustainer of the cre

universe,that He is supreme in the work of naand given head over all. Christ is the key of the

the reconciler between man and God and manman (the true Peace-maker), the mystery ofthe fullness of all the Godhead in bodily form.is all and in all. Christ is our ideal and ourWe are hid with Christ in God. No higher

d has ever been spoken of Christ than Paul utters


40/159


the head as is shown in Colossians. The body ofhead is the church, the spiritualchurch. We are

e alive in Christ, created in Him for good works.is the dignity of human nature so well

out as in Ephesians. We are to grow up intoto become one new man, one full man in Him,

some sense worthy of Him, our Head. We arein Him, both Jew and Gentile. The middle wall

partitionis broken down. Peace and love have cometead. He is the chief cornerstone and we are builto the great temple of God's redeemed humanity.

riches of Christ are unsearchable and His loveall comprehension and all telling.But we are

to sit in the heavenlies with Christ Jesus.

XVI. Paid Trusting in Christ Jesus, His Hope. Pastoral Epistlesshow the tender side of Paul's

He is an old man. Christ put him into thecounting him worthy. It is still a marvel

Paul how He came to do it. But he is deeplThe lesson of it all is that Jesus is the

of sinners. He is the Mediator between God

man, the ransom for all,the one Potentate, Kingkings,and Lord of lords,our great God and SaviourChrist. He abolished death and brought lif


41/159


his testimony in his Epistles.He has tested Christover the Roman Empire, by land and sea, with

end and foe. Christ has never failed him. Paulqualifiedo interprethrist out of the wealth of his

of Christ. The best tribute to Paul is forto learn to know Christ and the power of His resurtion. Paul was able to say at the end of the day:know him whom I have believed and I am persuadet he is able to keep that which I have committed

him against that day. He had committedis all to Christ. Soon he would see

again face to face. He will know even as Christknown him through all the years.

The address, given above, was delivered in 1911.the same year appeared the third edition of Knowl-

Testimony of St. Paul and Christ. The streamcriticism concerning Paul continues. Early in 1912

Paul and His Interpreterstranslatedbyappeared with trenchant criticism of

efforts to understand Paul. The Reformaof Luther fought and conquered in the name ofbut did not advance the historical knowledge of(p.2). His summary is that the study of Paul-sm has nothing very brilliant to show for itself in

way of scientific achievement (p. 237). He


42/159


save in the use of some technical terms (KenSt. Paul and the Mystery-Religions(1913). But

weitzer finds in Paul's eschatology the key tolife and teaching which he took over from the

and Jesus (p.243). This view that Paul tookfalse line from eschatologyand the sacraments and

Mystery-Religions is presented by Morgan inable volume, The Religion and the Theology oPaul (1917). Prof. H. A. A. Kennedy has a

n criticism of it in The Expositor (SeptemberM. Jones has no doubt that the new attack

Paul from the side of comparative religionwill berepelledwith a great increase of our knowl

of the Graeco-Roman world in which Paul laboredCriticisms in the Present Day, The Expos

July, 1917, p. 31). Jones thinks that recenthave seen a strikingand a gratifyingchange in

study of Paul (p. 16). Progress has been madethe knowledge of the chronologicaldata in Paul'sas M. Jones has shown in his discussion of Plooij'

on that subject (The Expositor, May,August, 1919). Deissmann thinks that Paul hasdoubly misunderstood as a man of culture instead

a tentmaker like Amos the herdsman of TekoaPaul, 1911, p. 6), in which view he greatlyunder


43/159


a great study of the Apostle, Tlie Life and Letof St. Paul (1920), on the scale of ConybeareHowson, in which he surveys with breadth of

the old and the new knowledge of Paul, buta touch of condescension at times out of keepingthe facts. Hayes does not call Paul the greatest

He reserves that honor for John (PaulHis Epistles,1915, p. 487). That is a matter of

but Hayes admits that Paul's influence asinterpreterof Christ has been greater than that of

Perhaps the truth is that John saw deeper intomind and heart of Christ by the singleness of hisand the length of his fellowshipwith Christ. Paul

a man of more genius and more variety and of aculture and of a more practicalturn of mind.

has seen more sides of Christ and of ChristianitJohn and has interpreted more aspects of Christ

more kinds of men. However, Paul remains toas of old, the chief Interpreterof Jesus Christ

modern men. He cannot be gotten rid of. Hison the mind of modern Christians is unshaken

spite of all criticism and progress. We must goto Christ, but we must go by way of Paul. Johnws Paul's influence as do Luke and Mark. Peter

Barnabas felt the force of Paul's leadership. That


44/159

CHAPTER II

THE VERSATILITY OF PAUL

The cry of Back to Christ has not disposed ofl. The great Apostle continues to give criticism a

time. He is accused of having perverted the simgospel of the kingdom as preached by Jesus into an

theology foreign to the thought and purpose ofist He is called the second founder of Chris

in reality the destroyer of the Christianity ofSo we have had the Jesus or Paul con

The battle is still raging over the Paulineand several recent volumes 2 treat this

Paul is condemned by some for rabbinisingBreitenstein, Jesus et Paul, 1908; Heine, Jesus Christus und

1902; Goguel, L'apotre Paul et Jesus Christ, 1904;Paulus und Jesus, 1910; Kaftan, Jesus und Paulus,

6; Knowling, Testimony of St. Paul to Christ, 1911 (seced.) ; A. Meyer, Jesus or Paul (tr.), 1909; Reid, Jesus the

and Paul the Apostle in the Light of Modern Criticism,Resch, Paulinismus und die Logia Jcsu, 1904; C. A. Scott,and Paul (Cambridge Biblical Essays, 1909) ; J. Weiss,

l and Jesus (tr.), 1909; Bacon, Jesus and Paul, 1921.The Christology of St. Paul, 1912; Forsyth, The Per

and Place of Jesus Christ, 1909; Olchewski, Die Wurzclnpaulinischcn Christologic, 1909; Rostron, The Christology ofPaul, 1912; Mackintosh, The Doctrine of the Person of Jesus


45/159

THE VERSATILITY OF PAUL 41

hough Montefiore 1 thinks that he didproperly understand Judaism which he denounces.W. M. Ramsay contends in his books on Paul that

was familiar with the best things in current Helthough he was a thorough Jew at bottom. AJew could never have grown into the Apos

of the Grasco-Roman world (Ramsay, The Helof Paul in the Teaching of Paul in Terms of

Present Day, 1913, p. 32). But PrincipalA. E.2 disputesboth the quantityand the qualityof

s Greek trainingof Paul. In the mind of Paul aversalised Hellenism coalesced with a universalised

(Ramsay, The Cities of St. Paul, p. 73).the mystery-religionsof the Grseco-Roman

are held by some to be the determining factorPaul's theology,a view ably answered by ProfessorA. A. Kennedy,4 but still advocated by ProfessorMorgan in his now famous volume, The ReligionTheology of St. Paul, 1917, clearlyrefuted also

Professor Kennedy in The Expositor 5 for AugustSeptember, 1917. Dr. Maurice Jones6 considersonslaught on the orthodox view of Paul parall

importance with the crisis raised by the criticismBaur: I have no doubt that this attack will be as


46/159


47/159


Professor G. G. Findlay has sounded anote in his able article on The Unity of St.Teaching, in the July London Quarterl

The apparently contradictoryelements inteaching admit of easy and natural synthesisifwe let Paul be his own interpreter. This Dr.

shows with characteristic ability. Paul wasan intellectual and theologicalchameleon, a mere

e was all things to all men, notof mental flabbiness,but that I may by al

s save some (i Cor. ix. 22). This dominantruns through all of Paul's thinkingand work

He was not driftingabout pickingup scraps ofdom in the Agora of Athens, as the Epicurean

Stoic philosopherssneered (Acts xvii. 18), but aconstructive thinker with a true philosophy ofand of life. He was not grasping at straws

save himself, but he was projectinga great camto evangelisethe Roman world for Christ. He

among men, to be sure, and was no scholastic reout of touch with men, though not a mere artisan

Deissmann argues in his St. Paul. We shall neverPaul's gospel tillwe understand the Indiof St. Paul (R. H. Strachan, 1916). The

ion that Paul was a borrower and made a patch


48/159


the current Stoic maxims. Ramsay is fullyjustid in terming Paul a philosopher, the greatest of

In like manner he knew the dialect andellectual method of the rabbis and does not hesi

on occasion to adopt the rabbinic method ofto turn a point with his Jewish opponents

Gal. iii.16, 20). He can use allegorywith morethan Philo (Gal. iv. 21-31). But it is as

to call Paul a discipleof Philo as of Zeno.the Jew I became as a Jew, that I might gai; to them that are under the law, as under thenot being myself under the law, that I mightthem that are under the law: to them that are

law, as without law, not being without lawGod, but under law to Christ, that I might gainm that are without law (i Cor. ix. 20, 21). In

important passage Paul has interpretedhis ownhod. It is still true that Paul is the best interpretPaulinism better than Baur, Pfleiderer, Wernle,

and all the rest.The critics of Paul confess their failure to undernd him. Findlay 1 quotes Pileiderer as findingno

but to admit that Paul kept the two differkinds of conceptions(Judaic and Hellenic) in hissciousness side by side but unrelated, and jumped


49/159


between them. This is naive, but it misPaul and quite misses the point. Paul

a Jew with Pharisaic training,n expert rabbi ofschools, and lived in the Grseco-Roman world andthe currents of thought and life all about him ; but

was now first of all a slave of Jesus Christ. Henot look at Christ now from the Jewish, nowthe Greek standpoint. He is interpretinghristto Jews, now to Greeks. His conception ofand of the gospel is not a jumble, but a singl

He varies his terminology to make himselfbetter understood by different auditors,just aspreachersdo to-day. Paul even calls a Cretan

a prophet, to add point to the quotation,withmeaning to endorse the poet as on a par with

istian teachers. The antitheses in Paul's languagelike the paradoxes of Jesus, to be interpretedby

main body of his teaching. Weinel misses the pointn he asserts that in St. Paul's writings we have

forms of religion the sacramental and the purelystanding side by side without any attempt

co-ordination. Language is at bottom figurativit is easy to ride the figuresto death. It gives one

queer feelingat the heart to read that Paul did notwhether he was a sacramentarian or a preacher


50/159


ves that Paul thought of baptism and the Lord'sin a sacramental way, it seems to him in thedegree inaccurate and misleading to call Paul

Christianitya mystery-religion.It is much moreand reasonable to say that it is a religion ofbelonging to the sphere of psychology and ethics

her than to that of mystery or magic. For faithas we have seen, is the fundamental principl

Pauline Christianity.We must learn how to put first things first with

He was not a faddist. He did not jumpone extreme to another. There was one greatin his life,a spiritualand intellectual revolution,

conversion. Up to that great event, when JesusHimself to Paul, his life ran a straightand

course as the champion of Pharisaism thatto blows with Christianity(Gal. i. 13, 14). Heequally consistent afterwards in his zealous pur

l of Christ (Phil. iii. 12). This whole great(Phil. iii. 1-16) is Paul's apologia for his

from rabbinism to Christ, and his consistentpersistentadherence to Christ as the one thing 2

th while in life. Christ dominates Paul's wholeChrist is his passion, his very life. All else

secondary and subordinate. The man who asserted


51/159


his grasp of Gentile freedom and the truth of thegospel was strong enough to shake off theof the Judaisers,the powerful Pharisaic ele

in Jerusalem Christianity(i Corinthians, 2 Corians,Galatians, Romans), Paul was equally clearin his detection of the sophistriesof nascent

(Colossians, Ephesians, and the PasIf he was able to proclaim the second com

of Christ with sanity,and not go to the excessesthe wild eschatologicalapocalyptists(i and 2 Thes-

he was certainlycompetent to fathom theof Mithraism without becoming a victim of

vagaries (cf. Kennedy, St. Paid and the Mystery-Paul is entitled to fair treatment at the hands of

The great majority of his epistlesre nowas genuine. Few scholars now disputetheauthorshipof the four great epistlesdmitted

Baur (i and 2 Corinthians, Galatians andand i Thessalonians, Colossians and Philip

These are enough to explain all the sides ofteaching,he being his own interpreter.Most

we are to welcome all the new light fromstudy of eschatology,apocalyptic,Pharisaism, the

the inscriptions,he emperor-cult, Mithraism


52/159

PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRISTriches of Christ (Eph. iii.8), if we seek

key to his message and life in one of these suborand contributory streams of influence rather

in the main source of all. Paul was a closeof the Old Testament, but he interpretedthescripturesin the lightof the Cross of Christ.

interpretedthe circumcision of Abraham as thel of the faith which he already had while in un-

(Rom. iv. 10, u). He refused to makeessential to salvation (i Cor. i. 14-17), but

it the symbol of death to sin and burial of thelife and resurrection to the new life in Christ

vi. 3-7). It is not fair to Paul to read intolanguage the sacramental ideas of current Mithra-when he pointedlyinterpretsis idea in the non-

sense, especiallywhen the sacramentalcontravenes Paul's repeated slogan of sal

by faith, not by works of the law (Rom. iii28). It is more natural to say that the criticsmake Paul give up the main thesis of his messalvation by grace, are mistaken when they so

that per se are capable of a sacrameaning.It is not the first time that critics have disposedof

to their own satisfaction,but he has remarkable


53/159


54/159


55/159

PAUL AND THE DEITY OF CHRIST 51

The two oldest and best Greek manuscriptthe New Testament (Codices Sinaiticus and Vati-

read God here, not Lord. But, it may bethis is simply Luke's report of Paul's speech

In Romans 9 15, Paul himself says : Whose are theand of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh

is over all,God blessed for ever. Amen. Thisthe text of the Revised Version. The old Greek

no punctuation and one is at libertyto make hispunctuation. There is no semicolon after flesh

who is over all,God, be blessed for ever. Amen.is possibleto be sure, but nothing like so natural

her in the Greek or in the English. Besides, theChrist as concerning the flesh clearlysuggestsnot according to the flesh and seems to demandin appositiono complete the sense.

But this is by no means all. The Epistle to Titusnot admitted as Pauline by all scholars,but the bal

of evidence still turns that way. In Titus 2:13read : Looking for the blessed hope and appearof the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesu

(margin of the Revised Version). The textV.) reads of the great God and our SaviourChrist. The papyri and inscriptionsfurnish

proof that the expression Our great God


56/159


57/159


but it is enough to controvert completely theof The Outlook reviewer that Paul never

that (the deity of Jesus Christ), as John'shas it.

The simple truth is that all the New Testamentks have the same attitude toward Jesus. Dr. Lukyn

has a new and able discussion of Matthew'sunder the title,The Hebrew Christian Messiah,

which he shows conclusivelyhat the author of theGospel presents and proves the deity of Christ.

The same position appears in the so-called LogiaQ of criticism).

Mark does no other.Modern criticism has shown that all the sources ofknowledge agree that Jesus is the Christ, the Son

God.Thus far is my brief reply to The Outlook in The

World in 1917. But the argument is reallthan I put it then. One must remember that

was a Jew, a Pharisee of the straitest sort, atheologian from Gamaliel's school and familiar

all the Jewish antipathy to polytheisticlanguageemperor worship so rife when he wrote. In apthe term Lord * to Jesus he was fullyaware

the Jewish sensitiveness about the use of that word


58/159


Lord. One must bear this in mind in measurinforce of Paul's language. It was not a carelesson Paul's part, but a deliberate conviction whenplaced Jesus on a par with the God and Fathermen.

Besides, Paul's faith in Jesus as Lord was theof personal experience. When he surren

to the Risen Jesus on the Damascus road, hefirst: Who art thou, Lord? (Acts 9:5, 22:8;

On learning that it was Jesus whom he wasPaul said: What shall I do, Lord?

22:10.) Paul never wavered from the convicthat he had seen the Risen Jesus who appeared toalso at other times and whom he recognized as

(Acts 9:10 in Damascus; Acts 22:19 in JeruFrom the very first,after Paul's radicalthat made him turn his back upon all hisrejudicesand self-interest,he proclaime

that he is the Son of God (Acts 9:20), provthat this is the Christ (Messiah) (Acts 9:22).had crossed the Rubicon. The Jews in Damascus

to kill him (Acts 9:23) and Jewish hate soughtlife to the end, but Paul never faltered in loyaltJesus as Lord.If it be said that Paul only believed in and taught


59/159

PAUL AND THE DEITY OF CHRIST 55He argued with the Stoics and Epicureans

the agora of Athens, much to their contempt infor they counted him a mere seed-collector, a

of scraps of wisdom in the marketplace17:18), a mere babbler in the midst of sophistlinguisticymnasts. But one recalls that Paul's

have so many words in common with thelanguage of Seneca that scholars have

discussed the questionwhether Paul did notrow from the great Stoic or he from Paul (Light

Excursus in his Commentary on PhilippiansSir W. M. Ramsay dares to say that Paul is the

philosopherof all times, greatest in insighsanity,in grasp, in knowledge of truth. Besides,l's later Epistles(Col.,Eph., the Pastorals) revealtitanic struggle with a subtle phase of philosopht struck at the Person of Christ. IncipientGnostic

in the Province of Asia had accepted Christianitrejected the Deity and Lordship of Jesus. This

philosophy of the East held that matter wasevil and that the good God could not touch

Hence it positeda series of czons as intermebetween God and matter. The Person of

was solved by them in two ways. One wingthat Jesus did not have a real human body, but


60/159


a on or emanation from God. The Gnostics placeChrist at the bottom of a series of (sons or emana

ns of God. Paul challengedthis degrading Christol-in a masterly argument in which he holds to theof Jesus and Christ,Christ Jesus the Lord (Colthe actual humanity of Jesus Christ through the

od of the Cross (Col. i :2o), the real deity ofChrist as the Incarnate Son of God, as the

of his love (Col. I 113), the image of the inible God (i 115), for in him dwelleth all the ful

of the Godhead bodily (2:9), and Christ is nowon the righthand of God (3:1). Paul fear

claimed primacy for Jesus Christ as the firstn of all creation (i :i5),not the end of a series of

as the Creator and Sustainer of the material uni(i : 1 6-1 7), as the head of the spiritualniverse

that in all things he might have the preThe same line of argument is carried out

Ephesians and in the Pastoral Epistles.It is impossible to say, therefore, that Paul did not

with the philosophicaland metaphysicaof the Trinityand that for him Jesus had only

value-judgment of God without any acute reflecn of the force of his words. He met and conqueresubtle a form of Christologicalheresy as Chris


61/159


Tit. 2:13), like John's Gospel (i :i),appliedtheword God to Jesus, whom he certainlycalled

the Son of God.A vast literature has grown up around the famous

in Phil. 2:5-11. Here Paul definitelyssertst in Christ's Preincarnate state He was exist

in the form of God. J In this state Christcounted the being on an equalitywith God 2

a fact. First get that clearly. It was a fact,a confact to Christ Jesus before his Incarnation, jus

we have it in John i :i. We need not splithairsthe distinctions between form 3 of God (se

o form of a servant ), likeness of men, 4 inas a man. These refinements do not affect

broad statement in the sentence that Jesus in hisstate was on a par with God just as the

accused him of claiming, making himself equalGod 6 (John 5 :i8). The deity which Christ hadjust as actual as the humanity which he took upon

self. Whatever is meant by emptied himself 7cannot mean to say that Jesus divested himself

his divine nature and Sonship. That he could notas no earthly son can rid himself of his father'sThe thing to which Jesus did not cling 8his place in heaven beside the Father and on the


62/159


63/159

CHAPTER IV

PAUL NOT A SACRAMENTARIAN

In the very able article of Professor H. T. Andrewsthe November Expositor on The Place of the Sac

in the Teaching of St. Paul the learnedit seems to me, makes the fatal mistake of read

into Paul's language about baptism the ideas ofMithraists and of the later sacramentarian Chris

ns. This is precisely the vice of the historico-tical method that Professor H. A. A. Kennedy hasskilfully refuted in his St. Paul and the Mystery-

Paul's keen mind was all alert for pointscontact with the thought of his time, but he wasa mere blunderer with no coherent theology. Pro

Andrews surely overstates the matter when heims that scientific exegesis has given the victory to

sacramentarians against the symbolists and thatmust find some way to rescue modernfrom this blight or throw Paul overboard

a reliable interpreter of Christianity. He holdsthat modern Christians as a whole are not go

to accept sacramentarian Christianity. Professoradmits that Paul has his evangelical side, but

holds that the inconsistency in his attitude towardis incapable of solution. I venture to reply


64/159


65/159

PAUL NOT A SACRAMENTARIAN 61

light of baptism, but he did not consider ittask.

I do not press the last clause where the fear is imthat the cross of Christ may be rendered null

void, emptied * of real value. It is possible tothis clause to the wisdom of speech, though

naturally points back also to the previous contrast.The other passage is Romans vi :3~6, where Paul

the symbolism of baptism in terms of burialresurrection. Certainly Paul here is a symbolist,

is so beautifully brought out by Sanday and Head-on this passage.

There are passages in Paul's writings which areof the sacramentarian interpretation given to

by Professor Andrews. My contention is thatambiguous passages should be expounded in theof Paul's real spirit and not from the standpoint

Mithraism and later sacramentarian Christianity.do that is not in my opinion scientific exegesis. It

er makes a jumble of Paul, whose insight into theof Christ has never been surpassed. It is not

to throw Paul overboard.


66/159

CHAPTER V

AS CHURCH ARCHITECT IN CORINTH

Paul is on the defensive in the first four chapters ofst Corinthians. The household of Chloe have

to Ephesus (i Cor. 1:11) with full reports ofstrife in the church in Corinth. There was schismpartisanship. Some stood for Paul, some for

some for Cephas, and some for Christ (maka partisan use of Christ's name). It was all very

to Paul. It is not certain that Peter hadto Corinth though it is possible. At any rate

Judaizers made use of Peter's name as they hadwith that of James, the Lord's brother (Gal.in opposition to Paul. Apollos himself had left

inth because of the disturbance and refused Paul'sentreaty to return (i Cor. 16:12). He had

enough of Corinth. He had gone with cordialommendations from Aquila and Priscilla in

(Acts 18:27) and his eloquence and learnhad made a great impression. He had clearly not

t to cause a schism. But once factions arisea church over preachers, it is not easy to end the

The situation in Corinth must have been very bad,from Paul's own language in these chapters


67/159

PAUL AS CHURCH ARCHITECT 63

ul is seeking to show that neither he nor Apollosto blame for the divisions that have come, but the

and jealousy of the members themselves whonot acted in the spiritof Christ (i Cor. 3:1-9;

Paul planted the seed, and Apollos wateredplant, but God gave the increase (3:6), and God

erves all the glory. Besides, it is God's field orand God's building and Paul and

are merely fellow-workers with God in buildthe house of God (3.9).

It is this figure of building that Paul takes updevelops in 3:11-17. In doing so Paul has to

his work in Corinth, but it makes him feela fool for Christ's sake to have to do it (4:10) assays with the keenest irony: We are fools for

sake, but ye are wise in Christ.The word translated master-builder is really ourd architect. * Dr. Walter Lock, Lady Margaret

of Divinity in Oxford University, has anmonograph on St. Paul the Masterbuilder

which he applies the figure to Paul's whole career.Paul is here thinking primarily of his work in

as founder and builder of the church there.pastor is a church architect if he does his work

He does not, indeed, build the edifice in


68/159


hitecture has developed from the Jewish synagoguethe Greek temple and the Roman basilica. The

is meant for worship and preachingand teachThe medieval cathedrals were for worship andimpressing the senses, not for preaching. Gothic

seems to be an invention of the devil forprevention of preaching and as such it is a great

In it one does not get air, heat, or lighone cannot hear the sermon. The dim religiosuits the deacon's nap and one's aesthetic taste

beauty.The Greek word for carpenter 1 has a wider

than our English word. It was applied toin stone and brick also. Prof. W. A.

2 argues that we should say Jesus the Workthat Jesus was in actual touch with the wide

ustrial life of his time. Be that as it may, the worde for architect ' was used for engineers,a directorworkmen, any one whose force of intellect is masteran enterprise(cf. our captains of industry). In a

3 of the third century B. C. we read thatthe architect had as successor one who had

ked under him and he is called Theodorus the*

It is plain that Paul conceives that the pastor of a


69/159


it is equally clear that Paul did not try to dothe work. He is the chief workman, the master-*

the leader of workmen, but he is not theworkman. Some churches have actuallyregardepastor as a hired man to do all the jobs in the

from sexton to sermon, ever to raisinghissalary. The pastor who does all the work in

church has done the church a great injury. Thepastor finds work for every member of the church

do. He sees the angel in the stone and he trainsworkmen who can carve the angel out of the

and who will themselves see angels. The trueis a Christian statesman with plans for the

of God of which his church is a part, adivision in the army that is storming the

nches of the enemy.And Paul is architect of the whole church life. All

of the church's activities head up in him.re should be no cross-currents, no cross-purposes,rivals to his leadership. A country can have butgovernor at a time. A railroad can have onlypresident. The local church is a great business

for the spread of the Kingdom of God in an community and in the whole world. The pastor

leader, but not autocrat. The church is a democ


70/159


71/159

67like the deacons, are part of the pastor'The Sunday School should function in har

with the church and not againstit. The youngshould work under the pastor'sleadership.Once more, the pastor must build on the rightfoun

ion if he is to be a wise architect as Paul claimst he was. Paul had no room for any other foun

1 than the one on which he built in Corinth andApollos added to in his work. Indeed, the

can have no other : For other foundationno man lay than that which is laid,which is Jesus

(l Cor. 3 :n). The architect who tries it willthat he has built his house upon the sand instead

upon the rock. It will not stand. One may buildattractive edifice upon the wrong foundation, but

will topple and fall. Nominal Christians have beenwho seem ashamed of Christ as the foundaThey find the Cross a stumbling block like the

or foolishness like the Greeks. The Sanhedrinthis Stone which God made the head of theJesus called obedience to his words buildin

the rock. The architect must see to it that Christunder the life of the church and of each life in the

The wise architect,says Paul, will build with the


72/159


testing comes for every house, even fire-proThe fire comes and then it will be shown

what sort the house is,whether wood, hay, stubble,silver,precious stones. Inflammable is writ

on some of the freight cars that one sees. Paulin mind the life-work of the Christian teacher or

It may go up in smoke like chaff while thehimself will be saved, but so as by fire (3:15)

s does not mean purgatory for the preacher,butmeans that the preacher or teacher himself may

to heaven, but empty-handed. He bears no sheavesh him. His work has been for naught. Some

not to say preaching,is dry enough to burnease, almost by spontaneous combustion. Buta ministry is a tragedy of failure.

But Paul picturessomething still worse. He warnsschismatics in Corinth againstthe perilof destroya church of God (3:16-17). That is a terrible

to do, to be a church-wrecker. For the church,the individual soul, is the real temple of God.Spiritof God dwells in the hearts of his peoplepreacher who wrecks churches like a tornado is a

but God will destroy him. It is not cleart Paul means by destroy. l He uses the samed for the church that he destroysand for his own


73/159


of Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:1-4). Hehimself by his trade and received occasional

from Philippi and Thessalonica (Acts 18:5; I3:6; Phil. 4:15). In fact, Paul refused hel

m Corinth and robbed other churches, takinof them that I might minister unto you (2

II :8) and kept himself thus from being a burdenthe Corinthians (2 Cor. 11:9) because of the critispiritof some of them who actuallyaccused Paulpreaching for money (2 Cor. 12:14). After Pault Corinth every conceivable charge that malignante could contrive was raised against him by the

minority there. Paul answers their chargesand with biting sarcasm and withering scorn

2 Cor. 10:1-13:10. He had written several lettersthe church. He had sent Timothy who was ap

ineffective against the rampant Judaizers (i4:17; 16:10-11); they had scouted his youth and

and frightenedhim back to Ephesus (ActsPaul had sent Titus who had a stouter spir

who brought him in Macedonia a glorious reportvictoryby the majorityin Corinth that deeply stirred

to appreciation(2 Cor. 1:12-3:3; 6:11-7:16)us had filled Paul's heart with praise,but Paul nowto win the stubborn minority by a powerfu


74/159


to finish the collection there (2 Cor. 8-9) anded awhile for the work to be done, apparently

round about to Illyricum (Rom. 15:19). Whencame again to Corinth, the opposition had disap

and the Judaizers had left the field to Paults 20:1-3). He met trouble again from the JewsCorinth as at the first (Acts 18). Paul did rot

fight trouble to a finish. Sometimes he leftno issue was at stake or when it seemed best

round as in Antioch in Pisidia, in Lystra, in Phi-in Thessalonica, in Athens. But in Corinth he

on the fight because the very essence of thewas at stake as in Galatia. The Judaizers were

the freedom of the gospel of grace inPaul kept away from Corinth till peace had

but he fought the fight for spiritual liberty tonot for personal vindication. He cared naught

a personal triumph. So he was a wise churchin Corinth and a model for ministers to-day

have to build a church of God in worldly andcities like Corinth where luxury and vice com

with worldliness and heresy to set at naughtmessage of Christ and the ministers of God.


75/159

CHAPTER VI

ECCLESIASTICAL INDEPENDENCE

It may seem a bit ungracious and unsympatheticthe rather strenuous efforts to bring about

union to-day to cite the conduct of Paul inof his own ecclesiastical independence. But

time has come, I think, for looking at facts as theywith calmness and balanced judgment. Every

Christian would prefer union as wellunity in the body of Christ (both the local church

the Kingdom of God). Unity does not alwaysst where there is union. Many a local church is

by dissension that does not lead to actual schism.in such cases the actual schism seems to

the only way to secure unity of spirit that doeslater.

Certainly disunion is not to be sought as an end inunless it is the expression of normal diversit

growth. The simplest form of reproduction iscellular fissure. Paul justified diversities of giftsthe body of Christ as seen in the church in CorinthCor. 12:4-11). The same Spirit bestowed these

gifts for the development of the body as ale and for the richer functioning of the body.

is a sign of life. Only no one must


76/159

PAUL THE INTERPRETER OF CHRISTin the body (12:25). This is preciselythe

in a democracy like a local church. It is theof the democracy that each member can beas in the assembly in Athens. But the perithe democracy is the demagogue. The religio

is,if possible,the worst of all. So Paulto warn the church in Corinth against dis

er and disaster (i Cor. 14) after the wondrousof the working of love that tempers the spir

bringsharmony out of chaos (i Cor. 13).Now, when Jesus made his IntercessoryPrayer in

he prayed earnestly for oneness among theand among all future disciples(John 17), he

that very night previously rebuked the apostleunseemly strife in struggling like heathen for the

of honor at the table (Luke 22:24-30). Thecontinued after the Passover meal had begun

that Jesus had to rebuke the apostlesby the objecof washing their feet with a pointed interpr(John 13:1-16). On two previous occasions

apostleshad caused anguish of heart to Christ bydisputes as to which of them was the greatest

is clear, therefore, that Jesus had this unseemlyk of unity in mind most of all in his prayer. There

already organic union, but a lamentable want of


77/159

ECCLESIASTICAL INDEPENDENCE 73writers has his own standpointand the world

the richer for the interpretationf Christ by a Peter,Mark, a Matthew, a Luke, a John, a James, a Paul, a

an Apollos. At times these men did not see everyalike as at Antioch where Peter and Barnabas

t Paul alone for a while. But the theologicaliffers were fought out and reconciliation came as theult of frank discussion and mutual understandingactual cleavage in doctrine came, no schism in the

of Christ.But it was different in Paul's controversy with the

and later with the Gnostics. In both thesePaul cared more for loyaltyto Christ and to

than for organic union. In the case of the JuPaul felt that the very heart of the gospel was

stake. This party of the circumcision,more Pharthan Christian, had its headquarters at JerusaThey were unwillingfor the Gentiles to become

unless they also became Jews. Peter wasbrought by them before the church in Jerusa

for his conduct in Csesarea when he entered intohouse of Cornelius and had the household bap

on their conversion without making them Jews10:1-11:18). The formal campaign of PaulBarnabas to win the Gentiles stirred the Pharisaic


78/159


79/159

ECCLESIASTICAL INDEPENDENCE 75the most important thing. He was not for peace

any price,not at the priceof loyaltyto Christ andtruth. He would not cover up vital error for the

of apparent harmony. He would not compromiseential truth with real heresy for the sake of meremal union. Least of all would he submit to comlsory conformity to what he considered error. He

in his freedom in Christ. And Paul wantedto enjoy the same libertyin Christ that he claimedhimself. Paul is the great protagonistof religiou

for all races, sexes, classes. There can beJew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor

there can be no male and female; for ye are allin Christ Jesus (Gal. 3 128).

But Paul's ecclesiastical independence has a widerch than the strugglewith heretics like the Judaizer

the Gnostics. Paul asserted and gloried in hisof the Twelve Apostles. The Judaizer

that Paul was not one of the Twelve andnot on a par with them. This they did to floutinfluence with the Gentile Christians and to wean

away from Paul. Their argument assumed thatTwelve agreed with them and not with Paul. We

e Paul's own defense in Galatians I and 2. Notis the fact admitted there he is not one of the


80/159


obtain his apostoliccommission or message fromTwelve or from any man. In fact, there is notslightestevidence that Paul received ordination atThe incident in Acts 13:1-3 comes after Paul hadlong at work in the ministry and is apparentla farewell service for the missionaries, BarnabasSaul, before they start. Paul goes on to show thathis conversion and call he did not go to Jerusa

to consult the apostlesbefore him, but to Arabiai :i6-i/). After three years he did make a

it of fifteen days to Jerusalem to visit Cephas andJames the Lord's brother (Gal. I :18-19). It was

years before he again came in touch with theapostlesin a privateconference in Jerusa

(Gal. 2 :i-io),probablyin between the first exploat Jerusalem (Acts 15:5) and the gatheringnextwhen the victory of Paul and Barnabas was won

15:6-29). Scholars are not agreed as to thee of the visit in Gal. 2:1-10 and it is not pertinenthe argument here. The point is that the interw of which Paul tells in Gal. 2:1-10, apparentlst in publicbefore them (2 12) and then private

them who were of repute, led to the frank andrecognitionby Cephas, James, and John, the Jerupillars, that Paul and Barnabas were their


81/159

ECCLESIASTICAL INDEPENDENCE 77t is impossibleto find the slightestecclesiasticalti

Paul and the Jerusalem apostles.There wasand spiritualnity,but absolute independ

The Jerusalem pillarsined up with Paul andarnabas and not with the Judaizers. But Paulvictory for the Gentile Christians as well as

maintenance of his own ecclesiastical independThat victoryis rendered all the more complet

the words and from things strangled (Act129) are not genuine. The example of Paul shouldus all pause before we push matters to an

in efforts to bring about compulsory union.one thing,it is sure to fail. The Roman Catholic

has alreadyfirmlyannounced that he will disthe reunion pf Christendom on only one basis

solute surrender to Rome. We know, then,of a certhat organic union cannot come to pass on

platform. The whole thing becomes chimerical.matter resolves itself to this. Those who prefe

to anything else can have it for themselvesfollowingNewman to Rome. But they must knowthey cannot carry the non-Roman world with

No amount of persuasionor of pressure canthe clock back to the pre-Reformation perio

And among non-Roman Christians differences existtoo great a nature to force,conformity.


82/159


the same persons to see the point. We see thething in Tit. I 15, 7. Dean Headlam has recentlto the same conclusion as Lightfoot. The onlyto reunite the non-Roman world on the basis

the historic episcopateis to convince the non-episcbodies that the New Testament ministry is not

for present-dayneeds. One may pursue thate of argument, if he will,but he will make no head

denouncing those who are satisfied with the simand sufficiencyf the New Testament ministry

can only be made here by frank recognitithe liberties of all and the rights of those whonot desire ecclesiastical overlords. If organi

were ever again achieved on this basis,how longld it last? Who can guarantee that the New Tes

itself may not keep on reproducing the veryof ecclesiastical independence of which Paul i

powerful an exponent?Another line of cleavage is concerned with sacratal salvation. The effort of sacramentalists to

non-sacramentalists to give up the purely spiriinterpretationof salvation by grace apart from

is doomed to failure. Justificationbycannot be killed so long as the New Testament

On the other hand the non-ceremonialists


83/159

ECCLESIASTICAL INDEPENDENCE 79

in nature and in grace. We can learn to live

to let live. Any effort by any type of Christianityforce its view on the others is resented. This does

meanthat

oneview is

as good as another. But itmean that, the human mind being as it is, we must

content for some men to see things differently.has been a hard fight to keep the Bible open and

It is hard also to keep the mind open to theh. It is still harder to keep the conscience in good

order. But, given the open Bible, the openand the honest conscience, then the result must

left to God and to the individual. Each has the

to preach and to propagate his view of God andHistory, heredity, environment, the personal

the experience of grace, and the guidancethe Spirit of God determine the outcome. Mean

we can learn to love each other heartily in spiteour differences, even because of them. What a dull

it would be if we were all precisely alike


84/159

CHAPTER VII

PAUL AND PATRIOTISM

I

Patriotism and piety are apparently placed in oppoion in some countries by the issues of the present

One of the first fulminations was theof a large group of the foremost scholars

theologians of Germany justifying the conduct ofFatherland in Belgium and in France. British

and theologians were quick to reply in a spiriholy horror at the apparent blindness of the German

to the moral and spiritual issues of the war.republic of letters was torn asunder, and the kingof God seemed rent in twain. Protestants haveagainst Protestants, Roman Catholics againstCatholics, Greek Catholics against Greek Cath

Mohammedans against Mohammedans, JewsJews. Kings have dragged their peoples into

Neutral nations have been driven into the warself-defense. In each case citizenship rises above

or at any rate the Christian citizen is comto be loyal to the position of his own country

be guilty of treason. The issue raised is one ofimport, and is intensely vital now in the


85/159


with Germany. We have millions of men of Gerbirth or descent who must decide what they are

do. There is but one thing to do: to be loyaltoland of adoption. So real Americans all feel. Sogreat mass of the German- Americans feel, andact. They are now Americans, not German-

The case of Paul is worth our study in the presentHe was caught in the maelstrom of world

or Rome, like the United States, was theof the nations, though not in quite the

sense. Racial and national characteristics perted with considerable tenacity in the various prov

of the Roman Empire, which in Asia Minor paitle attention to the old boundaries. The old namesthe peoples held on, so that Galatia, for instance

either the great Roman province or the oldpeople in North Galatia. Paul was at once a

a Tarsian, a Greek, a Roman, and soon a ChrisHe was true to the best things in these elements,

contradictory they seemed at times. Theand the concepts designatedby them overlappe

variousways,

and were not mutually exclusive.

n


86/159


87/159


in these words: For I could wish that Iwere anathema from Christ for my brethren's

my kinsmen according to the flesh; who arewhose is the adoption,and the glory, and

covenants, and the giving of the law, and thevice of God, and the promises; whose are the

and of whom is Christ as concerning the fleshis over all,God blessed forever (Rom. 9:3-5)

It is not easy to define patriotism,for it is moremere love of the land of one's birth or of his

It is that, but it broadens out into theof one's people wherever found, as Japanese love

Chinese, Chinese; Germans, Germans; Jews,The Jews had at this time lost their independ

though many of them still lived in Palestineer Roman rule. But many millions more dweltthe Diaspora. Some of these fell much underspellof the Grseco-Roman civilization,and gave

many of their Jewish customs and views. But Paulnot Hellenized, though a Hellenistic Jew with

maean traditions. We see in Paul the struggle ofcultured Jew, loyalto his faith and people,to adapt

to the world conditions in which he foundand to be a loyal Roman citizen.

But Paul was born in Tarsus of Cilicia, a citi


88/159


where Jews had a strong foothold. He was glad to beas Saul of Tarsus, a Jewish citizen of this great city

never forgot that he was a Jew, though always the eduJew, trained to life as a Roman citizen in the most aris

position among the population of the great Hellenized,more than half Asiatic, city of Tarsus.1

l was brought up to a certain stage at Tarsus infashion needed for a Jewish boy who was born

the local aristocracyas a Roman citizen and a burof Tarsus. He may have attended the Univerof Tarsus, and, after entering Gamaliel's school

Jerusalem, he probably spent his holidays at homea modern college-student. Tarsus undoubtedlyits impress on Paul, and made him more than

arrow Palestinian Jew. Probably most men to-dathe towns where they live,whatever their racebe. This is the least of the problems of

But Paul was a Hellenist,though not a Hellene orHellenizer. Being a Jew, he could not be a Greekbirth. Being a loyal Jew, a Hebrew of the He

he would not be a Greek in religionand cusAnd yet nothing is more certain than that Helmade its appeal to Paul's intellectual nature.

spoke and wrote the Koine, the current Greek, withas well as the Aramaic (called Hebrew in


89/159


three of the Greek writers. Previous comhave not sufficientlyppreciatedthat which

be stated in one word as Paul's Hellenism. *one of the modern interpretationsf Paul'sis that he derived much of it from the Greek

That is not true, but Paul cerknew the dialect of the initiates in those mysticand knew how to answer them, and to turn

terms to the service of Christ.3

ni

Beyond a doubt, Paul is a citizen of the world, acosmopolite,and not a narrow Palestinian Jew

a mere provincialCilician. His patriotismmust bein terms of world-sympathy, not of

He does not wish the Jews to conqueras they tried to do in 66-70 A.D. and failed.

But Paul is a Roman citizen with full privilegprerogatives. Roman citizenshipwas a prizwas not open to all. There were more non-

izens than citizens in the Roman Empire; probablslaves than citizens. Claudius Lysias boughtwith a great sum (Acts 22 128) ; but Paul proudlBut I am a Roman born. The man who


90/159

and in Csesarea (25:1 if.). What was Paul'situde toward the Roman government after Roman

and officers,finallyincludingthe Emperorbecame hostile to him? It is as a Roman

izen that we touch the side of Paul's life that isnearly parallelto our modern idea of patriotis

an American, British, or German citizen. Romanwere not all unkind to Paul. Gallic practical

a decision in Paul's favor, and recognized Chrisas a form of Judaism and so a religiolicitcts 18:14-16). The Asiarchs of Ephesus wereto Paul (19:31). Sergius Paulus, Proconsul

Cyprus, was a convert under Paul's preachinJulius the Centurion treated Paul kindly

Even Nero, during Paul's first Roman imsonment, probably finallydismissed the case for lackevidence without a formal trial. Certainlythe Pre

Burrhus or the Stratopedarch to whom Paul wasin Rome gave him a great deal of libert

8 :3of.).But Paul was mistreated by the cityofficialsAntioch in Pisidia (Act 13:50), in Iconium (14:5),Philippi(16:22), in Thessalonica (17:6-9), where

and his followers were accused of actingcontrarythe decrees of Caesar, as in Philippihe was charged

introducingJewish customs which Romans wereallowed to receive. The duplicityof Felix and

hard to bear Thus in


91/159


92/159


who misuse their power for personal aggranor wild schemes of empire. Paul is a staunchof law and order, includingtaxes. To be

he is no blind standpatter or reactionary. Henot, like Seneca, the apologistof Nero. He wasfirst champion of the emancipationof slaves,and

Philemon to set free and treat as a brotherChrist Onesimus, his converted runaway slave whoml returned to him (Philemon 14-21). He urgedChristian slaves to bear their lot with Christian

but announced a doctrine which was theth knell of human slavery: There can be neither

nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor freecan be no male and female; for ye are all onein Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:28). Paul preache

brotherhood of man to a world of slaves. He,than Tom Paine and Voltaire, proclaimed theof man and the world as his country.

But did not Paul become embittered toward Nerothe Roman government after Nero began his fierc

of the Christians? Unless we follow theEpistles,e have little to guide us in anthis query. I think that they are genuine

so have no hesitation in appealingto them forAfter Nero had charged Christians with


93/159


is clearlypresented. Paul is stilla loyacitizen,in spiteof Nero. At the end, when

first stage of the last trial made it plainwhat thewould be, Paul has no bitter word for Nero,

ess he called him the lion (2 Tim. 4:17), as islikely.He probablyrefers to Nero's failure to givto the lions,which he had escaped as a Roman

izen. Would Paul have responded to the call ofto fight? That would depend on the issue. He

ld have opposed a war of conquest and pillagt of the soldiers were mercenaries anyhow. They

hired to fight,and did not always express naconvictions or the will of the people. In a war

defense, Paul would have been ready to do hisI believe. He spoke kindlyof soldiers,and usedas illustrations of service for Christ. Suffer

with me as a good soldier of Christ Jesussoldier on service entanglethhimself in the affairs

this life;that he may pleasehim who enrolled hima soldier (2 Tim. 2:3f.).

IV

And Paul was most of all a Christian. We may bethat with Paul Christ was Lord and Master. Henot subordinate service to Christ to Caesar, let


94/159


95/159


war contrary to the clear spirit of Christ. Chriscitizens, if allowed to rule, wish peace if it is

to have it and be true to other high obligations

12:18). But Paul was not a peace-at-any-man. His teaching justifies the League to

Peace. His gospel is the gospel of couragecalls upon all soldiers of Christ to put on the

of God, and to withstand in the evil daythe world-rulers of this darkness (Eph.


96/159

CHAPTER VIII

PAUL'S MISSIONARY STATESMANSHIP

The marvel of Paul is that, after these nineteenuries of Christian history, he is still pre-eminent,

to the Lord Jesus himself, in all matters conthe principles of Christianity. Aristotle stil

in the rules of thought, for he practised bothinductive and the deductive methods of reasoning.

Paul the Interpreter of Christ - A. T. Robertson

Documents

Transcript of Paul the Interpreter of Christ - A. T. Robertson