The Conception of Authority in the Pauline Writings

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

CHAPTER I. PAUL'S APOSTLESHIP 7 Claims to be an Apostle 7

His Rights and Authomty as an Apostle .'. 15

CHAPTER 11. DOCTRINAL ELEMENTS IN PAUL'S WRITINGS 21

God 21

Man and his Wokld 26

Christology - 32

The Christ of Faith 32

The Historical Jesus 35

The death of Christ 40

The pre-existent Christ 51

The Christof the Future Age ' 57

The New Lite 60

Ftjtdke Things 67

The progress of the gospel 67

The new age 74

CHAPTER ni. PROBLEMS RESULTING FROM THE PREACHING

OF THE GOSPEL TO THE GENTILES 83

The Relation op the Law to the Gospel 83 ^

The Christian's Relation to Idolatry 94

CHAPTER IV. SUBJECTS CONNECTED WITH THE CHURCH 102 "

What the Church is 102

The Ordinances op the Church 106

Baptism .' 106

The Lord's Supper. 112

The Worship op the Church 117

Spiritual Gifts 118

Conduct of Women in the Meetings 123

Church Discipline 126

Opperings por the Poor at Jerusalem 129

CHAPTER V. THE UFE OF THE CHRISTIAN IN THE WORLD 135

The Christian in his Relation to Marriage 135

The Christian's Relation to Slavery 140

The Christian's Relation to the State 143

CHAPTER VI. IMPORTANCE OF THE SOURCES FROM WHICH PAUL

DERIVED TRUTH 146

Paul's Estimate op Experience 146

The Relation op Experience to his Jewish Inheritance 162

The Relation op Experience to the Lipe and Thought op the Mediterranean world 171

The Relation op Experience to the Lipe and Thought op the Church into which he entered 176

CONCLUSION. 180

BIBLIOGRAPHY 182

376393

INTRODUCTION Importance of the Study

There is no more important subject in the field of religious thought than the one which relates to authority. This subject is important because of its bearing on the interpretation of religion. The conception which one has of authority determines to a marked degree what religion means to him, and when the basis of his religious authority is shifted his idea of religion must be readjusted. Authority might be defined as ''that which is or may be appealed to in support of action or opinion,"^ and according to that definition, religious authority is that which is or may be appealed to in support of action or opinion in matters pertaining to religion.

In determining what shall be the basis of our own religious authority, it is necessary to study the subject in the light of its historical development, and to do this, we must begin with a careful and critical examination of the position of the New Testament writers, and of Paul in particular. While Jesus was the^founder of Christianity it was Paul who led in the organization of the church, and because of his writings, he has exerted a tremendous influence on the thinking of all the succeeding centuries. A study of Paul's conception of authority is interesting, not merely from a historical point of view, but also because it helps us in our effort to find a vital basis for our religion.

Writings Accepted as Pauline

•

Fortunately for us several of Paul's writings have been preserved, and by means of these we are able to form a fairly accurate opinion of what his thought was. In this discussion the following writings will be used as the ones which express Paul's thought: I Thessalo- .nians, Galatians, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Romans, Philippians and Philemon. These will be used because the scholarship of our day is almost universally agreed that they are Pauline. There is a tendency at the present time to take a more conservative position than was commonly held a decade ago on the Pauline authorship of the entire group of letters which bears his name. There are thirteen letters to which the name of Paul is attached, but the genuineness of some of these has been questioned by prominent scholars. Some writers have regarded all these letters as spurious and have insisted that they belong

' See New Standard Dictionary,

2 • coi^eEzrnoi^^ c* authority in the paxtline writings

to a later time. There is little ground, however, for such a position and most scholars do not take seriously the contentions of those who hold to it. The weight of scholarship for the genuineness of the group named above is so overwhelming that they can be accepted, without further discussion, as the basis of this treatise.

The Pastoral Epistles undoubtedly contain much Pauline material, but it is now^ conceded by the majority of New Testament scholars that in their present form they are not Pauline.* Many still question the Pauline authorship of Colossians, although there is a growing tendency in favor of its genuineness.' A larger number doubt the Pauline authorship of Ephesians and II Thessalonians, although some who had formerly rejected these books are now writing in their defense.* These letters, the Pauline authorship of which has been questioned by many, may well be neglected in this discussion, and no great loss will be sustained as there is little additional material which they would contribute.

Significance of Fatd^s Writings for a Study of his Conception of

Authority The material furnished by Paul's letters is well adapted to a study of his conception of authority, as these letters were written to meet specific needs in the churches, and these needs called for definite and positive statements. There were controversies over matters of faith and conduct, and Paul sought to settle these. He had been asked definite questions pertaining to the Christian life, and he answered these and gave his reasons for answering them as he did. While Paul did not directly discuss the problem of authority in any of his letters, yet his own conception of authority is reflected in each of them. He did not write as a theologian to give the church a systematic statement of doctrine; but being first of all a missionary, he wrote for a missionary purpose. His letters were occasioned by real situations, and they were based upon experience, and a brief statement of the dr-

* For a brief statement of some of the most prominent writers see James Moffatt, Jntrodudion to the Literature of the New Testament, 1911, pp. 414 ff.

* For a concise statement of the position of scholarship see James Moffatt, Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament, 1911, pp. 153 ff.

* James Moffatt thinks Ephesians was probably ''a cathoUdzed version of Colossians, written in Paul's name to Gentile Christendom {Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament, 1911, p. 393), but in regard to 11 Thessalonians he says: "For all the difficulties of the epistle, it is fair to say that almost every one of the features which seem to portray another ph3rsiognomy from that of Paul, can be explained, without straining the evidence, upon the hypothesis that he wrote the epistle himself" (Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament, 1911, p. 79).

CONCEPTION OP AUIHOSITY IN THE PAULINE WAITINGS 3

cumstances which produced them will reveal their practical character and will also prepare the way for the further discussion.

/ Thessalonians

Paul left Thessalonica under drcumstances which made him anxious about the welfare of the Christian conmiunity which he had gathered together in that dty . This anxiety prompted him to send Timothy from Athens back to Thessalonica while he himself went on to Corinth (I Thess. 3:1 ff.). Timothy joined Paul at Corinth, and it appears that he reported that although the Thessalonians were being persecuted, they had remained true to the faith and were loyal to Paul. He also reported that some of them were troubled about the fate of those o( their number who had died. In the light of this report Paul wrote his letter, and it is a practical discussion of these problems.

Galatians

The question whether Galatians was intended for the small district which was the ancient kingdom of Galatia, or for the larger group of churches in the Roman province of Galatia, is not vital in this discus* sion, as the circumstances which led Paul to write it would be the same in either case. Judaizers had followed Paul and had taught his Gentile converts that it was necessary for them to keep the law in order to be saved. They taught that faith in Christ was not sufficient, for in addition to that, the Jewish rites and ceremonies must be kept. Many of the Galatians were disturbed and even carried away by this teaching, and the church was in confusion. Paul wrote the epistle to win them back and establish them in the true faith, and because of the circumstances, he was very definite in his statements.

Tke CorifUkian Letters

There has been much discussion over the number of letters which Paul wrote to Corinth, and over the component parts of II Corinthians. It is evident that he wrote a letter to this church before the one which is designated as I Corinthians (see I Cor. 5:9 ff.), and it is quite probable that II Corinthians is a compilation of at least two letters. But inasmuch as I Corinthians and II Corinthians are almost universally accepted as letters, or compilation of letters, written by Paul to the churdi at Coriilth, any further discussion of the relation between these documents would not be germane to this treatise.

4 CONCEPTION OP AUTHORITY IN TH£ PAULINE WRITINGS

Paul was probably in Ephesus when he was informed by '' them of Chloe'' (I Cor. 1:11) concerning the condition of the church in Corinth. It was reported that there were divisions among the Christians, and that there was fornication in the church. It was stated that Christians carried their difficulties into the courts, and that there was a general tendency to immorality. Paul had also received a letter from the church (I Cor. 7:1), and it is quite likely that this letter was brought by Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (I Cor. 16:17). It is apparent that this letter contained a number of questions which troubled the Christians at Corinth. They asked him about various phases of the marriage relation: whether it was advisable for a Christian to marry, and if he should marry whether he was permitted to select a heathen for his companion; what should be the Christian's attitude towards sexual relations, divorce, the marr3dng of virgins, and the remarriage of widows. They undoubtedly asked him concerning the eating of meats which had been sacrificed to idols, and the conduct of their worship, especially as it related to spiritual gifts. It is quite probable that they also asked him about the resurrection of the dead, and the collection for the poor at Jerusalem. Perhaps the three messengers confirmed the statement made by "them of Chloe" concerning the evils, and also explained the circumstances which gave rise to the questions contained in the letter. Paul wrote I Corinthians to correct these evils and to answer the practical questions put to him.

What is contained in our II Corinthians was written to meet the situation which developed after the reception of I Corinthians. These letters are especially valuable for the study of Paul's conception of authority, for they were written to help to solve specific problems and to answer definite questions, and he expressed himself in unmistakable language.

Ramans

It is not necessary, in this connection, to discuss the original destination of the last chapter of Romans, as it contains but little that would throw any light on the subject under consideration. Paul was in Corinth, and as he had preached the gospel in all the great centers of the eastern part of the Roman Empire, he was thinking about going to the West in search of new territory. His plan was to go to Spain after making a visit to Jerusalem, and he was anxious to stop in Rome on the way. He was troubled lest the campaign of the Judaizers should extend to Rome, and he was anxious that the right type of Christianity should prevail in the world's capital city, hence to instruct them and to prepare for the visit which he was longing to make, he wrote this letter. Romans is not a complete and systematic statement of Paul's doctrine, but it contains a very full discussion of some subjects which were vital in his thinking, and consequently it is a valuable source for the study of his notion of authority.

Philemon and PhUippians

It is not necessary to enter into a lengthy discussion of the place from which Paul wrote these two short letters, or of the question whether Philippians was originally one document or two.^ Inasmuch as these letters are generally accepted as Pauline, and the circumstances which gave rise to them would be the same whether they were written from Caesarea or from Rome, these problems can be passed over.

While Paul was in prison, Onesimus, who was a runaway-slave, belonging to a Christian in Colossae by the name of Philemon, had come under his influence and had become a Christian. Paul sent him back to his master, and he also wrote a brief letter to Philemon, urging him to receive his slave who had become a servant of Christ. Inasmuch as this letter reflects Paul's convictions in regard to the right relationship between master and servant, it throws some light on his idea of authority.

While Paul was in prison, Epaphroditus brought him gifts from the Christians at Philippi and ministered to him in their behalf. When Epaphroditus returned home he carried with him a letter to the church, and while it is more personal in character than any of the rest of Paul's letters, it contains the discussion of some questions and problems which reflects his conception of authority.

Devdopment of Paulas Thought As is stated above, Paul wrote as a missionary and not as a theologian, and his letters should be studied with that purpose in mind. His letters were written to correct errors and to give needed instruction,

*Bemhard Wdss {Lekrbuch der Einleiiung in das Neue TestametU, 1897, pp. 236 ff.) and Carl Clemen (Die Chronologie der paidinischen Brief e aufs neue Unter^ suchi, 1893, pp. 249 ff.) maintain tliat Philemon was written during the imprisonment at Caesarea. O. Holtzmann {Theologische LiUeratungzeUung^ 1890, p. 177) and Friedrich Spitta (Apostdgeschichte ikre QueUen und der Geschichtlicher Wert, 1891, p. 281) think it most probable that Philippians was written during the Caesarean imprisonment, while Carl Clemen (Die Chronologie der paidinischen Brief e aufs neue Untersucht, 1893, p. 197) believes it is composed of two original documents, the first having been written at Caesarea, and the second at Rome.

and in them his own thoughts and feelings at the time were expressed. His thought undoubtedly developed under the influence of new situations, but it is not likely that there is as much development in his writings as some would have us believe. A marked development in his writings should not be expected, inasmuch as they all fall within a period of fifteen or eighteen years, and the first letter was not written for about that length of time after his conversion, and his Christian thought had already become quite definitely formulated.

The occasion which led Paul to write a given letter naturally gave it a peculiar character, and when conditions changed, as they sometimes did very rapidly because of controversies, his thought was undoubtedly changed by the new situation.

Method of Procedure

After making a careful study of the writings accepted as Pauline, a selection has been made of the most important subjects which are discussed in these writings. A study is made of each of these subjects to determine the sources from which Paul derived what he regarded as truth. This study is arranged imder five different heads: his apostleship, the doctrinal elements in his writings, the problems arising out of the establishment of Christianity in the Gentile world, the church, and the life of the Christian in the world. In each of these five chapters there is a brief statement of Paul's teaching on the subject under consideration, and then an attempt is made to determine the sources which influenced him in forming his conceptions. The writer's purpose in these chapters is to ascertain the sources from which Paul believed he could derive truth, and to which he felt appeal could be made in support of action or opinion.

The last chapter is a discussion of the various sources from which Paul either consciously or unconsciously derived what he accepted as truth, and the purpose in tMs part of the discussion is to determine the relation of these sources to each other and their relative value for Paul. The rest of the treatise furnishes the basis for the quest of this last chapter, which is to find the standard by which Paul estimated truth, for such a standard, whether he realized it or not, was for him ultimate authority.

CHAPTER I

PAUL'S APOSTLESHIP Claims to be an Apostle

Statemeni of his PosUion

Paul's defense of his apostleship furnishes a good opportunity to study his conception of the nature and basis of what was for him authority in religion, and what he believed he had a right to insist on as authority for others. His apostleship had not been called in question in Thessalonica when he wrote I ThessalonianSy hence no defense of it is made in this letter. He did not even designate himself as an apostle, but he began the letter with the simple greeting — ''Paul and SUvanus and Timothy unto the church of the Thessalonians. " The situation was very di£Ferent in Galatia. Judaizing teachers, in order that they might more successfully oppose Paul's gospel, had questioned his apostolic authority. Paul knew his labors in Galatia would end in failure, if there was any doubt in the minds of those whom he had led to Christ about his being an apostle; hence in his letter to these churches he vigorously defended hifi apostleship. Even the greeting is significant — ^'Paul, an apostle, not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead."

Paul was confronted by the same situation in Corinth that he had to overcome in Galatia. There were those who sought to undermine his work, and, in their opposition to him, they maintained that he was not an apostle. It seems that there was some one who was a leader in the Corinthian Church that strenuously opposed the apostle Paul (n Cor. 2:5-11; 7:11, 12), and that certain persons, who perhaps constituted the Christ-party, denied that he was an apostle. Those ^o constituted this latter class insisted that they belonged to Christ in a sense in which Paul did not (H Cor. 10:7; 11:23).^ Paul asserted

^ Many writers hold tliat there was not a separate party m Corinth called the Qirist-party. Some believe hydi Sk xpurrcG in I Cor. 1 :12 is antithetical to the other phrases rather than co-ordinate with them. According to this theory the passage should read: "Now this I mean that each sa,ys 'I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas' — ^but I am of Christ." That is the position of R&biger in Kritiscke Untersuchungm iiber den Inhalt der heiden Briefm an die Korinthische Gemeinde, second edition, 1886. Eorsopp Lake recognizes that there are objections to this view, but he thinks it is the most reasonable interpretation that has been given (See The EaHier Episttes of St. Paid, 1911, pp. 127 f .). Other writers think ky^ 6k -xp^tw is ah interpolation. That is the position of J. Weiss in Der Erste Korinther Bri^, 1910.

8 CONCEPTION OF AUTHORITY IN THE PAULINE WHITINGS

his apostleship in the greetings in both I Corinthians and II Corinthians, and he defended this claim throughout the letters.

Paul had not been in Rome at the time when Romans was written, and it is not probable that any campaign had been waged against him in that community, hence he did not deem it necessary to defend his apostleship in that letter. The fact, however, that his apostleship had been questioned in other communities led him. to assert it in the greeting.

The church at Philippi was always loyal to Paul, and there was no occasion for a defense of his apostleship, or even a reference to it, in his letter to that church. He did not feel called upon to make any reference to his apostolic claim in his personal letter to Philemon, but merely referred to himself as **a, prisoner of the Lord Jesus. "

It is doubtful whether the Twelve recognised Paul as an apostle on an equality with themselves; at least it does not seem that they ever formally gave him this recognition. In defending himself against the attacks of the Judaizers, Paul never claimed the support of the Twelve, and it is quite probable he would have done so had they formally recognized his apostolic authority, for this would have been the strongest argument he could have used against his objectors. He did say the leaders at Jerusalem -gave to him and Barnabas ''the right hand of fellowship/' commending them to the work among the Gentiles; but that seems to have been as far as they went in the matter.

A careful study of the four great epistles must convince one that, while there were those who denied Paul's apostleship, he regarded himself as an apostle with the same authority as the others. He declared he was not self-appointed, but that he had a divine commission for his work. He had been made an apostle, not by men, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father (Gal. 1:1; I Cor. 1:1; II Cor. 1:1; Rom. 1:5).

The Basis of his Claim

In the discussion of his apostolic appointment, Paul made his own Christian experience fundamental. He was absolutely certain that he was an apostle and that he had been divinely commissioned, and this conviction was the result of his own personal experience. Experience is a comprehensive term because everything which touches life may be included under it, but it has different aspects, and our present problem is to make a study of these to determine the sources from which Paul derived the elements which became a part of his experience. There were two aspects of the experience upon which he based his apostolic claim: one was in connection with his conversion, and the other with

his missionary activities.

a. His conversion-experiences.

Paul believed he had passed through a real and vital experience at the beginning of his Christian life, and it was this which separated him from Judaism and committed him to the new faith. He also believed it was in connection with this experience, which we call conversion, that he received his apostolic commission, (a). His conversion a revelation of Christ in him.

Paul said God called him through his grace to reveal his Son in him, and the purpose of this revelation was that he might preach him among the Gentiles. It is evident from what follows that Paul was thinking of a very definite experience when he referred to God's revealing his Son in him, and this came at the very beginning of his Christian career, for immediately after the statement about the revelation, he said: "Straightway I conferred not with flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem to them that were aposties before me: but I went into Arabia" (Gal. 1 :16, 17). Paul frequentiy referred to an experience which was paramoimt to all others, and it must have been in connection with his conversion. At this, time Christ laid hold upon him (Phil. 3:12), and this laying hold was in a forceful and violent manner, for he likened his entrance into the Christian life to that of a child that had been abortively bom (I Cor. 15:5-10). Paul felt that inasmuch as God had laid hold upon him and had compelled him to become a follower of Christ, there must have been a divine purpose in what he was doing, and that piupose was to make him Christ's ambassar dor. Paul preached because necessity had been laid upon him (I Cor. 9:16). He was an apostie, not because he had sought the position, nor because he had been appointed by men, but because Christ had commissioned him. This experience, which Paul interpreted as a revelation of Christ in him, and which he believed was his call to be an apostie, was something that was very definite in his thinking, and it was so vital that it was for him authoritative. Paul beheved this was something which came into his life suddenly and that it completely transformed him. Up to this time he had regarded Jesus as an impostor and had persecuted his followers; but from the time of this experience, he considered Jesus his Master and was devoted to his cause. Regardless of what the outward circumstances may have been, it is evident that Paul believed he had come into possession of a new power and that his life had been transformed and his religious thinking had been changed. He

10 CONCEPTION OF AUTHORITY IN THE PAULINE WHITINGS

thought of himself as one who had died and had been raised to life again. Old things had passed away, and all things had become new. What he had once coimted as great gain, he now counted as dross. Paul believed he had frequent visions and revelations and that these were given to guide him in the great crises of life. It was by revelation that he went up to Jerusalem to confer with the other apostles about drcumdsion (Gal. 2:2). But he regarded the revelation which made him an apostle as different from any of these; it turned his life into new channels. After that revelation he began to preach the faith which he ha4 been zealous to destroy. In this conversion-experience God had revealed his Son in him. At this time he had seen the glory of God shining in the face of Christ (II Cor. 4:6).

We are not concerned in this connection with a psychological explanation of Paul's conversion-experience.^ Regardless of the theories which may be advanced to explain the change in Paul's life, or of what the facts actually were, it is evident that he believed he had seen Jesus (I Cor. 9:1), and he also believed the appearance of Jesus to him was as real as it had been to the other disciples (I Cor. 9:1; 15:5-8). Paul did not regard his vision of Christ as an optical illusion. The word used in I Cor. 15:8 {&<fBri) is the same which occurs in Lk. 24:34 in connection with Christ's appearance to Peter. Paul imdoubtedly believed he had seen Jesus, and he was certain that this appearance was for the purpose of making him an apostle.

(b). The revelation of Christ, the possession of his gospel.

Paul said he did not receive his gospel from man '^ but it came through revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal. 1:12). The reason Paul connected the revelation of Christ in him with his call to be an apostle was the conviction that it furnished him his gospel, and the possession of his gospel was his call to preach it. To his mind his message and his apostleship were inseparable. He knew the gospel which he preached was from God (I Thess. 2 :2, 8), and the fact that God had entrusted the gospel to him was sufficient proof to his mind that he had divine approval (I Thess. 2:4).

^W. Wrede (Paulus, 1907, pp. 17 £., English translation, 1908, p. 22 f.) maintains that Paul was of a morbid temperament, and that he was quite likely subject to epileptic fits, and that his conversion is to be explained in the light of these conditions. Other writers hold to this or similar theories. F. C. Conybeare (Myth, Magic and Morals, 1910, p. 4; also appendix, p. 363) asserts that this explains not only Paul's conversion, but his other visions and revelations as well.

CONCEPTION OF AUTHORITY IN THE PAULINE WKITINOS 11

Paul's statement in the letter to the Galatians that the gospel which he preached was ''not after man/' for he did not receive it from man, nor was he taught it, ''but it came through revelation of Jesus Christ/' is open to different interpretations. Did Paul mean to be imderstood as sa3dng that in his conversion-experience there had been revealed to him all the historical data which he possessed concerning Jesus, or did he mean to state that these had been made known to him in the visions of later years? Or did he mean something entirely different?* It is not probable that Paul meant to state that he had received through revelation the historical data concerning Jesus, for he had many opportunities to know these from other sources. Paul was not arguing in the Galatian letter that he did not have opportunity to learn from men the stoiy of the life of Jesus, for he said he was with Peter fifteen days, and that would have furnished ample opportunity to go over the story repeatedly. It seems very probable that one of the motives which took him to Jerusalem at that time was to hear from Peter the story about Jesus. What Paul was insisting on was that no apostolic council was called to take action on his apostleship. He went up to Jerusalem after three years, but his purpose was to have a friendly interview with Peter, and the rest of the apostles were not connected with the visit in any way. He said he saw James, the Lord's brother, but his reference to his meeting with him would indicate that it was incidental and had no significance in connection with his visit at Jerusalem. Paul insisted that the gospel which he preached among the Galatians was divine, for he had received it through revelation of Jesus Christ; and this revelation was not a disclosing of the historical data, and as will be indicated later, these were merely incidental in his message.