(c) Post-Paulink Epistles, in a broad sense at least, we may style the other NT epistles (for James, see Sanday, BL 344). Some of them largely partake of the ' epistle ' in contrast to 'letter.' Deissmann, indeed, goes too far when he puts at least half of them into the former class in such a sense as to infer their pscudonymity (pp. 242 ff. ). But we may group them as ' letters ' and ' epistles ' according as they were or were not meant originally for readers more or less known to the writer. Here Hebrews first claims notice ; for, though not actually Pauline, it was most likely enggested by St. Paul'sexainple, seeing that Timothy is known to its author (13^). Its closing greetings mark it a true letter ; yet its abrupt opening makes it, even more than some Pauline epistles, hover between a letter and a homily. Possibly, the writer does not feel his name weighty enough to prefix in formal fashion (cf. Ep. J-arn. I'-'). On the other hand, Jamts has a formal address, but no final greetings ; which marks it an epistle proper, meant for a class, not for given circles personally known to the writer. Otherwise is it with 1 Peter (I'-' S"""), which is quite on the lines of an epistle like Ro, and involves some fiuiiiliarity with the readers' concrete relations. Ami this seems true even of I Jn, devoid as it is of the usual marks ; for the tone of paternal allcction (rtKvla.) seems best to suit a Church or Chunlies that knew and revered the writer — probably tljosi' addressed out
of full knowledge, though in a public or literary fashion, in the Bk. of llev (2^). 2 Jn is surely • real letter, in due form, to one such Church by the same apostle, whose cryptic use of 6 jrptirjSiVepos and ^kXcktt) Kvpla. is due to fear of a hostile State (v.'''). So is it with 3 Jn (v."), a sequel (cf. ") sent to a private friend when access to this Church was cut oil' by an ambitious official. In all of the above one seems to feel personality going forth in subtle ways to reach its proper audience. This is hardly so with Jude, whose address is quite vague ; still less with 2 Peter, which as it stands seems de- pendent on Jude. Nor need this surprise, when its author, in implying anxious study of certain Pauline epistles, can rank them as Scripture (3"- '").
To sum up. While we gam new insight into differences of type among NT epistles by placing them in line with other ancient epistles, yet on re- flexion we see afresh the strange distinctiveness of the former as a whole. It turns on the special nature both of the originating impulse and of the ties binding writer and readers in virtue of their common faith. Outside Judaism, religion meant neither passionate belief nor elevated conduct so much as correct ritual. From this could spring no literature of persuasion, least of all in epistolary form. But given the new motive for the religious letter, its native form could hardly stop short where it began, in the splendidly personal pro- plie.^iyings and exhortations of St. Paul the inspired missionary. Even in him new and more settled conditions evoked a new manner ; the sermon gets the upper hand, changing Christian letter into Christian epistle. Of the later, or strictly r)astoral type, 1 Jn seems a true sample. Placed alongside 1 Th, it, or even I P, miglit appear marked oil as Deissmann's 'artistic epistle' from his ' pre-literary letter.' But, with all intervening stages supplied in even acknowledged Pauline letters, these cate- gories cannot apply with such rigour as to be sj'nonymous with ' Catholic ' and ' Pauline ' epistles respectively. Various problems remain, e.g. as to the Pauline Pastoral Epp., whose integrity is open to doubt ; but flexibility and nice di.serimination must here be the order of the day. This is not the place to see how the NT epistles became, first litera- ture, and then canonical literature. But it here falls to note that even the most personal Pauline letters thereby became for the Church pure epistles or theological pamphlets. They were, that is, read for the most part in abstractu, their writer and original readers — and therefore the original sense — alike becoming of little or no moment.
LiTBRATt'HB, — Karraf, MeniKujeji of the Books (1S84), ch. vil.; Sandav, ItL 834 ff., ii44 ; and esp. J'roUa. zu den biOl. Brif/en und hpidUln, in O. A. DeissnuuiD's Bil/eUttuIieH. 181)5.
J. V. Bahtlet. EQUAL. — 1. As adj. in the sense of ' impartial,' 'fair' ( = Lat. ceqiius), Ps 17' 'Let thine eyes be- hold the things tiiat are equal ' (o-if'-p, either the obj. of the vb. hence AV, and RV ' Let thine eyes look upon equity ' ; or, more probably, an adv. [ = oi5^-;:9] as Del. and RVm '"Thine eyes behold with equity ' ). This meaning of ' equal ' is else- where in OT found only in Ezk ( IS^""- a<i.u 331761, :o_ Ileb. |:n-, lit. ' is proportioned ' or ' adjusted ') in ruf. to God's dealings. In Apocr. it is found 2 Mac 13"* ' sware to all eiiual conditions ' (t4 SUoia, R\' ' to acknowledge all their rights ') ; and in NT, Col 4' ' Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal ' (t-Jjk latmrra, RVm ' equality,' Lightft. ' equity,' ' fairness '). Tindale in Vrol. to Genesis, says ' that Joseph brought the Egyptians into soch subjection wold seme unto some a very cruel demle, howbeit it was a very equal waye ' ; and in ' The Obedience of a Christian M^an ' ( If 'orA-.?, i. 209) he says, ' it is impossilile llmt a man should be a righteous, an egal, or an indillerent judge i"