victory is seen to be nothing less than the moral unifical inn of all existence. The ruin wrought by Adam and the redeiii)ition wrought by Christ seem to be co-extensive in human history (Ro T)'", 1 Co 15°-) ; and in the dispensation of the fullness of the times it is (lod's jiurpo.se to bring all things again into unity (draKf^aXaniffoaflcii) in Christ (Eph 1'"; cf. Col 1^" -'", I'll 2»"). When Christ's work is done, God will be uU in all (1 Co 15-'). And this is the vision that arises when the final issue is regarded from the side of Divine sovereignty and [lurpose. As to the means by which such a con- summation may be hereafter achieved the NT is silent. Again it has to be said that its interest in the problem is wholly practical, not speculative — to emphasize the fact that there is complete, eternal deliverance and blessedness for all w ho are Christ's ; that in some sense, at some time, by some means beyond our ken, Christ will be universally victorious, because God is God, and God is Love.
RoiiKHT Law. UNIYERSALISM See Eschatology.
UNKNOWN GOD (.\c IT'^ ; AV and RVm 'To THE Unknown Gou,' RV 'to an Unknown God' [the absence of the article in Greek was common in inscriptions, so that either rendering is ]iermissible]). — It is often stated that light is thrown on this subject by an incident in the life of E])iiiienides as related by Diogenes Laertius (Epiniim. i. 110). We are told that the hero, in a timeof plague at Athens, took whiteand black sheep to the hill Areopagus and let them loose. Wher- ever one of the animals rested, an altar was erected, in the supposition that the sheep was pointing to the god wliosi! shrine was situated nearest to that particular spot. The reason for this ]irocedure was that the people were ignorant as to which deity was ofl'endeu, and they hoped in this way to ascertain which god thej- ought to propitiate in order that the plague might be stayed. Among the ancients such a dilemma seems to have been frequent (cf. at Rome, Aul. Gell. ii. 28 ; Horace, Enod. V. 1, Sat. II. vi. 20; see also Thenphrastus, Cliar. 17). Rut the chief objection to this theory is that the altars are distinctlj' .said to be ' anony- mous,' which can only mean that they bore no inscription.
It is just possible that some such inscription as that in the text was afterwards added, but not likely. Nor are we helped by .Jerome, who states (on Tit 1'-) that the inscription actu.-illy read, ' To the gods of Asia, and Euro|)e and Africa, to unknown and strange gods,' for such an allar could not nossibly be that referred to by the Apostle. The main difficulty lies in the fact that no extant inscription exactly iiearsout the Apostle's words ; and yet there is sufficient evidence to lead us to suppose that he is correctly reported. For instance, P.ausanias (I. i. 4) says that on the road from the I'haleric port to the city he had noticed 'altars of gods called unknown, and of heroes' {{iwfxoi Si deCiv T€ ovo/xai^ofjidfuv dyvwarojp xal ijpixiittif), which may quite well mean that he saw several altars bearing inscriptions similar to that mentioned by St. I'aul, yet in v. xiv. 6 he speaks again of ' an altar of unknown gods ' (irpAs aiVi? 6' ^ffriv ayviiiTTuf OeCiv pu/idi). Similarly I'hilostratus ( Vit. Apullon. vi. 3) says that at Athens are found 'altars of unknown deities.' It is, therefore, impossible to say with certainty whether such altars were erected ' to an (or ' the ) unknown god ' (u- ' to unknown gods.' The only passaj^e where direct support is found for the words of Acts is in the dialogue of P/ii/o/iatris — attributed to Lucian — where one of the characters swears ' by the un- known god of Athens.' Rut, as this worlk belongs to the 3rd cent. A.l)., it may only be a quotation
634
UNLEAVENED BREAD
URBANUS
from tliis passage. Tlie same dbjection is in part valid witli regard to the Mitliraic inscription of Ostia, now in the Vatican Museum ; a sacrificial group is represented bearing the legend ' the symbol of tiie undiscoverable god.' The date of this is prol)al>ly the 2nd or 3rd cent.; but, on the other liand, tlie Mitliraic cult is a good deal older than that. The Greek word (S.yi'wcrToi) translated ' un- known ' possibly bears also the meaning ' unknow- able,' though it is less probable. In this connexion we may compare a passage from Plutarch {de Is. et Osir. 9) which tells of an inscription on the veil of [sis at Sais. It runs as follows : ' I am, and I was, and I shall be ; no mortal has lifted my veil.' Such suggestions as that there is a reference in ' unknowable ' to Jahweh, who was spoken of by Gentile writers as ' wholly hidden ' (Justin Martyr, Apol. ii. 10), or that such an altar might date from the period when writing was unknown, are quite fanciful and cannot be entertained.
Some writers, as F. C. Baur and E. Zeller, re- gard the whole incident as unhistorical, from the fact that the inscription is in the singular, whereas none such has been found, while the plural is more in keeping with the prevalent polytheism. At any rate there is an element of doubt in some of the references, and, had the writer so wished, he could easily have fallen into line in this matter. Even F. Overbeck admits that the above refer- ences allow the possibility of such an inscription. It is difficult to suppose that a mere romancer would have invented such a point ; and, if St. Paul made any such reference, it is unthinkable that he would have been inaccurate.