* Most of these ghastly touches {e.g., 14™ ; cf. En 1003) have precedents, if not sources, in i\\e militant apocalyptic messianism ; e.g. the formation of angelic hosts to destroy the wicked is a commonplace of the apocalyptic strategy against evil (which was supernaturalized).
t It is only fair to contrast this with the Jewish Psalms o^f Sotomonin the 1st cent. B.C., where the political quietists who claim to be the righteous party in Israel accept the sufiferings
It is a proof of the quietist tennier in early Cliristinnity tliiit, even wlien a hook ot siicli anient liin^ua^e anil spirit was ailniilted to llic candn, it dill nut make the elnireh swerve from the path of non-resistanee into rebellion against the Kunian empire. The chureh ailhered to the 'loyalist' passivity of St. Paul on this issue. The seetion of St. John s apo(alyi)se wliieh resisted the spiritnaliz- iii<; interpretation longest was the predietion ('20'") of the saints' reign on earth ; what the book seems to have fostered was chiliasm rather than militarist hojjes of a supernatural kind, even though the military setting of the eschatologj- is prominent in its pages as it is not in 2 Thessalonians. It is true that the eliiliasm itself had a martial setting, but at lirst it was not interpreted in a militant sense. The early ehiliasts were not Fifth Monarchy men. There was a danger of this, b>it the danger wa.s never real in the early centuries. The ideal of Christianity remained i)eaceful — an important point, for no aspirations of martial success were excited in the church's mind, and there was no glorilication of the sword. In the main* the church kept, practically as well as ideally, to an eschatology wliidi was not coloured bj- the militant Impes of this apocalyptic tract.
3. Martial metaphors and illustrations. — But, if it is difficult to estimate the e.\tent to which some primitive Christians took a realistic view of their new messianic hope in its e-schatological out- look, there is no dubiety raised by their description of the Christian life in military terms. The one passes into the other through the conception of Satan as the inspirer of heresy (c.i/. Uo 16'-") and persecution (1 PS"; of. Z>.-lCi. 294), as the foe to be resisted. The very resistance tends to assume militant forms of expression. As the Persian dualism had contributed to develop the dejiionology of the later Judaism, it intensilied the sense of moral conflict. -Mithraism was one outcome of this tension, in the later days. But the dualism never became so sharp, metaphysically and morally, in Christianity or even in Judaism; Satan was never considered to be on anything like equal terms with his divine antagonist. Note how this militant exi)ression of the faith prevailed. Early Christians spoke of them.selves as soldiers of God, just because they were not literally soldiers as, e.g., the Maccabees had been. They were not even crusaders. Their militarj' language is purely meta- phorical and tigurative. But it is none the less signilicant on that account. And it is curiously widespread. The early Christian writers drew U[)on agriculture, architecture, sla^ery, law, marriage, sea-faring, and even the games, to illustrate their faith, but scarcely any one of these departments of life furnished such a number of apt and favourite metaphors for the heroic aspect of the new religion as the Roman armj'. When we consider that these Christians had as yet no rank or standing in the Roman world, .and also that thej' inherited traditions of a resolutely pai-ilic nature from their Lord, this becomes all the more remarkable. In one aspect it was part of the de- orientalizing of Christianity. As ' messiah ' was replaced by the equivalent 'Lord,' so 'carrying the cross' involved ideas which were more intelli- gible to nonSi!iiiitic people when they were ex- pressed in military figures. More than once we feel that the early Christians were sensible of the
of Pompey's invasion, in the hope of an ultimate triumph of messiah. The triumph leads to a reipn which is not military, hut it means a national predotninanne of Israel ; ond ' the purely ethical interest is suhordiiiate to the national one, and more iiartieularly to the Pharisair prnirramme ' (E. F. Scott, Thf! Kin(j(lnm and the Mesftififi. Edintiur(;:h, 1911, p. 48).
•The Acta PauU (see below), jkerhnps contemporary with Celsus, show how the lantniape, if not the actions, of Christians could ^ve rise to suspicions of treason.
iiariidox anil even delighted in the use of such language. To state the gospel of peace in ti'rnis of warfare was a telling as well as an inlelligihie method of sclf-expre.ssion. To siiy that their faith was ' the victory which conquers llie world,' or that by bearing persecution and stidering they were ' more than conciuerors,' was to put a new edge on language. Besides, their principles were so well known that these militant terms could be employed without the smallest risk of misconception, either to themselves or to those who overheard I hem.
Take the Paulino epistles, to begin with. St. Paul never calls himself the soldier of Cod or of Jesus Christ, but in two of his latest letters, when he was in daily contact with the Roman troops in his captivity, he describes Epaphroditus (Pli 2^) and Arciiippus (Philem-; cf. Jj.iC i. 89) as his fellow-soldier.s. * St. I'aul's experience of Roman soldiers was happier than that of Ignatius. The latter was disgusted with them. He calls his armed escort a set of wild biutes {ail Jiom. v. 1): ' I am bound fast to ten leopards (that is, a company of soldiers), who, the better they are treated, grow- worse and worse.' When pious Christians gave these soldiers money (see above, p. ()48),t in order to get access to Ignatius, the guard did not cease to ill-treat him ; they only became more brutal and bullying to their prisoner. St. Paul makes no complaints against his militarj' guard (.\c 28'"), and iniieed we know that notonlj' the procurator Felix (Ac 24^) but the officer of the Imperial regiment (DAC i. 123 f.) who condncted him to Rome behaved with courtesy and consideration (Ac 27') — a feature which more than once recurs in the red record of the martyrs, for soliliers had police -work to do, and they could alleviate a prisoner's lot, if they chose. St. Paul's epistles araw repeatedly and lavishly on the military voca- bul.ary. Thus, the apostolic instructions which were to regulate the practice of the church at Thessalonica are called by the technical military term ?rapa77eMai (1 Th 4"), as in I Ti V (TavTyjv ttiv Ta.pay-tc\ia.v Trapa.Tide/ia.1 ffoi), in order to emphasize their authority. A similar note of discipline is struck in 2 Th 3"-, where the church is told that it must not degenerate into a disorderly mob of individuals who break their ranks {irapayyiWo^iti' Si viJ.lv, kt\.); also, mutineers are tio be avoided, just as the Roman general Germanicushad ordered in the case of a mutiny (see Lightfoot's Notes on Epp. of Si. Paul, London, 1895, p. 129). On the contrary, churches which are free from insubordina- tion and united in a common obedience to the ordersof the gospel are commended ; itisajdeasure, the apostle writes to the Colossian Christians (Col 2^), ' to note your steadiness and the solid front of your faith in Christ,' which no specious heresies had been able to break ; and the Philippian Chris- tians are congratulated on having presented an undivided front against persecution and suHering (I'll !""• : ' Let me know you are standing firm in a common spirit, lighting side by side like one man for the faith of the gospel. Never be scared for a