RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Paul the Apostle
his own, not indeed elaborated into complete and final systematic form, but nevertheless a general conception of the revelation of God in Christ, the preparation for it, and its consequences resting on consistent thinking and well grounded in its main principles. He was by training and knowledge the only theologian in the modern sense of the word among the apostles. But he was not led to the Christian faith and life by study, but vice versa. His theology was experiential knowledge interpreted by the light of the general evolution as he saw it in the Old-Testament history, in the appearance of the historical Christ, in the religious antitheses of his time, and in the world of culture and civilization. This is seen most clearly in his doctrine of the law, of sin, and of justification. It has not always been sufficiently recognized that Paul's teaching has much in common with that of Jesus and the Apostolic Church. For example, his conception of the righteousness of God (Rom. i. 17, iii. 21-22, x. 3; II Cor. v. 21; Phil. iii. 9) is fully understood only when the fact is properly appreciated that Jesus (Matt. vi. 33) and James (i. 20) spoke of a divine righteousness contrasted with one merely apparent attained by human works. As the great preacher to the Gentiles, Paul remained in high honor and his epistles were added to the Gospels as the foundation of the New-Testament canon. His teaching was dominant in the sub-apostolic Church and the entire prereformation Church. Marcion was the only one who felt that Paul's doctrine was peculiar and tried to distinguish it sharply from other Christian thinking; and Marcion misunderstood Paul fundamentally.
7. Paul the Martyr: Paul's epistles throw no light on the events beginning with his arrest in Jerusalem at Pentecost, 58 a.d., and ending with his arrival in Rome nearly three years later (see 1, § 5, above), and what is known of this period is
1 Stat d derived solely from the last eight Facts chapters of the Acts. Mommsen (pp. 87 sqq.) has found the narrative trustworthy when tested by knowledge of Roman criminal law and procedure and has even pronounced it a unique and valuable commentary on other sources. Paul was attacked in the temple by a turbulent crowd (instigated by the Jews " of Asia," Acts xxi. 27) and was saved from summary mob vengeance by the intervention of the Roman chiliarch, Lysias. To escape examination by scourging Paul declared himself a Roman citizen, and Lysias then accorded him speedy trial in presence of his accusers and found no offense which called for death or imprisonment. The highest Jewish authority, however, preferred a capital charge against a Roman citizen, and in such a case the chiliarch had no jurisdiction; so he sent Paul to the procurator, Felix, at Csesarea. Again the accused had prompt trial (" after five days," Acts xxiv. 1) and no crime was proved. Further investigation (Acts xxiv. 22-26) must have removed any doubts that Felix may have had of Paul's innocence. But he delayed to pronounce final judgment, which must have set the prisoner at liberty, and Paul was still confined when Felix was succeeded by Festus two years later. The Jews made haste to press their charge before
Festus, whereupon Paul availed himself of the right to have his cause heard in Rome by an appeal to Csesar. Accordingly he was sent to Rome, being well treated on the way (cf. the entire narrative, Acts xvii. 1 sqq.), was put in charge of the pra?torian prefect (at the time the excellent Afranius Burrus; see 1, § 5, above), and was permitted to live for the next two years in his own hired house, to receive freely all who came to see him, and to preach without hindrance. Here the narrative of the Acts abruptly breaks off. The epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon, which were written from confinement in Rome, confirm the account of the Acts without adding anything of importance. They name some of the devoted fellow workers who gathered about Paul (Col. i. 1, 7, iv. 7, 10-12, 14; Philemon 23-24; cf. Acts xxvii. 2) and show that his desire to preach the Gospel in Rome, expressed many years earlier (Rom. i. 9-16, xv. 22-29), was being abundantly fulfilled (Eph. vi. 19-20; Col. iv. 3; Philemon 10). Only in Philemon 22 is there a hint that a trial is approaching. When the epistle to the Philippians was written Paul was also imprisoned in Rome, but conditions were different. His case had been taken up by the authorities but was not yet decided. The impression had gone forth that he was imprisoned solely because of his Christian faith and missionary preaching; others, both Paul's friends and some [Judaizers] who were actuated by " envy and strife," were preaching more zealously than ever (Phil. i. 12-18). This seems to imply that Paul was not allowed to preach himself, and also that the authorities were not disposed to adjudge Christian preaching criminal. Paul hopes to be acquitted (Phil. i. 19, 25, ii. 24). What the outcome was is nowhere told. If, however, the pastoral epistles are genuine, Paul was set free. For these letters imply many facts which can not be fitted into Paul's earlier life and were, for the most part, contemporary with the let- „ _ ters or happened shortly before they
Coniectures were written- They mention a visit to ' Crete (Titus i. 5, 12), to Miletus, Troas, and probably to Corinth (II Tim. iv. 13, 20), to Macedonia; and an intended visit to Ephesus ( I Tim. i. 3, iii. 14) ; the intention to spend the winter at Nicopolis in Epirus (Titus iii. 12). Furthermore, when II Timothy was written Paul had been for some time in prison in Rome, but the conditions are not those of Acts xxviii. 30-31, or of the epistle to the Philippians. A friend from Asia Mmor had found him only after diligent seeking and others had forsaken him (II Tim. i. 8-12, 15-18, ii. 9, iv. 10). There is no more mention of preaching, and Paul is convinced that his end is near (II Tim. iv. 6-8, 18; in iv. 16-17 he says that at his " first answer," cf. Phil. i. 7, 16, the Lord delivered him to the end that he and no other should preach the Gospel to all the Gentiles). If it was Paul who wrote all this, his first trial ended in acquittal, and then he not only revisited the eastern congregations but preached Christ, as he had long desired to do (cf. Rom. xv. 24), in the West. The facts mentioned in LT Timothy can hardly have been later inventions. Hence, even if the epistle be not genuine, it testifies to an acquittal and activity in the West. And this activity has
Paul the Apostle