* I find no reason for assuming with Baur, that the machinations against Paul pro- ceeded chiefly from the Jewish Christians, and fo charge the author of the Acts with falsi- fying a matter of fact. But I consider it possible that, among the great multitude of Jew- Christians, some might be found to whom their Judaism was more important than the little Christianity they possessed, and that such persons would make common cause with the Jewish zealots against Paul. \ The manner in which Paul here comes before us in the Acts, corresponds most exactly to his character, as we learn it from his epistles, combining a warmth of tempera- ment with a wisdom which knew how to turn every circumstance to the best account. A later writer, attempting to fabricate a story, would not have represented Paul as speaking in the way mentioned in Acts xxiii. 3. 284 PAUL S ARREST AT JERUSALEM. and said, he had not considered that it was the high priest, to whom reverence certainly was due according to the law.* In order to secure the voice of the majority among his judges, he availed himself of that meansf for the victory of truth, which has been often used against it — the divide et impera in a good sense; he enlisted on his side the bias for that truth by the acknowledgment of which the greater number of his judges really approached nearer to him, than the few who denied it, in order to produce a division in the assembly. He could say with tnith, that he was brought to trial because he had testified of the hope of Israel, of the resurrection of the dead, for he had preached Jesus as the person- age' by whom this hope was fulfilled. These words had the effect of uniting the Pharisees present in his favor, and of involving them in a warm debate with the Sadducees, to whom the high priest himself belonged. \ The former could find no fault in him. If he had said that * We need not be perplexed with the "I wist not," ydeiv ova in Acts xxiii. 5. The very turn of the expression shows us that Paul in his momentary embarrassment, and regretting bis intemperate language, only sought to apologise, and the words, as the by- standers would be aware, are not to be taken too stringently. f Everything here is exactly to the life. To fabricate this would require a talent for description different from what the author of the Acts possessed. Paul might have had in his thoughts another line of defence; but after he had allowed himself to be carried away by bis warmth, and bad returned from the digression, he chose this prudential method in order to give a favorable turn to his cause. \ Baur thinks that this representation of the transaction as we take it from the Acts, must be regarded as unhistorical throughout. It is an entire distortion of the question in dispute which Paul here allows himself, and inconsistent with his love of truth ; and the dispute thus called forth between the Pharisees and Sadducees is something altogether improbable. " Parties who differed from one another on such essential points, but who nevertheless so frequently met in society, and were united in the same official body, must have so long exhausted themselves respecting their points of difference, that it was im- possible they could, on every occasion, make them afresh the subjects of the most violent dispute, least of all in such a case, in which, as in the one before us, the easily detected stratagem of an opponent would be made use of in the dispute to his own advantage." As to the first point, I do not see why Paul, setting out from his own subjective train of thought, could not bring forward that side of the controversy from which his own cause must appear in a favorable light to a majority of his judges, while he kept in the back- ground the other points in dispute. It was not a false counexion, but one perfectly cor- responding to the truth according to his convictions. Ever since he had testified among the Gentiles of Jesus the Risen One as the foundation of the whole Gospel, he had been the object of the most violent attacks of the Jews. This faith involved everything else hat belonged to this controversy. Whether the hope of a resurrection to eternal life would be fulfilled, depended on the question whether Jesus was the Messiah, and whether he had really risen. Paul was conscious that he testified of the reality of all the hopes of the pious under the Old Covenant, and that he was a truly orthodox Jew. This he asserted with unwavering conviction. This was a line of conduct by which he occupied the position of his opponents, and obliged them to acknowledge what he maintained to be true — a method which perfectly suited Paul's rhetoric and dialectic. As to the second point, we know indeed that the Sadducees gladly retired from public offices, and whenever they occupied them, felt obliged, from regard to popular opinion, to accommodate themselves to the maxims of the Pharisees. (Ylpoax^povac off 6 bapioaloc PATTIES ARREST AT JERUSALEM. 285 the spirit of a deceased person or that an angel had appeared to him (the appearance of the risen Jesus) — whatever he might mean by this, and whether what he averred were true or not, they did not pretend to determine, nor trouble themselves about it — at all events, they could not criminate him on this account.* The tribune of the Roman cohort at last saw himself obliged, by the plots of Paul's enemies against his life, to send him under an escort to the metropolis of the province, Caesarea, and to transfer the whole affair to the Procurator Felix, who resided there. The accusation which the Sanhedrim was allowed to bring by counsel against him, was the only one which, according to the privileges secured to the Jews by the Roman laws, could with any show of reason be made, namely, that he everywhere disturbed the Jews in the enjoyment of these privileges, the peaceful exercise of their cultus, — that he excited dis- turbances and divisions among them, and that at last he had dared to desecrate the temple. The tribune was accused of preventing the Jews from judging Paul according to the privileges secured to them- by law. Felix, who was not disposed to meddle with the internal disputes of the Jews, perceived no fault in the accused, and hence must at once have set him at liberty, if he had not hoped, as it was his constant practice to make justice venal, to obtain money from him ; but as Paul was not willing to purchase his freedom by such an unlawful method, which would cast suspicion both on himself and his cause, Felix, in order to gain favor with the Jews on leaving them, to whom he had been sufficiently obnox- ious, left him in confinement, and thus he remained for two years till the arrival of the new Procurator, M. Porcius Festus.f "keyei, Aid. to jit) uXkuc avenrovc yereaSai role ■kI^Oeglv. Joseph. Antiq. 1. xviii. c. 1, § 4.) But tho warmth of party feeling could easily gain the ascendancy over cold-blooded politics, and the forcibly restrained spite between the two parties would readilv break out again on many occasions. It might very possibly happen that, owing to the quite tumul- tuary manner in which matters had been carried on against Paul, the leaders of the people had not yet learned what was the corpus delicti in his case ; and since the Pharisees had always heard him assert that Jesus the Risen One had appeared to him, they fixed their attention on that one point, because their controversy with the Sadducees, which to them was far more important, became the subject of discussion. * The words "let us not fight against God," pri deofiax^/nv, Acts xxiii. 9, are cer tainly a gloss, and a gloss at variance with the general tenor of the passage, for this waa certainly more than the Pharisees could be willing to say from their point of view. \ If the precise time at which Felix was recalled, and Festus received the govern- ment of the province, could be exactly determined, we should have an important chrono- logical mark; but thi3 period cannot be so exactly determined. The chronological data on which we here proceed, are the following. When Felix laid down the procuratorship, he was accused at Rome, as Josephus (Archceol. xx. 8, § 9) relates, by the Jews, on account of the oppressions he had practised, and would have been punished if he had not been delivered by the intercession of his brother Pallas, who just at that time had much influence with the emperor. But Pallas was poisoned by Nero in the year 62, see Tacit. Annal. xiv. 65. This enables us to fix the extreme terminus ad quern of the recall of Felix. But according to the narrative of Tacitus, Pallas had long before lost his influence, 286 PAUL SENT TO C^ESAEEA. Paul had for a long time previous to this event entertained the thought of preaching the gospel in the metropolis of the world. But it was now uncertain whether he would ever attain the fulfilment of this inward call ; but on the night after he had borne testimony to his faith before the assembled Sanhedrim, the Lord imparted the assurance to him by a vision, that as he had been his witness in the capital of the Jewish world, he should also be the same in that of the Gentile world. It was this which confirmed him in his resolution, when the procurator was about to sacrifice him to the wishes of the Jewish Sanhedrim, of seeking deliver- ance by an appeal to the emperor. The arrival at Cassarea of the young King Agrippa II., as a person acquainted with the Jews and their religion, was acceptable to Festus, since he hoped that by admitting Paul to an ex- amination in his presence, he could learn something more decisive in this affair, which might be communicated in his report to Rome. Paul ap- peared before so numerous and august an assembly, before the Roman procurator and the Jewish king, with exultation at the thought of being able to testify of what filled his heart before such an audience. He ad- dressed himself especially to King Agrippa, in whom, through their com- mon acquaintance with the Jewish faith, he could hope to find more points of connexion than in a heathen magistrate. He narrated how he had been educated in zealous attachment to Pharisaic principles, and from a violent persecutor had, by a call from the Lord himself, become a devoted preacher of the gospel, — that in obeying this call up to that time {Annul, xiii. 14.) At the beginning of his reign, Nero had removed Pallas from the office he held under Claudius, aDd treated him with displeasure. And since Josephus says that when Pallas interceded for his brother Felix he stood in favor with the emperor, it follows, that the recall of Felix must have taken place in the beginning of Nero's reign, which can by no means be admitted. "What Josephus says in the history of his life, of his own journey to Rome in his six-and-twentieth year, gives no sure foundation for determining the time when Felix laid down his office. 60 : " Ea diri pellex et adulteri Neronis. mox mariti potens," (She, a mistress of the de- testable and adulterous Nero, afterwards influential with him as her husband,) and may have already at an earlier day accomplished much by interceding with the emperor. Wo need not attach much weight to the circumstance that Josephus calls her at that time the wife of Nero. But in all this, much uncertainty attaches to the chronology of events, and the supposition that Felix laid down his office in the year 62, and therefore that Paul's confinement took place in 60, is by no means sufficiently proved. "We may there- fore safely place it some years earlier. If Paul was set at liberty from his confinement at Rome, we must necessarily admit the earlier date ; for if his confinement at Rome had been contemporaneous with the great conflagration, he would certainly have fallen a sacrifice to the fury then excited against the Christians. Paul's defence at oesarea. 287 he had testified bef re Jews and Gentiles, great and small, but had pub- lished nothing else than what Moses and the prophets had foretold ; why then do you doubt that the Messiah should suffer, that he should rise from the dead, and by the assurance of an everlasting divine life diffuse light among Jews and Gentiles ? This he might presume was admitted by the king as an acknowledged article of faith, but it must appear utterly strange to the Romans ; strange also must the religious inspiration with which Paul uttered all this -appear to the cold-hearted Roman statesman. He could see nothing in it but fanatical delusion. '* Too much Jewish learning," he exclaimed, " hath made thee mad." But with calm confidence Paul replied, " I am not mad, but speak the words of truth and soberness!" and, turning to Agrippa, he called upon him as a witness, since he well knew that these things were not done in any corner of the earth, in secret, but publicly at Jerusalem. And with a firm conviction, that, in all he had testified, the promises of the pro- phets were fulfilled, he said to the king, " Believest thou the prophets ? I know that thou believest !" Agrippa, offended by Paul's confidence, answered, "Truly in a short time* thou wilt make me a Christian." Paul, with his fetters on his arm, conscious of possessing more than all the glory of the world, uttered the noble words, "Yes, I pray God that sooner or later, he may make not only thee, O king, but all who hear me to-day, what I now am, except these bonds !" As the king and the procurator after this examination could not find Paul guilty of any offence punishable by the laws, the procurator would probably have set him at liberty, if after his appeal to Csesar it had not been necessary for the matter to take its legal course ; yet the report {elogium) with which he would be sent to Rome, could not be otherwise than in his favor. The centurion to whom he was committed, with other prisoners that were to be taken to Rome, certainly corroborated the im- pression of this favorable report by the account he gave of Paul's con- duct during his long and dangerous voyage. Hence he met at Rome with more indulgent treatment than the other prisoners : he was allowed to hire a private dwelling in which only one soldier attended him as a guard, to whom he was fastened by a chain on the arm (the usual mode of the custodia militaris), and could without restraint receive visits, and write letters. * I understand the words kv oliyu (Acts xxvi. 28) in the only sense which they can have according to the usus loquendi and Paul's answer. The interpretation adopted by Meyer "with little," is indeed possible, but appears to me not so natural. If the read- ing of the Cod. Alex, and of the Vulgate, which Lachmann approves, iv fieyiXu, be adopted in Paul's answer, the words of Agrippa must be thus explained: With few reasons (which will not cost you much trouble) you think of making me a Christian, — and the answer of Paul will be: Whether with great or with little — for many or few reasons, I pray God, &c. But I cannot make up my mird to receive as correct this read- ing, which may be explained as a gloes, and is not ei-pported by very preponderating authorities. 288 PAUL AND THE JEWS AT ROME. As he had cause to fear that the Jews dwelling at Rome had received from Jerusalem a report inimical to his character, and regarded him as an accuser of his people, he endeavored speedily to remove this unfavorable impression. Accordingly, three days after his arrival, he invited the principal persons among them to visit him. It proved that no report to Paul's prejudice had yet reached them, if it be allowed that they spoke the truth. It also appeared from the statements of these respectable Jews, that they had heard little or nothing of the Christian church which existed in the same city with themselves. Nor is this inconceivable, if we only consider the immense size of the metropolis, and the vast con- fluence of human beings it contained, and if to this we add, that the main body of that church consisted of Gentiles, and that these wealthy Jews busied themselves far more about other objects than about the concerns of religion. Yet it by no means appears from the statements of the Jews that they had scarcely heard of a Christian church existing at Rome, but only that they had not taken any pains to acquire an accurate knowledge of its existence. They knew indeed that this new sect met everywhere with opponents, and hence it might be inferred that they had heard of the controversies which had been carried on at Rome about it, for the "everywhere" (Travraxov), in Acts xxviii. 22, certainly does not exclude a reference to what was going on at Rome itself, and we must not forget that only the substance of what the Jews said is handed down to us.* As they heard much of the opposition excited against this new sect, but nothing precise respecting its doctrines, they were well pleased that Paul proposed to give them an address on the subject. But here, as everywhere else, Paul's preaching found more acceptance with the Gentiles than with the Jews.f * I cannot find any foundation for tbe contradiction which Dr. Baur thinks he has detected between this narration in the Acts, and the existence of such a church at Rome as the Epistle to the Romans requires us to suppose. f The position developed and advocated with equal acuteness and learning by H. Bottger in the second part of his Beitrage zur historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die pauli- nischen Briefe, Gottingen, 1837,— that Faul was a prisoner only for the first three or five days after his arrival in Rome, that he then obtained his freedom, and lived for two years in a hired house, quite at liberty; — this position, if it were true, would cast a new light on Paul's history during this period; for it would then appear that all those Epistles, which evidently were written during some one imprisonment, oouldnot have been written at Rome or during his first confinement there. But the narrative in the Acts is directly opposed to this supposition. I cannot understand Acts xxviii. 16, otherwise than that permission was then granted to Paul to reside in a private house, the same which is de- signated in v. 23, "his lodging," %evia, and in v. 30, as "his own hired house," kv Idiu ftiadu/xaTi. It cannot be imagined, that if, after three days, so important an alteration had taken place in Paul's circumstances, Luke would not have mentioned it, for the assertion that his readers must have concluded this of themselves, from the known forms of Roman justice, cannot satisfy us. Even if this could have been supposed, he would hardly have omitted to point out in few words so important a change in Paul's lot. But it is not easily proved that such an inference could be drawn from what is known respecting the course of Roman justice at that time. The manner also in which Luke expresses him- PAUL AND THE JEWS AT ROME. 289 With the confinement of Paul at Rome, a new and important era commenced, not only in his life and ministry, but also in the development of the churches founded by him; for in proportion as Christianity spread more widely, a number of heterogeneous mental elements were brought into action, many important phenomena became conspicuous ; while the divine word operated among them in an independent manner, and they were deprived of the apostle's personal oversight and guidance. self (Acts xxviii. 30, 31) respecting Paul's residence for two years at Rome, certainly implies that he had not then o.btiined his freedom, for we are merely told that he preached the gospel in his own dwelling; but it is not narrated that he visited the synagogue or any place where the church met, for which omission no other reason can be given, than that, although he could receive any visit in his own residence, under the inspection of his guard, he was not at liberty to go to whatever place ho chose; and least of all, would a prisoner, whose cause was not yet decided, have been permitted to attend these meetings of the church, even if accompanied by his guard. Here, therefore, we have a fact which cannot be explained, unless we admit the continued confinement of Paul. How likewise can it be imagined, that Paul, who wished to visit the church at Rome only on his way, would have stayed there for two years, where suitable measures had already been taken for the continued propagation of Christianity, instead of travelling to those regions of the West, where nothing at all had yet been done for making known the gospel ? This is explicable only on the supposition, that he remained so long a time at Rome under constraint. According to the account in the Acts, we may receive it as an established fact, that Paul lived two years in Rome as a prisoner, — a fact which can be overturned by nothing that we know of the course of Roman justice in the case of such appeals; even without waiting to examine how these could be reconciled to one another. Meanwhile, from what is known of the legal processes in the time of the first Cassars, it can by no means be proved, what is in the highest degree improbable, that all the causes which, in consequence of an appeal, were brought to Rome for decision, were decided in the course of five or ten days. It was one thing to decide on the admissibility of the appeal, and another thing to decide on the point of law respecting which the appeal was made. My respected colleague, Professor Rudorflf, who has had the goodness to make me a written communication on this subject, concludes with the statement, that the term of five or ten days related not to the duration of the judicial proceedings, but to the lodging of the appeal, and to the apostoli ( = literal dimissorice) ; that it gave no prescrip- tion relative to the term of the transaction itself; and that the accused remained under arrest till the decision of the emperor. Thus, in the Sententioz Receptee, of Julius Paulus, lib. v. tit. 34, it is said expressly of the apostoli, " Quorum postulatio et aceeptio intra quintum diem ex officio facienda est," (whose application and grant must be made within five days). In a law enacted by the Emperor Constantino in 314, according to which, however, we are not justified in determining the legal process in the limes of the first Caesars, is the express provision that the appellator should be free from arrest only in causa civiles, but of crirninales causce it is said, " In quibus, etiamsi possunt provocare, eum tamen etatum debent obtinere, ut post provocationem in custodia perseverent," (in. which although they can appeal, yet they ought to hold that position that, after the ap- peal, they may remain in custody.) Cod. Theodoa. lib. xl tit. 30, c. 2. 290 PAULS FIRST CONFINEMENT AT ROME. CHAPTER IX. PAUL DURING HIS FIRST CONFINEMENT AT ROME, AND THE DEVELOP' MENT DURING THE SAME PERIOD OF THE CHURCHES PREVIOUSLY FOUNDED BY HIM. In examining this portion of Paul's history, we must fix our atten- tion on three principal points ; his relation to the Roman state, — to the Church at Rome, — and to the Churches in other parts. With respect to the first, the main thing to be considered is, from what point of view the charge under which he was detained as a prisoner is to be regarded ? Christianity was not yet denounced as a religio illicita, therefore Paul could not, like the later teachers of Christianity, be ac- cused of violating the laws of the state, on account of his exertions in propagating this religion. If Christians appeared only as a sect pro- ceeding from Judaism, who were accused by Paul's Jewish adversaries of adulterating the original doctrines of their religion, then at Rome no attention would have been paid to disputes that merely concerned the religious institutions of the Jews. This charge against Paul could there- fore have been considered as altogether foreign to Roman judicature, and he should have soon regained his liberty ; in this manner the affair would soon have been brought to a close. But it cannot be shown that the matter should be viewed under this aspect, the most favorable for the apostle. The Jews might accuse him as being a disturber of the public peace, who interfered with the privileges guaranteed to them by the Roman government, as their advocate Tertullus had already attempted to prove. An additional allegation might be made, which in view of the Roman law would tend much more to Paul's injury — that he had caused among other Roman subjects and citizens in the provinces, and in Rome itself, movements which were detrimental to the good order of the state ; that he had induced subjects and citizens to apostatize from the state religion, by propagating a religion at variance with the ancient Roman institutions, in which religion and politics were intimately blended.* If the church at Rome, consisting mainly of Gentile Chris- tians, gave the impression, in its whole appearance, of being un-Jewish, in * The point of view as a Roman statesman, from which Cicero formed his model of law. " Separatim nemo habessit Deos; neve novos sive advenas, nisi publico adscitos privatim Dolunto. Ritus familial patrumque servanto." (No one may have goda by himself; let no one worship new gods or foreign ones in private, unless recognised by the state. Let him preserve the rites of the family and of the fathers.) Cicero de Legibus, 1. ii. 8 ; and in the Commentaries, c. x., against the conftisio religionum, which arose from the introduction of foreign, new religions. This was the point of view from which a Tacitus and the Younger Pliny formed their judgment of Christianity. PAUL AT ROME. 291 short, a genus tertiwn / this view of Paul's conduct would be formed so much the more easily. The existence of this new religious sect in the capital, would first be made an object of public attention by the proceed- ings against Paul. We may suppose, that his fanatical and artful adver- saries among the Jews would leave no artifice untried to set his conduct in the worst possible light to the Roman authorities. Thus the investi- gation of his cause, with the accusation and defence, might be protracted, and his prospects might by turns become favorable or unfavorable. During the first period of his residence at Rome he underwent no public examination.* His situation justified the most favorable expecta- tions, and he proposed when set at liberty, before he extended his sphere of labor towards the West according to the plan he had previously formed to visit Lesser Asia, where his personal exertions seemed to be very necessary to counteract many influences that were operating injuri- ously on the churches. He could even intimate to an overseer of the church at Colossse, Philemon, that he intended to take up his abode with him. At a later periodf of his imprisonment, when he had already under- gone a public examination, he had no such favorable prospect before him ; the thought of martyrdom became familiar to his mind ; yet the expectation of being released from confinement was predominant, so that he wrote to the church at Philippi that he hoped to come to them soon. But if the view we have taken of the origin and original constitution of the church at Rome be correct, a close connexion and intimate commu- nion may be presumed to have existed between its members and the in- dividual whom they might regard mediately as their spiritual father, and whose peculiar form of doctrine prevailed among them. Now if the epistles which Paul wrote during his first confinement at Rome bore evidence against such a supposition, they might also be adduced against our views.J If these epistles make us acquainted with any difference existing between the Roman church and Paul, this fact would be very decisive, and we should be forced to conclude that a strongly marked Ju- daizing element predominated in that church. But the Roman Christians had already, even before he arrived at Rome, evinced their sympathy, since several of their number travelled a day's journey, as far as the small town of Forum, Appii, and some a shorter distance to the place called Tres Tabernce, in order to meet him. In the Epistle to the Phi- lippians he sends salutation from the whole church (iravreg ol ayioi) which is a proof of the close connexion in which he stood with them. * Whether this term embraced the whole of the first two years of his confinement we cannot with certainty determine, for the silence of Luke in the Acts, which he closes so abruptly, is not a sufficient proof that, during the whole of this period, there waa nothing memorable to be narrated respecting the fate of the imprisoned apostle. j- As appears from his Epistle to the Philippians. \ As has actually been done by Schneckenburger, in the work to which we have fre* quently referred, see p. 123. 292 PAUL AT ROME. As to his givfcig special salutations from the Christians in the service of the imperial palace (the Ccesariani), we are not to infer that these per- sons were more in unison with him than the rest of the church, but rather that they were better acquainted, and on more intimate terms, with the church at Philippi. At all events, it is an arbitrary supposition* that these Gentile Christians were those who, in distinction from the rest of the church consisting of Jewish Christians, were in closer connexion with Paul. It might indeed be expected, that if these Ccesariani were more allied by their Gentile origin to the church at Philippi, he would have mentioned this circumstance as the reason for presenting their special salutations. It is not at all inconsistent with this view, if these epistles contain undeniable marks, that in the Roman church Judaizers were found hostile to Paul, and occasioning him much vexation; for we ourselves have pointed out a Judaizing tendency in a smaller part of this church sufficient to account for such an appearance. As the Gentile Christians who advocated the Pauline principles, now found so important a support in his personal presence, and cooperated with him in publishing the gospel among the Gentiles, the opposition of the Judaizing anti- Pauline party must have been excited by it, and rendered still more ac- tive and violent. The whole tone of the Epistle to the Philippiansf tes- tifies of the conflicts he sustained in his intercourse with the Judaizers. His excited feelings cannot be mistaken ; his displeasure was called forth by anxiety for the purity of the gospel against those who, where the soul appeared in a fit state for receiving the gospel, sought to take advantage of it in eveiy way, for gaining adherents for their Jewish ceremonies and doctrine of meritorious works, at the same time that they won them to a reception of Christianity. And Paul himself distinguishes those among the Roman Christians who, with friendly feelings towards himself, were active in cooperating with him for the spread of the gospel, from those who, animated with jealousy at his success, endeavored to form a party against him, and to " add affliction to his bonds," Phil. i. 15-] 8 ; and among the whole body of Jewish Christians about him, he could only point out two who labored with him for the kingdom of God, and con- tributed to his comfort ; Col. iv. 11. During his confinement, anxiety for the extension of the kingdom of God, and for the prosperity of the churches he had founded, occupied him far more than the care of his personal welfare. As all persons had free access to him, he thus enjoyed opportunities for preaching the gos- pel. By the soldiers who relieved one another in standing guard over him, it became known among their comrades, (among the cohortes prce- torianm, in the castra prcetoria, in the prcetorium) and hence to a wider extent in the city, that he was put in confinement, not on account of any civil offence, but for his zeal on behalf of the new religion ; and * Proposed by Schneckenburger, p. 123. f As Schneckenburger remarks with great justice, p. 123. PAT7L AT ROME. 293 this tended to promote it, since a cause for which its advocate sacrificed everything was certain of attracting attention. By his example, also, many of the Roman Christians were roused to publish the truth zeal-. ously and boldly. But while some cooperated with Paul in a oneness of heart and mind, others came forward who belonged to the anti-Paulin^, Judaizing party, in opposition to his method of publishing the gospel. The manner in which he expresses himself respecting these his opponents is worthy of notice on two accounts. We here see a man who could entirely forget his own person when the cause of his Lord was concerned, — who could even rejoice in what bore an unfriendly aspect towards him- self, if it contributed to promote the cause of Christ. We perceive how far his zeal for the truth and against error was from all selfish contract- edness ; with what freedom of spirit he was able to pass judgment on all doctrinal differences. Even in the erroneous views of these Judaizers he acknowledged the truth that lay at their basis ; and when he com- pared the errors propagated by them, with the fundamental truth which they announced at the same time, it was still a cause of joy to him that this fundamental truth was becoming more generally known, that in every way, whether in pretence (by those who in their hearts preferred Judaism to Christianity,) or with an upright intention, Christ was preached, Phil. i. 18. For even by these persons the knowledge of the facts on which the gospel rested was spread to a greater extent; and where faith in Jesus as the Messiah, the Founder and King of the king- dom of God, was once produced, on this foundation a superstructure could be raised of more correct and extended instruction. But from this we learn what is of service for explaining later appearances in the history of the Roman church, that when the Pauline spirit was com- municated to it, there wras at the same time transplanted within it the germ of a Judaizing tendency. The concerns of the churches of Lesser Asia first occivpied Paul's attention in his imprisonment.* He had received an exact account of * The supposition on which we here proceed, that Paul wrote the Epistles to the Colos- sians, the Ephesians, and Philemon, during this confinement at Rome, has found in later times strenuous opponents in Schulz and Schott, to whom must be added Bottger ; but the arguments advanced by them against it do not appear to me adapted to overthrow the opinion hitherto most generallj' held, though no demonstrative proof can be given in its favor, since Paul does not exactly state the circumstances under which he wrote. What he says of the opportunities presented for announcing the gospel, at least agrees best with what we know of his confinement at Rome from the hints given at the close of the Acta and in the Epistle to the Philippians. (The latter indeed cannot be urged against Bottger, for he supposes that epistle to have been written while Paul was confined at Caesarea.) It does not appear to me surprising, that a runaway slave from Colossae should betake himself at once to Rome ; for the constant intercourse with the capital of the empire would easily furnish him with an opportunity, and he might hope for greater security from the distance and the immense population of the metropolis. Nor is it at all strange, that a teacher of the church at Colossae should be induced, by the dangers that threatened pure Christianity there, to travel as far as Rome in order to consult the apostle and to solicit his assistance; 294 THE FALSE TEACHERS AT COLOSS^E. their condition from an eminent individual belonging to the church of Colossse, Epaphras, the founder of that and of the neighboring Christian communities. He visited Paul at Rome, and gave practical proofs of his sympathy,* and through him the apostle learnt how very many things, which had happened in the churches of Lesser Asia during his absence, required to be vigorously counteracted. During the preceding year, a new influence emanating from Judaism" had been developed in those regions ; — an influence with which Chris- tianity had hitherto not come in contact, but which now threatened to mingle with it, and to endanger its purity and simplicity. It might be expected that Christianity on its first spread among the Jews, would chiefly come in contact with the Pharisaic mode of thinking which was then predominant. Hence the first false teachers, with whom Paul had hitherto been so often in conflict, had originated in a mingling of Phari- saic Judaism with Christianity. But now, after Christianity had spread further among the Jews, and had attracted the attention of those who lived in greater retirement, and troubled themselves little about the novelties of the day, its influence affected sects that had long existed among the Jews of a theosophic-ascetic character, such as that of the Essenes.f Persons of such a tendency must have felt themselves at- though we cannot determine with certainty whether other personal concerns did not also bring Epaphras to Rome. Neither can the fact that Paul, when at Rome, desired a lodg- ing to be in readiness for him at Colossse, determine anything; for though he had at an earlier period formed the intention to travel first into Spain, yet, as we have already re- marked, he might be induced, by the information respecting the changes in the churches of Lesser Asia, to alter his plan. Nor is it otherwise thau natural, that, during his con- finement at Rome, he should collect around him younger men, who at other times had been used to serve as companions and instruments in his ministry, and that he should now make use of them in order to maintain with the distant churches, of whose situation he could re- ceive information through various channels at Rome, a living connexion adapted to their necessities. * It is remarkable that Paul, in the Epistle to Philemon, calls this Epaphras his "fellow- prisoner in Chtisi Jesus." As he thus distinguishes him from his other fellow-laborers, we may oonclude that it could be affirmed only of Epaphras. Since the judical inquiry insti- tuted against Paul would have attracted the attention of the Roman magistrates to the new religious party that were opposed to the religion of the state, it may be supposed that this led to the apprehension of Epaphras, who had labored so zealously on behalf of this cause in Lesser Asia. But it is against this opinion, that he is not mentioned with this epithet in the Epistle to the Colossians, unless we suppose that the apprehension of Epaphras did not occur till after that epistle was written. Still it is fair to suppose, that he was distin- tinguished by this epithet to Philemon only as a faithful companion of the apostle in his confinement ; as on the other hand he is distinguished by another epithet in the epistle to the whole church at Colossae; and this title of honor (6 evvaixiualuTos /xov) is applied, in the same epistle, to Aristarchus, who had accompanied the apostle in his confinement. f Storr's opinion that the Jewish- Christian sect at Colossse was derived immediately from the Essenes, who yet can be regarded only as one manifestation of this general men- tal tendency, is not supported by sufficient evidence. Yet it is not a decisive objection against it, that the Essenes had not spread themselves beyond Palestine, and showed no inclination for proselytism; for by the influence of Christianity, it is vory possible that the THE FALSE TEACHERS AT COLOSS^E. 295 tracted, still more than Jews of the common Pharisaical bias, by what Christianity presented that was suited to the internal religious sentiment; only they were too much entangled in their mystical-ascetic bias, so op- posite to the free, practical spirit of the gospel, and in their spiritual pride, to be able to appropriate the gospel simply and purely with a re- nunciation of the preeminence of a higher religious philosophy, which they fancied themselves to possess, and of a higher practical perfection in their modes of abstinence. They must have been rather tempted to remodel Christianity according to their former ideas and tendencies, and to recast it into a theosophic form of their own. We here see a ten dency, first germinating in the circle of Judaism, from which, in the fol lowing century, manifold branches proceeded of a Gnosticism that was hostile to the simple gospel.* Paul had probably cause, from his expe- rience during his long sojourn in Lesser Asia, to apprehend the spring- ing up of a tendency so injurious to the gospel, and hence we may ac- count for his warnings addressed to the presbyters of the Ephesian church. His apprehensions were now verified. Jewish false teachers of this tendency had made their way into the church at Colossje. What distinguished them from the common pharisaically-minded Jewish Chris- tians was this, — that they did not begin with recommending to the Gen- tiles the observance of Jewish ceremonies, as indispensable for justifica- tion and sanctification, and for obtaining eternal happiness. Had they proceeded in this manner, they would in all probability not have found original character of such a sect might be somewhat modified. And I would by no means adduce against it, what is said in the Epistle to the Colcssians, not merely of the practically ascetic, but also of the theosophic tendency of this sect (their (puoaocpia). 