'§ 28.

RECEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY AMONG JEWS AND GENTILES.

(COMP. § 19.)

Neander's Kirchengesch., 2te Auflage, i. i. 117 ff.

With the Jews, their earthly expectations of the Messiah always presented a special obstacle to Christianity. When the Christians not only took into their society the Samaritans, but when Paul admitted the very heathen into it, without requiring of them circumcision, the fact appeared to the Jews to afford sufficient proof that the confessors of Christ could not be followers of a true Messiah; and Christianity now appeared to them only a form of Judaism profaned by a mutilated impartation of it to the heathen, as is expressed even in the appellation of the Christians, which originated, perhaps, somewhat later. On this account Paul and his disciples were most violently hated by the Palestinian Jews, (Gal. v. 11, Rom. xv. 31), who could even spread the report concerning him, that he had introduced heathen into the temple, the uproar arising from which caused his imprisonment, (Acts xx. 27 ff.) Among the Hellenistic Jews Paul found once and again much susceptibility of mind in relation to Christianity, as in Berea (Acts xvii. 11, 12), Ephesus (xviii. 19, 20), and Rome (xxviii. 17). In other places these very Jews were his most dangerous enemies, as in Thessalonica (xvii. 5 ff.) and Corinth (xviii. 12 ff.), partly from the usual national prejudice, and partly also, perhaps, from fear lest the publication of their Messianic hopes might injure them in the eyes of the Romans, (Acts xvii. 6—8).

In adition to the inward power of Christian truth on the human spirit, the miraculous origin of Christianity and the prevailing inclination to foreign superstitions, influenced the heathen in its favour. On the contrary, with the higher classes, and especially the philosophers, (1 Cor. i. 18 ff.), its Jewish

the Germans, Maternus, Eucherius, and Valerius, as legates of Peter; the Russians, Andrew, &c, The real but later founders of churches have been frequently transferred to the times of the apostles by tradition.

origin, the simple form in which it appeared (Acts xvii. 18 ff.), and the doctrine of the resurrection of the body (1. c. 32) hindered its reception. Christianity was looked upon at this time by the heathen only as a Jewish sect, an opinion which from many indeed may have drawn upon it contempt, but which secured for it, notwithstanding, the protection of the civil government (Acts xviii. 12 ff.); for now, the Christian societies, like the Jewish, passed for Sodalitia licita (comp. § 12). The circumstance, that even some heathens were drawn away from their own religion by means of these communities, served indeed to raise complaints against them (Acts xvi. 20 ff. xvii. 18); these, however, were generally overlooked by the Roman magistrates, just as the circumstance of many heathens becoming proselytes of the gate had been formerly passed over, since amid the general inclination to foreign superstitions, the old religious laws were not strictly enforced. When Claudius, on account of a dispute between the believing and unbelieving Jews at Rome, expelled both parties from the city, this act cannot naturally be reckoned a persecution of the Christians.3 As little were the Christians

1 1 J. G. Kraft proluss. ii. de nascenti Christi ecclesia sectae judaicae nomine tuta, Erlang. 1771-72. J. H. Ph. Seidenstücker diss. de Christianis ad Trajanam usque a Caesaribus et Senatu Romano pro cultoribus religionis Mosaicae semper habitis, Helmst. 1790.

6 When Tertullian relates that Tiberius wished Christ to be admitted among the Roman deities (Apologeticus, c. 5: detulit ad Senatum cum praerogativa suffragii sui. Senatus quia non ipse probaverat, respuit. Caesar in sententia mansit comminatus periculum accusatoribus Christianorum), this is in contradiction to the Roman spirit, the character of Tiberius (Sueton. Tiber. c. 36: Externas ceremonias, Aegyptios Judaicosque ritus compescuit, c. 69: Circa deos ac religiones negligentior: quippe addictus mathematicae, plenusque persuasionis, cuncta fato agi), and the historical relations; while the silence of the Roman historian in regard to it would be inexplicable. The less credit is to be given to Tertullian's single testimony, inasmuch as he falsely ascribes to his contemporary Marcus Aurelius, partiality for the Christians, in a passage subsequent to the one in which he speaks of Tiberius. Yet the account is defended by J. W. T. Braun de Tiberii Christum in Deorum numerum referendi consilio comm., Bonnae 1834, 8.

3 Sueton. in Claudio, c. 25: Judaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit, cf. Act. xviii. 2. A play on the word, Xpιotós, Xpηorós, sometimes used by the Christians (Justin. apol. maj. p. 45. Athenag. leg. 281, 282), sometimes declined (Tertull. apolog. 3; perperam Chrestianus pronuntiatur a vobis). Comp. the programm. of Ammon, 1803: Illustratur locus Suetonii de Judaeis imp. Chr. ass. tum. Credner's Einl. in d. N. T., i. ii. 380.

G

persecuted on account of their religion by Nero, when, to turn from himself the suspicion of setting fire to the city, he gave up the despised sectaries to all kinds of torture (64).4 Probably the Neronian persecution was confined to Rome, though it appears to have continued with some interruptions till the death of the tyrant (Peter and Paul suffered under him).

Tacit. ann. xv. 44. Sueton. Nero, c. 16.

5 First extended to the provinces also by Orosius, vii. 7, whose opinion gained the assent of many, till H. Dodwell in dissertt. Cyprianicarum (Oxon. 1684, 8.), dissert. xi. de paucitate martyrum, § 13, proved the opposite. Yet Theod. Ruinart in praefat. ad acta Martyr. sincera, § 3, still defended the opinion of Orosius. The inscription pretending to have been found in Spain or Portugal: Neroni ob provinciam latronibus et his qui novam generi humano superstitionem inculcabant, purgatam (Jan. Gruteri inscriptt. T. i. p. 238, n.. 9), is spurious, and was forged perhaps by Cyriacus of Ancona. See Ferreras histoire d' Espagne, i. 192. Defended by J. E. J. Walch persecutionis Christianorum Neronianae in Hispania ex ant. monumentis probandae uberior explanatio. Jenae 1753, 4. But compare especially the epistola Hagenbuchii, p. 31-60, there given.

Since the Christians constantly expected Antichrist as the forerunner of Christ to be near at hand, it is not to be wondered at that Nero during his persecution, should appear to them as Antichrist, and that they entertained the opinion, after his death, that he had not actually died, but should soon return again to undertake a final persecution. Hence the Sybilline oracles, iv. 116 (which verses, according to Bleek in Schleiermacher's, De Wette's and Lücke's theol. Zeitschrift, i. 244, were composed about the year 80 A.D.) That the like report among the heathen originated in that sentiment of the Christians, is at once apparent from the form of it, comp. Sueton. Nero, c. 40: Praedictum a mathematicis Neroni olim erat, fore, ut quandoque destitueretur. Spoponderant tamen quidam destituto Orientis dominationem, nonnulli nominatim regnum Hierosolymorum. Hence the Pseudoneronen. Sueton. 1. c. c. 57. Tacit. hist. ii. 8. Dio Cassius, lxiv. 10. Among the Christians that expectation survived for several centuries. Lactant. de morte persecut. c. 2. Sulpic. Sever. hist. sacr. ii. 28, § 1, 29, § 6, dial. ii. c. 14. Hieronym. in Daniel xi. 28, in Esaiam xvii. 13, ad Algasiam qu. xi., and it was believed that Paul referred to Nero in 2 Thess. ii. 7. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophyl. and Oecumen. on this passage. Augustin. de civ. Dei, xx. c. 19. Compare Corodi's krit. Gesch. d. Chiliasmus, ii. 309. Lücke's Einl. in d. Offenb. Johannis, S. 248. Credner's Einl. in d. N. T., i. ii. 704.

§ 29.

INTERNAL DEVELOPMENT OF CHRISTIANITY.

The assembly of the apostles and church at Jerusalem had allowed the Gentile Christians to observe the Mosaic law, but in so doing they had tacitly recognised its binding force on the posterity of Abraham. Since, therefore, on this account the Jewish Christians must have avoided intimate intercourse with the Gentile Christians, for the sake of Levitical purity; and since the one party looked upon James, the Lord's brother, and on Peter, as their leaders, while the other took Paul for their head (Gal. ii. 9), a certain wall of partition necessarily stood between them, and perfect incorporation into one brotherhood was impossible. This must have been first felt in many churches gathered from among Jews and Gentiles by Paul out of Palestine (Gal. ii. 11 ff.). The very circumstance, however, contributed, in no small degree, to lead that apostle to a more spiritual development of Christianity, and one freer from the national prejudices of the Jews. He attained, accordingly, to the inward perception of the truth, that spiritual communion with God by faith in Christ alone constitutes the essence of Christianity. In this conviction, he was not afraid to overstep those rules of the council at Jerusalem in a twofold manner, both by declaring the obligation of the Jews to observe the Mosaic law invalid (Romans vii. 1 ff.; 1 Cor. ix. 20, 21; Gal. ii. 15 ff.), while he regarded that law merely as preparatory to Christ (Gal. iii. 24); and also by denying the absolute binding force of the laws regarding food given to the Gentile Christians (1 Cor. viii. 10, 23, ff.), while, with reference to all such external institutes he merely required some regard for the consciences of weaker brethren, and practised himself such forbearance (1 Cor. viii. 9 ff.; x. 32; Acts xxi. 26). The other national prejudice of the Jewish Christians, viz. carnal millennarianism, likewise disappeared

1 G. W. Meyer Entwickelung des Paulin. Lehrbegriffs, Altona 1801. (J. G, F. Leun) reine Auffassung des Urchristenthums in den Paulin. Briefen, Leipzig 1803. L. Usteri Entwickelung des Paul. Lehrbegriffs, Zürich 1832, 4te Aufl. Neander apost. K. ii. 503. A. F. Dähne Entwickelung des Paulin. Lehrbegriffs, Halle 1835, 8.

from his mind along with an overweening estimate of the Mosaic law. He thought, indeed, of the return of Jesus as near at hand (Phil. iv. 5), but he expected the triumph of God's kingdom in a state above the earthly (1 Thess. iv. 16, 17; 2 Cor. v. 1,2). Christ himself was conceived of by Paul, who had seen him in the clouds of heaven, more in his spiritual and divine aspect; while the Jewish apostles, in consequence of the personal intercourse with him which they had enjoyed, dwelt more on his human appearance.

The Palestinian Christians might have overlooked the new development of doctrine, inasmuch as they had been accustomed to much more important doctrinal differences springing out of Judaism, without forfeiting the privileges of ecclesiastical fellowship. On the other hand, they attributed to Paul's loose view of the law, by which he drew away so many Jews from the observance of its precepts, in the Gentile-Christian churches, so much the greater mischief, because the other apostles conformed to the stricter view (Acts xxi. 20 ff.). Nor, on the other side, could the Palestinian appear to the Pauline Christians in any other light than as obtuse, because they had not long ago penetrated into the essence of Christianity (Heb. v. 11, 12).

The difference between these two parties is still more strongly manifested, in the aberrations into which they respectively fell from the positions they had assumed. Among the Jewish Christians, a party always continued, who asserted the absolutely binding nature of the Mosaic law in relation to the Gentiles. By this means many belonging to Gentile - Christian churches were led astray, so that Paul felt the necessity of combating the error (Ep. to the Galatians; Phil. iii. 2). And when persecutions befel the Christians in Palestine, shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem, many of them were on the point of falling away entirely from Christianity (Hebrews vi. 4. ff.; x. 25 ff.), having been rendered impatient, partly by the long-continued disappointment of their millennarian expectations, partly because they could not decide upon a complete separation from Judaism, which now appeared necessary.

Among the Gentile Christians, on the contrary, philosophy

2 Dav. van Heyst diss. de Judaeo-Christianismo ejusque vi et efficacitate, quam exseruit in rem christianam saec. primo, Lugd. Bat. 1828, 8. C. E. Scharling de Paulo Apostolo ejusque adversariis, Havniae 1836, 8. 3 Brief a. d. Hebräer erläutert v. F. Bleek, i. 60 ff.