Journal of Biblical Literature 1939-1

Volume Information Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939) Published by: The Society of Bibl...

Author: Journal of Biblical Literature

92 downloads 573 Views 9MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Volume Information Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939) Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259348 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

JOURNAL OF

BIBLICAL

LITERATURE Editor ERWIN R. GOODENOUGH

Editorial Committee WILLIAM F. ALBRIGHT JULIUS A. BEWER MILLAR BURROWS HENRY J. CADBURY GEORGE DAHL

CARL H. KRAELING J. A. MONTGOMERY JULIAN W. MORGENSTERN JULIAN J. OBERMANN DONALD W. RIDDLE

Book Review Editors Old Testament: WILLIAM F. ALBRIGHT New Testament: ERNEST CADMAN COLWELL

VOLUME LVIII 1939

A QUARTERLY PUBLISHED BY THE SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND EXEGESIS 320 LEWIS TOWER PHILADELPHIA. PA.

PRINTED THE UNITED PRESS

STATES

OF THE JEWISH

IN OF AMERICA

PUBLICATION

PHILADELPHIA,

PENNA.

SOCIETY

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

i Proceedings, December 28th, 29th, and 30th, 1938........... of Officers ..............................xviii Reports Proceedings of the Mid-Western Section, November, 1938... xxi The American Schools of Oriental Research, Yearly Report.. xxiv Constitution of the Society ........................... xxvii Members of the Society ...............................xxxi

ABEL, F.-M., Edward Robinson on the Identification of

Biblical

Sites............................... ALT, ALBRECHT, Edward Robinson and the Historical Geography ALBRIGHT, WILLIAM

of Palestine ........................

365 373

F., The Babylonian Matter in the Pre-

deuteronomic

Primeval History (JE) in Gen 1-11.. ANDREWS, MARY E., Tendenz versus Interpretation ......

91 263

283 BEN-MORDECAI, C. A., Chezib......................... BERRY, GEORGE RICKER, The Composition of the Book of Ezekiel .... 163 ................................. BEWER, JULIUS A., Edward Robinson as a Biblical Scholar.. 355 BOSSHARD, EVERETT, Septuagint Codices V, 62, and 147 in the Book of Amos ............................. 331 CADBURY, HENRY

J., The Meaning of John 20 23, Matthew

16 19, and Matthew

18

18s........................

251

Sacramental Interest in the Fourth 31 Gospel..................................... FLOYD The FILSON, V., Significance of the Early House . 105 Churches............................... 277 GEHMAN, HENRY S., Notes on 0pln...................... BEATRICE 151 GOFF, L., Syncretism in the Religion of Israel.... CRAIG, CLARENCE T.,

CONTENTS PAGE

R., Problemsof Method in Studying 51 Philo Judaeus ............................... 1 HATCH, WILLIAM H. P., The Primitive Christian Message.. .15 KNOX,JOHN,The Pauline Chronology. .................. 193 KNOX, JOHN, On the Vocabulary of Marcion's Gospel ..... in Tense Perfect the The of Mistranslation MANTEY, J. R., 243 John 20 23, Mt 16 19, and Mt 18 s18..............

GOODENOUGH, ERWIN

MAY, HERBERT GORDON,

The Creation of Light in Genesis

..203 13-5 ...................................... 221 Palestine.. in Cult The S. MCCASLAND, VERNON, Asclepius Helleninto Semitic of C. Luke's Translation MCCOwN, C., 213 istic Custom ................................ 311 MORGENSTERN,JULIAN,Psalm 121...................... Prein the Matter The MOWINCKEL,SIGMUND, Babylonian deuteronomic Primeval History (JE) in Gen 1-11 91 OBERMANN, JULIAN, An Early Phoenician Political Docu229 ........... m ent............................ ORLINSKY,

HARRY

M., The Supposed Qiryat-Sannah of

Joshua 15 49 ...................

.....

..............

ROWLEY, H. H., Zadok and Nehushtan ..................

255 113 143 43 325

R. B. Y., The Pillars of Jachin and Boaz .......... SMITH, LOUISE PETTIBONE, The Eagle(s) of Ezekiel 17 .... W. E., The Third Commandment. ............. STAPLES, STINESPRING, W. F., The Critical Faculty of Edward 379 Robinson.................................... 69 TORREY, CHARLES C., Notes on Ezekiel .................. Transa of ZIMMERMANN, FRANK, Some Verses in the Light 349 lation Hypothesis........................... .... SCOTT,

Book Reviews Old Testament Section ..................... New Testament Section ..................... Books Received 1939 .................. .................

177, 389 59, 287 401

Front Matter Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939) Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259349 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

JOURNAL OF

BIBLICAL

LITERATUR VOLUME LVIII

PART I MARCH 1939

. . ....... Proceedings, December 28, 29, and 30, 1938 . of Officers Reports ............. Proceedings of the Mid-Western Section, November, 1938 ..... The American Schools of Oriental Research, Yearly Report. ... Constitution of the Society..... .... Members of the Society . . . . . . . . . ..

..

i . xviii xxi . xxiv . xxvii . xxxi

THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN WILLIAM H. P. HATCH MESSAGE ......... JOHN KNOX THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY. ...... SACRAMENTAL INTEREST IN THE CLARENCE T. CRAIG FOURTH GOSPEL. ...... THE EAGLE(S) OF .LOUISE PETTIBONE SMITH EZEKIEL 17....... PROBLEMS OF METHOD IN STUDYING ERWIN R. GOODENOUGH PHILO JUDAEUS . ..... BOOK REVIEWS ................59

PUBLISHED

A QUARTERLY BY THE SOCIETY

LITERATURE

1 15 31 43 51

OF BIBLICAL

AND EXEGESIS

320 Lewis Tower Philadelphia, Pa. SINGLENUMBERS, $1.25

$5.00 A YEAR

Entered as second class matter April 25, 1934, at the Post Ofice at Philadelphia, Pa. under the Act of August 24, 1912.

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND EXEGESIS EDITOR ERWINR. GOODENOUGH, Yale University EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Term expires 1939:

JULIUSA. BEWER,Union Theological Seminary GEORGEDAHL, Yale University J. A. MONTGOMERY, University of Pennsylvania JULIANJ. OBERMANN, Yale University DONALDW. RIDDLE,University of Chicago

Term expires 1940:

WILLIAM F. ALBRIGHT, Johns Hopkins University MILLAR BURROWS, Yale University HENRYJ. CADBURY, Harvard University

CARLH. KRAELING,Yale University Hebrew Union College JULIANW. MORGENSTERN, BOOKREVIEWEDITORSFOR1939

WILLIAMF. ALBRIGHT,Johns Hopkins University OLD TESTAMENT: NEW TESTAMENT: ERNEST CADMAN COLWELL, University of Chicago Communications for the Editor should be addressed to the Journal of Biblical Literature, Hall of Graduate Studies, Yale University, New Haven, Conn. Articles appearing in the Journal are regularly listed in the "International Index to Periodicals." Members one year in arrears in the payment of dues will be dropped from

membershipin the Society. Changes of address should be brought to the attention of the RecordingSecretary. The next meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature will be held at the Union Theological Seminary, New York City, on December 27, 28, and 29, 1939.

OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY FOR 1939 President: Prof. WILLIAM F. ALBRIGHT,Johns Hopkins University

Vice-President:Dean C. C. McCowN, Pacific School of Religion Secretary: Prof. JOHNW. FLIGHT, Haverford College Editor: Prof. ERWIN R. GOODENOUGH, Yale University Treasurer: Prof. R. S. HAUPERT,Moravian College and Theological Seminary Associates in Council (term expires 1939): Prof. MARIONJ. BENEDICT,Sweetbriar College; Prof. HENRY J. CADBURY,Harvard University; Prof. R. E. WOLFE, Crane Theological School. Associates in Council (term expires 1940): Prof. GEORGEDAHL, Yale University; Prof. R. S. HAUPERT,Moravian College; Prof. RALPHMARCUS,Jewish Institute

of Religion.

Associates in Council (term expires 1941): Prof. W. H. P. HATCH,Episcopal Theological School; Mr. HOWARD L. GOODHART; Mrs. MARY E. LYMAN,Union Theological Seminary. Representative on the Board of Trustees of the American School of Oriental Research: Pres. W. J. MOULTON,Bangor Theological Seminary. Delegates to the American Council of Learned Societies: Prof. W. F. ALBRIGHT,Johns Hopkins University (term expires 1940); Prof. H. J. CADBURY,Harvard University (term expires 1942). Hebrew Officers of the Mid-West Section: President, Pres. JULIANW. MORGENSTERN, Union College; Vice-President, Prof. DONALDW. RIDDLE,University of Chicago; Secretary- Treasurer, Prof. FLOYD V. FILSON, Presbyterian

Theological

Seminary.

The Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis: Seventy-Fourth Annual Meeting Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. i-xxix+xxxi-l Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259350 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

THE SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND EXEGESIS Seventy-fourth Annual Meeting

PROCEEDINGS December 28th, 29th and 30th, 1938

meeting of the Society of Biblical Exegesis was called to order by the H. P. Hatch, at 2:30 P. M. on William Professor President, December 28th at Union Theological Seminary in New York City. President Henry Sloane Coffin of the Seminary gave a word of greeting and welcome to the members of the Society, with special reference to the Seminary's pleasure in acting as host at the occasion this year of the Robinson Centenary Celebration, in which the Seminary, the American Schools of Oriental Research, the Archaeological Institute of America and the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis are cooperating. Minutes of the 1937 meeting having been printed in the Journal were approved without reading. The reports of the Corresponding Secretary and of the Recording Secretary, printed below, were read and accepted. The President announced appointment of the following committees: Nominating Committee: Professors Cadbury, F. C. Grant and Torrey; Auditing Committee: Professors Tryon and Filson; Committee on Memorial Resolutions: Professors Albright and Cadbury. A number of persons nominated for membership and recommended by the Council, including thirteen added by the MidWest Section, were elected members of the Society. seventy-fourth THELiterature and

ii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

Professor Cadbury, a delegate from the Society to the American Council of Learned Societies, gave an oral report of the work of the Council. Amendments to the Constitution, proposed by the Council at last year's meeting and distributed to members by publication in the Journal (LVII, 1937, pp. xv-xvi) were adopted. The Committee on Memorials presented the following papers concerning the two deceased honorary members, Professor Marie-Joseph Lagrange and Professor Adolf Jillicher, which were adopted and ordered included in the minutes and printed in the Journal with the Proceedings of this meeting: The death of FATHERMARIE-JOSEPHLAGRANGE,March 10, 1938, in the eighty-fourth year of his life, takes from us one of the greatest figures of our time. Pere Lagrange, as he was familiarly called by his friends and admirers, sprang from an old bourgeois family of Burgundian origin, and his parents were highly respected citizens and devout Catholics. He studied for the law in Paris and received his Doctorat en Droit at the age of twenty-three. After having practiced for only a few weeks, he resolved to become a Dominican, following a secret wish of years' standing. A brief interlude at the seminary of Issy was followed by his entrance into the Dominican order, when he was twenty-five years old. His early preparation, at Salamanca and Toulouse, was prevailingly theological and Thomistic, but at Issy he had acquired an interest in Biblical studies which soon became dominant. Noting this, his superiors decided to send him to Vienna for some specialized training, after which they planned to make him head of the future school of Biblical studies in Jerusalem. This project was duly carried out and in March, 1890, he arrived in the Holy City in order to found the Dominican ?cole Biblique. He was then thirty-five and he was to spend some forty years of his life in his beloved Jerusalem. During this time he built up the greatest school of Biblical and Palestinian studies which has ever been known, with a staff of internationally famous professors-all of them his own pupils-, an authoritative journal, and an excellent physical establishment. While engaged in arduous teaching, administration, and pastoral work he found the time to write over twenty volumes and hundreds of articles and reviews in the Revue Biblique. Among these volumes are massive works of erudition and standard works of reference, brilliant syntheses, and works of devotional and literary character. Pere Lagrange was a dialectician and a theologian of the first rank; he was a practical linguist of remarkable attainments, at home in a score of languages; he was an historian of religion who was not only deeply versed in the sources, both literary and archaeological, but who was also thoroughly trained in modern methodology. To him more than to anyone else does the Catholic Church owe its successful transition from scholastic to modern scholarship in Biblical

PROCEEDINGS,

1938

iii

and related fields. During the most acute phase of this transition he was bitterly attacked for alleged modernism, but he remained loyal to his Church, which was equally loyal to him. In scholarly Catholic circles Pere Lagrange's prestige was greater than that of almost any other scholar of his time. Outside of Catholic circles his reputation was also very great, as witnessed by his many honorary memberships in learned societies, including our own Society and the American Oriental Society. With him there has passed a renowned savant, a profoundly cultured gentleman, and a great spiritual leader, whose memory we are proud to honor. Forty years ago today this Society elected two men as honorary members, Karl Budde and ADOLF JiJLICHER;the former died in 1935, and the latter on August 2, of the present year. Only one honorary member of longer standing remains upon our records. The two men named were destined for much closer connection than membership with us. For over thirty-five years they were colleagues in the Theological Faculty of Marburg. Gustav Adolf Jiilicher was born at Falkenberg near Berlin, January 26, 1857. His graduate education and his first teaching was in the University of Berlin, but he was called to Marburg as Professor ordinarius in 1889, where he remained until his death; he became emeritus in 1923. His first published works were in the literary criticism of the Hexateuch. As a teacher he lectured on early Church history as well as on the New Testament. He had other literary interests of an almost contemporary character like modern fiction. But he will remain known for his substantial work in the New Testament. His Gleichnisreden Jesu, published in two parts in 1888 and 1899, mark a change in the interpretation of the parables which will never be reversed. His Introduction, published first in 1894 and translated into English in 1904, has been one of the best in either language. In German its printing has run up to 15,000 copies. The seventh edition revised in his later years (1931) with the cooperation of Erich Fascher still shows a youthful freshness in style and a scholarship abreast of change. Shortly after the war Adolf Jtilicher's eyesight began to fail and the energetic worker found himself bound with almost insuperable handicaps and finally with severe suffering. For decades he had been working on a critical edition of the Old Latin of the New Testament. This was hardly the best occupation for a blind man, but he persevered to carry through his studies with the help of readers and attendants, and now within a few weeks after his death the first volume (Matthew) has actually appeared from the press, Das Neue Testament in altlateinischer Uberlieferung, to be followed shortly by the second volume on Mark. The volume has not yet reached America, but to judge from numerous Vorstudien there is reason to believe that American scholars will class this with his best undertakings and with the most accurate and wise tools of textual criticisms. It was in this general field that he made his only contribution to our own Journal (XLIII, 1924), "Der echte Tatiantext," a forty page critique of Plooij's claims concerning the Lidge manuscript of a mediaeval Dutch translation of the Diatessaron.

iv

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

This Society recognizes the humanity, the courage, and the scholarship of a fellow member,and extends sympathy to his colleaguesabroad,to his widow, and to their numerousprogeny in three generations.

President William H. P. Hatch read a paper on "The Primitive Christian Message" as the Presidential Address.* The Society then proceeded to the consideration of the following papers: By Mary E. Andrews: Tendenzversus Interpretation. This paper was devoted to a drastic condensation of the major conclusions of Ferdinand Christian Baur on the Gospel of Luke. It pointed out certain interesting parallels-apparently unconscious-between Baur's conclusions and those of contemporary or very recent modern scholars, and concluded with Baur's own ideals as to what constitutes historical criticism-very modern ideals, though written nearly a century ago. By Kendrick Grobel: Death-throes of English Grammatical Gender in the King James Bible. Grammatical gender, vestigially surviving in some dialects, was dying in literary English in early 17th century, to which the 1611 Bible bears witness. Having puristically rejected the fictive neologism (1598) "its," the 1611 translators were embarrassedfor an adequate substitute. This paper aimed to analyze and classify their use of "her" for "its," where yet no genuine personification appears (Hebrew, Greek, Latin and AngloSaxon influences are considered), and concluded that in addition to the historical declension "it, his" and the periphrastic "it, thereof," they also employ the anomalous declension "it, her" out of vestigial feeling for grammatical gender. By R. H. Pfeiffer: The Ages of Mankind in Genesis and Hesiod. Authors of the earliest parts of Gen 2-11 and Hesiod (Worksand Days, 5:109-201) know three differentschemes of the eras of human development: 1. The two ages, or the myth of the lost paradise (in Eden and outside of Eden; the age of Kronos and the age of Zeus); 2. The four ages (a. primitive, Gen 2; b. beginning of civilization, Gen 3; c. development of arts and crafts, Gen 4; the separation of nations and languages, Gen 11. The gold, silver, brass and iron ages); 3. the five ages: the age of the giants (Gen 6) and of demigodsare added in Gen and Hesiod between the third and fourth of the four ages, from an entirely different tradition. The interpolation of the Deluge story into this scheme (Gen 6 5-9 17) in classical literatures appears for the first time in Ovid (Metam.89-162). By Carl H. Kraeling: Gerasa and Roman Palestine. (Illustrated) * See below, pp. 1 ff.

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

v

Wednesday evening, December 28. The following papers were

read: By R. B. Y. Scott: The Pillars of Jachin and Boaz. Various explanationsof, and parallelsto this pillar-pairat Temple threshold. No satisfactory explanation of names JACHIN and BOAZ (I Ki 7 21). The writer suggested that these are initial words of brief inscriptions, significant for cultic ceremonies such as coronation (II Ki 11 12-19)and covenant-making (II Ki 23 1-3). Attention was drawn to the pillar in each case. Verb kiin a markedfeature of dynastic oracles (e. g. II Sam 7 12,13,16) and Accession Psalms, (e. g. Ps 89 5, 22,38). Noun 'ozalso a feature of Accession Psalms (e. g. Ps 93 1, 2). Suggestions as to wording of the inscriptions. By C. C. Torrey: The Critical Apparatus of a Hebrew Bible. We have in the Massoretic Bible the authoritative collection of a mass of unsifted material. By separating out and relegating to footnotes the multitude of variant readings, often very disturbing, it is generally possible to restore the text which was made normative in Jerusalem. There is great need of a scientificallyedited text strictly confinedto the Massoretic material, adopting nothing from the versions and making no use of conjectural criticism. By J. A. Montgomery: CorrectoresCorrigendi. (by title). By Beatrice L. Goff: Syncretism in the Religion of Israel. The paper was a study in methodology. How should archaeological remains and contemporaryreligions be used to supplement the Old Testament in investigating Israelite religion? By J. P. Hyatt: Iconic Representationsof the Deified Sanctuary. (Illustrated). In a former paper the writer has discussed the origin and development of the deity 'Bethel,' the deified sanctuary. In the present paper the suggestion was made that this deity may have been representedby the 'potteryshrines' found in several Near East excavations. The best exemplars are from Megiddo; similaror related objects are known from Beth-shean, Gezer, Ashur, Dali (Cyprus) etc.

Thursday morning, December 29. This session was held as a joint meeting with the Linguistic Society of America for the reading of papers on Old Testament Linguistic subjects, while a separate session convened for the hearing of papers on general

vi

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

New Testament subjects. In the Old Testament session, presided over by Professor R. H. Kent of the Linguistic Society, the following papers were presented: By Ralph Marcus: The Name YHWH. The most generally accepted explanation of the Hebrew divine name YHWH are the following: 1. as impf. qal of root hwy "to be"; 2. as impf. hiphil of root hwy "to bring into existence"; 3. as impf. qal of root hwy "to blow" or "to fall" (of wind, rain, etc.); 4. as impf. hiphil of root hwy "to cause to blow or fall"; 5. as combinationof interjection yd with masc. sing. pron. huwaor hfi. The writer doubted the correctnessof the preceding explanations on the basis of the two following assumptions: 1) that the pronunciationyahwehis older than yahfior yah5 or yah among the Hebrews; 2) that divine names in West Semitic were originally nominative (substantives or participles)and not verbal (perfect or imperfect). The writer proposed to derive the name YHWH from a West Semitic root ywy meaning "to be kindly," and believed the original form to have been ydwiy (ptc. qal) which later, by confusion with root hwy, was pronouncedyahweh. By J. J. Obermann:The Semitic Third Person Singular. This paper concerneditself with the following questions of Semitic grammar: 1. Verb forms in 3rd sing. masc.; 2. the bearing of these forms, especially in pf. tense, on the nature of the verbal sentence (as contrasted with the nominal); 3. various syntactical phenomena more or less out of keeping with the common conception of the verbal sentence; 4. the socalled impersonalia. By H. S. Gehman: Philological Notes on Two Hebrew Words. In a recent note Driver defines modqsh(Amos 3 5) as boomerang. This is not entirely new; Gesenius-Buhlsuggests: 'vielleicht auch ein Wurfholz.' An etymological study of this word and its usage in the OT passages consideredfrom the point of view of context and parallelismproperlyeliminates boomerang,fowler, and lure. The meaning that satisfies all the conditions is snare or gin. In a recent discussion of Song of Songs 5 6, Vaccari correctly notes that according to 6a the lover has gone and consequently from dabar 'to speak' does not make sense. Accordingly he probedabbero poses the simple emendation be'obro. The LXX however supports the Massoretic text and leads us to interpret the word from the Arabic and Aramaic usage of the root. By E. A. Speiser: Concatenated Sound-shift in Canaanite. Primitive Semitic had 2 dental and 2 palato-velar non-emphatic spirants (t, d; h, k). These sounds shifted in Canaanite to merge with sibilants and laryngeals respectively (?, z; h, '). Subsequently Canaanite developed new

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

vii

spirants (beta, gamma, delta, chi, phi, theta) through dichotomy of its stops. Correlation of these two processes (loss of inherited spirants; development of a new set) is suggested by the fact that in those languages which did not shift original spirants dichotomy of stops has not occurred (e. g. Arabic). It follows that spirantization of stops in Canaanite is bound up with, and set in not long after, loss of inherited spirants (contrary to established opinion as to date of spirantization). The phonetic affinity of stops and spirants in Canaanite as contrasted with the phonetic and morphologicalindependenceof those groupsof sounds in other branches of Semitic indicates that the sound pattern of Canaanite had changed radically; it is definitely un-Semitic. Impetus for this departure may be ascribed plausibly to Hurrian where the known phonetic facts, plus geographical, chronological and cultural considerations, account adequately for the Canaanite shift. By Z. S. Harris: Vowel Reduction and Spirantization in Canaanite. By C. H. Gordon: Notes on the Amarna Tablets. (Illustrated) A discussion of two unpublished texts. One is Pharaoh's letter to Itia, governor of Ascalon, commanding him to receive and obey Iria, the new royal commissioner. The other is from a Syrian kinglet (Abdi-Ashirta?) to the Pharaoh (Amenophis III?) and describes a raid on the Egyptian garrison city (Simyra?) by the hosts of the city of Shechlal. By W. F. Albright: What is Biblical Hebrew? (by title) This paper applied evidence from epigraphic sources to the historical evolution of Biblical Hebrew, distinguishing between some of the more important successive phases. Standard biblical prose reflects the spoken language as it was between 1000-800 B. C., and it became increasingly literary and artificial until replaced by the prose of the Chroniclerin late 5th and early 4th centuries B. C. The language of the Judaean inscriptions from the 8th, 7th and early 6th centuries B. C. is substantially identical with standard biblical prose, but is syntactically more recent and may be considered as the contemporary vulgar form of literary Hebrew. Some phenomena characteristic of the dialects of Jerusalem and of Samaria are also discussed. By T. J. Meek: The Hebrew Accusative of Time and Place. A careful study of the accusative in Hebrew leads to the following conclusions: 1. that the accusative of time can express duration of time only and not point of time; 2. that the accusative of place can be terminative only and never locative; 3. that the so-called locative h9 is terminative only; 4. that the -&hending is never to be interpreted as the accusative case-ending because this never appears in Hebrew.

viii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

In the New Testament Section the papers read and discussed were: By E. S. Tanner: Recent Jewish Interpretationof Jesus. The study was based on following Jewish writers' books: Georg Brandes, J. Cournos,H. G. Enelow, J. Klausner, E. Ludwig, C. G. Montefiore,E. R. Trattner, J. W. Wise. The following factors among others may be noted: 1. Broad diversity of interpretation, ranging from totally negative evaluations to theological interpretationsequivalent to those of liberal Christians. 2. McGiffert, Case, Cadbury and others have shown that the Jesus of Christian interpretersis most often a reflectionof the interpreter. Though Jewish writers are somewhat more objective than most Christians their portrait is highly colored by their individual backgroundsand attitudes. 3. The estimation of Jesus by postwar Jewish writers is generally more favorable than for centuries. By F. V. Filson: Significanceof Early House Churches. Evidence in the NT that the Christians used the home for meetings is briefly summarized. The limited contribution of archaeology is utilized. Main purpose of paper is to suggest how the "house church" must have affected life, worship, administration,and membershipof the first century churches. By C. T. Craig: Sacramental Interest in the Fourth Gospel. Wide differencesof opinion exist on the extent of sacramentalismin the Fourth Gospel. No solution of the problemis possible without consideration of the purpose of the evangelist and the unity of the gospel. Evidence was presented to support the contention that the faith-mysticism does not preclude necessity of sacraments. On contrary, the evangelist insists throughout, by means of subtle methods of exposition, on the sacramental mediation of life. By Norman Huffman: Case for Alexandriaas Home of Fourth Gospel. The case for Ephesus is chiefly that it provides a good solution for problem of authorship. The case for Alexandria: internal evidence, especially the Logos;external evidence, especially Fragmentsfrom an UnknownGospel (Bell & Skeat); possible solutions of problem of authorship. If Fourth Gospel was written in Alexandria,it sheds significant light (consistent with what we might expect) on a phase of Christianhistory hitherto very much in the dark. By P. N. Schubert: Study of the Form of Pauline Letters. 1. Extent and significance of letter-writing in the hellenistic world. 2. Two main difficultiesin study of the form of Pauline letters. 3. Critical survey of recent research on subject. 4. Comprehensiveformal classifica-

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

ix

tions of hellenistic epistolographyon basis of extant documents. The place of Paul's letters in these classifications. Specific researchprojects suggested by them. 5. The status of Paul's letters in hellenistic literature. By H. A. Rigg, Jr.: Thallos (the Samaritan?) (by title) Brief summary of what can be known about Thallos, the historian (?), mentioned by ChurchFathers, and what, in present status of paleographical and historical evidence, can be said for the moot passage in Josephus (Antiq. XVIII, 167-Ed. Niese). In light of the available sources, paleographical and historical, an appraisal was made of the position of this Thallos among the earliest non-Christian referencesto the gospel traditions. By D. W. Riddle: Challenging Some Assumptions in the Life of Paul. Biographies of Paul are characterized by a general uniformity due to common assumptions of certain viewpoints of method and result. Progress in Pauline biography requires restudy of these points: the use of source materials of varying levels, the use of data from Acts, the sequence of Paul's letters, chronology, date of "conversion,"problemof an Ephesian imprisonment, influence of Jewish and Gentile environment. By C. C. McCown: Luke's Translation of Semitic into Hellenistic Custom. (by title). In a few instances Luke plainly makes over a phraseof his ultimate source so as to change a custom or feature of Palestinian Jewish life into one which will be more easily intelligible to a Graeco-Roman audience. Two such instances, the anointing of Jesus at dinner and the opening of the roof in story of the paralytic, were discussedand some of their implications pointed out.

Thursday afternoon, December 29. A joint meeting with the Linguistic Society of America for the reading of papers on New Testament linguistic subjects, and a concurrent meeting held separately at which general Old Testament subjects were discussed. In the New Testament Section the following papers were considered: By K. W. Clark: Family 2412 in the Text of Acts. The history of the church'stransmissionof the NT text through medieval period is gradually supplementing the story of the earliest recensions. In 1931 the writer presented here a report of studies which revealed the close textual relationship of five medieval Greek codices of Acts. So consistent was their common textual witness that they were readily distinguished from the mass of MSS, and were designated, from the chief representative of the group, "Family 614." This paper reported additional observations

x

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE based on further researches in this same family text: the famous Codex 614 has been displaced as chief representative of the family, through the discovery of an older, more perfect exemplar found in a new MS recently added to an American collection. This has requiredrenaming of the group as "Family 2412." Considerationof additional members of the family, in America and abroad.

By F. W. Gingrich: Four New Testament Greek Word-histories. Kolphiz5, "cuff, treat roughly." Doric, colloquial word, used five times in NT, once metaphorically;used only in literary modernGreek. Methodeia, "craftiness." This relative of methodoshas degenerated in meaning, but is "rehabilitated" in papyri of the 5th century and later. Peismon?, "persuasion." Passive use wins out over active, and meaning degenerates into "obstinacy" in literary modern Greek. PlUrophoria,"conviction, assurance," comes in the 4th century to mean "information,"which it now has both in the literary and the colloquial modern Greek. By H. J. Cadbury: 1. Maranatha; 2. Otiose kai in Relative Clauses. 1. maranatha. While the second element is variously explained, the first part is generally regardedas evidence of early use in Aramaic Christianity of the term 'Lord' for Jesus. Such important deductions make advisable the reconsiderationof alternatives. One suggestion, adumbrated as early as the 15th century and more recently (e. g. D. Kaufmann, Gesammelte Schriften, 1915, 404), derives the first element from the stem brm, curse. This is phonetically justified by our modern knowledge of the transcription of Hebrew or Aramaic into Greek. It fits the context of I Cor 16 22 and Didache 10 6, and explains why the phrase is untranslated. 2. Otiose kai in relative clauses. One who is convinced by the study of one hellenistic writer (JBL, XLII, 150 ff.) that the nominative forms of the simple relative pronoun because of their weakness tended to give way to the indefinite relative, naturally expects to find other strengtheningdevices. The frequent use of kai after relative pronounsand adverbs may be one of these. If so, several NT passages do not support their usual translations or interpretations. By J. R. Mantey: Mistranslationof Perfect Tense. Greek grammariansare unanimousin declaringthat perfect tense denotes completed action and the continuance of results of that action. In some contexts one aspect is dominant and in others the other. Even though one may often translate a perfect as a present, the fact remains that to a Greek the action occurred prior to the present. Thus Jn 20 23 should be translated "have been forgiven" instead of "are forgiven,"-or God forgives and man concurs in that forgiveness. The future perf. passive in Matt 16 19

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

xi

and 18 18 should be translated "Whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven,"--or man ratifying what God has decreed. The use of these passages by early writers to support sacerdotalism,due perhaps to wrong translation into Latin, is explored. By Louise S. Eby: Meaning of eis tas aidnious sk~nas (Lk 16 o10). A survey of usages of this phrase in apocryphal apocalypses, comparing it with related phrases (e. g., repositoriesof souls, IV Ezra 4 42; "chambers" of 7 79-101;the "treasuries"of II Baruch 21 23,24; and I Enoch 41 2 where the word used is "mansions"). The eternal tabernacles of Lk 16 10 were compared with similar NT phrases such as the mansions of Jn 14 2 and the repository of souls under the altar in Rev 6 9. Questions: 1. Is the phrase the eternaltabernaclesintended to be understood as referringto the interim between the death of the individual and the resurrection,or is it millennial in its connotation? 2. Does the phrase really represent Jesus' own beliefs about the destiny of the soul, or is it secondary? By John Knox: The Vocabulary of Marcion's Gospel. A reporton an investigation into the extent to which the gospel of Marcion can be said to share the linguistic character of the Gospel of Luke. The conclusion was that the assurance commonly felt of the literary homogeneity of Marcion's gospel and Luke-Acts is not justified and that therefore one of the principal arguments for priority of our Gospel to Marcion's is without validity.

Mrs. Silva Lake having withdrawn a scheduled (illustrated) paper on The Excavations at Lake Van, Professor W. J. Moulton gave a report on the condition and activities of the American Schools of Oriental Research, as the Society's Representative on the Board of the ASOR. In the Old Testament Section, presided over by Professor R. B. Y. Scott, the papers read and discussed were: By H. L. Ginsberg:The Wildernessof Kadesh (Ps 29 8). Vv. 3, 5, 6 show that it must be 1. in or contiguous with Syria, 2. comparable in size to the MediterraneanSea and the Lebanon and Antilibanus Ranges, and 3. situated east of the last named. Only the Syrian Desert satisfied these conditions. Syrian location and considerable size are also requiredto account for its being the only desert mentioned by name in Ras Shamra texts. To the south of Palestine only an oasis is known to have acquired, at a late date (see Gen 14 7), the name of Kadesh, but no desert.

xii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

By G. R. Berry: Compositionof the Book of Ezekiel. By A. Spiro: A Law in Privity in the Pentateuch. The accepted view that Lev 5 2-4 deals, like ch. 4, with persons who sin unwittingly and then find out their offences, involves the assumption of contradictions between 5 1-6 and its context, and of multiple authorship for these verses themselves. Complete continuity in chs. 4-5 is obtained if "And he" in 5 2-5 is made to refer back to the subject of v. 1. V. 1 deals with failure to testify where an offence has been committed; 2-5 with failure to warn a person likely to commit a sin unwittingly. By A. S. Siebens:Hiatus in the Regnant Hypothesis of Originof Deuteronomy. (by title). Notwithstanding wide acceptance of the critical theory concerning the origin of Deut, there are certain weaknesses in this position. The theory that Deut was found ready-madeand was revised repeatedly until it reached its present form offers serious difficulties. To this we may add the customary elimination of all other reform movements on the ground that references to them in Kings are late accretionswith the exception of II Ki 22-23. There are difficulties also in assuming that the book was written in secret by a single author. By R. Gordis: The Root SHDY-SHD in Biblical Hebrew. (by title) The value of the Ugaritic inscriptions for Biblical studies is undeniable. But at times their significanceis indirect rather than direct. Thus a Ugaritic parallelhas been suggested for II Sam 1 21. This passage, however, was re-examinedin the light of semitic cognates, and a new solution proposed which is useful in other Biblical passages. By J. Finkel: The Paseq and the Puncta Extraordinaria. The Puncta Extraordinariaoccur in connection with 15 passages: Gen 16 5, 18 9, 19 33,33 4, 37 12;Num 3 39, 9 to, 21 30, 29 15;Deut 29 28;II Sam 19 20;Isa 44 9; Ezek 41 20,46 22;Ps 27 13. The Puncta, like the Paseq, often mark consecutive words that are identical or graphically similar. This parallelismof function is more than accidental. Thus the Puncta seem to be, to some extent, precursorsof the Paseq. By J. Reider: Suggestions on the Text of Lachish Letters. (by title) Lachish Letters: 1. a difficult and much disputed reading in Letter II, 1.5; 2. the interpretation of the word deleth in Letter IV, 1.3; 3. the decipheringof peculiar unknown sign in Letter IX, 1.3. By H. A. Rigg, Jr.: The Hittites in the Bible. (by title)

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

xiii

Thursday evening, December 29. Members of the Society convened at 6:30 for dinner in the dining room of the Refectory of the Union Theological Seminary, following which talks were given, in connection with the Robinson Centenary program by Professor Rockwell of Union Theological Seminary on "Edward Robinson as Librarian of the Seminary" and by President Moulton on "The Display of Edward Robinson's Publications." Afterwards the members met informally in the Social Room of the Seminary. Friday morning, December 30. The Society convened at 9:30 A. M. for a business session. The Treasurer's report was received and, with the report of the Auditing Committee, was accepted and ordered placed on file. The Nominating Committee brought in its report suggesting a list of officers who were elected by the Society for one year (except as indicated). ProfessorW. F. Albright

President

Dean C. C. McCown

Vice-President

ProfessorJohn W. Flight Professor R. S. Haupert

Secretary Treasurer

Professor D. W. Riddle

Associate in Council to serve until 1940, replacing Professor Haupert

ProfessorW. H. P. Hatch Mr. H. L. Goodhart

Mrs. Mary E. Lyman

)

Associates in Council (Term expires 1941) Representative on the Board of Trustees of the American Schools of Oriental Research

Professor H. J. Cadbury

Delegate to the A merican Council of Learned Societies (term expires 1942)

An oral report of the work and annual meeting program of the Mid-West Section of the Society was given by Professor D. W. Riddle. It was voted that the program of the meeting of the Mid-West Section be printed in the Journal with the proceedings of the Society. Greetings to the Society were read from honorary member Professor Gustaf Dalman who at the age of 83 reports that he is completing the sixth volume of his A rbeit und Sitte in Palcistina. A letter of greeting was also read from Professor Nathaniel

xiv

SOCIETYOF BIBLICALLITERATURE

Schmidt who this year marks the fiftieth year of membership in the Society. The Secretary was instructed to send a letter to Professor Schmidt conveying the greetings of the Society and best wishes for his recovery from illness. The Secretary reported the further actions of the Council, announcing the election of Professor Erwin R. Goodenough as Editor of the Journal, and as an Editorial Board the following five members to serve one year: Professors Bewer, Dahl, Montgomery, Obermann, Riddle; and the following five members to serve two years: Professors Albright, Burrows, Cadbury, C. H. Kraeling, Morgenstern. In accordance with the recommendation of the Council, it was voted to elect as Honorary Members of the Society: ProfessorAlbrechtAlt of the Universityof Leipzig. ProfessorF. M. Abelof the EcoleBiblique,Jerusalem. The Council's proposal was approved that the Society plan to meet next year in New York City, accepting the invitation of Union Theological Seminary, on December 27, 28 and 29, with a dinner and social evening to be arranged for the second day by the program committee. It was further reported that instead of a symposium the program committee is authorized to arrange a number of concurrent colloquia or discussion groups on subjects of interest and importance in both Old Testament and New Testament fields, the groups to be led by such scholars as have given special study to the subjects selected for discussion. The Society concurred in the Council's recommendation that the dues of the Society be raised from $3.00 to $3.50 per year, beginning 1939. It is understood that this rise will not apply to those members who have been elected in 1938. In view of the fact that By-Law VII contains reference to the old rate of $3.00 it was voted that the first sentence of this By-Law be revised to read: "Each member shall annually pay a tax of $3.50." It was further voted that there be inserted in By-Law VII a second sentence to read: "Those who have been members for fifty years shall be automatically exempted from further payment of dues."

PROCEEDINGS,

1938

xv

The Society concurred in the Council's recommendation that the organization of a Canadian Section of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, along the lines of the Mid-West Section, be approved and that Professor T. J. Meek be appointed to convene the first meeting of the Canadian Section. The Council's suggestion was approved that the Secretary inquire into the possibility of arranging with the book store of the Seminary for a display at annual meeting of publications by members of the Society, provided that members send sample copies of their publications to the store in advance of the meeting. Professor F. C. Grant spoke briefly about the possibility of publication in this country of reasonably-priced wide-margin work Bibles, and also about the prohibitive costs of imported theological text-books. The president was authorized to appoint a committee, with Professor Grant as chairman, to take in charge these matters which were of great interest to the Society. Other members appointed to the committee were Professors Tryon and Hedrick. The Secretary was instructed to convey to President Coffin the Society's unanimous vote of thanks to the Seminary for the hospitality we have enjoyed this year. The Society then proceeded to the consideration of the following papers: By H. G. May: The Creation of Light in Gen 1 3-5. The representation of light as God's first creation belongs only to the later revision of creation story in Gen 1. It was not a part of the earlier version, according to which the sun (along with moon) was the source of light. The conception of divine light apart from the sun as it appears here belongs in part to late eschatological ideology, such as found in Isa 60 19-20 and Zech 14 7. Gen 1 3-5 is also part of the late Sabbatical revision, introducing the scheme of six days of creation. By A. Sperber: Idiomatic Characteristics of the Hebrew Inscriptions. In a paper read here in 1936 the author advanced the theory that in Biblical days the Hebrew language was differentiated into two dialects: Israelitish and Judaean. In the discussion the objection was raised: Since the parallel passages in the OT upon which the theory rests, are largely found in books generally assigned to post-exilic period, their language cannot prove existence of Heb. dialects in pre-exilic time. To clarify the point,

xvi

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

the author has examined the language of Mesha Stone, Siloam Inscription and LachishLetters. The presentpaper showed that not only does this epigraphic material substantiate the theory, but the results of the author's studies (indicated merely in outline in 1936) if applied to them, reveal a number of characteristic phenomena which have remained unnoticed until now. By S. V. McCasland:The Asklepios Cult in Palestine. As one of the most popular cults in Greece during the hellenistic period, it was only natural that the cult of Asklepios should make its appearance in lands penetrated by Greek culture. Asklepios usually absorbed native healing deities. The cult became well established in Phoenicia and was known also in Palestine. By J. Morgenstern:Psalm 121. Ps 121 has never been adequately appreciated because its remarkable symbolism and consequent meaning have, as the many commentariesshow, not been correctly understood and interpreted by any scholar. The crux of the interpretationlies in determiningjust what are the mountainsreferred to in v. 1 and just why the Psalmist lifts his eyes to them. When rightly interpreted it will be found that this Psalm is in every respect (literary dignity and beauty, unity and effectiveness of symbolism, spiritual content and inspirational power) a fitting companion-pieceto Ps 23. By C. C. Torrey: Moses Stuart, the Pioneer. By W. F. Stinespring: The Critical Faculty of Edward Robinson. Certain writers have accused Robinson of prejudice with regard to some of his observations in Jerusalem and elsewhere. Other writers have been inclined to repeat these charges without proper investigation. The present paper attempted to re-evaluate the strength and weakness of Robinson's critical faculty as shown in researchesin Palestine. By S. Spiegel: UnrecordedDeportations. (by title) Population statistics in Northern Israel shortly before the fall of Samaria. Data on the North Israelites after 721 B. C. The meaning of the gloss in Isa 7 8. The population of Judea before 597 B. C. Traces of deportations not recordedin Jer 52. The dates in the book of Ezekiel. The revolt of 593 and its aftermath. Recent researchon the populousnessof ancient Palestine.

Adjourned 12:30 P. M. JOHN W. FLIGHT, Secretary.

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

xvii

Sessions on Friday afternoon and evening, December 30, following the regular meetings of the Society and participated in by the Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, the Archaeological Institute of America, the Union Theological Seminary, and guests, were held in commemoration of the centennial of Edward Robinson's first exploration in Palestine. At the afternoon session, presided over by Professor Millar Burrows, President of the American Schools of Oriental Research, the following papers were presented: By President Warren J. Moulton, Bangor Theological Seminary: Edward Robinson and His Early Successors. By ProfessorJulius A. Bewer, Union Theological Seminary: Edward Robinson as a Biblical Scholar. By Albrecht Alt, University of Leipzig (Paper read in translation by Ludlow Bull, Metropolitan Museum): Edward Robinson and the Historical Geography of Palestine. By F. M. Abel (0. P.), 1cole Biblique, Jerusalem (Paper read in translation by Ludlow Bull, Metropolitan Museum): Edward Robinson and the Identification of Biblical Sites. By John H. Finley, Editor Emeritus, The New York Times: Address.

At the evening session, presided over by Professor W. H. Moulton, there were greetings presented by representatives of Institutions with which Robinson was connected, following which addresses were given: By Professor Millar Burrows, Yale University: American Excavation in Palestine during the Last Half Century (Illustrated) By ProfessorHarold R. Willoughby, University of Chicago: Current Contributions from Archaeology to Early Christian History (Illustrated) By Henri Seyrig, Director of the Department of Antiquities in Syria: Ritual Banquets in the Culst of Palmyra (Illustrated)

xviii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

REPORT OF THE RECORDING SECRETARY During the year 1938, 50 persons elected at last year's meeting qualified for membershipin the Society and have been added to our list. The present active membership of the Society appears to number 569, which with 13 honorary members makes a total of 582. Last year our membershiptotalled 565. The deaths of the following have been noted: Honorary Members: Professor Marie-Joseph Lagrange, of Paris, died March 10, 1938, aged 84 years. ProfessorAdolf Jiulicher,of Marburg,died Aug. 3, 1938, aged 82 years. Active Members: ProfessorFrank Gavin, died March 8, 1938, a member since 1924. Right Rev. Hiram R. Hulse, died April 11, 1938, a member since 1896. ProfessorHowell M. Haydn, died June 21, 1938, a member since 1921. Respectfully submitted, JOHNW. FLIGHT,Recording Sercetary.

REPORT OF THE CORRESPONDING SECRETARY With the passage of the proposedamendments to the Constitution, this is the last time the Editor of the Journal will make his report under the alias of CorrespondingSecretary. His duties have for many years been exclusively those of Editor. The Journal has appeared in the usual four installments, and the Board hopes that the members have been pleased. The question of financially supporting an adequate Journalis still unsolved. We have again gone well beyond the income of the Society to give you what you have had. Those of you who have publishedknow that eight hundredcopies of a book of nearly five hundred pages, in which a great variety of types for differentlanguages is used, cannot be published and distributed in four parts for anything like $2.65 a volume. I say $2.65 since approximately thirty-five cents of each member's dues goes to Society expenses. We have an excellent contract with the publisher,and all that is left is to face the dilemma that we must cut the Journal or raise more money. One of our members has anonymously and most generously undertaken to make good the deficit for us, but it would be most unwholesomefor the Society to accept this as a permanentarrangement.

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

xix

To cut the Journal would seem to me very unfortunate. Americanscholars must face their responsibilities. With conditions in Europe as they are, it looks as though we must more and more carry the burden of Biblical scholarship, and that burden means offering opportunity for publication as well as finding places for refugees. If we believe in our work, I cannot see how there can be any question at this time of reducing the size of the Journal. If the Journal is not now intrinsically worth more than $3.00, the Society should get an Editor who can make it worth more to them. But the Society should publish and pay for a first class Journal. My gratitude to the members of the Editorial Board is deeper each year. Their promptness, kindness, and acumen alone make the Editor's work possible. Respectfully submitted, ERWIN R. GOODENOUGH, Corresponding Secretary.

xx

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

REPORT OF THE TREASURER RECEIPTS 1937, Dec. 28th Balance carriedforward . 1938, Dues and Arrears . . . . . .. Sustentation Fund for Journal . ...... .. Reprints, and Refunds ....... Subscriptionsto and sale of Journal ..... Interest. . . . . . . ....

.

.

. $ 1549.89 1629.38 . 226.99 91.74 499.33 7.39 $ 4004.72 .

EXPENDITURES Printing and Mailing Journal ....... Editorial Expenses . . .......... Secretary's Expenses .. ......... Treasurer'sExpenses ......... Annual Meeting Expenses ........ Dues, AmericanCouncil of Learned Societies. . Refund of over-payment of dues ......

Balance on hand .

..........

Respectfully submitted Treasurer Dec. 27th, 1938. (signed) C. A. SIMPSON, Dec. 28th, 1938. Audited and found correct (signed) HAROLDH. TRYON (signed) FLOYDV. Filson

$ 2314.38 68.93 19.15 53.92 71.01 25.00 1.25 2553.64 1451.08 $ 4004.72

PROCEEDINGS,1938

xxi

PROCEEDINGS MIDWEST SECTION OF THE SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND EXEGESIS Third Meeting, November 11 and 12, 1938. The third meeting of the Midwest Section of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis was called to order on November 11, 1938 at 2:45 P. M. in the James Henry Breasted Hall of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, by President Theophile J. Meek. The minutes of the meeting of 1937 were read by the Secretary and were approved. Applications for membership in the Society and the Section were presented, accepted by the Section and referred to the Society. President Meek appointed the Nominating Committee: Professor Charles Lynn Pyatt, Chairman, and Professors Paul S. Minear and Beatrice A. Brooks. The Presidential Address, "Primitive Monotheism and the Early Hebrew Religion," was read by President Meek. Papers were presented as follows, with interesting discussion: By ProfessorPaulS. Minear,GarrettBiblicalInstitute: SomeRevaluationsof Apocalypticism. By ProfessorA. T. Olmstead,Universityof Chicago: Johnthe Baptistand Jesus;the Date of the Crucifixion. The evening session convened at 8 P. M. The program consisted of a paper, By ProfessorErnest Cadman Colwell, Chairmanof the Divinity Faculty and Conferenceof the University of Chicago: The Place of the Bible in Theological Education.

xxii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

The paper was followed by thorough and valuable discussion. The Section reconvened at 9 A. M. Saturday, November 12. Professor Pyatt presented the report of the Nominating Committee, placing in nomination the following: President Julian Morgenstern, President, Professor Donald W. Riddle, VicePresident, Professor Floyd V. Filson, Secretary. These nominees were elected by vote of the Section. Papers were presented as follows to the Old Testament and Oriental Studies Section: By ProfessorNils W. Lund, Park College: Literary Structure in the Psalms. By ProfessorJulius Lewy, Hebrew Union College: The Meaning of Canaan, Jahu (Jahweh), Jehuda, and other Biblical Names of Hurrian Origin. By ProfessorO. R. Sellers, PresbyterianTheological Seminary: The Rise of National Consciousnessin Israel. By Professor Charles D. Matthews, Birmingham-SouthernCollege: Some Arabic Manuscripts Relating to Palestine.

At the New Testament Section the following papers were read: By ProfessorAllen P. Wikgren, Ottawa University: The Orphic Prelude to Christian Faith. By ProfessorJohn Merle Rife, Muskingum College: The Literary Backgroundof Revelation 2-3. By Morgan Ward Redus, Southern Methodist University: Tertullian's Idea of the Good Life. By ProfessorHarold Hutson, Birmingham-SouthernCollege: Some Factors in the Rise of Scientific New Testament Criticism.

At 3:30 P. M. Saturday, November 12, the Midwest Section met in joint session with the Chicago Society of Biblical Research.

PROCEEDINGS,1938

xxiii

President Forster, of the Chicago Society, was in the chair. Papers were presented as follows: By PresidentL. FranklinGruber,ChicagoLutheranSeminary: The Relation of Tyndale's New Testament to that of Luther.

By ProfessorOtto J. Baab,GarrettBiblicalInstitute: Studiesin the Background of SecondIsaiah. By ProfessorPaul E. Davies,Presbyterian TheologicalSeminary: The Apocalyptic Temper: an Element in Interpretation.

Members of the Section and of the Chicago Society, and guests, dined in the Hutchinson Commons of the University of Chicago. Attendance at the third meeting of the Section approximated that of former sessions; members and guests from twelve states outside Illinois, and one Canadian province, were present. DONALD W. RIDDLE, Secretary.

xxiv

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

THE AMERICAN SCHOOLS OF ORIENTAL RESEARCH The Director of the Baghdad School, Dr. E. A. Speiser, reports that last season's excavations at Tepe Gawra were eminently successful. The work at this site continues to be a joint undertakingof the Baghdad School and the University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania. In spite of the necessity of operating on a reduced budget, the examination of prehistoric levels advanced to a stage where it is believed that one more campaignwill complete the task for the present. The latest discoveries have enhanced still further the importance of this site for comparative historic archaeology. It has now been established definitely that there were twenty-six main building levels at Tepe Gawra, and that the tell is unique in that it has the longest known successionof strata belongingto the oldest civilization of Lower Mesopotamia. During a portion of the winter months, work was continued likewise at Khafajeh, not far from Baghdad, where there were further discoveries of sculpture from the early Dynastic Period, as well as of painted pottery, and a complete inscribedSumeriancylinder of Samsuiluna. As in previous years the Irak Department of Antiquities has cooperated in a most helpful way in both these undertakings. The Annual Professorof the Baghdad School, Dr. Elihu Grant, was obliged to curtail his stay in Irak by reason of unforeseen circumstances at home which requiredhis return to America. The normal activities of the JerusalemSchool went forwardlast year much as usual, notwithstanding the adjustments that were made necessary by the violence and conflict in Palestine. The teaching staff included Dr. Nelson Glueck, the Director, Dr. Clarence S. Fisher, Professorof Archaeology, and Dr. S. Vernon McCasland of Goucher College, the Annual Professor. There were also occasional lectures by specialists in the archaeologicalfield. Trips

to Palestiniansites hadto be conductedwithcare,but therewasa compensation in the freedomof movementthat was possiblein Syriaand Transjordan. It was the good fortuneof the membersof the Schoolto participatein the finalsuccessfulcampaignat the Nabataeansanctuaryof KhirbetEt-Tannflr, and also in a mostrewardingtwo monthsof excavationat Tell el-Kheleifeh, identified by Dr. Glueck as King Solomon's seaport of Ezion-Geber, at the head of the Gulf of Akabah. A recent message from Dr. Glueck states that "the wave of anti-American feeling which made itself apparent for a short time, did not extend itself generally, nor prevail for long." Quite recently there has been marked improvement in conditions of travel in Palestine and in freedom of movement at Jerusalem. At present, the work of the Jerusalem School is going forward much as usual. To the above statements, it may be added that the present calendar year is to be all important for the finances of the American Schools of Oriental Research, since it affords the last opportunity for meeting to the full the

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

xxv

endowment challenge given by the Rockefeller Foundation. Of the seventyfive thousand dollars that we were called upon to raise, in order to receive twice that amount as an addition to our endowment, there remains still to be provided somewhat less than twenty-five thousand dollars. In other words, with two-thirds of the requisite sum actually in hand, the Schools are seeking the generous cooperationof all their friends in a final successful endeavor.

ARCHAEOLOGICALACTIVITY IN PALESTINE In spite of disturbed conditions in Palestine, archaeological research has continued at various centers. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago had its usual season of excavation from November to May at the site of Megiddo. In one section the clearance has gone down through the complete range of occupation to bed rock, and has established the twentieth stratum as the earliest building period. The fragments of pottery that came to light at this level evidently belong to a very early date. The next stratum (XIX) brings evidence of a marked architectural development. It was found that the tremendous city wall, originally 4 metres in thickness, was increasedat a later time to 8 metres. The Wellcome-Marston Archaeological Expedition continued its work at Tell ed-Duweir (Lachish). Following the tragic death of the Director J. L. Starkey early last year, operations were in charge of Acting-Director, C. H. Inge. Further confirmationwas found for Starkey's conclusion that Lachish was twice destroyed by fire within a decade. An ostrakon came to light resembling the receipts discovered at Samaria, but unfortunately only its first words "In the ninth (year?)" were legible. A step was uncovered that had scratched upon its vertical face the first five letters of the HebrewPhoenician alphabet. It was found that the great pit, previously discovered not far from the Palace-Fort, was never finished or put to any use. The work on the Temple Area was completed, and duringthe present winter the membersof the expedition are engaged in London in preparingthe material on this portion of the site for publication. The Pontifical Biblical Institute of Rome and Jerusalem continued its excavations at Tuleildt El-Ghassfil for two months, during which time progress was impeded not a little by unfavorable weather. P. R. Koeppel S. J. was the Field-Director in charge. The Goerresgesellschaftand Islamic Department of the Staatliche Museen of Berlin had their expedition in the field again at Khirbet Minya from November 1, 1937 to May 1, 1938. No new discoverieswere made as to the general plan of the palace area, but additional evidence of sumptuous decoration was uncovered, as was an excellently preserved floor mosaic belonging to the big center apartment of a five-roomgroup.

xxvi

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

Mr. T. J. Colin Baly has continued investigations in South Western Palestine on behalf of the Colt ArchaeologicalExpedition. Dr. E. L. Sukenik of the Hebrew University excavated a small tell near the mouth of the Auja (Jarkon) River, and has worked likewise at other sites. The ArchaeologicalSurvey of Palestine under the auspices of the Palestine Exploration Fund and the British School of Archaeologywas continued under the leadershipof Director P. L. O. Guy. They are occupied particularly with the Jaffa-Tell-Aviv section, but are active at other sites when there is a call for investigation. As in previous years, there have been various chance discoveries and activities of lesser importance, in Jerusalem and in other localities of Palestine. WARRENJ. MOULTON

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

xxvii

CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS of the SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND EXEGESIS (As amended Dec. 28, 1901, Dec. 28, 1923, Dec. 29, 1930, Dec. 29, 1936, and Dec. 28, 1938)

CONSTITUTION I. This association shall be called "The Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis." II. The object of the Society shall be to stimulate the critical study of the Scripturesby presenting,discussing,and publishingoriginal paperson Biblical subjects. III. The officersof the Society shall be a President,a Vice-President,a Secretary, an Editor, and a Treasurer,who with nine others shall be united in a Council. These shall be elected annually by the Society, with the exception of the Editor who shall be elected annually by the Council, and of the nine members of the Council three of whom shall be elected each year for a term of three years. Additional membersof the Councilshall be the Presidentof the Society for the preceding year and the Secretaries, or their proxies, of the Sections hereinafter provided for.

IV. Members shall be elected by the Society upon the recommendationof the Council. They may be of two classes, active and honorary. Honorary members shall belong to other nationalities than that of the United States of America, and shall be especially distinguishedfor their attainments as Biblical scholars. The number of honorarymembers chosen at the first election shall be not more than ten; in any succeeding year not more than two. V. The Society shall meet at least once a year, at such time and place as the Council may determine. On the first day of the annual meeting the President, or some other member appointed by the Council for the purpose, shall deliver an address to the Society.

xxviii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE VI.

Sections, consisting of all the membersof the Society residingin a particular locality, may be organized,with the consent of the Councilfor the object stated in Article II, provided that the number of members composing any Section shall not be less than twelve. Each Section shall annually choose for itself a President, whose duty it shall be to preside over its meeting, and to take care that such papers and notes read before it as the Section may judge to be of sufficient value are transmitted promptly to the Editor of the Society. Each Section shall also annually choose for itself a Secretaryand other officers at the discretionof the Section. The dues of membersof a Section shall be payable to the Treasurerof the Society. The Secretaryof a Section is authorized to draw upon the Treasurerof the Society for expenses involved in sending notices of meetings, in printing, and in the conduct of the annual meetings. The Sections shall meet as often as they shall severally determine, provided that their meetings do not interfere with the meetings of the Society. VII. This constitution may be amended by a vote of the Society, on recommendation of the Council, such amendment having been proposedat a previous meeting, and notice of the same having been sent to the members of the Society.

BY-LAWS I. It shall be the duty of the President,or, in his absence, of the Vice-President, to preside at all the meetings of the Society; but in the absence of both these officers,the Society may choose a presidingofficerfrom the members present. II. It shall be the duty of the Secretary to conduct the correspondenceof the Society; to use his best efforts for the securing of suitable papers and notes to be presented to the Society at each meeting; to notify the members, at least two weeks in advance, of each meeting, transmitting to them the list of papers to be presented at the meeting; to keep a record of the proceedingsof such meetings; to preservean accurate roll of the members;to make an annual report of the condition of the Society. III. It shall be the duty of the Editor to receive all papers and notes that shall have been presented, and lay them before the Editorial Committee; to edit and preparefor printing all manuscriptsselected for publication;to distribute

PROCEEDINGS, 1938

xxix

the publications of the Society and to do such other like things as the Council may request; to make an annual reportof the work of the Editorial Committee.

IV. It shall be the duty of the Treasurerto take charge of all the funds of the Society, and to invest or disburse them under the direction of the Council, rendering an account of all his transactions to the Society at each annual meeting.

V. It shall be the duty of the Council to propose candidates for membership of the Society; to elect the Editor and the members of the Editorial Committee; to fix the times and places for meetings, and generally to supervise the interests of the Society. VI. It shall be the duty of the Editorial Committee to publish the proceedings of the Society, and also to select, edit, and publish, as far as the funds of the Society will justify, such papers and notes from among those laid before them, as shall in their judgment be fitted to promote Biblical science. VII. Each membershall annually pay a tax of three dollarsand fifty cents. Those who have been members for fifty years shall automatically be exempted from further payment of dues. The donation at one time, by a single person, of fifty dollars shall exempt the donor from all further payments, and no payments shall be requiredof honorarymembers. VIII. Each member shall be entitled to receive, without additional charge, one copy of each publication of the Society after his election; in addition to which, if he be a contributor to the Journal, he shall receive twenty-five copies of any article or articles he may have contributed.

IX. Five members of the Council, of whom not less than three shall have been elected directly by the Society, shall constitute a quorum thereof. Twelve members of the Society shall constitute a quorum thereof for the transaction of business, but a smaller number may continue in session for the purpose of hearing and discussing papers presented.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xxxi

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY' HONORARY MEMBERS Prof. F. M. Abel, P. O. B. 178, Jerusalem, Palestine. Prof. Walter Bauer, Dustere Eichenweg 14, Gottingen, Germany. Prof. A. Bertholet, Theol.D., Im Geheze 2, Berlin-Dahlem, Germany. Prof. Stanley A. Cook, Litt.D., 26 Lensfield Road, Cambridge,England. Prof. Gustav Dalman, Theol.D., Arndstrasse31, Greifswald, Germany. Prof. Otto Eissfeldt, Seydlitzstrasse 14a, Halle/Saale, Germany. Prof. Martin Dibelius, Bergstrasse 115, Heidelberg, Germany. Prof. Maurice Goguel, 2 Rue Lecourts, Paris xve, France. Prof. Johannes Hempel, Berlin-Schlachtensee,am-Schlachtensee28, Germany. Prof. D. Hans Lietzmann, BerlinerStrasse 65, Berlin-Wilmersdorf1, Germany. Prof. Ernst Lohmeyer, Greifswald,Arndstr. 3, Germany. Prof. Ernest Sellin, LandgrafenStr 11, Berlin, Germany. Sir G. A. Smith, D.D., Aberdeen,Scotland. Pere L. P. Hugues Vincent, P. O. B. 7, Jerusalem, Palestine. ACTIVE MEMBERS' (593) '20 Prof. Arthur Adams, Ph.D., Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. (1082)'33 Prof. David E. Adams, D.D., Mt. Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass. (242) '92 Pres. Cyrus Adler, Ph.D., 2041 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, Pa. (969) '30 Rev. H. W. C. Ainley, A.B., D.B., The Bible Institute of Corpus Christi, Box 1453, Corpus Christi, Texas. (1326)'37 Tadao Aiura, M.A., 2311 Buena Vista Ave., Alameda, Calif. (1258)'36 Prof. Allen D. Albert, Jr., Ph.D., Seabury-Western Theological Seminary, Evanston, Ill. (576) '17 Prof. William Foxwell Albright, Ph.D., Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. (1314)'36 Prof. John B. Alexander,Ph.D., Keuka College, Keuka Park, N. J.

1This list has been corrected up to February 1, 1939. Members are requested to notify the Recording Secretary, J. W. Flight, Haverford, Pa., of any change of address.

2 The two numbersprefixedto the name of each memberindicatethe order and date of accessionto membership in the Society.

xxxii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(466) '11 Prof. Herbert C. Alleman, D.D., Lutheran Seminary, Gettysburg, Pa. (1372)'38 Milton Anastos, S.T.B., 104 OrchardSt., Somerville, Mass. (1373)'38 Rev. Bernhard Anderson, Sunnyvale, Calif. (1331)'37 Prof. Carl A. Anderson, Augustana College & Theological Seminary, Rock Island, Ill. (1230)'36 Prof. J. N. Anderson,4612 Stockwell St., Lincoln, Nebr. (1110)'34 David Keith Andrews, R.R. 1, West Corns, Md. (934) '29 Prof. Mary E. Andrews, Ph.D., 200 E. 24th St., Baltimore, Md. (711) '22 Rev. Prof. S. Angus, Ph.D., St. Andrew's College, Sydney, Australia. (1282)'36 Prof. W. Arndt, ConcordiaSeminary, St. Louis, Mo. (1346)'37 Eugene S. Ashton, B.D., 99 Claremont Ave., New York, N. Y. (1112)'34 Rev. Frederick A. Aston, 690 Riverside Drive, New York, N. Y. (901) '28 Prof. Otto J. Baab, 2431 Ridgeway Ave., Evanston, Ill. (1206)'35 Rev. Paul T. Bahner, M.A., S.T.B., 705 N. 3d St., Palmerton, Pa. (926) '29 Prof. John William Bailey, Ph.D., 2606 Dwight Way, Berkeley, Calif.. (690) '22 Prof. Moses Bailey, Ph.D., Hartford Seminary Foundation, Hartford, Conn. (1308)'36 Rev. William Paul Barnds, M.A., 400 East Maple St., Independence, Kansas. (825) '26 Prof. Albert E. Barnett, Ph.D., Scarritt College, 19th St. and Grand Ave., Nashville, Tenn. (1207)'35 Rabbi Joseph L. Baron, Ph.D., 2419 E. KenwoodAve., Milwaukee, Wis. (927) '29 Prof. Salo Baron, Jur.D., Ph.D., Pol. ScD., Columbia University, New York, N. Y. (1004)'31 Rev. Alois Barta, Ph.D., University of Dubuque, Dubuque, Iowa. (1374)'38 Rev. Eugene H. Barth, B.D., Graduate School of Theology, Oberlin, Ohio. (1085)'33 Prof. Edward R. Bartlett, Ph.D., D.D., DePauw University, Greencastle, Ind. (210) '91 Prof. George A. Barton, Ph.D., Weston, Mass. (211) '91 Prof. L. W. Batten, Ph.D., 560 Riverview Road, Swarthmore,Pa. (1083)'33 Rev. Stephen F. Bayne, Jr., S.T.M., 600 North Euclid Ave., St. Louis, Mo. (1359)'37 Prof. N. H. Baynes, M.A., D.D., F.B.A., 29 Abercom Place, London N. W. 8, England. (561) '16 Prof. John W. Beardsley, Jr., Ph.D., D.D., New BrunswickTheological Seminary, New Brunswick, N. J. (1300)'36 Rev. Kenneth C. Bechtel, Ph.D., 614 6th Ave., Sterling, Ill. (828) '26 Prof. Dwight M. Beck, S.T.B., Syracuse University, Syracuse, N. Y. (694) '22 Prof. Irwin R. Beiler, Ph.D., Allegheny College, Meadville, Pa.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xxxiii

(970) '30 Prof. A. D. Beittel, Ph.D., Guilford College, N. C. (1187)'34 Rabbi Samuel Belkin, Ph.D., 684 Riverside Drive, New York, N. Y. (829) '26 Marion J. Benedict, Ph.D., Sweetbriar College, Sweetbriar, Va. (1231)'36 Pres. Conrad Bergendoff, B.D., Ph.D., Augustana College and Theological Seminary, Rock Island, Ill. (1344)'37 Rev. William C. Berkemeyer,524 E. Locust St., Bethlehem, Pa. (830) '26 Rev. J. Buchanan Bernardin, Th.D., 42 Janssen Place, Kansas City, Mo. (1232)'36 Prof. William Henry Bernhardt, B.D., Ph.D., The Iliff School of Theology, Denver, Colo. (326) '99 Prof. George R. Berry, D.D., 2 Prescott St., Cambridge,Mass. (1375)'38 Rev. Lawrence M. Berry, B.S., B.D., 6221 Main St., Houston, Texas. (318) '98 Prof. Julius A. Bewer, Ph.D., D.D., Union Theological Seminary, Broadway and 120th St., New York, N. Y. (1301)'36 Prof. John Biegeleisen, M.A., 119 Bompart Ave., Webster Groves, Mo. (1329)'37 E. P. Blair, 85 Sachem St., New Haven, Conn. (618) '21 Pres. James A. Blaisdell, 7803 Prospect Place, LaJolla, Calif. (1067)'32 Prof. Sheldon H. Blank, 201 Lafayette Circle, Cincinnati, Ohio. (1283)'36 Rev. Frederic E. Blume, A.B., 1224 Darrow Ave., Evanston, Ill. (843) '26 Prof. F. Darcy Bone, 810 Broadway, Nashville, Tenn. (1201)'35 Prof. Edwin P. Booth, Ph.D., Box 23, Islington, Mass. (928) '29 Prof. Osborne Booth, B.A., B.D., Bethany College, Bethany, W. Va. (1328)'37 Rev. Everett Bosshard, 2451 Ridge Road, Berkeley, Calif. (972) '30 Prof. J. S. Boughton, Ph.D., Shurtliff College, Alton, Ill. (1005)'31 Rev. Jalmar Bowden, S.T.D., Rua Sampaio 129, Juiz de Fora, Minas, Brazil. (887) '27 Rev. Boone M. Bowen, Ph.D., Emory University, Atlanta, Ga. (1006)'31 Prof. Raymond A. Bowman, M.A., Ph.D., 5464 S. Ridgewood Court, Chicago, Ill. (1068)'32 Watson Boyes, Ph.D., Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1376)'38 Abraham J. Brachman, 2308 Warner Road, Fort Worth, Texas. (9063)'28 Prof. Harvie Branscomb, Duke University, Durham, N. C. (1179)'34 Rabbi Willian G. Braude, Ph.D., 166 Brown St., Providence, R. I. (931) '29 Dr. Baruch Braunstein, 927 Chemical Building, St. Louis, Mo. (1007)'31 Prof. Raymond R. Brewer, Ph.D., James Millikin University, Decatur, Ill. (311) '97 Miss Emilie Grace Briggs, Hotel Taft Annex, New Haven, Conn. (1189)'34 Prof. Howard Brinton, Ph.D., Pendle Hill, Wallingford,Pa. (831) '26 Rev. Mitchell Bronk, D.D., 1701 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. (569) '16 Mrs. Beatrice A. Brooks, Ph.D., Western College, Oxford,Ohio.

xxxiv

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(1180)'34 Mrs. Maurice Brooks, 322 Brockway Ave., Morgantown, W. Va. (1334)'37 Rev. Edwin C. Broome, Jr., A.B., B.D., 171 BrightbridgeAve., East Providence, R. I. (870) '27 Prof. W. Rolfe Brown, 2355 W. 19th St., Oklahoma City, Okla. (1399)'38 Prof. G. M. Bruce, Ph.D., D.D., Luther Theological Seminary, Como and Pierce Aves., St. Paul, Minnesota. (1294)'36 Prof. Thomas M. Brumfield, M.A., B.D., 1006 12th Ave N., Nashville, Tenn. (1255)'36 Ludlow Bull, Ph.D., Metropolitan Musuem, New York, N. Y. (719) '22 Prof. Walter E. Bundy, Ph.D., DePauw University, Greencastle, Ind. (973) '30 Rev. A. L. Burgreen, 249 Woodbine St., Brooklyn, N. Y. (1233)'36 B. LeRoy Burkhart, B.A., 5800 Maryland Ave., Chicago, Ill. (747) '23 Prof. Millar Burrows,Ph.D., 409 Prospect St., New Haven, Conn. (1190)'34 Pres. J. Oliver Buswell, Jr., D.D., Wheaton College, Wheaton, Ill. (950) '29 Rev. Frank E. Butler, 20 Everett Ave., Providence, R. I. (689) '18 Prof. Moses Buttenwieser, Ph.D., 300 Green St., San Francisco, Calif. (471) '11 Prof. Henry J. Cadbury, Ph.D., 7 Buckingham Place, Cambridge, 38, Mass. (904) '28 Prof. J. Y. Campbell, St. Columba Manse, Kilmacolm, Scotland. (1234)'36 Rev. C. G. Carlfelt, Ph.D., Augustana College and Theological Seminary, Rock Island, Ill. (1235)'36 Prof. Florence E. Carman,M.A., 2969 VermontAve., Chicago, Ill. (974) '30 Rev. Wesley M. Carr, Th.D., 1306 Emery Circle, Atlanta, Ga. (1236)'36 Prof. Samuel A. Cartledge,Ph.D., ColumbiaTheologicalSeminary, Decatur, Ga. (1087)'33 Prof. Robert P. Casey, Ph.D., Brown University, Providence,R. I. (964) '29 Prof. Maynard L. Cassady, M.A., Th.B., 195 Summit Drive, Rochester, N. Y. (1115)'34 Prof. William D. Chamberlain,Ph.D., D.D., 2433 Tophill Road, Louisville, Ky. (1405)'38 Rev. Alphonse D. Chaurize, Woodbridge, New Haven, Conn. (1237)'36 John L. Cheek, 7003 Sangamon St., Chicago, Ill. (987) '30 Rev. John R. Cheney, Ph.D., Willoughby, Ohio. (1272)'36 Rev. Clinton M. Cherry, Th.D., 408 Union St., Millersburg,Pa. (1201)'36 Prof. BernhardM. Christensen,AugsburgSeminary, Minneapolis, Minn. (975) '30 Rev. Felix L. Cirlot, Th.D., 3105 Main St., Buffalo, N. Y. (369) '03 Prof. Calvin M. Clark, Bangor TheologicalSeminary,Bangor, Me. (1008)'31 Rev. Prof. Kenneth W. Clark, Ph.D., 4684 Duke Station, Durham,

N. C. (1408)'38 Rev. Otha L. Clark, Minneapolis, Kans. (1208)'35 Prof. Frank W. Clelland, Ph.D., D.D., Gammon Theological Seminary, Atlanta, Ga.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xxxv

(1009)'31 Rev. J. R. Coates, 10, Kingsmead Close, Selly Oak, Birmingham, England. (523) '14 C. P. Coffin, 2304 Park Place, Evanston, Ill. (686) '22 Rabbi Simon R. Cohen, 17 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, N. Y. (935) '29 Prof. Samuel S. Cohon, A.B., Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. (1010)'31 Dean Ernest C. Colwell, Ph.D., Faculty Exchange, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1260)'36 Prof. Gordon R. Conning, Ph.D., 1 Highland Terrace, Upper Montclair, N. J. (1293)'36 Rev. Theodore E. Conrad, B.D., Rush City, Minn. (1011)'31 Rev. Elmer J. Cook, B.Litt., Ph.D., Hartford Theological Seminary, Hartford, Conn. (1116)'34 Rev. Ruford B. Cook, A.B., 215 Lancaster St., Albany, N. Y. (615) '21 Rev. Francis T. Cooke, Ph.D., 31 Maple St., Bristol, Conn. (1117)'34 Rev. Alfred H. Coons, Grove St., New Paltz, N. Y. (1349)'37 Rev. Prof. Charles M. Cooper, Ph.D., LutheranTheologicalSeminary, Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, Pa. (1209)'35 Prof. Isaac S. Corn, Bloomington, Ill. (936) '29 Miss Virginia Corwin, Smith College, Northampton, Mass. (937) '29 Prof. Clarence T. Craig, Ph.D., D.D., Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. (296) '96 Prof. Harlan Creelman, Ph.D., 118 North St., Auburn, N. Y. (1224)'35 Rev. John Crocker, B.A., B.D., 53 University Place, Princeton,

N. J.

(796) '25 Rev. Margaret B. Crook, 30 Washington Ave., Northampton, Mass. (759) '24 Prof. Earle B. Cross, Ph.D., 76 Dartmouth Street, Rochester, N. Y. (498) '13 Prof. D. E. Culley, Ph.D., 57 Belvidere St., Crafton, Pittsburgh, Pa. (573) '16 Prof. Charles Gordon Cumming, Bangor, Me. (739) '23 Prof. Muriel Streibert Curtis, Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass. (499) '13 Prof. George Dahl, Ph.D., 209 Livingston St., New Haven, Conn. (797) '25 Prof. H. E. Dana, Th.D., Seminary Hill, Fort Worth, Texas. (1203)'35 Dr. John W. Darr, Scripps College, Claremont, Calif. (1298)'36 Rev. J. Shackelford Dauerty, M.A., Th.D., First Presbyterian Church, Moorestown, N. J. (645) '21 Miss Clara W. Davidson, Randolph-Macon College, Lynchburg, Va. (526) '15 Prof. Israel Davidson, 92 Morningside Ave., New York, N. Y. (451) '10 Prof. Richard Davidson, Ph.D., D.D., 75 Queen's Park, Toronto, Ont., Canada. (1261)'36 Prof. John Newton Davies, S.T.D., Drew Forest, Madison, N. J. (1069)'32 Prof. Paul E. Davies, Ph.D., 844 Chalmers Place, Chicago, Ill. (1347)'37 Wm. H. Davies, Department of Biblical Literature, Brown University, Providence, R. I.

xxxvi

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(705) '22 M. E. Davis, D.D., Box 526, Brownwood, Texas. (1070)'32 Pres. Milton C. Davis, Apartado 117 Bis, Mexico City, D. F., Mexico. (1323)'37 Prof. Wesley C. Davis, A.M., B.D., Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas. (906) '28 Rev. Edward Day, 202 King William St., San Antonio, Texas. (633) '21 Prof. John Pitt Deane, M.A., Beloit College, Beloit, Wis. (524) '14 Dean IrwinHoch DeLong, Ph.D., 523 W. James St., Lancaster, Pa. (1103)'33 Rev. Robert C. Dentan, B.D., 703 OrangeSt., New Haven, Conn. (1012)'31 Prof. Frederick M. Derwacter, Ph.D., William Jewell College, Liberty, Mo. (723) '22 Prof. H. T. DeWolfe, D.D., Acadia University, Wolfville, N. S., Canada. (1088)'33 Rev. A. H. Dirksen, S.T.D., St. Joseph's College, Collegeville, Ind. (382) '05 Mrs. Olive Dutcher Doggett, 153 Western Drive, Longmeadow, Mass. (417) '07 Prof. Winfred N. Donovan, Newton Center, Mass. (823) '26 Prof. C. C. Douglas, Ph.D., 5722 Buena Vista Terrace,Los Angeles, Calif. (833) '26 Rev. Prof. John Dow, M.A., Emmanuel College, Toronto, Ont., Canada. (1086)'33 Mrs. Francis B. Downs, M.A., Christ Church Rectory, Riverton, N. J. (664) '22 Rev. George H. Driver, 27 Eaton St., Winchester, Mass. (760) '24 Prof. George S. Duncan, 2900 7th St. N. E., Washington, D. C. (938) '29 Prof. Marion H. Dunsmore, Ph.D., Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo, Mich. (402) '07 Prof. Burton S. Easton, Ph.D., 4 ChelseaSquare, New York, N. Y. (844) '26 Rev. Louise Eby, Ph.D., Milwaukee-DownerCollege, Milwaukee, Wis. (1239)'36 Prof. William Graham Echols, M.A., D.D., University, Ala. (1337)'37 G. D. Edwards, A.M., 1205 Wilson Ave., Columbus, Ohio. (1210)'35 Rabbi Israel Elfenbein, D.H.L., 4208 Manhattan Ave., Sea Gate, Brooklyn, N. Y. (1119)'34 Calvert N. Ellis, Ph.D., Huntington, Pa. (1104)'33 Prof. Stephen J. England, B.D., Th.M., Phillips University, Enid, Okla. (403) '07 Prof. Henry Englander, 904 Lexington Ave., Cincinnati, Ohio. (1185)'34 Prof. J. S. Engle, B.D., A.M., OtterbeinCollege,Westerville,Ohio. (1120)'34 Rev. Donald M. C. Englert, R. 1, Mertztown, Pa. (745) '23 Prof. Morton Scott Enslin, Th.D., 4 Seminary Ave., Chester, Pa. (1363)'37 Rev. AldredW. Eppard, 916 North FranklinSt., Wilmington, Del. (1203)'34 Rev. Garfield Evans, M.A., B.D., Dania, Florida. (263) '94 Pres. Milton G. Evans, D.D., Main St., Clifford,Pa. (1262)'36 Charles Farace, A.M., B.D., Goodspeed Hall, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xxxvii

(800) '25 Prof. David E. Faust, Catawba College, Salisbury, N. C. (753) '23 Dr. S. Feigin, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (939) '29 Rabbi Abraham J. Feldman, 145 Ballard Drive, West Hartford, Conn. (1273)'36 Prof. E. C. Fendt, Capital University, Columbus, Ohio. (1340)'37 Rev. Anthony Feyer, Ph.D., Oriental Seminary, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. (862) '26 Floyd V. Filson, 857 Chalmers Place, Chicago, Ill. (1176)'34 Rabbi Joshua Finkel, Ph.D., 3505 Ave. I, Brooklyn, N. Y. (762) '24 Prof. Louis Finkelstein, 531 W. 123d Street, New York, N. Y. (1409)'38 George G. Finlay, B.D., Bethlehem, Conn. (1256)'36 Prof. Milton E. Fish, S.T.M., 340 W. 55th St., New York, N. Y. (1038)'31 Mrs. Florence Mary Fitch, Ph.D., Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. (873) '27 Prof. Elmer E. Flack, Th.D., D.D., 503 E. McCreightAve., Springfield, Ohio. (763) '24 Prof. John W. Flight, Ph.D., Haverford College, Haverford, Pa. (1377)'38 Hon. Maynard D. Follin, P. O. Box 118, Detroit, Mich. (578) '17 Rev. Robert B. B. Foote, East Norwalk, Conn. (1378)'38 Rev. Willard GriffinFoote, First Baptist Ch., Belfast, Me. (874) '27 Bliss Forbush, Park Ave. and Laurens St., Baltimore, Md. (1122)'34 Prof. W. M. Forrest, B.A., Box 1654, University, Va. (629) '21 Rev. Donald F. Forrester,S.T.D., 175 9th Ave., New York, N. Y. (1072)'32 Prof. A. Haire Forster, Ph.D., Seabury-WesternTheological Seminary, Evanston, Ill. (441) '08 Dean Hughell E. W. Fosbroke, S.T.D., 175 9th Ave., New York, N. Y. (1105)'33 Prof. Hazel E. Foster, Ph.D., Presbyterian College of Christian Education, 815 Belden Ave., Chicago, Ill. (587) '18 Rabbi Solomon Foster, 90 Treacu St., Newark, N. J. (875) '27 Prof. William M. Fouts, Th.D., Northern Baptist Theological Seminary, 3040 W. Washington Boulevard, Chicago, Ill. (298) '96 Prof. Henry T. Fowler, Ph.D., Harmony, R. I. (1321)'36 Rabbi G. George Fox, Ph.D., South Shore Temple, 7205 Jeffrey Ave., Chicago, Ill. (312) '97 Prof. James E. Frame, 7 Edgehill St., Princeton, N. J. (1013)'31 A. Freed, M.D., New York Cancer Hospital, 124 E. 59th St., New York, N. Y. (1039)'31 Prof. Merton B. French, Box 235, Elon College, N. C. (366) '03 Prof. Kemper Fullerton, Oberlin Theological Seminary, Oberlin, Ohio. (989) '30 Prof. Fred D. Gealy, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas. (765) '24 Prof. Henry S. Gehman, Ph.D., S.T.D., Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, N. J. (889) '27 Miss Katy Boyd George, Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass.

xxxviii

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(1240)'36 Rev. Samuel S. George, M.Th., University of Dubuque, Dubuque, Iowa. (1241)'36 A. C. Gettys, Belton, Texas. (1123)'34 Rev. Robert J. Gibson, S.T.M., Accokeek, Prince George Co., Md. (965) '29 Prof. MacLean Gilmour, Ph.D., Queens Theological College, Kingston, Ont., Canada. (1073)'32 Prof. F. W. Gingrich, Albright College, Reading, Pa. (1263)'36 Dr. H. L. Ginsberg, 310 W. 99th St., New York, N. Y. (766) '24 Prof. Louis Ginzberg, Ph.D., Apartment 71, 514 W. 114th St., New York, N. Y. (1089)'33 Prof. Nelson Glueck, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. (1285)'36 Prof. Albrecht Goetze, Yale University, New Haven, Conn. (907) '28 Miss Beatrice L. Goff, Ph.D., 69 Stratford Road, Melrose, Mass. (1199)'34 Rev. John T. Golding,A.B., B.D., 390 Riverside Drive, New York, N. Y. (794) '24 Prof. E. R. Goodenough, D.Phil., D.D., Yale University, New Haven, Conn. (1353)'37 Howard L. Goodhart, Hotel St. Regis, New York, N. Y. (340) '00 Prof. Edgar J. Goodspeed, Ph.D., University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1333)'37 Charles Goodwin, 84 ScarboroughSt., Hartford, Conn. (1286)'36 Paul J. Goodwin, M.A., B.D., 4113 Park Boulevard, Oakland, Calif. (1124)'34 Rev. Paul V. Goodwin, B.D., 2016 4th Ave., Kearney, Nebr. (1015)'31 Dr. Robert Gordis, Rockaway Park Hebrew Congregation, 121st St. and Rockaway Boulevard, Rockaway Park, N. Y. (940) '29 Dr. Cyrus H. Gordon, 13 Belmont Ave., Northampton, Mass. (635) '21 Prof. William C. Graham, S.T.M., 41 Balmoral Place, Winnipeg, Man., Canada. (384) '05 Prof. Elihu Grant, Ph.D., 111 W. North St., Stamford, Conn. (621) '21 Prof. Frederick C. Grant, S.T.D., D.D., 3041 Broadway, New York, N. Y. (1125)'34 Prof. J. A. Greene, S.T.M., Clark University, Atlanta, Ga. (877) '27 Rev. Caspar R. Gregory, Scipio Center, N. Y. (988) '30 Prof. Ross J. Griffeth, Butler University, Indianapolis, Ind. (1371)'38 W. Everett Griffiths, 112 Crestmont Terrace, Collingswood,N. J. (1414)'38 Ivan G. Grimshaw, 2757 Fairmount Blvd., Cleveland Heights, Cleveland, Ohio. (1181)'34 Prof. Kendrick Grobel, Ph.D., 89 E. Main St., Stafford Springs, Conn. (1242)'36 Pres. L. Franklin Gruber, 1600 S. 11th Ave., Maywood, Ill. (1106)'33 Rev. GeorgeGottlob Hackman, Ph.D., 543 Main St., Southington, Conn. (1315)'36 Prof. Alfred E. Haefner, Ph.D., WartburgCollege, Waverly, Iowa. (1368)'37 Rev. Charles B. Hahn, Martin, Mich. (1040)'31 A. S. Halkin, Columbia University, New York, N. Y.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xxxix

(1243)'36 Prof. George F. Hall, Ph.D., 318 Myrtle St., St. Peter, Minn. (646) '21 Rev. Frank H. Hallock, D.D., Nashotah House, Nashotah, Wis. (1264)'36 Rev. Emanuel W. Hammer, S.T.M., 111 Cook Ave., Meriden, Conn. (1003)'30 Rev. Edward R. Hardy, Jr., Ph.D., 175 9th Avenue, New York, N. Y. (1351)'37 Prof. Georgia Harkness, Ph.D., Mt. Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass. (1360)'37 Victor Harlow, 217-223 North Harvey, Oklahoma City, Okla. (1090)'33 Prof. Joseph G. Haroutunian, Ph.D., 12 Cottage Street, Wellesley, Mass. (968) '29 Rev. Charles W. Harris, 4 East Campus, Easton, Pa. (119) '84 Prof. J. R. Harris, Litt.D., 210 Bristol Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham, England. (385) '05 Prof. W. H. P. Hatch, Ph.D., D.D., St. John's Road, Cambridge, Mass. (834) '26 Prof. R. S. Haupert, Ph.D., Moravian College & Theological Seminary, Bethlehem, Pa. (668) '22 Prof. CharlesA. Hawley, Ph.D., 311 Ronalds St., Iowa City, Iowa. (322) '98 Rev. Henry H. Haynes, Ph.D., Derry Village, N. H. (1287)'36 Prof. A. A. Hays, D.D., Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Chicago, Ill. (503) '13 Prof. Charles B. Hedrick, D.D., 599 Whitney Ave., New Haven, Conn. (1016)'31 Rev. MacKinley Helm, Th.D., 58 MonmouthSt., Brookline,Mass. (1092)'33 Rev. Robert D. Hershey, A.B., S.T.M., 117 Spring St., Reading, Pa. (1348)'37 Prof. J. H. Hicks, 3548 McFarlin Ave., Dallas, Texas. (434) '08 Prof. William J. Hinke, Ph.D., 156 North St., Auburn, N. Y. (1204)'35 Sidney B. Hoenig, Ph.D., 199 Keap St., Brooklyn, N. Y. (802) '25 Rev. Ernest G. Hoff, Ph.D., 22 South State St., Elgin, Ill. (1265)'36 Rev. Ralph L. Holland, Th.D., Reformed Church, Fort Washington, Pa. (990) '30 George W. Hollister, B.D., 150 N. Sandusky St., Delaware, Ohio. (1126)'34 Benjamin T. Holmes, B.A., F.A.I.A., A.I.A., 320 Deloraine Ave., Toronto, Ont., Canada. (1195)'34 Rev. Norman A. Holmes, B.D., 2307 Bienville Ave., New Orleans, La. (427) '08 Rev. Ivan L. Holt, 1910 Main St., Dallas, Texas. (1127)'34 Emil Holzhiuser, Ph.D., Dakota Wesleyan University, Mitchell, S. Dak. (539) '15 Prof. Lynn H. Hough, Drew University, Madison, N. J. (942) '25 Prof. J. Howard Howson, M.A., B.D., Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. (1188)'34 Norman Huffman, Th.M., Ph.D., Waxhaw, N. C. (1318)'36 Rev. Paul E. Huffman, 1948 W. North Ave., Baltimore, Md.

xl

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(1266)'36 Dr. George R. Hughes, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1128)'34 Prof. Erminie Huntress, 40 Bartlett Ave., Pittsfield, Mass. (439) '08 Prof. Mary I. Hussey, Morgan Road, South Hadley, Mass. (1400)'38 Miss Frances N. Hutchison, A.B., M.A., Graduate School of Theology, Oberlin,Ohio. (1302)'36 Harold H. Hutson, A.B., B.D., Ph.D., Birmingham-Southern College, Birmingham,Alabama. (1017)'31 Prof. J. Philip Hyatt, Ph.D., Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass. (452) '10 Prof. Henry Hyvernat, Catholic University, Washington, D. C. (1042)'31 Prof. William A. Irwin, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1018)'31 Prof. Arthur J. Jackson, Th.D., 5 Poplar Ave., Wheeling, W. Va. (858) '26 Dean Clyo Jackson, St. Stephen's College, Edmonton, Alta., Canada. (1319)'36 Maurice Jacobs, 225 South 15th St., Philadelphia, Pa. (679) '22 Prof. Fleming James, D.D., Ph.D., Berkeley Divinity School, New Haven, Conn. (1338)'37 Rev. A. Leland Jamison, B.D., Fulton, Mo. (1274)'36 Miss Helen G. Jefferson, Th.D., 610 Arlington Ave., Berkeley, Calif. (1410)'38 Rev. Arthur Jeffery, Ph.D., 3041 Broadway, New York, N. Y. (1407)'38 Ellis E. Jensen, 1009 E. 62nd St., Chicago, Ill. (386) '05 Prof. James R. Jewett, Ph.D., 44 Francis Ave., Cambridge,Mass. (485) '12 Miss Harriet E. Johnson, 32 Chestnut St., Boston, Mass. (1267)'36 Prof. Hjalmar W. Johnson, Ph.D., 1130 35th St., Rock Island, Ill. (1244)'36 Prof. Ottis L. Johnson, Oakland City College, Oakland City, Ind. (1129)'34 Rev. Sherman E. Johnson, Ph.D., Nashotah House, Nashotah, Wis. (636) '21 Pres. EmeritusWilliam Hallock Johnson, Ph.D., D.D., 9 Hamilton Ave., Princeton, N. J. (1268)'36 Rev. Bernice O. Jones, M.A., B.D., Conifer, N. Y. (1019)'31 Prof. E. E. Jones, M.A., B.D., Northfield Seminary, East Northfield, Mass. (1406)'38 Myrddyn W. Jones, Disciples Divinity House, 57th St. at University Ave., Chicago, Ill. (1245)'36 Dr. S. H. Jones, Judson College, Marion, Ala. (1379)'38 Rev. Wm. H. Jones, Phillips Exeter Academy, Exeter, N. H. (1177)'34 Dean Louis L. Kaplan, Ph.D., 1201 Eutaw Place, Baltimore Md. (1339)'37 Edmund H. Kase, Jr., Ph.D., 504 WoodlandAve., Grove City, Pa. (1246)'36 Prof. Paul E. Keen, M.A., S.T.B., 209 N. Columbia St., Naperville, Ill. (878) '27 Rev. Francis L. Keenan, D.D., St. John's Seminary, Brighton, Mass. (1398)'38 Paul J. Keller, B.S.E., B.D., 36 Morse St., New Haven, Conn. (660) '22 Prof. Fred T. Kelly, 2019 Monroe St., Madison Wis.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xli

(725) '22 Prof. Alexander P. Kelso, B.Sc., Southwestern Presbyterian University, Memphis, Tenn. (338) '00 Pres. James A. Kelso, Ph.D., 731 Ridge Ave., Pittsburgh, Pa. (438) '08 Prof. Eliza H. Kendrick,Ph.D., Wellesley College,Wellesley, Mass. (1021)'31 Prof. Thomas S. Kepler, Lawrence College, Appleton, Wis. (1313)'36 Prof. Bruce L. Kershner, Butler College of Religion, Butler University, Indianapolis, Ind. (1094)'33 Rev. Rowland H. Kimberlin, B.D., 402 Marine Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y. (895) '27 Rev. Carl H. King, Box 828, Salisbury, N. C. (1132)'34 Prof. G. B. King, United College, Winnipeg, Man., Canada. (1133)'34 Miss Rachel H. King, M.A., Revell Hall, East Northfield, Mass. (1309)'36 Pres. L. Clayton Kitchen, Ph.D., 1425 Snyder Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. (1380)'38 Rev. W. C. Klein, Th.D., 209 St. Mark's Square, Phila., Pa. (1361)'37 Rev. Ernest Knautz, B.D., 2226 W. 91st St., Cleveland, Ohio. (852) '26 Prof. Edward H. Knight, D.D., 71 Tremont St., Hartford, Conn. (544) '15 Prof. CarlS. Knopf, University of SouthernCalifornia,Los Angeles, Calif. (1134)'34 Rev. John Knox, B.D., 72 Sherman St., Hartford, Conn. (460) '10 Rev. Raymond C. Knox, Columbia University, New York, N. Y. (767) '24 Prof. Carl H. Kraeling, Yale Divinity School, New Haven, Conn. (518) '14 Rev. Emil G. H. Kraeling, 531 E. 18th St., Brooklyn, N. Y. (1288)'36 Charles F. Kraft, B.D., Ph.D., McKendree College, Lebanon, Ill. (1218)'36 Prof. E. F. Krauss, D.D., 1618 S. 11th Ave., Maywood, Ill. (1362)'37 Prof. Albert Kuhn, University of Dubuque, Dubuque, Iowa. (952) '29 Prof. Howard T. Kuist, Ph.D., Union Theological Seminary, Richmond, Va. (879) '27 Robert M. Kurtz, M.A., 203 Serpentine Road, Tenafly, N. J. (1336)'37 Rev. Ernest R. Lacheman, Ph.D., Torrington, Conn. (1369)'37 Dr. Manuel Laderman, 1574 Newton St., Denver, Col. (1044)'31 Prof. Kirsopp Lake, D.D., 522 Oakley Road, Haverford, Pa. (924) '28 Mrs. Silva Lake, Ph.D., 522 Oakley Road, Haverford, Pa. (1095)'33 Prof. Mary E. Lakenan, M.R.E., Mary Baldwin College,Staunton, Va. (519) '14 Prof. Elbert C. Lane, Hartford Theological Seminary, Hartford, Conn. (1135)'34 Prof. George Lang, D.D., LL.D., Box 282, Tuscaloosa, Ala. (880) '27 Prof. Frank G. Lankard, Drew University, Madison, N. J. (910) '28 Paul F. Laubenstein, S.T.M., 57 Oneco Ave., New London, Conn. (1275)'36 Prof. Viola M. Lawson, B.L., 340 W. 55th St., New York, N. Y. (1411)'38 Charles R. Leech, B.D., Seventh Baptist Church, Baltimore, Md. (1296)'36 Thomas L. Leishman, M.A., S.T.M., c/o Emile Marghat Inc., 1775 Broadway, New York, N. Y.

xlii (1316)'36 (665) '21 (1183)'34 (1223)'35 (769) '24 (1212)'35 (1364)'37 (1045)'31 (1046)'31 (1257)'36 (372) '04 (845) '26 (991) '30 (944) '29 (715) '22 (1137)'34 (720) '22 (590) '18 (847) '26 (721) '22 (1138)'34 (536) '15 (1250)'36 (1354)'37 (1213)'35 (1310)'36 (1229)'36 (1047)'31 (1139)'34 (1276)'36 (1381)'38 (1322)'37 (742) '23 (837) '26

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE Rev. William P. Lemon, 1432 WashentawAve., Ann Arbor, Mich. Prof. Elmer A. Leslie, 228 Mason Terrace, Brookline, Mass. Louis M. Levitsky, D.H.L., 236 S. River St., Wilkes-Barre,Pa. Prof. Julius Lewy, 420 Kasota St., Cincinnati, Ohio. Rabbi Leon Liebreich, Ph.D., 614 West State St., Trenton, N. J. Rev. Francis C. Lightbourn, A.B., S.T.B., St. Mary's School, Sewanee, Tenn. Prof. Robert H. Lightfoot, New College, Oxford, England. William R. Locke, 30 High St., Whitefield, N. H. William Keithledge Lomason, 468 W. Ferry Ave., Detroit, Mich. Rev. S. Burman Long, 608 Willis Ave., Syracuse, N. Y. Prof. Lindsay B. Longacre,2273 S. Fillmore St., Denver, Colo. Pres. Arnold E. Look, Ph.D., Ellis College, Newtown Square, Pa. Mrs. Florence B. Lovell, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. Rev. John Lowe, Trinity College, Toronto 5, Ont., Canada. Prof. William J. Lowstuter, 72 Mt. Vernon St., Boston, Mass. Rev. William Linnaeus Ludlow, B.D., Muskingum College, New Concord,Ohio. Prof. Nils W. Lund, Th.M., North Park College, Foster and Kedzie Aves., Chicago, Ill. Mrs. Eugene W. Lyman, Union Theological Seminary, Broadway at 120th St., New York, N. Y. Prof. S. V. McCasland, Ph.D., Goucher College, Baltimore, Md. Prof. W. H. McClellan,S. J., Woodstock,College, Woodstock, Md. Rev. Lee S. McCollester,D.D., 48 Professor'sRow, Tufts College, Mass. Dean C. C. McCown, Ph.D., D.D., Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, Calif. Prof. Mary M. McCoy, LL.D., Alabama College, Montevallo, Ala. Winm.Stewart McCullough, University College, University of Toronto, Toronto, Can. Edward A. McDowell, Jr., B.A., Th.M., Ph.D., Norton Hall, 2825 Lexington Road, Louisville, Ky. Mrs. Jean Joslyn McDuffee, M.A., B.D., 18 Brookside Road, Darien, Conn. Dr. Dean G. McKee, 235 E. 49th St., New York, N. Y. Rev. J. W. McKelvey, 2506 Brown St., Philadelphia, Pa. Prof. Donald Mackenzie, D.D., 31 Library Place, Princeton, N. J. Prof. E. M. McKown, Ph.D., 615 S. NormanAve., Evansville, Ind. Prof. W. H. McMaster, 824 Genoa St., Coral Gables, Fla. Rev. Wm. H. Manshardt, D.D., 1528 East Emerson Place, Rossmead, Calif. Prof. J. R. Mantey, Th.D., Ph.D., 3034 W. WashingtonBoulevard, Chicago, Ill. Prof. Ralph Marcus,Ph.D., PhilosophyHall, ColumbiaUniversity, New York, N. Y.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xliii

(545) '15 Prof. Alexander Marx, 3080 Broadway, New York, N. Y. (911) '28 Rev. Thomas B. Mather, Th.D., 7434 Madison St., Kansas City, Mo. (770) '24 Prof. C. D. Matthews, Ph.D., Birmingham-Southern College, Birmingham,Ala. (617) '21 Prof. I. G. Matthews, Crozer Theological Seminary, Chester, Pa. (1358)'37 Wm. H. Maurer, A.B., 254 E. Church St., Bethlehem, Pa. (1140)'34 Prof. Herbert Gordon May, Ph.D., Graduate School of Theology, Oberlin, Ohio. (1219)'36 Prof. George N. Mayhew, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn. (546) '15 Rev. J. A. F. Maynard, Ph.D., Th.D., 229 E. 61st St., New York, N. Y. (584) '18 Prof. Theophile J. Meek, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada. (1401)'38 John E. Meeter, Th.M., 239 Park Ave., Chambersburg,Pa. (1141)'34 Rev. Phillipp H. Mergler, Ph.D., Daretown, N. J. (1342)'37 Bruce M. Metzger, A.B., 37 N. Union St., Middletown, Pa. (1048)'31 Prof. J. Hugh Michael, Emmanuel College in Victoria University, Toronto 5, Ont., Canada. (585) '15 Mrs. Ruth Richards Miller, 16 Chestnut St., Medford, Mass. (1023)'31 Rev. Paul S. Minear, B.D., Ph.D., Garrett Biblical Institute, Evanston, Ill. (1226)'35 Rabbi Samuel Mirsky, M.A., 1303 50th St., Brooklyn, N. Y. (921) '28 Prof. James Moffatt, D.D., Union Theological Seminary, Broadway at 120th St., New York, N. Y. (236) '92 Prof. J. A. Montgomery, Ph.D., 6806 Greene St., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa. (1352)'37 Robert Montgomery, B.D., 276 OrangeSt., New Haven, Conn. (1142)'34 Prof. John M. Moore, M.A., Ph.D., College Hill, Clinton, N. Y. (1305)'36 Prof. Lloyd V. Moore, Ph.D., 1517 Pine St., Redding, Calif. (566) '16 Pres. Julian Morgenstern, Ph.D., 8 Burton Woods Lane, Avondale, Cincinnati, Ohio. (1143)'34 Rev. Arthur B. Moss, B.D., 976 Park Place, Brooklyn, N. Y. (1317)'35 Prof. Otoniel Mota, Rua AlbuquerqueLins 534, Sao Paulo, Brazil, S. A. (698) '22 Prof. Elmer W. K. Mould, 503 Fitch St., Elmira, N. Y. (331) '99 Pres. Warren J. Moulton, Ph.D., Bangor Theological Seminary, Bangor, Me. (772) '24 Prof. James Muilenburg, Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, Calif. (1324)'37 Rev. Warner Muir, 310 North Market St., Marion, Ill. (1205)'35 Rev. WarrenVinton Murphy,A.B., B.D., 248 ChurchSt., Phoenixville, Pa. (1271)'36 Prof. E. D. Myers, Ph.D., Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. (1198)'34 Prof. Hiram Earl Myers, A.B., S.T.M., Duke University, Durham, N. C.

xliv

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(1382)'38 Rev. J. M. Myers, B.D., S.T.D., 227 East Middle St., Gettysburg, Pa. (1049)'31 Toyozo W. Nakarai, Ph.D., Collegeof Religion, Butler University, Indianapolis, Ind. (627) '21 Prof. Thomas Kinloch Nelson, D.D., Theological Seminary, Alexandria, Va. (1251)'36 Prof. Charles F. Nesbitt, M.A., B.D., Wesley College, University Station, Grand Forks, N. D. (508) '13 Rev. William M. Nesbit, Ph.D., 15 Frederick St., Naugatuck, Conn. (806) '25 Prof. Herbert L. Newman, S.T.M., 2 West Court, Waterville, Me. (1304)'36 Mrs. Reinhold Niebuhr, M.A., S.T.M., 99 Claremont Ave., New York, N. Y. (1050)'31 Charles Francis Nims, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1024)'31 Prof. A. D. Nock, 96 Widener Library, Harvard University, Cambridge,Mass. (820) '24 Prof. Julian Obermann,215 Hall of Graduate Studies, Yale University, New Haven, Conn. (1144)'34 Rev. Arthur F. O'Donnell, S.T.B., 414 E. Broad St., Westfield, N. J. (572) '16 Prof. Albert T. Olmstead, Ph.D., 5758 Blackstone Ave., Chicago, Ill. (1396)'38 Rev. C. Evan Olmstead, Box 283, Winona Lake, Ind. (1311)'36 Harry M. Orlinsky, Ph.D., 1201 Eutaw Place, Baltimore, Md. (1370)'38 Albert C. Outler, Ph.D., 1003 Lamond Ave., Durham, N. C. (1075)'32 Pierson Parker, Th.D., 1242 Glen Ave., Berkeley, Calif. (773) '24 Prof. Ernest W. Parsons, Colgate-Rochester Divinity School, Rochester, N. Y. (1025)'31 Prof. John Paterson, Ph.D., B.D., Drew University, Madison, N. J. (1350)'37 Rev. Theodore Paterson, M.A., Th.D., Box 19, Kirwee, Canterbury, New Zealand. (757) '23 Mrs. Katherine H. Paton, S.T.B., Pendle Hill, Wallingford, Pa. (1343)'37 Henri Pearcy, 705 Ridge Ave., Evanston, Ill. (1345)'37 Rev. David Pellett, Box 53, Greentown, Ind. (1383)'38 Rev. John S. Penman, 150 E. 72nd St., New York City. (323) '98 Prof. Ismar J. Peritz, Ph.D., Lake Bluff, Wolcott, N. Y. (623) '21 Prof. Alfred Morris Perry, Ph.D., Bangor Theological Seminary, Bangor, Me. (1397)'38 Robert M. Perry, Ph.D., 106 Heller Parkway, Newark, N. J. (1214)'35 Ray C. Petry, A.M., Ph.D., 1111 Oval Drive, Durham, N. C. (611) '21 Prof. Robert H. Pfeiffer,Ph.D., 57 Francis Ave., Cambridge,Mass. (748) '23 Rev. ZeBarney B. Phillips, D.D., 2224 R St., N. W., Washington, D. C. (1026)'31 Prof. Ellis E. Pierce, Th.D., 5 Nickerson St., Cazenovia, N. Y.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY (1384)'38 (1269)'36 (980) '30 (378) '05 (254) '93 (1215)'35 (509) '13 (1412)'38 (176) '87 (1216)'35 (597) '20 (1052)'31 (653) '21 (1097)'33 (883) '27 (1107)'33 (913) '28 (557) '16 (1402)'38 (361) (914) (848) (533)

'03 '28 '26 '15

(1217)'35 (1385)'38

xlv

Dr. Otto A. Piper, D.D., 58 Mercer St., Princeton, N. J. Rev. W. Norman Pittenger, S.T.B., 175 9th Ave., New York, N. Y. Rev. P. Hewison Pollock, 1002 3rd Ave., S., Bozeman, Mont. Prof. William Popper, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, Calif. Prof. F. C. Porter, D.D., 266 Bradley St., New Haven, Conn. Rev. Vincent F. Pottle, A.B., Th.M., 1625 Locust St., Philadelphia, Pa. Prof. Waldo S. Pratt, 86 Gillett St., Hartford, Conn. Pres. H. A. Preuss, Luther TheologicalSeminary,Como and Pierce Aves., St. Paul, Minn. Prof. Ira M. Price, Ph.D., University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. Rev. James B. Pritchard,A.B., D.D., 22 W. Chelten Road, Parkside, Chester, Pa. Prof. AlexanderC. Purdy, Ph.D., Hartford Theological Seminary, Hartford, Conn. Prof. Carl E. Purinton, 54 Hathaway Drive, Garden City, N. Y. Prof. Charles Lynn Pyatt, College of the Bible, Lexington, Ky. Prof. Ernest Pye, D.D., 1253 Harding St., Winter Park, Fla. Prof. Chester WarrenQuimby, Saxton, Pa. Prof. J. H. Quiring,A.M., 509 W. 121st St., New York City. Principal Harry Ranston, Richmond House, Trinity College, Auckland, New Zealand. Pres. John H. Raven, D.D., New BrunswickTheologicalSeminary, New Brunswick, N. J. Prof. MorganWardRedus, SouthernMethodist University, Dallas, Texas. Pres. Harry L. Reed, AuburnTheologicalSeminary,Auburn,N. Y. Max I. Reich, D.D., 153 Institute Place, Chicago, Ill. Prof. Nathaniel Reich, Box 337, Philadelphia, Pa. Prof. Joseph Reider, Ph.D., Dropsie College, Broad and York Sts., Philadelphia,Pa. Rev. Jesse B. Renninger, B.A., B.D., 40 W. Main St., Macungie, Pa. Stephen M. Reynolds, Th.B., A.M., 33 JeffersonRoad, Princeton,

N. J.

(776) '24 Rev. Hilary G. Richardson,A.B., B.D., 147 N. Broadway,Yonkers N. Y. (777) '24 Prof. Donald W. Riddle, Faculty Exchange, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1335)'37 Prof. Frank H. Ridgley, Lincoln University, Chester Co., Pa. (1053)'31 Prof. J. Merle Rife, Ph.D., Muskingum College, New Concord, Ohio. (1306)'36 Prof. Horace Abram Rigg, Jr., Ph.D., 2222 Delaware Road, Cleveland Heights, Ohio.

xlvi

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(993) '30 Rev. Martin Rist, Th.D., The Iliff School of Theology, Denver, Colo. (1001)'30 Gale Ritz, Leipsic, Ohio. (1027)'31 Rev. Prof. Michael E. Ritzman, Ph.D., 1518 N. 15th St., Reading, Pa. (1147)'34 Miss Narola Rivenburg, Ph.D., 1425 Snyder Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. (815) '25 Prof. Corwin C. Roach, Gambier, Ohio. (884) '27 Rev. J. B. Robertson, B.D., First Christian Church, Mexico, Mo. (284)' 95 Prof. GeorgeL. Robinson, Ph.D., 835 ChalmersPlace, Chicago, Ill. (1054)'31 Paul Romanoff, Ph.D., 3080 Broadway, New York, N. Y. (1148)'34 Rev. Raymond H. Rosch6, S.T.M., 2107 N. Howard St., Philadelphia, Pa. (687) '22 Rabbi William Rosenau, 1515 Eutaw Place, Baltimore, Md. (1055)'31 Dr. Samuel Rosenblatt, 3605 SpringdaleAve., Baltimore, Md. (1056)'31 Trude Weiss Rosmarin,Ph.D., 609 W. 114th St., New York, N. Y. (1028)'31 Prof. W. Gordon Ross, Box 443, Berea College, Berea, Ky. (1386)'38 Prof. Geo. E. Rosser, Wesley College, Macon, Georgia. (1150)'34 Prof. Walter E. Roush, D.D., 2129 Rugby Road, Dayton, Ohio. (897) '27 Rev. H. H. Rowley, B.D., Dol Menai, Bangor, North Wales. (387) '05 Dean Elbert Russell, Ph.D., Duke University, Durham, N. C. (1320)'35 AbrahamSachs, 102 Aisquith St., Baltimore, Md. (1355)'37 Rev. Y. Herman Sacon, M.A., B.D., Aoyama Gakuin School of Theology, Tokyo, Japan. (456) '10 Prof. J. R. Sampey, LL.D., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Ky. (511) '13 Prof. H. A. Sanders, Ph.D., 2037 Geddes Ave., Ann Arbor, Mich. (1253)'36 Miss Oscie Alice Sanders, Box 112, Canyon, Texas. (780) '24 Rev. J. Foster Savidge, S.T.M., Churchof the Holy Communion, Norwood, N. J. (1361)'37 Rev. J. H. Scammon, A.B., B.D., 11 Nantucket Road, Newton Highlands, Mass. (1270)'36 Prof. Henry Schaeffer,Ph.D., D.D., 1606 S. 11th Ave., Maywood, Ill. (1029)'31 Rev. F. A. Schilling, Ph.D., St. Paul's Rectory, Rennewics,Wash. (190) '88 Prof. Nathaniel Schmidt, Ph.D., CornellUniversity, Ithaca, N. Y. (1153)'34 Rev. Ellwood M. Schofield, M.Th., Ph.D., 221 W. Pike St., Canonsburg, Pa. (994) '30 Prof. Paul Schubert, Ph.D., Yankton College, Yankton, S. Dak. (457) '10 Rev. Samuel Schulman, D.D., 1 E. 65th St., New York, N. Y. (955) '29 Dean Paul J. Schwab, B.D., Ph.D., Trinity University, Waxahachie, Texas. (1154)'34 Rev. Heinz Schwarz, B.D., Ph.D., 35 Owen St., Hartford, Conn. (463) '10 Prof. E. F. Scott, Union Theological Seminary, Broadway at 120th St., New York, N. Y.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xlvii

(1057)'31 Prof. R. B. Y. Scott, Ph.D., United Theological College, Montreal, Que., Canada. (956) '29 Stanley Scott, Ph.D., Bonnyville, Alta., Canada. (856) '26 Prof. William Scott, Randolph-MaconCollege, Lynchburg, Va. (520) '14 Prof. William G. Seiple, 3 Ichigaya Daimachi, Ushigome Ku, Tokyo, Japan. (1186)'34 Rev. Oscar J. F. Seitz, S.T.M., 83 Brattle St., Cambridge, Mass. (699) '22 Prof. Arthur G. Sellen, Ph.D., Washburn College, Topeka, Kans. (676) '22 Prof. Ovid R. Sellers, Ph.D., 846 ChalmersPlace, Chicago, Ill. (1155)'34 Rev. Eugene Seraphin, Holy Name College, 16th and Shepard Sts., N. E., Washington, D. C. (1109)'33 Thomas G. Shearman, M.A., L.L.B., 3701 Massachusetts Ave. N. W., Washington, D. C. (1387)'38 Paul E. Sheldon, S.T.B., Topsfield, Mass. (408) '07 Prof. Charles N. Shepard, S.T.D., General Theological Seminary, 9 Chelsea Square, New York, N. Y. (1277)'36 Massey H. Shepherd, Jr., M.A., Faculty Exchange, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1357)'37 Rev. Henry H. Shires, M.E., D.D., 2457 Ridge Road, Berkeley, Calif. (1289)'36 Prof. Montgomery J. Shroyer, Ph.D., Westminster Theological Seminary, Westminster, Md. (808) '25 Rev. A. R. Siebens, 135 Church St., Bowling Green, Ohio. (1194)'34 Prof. Walter W. Sikes, M.A., S.T.M., Berea College, Berea, Ky. (1312)'36 Rev. Robert Murray Simmons, B.A., S.T.M., Simcoe, Ontario, Canada. (984) '30 Prof. C. A. Simpson, Th.D., 6 Chelsea Square, New York, N. Y. (337) '00 Prof. Charles F. Sitterly, D.D., Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, N. J. (849) '26 Dr. S. L. Skoss, Dropsie College, Broad and York Sts., Philadelphia, Pa. (841) '26 Prof. W. Aiken Smart, D.D., Emory University, Atlanta, Ga. (786) '24 Rev. H. Framer Smith, Ph.D., D.D., Presbyterian Theological Seminary, 21st and Lothrop St., Omaha, Nebr. (548) '15 Miss Louise P. Smith, Hartford Seminary Foundation, Hartford, Conn. (1218)'35 Prof. Heber C. Snell, 627 S. 9th Ave., Pocatello, Idaho. (1158)'34 Prof. R. D. Snyder, D.D., 7304 Boyer St., Mt. Airy, Philadelphia, Pa. (1389)'38 Prof. Carl Soule, 752 Hartshorn St., Alliance, Ohio. (1159)'34 Prof. Earl Edmon Speicher, Ph.D., 1217 2d Ave., West Ashland, Wis. (787) '24 Prof. Ephraim A. Speiser, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,Pa. (1160)'34 Dr. Alexander Sperber, Jewish Theological Seminary, New York, N. Y.

xlviii (1161)'34 (1058)'31 (1356)'37 (863) '26 (1390)'38 (1391)'38 (738) '23 (567) '16 (716) '22 (1162)'34 (1030)'31 (1163)'34 (1219)'35 (1367)'37 (1388)'38 (1313)'36 (1392)'38 (917) '28 (1077)'32 (918) '28

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE Prof. Sidney B. Sperry, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah Prof. Shalom Spiegel, Ph.D., 309 W. 93d St., New York, N. Y. AbrahamSpiro, 1064 E. 14th St., Brooklyn, N. Y. Prof. R. T. Stamm, Lutheran Theological Seminary, Gettysburg, Pa. Prof. W. A. Staples, University College, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. William S. Steele, A.B., Emory University, Emory University, Ga. Prof. Ferris J. Stephens, Ph.D., Yale Babylonian Collection, New Haven, Conn. Paul R. Stevick, Y.M.C.A., Joplin, Missouri. Prof. Harris B. Stewart, 15 Seminary St., Auburn, N. Y. Prof. Carl Stiefel, D.D., 145 Jacob St., Berea, Ohio. William F. Stinespring, M.A., 1107 Urban Ave., Durham, N. C. Rev. John W. Stockwell, Ph.D., B.D., 2129 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. John Lemacks Stokes, 2d, Ph.D., Randleman, N. C. Dr. Robert C. Stone, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Ill. Rev. Prof. N. B. Stonehouse, 157 GreenwoodAve., Wyncote, Pa. Prof. W. E. Straw, B.S., M.A., Berrien Springs, Mich. Rev. R. H. Tafel, M.A., 61 N. 34th St., Philadelphia, Pa Rev. Ronald J. Tamblyn, B.D., 8 Williams St., Holyoke, Mass. Rev. Eugene S. Tanner, Ph.D., University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Okla. Prof. George S. Tarry, B.S., Randolph-Macon College, Ashland, Va.

(894) '27 Rev. Charles L. Taylor, Jr., Th.D., 6 Phillips Place, Cambridge, Mass. (810) '25 Prof. W. R. Taylor, Ph.D., University College, Toronto, Ont., Canada. (919) '28 Prof. Chaim Tchernowitz, Ph.D., 640 W. 139th St., New York, N. Y. (691) '22 Rev. Patrick J. Temple, S.T.D., Our Lady of the Rosary, 7 State St., New York, N. Y. (342) '00 Rev. Charles S. Thayer, Ph.D., 64 Gillette St., Hartford, Conn. (1165)'34 Prof. Seal Thompson, Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass. (859) '29 Rev. Montgomery H. Throop, St. John's University, Jessfield Road, Shanghai, China. (695) '22 Rev. Edward K. Thurlow, S.T.M., Sheffield, Mass. (1166)'34 Prof. Godfrey Tietze, M.A., B.D., University of Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tenn. (257) '93 Prof. C. C. Torrey, D.D., 191 Biship St., New Haven, Conn. (1393)'38 John C. Trever, A.B., 111 York St., New Haven, Conn. (996) '30 Prof. Daniel Curtis Troxel, College of the Bible, Lexington, Ky. (480) '11 Prof. Harold H. Tryon, 3041 Broadway, New York, N. Y. (1059)'31 Prof. Russell C. Tuck, 17 Glenwood Ave., Newton Center, Mass.

MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY

xlix

(1403)'38 James Wesley Turner, A.B., Emory University, Emory University, Ga. (1100)'33 Prof. Leon Vaganay, 41 Rue H. Gorjus, Lyon (Rhone), France. (549) '15 Rev. Prof. A. A. Vaschalde, Ph.D., Catholic University, Washington, D. C. (1202)'34 Rev. Willis W. Velte, Racine, Minn. (663) '22 Prof. E. E. Voigt, 1st M. E. Church, Iowa City, Iowa. (1078)'32 David O. Voss, Ph.D., 2227 Summit St., Toledo, Ohio. (1221)'35 Prof. Joachim Wach, Ph.D., Th.D., Faculty Club, Brown University, Providence, R. I. (1290)'36 Prof. Eric Wahlstrom, B.D., Augustana Theological Seminary Rock Island, Ill. (1169)'34 Prof. Henry H. Walker, Ph.D., Iberia, Mo. (1101)'33 Prof. Rollin H. Walker, Ph.D., Ohio Wesleyan College, Delaware, Ohio. (1222)'35 Prof. William H. Walker, Ph.D., 628 Pingree Ave., Detroit, Mich. (1325)'37 Rev. Erland J. Wang, Algonac, Mich. (521) '14 Prof. LeRoy Waterman, 1835 Vinewood Boulevard, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1413)'38 Harvey H. Watts, B.D., 6131 Woodlawn Ave., Chicago, I11. (643) '21 Dean Thomas Wearing, Ph.D., 263 Canterbury Road, Rochester, N. Y. (1297)'36 Prof. Aaron F. Webber, A.B., S.T.M., Box 426, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico. (1278)'36 Rev. Gustav W. Weber, S.T.M., Lutheran Church, Pottstown, Pa. (1332)'37 Prof. A. Wehrli, 114 Park Road, Webster Groves, Mo. (667) '22 Prof. Gordon B. Wellman, Ph.D., 17 Midland Road, Wellesley, 81, Mass. (1254)'36 W. B. West, M.A., 2305 West 12th St., Los Angeles, Calif. (1394)'38 Rev. C. Vin White, Th.M., 817 GarfieldAve., Dubuque, Iowa. (689) '22 Pres. W. W. White, Ph.D., D.D., 235 E. 49th St., New York, N. Y. (1341)'37 Rev. Arthur P. Whitney, B.A., B.D., 525 So. Wellwood Ave., Lindenhurst, L. I., N. Y. (445) '09 Prof. Edward A. Wicher, D.D., San Francisco Theological Seminary, San Anselmo, Calif. (1404)'38 Herbert W. Wicher, M.A., B.D., Box 33, Manchester, N. H. (726) '22 Rev. Dean Rockwell Wickes, 112 Chestnut Ave., Takoma Park, Md. (1079)'32 Allen P. Wikgren, Ph.D., Ottawa University, Ottawa, Kansas. (535) '15 Prof. Emeritus Laura H. Wild, 264 W. Sixth St., Claremont,Calif. (997) '30 Prof. Amos Niven Wilder, Ph.D., 144 Institution Ave., Newton Center, Mass. (684) '22 Prof. Clyde E. Wildman, 125 Wood St., Greencastle, Ind. (1279)'36 Rev. Herbert L. Willett, Kenilworth, Ill. (1291)'36 Rev. Lester E. Williams, B.D., 130 N. Port Crescent St., Bad Axe, Mich.

1

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

(1032)'31 Rev. Walter G. Williams, Ph.D., 1516 East 86th St., Cleveland, Ohio. (790) '24 Prof. H. R. Willoughby, 139 Goodspeed Hall, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (1080)'32 Prof. J. A. Wilson, Ph.D., OrientalInstitute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. (985) '30 W. J. Wilson, Th.D., Division of Manuscripts,Libraryof Congress, Washington, D. C. (788) '24 Pres. S. S. Wise, Ph.D., LL.D., Jewish Institute of Religion, W. 68th St., New York, N. Y. (1062)'31 Miss D. Helen Wolcott, Mt. Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass. (1081)'32 Prof. Rolland E. Wolfe, Ph.D., Crane Theological School, Tufts College, Mass. (782) '24 Prof. H. A. Wolfson, 15 Widener Library, Cambridge,Mass. (1280)'36 Rabbi Louis Wolsey, Rodeph Shalom Synagogue, Broad & Mt. Vernon Sts., Philadelphia,Pa. (1365)'38 Prof. Lynn H. Wood, Seventh Day Adventist Theological Seminary, Takoma Park, Washington, D. C. (916) '28 Mrs. Pearle Stone Wood, 167 Watchung Ave., Montclair, N. J. (1299)'36 Prof. G. Ernest Wright, Ph.D., PresbyterianTheologicalSeminary, 2330 N. Halstead St., Chicago, Ill. (1366)'37 Kosaku Yonemura, 1798 Scenci Ave., Berkeley, Calif. (1174)'34 Frank H. Yost, M.A., Union College, Lincoln, Nebr. (1063)'31 Rev. Edgar C. Young, M.A., Th.D., 200 North 50th St., Philadelphia, Pa. (1292)'36 Dr. Herbert C. Youtie, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. (610) '20 Prof. Solomon Zeitlin, Ph.D., Dropsie College, Broad and York Sts., Philadelphia,Pa. (1064)'31 Rev. Prof. Samuel C. Zeller, 42 S. Broad St., Nazareth, Pa. (1281)'36 Prof. Andrew C. Zenos, 834 Chalmers Place, Chicago, Ill. (1395)'38 Frank Zimmerman,Ph.D., 201-11 34th Ave., Bayside, L. I. (1330)'37 Rev. John D. Zimmerman,4624 Erie Ave., Madisonville, Cincinnati, Ohio.

The Primitive Christian Message Author(s): William Henry Paine Hatch Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 1-13 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259351 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE* WILLIAMH. P. HATCH THEOLOGICAL EPISCOPAL SCHOOL HAT was the character of the primitive Christian message? This is a question of great importance from several points of view. It is important historically and theologically and practically. The historian of Western civilization, whatever his personal beliefs and feelings may be, is obliged to study and appraise a movement which, over a period of nearly two thousand years, has probably affected that civilization more profoundly than any other single force. It has left its mark everywhere in the West - not only on literature and all the arts, but also on the thoughts and actions and lives of men. And no movement in history is intelligible without some knowledge of its beginnings. The greatness of Rome cannot be really understood or appreciated unless one knows something about the legendary settlement of Romulus and Remus beside the Tiber. The theologian also is interested in the primitive Christian quite as much as the historian. For he, too, in order K0pv'ytya to understand the great doctrines of Christianity and their relative importance, must know what ideas were included in the original Christian message. Without this knowledge the development of Christian thought is unintelligible. No living thing ever wholly outgrows or transcends the earliest stage of its life. The botanist must study the seed in order to understand fully the plant and the flower.

W

*The Presidential address delivered at the meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, December 28, 1938, at Union Theological Seminary, New York City.

2

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

So, too, the practical man, who is neither an historian nor a theologian, wishes to learn something about the earliest phase of his religion. How and why did it get its start? He may be moved by mere curiosity, or he may have some purely personal motive; but in any case he wants to know something about it, just as he desires some knowledge of geology and astronomy. Where then shall we look for knowledge of the content and character of the primitive Christian message? Evidence derived from contemporary non-Christian sources is so scanty that only two courses are open to us in our quest. (a) We may ask the Church herself to tell us something about her infancy. But in this case we shall certainly get a confused and uncertain account of Christian beginnings. (b) We may with greater profit turn to the New Testament, which contains along with later material the earliest Christian literature that is still extant. But it will be necessary for us to separate between the earlier and the later, to proceed cautiously, and to employ sound principles of criticism. Ferdinand Christian Baur, a professor in the University of Tiibingen, was once a dominant figure in biblical and historical criticism and in theology. Though his influence has waned with the passage of time, Professor Henry S. Nash of Cambridge has said of him: "One thing is certain: New Testament study, since his time, has had a different colour."' Baur himself was hampered and his work vitiated in the judgment of later generations by his Hegelian interpretation of early Christian history, but he was nevertheless a scholar of clear and penetrating insight. We shall often do well if we take his words to heart, at least as a starting point for our own thinking. Baur held that the Christian movement, full of new life, strong and vigorous, surged forward on its way, and as it went it projected out of itself the New Testament and the Church. In other words they were both the products of the movement, and they were both equally inevitable. There is obviously much truth in this idea. x Cf. H. S. Nash, The History of the Higher Criticism of the New Testament, New York, 1900, 131 f.

HATCH:

THE PRIMITIVE

CHRISTIAN

MESSAGE

3

But just as the Christian movement antedated and produced both the New Testament and the Church, so something else preceded the Christian movement, if we do not limit the latter solely to the teaching of Jesus. That something was the preaching of the early Christian missionaries, who were known as apostles, i. e. persons entrusted with a mission and sent forth to proclaim it publicly. Their preaching (K gave rise rpvy•a) to the Christian movement, and all the rest followed naturally in the course of time. It was because certain early believers went out and made known far and wide the message of salvation in Jesus Christ that Christian communities sprang up here and there throughout the Mediterranean world. For the same reason the Epistles and Gospels and Acts, which were later to be gathered together to form the New Testament, were written and published. The primitive Christian Kfrpvy/a was the fons et origo both of the Church and of the New Testament. Without it neither would have come into being; but once the missionaries, preaching was given, the literature and the institution were both inevitable. Without these as conserving agents the message of salvation in Jesus Christ would have been soon forgotten; and the inaugurator of the movement would have been remembered, if at all, only as a liberal Galilean rabbi whose teachings were distinguished by a high ethical and religious quality. But the K7)'pvy/taand what resulted from it made him the founder of a religion. The First Evangelist recognized clearly the supreme importance of the missionaries' preaching. According to Matthew Jesus appeared to his eleven faithful followers in Galilee and commanded them, saying, "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."2 This injunction is put into 2 Matt 28 19. According to Luke and the Acts the disciples' task was to bear witness, and for this work they were to be endued with the Holy Spirit. Although scriptural warrant for the preachingof repentance for the remission of sins to all the nations in the Messiah's name is alleged, the disciples are not expressly commanded to preach the gospel or to baptize. (Luke 24 46ff. and

Acts 1 8).

4

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

the short period which intervened between the resurrection and the ascension, and certainly no more effective position could have been found for it. So, too, in the longer of the two spurious endings of the Gospel of Mark the risen Jesus bids the Eleven to "go into all the world and preach the gospel to all the creation."3 The gospel is here conceived as a means of salvation. He who receives it and is baptized will be saved, but he who ignores or rejects it will suffer divine condemnation. Finally, in the shorter of the spurious endings of Mark it is said that "Jesus sent forth from the east even unto the west through them (i. e. his disciples) the sacred and incorruptible preaching (K'pvy.za) of eternal salvation."4 This event is understood to have taken place after the resurrection and before the ascension. All these passages reflect the ideas and background of the apostolic mission so clearly that there can be no doubt about their origin. They testify to the fact that soon after the death of Jesus his followers went out and preached the message of salvation in Jesus Christ to all who would listen to them, and they believed that they were commissioned for this work by the risen Lord himself. In other words what actually happened is stated as a dominical command. What was the content of this earliest Christian preaching? But before we attempt to answer this question we must ask another. Where is the subject-matter of the Kpv'yua to be found? It is contained chiefly in the first half of the Acts, in certain earlier epistles of the Apostle Paul, in First Peter, and here and there in the gospels. It has long been recognized that the theology of the first part of the Acts is primitive. This is doubtless due to the fact that it is based on an early source or sources, which the present writer believes to have been Aramaic. The Apostle Paul sometimes incorporates in his epistles ideas which he received from persons who were believers in Christ before he himself was converted. Of this he makes no secret. Although First Peter was probably 3

Cf. Mark 16 15.

B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, The New Testamentin the Original Greek,London, 1907, 113. 4 See

HATCH: THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE

5

written near the end of the reign of Domitian (81-96 A.D.), it contains much primitive matter. It is the work of a Paulinist who knew and believed the earlier teachings and wished to impress them upon his readers. This accounts for the resemblances which have sometimes been pointed out between this epistle and the speeches of Peter found in the Acts. Finally, some phrases and ideas are imbedded in the gospels which seem to have been derived from the preaching of the early Christian missionaries. But there are surprisingly few of them in view of what Form Criticism has taught us concerning the formation of the synoptic gospels. These then are the principal sources in which the primitive Christian Kflpvybla has been preserved. However, it must not be imagined that the beginnings were entirely forgotten or completely outgrown in later times. A healthy religion grows and develops from within and from without, but its essential character abides. Old ideas underwent change, new views were adopted, and emphases were shifted; but the fundamental and distinctive message was never lost. Hence traces of the primitive KfpvupLa appear sporadically even in the later books of the New Testament. Jesus died an ignominious death on the cross. At first the disciples were stunned by the blow, but they soon perceived that a catastrophe so appalling could be understood only as of God's ordering. It all happened "by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God."s Indeed, it was just what He had foreordained from eternity should occur.6 Moreover, Jesus' death was not meaningless or ineffective. On the contrary it had great and lasting significance; for it was sacrificial, and by it sin was done away. He was held to be "the lamb of God, which (by his death) taketh away the sin of the world."7 Paul also calls him "our paschal lamb"; and he mentions the fact that he has been sacrificed, so that his death has actually taken away the sins of believers.8 s Cf. Acts 2 23.

6 Cf. Acts 4 28.

7 Cf. John 1 29. Cf. also John 1 36. 8 Cf. 1 Cor 5 7.

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

6

Hence the tragedy of Calvary by no means put an end to the movement which had been inaugurated by Jesus. On the contrary it gained thereby new life and power. For soon after the death of their leader the disciples became firmly convinced that he was still living. God had loosed the cords of death and raised him from Sheol.9 It was even said that he had appeared not only to the leading believers but also to more than five hundred brethren at one time.Io This conviction, based (as they believed) on the testimony of sight and confirmed by the Scriptures, was at once the foundation on which their faith rested and the basis of their preaching. "And if Christ hath not been raised, then vain (KEV6v), vain (KEv4) also is is our preaching (K~4pvy'La) to be also false witnesses of God, we are found and your faith, we have witnessed because against God that He raised up the Messiah."" "And if Christ hath not been raised, your faith is In other words the missionaries' message vain (uarala)."'2 depended for its validity on the resurrection of Jesus viewed as an act of God, and this event was one of the basic elements in their preaching. It was also believed that Jesus, having been raised from the dead, had been exalted to heaven by the power of God.'~ Thence, in accordance with ancient prophecy, the Spirit was poured out upon believers, thus producing the strange phenomena which were seen in the various Christian communities.'4 In these mighty acts the hand of Deity was manifest. Jesus was still living, and he would soon return to the earth and establish his reign with power and glory.~s This hope was fostered and kept alive by the early Christian watchword maranatha, which circulated in Greek-speaking as well as in Aramaic-speaking circles.'6 The fact that it was in a strange language and was doubtless 9 Cf. Acts 2 24.

0oCf. 1 Cor 15 3 ff.

11Cf. 12 Cf. '3 Cf. 14 Cf. Is Cf. T6 Cf.

1 Cor 15 14 f. 1 Cor 15 17. Acts 2 33 and 5 31. Acts 2 16 ff. Acts 3 20. 1 Cor 16 22. Cf. also Apoc 22 20.

HATCH: THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE

7

known to have been handed down from the Palestinian community made it especially impressive. The idea that Jesus had been exalted to heaven and would soon return to the earth, which was complementary to that of his resurrection, also formed part of the primitive Christian K•7pvyT/.a. Jesus' resurrection convinced his disciples that God had made him both Lord and Messiah.'7 Paul says that he was designated the Son of God with power by his resurrection from the dead.'8 In other words Jesus was Messiah and Lord not by virtue of birth or descent, but by divine appointment. As Messiah he was the fulfillment of God's promise made to his people through the prophets and the inaugurator of the Messianic kingdom on earth. As Lord he was the bearer of supreme authority, and he actually exercised this authority in the lives of believers. How the authority of Jesus and that of God were related to each other was one of the questions which were necessarily left for a later generation to solve. It was probably not a pressing problem in the early period, because the Messiah was expected to return very soon to the earth and set up his kingdom. Paul, being a strict monotheist, had sensed the difficulty involved in ascribing supreme authority to Christ; and he had found a possible solution of the problem. "And when all things have been subjected unto him (i. e. Christ), then shall the Son also himself be subjected (or subject himself) unto him who subjected all things unto him, that God may be all in all."'9 Messiahship was a Jewish category, and its appeal was primarily to members of the Jewish race. It was the highest dignity that could be ascribed to a human being, but it did not imply or connote divinity. The word Messiah was meaningless to Gentiles and had to be translated and explained to them. It became a proper name rather than a title at an early date, and as such it has survived. Lordship on the other hand was a familiar idea in hellenistic as well as in Semitic quarters. The divinities worshipped in the mystery cults of the Graeco-Roman 17 Cf. Acts 2 38. 18 Cf. Rom 1 4. '9 Cf. 1 Cor 15 28.

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

8

world had the title Lord or Lady, and each of them was supreme in the life of his or her devotees. When Jesus was called Lord by believers, this title could not have seemed new or strange to many people in Ephesus or Corinth. Indeed, it must have had an old and familiar sound, and it must have suggested ideas which were well known to them in their own religious life. Jesus was proclaimed by the early Christian preachers not only as Messiah and Lord but also as Savior, and this was likewise a term with which Gentile hearers were well acquainted. The idea was nothing new or startling. It was indeed just what many of them had been seeking, and to these the announcement of a saviour was welcome news. The missionaries declared that God, having raised Jesus from the dead, exalted him to heaven to be the leader and savior of all those who believe.20 God, not man, was the prime mover in the great drama of salvation. The first preachers were not much interested in the events of Jesus' life or even in his teachings, for he was not thought of primarily as an ethical teacher or a worker of miracles. Our canonical gospels tacitly testify to the fact that the early Christians' chief concern was with the death and resurrection of Jesus, for in all of them the story of the passion occupies a disproportionate amount of space.2' "The things either said or done by Christ," to borrow a phrase from Papias, were matters of interest to a somewhat later generation. In this period Jesus' sayings were collected and anecdotes about him were committed to writing. These were the materials which the evangelists used as sources. Why did God do the above-mentioned mighty acts? Why did He raise Jesus from the dead and exalt him to heaven? Why did He make him Messiah and Lord and Savior? The answer to these questions is suggested by the title Savior. All these things were done solely in order that by means of them men might be saved. For they were in dire need of salvation from various evils --from sin, from the demons, and from death. soCf. Acts 5 30 f. In Matthew the passion occupies a little less than one-seventh of the whole gospel, in Mark (not including the last twelve verses) about one-sixth, and in Luke about one-seventh. 21

HATCH: THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE

9

They were perishing in their sins, and many of them felt the need of salvation and longed for a savior. Then along came the Christian missionaries with the announcement that God had provided salvation for men in and through Jesus, who was Messiah and Lord and Savior. He had died on a cross at the hands of men, and then he had been raised from the dead and exalted to heaven by God. His death was redemptive, for he "came ... to give his life as a ransom (Xbrpov) for many.""22 Jesus' resurrection from the dead and exaltation to heaven set the seal of divine approval upon his work. To obtain the proffered salvation, one thing only was necessary, and that was faith. "This is the word of faith which we preach: that if thou confess the word with thy mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe with thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."23 But faith was not merely intellectual assent to the missionaries' message or even acceptance of it. Paul understood faith as "at once belief, trust, and loyalty - the means whereby the believer receives the Spirit, and enters into and continues in mystical fellowship with Christ."24 It was, moreover, a divine gift. Being in Christ by virtue of his faith, the believer experienced all the blessings of salvation. Two religious rites, baptism and the Lord's Supper, accompanied the missionaries' message of salvation and formed part of it. The former signified repentance and remission of sins, and at the same time it signalized the believer's entrance into the Christian community. The Lord's Supper (&Z^7rvovKUvpaK6V) was a memorial and symbolical meal. By its frequent recurrence it kept continually in mind Jesus' sacrificial and redemptive death on the cross; and it symbolized the new covenant, which was sealed with his blood. But it was more than this. According to Paul those who ate the bread and drank of the cup through this act had mystical fellowship with Christ. 22

Cf. Mark 10 45. 23Cf. Rom 10 8 f. 24 Cf. W. H. P. Hatch, The Pauline Idea of Faith, Cambridge, Mass., 1917,

65.

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

10

The various terms by which the missionaries' message was designated are significant. It was "called 'the word of God' or 'the gospel of God,' and 'the word of Christ' and 'the gospel of Christ.' Paul also speaks of it as 'the word of the cross,' 'the word of reconciliation,' 'the word of truth,' and 'the word of life.'

"25

In other words the primitive

Christian

Klipvoypa was

regarded as the utterance of God or Christ. Like the Hebrew prophets of old, the preachers were merely the instruments or channels through which the divine message was communicated to man. The expressions quoted above also show that the essential character of the missionaries' preaching was soteriological. It is aptly described by the author of the Epistle to the Ephesians as "the gospel of salvation.""2 What shall we say about the character of the early Christian Krlpvyla? The missionaries did not proclaim far and wide the Kingdom of God, or humanitarianism, or social amelioration, or even a more just social order. They did not preach the high ethical principles which are found in the Sermon on the Mount and in the parables of Jesus, nor did they recount the miracles or mighty works which are recorded in the gospels as proof of Jesus' divine mission. The interest in his teachings and miracles came later. The missionaries' preaching was of an entirely different sort, for it was primarily soteriological. The gospel, as they understood it, was God's message of salvation in Jesus Christ; and it was their duty as God's heralds to announce it. In God's name they offered salvation to the world and presented to their hearers a savior. Paul says that this message was "a stumbling-block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles";27 but that mattered little, for "it pleased God to save those who believed through

the foolishness

of the preaching

(rb KflpvyyIa)."28

By

faith and sacrament the salvation proffered by the preachers could be received and become effective. Cf. W. H. P. Hatch, op. cit., 33 f. A Cf. Eph 1 13. s25

27 28

Cf. 1 Cor 1 23. Cf. 1 Cor 1 21.

HATCH: THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE

11

The soteriological message, however, was by no means the only concern of the Christian missionaries. They were also vitally interested in morals, and a moral life was looked upon as evidence that one possessed the divine Spirit. Like the Stoic and Cynic preachers, they extolled and commended virtue and denounced vice. The result was amendment of life and a higher standard of living in the Christian communities. Converts from the Gentile world must have sensed keenly the difference in moral tone between their old background and their new environment. We ordinarily think of the Greeks as a joyous and happy people. But there was gloom as well as joy in their civilization. A dark shadow is cast across the pages of Greek literature from the time of Homer onwards by the thought of death, which seemed to be the inexorable and ineluctable foe of all that is fair and good. This feeling was especially strong in the Hellenistic Age, and there are traces of it in the New Testament. Thus the Apostle Paul exclaims: "Wretched man am I! Who will deliver me from this body of death?"29 Along with this revulsion at death went a strong yearning for salvation (aowrpLa) - deliverance from various evils in this life and bliss beyond the grave. Dr. Angus says: "The cry for salvation was loud, persistent, and universal."3o Professors Macgregor and Purdy speak of "that universal longing for 'salvation' wherein we shall find the prime Praeparatio Evangelica of the Hellenistic Age."3' Men and women longed to be saved and were seeking earnestly for a savior. Many prayers and vows for or7?pLa engraved on stone are extant, and they testify eloquently to the aspirations of those who set up the monuments. No doubt in many cases these people were thinking primarily of safety, health, and worldly prosperity; but there was often 29 30

Cf. Rom 7 24. Cf. S. Angus, The Mystery-Religions and Christianity, New York, 1925,

226. 3'

Cf. G. H. C. Macgregor and A. C. Purdy, Jew and Greek Tutors unto

Christ,London, 1936, 232.

12

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

something more than these in their minds. Sir William Ramsay says: "There lies latent in it (i. e. the word aorT7pla) some undefined and hardly conscious thought of the spiritual and the moral."'32 In the hellenistic period the old state religions had almost completely lost their influence. They were only obsolete survivals of an ancient past, and nobody any longer really believed in them. Men and women in considerable numbers were turning to the mystery cults, most of which were of Oriental origin. There were several important mysteries - the Eleusinian, the Phrygian, the Syrian, the Egyptian, and the Persian. They differed from one another in various ways; but they were all sacramental and soteriological, and membership in them was voluntary. They promised salvation to those who were initiated into them - a life of happiness after death. This promise, however empty it may seem to us, appealed strongly to many in the first century of our era; and the mystery religions made many converts. At least it can be said that these cults gave the hope of a happy future to people who otherwise would have been without it. They must also have tended to raise the moral tone of the lives of their votaries by fixing the thoughts of the latter on a life to come. Both the mystery cults and early Christianity offered to the hellenistic world just that for which many people in that age were yearning, viz. salvation. All these religions were soteriological, but a profound difference separated early Christianity from its rivals. In the latter the chief emphasis was put upon initiation, ceremonies, and sacramental rites of a magical character; whereas in the former admission into the community and salvation depended in the last analysis upon faith. This difference is fundamental and far-reaching, and the recognition of it is of prime importance. Early Christianity had another great advantage over its competitors. Demeter, Cybele, Atargatis, Osiris, Isis, and Mithra 32 Cf. Sir W. M. Ramsay, The Teaching of Paul in Terms of the Present Day, second ed., London, 1914, 94 f. See also the same writer's The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, London, 1915, 173 ff.

HATCH: THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE

13

were mythical divinities. Jesus on the contrary was an historical person, and the religion which claimed him as its founder was firmly rooted in history. In the long run the historical is sure to triumph over the mythical. Edward Gibbon, in a well-known chapter of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,33enumerates five causes to which he attributes the rapid growth of Christianity in the Graeco-Roman world. The second of these causes is the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. In Gibbon's time ancient life and thought were known almost exclusively from literary sources. We on the other hand have learned much from inscriptions and papyri about the life and religion of ordinary people in antiquity. In the light of this knowledge we should substitute the promise of salvation for the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. Moreover, while recognizing that there were other reasons for the rapid spread of Christianity among Gentiles in the first century of our era, we should put the promise of salvation first and foremost. This was the essence of the primitive Christian message, and it was this more than anything else that attracted men and women to the new religion in great numbers. They believed and were baptized, and thereby they became members of the Christian community. 33 Chapter XV.

The Pauline Chronology Author(s): John Knox Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 15-29 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259352 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY BY JOHN KNOX HARTFORD

THEOLOGICAL

SEMINARY

I

IN an article published

two years ago, I ventured to make a suggestion about the Pauline chronology the implications of which call for further examination. The suggestion, by no means altogether new, was that the starting point for the relative chronology of Paul's missionary career should be two familiar passages in his letters: (1) Gal 2 1, which tells us that fourteen years after his conversion Paul went up to Jerusalem, where he discussed the status of the gentile believers with the leaders of the church there,2 and (2) II Cor 12 2, in which Paul refers apparently to his conversion as having occurred "fourteen years ago." Since it is clear that at the time of this reference Paul had done missionary work in Galatia, Greece, Macedonia, and Asia (not to ' " 'Fourteen Years Later': A note on the Pauline Chronology," Journal

of Religion, XVI, 341 ff. 2 Paul's statement here is somewhat ambiguous. He has previously stated that three years after his conversion he made his first visit to Jerusalem, and now he alludes to this second visit as occurring "fourteen years later." Is the fourteen years reckoned from the first visit or from the conversion? The Greek can be interpreted either way with equal accuracy and naturalness, so that the question of whether this second visit happened fourteen or seventeen years after Paul's conversion must be answered on other than linguistic grounds. My principal reason for regarding the shorter interval as the more probable is this: Paul in this whole section of Galatians is concerned among other things to show how meager have been his contacts with the Jerusalem church. It would have been natural, therefore, for him to make the intervals between his visits to Jerusalem seem as long as possible. If he could truthfully have said "seventeen years later," as on the other hypothesis he could, I think he would have done so. 15

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

16

mention other possible areas), we are forced to place Paul's conversation with James, Cephos and John (mentioned in Gal 2 xff and also presumably in Acts 15) not where it is usually placed before he entered the fields of his most important work - but at a point midway in or toward the culmination of his career. It was apparently while he was residing in Ephesus (for it was there that II Cor 12 2 was probably written), when his evangelistic work was in considerable part done, that he went to Jerusalem to confer with the leaders there. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that the collection for the poor of the Judean church, suggested at the time of this fourteen-year-later visit by the leaders at Jerusalem3 as a gesture of loyalty on the part of the gentile churches, was actually being taken during the period of the Corinthian correspondence. Perhaps the most questionable feature of this analysis is the interpretation offered of II Cor 12 2. That passage with its immediate context reads as follows: "I must needs glory, though it is not expedient; but I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I know not; or whether out of the body I know not; God knoweth), such a one caught up even to the third heaven. And I know such a man (whether in the body, or apart from the body, I know not; God knoweth), how he was caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. On behalf of such a one will I glory: but on my own behalf I will not glory, save in my weaknesses." Is Paul alluding here, as I have said, to his conversion? I have given in the article referred to some reasons for believing that he is, and in particular have shown that there is nothing in Galatians, the other important autobiographical source, to render that interpretation impossible. I could name other investigators who have taken a similar view.4 Without undertaking to argue the matter here, may I simply point out that it is undoubtedly Paul's conversion which comes first to our minds when we read of this significant experience of 3 Gal 2 10. 4 For example, see P. Hartmann, "Das VerhAltnisGalaterbriefszum Zweiten Korintherbrief,"ZNW, XIII, 187 ff.

KNOX: THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY

17

"fourteen years ago." If we decide that the "revelation" thus singled out was not the "revelation" (Gal 1 16) with which his career as an evangelist began, we do so in all probability not because that is an unnatural interpretation of the passage considered separately, but because it is an interpretation incompatible with our conception of the chronology of Paul's life as a whole. But it is precisely that chronology which we are investigating, and we must not permit any preconceived conclusion to affect our view of the evidence. On the contrary we must take the evidence at face value and see to what new conclusion it may lead us. Only when the evidence thus taken is found to be in conflict with further evidence, can the investigator properly follow any other course. But in this case no such conflict, so far as our primary sources are concerned, is involved. In my judgment, to take II Cor 12 2 at its face value is to see in it a reference to the original and crucial revelation from which Paul's career as an evangelist took its start,5 and I believe that s The strength of the case for identifying the revelation of II Cor 12 2 with the conversion revelation is not felt until one tries to answer the question: Why should Paul in this particular context have singled out any other revelation? If he is going to mention only one "vision of the Lord," a vision thought of as in some sense giving significance to other visions, why should he have selected one which by definition (if it was not the revelation of Gal 1 16) was of only secondary importance? Dr. Martin Dibelius in a conversation about this point, without expressing a judgment, raised the question whether Paul's manner of referring to this experience in II Cor 12 is consistent with his manner of referring to his vision of Jesus in I Cor 15. There Paul evidently regards his vision of Jesus as a public fact, a proof of Jesus' resurrection whereas in II Cor 12 he alludes to an experience mysterious, secret and unspeakable. The question is an important one. It may be pointed out, however, that in I Cor 15, as well as in Gal 1, Paul is speaking merely of the formal objective fact of his vision of Jesus; he is not disclosing any of the concrete character of the experience. It is this character which, according to II Cor 12, cannot be described to others. The one objective fact which is disclosed in the other passages is disclosed in this one also: it was a "vision of the Lord." It may also be pointed out that Paul's manner of referring to the revelation in II Cor 12 2 suggests that he knew his readers would understand his allusion, but would they have done so if he was not speaking of the revelation which, as Dr. Dibelius said, was a fact of public knowledge among the churches, at least among the Pauline churches?

18

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

the new chronology which the acceptance of that interpretation implies is not only defensible but strongly supported by independent evidence. The elaboration of that chronology in briefest possible outline is the purpose of this article. I say "new chronology" not in the sense of a chronology never suggested, at least in part, before,' but in the sense of a chronology radically different from that ordinarily adopted. II We may begin by asking how near we can get to establishing any absolute dates in Paul's career. Here, so far as I know, there are only three real possibilities; that is, there are only three events in the apostle's life for the dating of which external evidence of any value is available. These are (1) Paul's conversion, (2) his trial before Gallio in Corinth, and (3) his imprisonment in Caesarea.7 Can we set either specifically or within definite limits the dates of any of these events? As to the first, the time of Paul's conversion, we are certain, of course, that it occurred after the death of Jesus, which can be placed with some assurance around the year 30 A. D.8 But how long after? Some scholars say as early as 30 or 31, but it is likely that they do so not because the immediately relevant evidence convinces them that an interval of only about a year elapsed between Jesus' death and Paul's conversion, but (as in the case of the interpretation of II Cor 12 2) because their conception of the Pauline chronology as a whole requires that view. In other words they cannot get Paul's career as they conceive it 6 See, for example, Carl Clemen, Die Chronologie der Paulinischen Briefe, Halle, 1893. 7 I do not include here reference to the visit of Paul to Jerusalem in connection with the famine, recorded in Acts 11 30 ff. as having occurred somewhere near the time of the death of Herod Agrippa I, because I share the usual view that this visit did not occur. (But see footnote 17 below.) Efforts to find evidence for the date of Sergius Paulus' proconsulship in Cyprus have apparently failed. The dating of Claudius' expulsion of the Jews from Rome, which bears indirectly upon the Luke-Acts story of Paul, will be referred to later (footnote 18). 8 It ought to be remembered, however, that this date is partly determined by the exigencies of the usual Pauline chronology.

KNOX: THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY

19

into the area lying between his conversion and his final arrest unless they press those limits to the extreme, and this means that the former of them must be placed as near to the death of Jesus as possible. But if that limit be determined independently, on the merits of the directly relevant evidence alone and without reference to the requirements of any chronological scheme, I believe that one will arrive at a date at least as late as 35 A. D. The new movement had spread to Antioch and Damascus. Indeed, Gal 1 22-23, if it means precisely what it says, indicates that Paul's whole experience both as a persecutor and as an evangelist of the new faith lay outside of Palestine, or at any rate outside of Judea. Paul is clearly a product of extraPalestinian Christianity, and time must be allowed for the development of that phase of the movement. The earliest likely date of Paul's conversion, then, can be placed at 35 A. D. The latest possible time can be set with greater assurance at 40. That dating is based upon II Cor 11 32-33, where Paul tells of the ethnarch under King Aretas having men watch the city gates of Damascus to take him. Since Paul was obviously a believer at the time and since there is adequate reason for regarding 40 as the final date of Aretas IV,9 it is apparent that Paul's conversion cannot have occurred after that year.'o I propose, then, some point between 35 and 40 as the time when Paul became a preacher of the faith he had previously persecuted. 9 It is urged by some scholars that only in 37, when Caligula succeeded Tiberius, did Aretas become the ruler of Damascus and hence have the jurisdiction there which this incident implies; and that Paul's escape from that city must thus have occurred between 37 and 40. The grounds for this position seem precarious to me, but the position itself is thoroughly consonant with our view of the date of Paul's conversion. It would be more embarrassing, if established, to those who place Paul's conversion in 33 or before. 10 Paul tells us in Gal 1 18 that three years after his conversion he left Damascus for Jerusalem. If this departure from Damascus is the same as that referred to in II Cor 11 32-33, the conversion obviously cannot have been later than 37 or 38 A. D. But I do not believe one is justified in assuming that the two references are to the same departure. I prefer to play safe here and to set the later limit at 40, although it is as well to remember that a date somewhere between 35 and 38 is probable.

20

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

The second date usually regarded as established is that of Paul's trial before Gallio at Corinth, described in Acts 18 12if. The Delphi inscription indicating that Gallio was proconsul of Achaia in or about 51-52 is well known. If then we are to take the episode as historical, Paul was in Corinth during that year. Unless, however, we take so strict a view of the historical accuracy of Acts as to hold that this incident must not only have occurred but must have occurred on the occasion of Paul's first visit to Corinth (where Acts places it), this date helps us very little, since on any view of the chronology of Paul's life, he may have been in Corinth at that time. As to the date of Paul's arrest in Jerusalem, Acts states that it occurred two years before Festus succeeded Felix as procurator of Judea. Although there is no corroborative evidence for that statement, there is no contradictory evidence, and I see no adequate reason for distrusting it. The author of Luke-Acts describes at great length and with elaborate detail Paul's trials before Felix and his successor. If Paul's arrest did not occur somewhere in the neighborhood of the time when this change of administration took place, Luke-Acts is involved in an error which on any view of the date, authorship or purpose of the work, is almost incredible." In Romans we find Paul ready to leave for Jerusalem and apprehensive of difficulty there. Acts tells us that the difficulty came, and there is no sufficient reason for doubting the approximate accuracy of its statement as to when it came. It came somewhat before - Acts says two years before - Festus took Felix's place as procurator of Judea. But when was that? The evidence is somewhat confused, but on the whole points to 55 A. D.'2 To be sure, most scholars " In this tentative reconstruction of the Pauline chronology I assume the general accuracy of the Acts date. And yet I cannot altogether rid my mind of doubt. It suits the author's purpose so well to have Paul make his defense before Felix, Festus, and Agrippa that one cannot quite suppress the question of whether he may not have arranged it so. In similar fashion, Luke alone has Jesus appear before both Pilate and Herod. 12 There are two principal pieces of evidence. One is the statement of Eusebius (Chr.) that the accession of Festus occurred in the second year of Nero, which would be 55-56. The other is the statement of Josephus (Ant. 20: 8, 9) that Felix was after his term of office saved from disgrace by the

KNOX: THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY

21

prefer a later date, but I believe that it is fair to say again that they do so not on the basis of the evidence bearing on this particular point, considered independently and taken at face value, but, as in other cases, because of the requirements of the usually accepted chronology. Just as they have tended for this reason to push the date of the conversion back as far as possible, so they have been inclined to press the time of the arrest forward as far as the evidence can be forced to allow. That it is considerations like these which in large part determine the dating of both events will appear from an examination of the chronological schemes which the various modern students of Paul's life have adopted. Generally speaking, writers who take 55 or 56 as the date of Festus' accession put Paul's conversion in 31 or 32, and writers who put the latter event as late as 35 place the accession of Festus in 57 or later. In each case it is apparently the supposed demands of the Pauline chronology as a whole which determine the scholar's opinion rather than the evidence bearing on the particular point. Indeed it may almost be said that those who place the arrest as late as 57 do so in spite of the evidence (although not of conclusive evidence) rather than because of it. Let us, then, date the final visit of Paul to Jerusalem in 53 or 54. And since we have tentatively placed the beginning of his career as an evangelist at some point between 35 and 40, we are left with an interval of at least fourteen years and at most of twenty, during which Paul's work as an apostle was done. What occurred in that interval?

III The first three years (or perhaps two) are accounted for. Paul says that three years after his conversion he went to Jerusalem for the first time,'3 and the inference would appear to be justified that he had been for the greater part of the interval in Damascus. intervention of Pallas --this statement taken with that of Tacitus that Pallas fell into disfavor apparently in 55 (Annals 13: 14-15). But see C. Erbes, "Die Todestage der Apostel Paulus und Petrus," in Gebhardt und Harnack, Texte und Untersuchungen, Neue Folge, IV, 16 ff. '3 Gal 1 18.

22

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

In any case, it is fair to suppose that he was in Syria or Arabia for that period. Since we have set the conversion between 35 and 40, this three-year interval would have ended somewhere between 38 and 43 A. D. Immediately afterward, Paul tells us, he went into Syria and Cilicia.'4 Acts describes missionary activity in Syria, Cilicia, Galatia, Macedonia, Greece and Asia in that order. There is no reason to question the essential accuracy of this account of Paul's career in the years following the initial three-year interval. It is confirmed by the fact that II Cor 12 2 indicates, as we have seen, that fourteen years after his conversion Paul was in Ephesus, and the Corinthian letters as a whole clearly show that at that time he had already been active in Galatia, Macedonia and Greece as well as in Asia itself. This would have been somewhere between 49 and 54 (the conversion having been dated between 35 and 40). Paul is then at the height of his career. He is engaged in taking an offering for the church at Jerusalem, an offering on which, Gal 2 to tells us, he had begun work immediately after his second visit to Jerusalem. The offering is soon completed and Romans 15 informs us of Paul's plan to take it to Jerusalem himself. This last visit to Judea, in the course of which his arrest took place, would thus have occurred fifteen or sixteen years after his conversion. It is clear that we have now secured a datum for determining more narrowly than we have so far been able to do the date of Paul's conversion. For as we have seen, it is not easily possible to place Paul's arrest earlier than 53. This means that the writing of the Corinthian letters and the taking of the collection can hardly have been earlier than 51 or 52. And if we are right in dating the writing of those letters and the taking of the offering fourteen years after the conversion, as both II Cor 12 2 and Gal 2 1-10 indicate, the year 37 or 38 is indicated for that event. Bringing these data together, I am thus proposing the following chronological scheme: '4

Gal 1 21. He has no occasion to say where else he went.

KNOX: THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY

23

A. D. Conversion in or near Damascus ........................37 40 First visit to Jerusalem ("three years later") ............. Evangelistic activity in Syria, Cilicia, Galatia, Macedonia, 40-51 Greece, Asia ..................................... Second visit to Jerusalem ("fourteen years later")........51 The taking of the collection and furtherevangelistic activity in Greece and Asia .51-52 Minor.......................... Final visit to Jerusalem to deliver collection; the arrest there...................... ..............53

No one could be more aware than I of the extreme tentativeness of these dates. It is only for the general chronological arrangement that I am claiming a measure of probability. I have tried to reduce that arrangement to the terms of precise dates only to demonstrate that it fits neatly between the years which independent evidence would suggest as the probable dates of the beginning and the end of Paul's career as an evangelist.

IV Dr. C. J. Cadoux in a recent issue of the Journal of Biblical Literature's says of my suggestion about the Pauline chronology that it "involves largely ignoring the statements of Acts in the reconstruction of Paul's biography." Although it is my conviction that students of the life of Paul must rigidly hold themselves to using Acts as a secondary source and must be ready to disregard it whenever the letters give the slightest ground for doing so, nevertheless a chronological arrangement which involved constant or even frequent conflict with the Acts narrative would be open to serious question. It is important, therefore, to ask whether the proposed chronology can properly be charged with doing so. I find four points of conflict and only four: (1) Acts suggests that Paul went to Jerusalem soon after his conversion; the suggested chronology calls for a three-year interval. (2) Acts regards the visit of Paul to Jerusalem to discuss the status of the Greek churches (the "conference" visit) as his third to that Is

"Chronology of the Apostolic Age," JBL, XVI, 184 ff.

24

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

city after his conversion, his second having been for the purpose of bringing an offering to the Jerusalem church from the church at Antioch; according to the proposed chronology, this intermediate visit did not occur and the "conference" visit was Paul's second to Jerusalem after his conversion. (3) This "conference" visit, according to Acts, took place immediately after Paul's first evangelistic activity in Galatia and before he had gone into western Asia Minor and Greece, in other words, near the beginning of his missionary career as we know it; the suggested chronology makes this visit occur after Paul had done much of his work in Greece and Asia, or at a point near the culmination of his career.'6 (4) Paul's trial before Gallio at Corinth, according to Acts, occurred on the occasion of Paul's first visit to Corinth; according to the proposed chronology, if the trial before Gallio occurred at all (and there is no particular reason to doubt), it took place during one of the later, or perhaps the last, of Paul's periods of residence in that city. Of these four points of conflict, two are involved in almost any reconstruction of the Pauline chronology. That Acts is mistaken in having Paul go to Jerusalem so soon after his conversion is acknowledged by everyone. That it is equally mistaken in regarding the "conference" visit as Paul's third is conceded by all except the few scholars who take Gal 2 1 if. and Acts 15 as descriptions of two separate events and place the writing of Galatians between them.17 But if the conventional A6Perhaps I should make separate mention of the fact that Barnabas who according to Gal 2 1 accompanied Paul on this visit had, according to Acts, broken with him before Paul entered Greece or Asia. I have not done so because in both Galatians and Acts the break with Barnabas occurs immediately after the "conference," and the transposition of one event would involve transposition of the other also. '7 It may be noted that those scholars who take the position that the "conference" (Gal 2 1 fr.) occurred on the occasion of Paul's "famine visit" (Acts 11 30) and that Luke-Acts has made the mistake of regarding an original actual visit with two purposes as two separate visits - these scholars are scarcely adhering more closely to the Acts narrative at this point than those who deny that the "famine visit" took place at all. For an interesting discussion of this possibility see E. Schwartz, "Zur Chronologie des Paulus, "Nachrichten von der Kbniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu G6ttingen, Berlin, 1907, 263 ff.

KNOX: THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY

25

chronology contradicts Acts at two points, surely a proposed chronology is not to be condemned merely because it conflicts in two additional instances, especially as in both of them it is only a question of the relative time of events which is involved. Can the writer who was so obviously wrong at two points be unquestionably right at every other? It is not necessary to insist that the trial of Paul before Gallio may have occurred later than on Paul's first visit to Corinth. The author of Luke-Acts would not have regarded the exact time of that incident as a matter of any importance whatever. As a matter of fact, he refers vaguely to a conspiracy of the Jews as the occasion of Paul's sudden departure from Corinth after his last visit there. May not the trial before Gallio have happened then?1s

As for the "conference" with the Jerusalem leaders, since the author of Luke-Acts is clearly mistaken as to the character and outcome of that discussion, may he not have been mistaken as to its time also? Besides, it is by no means impossible that we have in the order in which he places the Jewish controversy an evidence of tendency. If, as seems likely, this controversy reached its height only toward the end of the apostle's career, there was every reason why Luke-Acts should have wanted to ignore or play down the fact and to let it appear that the divisive is Acts 20 3. It is interesting to note that although the early dating of Paul's first arrival in Corinth, probably early in the forties, conflicts with the Acts account of the time of Paul's appearance before Gallio, it suits better than does the usual dating of that event the statement of Luke-Acts that Aquila and Priscilla had arrived in Corinth only shortly before Paul (Acts 18 2). Comparisonof Suetonius (Claudius, xxv) and Dio Cassius (lx, 6, 6) indicates that the most probable date for the expulsion of the Jews from Rome, cited in Luke-Acts as the occasion of the two taking up their residence in Corinth, is the year 41 A. D., soon after the beginning of Claudius' reign. The way in which general chronological considerations are allowed to determine the dates of particular events is illustrated here also: "It must be admitted," writes K. Lake, "that if there were no reason to the contrary it [the expulsion] would probably be put down to A. D. 41. Acts, however, distinctly says that Aquila and Priscilla had 'recently' arrived from Italy, and 41 is far too early to be a conceivable date for Paul in Corinth." (The Beginningsof Christianity, Part I, Vol. v, p. 459.)

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

26

and troublesome issue was disposed of almost before Paul had embarked on his work.19 But it is not my intention here to argue that point again, but merely to demonstrate that the proposed chronology does not involve wholesale disregard of the statements of Acts.

V I have not dealt in this discussion with the order of the epistles. I have not done so because except in one case, Galatians, the proposed chronology, as distinguished from the usual one, does not bear on that question. That I and II Thessalonians, I and II Corinthians, and Romans were probably written in that sequence is obvious enough on any view of the Pauline chronology. The question of where and when the so-called imprisonment

letters -

Colossians,

Philemon

and

Philippians -

were

written is still an open one, but the suggested chronology throws no new light on it. As for the date of Galatians, it is evident that if the chronological scheme suggested in this paper be adopted, that letter must be placed at least as late as I and II Corinthians. That is true for the obvious reason that Galatians could not have been written until after the "conference" visit (since it refers to it as having occurred), and the "conference" visit took place only just before the taking of the collection for the poor at Jerusalem, referred to as in progress when the Corinthian letters were written. Besides, the allusion in II Cor 12 2 to Paul's conversion as having occurred "fourteen years ago" dates the writing of that sentence at least as in the general period of the "conference" visit, which, according to Gal 2 1, happened fourteen years after the conversion. The question here is how long after the "conference" visit was Galatians composed? Similarities between Galatians and II Cor 10-13 suggest the general period of the Corinthian correspondence, and more specifically, some time between I and II Corinthians, as the time of Galatians. This "9In my article previously referred to I have ventured to indicate the point in the Luke-Acts source (now found as Acts 18 19-23) where the "conference" may originally have come.

KNOX: THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY

27

would mean that the letter was written very soon after Paul's return from the conference at Jerusalem and while the collection for the poor was being taken. I am not quite convinced, however, that the date of Galatians should not be later still. Would Paul in Romans have been so complacent about the state of his work "from Jerusalem to Illyricum" if as recently as a year previously so critical a situation had existed as called forth the Galatian epistle? And can we easily conceive of his carrying through with such enthusiasm the collection for the poor at Jerusalem if in the midst of it there occurred the very crisis which the collection was designed to avert? Is it possible that a more natural order than Galatians, Corinthians, Romans (the order usually adopted), or Corinthians, Galatians, Romans (the order often adopted), or even I Corinthians, Galatians, II Corinthians, Romans (the order we have just proposed) - may a more natural order than any of these be Corinthians, Romans, Galatians? That suggestion has been advanced before; I make it again with all tentativeness and with no disposition whatever to press it. It is a possibility, however, of which discussions of the date of Galatians should take account. If Galatians should be put after Romans, it could have been written after Paul's departure for Jerusalem on his last recorded visit, or after his arrest. It is by no means proved that Galatians was not an imprisonment letter. It is true that imprisonment is not explicitly referred to, but by what right do we infer so surely that if Paul had been in prison he would necessarily have said so? Galatians is noteworthy for its omission of details of this kind? We are not told who were with Paul when he wrote it or where he was at the time. There are no personal greetings in the letter; there is not even a thanksgiving. It would not have been necessary to inform his readers of his situation; they would have known about it already or the bearer of the letter would have acquainted them with it. Galatians is a terribly earnest communication and contains little if anything which is not relevant to the matter with which it is concerned. One is quite prepared to understand the absence of casual references to Paul's external situation in this singularly intense letter written by Paul's own hand.

28

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

On the other hand, if Paul was in prison when this letter was composed, several obscure statements in it become significant for example, the reference to "those who are with me" in the greeting, or "Why am I still being persecuted?" or "Would that I could be with you!" or "Let no one trouble me after this: I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." Weiss refers to the "world weariness" which the closing sentences of the Galatian letter disclose.2o The imprisonment hypothesis would also explain the absence of any promise (or threat) of an early visit to Galatia. Most important of all, that hypothesis would permit us to see in Galatians, in Paul's arrest in Jerusalem, and perhaps in the perplexing section of Philippians (3 1 if.), which seems to reflect the same situation as Galatians, signs and consequences of the same crisis - a crisis which Paul had seen approaching a few years before, which he had hoped to forestall by his journey to Jerusalem and his conference with the leaders there ("lest I had run or might run in vain"), but which broke with all its fury only as he returned to Jerusalem with what was meant to be an offering and seal of peace. Corinthians, Romans, Galatians - this surely is the order in which the letters would fall if they were arranged according to the importance which the Jewish controversy assumes in them. If, as I believe, that controversy did grow in intensity during the latter years of Paul's career until it culminated in his arrest and execution, the logical place for Galatians is not in the brief interval which separates Galatians and Romans, but after Romans, whether Paul had actually been arrested at the time or not. But attractive and plausible in many ways as this way of dating Galatians may be, there are obvious difficulties, and at the present stage it can be regarded only as an interesting possibility - which is in the end about all that can be said for any dating of Galatians. I do not want to leave the impression that this later date for Galatians is required by the chronological Translation by Frederick C. Grant 2o J. Weiss, Das Urchristentum. English and others under the title, The History of Primitive Christianity (New York, 1937), I, 386.

KNOX: THE PAULINE CHRONOLOGY

29

scheme it has been my purpose to outline in this paper. That scheme requires only that Galatians be placed during or after the Corinthian correspondence, and to that dating of Galatians I know of no serious objection. VI I am far from insisting that the validity of the chronology we have been examining has been proved. I do not believe that the validity of any chronology of Paul's life can be proved. The evidence is too meager and too indecisive. My case for the proposed scheme consists of the following claims, which can in my opinion be established, and which together invest the suggested chronology with no little plausibility: (1) It is the chronology at which we should arrive if we had available only the primary sources for the life of Paul, that is, his letters; (2) It involves conflict with the Acts narrative, our secondary source, at few more points than does the conventional chronology; (3) it permits easily (whereas the usual chronology does not) our acceptance of the more probable dates for the conversion of Paul and for his arrest in Jerusalem; (4) it is intrinsically more probable since it does not call for a fourteen year period of relative inactivity, or of relatively fruitless activity, before the beginning of a shorter period into which almost the whole of Paul's known missionary career must be crowded; and (5) it makes possible a more rational reconstruction of the apostle's life as an evangelist by bringing his conference with the leaders of the church at Jerusalem about the status of the gentile churches into the years when his letters reflect concern with that same issue and when the collection, Paul's decision to take it to Jerusalem himself, and his final arrest indicate its great and growing importance.

Sacramental Interest in the Fourth Gospel Author(s): Clarence T. Craig Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 31-41 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259353 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

SACRAMENTAL INTEREST IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL CLARENCE T. CRAIG OBERLIN

M

GRADUATE

SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY

ODERN interpretersare still at antithetical poles in their

judgment on the extent of sacramental emphasis in the Fourth Gospel. According to the recent expression of one American scholar, "For John, the two great rites of Christianity were of little importance."' According to the latest British commentator, "He is the foremost teacher on 'the sacramental principle'.'"2

1. How is it that competent scholars,- granting that they come to the evidence with widely differing prejudices,- can arrive at such opposing conclusions? The answer lies in part at least in their divergent positions on the unity of the gospel and the purpose of its author. I can only indicate briefly the position on each of these questions which I find convincing; any adequate examination would call for separate monographs. I do not deny the strong probability that the hand which added chapter 21 may likewise have made extensive changes in I E. C. Colwell, John Defends the Gospel, Chicago, 1936, 135, links this to the idea that the author writes for a group on a higher cultural level. See also Jas. Moffatt, "The Lord's Supper in the Fourth Gospel," The Expositor, Series VIII, VI, 1-22. Bultmann excludes nearly all sacramentalism from the gospel in his new Meyer commentary which is now appearing. 2 C. J. Wright, The Mission and Message of Jesus, New York, 1938, 691. Much more extreme positions on this side are cited later in this article. Probably the commonest position is that the evangelist seeks to correct false ideas about the sacraments without repudiating them. One of the most balanced treatments is to be found in H. Windisch, Johannes und die Synoptiker, Leipzig, 1926, 72-76. 31

32

JOURNAL

OF BIBLICAL

LITERATURE

the body of the gospel. All that I would urge is that we cannot discover the redactor's additions by any such simple procedure as isolating the ideas that seem to us to contradict the main position of the evangelist. It is quite another thing to demonstrate that they were contradictory to him. To illustrate from the problem at hand, many of the greatest mystics of the church have at the same time been devoted to its sacraments. Catherine of Genoa was one of that type, as Baron von Hilgel has shown.3 Because mysticism may exclude the necessity of sacraments to the mind of a modern scholar, it does not follow that a religious devotee who inherited them would come to the same conclusion. I do not see any need of following those scholars who excise the words which are inconvenient for the view of the gospel which they find more congenial.4 Turning to the second preliminary question, it seems inescapable to me that the Fourth Gospel was written not for outsiders, but for the Christian cult group. That is in no way disproved by the purpose expressed at the close, "These have been written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you might have life in his name."s Every sermon to church members today is preached for that purpose. The polemical interests and apologetic motives of this gospel have often been catalogued,6 but it is just the believers who need to have their faith stated in opposition to other positions. The kind of books which would be written for outside propaganda is illustrated by Justin and the other apologists. The Fourth Gospel breathes the intimacy of the cult group. The author begins with a hymn to the Logos, which is not identified as Jesus until almost the end.7 But surely the readers were expected to know at once who was meant. Ideas are thrown out quite without explanation, such as that the children of God 3 F. von Hilgel, The Mystical Element of Religion, New York, 1923, II, 87 f. M. Dibelius writes in RGG, 2 ed., III, 355, "Das J. ist religionsgeschichtlich betrachtet, eine Einheit." 4 Wellhausen, Spitta, Merx, Thompson, Bultmann, etc. eliminate 6 51-59. s John 20 31. 6 Especially in E. F. Scott, The Fourth Gospel, Edinburgh, 1908, 65-144. 7 117.

CRAIG: SACRAMENT IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL

33

are not born of flesh and blood;' the readers were not expected to find them strange. The scheme of constant misunderstanding of mysterious words of Jesus presupposes readers who already possess the key to the symbols used.9 Most important of all, the introduction of the figure of the Beloved Disciple assumes that the first readers were expected to understand more than was clearly stated. It would be pointless for the appendix to identify this figure as the author if the readers were outsiders who had no knowledge of either the son of Zebedee or the Beloved Disciple."o

If the Gospel of John had been written for those who knew nothing of the practice of baptism or the conduct of the eucharist, we might well conclude that its author had no interest in conveying the most elementary instruction on the sacraments. But in a gospel written for those with extended contact with the church, the cult practices could be taken for granted, and the emphases laid through the subtle form of teaching in which the evangelist delights. 2. The total point of view of the evangelist must be born in mind if we are to evaluate correctly the significance of two objections raised to a sacramental emphasis. We cannot conclude that baptism was unimportant for him because he omitted an account of the baptism of Jesus. The Christ of the Fourth Gospel was not one who should come to human hands to receive baptism, any more than he could be tempted of the devil, or suffer genuine agony in Gethsemane. I would quite grant, on the other hand, that we cannot build any conclusions on the statement that Jesus actually baptized during his early ministry, a statement contradicted in the next chapter." These passages involve the insoluble problem of sources incompletely worked up into the gospel. No connection is made with the teaching of the gospel, nor any indication of a fulfillment of the prophecy in 1 33 of one who would baptize with the Spirit. a113.

9 2 20, 3 4, 411, 7 35, 1136, etc. 1o 21 24. ," 3 22; 4 2.

34

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

Likewise, the omission of the so-called institution of the Lord's Supper does not indicate any minimizing of the eucharist. It would be truer to say that John verifies the critical position that there was no specific institution. I believe that the position has been definitely proven that the eucharistic celebrations in early Christianity were not of one type but two.'2 There was a Jerusalem type which was not a commemoration of the Last Supper, but a common meal continuing their table fellowship with the Lord and looking forward to reunion with him in the New Age. The Pauline type first stressed the commemoration of the parabolic action of Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed, as a memorial of the new dispensation inaugurated by that death. The eucharistic teaching of the Fourth Gospel is divorced from the Last Supper for the clear-cut reason that any "commemorative aspect" was entirely missing for its author.'3 The eucharist was a present communion with the exalted Lord. John does not preserve simply the early Jerusalem rite; but despite the fact that the eschatological hope has faded almost entirely from his picture, he stands much closer to the Didache prayers than to Paul. Much confusion arises in many current discussions because of a failure to distinguish clearly between the Last Supper and the Lord's Supper. The Fourth Gospel has its teaching on the Lord's Supper where the evangelist thought that it belonged. The Last Supper was simply a farewell meal where other emphases predominate. 3. In contrast to these misunderstandings of the evangelist's procedure, we would call attention to the fact that no other evangelist goes so far in insisting upon the necessity of the saving sacraments of the church. Nicodemus is told that he must be born of water as well as the Spirit. Three times are the words repeated that the man who was born blind had to wash in the 12 H. Lietzmann, Messe und Herrenmahl, Bonn, 1926. The position is developed in English in A. B. Macdonald, Christian Worship in the Primitive Church, Edinburgh, 1934, 123-154. '3 That is brought out by J. H. Bernard, I.C.C. Commentary, New York, 1929, pp. clxvi-clxxvi, and G. H. C. Macgregor, Eucharistic Origins, Edinburgh, 1929.

CRAIG: SACRAMENT IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL

35

pool of Siloam (sent).'4 Then and then only does faith in Christ bring sight (salvation). No other evangelist reports the baptism of the twelve disciples; but on his last night, conscious that he was returning to the Father, Jesus girds himself to wash their feet. He assures them that they cannot understand his action yet. When impulsive Peter protests, there comes the clear and unmistakable word, "If I do not wash you, you have no part in me."'s Without baptism there was no entrance into the life of the Spirit. How do the anti-sacramental interpreters attempt to escape these conclusions? We can pass by such positions as ascribing the word "water" to a redactor or glossator, for that has no adequate basis.'6 The most important rejection of a sacramental reference is offered by Odeberg, who cites Jewish mystical writings to prove that water stands for "the divine efflux," or seed, the fertilizing principle from the world of the Spirit.'7 Unquestionably there are references to water in the Fourth Gospel which have no connection with baptism;I8 but in the Nicodemus interview Jesus is not discussing "the water of life" in general but the mode of entrance into the kingdom of God. Since baptism was the rite of entrance, how could the author say "water," and not have that in mind? Allusions to the "divine efflux" and the "fertilizing principle" may also have been in his mind, just as the forgiveness of sins was with other early Christians. For, it is the very genius of ceremonies that the one act may be interpreted from quite varied backgrounds. '4 9 7, 11,15. Is 13 8. x6The position is examined by W. F. Howard, The FourthGospelin Recent

Criticism and Interpretation,London, 1931, 206-207. Colwell, op. cit., 136, holds that the author adds "spirit" to a source which read only "water." From the days of Justin and Tertullian, however, it has been understoodthat John 3 5 referredto baptism. '7 Hugo Odeberg, The Fourth Gospel, Uppsala, 1929, 48-71. His overemphasis on the importance of the Mandaean writings for the understanding of John belongs with the period when the book was written. 's 4 10-15; 7 37-39.

36

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

The foot-washing scene is undoubtedly difficult from any point of view. It has a definitely ethical bearing - an example of lowly service which is set by the Son of God. The new commandment of love significantly replaces the new diatheke.19 It is highly possible that this emphasis may be related to the agape or early Christian charitable meal. An example of humility within the brotherhood is set by the Lord of the church.20

But it is just as certain that the meaning of the foot-washing scene cannot be restricted to its ethical teaching. Central are the emphatic words of the necessity to receive this service, and then the enigmatical statement, "He who is bathed need only wash his feet to be clean all over."" Most of the interpreters who have accepted a sacramental emphasis see here an allusion to the necessity of both sacraments.22 The bathing is baptism; that is never repeated. The foot-washing is the eucharist which we continue to need. Despite the impressive list of representatives who support this interpretation, it must be excluded as improbable. Water is not elsewhere a symbol of the eucharist. Just as improbable is the suggestion of Hirsch that foot-washing refers to the daily forgiveness of sins which is necessary even after baptism.23 Forgiveness is a need almost never expressed in the Fourth Gospel; such an idea would involve much later conceptions of penance.24 The most probable interpretation to my. mind is that sug'9 13 34 versus I Cor 11 25. 2 Some have found here an attack on the arrogance of certain bishops because of their position at these meals (I Clem. 44). Such suggestions are always possible, yet never demonstrable. 21 13 10. 22 M. Goguel, L'Eucharistie, Paris, 1910, 195 f.; W. Heitmtiller, Die Schriften d. N. T., IV, Gottingen, 1920, 3 ed., 143-45; A. Loisy, Le Quatrikme E•vangile, Paris, 1921, 382-394; W. Bauer, HNT, 171 f.; G. H. C. Macgregor, The Gospel of John, London, 1928, 276. 23 E. Hirsch, Das vierte Evangelium, Tiibingen, 1936, 332. 24 Only in 20 23 is forgiveness even mentioned in the gospel. Possibly "cleanse" is a Johannine equivalent.

CRAIG: SACRAMENT IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL

37

gested by von Campenhausen.25 He calls attention to the transition from baptism by immersion to that by pouring. He assembles the archeological evidence to show that candidates had water poured over their heads so that the water covered nothing more than the feet. In this scene, therefore, in language that was perfectly understandable to those who had listened to debates over the necessity of immersion,- possibly advocated by former disciples of John and represented here by Peter in his demand to be washed all over - Jesus is made to defend the adequacy of baptism by pouring. "He who is bathed (by the word) need only wash his feet"; i. e., a baptism by pouring that covers the feet.26 4. Turning to the eucharist, we find a second categorical imperative. The discourse on the bread of life culminates in the word, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."27 Naturally the Jews cannot understand such predictions of cannibalism. Their query as to how this could be is answered just as the objection of Nicodemus, by the solemn reaffirmation of the necessity. Six times Jesus repeats that there is no communication of life without eating his flesh and drinking his blood.28 That such was 25 Hans von Campenhausen, "Zur Auslegung von John. 13 6-10," ZNW, XXXIII (1934), 259-71. He points out that Didache 7 1-2 already recognizes the validity of baptism by pouring. Early catacomb paintings show candidates for baptism standing in water that simply covers their ankles: J. Wilpert, Die Malereien der Katakomben Roms, 1903. This is substantiated by evidence from sarcophagi, and the earliest baptistries which would admit of water only 2-3 feet deep. 26 The alternative interpretation of von Campenhausen of XEXOpUEOS does not seem so probable. It could hardly refer to the action then taking place since the perfect tense is used. John 15 3 would point in the direction taken above unless it is insisted that the "word" should refer only to the statement following the foot-washing (13 10). The short text, omitting the words El iu 7rovi i7rbas found in M Or, Ter, and manuscripts of the Vulgate (followed by Tischendorf and Lagrange) would limit the meaning to the sufficiency of one baptism. 27 6 51. 28 6 53-58.

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

38

the view of the evangelist is supported by a gospel which begins the revelation of the glory of Christ by the changing of the water of Jewish purifications into the wine of the Spirit and the eucharist at the word of Jesus.29 It leads up to the last night when the life-giving union between Christ and his disciples is illustrated by the allegory of the vine and its branches.30 An essential way of abiding in Christ is by partaking of the fruit of the vine. Now how do the anti-sacramentalists attempt to turn the force of these facts? We may ignore here the position represented by Westcott that Jesus could not have given eucharistic teaching at this time because the Lord's Supper was not yet instituted.3' We shall turn again to Odeberg for the most plausible attempt to exclude a sacramental reference.32 He holds that the essential message of the gospel is participation in spiritual reality through the messenger from above. "Bread from heaven" falls under the category of the "divine spiritual efflux." It is as real food in the spiritual world as earthly bread is in the material. The son of man is this celestial bread. He must be eaten in the world of the spirit; he must enter into and be assimilated with the spiritual organism of the believer. This is stated realistically in order to impress the fact that it is no mere allegory. But anyone who understands the words of eating and drinking the flesh and blood to refer to the bread and wine of the eucharist takes the mistaken view of the Jews. Spiritual realities are not external, but must be so completely absorbed and assimilated that the most fitting expression is to eat spiritual food. It certainly is a wholesome reaction against attempts to derive Johannine sacramentalism directly from the primitive magic 29

2

1-11.

30 15 1-10. 31 B. F. Westcott, The Gospel of John, London, 1908. Doubtless this influenced the fathers who rejected a eucharistic interpretation; it was recognized, however, by Chrysostom, Cyril, Cyprian, Hilary, etc. Modern orthodox writers do not find this a difficulty; J. Lagrange, Pvangile selon Saint Jean, Paris, 1927, 183, speaks of the "revelation of the eucharist"; C. F. Nolloth, The Fourth Evangelist, London, 1925, 142: "The true significance of the eucharist only became manifest when the discourse in the synagogue at Capernaum was published."

32

Op. cit., 235-269.

CRAIG: SACRAMENT IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL

39

of "eating the god"33 to appeal to ideas from the early Jewish and oriental mysticism. If this were a passage in Philo or a Hermetic teacher who belonged to no cult group with a sacred meal, the claim would have more cogency. But John belonged to a group which had long since spoken of the bread of their meal as a "sharing in the body of Christ,"33and nearly contemporaneous with him "the flesh" of Christ is called the "medicine of immortality."34 Of course John must be interpreted by himself, not by other Christian authors, but how could he use such language and not expect his readers to understand a reference to the eucharistic celebration? We should rather picture the bread of life discourse as a communion sermon, and visualize the elder lifting the loaf as he solemnly repeats, "This is the bread which came down from heaven ...

He who eats of this

bread will live forever."36 The crucial support for a non-sacramental interpretation is sought in 6 63. Just as Paul would deflate the entire law by citing Genesis 15 6 in defense of his law-free gospel,37 it would appear as if some modern exegetes seek to negate all sacramentalism in John by this one verse. But it does not deny the realism of the preceding verses; rather, it binds together the whole exposition of the chapter. "It is the Spirit which gives life, the flesh profits nothing. The words which I have spoken to you are spirit and life." To eat of anything in the world of flesh cannot give life. But the eating which has just been described will become explicable when the Son of man ascends and bestows the Spirit. In partaking of the eucharist, therefore, they do not eat mere flesh, but they are fed by the life-giving Spirit.38 The 33The relevant evidence is assembled by W. Bauer, HNT Das Johannes-

evangelium,3 ed., Tiibingen, 1933, 100-101. 34 I Cor 10 16. 35 Ignatius, Rom 7 3; Phil 4 1; Smyrn 7 1, 11 2. 366 58. The liturgical use of these phrases is suggested by B. W. Robinson, The Gospel of John, New York, 1928. Eucharistic suggestions are clear in the actual feeding story, such as the command to let none of the fragments be lost (6 12). 37 Gal 3 6 f.; Rom 4 3 f. 38 J. E. Carpenter, The Johannine Writings, Boston, 1927, 435. The words may possibly refer to those pronounced over the elements, a forerunner of

the epiklesis.

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

40

words of Jesus in this context refer to what he has said about the necessity of the sacrament. No words of any kind have lifegiving quality of themselves. It is their content. Naturally, what the Johannine Jesus says here on the necessity of the eucharist in no way excludes what he repeats elsewhere on the necessity of believing.39 But it must be insisted just as strongly that those passages do not eliminate his assertion here that the word about the sacrament is an essential, life-giving word. Chapter six therefore sets forth the place of the eucharist in the mediation of the divine, spiritual life. It brings the climax to the three chapters devoted to a positive presentation of the Christian faith. Entrance is through a new birth from above, which takes place at baptism; it is a universal religion from which even a Samaritan woman can receive the "water of life"; but at its heart is the revealer who has come down from the Father to be the Savior of the world; he is the bread which through the eucharist sustains the life in the world of the Spirit. For the fourth evangelist then the eucharist is primarily a rite of communion. He does not think of the personal presence of the Savior at the table as host, though that may be found in 21 13 where the risen Christ distributes the food. The evangelist looks rather upon the elements as the channels of the divine life. The value of the community meal lies in the opportunity for the individual to participate therein. Such participation is not confined to one ceremony of the church, but this is their characteristic act of worship. Its meaning is defined by John in relation to his understanding of Christian experience. That view of the eucharist which finds in it an extension of the Incarnation has its first expression in the Fourth Gospel.40 It is of the essence of any incarnation of the Word that the spiritual operates through the means of the material. The view expressed in this paper would not for a minute ignore the number of times in which believing and knowing God are stressed without any sacramental reference. But the emphases 39 1 12, 3 16, 3 36, 5 24, 6 40, 47, 11 26, 20 39. I. Brilioth, Eucharistic Faith and Practice, London, 1931.

40

CRAIG: SACRAMENT IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL

41

of any author are not to be gathered by any purely statistical means. The central focus of the Christian message was from the very beginning the death of Jesus. The Fourth evangelist puts a new witness at the foot of the cross, the Beloved Disciple. We are given the solemn assurance that this man's testimony is reliable, for he bears witness of what he has seen. What is it that calls for these solemn words? That at the death of Jesus there flow from his pierced side blood and water.4' That death released the life-giving sacraments of the church. 41 19 34-35.

The Eagle(s) of Ezekiel 17 Author(s): Louise Pettibone Smith Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 43-50 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259354 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

THE EAGLE(S) OF EZEKIEL 17 LOUISEPETTIBONESMITH COLLEGE WELLESLEY

fact that the book of Ezekiel contains both prose and poetry is now generally recognized, but the relation between the poems and the prose sections is variously interpreted. To quote Professor G. A. Barton2 "At the moment the problem of Ezekiel is the most difficult and thorny in the whole Old Testament." Chapter 17 serves well as an illustration of the complicated combination of prose and poetry in the book, and the relation between the parts in this chapter is perhaps an indication of what is to be found elsewhere. The central section, an explanation of the preceding mashal, runs from verses 11-21.3It is obviously prose. An examination of the vocabulary of these verses shows a surprising number of the recurring phrases characteristic of the book of Ezekiel as a whole.

THE

1... . 1) m•' ' '3m 2) '~ 'n 3) '~inun,: 4)

,

i

... •

'

more than 60 times in Ezekiel 16 times 6 times and 7 more without the article 17 times: (There are 4 occurrences in the book of Isaiah)

A. Bertholet, Hesekiel, Tiibingen, 1936, p. xviii, cf. pp. 27, 52 f. etc.

G. A. Cooke, The Book of Ezekiel (ICC), 1937, p. xxviii. 2 The Haverford Symposium, New Haven, 1938, 65 f. 3 Bertholet, op. cit., 61; Cooke, op. cit., 181. Johannes Herrmann, Ezechiel,

Leipzig, 1924, 103, and Gustav H6lscher, Hesekiel, Giessen, 1924, 99, end the mashalat verse 9. 43

44

JOURNALOF BIBLICALLITERATURE

5) n~ Hi. "cut off" 6) 'iN ... 7)

.i

$?v

•yv

8) ntr y •r•m 9) nrln?b

14 times: (4 in Isaiah and 1 in Jeremiah before ch. 44) 5 times: 17 19 and 9 to; 11 21; 16 43; 22 31 6 times: 17 20and 14 13; 15 s; 18 24; 20 27; 39 26 4 times: 17 20 and 12 13; 19 s; 32 3 4 times: 17 21 and 5 to, 12; 12 14

The whole section is commonplace, containing few unusual words or phrases. occurs in connection with twn in 12 13, an exact parallel; and in 13 21. m• Hith. in 29 15. •r Hi. with n':n in 16 59 and 44 7. N "nr:stands also in 16 59, an exact parallel, from which 17 16, is are probably repeated. 6ve Ni. occurs in Ezekiel in this passage only. The Piel is found in 33 5. ,•-in

Except tho, these five words and phrases are common in "P" and the later literature although not frequent in Ezekiel. The vocabulary of verses 3-10 is of an entirely different character. Nine words occur, in Ezekiel, only in this chapter (five only here in the Old Testament). 7jn (adj.) The noun occurs in 317 and frequently in ch. 40-48

7t (leaf?) lL Five more only here and in the closely related chapters 19 and occurs 31: n'-7r, nwv,niN, n~n, (vine shoots). n m nitf '01•7 in The common in this the Old Testament. here only phrase only section is 03'1 0,0. The section 3-10 presents sufficient regularity of form to be printed as poetry in the Kittel edition of 1913 and in Professor Bewer's text. The commentaries of H-ilscher, Cooke, and Bertholet treat it as poetry. nip'i' (npn')

SMITH: THE EAGLE(S) OF EZEKIEL

17

45

The concluding verses 22--24are also metrical, but these verses are composed almost entirely of quotations from the first part of the chapter and phrases characteristic of the book as a whole. Exceptions are: 'i5n here only; nr also in 21 3; and me Qal in 7 to. The poem 3-10 is thus the basis of the chapter. As usual in dealing with a poetical passage, it is necessary to choose between assuming such irregularities in Hebrew metre that the term becomes a misnomer; drastically emending the text; or omitting a number of words and clauses as glosses, either added by an editor or inserted from the margin by copyists. In justification of the third of these methods, the prophetic Targum can be cited as an example of editorial additions since it offers innumerable examples of insertions for the purpose of explanation or edification.4 The Targum of verse 4 of this chapter is an excellent example, where 19 iYn • w~ is expanded to n~'~l~1

7 IJY: r 9,i'N Indeed • 11y ll' n3rn n, addition r'i. n such an hasi"even crept into the text of verse 15 of this chapter in one manuscript cited by Kennicut (# 249) where z ln 0nn- has been explained as on n1 mD t. A most convincing demonstration of the inevitable procedure by which explanatory glosses are later incorporated in the text was given in a paper by Dr. A. R. Siebens, Manuscripts of Bracton's Notebook and Variations in Bible Manuscripts, at the meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in New York in December 1937. If we assume then that the Hebrew text has been expanded in both these ways, our problem becomes chiefly one of omission. Our knowledge of the Pronunciation of Old Testament Hebrew as Professor Kahle and others have showns is not sufficient to allow the counting of syllables or even of word accents to serve as criterion, although of course unusual length of one ?brir

4 JBL, LII, 121-130: the Higher Critic." s P. Kahle, Masoreten des Westens, Stuttgart, upon Greek and Latin

XII-XIII, 103-274.

"The Prophetic Targum as Guide and Defence for des Ostens, Leipzig, 1913, 164 ff., 180-199; Masoreten 1927, 43-56. Alexander Sperber, "Hebrew Based Transliterations," Hebrew Union College Annual,

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

46

"member" is always suspect. We must depend chiefly on the parallelism and on the presence of grammatical or syntactical difficulties to indicate the inserted glosses. In the section under consideration verse 3bc provides two parallel pairs of nouns and adjectives; 3c and 4a balance: "And he took the cedar's top, its highest twig he plucked". sb is the usual form of a balanced purpose clause:6 "To turn to him its boughs that its roots be under him". The alternation of masculine and feminine suffixes in verses 6 and 7 reveals the presence of addition or confusion. In verse 3, .p173, "variegated cloth" as Hblscher pointed out7 seems out of place on an eagle (or vulture), and when we find the word three times in chapter 16, it is easy to recognize it as an intrusion here. p1u13n '

iy,

3d, illustrates

the typical

glossator's

associative

process on seeing the word rw. With this omitted, the imperfect with waw follows directly the preceding nouns, according to Gesenius-Kautzsch ? 111h. In 5a, Y-IHT?Y~ n3p' looks like the addition of a literal mind which objected to a cedar turning into a vine. One factor peculiar to the book of Ezekiel must also be considered - the astonishing amount of exact or almost exact repetition, which has impressed commentators from Calvin down. Calvin explaineds it as required by the stupidity of the prophet's audience. Kraetzschmar in 1900 suggested that we have in the present book two original recensions combined by an editor anxious to preserve both.9 Many of the repetitions of one or two words, like Wn',V'n in verses 9 and to, or up in verse 5, are so awkward that they are probably the work of a scribe in dire need of spectacles. But apart from what can be explained as copyist's blunders, one of the makers of the book of Ezekiel evidently enjoyed and constantly employed repetition of clauses and often of whole sentences with very slight variation in wording. 6 Cf. Gesenius-Kautzsch, ?114r, 165c. 7 H6lscher, op. cit., 97. Cf. also Cooke, op. cit., 186. 8 Calvin, Commentary on Ezekiel, Edinburgh, 1848, I, 139.

9 Richard Kraetzschmar,Das Buch Ezechiel,G6ttingen, 1900, p. xiii.

SMITH:

THE EAGLE(S)

OF EZEKIEL

47

17

Any reconstruction of the original poem is necessarily partial and tentative; but in spite of the impossibility of finality, the attempt is worth making both for the sake of the beauty of the poetic imagery when freed from some of the later accretions, and for the light which the glosses themselves often throw on the development of the book under consideration or of the Old Testament. I suggest then that, following the introductory formulae, we have an ancient poem of somewhat the following form.

-1: 1n3b Inv

....

11OD

im-'nnpT!nT I1 om

0:'1"I'DD73

'.IIimn

nrml

5

10

V. 5 to from the root rpr overflow, (Dt 11 4)6 and l near probably parallel ,•a m. V. 6ab The transposition indicated by the gender of the pronominal suffixes. V. 7 translate "twined" after the Greek 7rcptrXc•-yvur?; 17D the root appears in Arabic with this meaning. V. 8s y corrected from ?m as often in Ezekiel. The eagle great! Of spreading pinions, And he took the cedar's top, And he brought it to Canaan land,

Great of wing! of plumage thick! its highest twig he plucked. set it in a fertile field,

48

JOURNALOF BIBLICALLITERATURE

By plentiful waters, To turn to himself its branches, And it branchedand became a vine, And it thrust out branches, It twined its roots upon him, Upon good soil, To make boughs, to raise fruit, Will he not tear up its roots? Behold will the transplanted prosper

a flowing stream, he put it; that its roots be under him. spreadingand low in stature. and put forth leaves. and its branches from the garden, upon plentiful waters. to become a noble vine. And strip off its fruits? at the coming of the east wind?

This has been expanded by editors and glossators at various times. V. 3. TMVp-n 17 inserted to explain r~1ir (in Ezekiel here "I? t and in verse 5 only); the last word, taken over from the ,npn, chapter. preceding aI H i. e. "that's where he got the cedar". 1]1:r, V. 4. Itn c' n inserted to make the poem fit the exile 'YT the comes the next clause. from Iro better, V. 5. Fn-N7y"nt np'f a literal-minded addition to prevent a cedar from turning into a vine. rnpa copyist's blunder, from

rp',i.

V. 6. I19 '),1l1 repetition of ]M3"'1'1 (6a), with gender corrected. V. 7a An almost exact copy of verse 3, varied just enough to make it impossible to regard it as balanced couplets. It was probably inserted for increased emphasis and pl•t nii added to make connection with what follows.Io nNri, V. 7b ~'rv1'H1 the masculine ending here seems to be due to 6b. G and S read the feminine. Possibly the whole word is an insertion from 6b, if so o is original; but the parallelism is better with vrni'-rn, and, yon which occurs also in Ezekiel 31 4 and 34 29 as well as in Isaiah seems a probable gloss on rmrny which is found only in this chapter of Ezekiel and in Song of Songs. ~nmm probably added to the a'r of the next verse, nipv,6 if the form can be from pm m'•~ (cf. Ez 3 13) it may belong although 'o For a discussion of the usual interpretation of this verse, emending Irnr to i"nswith GSV compare below.

SMITH: THE EAGLE(S) OF EZEKIEL

17

49

with the anomolous niwn6p in v. 9 as a fragment of a lost the ,nit couplet. 1' -rn9r from n~lrni of V. 6, was added here ,nro, to fit the mn nipmo into the sentence. mrin V. 8a. r~ln ~'Ri inserted to prepare the reader for , ,rn~ in verse io. 8b. Probably one of the three phrases should be omitted. V. 9 rni... .n a usual introductory formula in Ezekiel. , verse. v'= inserted from the concluding

nr?n

and min, cf. v. to l•',

•'in.

The remainder of the verse is hopelessly confused. Is rlqlnperhaps a verb rather than the doubtful "leaf"? •%i?'ny •n t• 5nPiY1 sounds like a late tag, the :" DyCis from verse 15 where it fits. in~vo repetition from nr above. ,imvr V. to v 'nrainr dittography from verse 9. Evidently these glosses were not all made at one time nor by the same hand. Some of them are inconsistent with the prose explanation, for instance the eagle's trip to Lebanon for the cedar; others emphasize points in the application. It is difficult to decide whether the poem and the following prose are by the same author, or whether an old poem, perhaps a song originally referring only to the culture of the vine, has been adapted to the political crisis. The extraordinary difference in vocabulary in the sections supports the latter hypothesis. Unless the final clause of v. 127~6=1N W1~N N=I1is itself a gloss, it would seem probable that the interpretation of W1j in v. 4

as "merchant" which led to the insertion of ? ly is ir•x n•," that of the author of the prose section. (G here reads tLrre•m ,•U~yEV,

equating the city with Jerusalem.)

The original poem, so far as it can be recovered, tells only of the inevitable failure of a well planned enterprise. The author of the prose section fits the detail most ingeniously, if not wholly consistently, to the narrative of II Chron 36 and Jer 37 (against II Kings 24 7) emphasizing the certainty of the failure of Zedekiah's revolt. One point emerges clearly. The prose explanation gives not the slightest indication of the conventional allegorical interpretation, according to which the poem described two different eagles, representing respectively Nebuchadrezzar and Hophra

50

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

of Egypt, while the cedar and the vine stand for the exiles in Babylon and the people left in Palestine. This interpretation is apparently as old as the Septuagint since the Greek v. 7a read Erepos, i. e. -im for rint. The Syriac and Latin follow the Greek; the Targum, however, keeps -riN. The author of the prose section is not using allegory; he is merely applying the two motifs of the poem, the planting of the cedar in fertile ground and the disaster certain to befall the spreading plant, to the historical situation of Zedekiah as he understood it. There is a somewhat similar repetition in chapter 19. Verses in almost identical context. If the and 3 5 repeat minrin , clauses in vv. 4 and 9 referring to Babylon and Egypt are a later addition" we have in chapter 19 a poem in which the land is the mother (compare Hosea) and the people are the whelp caught in the trap, another example of a poem later expanded and applied to a specific situation. If a similar adaptation of poems is found, as I believe it is, in other parts of the book, we have a reasonable explanation of the fact that certain parts of the book of Ezekiel present an exceedingly varied and unusual vocabulary while the book as a whole makes an impression of uniformity and contains frequent recurrence of characteristic phrases. The poems come from many sources and dates; the book as a whole, except for relatively unimportant glosses and repetitions for added emphasis, from one author. 11

Cf. C. Torrey, Pseudo-Ezekiel,New Haven, 1930, 76, 110.

Problems of Method in Studying Philo Judaeus Author(s): Erwin R. Goodenough Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 51-58 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259355 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

PROBLEMS OF METHOD IN STUDYING

PHILO JUDAEUS ERWIN R. GOODENOUGH YALE

UNIVERSITY

of Philo has recently been opened afresh in a has come to the Journal for review,' and which is so important for its questions, if not for its answers, that more space must be given it than is ordinarily allowed a review. The problem V61lkersets is first how we are to approach Philo in order to understand him, and, implicit in this, is the problem of the relation of Philo to his Greek and Jewish backgrounds as well as of Christianity's relation to him. V61ker's Introduction (pp. 1-47) is a description of the methodological problem and an extremely valuable survey of PhiloForschung to the present. The difficulties of Philonic study are at first set forth: the variety of his literary form, the difficulties of his style, the problem of his originality or dependence upon sources, the variety of influences which have been at work in his thought, and, above all, the piecemeal presentation of his major works in which continuity of thought is always difficult to discover. On this last V6lker comes out positively: Philo's works are piecemeal, and hence "All efforts to discover in our author great and consistently elaborate connections, all attempts at a strict systematization, cannot achieve their goal because they do not properly observe the vacillating, fluctuating, and, in the last analysis, fragmentary character which is peculiar to

THEnewproblem book which

x Fortschritt und Vollendung bei Philo von Alexandrien: eine Studie zur Geschichte der Frommigkeit, by Walther V6lker, Leipzig, Hinrichs, 1938, pp. xiv, 350, RM 27.-(Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, XLIX, i). 51

52

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

this writer ...

All attempts

to reconstruct

a unified system in

Philo must fail" (p. 7). Philo's statements about the Logos and mediating Powers, for example, Valker feels to be so contradictory that he concludes Philo was simply commenting upon the Scriptures, verse by verse, with no attempt at consistency. Philo belongs, V6lker is sure, to no "School Tradition" (p. 10). He can be understood only by getting to the kernel of the Philonic thought world without disturbing this fragmentary and constantly metamorphosing fluid in which his ideas are presented (p. 12). Into what divergencies these difficulties have led the student of Philo Vl6ker now demonstrates in a brilliant review of Philo literature. No such review has been written since the essays of Freudenthal in 1869 and of Cohn in 1893.2 Not only are the main studies listed with a host of minor writings, but the relation of each to the others is presented, with a keen evaluation of each and a most illuminating review of how the interests of different generations of Philonic scholars were related to the current philosophies of those generations. It is a most sobering chapter for those who think that we can ever hope to write history "wie es eigentlich gewesen ist," above all the history of ideas. The chief modern perversion in the study of Philo, V61ker thinks, is to approach him in the "religionsgeschichtliche" spirit. That Ritter saw traces of the "Orient"; Brehier, Pascher, La Grange, Turowski, and others, of Egypt; Reitzenstein, of Persia; Schmidt, of Hermetica; Leisegang, of Dionysus; Cumont and Cerfaux, of "astro-mysticism"; and myself of all these and others together; such contradiction vitiates the whole method to his mind, and forces the Philo student to go back and begin all over again. That fresh beginning the author is attempting. The rest of us are naturally interested in the major premises upon which he will base his own study, and which, it is suspected, will color his work as much as ours have done. Philo's contribution to 2

See the Bibliography of Philo Judaeus by Howard L. Goodhart and

myself, nos. 530 and 534.

GOODENOUGH: METHOD IN STUDYING PHILO

53

New Testament writers, directly or indirectly, or any debt of them to the Hellenistic Jewish School he excludes a priori (pp. 41-42). This exclusion is based, we see in the Preface, upon still deeper axioms. For there V61ker says that Philo is not a mystic, and must not be called by such a term whether as a follower in any sense of the ideas of Mystery Religions, or in the more general meaning of Evelyn Underhill, for example. The representation that Philo is a mystic has been motivated, he says, by the desire to make mysticism arise outside of Christianity, and hence "to discredit it [Christian mysticism] at once in its beginning because of its supposed extra-Christian origin. My exposition will answer this; or precisely the Philonic picture of the rXEaos discloses the essential distinction from Christian mysticism. Whoever is convinced that there can be no true mysticism without the 'z' Xpto-rQp'and without the sacrament will hold it as antecedently (schon) impossible in itself that Philo, from the different structure of his piety, could have transmitted essential impulses to Christian mysticism" (p. xii, cf. xiv). This is certainly one place to begin, and the end is in sight from the start. No one can have the least objection to V61lker's defining his own terms, in this case limiting mysticism as he does to Cv Xpto-r4' and the sacraments, if that pleases him. But it is quite another matter to say that those of us who have defined the word differently, and so see a connection between Philo and Christian mysticism, do so "um diese durch ihren angeblich ausserchristlichen Ursprung gleich in ihrem Beginn zu discrediti?ren." Further, in order to settle the matter of Philo's mystic character or of his relations with Christianity or with the pagan religions, V61ker says he will begin afresh, disregarding all the confusion of his predecessors, to study the text itself. Philo "will be explained out of himself, not out of Plutarch, Posidonius, or the Mystery Religions." Only when one has thus got to the kernel of Philo's own piety can one begin to seek his sources and compare him with the New Testament. No one could object to the idea that Philo is both first and last to be understood from his own statements. It is a vitiating petitio principis to assume that Philo must be understood from

54

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

the Mysteries: V6lker does not see that he has substituted for that just as irrational an assumption, that Philo must be understood from the Psalms and other books of Jewish piety. For the fact is that we cannot read Philo in vacuo at any stage of our study of his writings. None of us with a Jewish or Christian education and classical training can possibly read Philo simply of and for himself. The same is true of one who has read the material on the Greek Mysteries and mystic philosophy. No one brought up to love the Fourth Gospel, and to orient his emotions in its ideology, can possibly read Philo's passages on the Logos, for example, without a constant sense of comparison. To demand that we begin by reading Philo without such comparisons in mind is obviously to begin where Valker does not, and cannot, begin himself, and his Preface shows that he is really making no attempt to do so. It is equally the fact that Philo is frequently not intelligible "out of himself." No one would dream of suggesting that we must wipe from our minds all memory of Judaism, of the Psalms and prophets, the Jewish cultus and law, in order to understand him. His language, his references, all compel us to go to Jewish sources to make them intelligible. Precisely the same thing is true of the Greek references of Philo. A great part of his writing is quite unintelligible to one who does not know Greek mystic philosophy. For example, what is there in Judaism to explain Philo's amazingly beautiful allegory of the marriage of Isaac with Rebecca, in which she is Virtue or Sophia, wearing the material world as a bracelet on her arm, coming down from her camel as Sophia comes to man, veiled as are the secrets of the mystery, and at last united with him in the tent of Sarah, so that Isaac is thereby at last reunited with his mother, also Sophia? "From her love," Philo prays, "may I never cease." What does it all mean anyway? Reference to Egyptian traditions, to Plutarch, makes this allegory as intelligible as it is beautiful, and only such reference. And what does it mean when Philo says that he was initiated by Moses into the divine Mysteries? We can, of course, as V61lkerdoes, ignore such passages altogether, but in view of the great quantity of them I collected in By Light, Light it seems that to ignore them is hardly

GOODENOUGH: METHOD IN STUDYING PHILO

55

to understand Philo "out of himself." Philo can no more be understood in isolation than any other human being. Language is always a social thing, and we can understand what any individual is adding to contemporary thought only by understanding the language and what it would have meant to the author's contemporaries. If Philo, or Paul, uses the language of Mystery Religions it is they, not modern perversity, who force us to look to the language of those Mysteries before we can say whether either the Jew or Christian is using that language formally or with real mystic meaning. For whatever the religious experience which Christians had in Christ, and Philo had through allegory, both, in V61lker'slanguage, "borrowed the terminology" of the Mysteries to explain that experience to others. It cannot then be more perverse to explain that language out of Plutarch than to explain other phrases out of the Psalms, if in a given case Philo's language finds a natural explanation in either source. The question still remains how close Philo is to the piety of either. But that is not a question which can be solved without close scrutiny of all possible sources for understanding. No historian of religion that I know has assumed that all Philo is to be explained from the Mysteries as confidently as V61ker has assumed that none of him is to be thus explained. To reproduce here the extended analysis of V61ker's work which I have made for myself is impracticable. Beginning with the doctrine of God, then of sin, he traces step by step the process of "completion," emancipation from sin. His procedure is throughout basically the same. At each step he shows that Philo had two ways of expressing himself, a Greek and a Jewish. The Greek expression V61ker presents, limiting himself to those statements of Philo which can be paralleled with statements of the formal philosophers of Greek schools, especially the Stoic and Platonic. Pythagorean parallels he never discusses. He always conspicuously omits those passages which are like Greek mystic writers. Having reduced the Greek element thus to the formal, he then adduces passages which seem more Jewish in inspiration, and then reasons, in substance: Philo's motivation was religious (which is true); the Greek elements (which V61ker adduces) are not religious; therefore Philo must have been basically Jewish

56

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

in his motivation, and the Greek elements are all "Nebenstr6mungen," an essentially extraneous terminology which Philo has put on, but which never affected his basic meaning. To the historians of religion the problem of Philo has centered in the apparent duality of his religious motivation, Greek and Jewish, each of which, we have felt, must be evaluated if we are to come, as Abraham came in the Logos, to find a higher principle in which these two were united into the single religious point of view or experience of Philo himself. And I cannot see how that view of the problem is challenged by V6lker's reasoning. If comparison of Philo with both Greek and Jewish sources of all kinds is not only necessary, but will be going on in the mind of any educated reader in spite of himself, it seems we must make a virtue of the necessity and take it frankly as our method. We shall read Philo as much as we can "out of himself," then go to sources of all kinds for illumination, then come back to Philo to see whether suggestions of new meaning really belong in his thinking, then go back for further information as the better understood Philo has pointed us more definitely in some direction, and so on back and forth. This is what our unconscious minds will be doing if our conscious minds do not, and it seems much safer to keep the process in the conscious. It is a blundering methodology which lacks the precision of V61lkers' syllogism, but nothing is so dangerous as logic from bad premises. As men we must proceed in this way whether we like it or not. Then let us do so openly and without implying that the other is more driven by ulterior motives than ourselves. Another of V61lker'smethodological axioms is that Philo must be understood as a whole, and that he cannot be approached through a selection of passages, some of which are arbitrarily made decisive for Philo's thinking. V61lkeris denouncing us all for doing what, of course, he must do himself. In point of fact there is no other way of reconstructing the ideas of any man of the past but that of assembling the various passages in which he discusses them. In a writer whose form of presentation is as unsystematic as Philo's, where discussion of almost any point may appear in almost any connection, this is all the more obviously necessary. The real crux of the matter is in the word

GOODENOUGH: METHOD IN STUDYING PHILO

57

"arbitrary." If any scholar selects passages as decisive on a point where I think other passages are decisive, I am going to feel inevitably that his selection is arbitrary. What is left for me, then, is not to attack the other scholar's method of demonstration by passages, but to show good ground for thinking that the passages which seem to me decisive are so rather than the one which the other scholar has selected. This necessity for arguing from selected passages shows again that understanding Philo out of himself is the ideal stage which we probably never can reach. For we shall never agree on the selection, since the selection must always come as much out of ourselves as out of Philo. We must also applaud every word which V6lker says about the dangers of systematizing the thought of an author who presents himself to us in so unsystematic a form. Yet I know no recent writer who has so systematized Philo as V6lker himself, since I can see no distinction between the extreme simplification Vdlker has produced and systematization. Most of us who have read Philo have felt that he was not so simple as Vdlker represents, and I predict we shall continue so to feel. The Jewish piety which V61ker presents was certainly there in Philo. He believed and felt all that V61ker ascribes to him: but he believed and felt much more besides. In his life two types of religion, of approach to God, indeed of Gods, had come together, each quite different from the other, and each unable to displace the other. Such a situation is not at all abnormal. The history of religion is full of parallels. The mystic philosophy of Philo's day presented him with a deity which was quite unlike the God of Amos or Ezra. The vacillation between the two which Philo shows in different passages was caused precisely by the fact that he believed passionately in both. They were blended in Philo's emotions, if not adequately in his mind, though Philo made one of the heroic attempts of history to reconcile two such conflicting views. To suggest that Philo was a mystic to whom Judaism was a "Nebenstr6mung," as, I now see, I might be understood to have done in By Light, Light, is wrong. Such was never my intention. Yet to assert that the Greek side, even the Greek religious side, of Philo was unessential is equally erroneous.

58

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

Philo held both. It seems to me obvious that Philo joined the two in his mind by associating the Jewish attitude with the letter of the Torah to which all men had access, and the mystical with the esoteric or allegorical meaning intelligible only to the spiritually gifted, and by convincing himself that as he could read both of them in or into the Torah, both were Jewish. However that may be, the point is that V61ker has nowhere attempted to ask about this mystical side of Philo, has indeed deliberately and by principle refused to discuss it, even a priori denied its existence, so as to unify Philo's personality, if not his writings, in "Jewish piety." It is quite true that the first consideration in studying Philo must be that of method.

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Donald W. Riddle Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 59-60 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259356 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

BOOK REVIEWS NEW TESTAMENT

SECTION

Origins of the Gospels, by Floyd V. Filson, New York, Abingdon, 1938, pp. 216,

$2.00. Professor Filson has produced a book which adequately fills an important niche in the structure of New Testament scholarship. It treats the questions of gospel origins; a subject in which there is no dearth of studies. But the distinctive feature of this volume is that it addresses itself to a certain public, and it serves this definitely circumscribed purpose most effectively. The aim is to present to ministers, in untechnical language, the findings of recent research. All too seldom does a scholar who is himself accomplished in research limit himself to so practical an objective. Professor Filson has succeeded admirably in the task which he has undertaken. After introducing his subject in a chapter which attractively sets forth the usefulness of "critical" studies to the minister, the author gives a competent and useful summary of textual criticism, and then proceeds to a fair and balanced exposition of the question of the original language of the gospels. While his own position is that the gospels were written in Greek, Professor Filson presents the considerations of Aramaic as the original language with objective impartiality. Next, a review of the various studies in Form-criticism brings the reader to the point from which the synoptic problem is studied; it is significant, and indicative of the contemporaneousness of the book, that this order is followed, rather than beginning with the older theories of source analysis. In two succinct chapters the four gospels are studied in the light of the review of questions of origins already made. No important work on gospel origins has been missed in this book; references to literature are made in the body of the work, with supplementary bibliographical references at the end of chapters and sections. The author has a remarkable gift for digesting and presenting in brief, simple language the contents of highly technical studies. 59

60

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

It must not be supposed, however, that the book merely presents the results of the researchof other scholars. ProfessorFilson speaks for himself. Particularly in the two chapters in which the four gospels are discussed his contribution is positive and individual. Impartial as he is, the reader is never left in doubt of the author's judgments, and without being invidious he capably guides his reader into soundly based views of moot points. Nor is it to be thought that Professor Filson "talks down" to his public; the effectiveness with which he presents his materials to ministers is indeed one of the reasons for the success of the book in achieving its intended purpose, but the author respects his readers and demands much of them. What he gives them sufficiently rewardstheir industry. ProfessorFrederick C. Grant offers a foreword. This volume deserves wide circulation; if it is widely read its usefulnesswill be profound. DONALDW. RIDDLE

The Apocrypha:an American Translation,by Edgar J. Goodspeed,Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1938, pp. viii, 493, $3.00. When the Prince Consort died, Queen Victoria had a granite cairn erected in memory of him at Balmoral, on which she had a verse from the book of Wisdom carved. "He being made perfect, in a short time fulfilleda long time; for his soul pleased the Lord. Therefore hastened He to take him away from the wicked". This was in 1862, and the choice of a text from an uncanonical scripture vexed some of the orthodox godly in the land. Dr. Goodspeed's volume is not likely to encounterthis attitude at the present day in the United States. It is more likely to meet a prevailingindifference,for the Apocrypha, one is afraid, belongs to the class of books which have no readers, i. e. too few. Scholarsof course know these fourteen scripturesfrom the Greek canon of the Old Testament, but, apart from one or two select passagesin the lectionary of the Episcopal Church, their contents are unfortunately unknown to the generaland even to the religious public. It is a real service to have them rendered into lucid, accurate English. Shakespearecalled his two daughters Susanna and Judith, and we know where he went for the names. Dr. Goodspeed's Americantranslation may not lead to a similar vogue, but at least it will deprive his fellow-countrymenof the excuse that they cannot get access to this literature in their own tongue. The book is tastefully printed, and it

Review: [untitled] Author(s): James Moffatt Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 60-62 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259357 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

60

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

It must not be supposed, however, that the book merely presents the results of the researchof other scholars. ProfessorFilson speaks for himself. Particularly in the two chapters in which the four gospels are discussed his contribution is positive and individual. Impartial as he is, the reader is never left in doubt of the author's judgments, and without being invidious he capably guides his reader into soundly based views of moot points. Nor is it to be thought that Professor Filson "talks down" to his public; the effectiveness with which he presents his materials to ministers is indeed one of the reasons for the success of the book in achieving its intended purpose, but the author respects his readers and demands much of them. What he gives them sufficiently rewardstheir industry. ProfessorFrederick C. Grant offers a foreword. This volume deserves wide circulation; if it is widely read its usefulnesswill be profound. DONALDW. RIDDLE

The Apocrypha:an American Translation,by Edgar J. Goodspeed,Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1938, pp. viii, 493, $3.00. When the Prince Consort died, Queen Victoria had a granite cairn erected in memory of him at Balmoral, on which she had a verse from the book of Wisdom carved. "He being made perfect, in a short time fulfilleda long time; for his soul pleased the Lord. Therefore hastened He to take him away from the wicked". This was in 1862, and the choice of a text from an uncanonical scripture vexed some of the orthodox godly in the land. Dr. Goodspeed's volume is not likely to encounterthis attitude at the present day in the United States. It is more likely to meet a prevailingindifference,for the Apocrypha, one is afraid, belongs to the class of books which have no readers, i. e. too few. Scholarsof course know these fourteen scripturesfrom the Greek canon of the Old Testament, but, apart from one or two select passagesin the lectionary of the Episcopal Church, their contents are unfortunately unknown to the generaland even to the religious public. It is a real service to have them rendered into lucid, accurate English. Shakespearecalled his two daughters Susanna and Judith, and we know where he went for the names. Dr. Goodspeed's Americantranslation may not lead to a similar vogue, but at least it will deprive his fellow-countrymenof the excuse that they cannot get access to this literature in their own tongue. The book is tastefully printed, and it

BOOK REVIEWS

61

contains two pictures of Judith and of Tobias by CristoforeAllori, the Florentine artist about the beginning of the seventeenth century, Guido Reni's Susanna, and Raphael's picture of Heliodorusbeing ejected from the Temple. The plan of the translation excludes notes, but Dr. Goodspeed prefixes a few words to each book. The Wisdom of Solomon he assigns to a late period in 50 B. C.-40 A. D., "perhaps in the reign of Caligula" (as earlier editors like Goodrick had thought), and decides in favour of two authors; the latest editor, Johannes Fichtner in Eissfeldt's Handbuch zum Alten Testament, ex-

plains the differencesof tone and style by arguingthat a single writeremployed a variety of sources, a theory for which there seems more probability; the falling off, after the ninth or tenth chapter, with the weakening of literary power as the denunciations grow stronger, is explicable on this hypothesis. The textual problems of books like Tobit and Ecclesiasticus must have cost Dr. Goodspeedmuch labour, far more than the general readercan understand. But here as elsewhere this is in the background. The translation reads smoothly, and only those who have had occasion to handle the intricacies of the text can appreciate the editor's skill and judgment. The verse chosen by Queen Victoria appears thus: "Being perfected in a little while he has fulfilled long years, for his soul pleased the Lord; therefore he hurried from the midst of wickedness" (4 13,14); the traditional version, is based on the Vulgate, must probably yield to the view that ir~•v'rEv intransitive here. I hope it is not traditionalist prejudice, however, that makes one regret the substitution of "Jeshua" for "Jesus" as the original author of Ecclesiasticus. In Tobit 3 8 the Syriac text surely reflects the original: not "Do you not know that you strangle your husbands?" but "It is you who strangle your husbands," just as "I will not conceal anything from you" looks like an abbreviation of what was the original sententious text of the Syriac version, "I will show you all the truth and will not conceal anything from you" (12 11). But no part of the book reads more attractively than the story of Tobit. The alterations in the "Let us now praise famous men" passage of Ecclesiasticus restore much of the real sense. "Famous" becomes "distinguished." Possibly "prophecy"had to be kept, in "broughtmen tidings through their prophecy," but the ordinary reader, it is to be feared, will confine this to prediction. Altogether this is a timely, welcome book. Dr. Goodspeed points out how the Apocrypha has been unduly ignored by translators, except in the case of

62

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

one or two books. He cannot find that it has been rendered into English as a whole since Coverdale in 1535, "or that the Greek Apocrypha as a whole, that is, all the books except II Esdras, have ever before been directly translated from Greek into English." Well, here they are at last, thanks to the enterprise and ability of a scholar who has kept the unlearned as well as the learned in mind. JAMES MOFFATT

The Politics of Philo Judaeus: Practice and Theory, by Erwin R. Goodenough, with a General Bibliography of Philo, by Howard L. Goodhart and Erwin R. Goodenough, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1938. Pp. xii+348, $3.75. Of the outstanding Jews of the Hellenistic and Roman periods, Josephus and Philo are best known to the Christian world. They are quoted in the Patristic literature and are spoken of with great reverence. The Talmud, on the other hand, does not mention either of them, directly or indirectly, apparently ignorant of their ever having existed. (The opinion that the word Peloni in Tosefto Yebamot 3; Yoma, 66b, refers to Philo, may be dismissed as a mere conjecture without any scientific basis whatsoever.) Josephus was primarily a historian; only one of his works is of a polemical character. Philo was a philosopher. In his works he strove to impart to the hellenistic world the religion and ethics of the Jews, and to acquaint his own people with the culture of the Greeks. Philo also wrote treatises dealing with historical events. Two, In Flaccum and Legatio ad Gaium are extant. There exists sufficient evidence in the former book for the assumption that Philo also wrote a third book against Sejanus. The question arises as to Philo's purpose in writing these books. Prof. Goodenough advances a very interesting and original hypothesis. In Flaccum, he claims, was written as a warning to the new governor of Egypt not to follow Flaccus in persecuting the Jews, for God will visit His retribution upon him also, and Legatio ad Gaium, he wrote "for presentation to that emperor (Claudius)," also with the intent of warning him against persecuting the Jews. According to Prof. Goodenough, Philo is revealed in these two documents as "a fearless and experienced politician, whose ideas for the practice and theory of statecraft are of great importance." Philo's motives, then, in writing these two books were purely political. As striking as this theory is, it is not fully convincing to this reviewer. As was said before, there is good reason to assume that Philo also wrote a third book against Sejanus, who instigated Tiberius against the Jews of Rome, and

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Solomon Zeitlin Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 62-64 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259358 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

62

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

one or two books. He cannot find that it has been rendered into English as a whole since Coverdale in 1535, "or that the Greek Apocrypha as a whole, that is, all the books except II Esdras, have ever before been directly translated from Greek into English." Well, here they are at last, thanks to the enterprise and ability of a scholar who has kept the unlearned as well as the learned in mind. JAMES MOFFATT

The Politics of Philo Judaeus: Practice and Theory, by Erwin R. Goodenough, with a General Bibliography of Philo, by Howard L. Goodhart and Erwin R. Goodenough, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1938. Pp. xii+348, $3.75. Of the outstanding Jews of the Hellenistic and Roman periods, Josephus and Philo are best known to the Christian world. They are quoted in the Patristic literature and are spoken of with great reverence. The Talmud, on the other hand, does not mention either of them, directly or indirectly, apparently ignorant of their ever having existed. (The opinion that the word Peloni in Tosefto Yebamot 3; Yoma, 66b, refers to Philo, may be dismissed as a mere conjecture without any scientific basis whatsoever.) Josephus was primarily a historian; only one of his works is of a polemical character. Philo was a philosopher. In his works he strove to impart to the hellenistic world the religion and ethics of the Jews, and to acquaint his own people with the culture of the Greeks. Philo also wrote treatises dealing with historical events. Two, In Flaccum and Legatio ad Gaium are extant. There exists sufficient evidence in the former book for the assumption that Philo also wrote a third book against Sejanus. The question arises as to Philo's purpose in writing these books. Prof. Goodenough advances a very interesting and original hypothesis. In Flaccum, he claims, was written as a warning to the new governor of Egypt not to follow Flaccus in persecuting the Jews, for God will visit His retribution upon him also, and Legatio ad Gaium, he wrote "for presentation to that emperor (Claudius)," also with the intent of warning him against persecuting the Jews. According to Prof. Goodenough, Philo is revealed in these two documents as "a fearless and experienced politician, whose ideas for the practice and theory of statecraft are of great importance." Philo's motives, then, in writing these two books were purely political. As striking as this theory is, it is not fully convincing to this reviewer. As was said before, there is good reason to assume that Philo also wrote a third book against Sejanus, who instigated Tiberius against the Jews of Rome, and

BOOK REVIEWS

63

was later executed by the Emperor. That Philo wrote such a book is evident from the opening paragraph of In Flaccum, and especially from the closing sentence of the same book, which reads as follows: "such was also the end of Flaccus" (roLaDra Kalc bXKKOS). This seems very much like a reference to an earlier book on a similar theme, namely, the punishment of Sejanus. Assuming that In Flaccum and Legatio ad Gaium were written as warnings to the successors of Flaccus and Caligula, the question arises to whom did Philo write his book against Sejanus as a warning, since we know that Macro who followed Sejanus was forced by Caligula to take his own life, and Macro himself was not unfriendly to the Jews. It seems to me that the motive of these books is primarily theological rather than political. Philo wanted to demonstrate to his own people God's concern for them. He may punish them, but He will never permit them to be destroyed. Philo illustrated his lesson with the three events which occurred during his own lifetime. Sejanus wanted to destroy the Jews of Rome; Flaccus, the Jews of Alexandria; and Caligula aimed to uproot the entire Jewish religion. God, however, destroyed them. This is in accord with the theology of Philo as expressed throughout his writings. This theory is substantiated by the longer title of his treatise against Flaccus, as found in some manuscripts (KarT -6O Philo was influenced, no doubt, by the JIXaKKOV rept rpovotas). P70oL Biblical book of Esther, and by the books of Judith, the second and the third Maccabees. Philo makes Flaccus repent in the end, as the author of the second Maccabees makes Antiochus IV do. Prof. Goodenough assumes that In Flaccum was written for non-Jewish readers, since included in it are descriptions of certain Jewish customs of which it would not have been necessary to inform the Jewish reader. This is not convincing enough, since we find similar descriptions in other books, definitely intended for Jewish readers. According to Prof. Goodenough "the entire allegory of Joseph is a clever piece of double entendre, a fierce denunciation of the Roman character and oppression." Although he presents a plausible argument in defence of this interpretation, we must differ with him in many of its details. in Philo by race, and throughProf. Goodenough renders the word Wtvos out the book he speaks of the Jewish race. This would seem to indicate that Philo was racially minded. However, the fact is not so. Neither Philo, nor the Jews of his period, laid stress on race. Anyone who accepted the Jewish religion was considered a full fledged Jew, regardless of his racial ancestry.

64

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

The word iSvos should be rendered by people. Philo, in saying that Abraham was the father of the Jewish ethnos, Joudaion Ethnos, (De Vita Mosis, 1, 2) meant that he was the father of the Jews as a religious community and not as a race. If Philo had been racially minded, he would have called Jacob, not Abraham, the father of the Jewish ethnos, for Abraham was the father of many other nations. He chooses Abraham, because Abraham was the first to recognise God as the God of the universe. Philo is in total agreement with the point of view of the Tannaim, who said that a proselyte may invoke the name of God in his prayers by saying "the God of our fathers, the God of Abraham." Abraham is the father of all who worship the God of Israel. During the Second Commonwealth the Jews of the world considered themselves united by religion only and not by race. Although we have singled out a few points wherein we differ with the author, and were compelled by considerations of space to omit other points of disagreement, we recommend this book as a most scholarly contribution to the study of Philo. The book is divided into two parts. The first 120 pages contain the text, while pages 131-321 contain an exhaustive bibliography of the manuscripts, editions and translations of Philo's works as well as of the literature on Philo. With this edition, Goodenough and Goodhart made this work indispensable to students of Philo. Students of the Second Jewish Commonwealth and of the beginnings of Christianity will be indebted to them for this scholarly work. SOLOMON ZEITLIN

History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature, by Martin Braun, Oxford, Blackwell, 1938, pp. xiii, 106, 7s.6d. Braun has written an extremely interesting little book in which he takes the hero romances of the ancient world and discusses them as products of the popular mind, valueless as sources for the heroes celebrated, but of great importance in showing the political dreams and adaptations of various conquered peoples in the hellenistic world. From this point of view he considers Ninus and Semiramis, Sesostris, Nectanebus, the Artapanus version of Moses (with antithetical Egyptian legends), and Alexander. The student of the early Church will find these studies of real value in throwing a little more precious light upon the popular life and aspirations of the people to whom Christianity first presented itself outside Palestine.

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Erwin R. Goodenough Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 64-65 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259359 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

64

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

The word iSvos should be rendered by people. Philo, in saying that Abraham was the father of the Jewish ethnos, Joudaion Ethnos, (De Vita Mosis, 1, 2) meant that he was the father of the Jews as a religious community and not as a race. If Philo had been racially minded, he would have called Jacob, not Abraham, the father of the Jewish ethnos, for Abraham was the father of many other nations. He chooses Abraham, because Abraham was the first to recognise God as the God of the universe. Philo is in total agreement with the point of view of the Tannaim, who said that a proselyte may invoke the name of God in his prayers by saying "the God of our fathers, the God of Abraham." Abraham is the father of all who worship the God of Israel. During the Second Commonwealth the Jews of the world considered themselves united by religion only and not by race. Although we have singled out a few points wherein we differ with the author, and were compelled by considerations of space to omit other points of disagreement, we recommend this book as a most scholarly contribution to the study of Philo. The book is divided into two parts. The first 120 pages contain the text, while pages 131-321 contain an exhaustive bibliography of the manuscripts, editions and translations of Philo's works as well as of the literature on Philo. With this edition, Goodenough and Goodhart made this work indispensable to students of Philo. Students of the Second Jewish Commonwealth and of the beginnings of Christianity will be indebted to them for this scholarly work. SOLOMON ZEITLIN

History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature, by Martin Braun, Oxford, Blackwell, 1938, pp. xiii, 106, 7s.6d. Braun has written an extremely interesting little book in which he takes the hero romances of the ancient world and discusses them as products of the popular mind, valueless as sources for the heroes celebrated, but of great importance in showing the political dreams and adaptations of various conquered peoples in the hellenistic world. From this point of view he considers Ninus and Semiramis, Sesostris, Nectanebus, the Artapanus version of Moses (with antithetical Egyptian legends), and Alexander. The student of the early Church will find these studies of real value in throwing a little more precious light upon the popular life and aspirations of the people to whom Christianity first presented itself outside Palestine.

BOOK REVIEWS

65

The second chapter discusses "Biblical Legend in Jewish-Hellenistic Literature with special Reference to the Treatment of the Potiphar Story in the Testament of Joseph." Here the concern is directly with an aspect of Hellenistic Judaism to which the general studies of the subject make little reference, the influence of the oriental-hellenistic erotic motif upon Jewish legend, with the accompanying inference of the effect gentile standards and ideas were having upon Jews. The influence of the Phaedra legend is especially demonstrated in the story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife. Braun concludes that this interest in the erotic is only one side of a tendency which might express itself in either the elaboration or repression of sex, and so is a part of the shift of the ancient world toward asceticism. Braun is primarily interested in details of literary criticism, and does not indulge in much generalization about Hellenistic Judaism. But he suggests very important generalizations, and here, as in his earlier Griechischer Roman und hellenistische Geschichtschreibung, 1934, gives much that is valuable. The present reviewer felt that for the interpretation of the religious meaning of the story of Joseph as told in TJ much more use can still be made than Braun has done of the story of Combabus in Lucian's Syria Dea, 19-27. ERWIN R. GOODENOUGH Der Rimerbrief in der Gnadenlehre Augustins, by Philipp Platz, Cassiciacum, V, Wiirzburg, Rita-Verlag und -Druckerei, 1938, 260 pages. Augustine started a commentary on Romans, but only expounded the first seven verses. The volume under review presents a careful study of his exegesis of Romans 5 12-21; 7 7-8 11; 8 19-23, 28-39; 9 6-29. This is taken for the most part from his anti-Pelagian writings, and deals with the problems of original sin and grace. Copious cross-references are given to all of his works, however, and strict attention is paid to variant opinions expressed in his earlier treatises. As an exegete Augustine excelled in the careful thoroughness with which he followed through the ramifications of each word or phrase of a given text without losing at the same time relevance and pointedness in his discussion. Yet like many Biblical commentaries whose interest is primarily doctrinal the exegesis tells us more about Augustine's thought than about Paul's. Nor will the Biblical student find any help here as to the text of the Latin Bible. Augustine frequently made his own text, and that too without reference always to the Greek original. MASSEY H. SHEPHERD, JR.

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Massey H. Shepherd, Jr. Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), p. 65 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259360 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

BOOK REVIEWS

65

The second chapter discusses "Biblical Legend in Jewish-Hellenistic Literature with special Reference to the Treatment of the Potiphar Story in the Testament of Joseph." Here the concern is directly with an aspect of Hellenistic Judaism to which the general studies of the subject make little reference, the influence of the oriental-hellenistic erotic motif upon Jewish legend, with the accompanying inference of the effect gentile standards and ideas were having upon Jews. The influence of the Phaedra legend is especially demonstrated in the story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife. Braun concludes that this interest in the erotic is only one side of a tendency which might express itself in either the elaboration or repression of sex, and so is a part of the shift of the ancient world toward asceticism. Braun is primarily interested in details of literary criticism, and does not indulge in much generalization about Hellenistic Judaism. But he suggests very important generalizations, and here, as in his earlier Griechischer Roman und hellenistische Geschichtschreibung, 1934, gives much that is valuable. The present reviewer felt that for the interpretation of the religious meaning of the story of Joseph as told in TJ much more use can still be made than Braun has done of the story of Combabus in Lucian's Syria Dea, 19-27. ERWIN R. GOODENOUGH Der Rimerbrief in der Gnadenlehre Augustins, by Philipp Platz, Cassiciacum, V, Wiirzburg, Rita-Verlag und -Druckerei, 1938, 260 pages. Augustine started a commentary on Romans, but only expounded the first seven verses. The volume under review presents a careful study of his exegesis of Romans 5 12-21; 7 7-8 11; 8 19-23, 28-39; 9 6-29. This is taken for the most part from his anti-Pelagian writings, and deals with the problems of original sin and grace. Copious cross-references are given to all of his works, however, and strict attention is paid to variant opinions expressed in his earlier treatises. As an exegete Augustine excelled in the careful thoroughness with which he followed through the ramifications of each word or phrase of a given text without losing at the same time relevance and pointedness in his discussion. Yet like many Biblical commentaries whose interest is primarily doctrinal the exegesis tells us more about Augustine's thought than about Paul's. Nor will the Biblical student find any help here as to the text of the Latin Bible. Augustine frequently made his own text, and that too without reference always to the Greek original. MASSEY H. SHEPHERD, JR.

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Ernest Cadman Colwell Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), p. 66 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259361 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

66

JOURNALOF BIBLICALLITERATURE

The Principle Uncial Manuscripts of the New Testament,by William Henry Paine Hatch, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1939, pp. 33, plates LXXVI, $10.00. In his illustrated catalogues of Greek New Testament codices at Sinai and Jerusalem, Professor Hatch increased the resources available for the study of the Greek minuscule; in the present work he renders a comparableservice to those interested in the study of the Greek majuscule script. After brief discussionsof such introductorytopics as the materialsand methods of manuscript production, styles of writing, etc., the author presents seventy-six reproductions of uncial codices, including all the earliest New Testament papyri (13 papyri in all) and all the famous vellum New Testaments. Author and publisher are to be congratulated on the quality of the printing and the plates. The volume is a very valuable one and will be welcomed by all who work with the uncial manuscripts. The preliminarydiscussions are all carefully documented, but in two small details additional referencesmay be given - i. e., page 22, n. 8, for a facsimile of LeningradGr. 219 the plates in Lake and Lake's series of dated minuscules are more accessible than the work of Wattenbach and von Velsen; again on page 25, n. 10, the author fails to note that the letter of Eusebius to Carpianus appears in Nestle's editions as well as in the printings of the T.R. listed. In one area the work may mislead the student. There is no warning as to the tentative nature of the dating of undated uncial codices. "It is possible," says the author in a brief paragraph,"to date manuscriptsapproximately on the basis of the forms of the letters and the general character of the handwriting." Everything depends on how the word "approximately" is interpreted. In this reviewer's judgment, it can mean no more than within a century and a half or two centuries. The footnotes to various plates record a variation of three centuries in the date assigned to a manuscriptby different experts, but the author unfortunately fails to document his own judgment on the date of the codex. It is to be hoped that ProfessorHatch will put us still further in his debt by identifying the various styles of uncial script and establishing a chronologyfor each one. ERNEST CADMAN COLWELL

Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the United States and Canada,by Seymour de Ricci and W. J. Wilson, New York, H. W. Wilson, 1, 1935; II, 1937. These two volumes contain 2,343 pages and give brief descriptions of thou-

sands of codices. All students of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance will

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Ernest Cadman Colwell Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 66-67 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259362 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

66

JOURNALOF BIBLICALLITERATURE

The Principle Uncial Manuscripts of the New Testament,by William Henry Paine Hatch, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1939, pp. 33, plates LXXVI, $10.00. In his illustrated catalogues of Greek New Testament codices at Sinai and Jerusalem, Professor Hatch increased the resources available for the study of the Greek minuscule; in the present work he renders a comparableservice to those interested in the study of the Greek majuscule script. After brief discussionsof such introductorytopics as the materialsand methods of manuscript production, styles of writing, etc., the author presents seventy-six reproductions of uncial codices, including all the earliest New Testament papyri (13 papyri in all) and all the famous vellum New Testaments. Author and publisher are to be congratulated on the quality of the printing and the plates. The volume is a very valuable one and will be welcomed by all who work with the uncial manuscripts. The preliminarydiscussions are all carefully documented, but in two small details additional referencesmay be given - i. e., page 22, n. 8, for a facsimile of LeningradGr. 219 the plates in Lake and Lake's series of dated minuscules are more accessible than the work of Wattenbach and von Velsen; again on page 25, n. 10, the author fails to note that the letter of Eusebius to Carpianus appears in Nestle's editions as well as in the printings of the T.R. listed. In one area the work may mislead the student. There is no warning as to the tentative nature of the dating of undated uncial codices. "It is possible," says the author in a brief paragraph,"to date manuscriptsapproximately on the basis of the forms of the letters and the general character of the handwriting." Everything depends on how the word "approximately" is interpreted. In this reviewer's judgment, it can mean no more than within a century and a half or two centuries. The footnotes to various plates record a variation of three centuries in the date assigned to a manuscriptby different experts, but the author unfortunately fails to document his own judgment on the date of the codex. It is to be hoped that ProfessorHatch will put us still further in his debt by identifying the various styles of uncial script and establishing a chronologyfor each one. ERNEST CADMAN COLWELL

Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the United States and Canada,by Seymour de Ricci and W. J. Wilson, New York, H. W. Wilson, 1, 1935; II, 1937. These two volumes contain 2,343 pages and give brief descriptions of thou-

sands of codices. All students of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance will

BOOK REVIEWS

67

rejoice in the multitude of manuscripts listed, and will appreciate the patient labors of the authors of this monumental work. However, the two volumes are not equally inclusive. The Preface notes that Oriental Mss are excluded, and the footnotes in Vol. II refer to codices in Armenian,Hebrew, Coptic, etc. that are not listed; but Vol. I includes scores of codices in these languages; e. g., p. 869. I have checked the accuracy of the work in the listings of Chicago codices known to me, and find some errors in detail; e. g., I, p. 570, no. 138 has five miniatures, not thirteen; p. 598, no. 727 was not written by Giorgios "Rastos"; p. 600, no. 897 is a lectionary of the Gospels; II, errata and addenda p. 2281, no. 134 is Evv. 2406 and no. 136 is 2407; p. 2282, no. 902 is not a lectionary but a Gospels Ms; p. 2284, no. 1 is 1424 not 1. 1424. These errors in detail, however, will be but a slight hindrance to the main function of this great work: to give the serious student a guide book to the manuscriptwealth of America. It serves this purpose well. The value of the work is to be increased by the publication of an index volume. E. C. C.

AbhandDas Erste ChristlichePfingsfest,by Nikolaus Adler, (Neutestamentliche lungen, herausgegeben von Prof. Dr. M. Meinertz), Munster, Aschendorff, 1938, pp. 171, Rm. 6.75. This study begins the eighteenth volume of New Testament studies by Roman Catholic scholars which are edited by Dr. Meinertz. It investigates literary parallels, the religious experience and the meaning of the Pentecost story. It is characterizedby a thorough use of previous studies and affirms the historical validity of the narrative. E. C. C.

Historia aetatis Novi Testamenti,Editio altera. (InstitutionesBiblicae: series altera: opera subsidiaria), by Urbanus Holzmeister, S. J., Rome, Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1938, pp. 307, Lire 35. The first edition of this work was privately distributed. This is a "profane" history of political events, 63 B. C. to A. D. 70, which affected the career of Jesus and his apostles. To obtain "objectivity" the materials are presented in the form of a catalogue of events, etc., rather than as a narrative. This secures objectivity here no better than it does elsewhere. The historicity of

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Ernest Cadman Colwell Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Mar., 1939), pp. 67-68 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259363 . Accessed: 15/10/2011 14:11 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

BOOK REVIEWS

67

rejoice in the multitude of manuscripts listed, and will appreciate the patient labors of the authors of this monumental work. However, the two volumes are not equally inclusive. The Preface notes that Oriental Mss are excluded, and the footnotes in Vol. II refer to codices in Armenian,Hebrew, Coptic, etc. that are not listed; but Vol. I includes scores of codices in these languages; e. g., p. 869. I have checked the accuracy of the work in the listings of Chicago codices known to me, and find some errors in detail; e. g., I, p. 570, no. 138 has five miniatures, not thirteen; p. 598, no. 727 was not written by Giorgios "Rastos"; p. 600, no. 897 is a lectionary of the Gospels; II, errata and addenda p. 2281, no. 134 is Evv. 2406 and no. 136 is 2407; p. 2282, no. 902 is not a lectionary but a Gospels Ms; p. 2284, no. 1 is 1424 not 1. 1424. These errors in detail, however, will be but a slight hindrance to the main function of this great work: to give the serious student a guide book to the manuscriptwealth of America. It serves this purpose well. The value of the work is to be increased by the publication of an index volume. E. C. C.

AbhandDas Erste ChristlichePfingsfest,by Nikolaus Adler, (Neutestamentliche lungen, herausgegeben von Prof. Dr. M. Meinertz), Munster, Aschendorff, 1938, pp. 171, Rm. 6.75. This study begins the eighteenth volume of New Testament studies by Roman Catholic scholars which are edited by Dr. Meinertz. It investigates literary parallels, the religious experience and the meaning of the Pentecost story. It is characterizedby a thorough use of previous studies and affirms the historical validity of the narrative. E. C. C.

Historia aetatis Novi Testamenti,Editio altera. (InstitutionesBiblicae: series altera: opera subsidiaria), by Urbanus Holzmeister, S. J., Rome, Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1938, pp. 307, Lire 35. The first edition of this work was privately distributed. This is a "profane" history of political events, 63 B. C. to A. D. 70, which affected the career of Jesus and his apostles. To obtain "objectivity" the materials are presented in the form of a catalogue of events, etc., rather than as a narrative. This secures objectivity here no better than it does elsewhere. The historicity of

68

JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

gospel statement is always maintained. But reference is made to all the important sources both primary and secondary, and the tables of officials, both civil and ecclesiastical, will help to recommendthe volume to those who desire a catalogue of this type in Latin. E. C. C. What Jesus Taught, by Burton Scott Easton, New York, Abingdon Press, 1938, pp. 147, $1.50. This is a collection of Jesus' sayings in topical arrangement for the nontechnical student. Mr. Easton's contribution lies in his judgment as to those authentic sayings which should be included and also in a minor revision of the wording of the traditional English version. E. C. C.