PAUL
THE
APOSTLE
that
St.
Paul
suffered
martyrdom
in
Rome
under
Nero
[Nero
died
a.d.
68].
As
tliere
is
no
conSicting
tradition,
we
may
with
confidence
accept
this
account.
More
modern
traditions
maliie
the
death
to
have
talten
place
at
Tre
Fontane,
3
miles
from
Rome,
and
the
burial
at
S.
Paolo
fuori
le
Mura,
nearer
the
city.
14.
Appearance.
—
The
following
is
the
description
in
the
Acts
of
Paid
and
Thecla
(Armen.
vers.
§
3,
Cony-beare's
Monuments,
p.
62),
which
may
go
back,
in
this
matter,
to
the
1st
cent.:
'Onesiphorus
.
.
.
saw
Paul
coming
along,
a
man
of
moderate
stature,
with
curly
hair
.
.
.
scanty,
croolsed
legs,
with
blue
eyes
and
large
knit
brows,
long
nose;
and
he
was
full
of
the
grace
and
pity
of
the
Lord,
sometimes
having
the
appearance
of
a
man,
but
sometimes
looking
like
an
angel.'
The
'blue
eyes'
are
peculiar
to
the
Armenian.
The
other
versions
say
that
he
was
bow-legged,
with
meeting
eyebrows,
and
bald-headed.
This
unflattering
descrip-tion
does
not
agree
badly
with
that
of
St.
Paul's
de-tractors
in
2
Co
10'"
11«,
who
said
that
though
his
letters
were
weighty
and
strong,
his
bodily
presence
was
weak,
and
his
speech
of
no
account;
he
was
'rude
In
speech.'
The
appearance
of
the
Apostle
would
be
made
worse
by
the
permanent
marks
of
persecution,
the
'
marks
of
Jesus,'
as
most
moderns
interpret
Gal
6",
which
branded
Paul
as
the
slave
of
Christ.
iii.
St.
Paul's
Teaching.
—
It
would
be
a
mistake
to
look
on
the
Pauline
Epistles
as
constituting
a
Summa
Theologica,
a
compendium
of
Christian
doctrine.
The
writer
always
assumes
that
his
readers
have
in
their
possession
the
Christian
tradition.
We
have
no
record
of
the
method
by
which
Paul
preached
the
gospel,
but
he
takes
it
for
granted
that
it
is
knovm
by
those
to
whom
he
writes,
and
he
repeats
his
teaching
only
when
some
special
circumstances
call
for
repetition.
Doctrines
like
the
Godhead
of
our
Lord
and
of
the
Holy
Spirit,
the
Atonement,
and
the
Sacraments,
are
not
stated
as
in
a
theological
manual,
but
assumed
(cf.
2
Th
2"
3",
1
Co
11^).
Even
the
Epistle
to
the
Romans,
addressed
to
those
who
had
not
heard
the
Pauline
presentation
of
the
gospel,
and
partaking
more
of
the
nature
of
a
treatise
than
do
any
of
the
rest,
assumes
the
substratum
of
Christian
dogma;
note,
for
example,
the
way
in
which
the
Atonement
is
alluded
to
in
Ro
3"'S".
It
follows
that
it
would
be
extremely
unsafe
to
build
any
argument
as
to
St.
Paul's
teaching
upon
his
silence.
The
paragraphs
which
here
follow
are
an
attempt
to
bring
together
references
in
the
Epistles
to
some
of
the
more
important
points
of
Christian
doctrine.
But
we
may
first
ask
whether
St.
Paul
used
a
creed
in
his
instructions.
In
1
Co
15"-
he
seems
to
be
quoting
something
of
this
nature;
and
a
verse
from
a
creed-like
hymn
is
given
in
1
Ti
3".
Yet
the
earliest
known
creed
(the
Apostles')
cannot
be
traced
back
in
any
form
beyond
the
second
quarter
of
the
2nd
cent.,
and
the
existence
of
anything
like
a
creed
in
the
Apostle's
times
is
therefore
a
matter
of
conjecture
only.
1
.
The
Fatherhood
of
God
.
—
Christianity
inherited
this
doctrine
from
the
OT.
Yet
it
was
fully
revealed
to
us
only
by
our
Lord,
for
the
Jews
had
hardly
got
beyond
the
truth
that
God
was
the
Father
of
Israel.
The
Apostle
develops
this
truth.
God
is
the
Father
of
Jesus
(2
Co
1',
Eph
1'
etc.),
who
is
'the
Son
of
God'
(Gal
2M,
Ro
1',
2
Co
1",
Eph
4";
cf.
1
Th
li»)—
His
'own
Son'
(i.e.
partaker
of
His
nature),
whom
He
did
not
spare
(Ro
8'-
^,
passages
which
recall
both
Mk
1"
and
Jn
S'').
—
But,
further,
God
is
the
father
of
all
creatures
(Eph
4«),
from
Him
'every
fatherhood'
(ie.
family)
in
heaven
and
earth
is
named
(Eph
3"');
He
is
'the
Father'
(Gal
1>
etc.),
the
'Father
of
glory'
(Eph
1").
—
In
a
special
sense
He
is
the
Father
of
all
Christians,
who'are
His
sons
by
adoption
(Ro
S"<;
Gal
3»
4f';
Eph
1'
etc.).
St.
Paul
never
confuses
the
relation
of
the
Father
to
the
Son
with
that
of
the
Father
to
mankind,
but
keeps
the
distinction
of
Jn
20"
('my
Father
and
your
Father').
PAUL
THE
APOSTLE
2.
The
Fall
of
Man.
—
The
universality
of
sin
is
the
most
prominent
theme
in
Rom.,
among
both
Gentiles
(I'M.)
and
Jews
(2«-);
all
are
'under
sin'
(S"").
Sin
is
due
to
Adam's
fall,
and
is
punished
by
death;
yet
each
man
is
responsible
(5").
'Sin'
does
not
mean
mere
error,
as
it
was
understood
by
the
heathen,
but
moral
wrong
(cf.
Ps
51*;
so
frequently
in
OT).
From
Adam
came
a
taint
which
is
called
the
'law
of
sin'
in
the
members
(Ro
7^)
;
it
is
a
moral
weakness
which
makes
man
inclined
to
sin.
It
is
noticeable
that
Genesis
says
nothing
of
the
penalty
and
taint
as
inherited
from
Adam
upon
which
St.
Paul
insists;
we
find
it
first
in
Wis
2MI-,
and
probably
in
Sir
25".
The
Rabbinical
teaching
varied;
some
Jewish
teachers
emphasized
the
inherited
taint
and
penalty,
others
the
responsibility
of
each
man.
For
the
first
cf.
2
Es
i'<"-
7"*
[7'»];
for
the
second
cf.
2
Es
9"
(freedom
of
choice)
and
Apocalypse
of
Baruch
54'=-"';
2
Es
3*™-
combines
both
views.
These
two
works
are
probably
of
the
1st
cent,
a.d.,
and
parts
of
2
Esdras
(but
not
those
quoted)
seem
to
have
been
added
by
a
Christian
hand
(see
'Thackeray,
St.
Paul
and
Jemsh
Thought,
ch.
ii.
and
p.
21f
.;
a
most
suggestive
book).
—
St.
Paul
traces
the
universality
of
sin
to
the
instigation
of
Satan,
the
personal
power
of
evil
(1
Co
7'
etc.),
and
of
his
evil
angels
(Eph
6'^).
3.
The
Incarnation.
—
The
remedy
for
universal
sin
is
provided
by
the
love
of
the
Father
(Ro
S'^)
and
of
the
Son
(Gal
22"),
in
the
Incarnation.
That
St.
Paul
uses
the
title
'
Son
of
God
'
in
no
mere
ethical
sense
is
seen
by
the
language
in
which
he
describes
the
pre-existence
of
our
Lord.
The
Manhood
and
the
Godhead
are
both
spoken
of
in
Ro
!"•
('of
the
seed
of
David
according
to
the
flesh,'
'
declared
to
be
the
Son
of
God
')
and
8'
('God
sending
his
own
Son
in
the
likeness
of
sinful
flesh
')
.
The
Christ
is
of
the
fathers
as
concerning
the
flesh,
but
is
over
all,
God
blessed
for
ever
(Ro
9>;
so
EV
and
Sanday-Headlam,
who
in
an
exhaustive
note
uphold
this
interpretation;
those
mentioned
in
RVm
as
of
'some
modern
interpreters'
seem
to
suit
neither
NT
usage
nor
the
context).
With
these
passages
cf.
Ph
2'"-,
with
Lightfoot's
notes.
Christ
Jesus,
being
originally
in
the
form
of
God,
having
(that
is)
the
essential
attributes
of
God
(Lightfoot),
did
not
think
equality
with
God
a
thing
to
be
jealously
guarded
[as
a
robber
guards
what
is
not
his],
but
emptied
Himself
[of
the
insignia
of
majesty]
by
taking
the
form
of
a
slave.
His
position
was
no
uncertain
one
that
it
should
need
to
be
asserted.
It
was
this
fact
that
made
the
con-descension
so
great;
Christ,
being
rich,
became
poor
for
our
sakes
(2
Co
8').
The
pre-existence
of
our
Lord
is
implied
by
the
fact
that
He
was
the
Father's
instru-ment
in
Creation
(1
Co
8«,
Col
I'"-;
cf.
Jn
1').
He
'is
the
image
of
the
invisible
God,
the
firstborn
of
all
creation
.
.
.
and
he
is
before
all
things'
(Col
1'*-
").
Lightfoot
remarks
that
thefirstofthese
phrases
expresses
Christ's
relation
to
Deity
(cf.
Wis
7^,
2
Co
4*,
He
1'),
—
He
is
the
manifestation
of
the
unseen
Father;
while
the
second
denotes
His
relation
to
created
things,
—
it
implies
priority
to
all
creation
(for
the
Arian
gloss
that
it
means
that
Christ
was
the
first
creature
is
absolutely
excluded
by
v.'"'),
and
implies
also
sovereignty
over
creation,
for
the
firstborn
is
the
ruler
of
God's
family
(Ps
89*';
so
in
He
IZ"
the
'church
of
the
firstborn'
probably
means
'heirs
of
the
Kingdom';
cf.
also
Ro
8").
The
Pastoral
Epistles
also
teach
the
pre-existence
of
our
Lord;
the
words
'manifested
in
the
flesh'
in
1
Ti
3"
(where
'
God
'
must
be
omitted
from
the
text)
necessitate
this;
and
in
Tit
2",
according
to
the
most
probable
interpretation
(RV
text),
Jesus
is
called
'our
great
God
and
Saviour'
(see
Dean
Bernard's
note).
—
It
would,
however,
be
misleading
to
suggest
that
St.
Paul's
belief
in
the
Divinity
of
his
Master
depends
only
on
the
interpretation
of
a
few
controverted
texts,
however
great
their
combined
force.
The
whole
language
of
the
Pauline
Epistles,
the
devoted
submission
of
Paul
the
'slave'
(Ro
1'
and
passim)
to
Jesus,
are
