p. 391; Greenidge, Roman Public Life, p. 55, citing Pliny, H.N. xviii,
iii, 12.
[105] Apology and Acts of Apollonius, etc., ed. by F. C. Conybeare,
1894, p. 270. Here Dr. Conybeare momentarily appears as a
myth-theorist.
[106] Id. p. 258.
[107] P.C. 115.
[108] The Christ Myth, Eng. trans. pp. 65-68.
[109] Cp. Cheyne, Introd. to Isaiah, 1895, pp. 304-5, as to Ewald's
theory that Jeremiah may have been meant.
[110] So to be estimated whether he be "the" Deutero-Isaiah or a
song-writer whose work has been incorporated. Cp. Cheyne, as cited,
and his art. Isaiah in Encyc. Bib.
[111] The terms "Christists" and "Jesuists" are, it need hardly be
said, used for the sake of exactitude. The term "early Christians"
would often convey a different and misleading idea. There were Jesuists
and Christists before the "Christian" movement arose. Dr. Conybeare
pronounces such terms "jargon" (Histor. Christ, p. 94). In the next
line he illustrates the delicacy of his own academic taste by the
terms "tag-rag and bobtail." Such slang abounds in his book, and this
particular phrase recurs (p. 183).
[112] It is interesting to note that in the Gospel of Peter one of
the malefactors is represented as speaking to the Jews in defence of
Jesus, whereupon they break his legs in vengeance.
[113] Ex. xii, 46; Num. ix, 12. Cp. Ps. xxxiv, 20.
[114] P.C. 113, 155.
[115] Granum turis in poculo vini, ut alienetur mens ejus. Talmud,
tract. Sanhedrin.
[116] Vinegar in the Alexandrian Codex.
[117] C.M. 367.
[118] John xi, 50.
[119] See the whole question minutely discussed in Strauss, Pt. III,
ch. iv, § 134.
[120] Zech. xii, 10.
[121] P.C. 125-6.
[122] Ps. xxii, 18. The citation in Mt. xxvii, 35 (omitted in R.V.) is
a late interpolation, found in the Codex Sangallensis.
[123] C.M. 380.
[124] C.M. 364.
[125] C.M. 369 sq.; P.C. 150 sq.
[126] P.C. 319.
[127] P.C. 151, 368, note.
[128] P.C. 113, top. The preceding hypothesis with regard to the
Meriah post is an error. Mr. H. G. Wood informs me he has learned
from the Museum authorities at Madras that the apparent cross-bar
was really a projection, representing the head of an elephant, to
the trunk of which the victim was tied.
[129] P.C. App. A.
[130] C.M. 376.
[131] P.C. 196.
[132] Gal. iii, 1.
[133] vi, 17.
[134] De Dea Syria, 59.
[135] C.M. 373.
[136] P.C. 371.
[137] P.C. 157.
[138] C.M. 375.
[139] Id. 377.
[140] P.C. 166. Cp. Drews, Christ Myth, 42.
[141] Judge T. L. Strange, Contributions, etc., 1881. "The Portraiture
and Mission of Jesus," p. 6.
[142] Cp. Charles, introd. to The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,
1908, p. xvi, as to John Hyrcanus.
[143] Cp. Charles, The Apocalypse of Baruch, 1896, pp. 52-53,
notes. The Messiah, in the view there discussed, was to have been
"concealed"--another cue for the evangelists.
[144] H.J. 153 sq.
[145] P.C. 304-6, 316-18; C.M. 331 and note.
[146] Conybeare, Historical Christ, p. 19.
[147] Col. Conder, The City of Jerusalem, 1909, p. 3, citing Rix.
[148] Id. p. 9.
[149] Id. p. 10; Eusebius, Life of Constantine, iii, 42.
[150] Conder, p. 13.
[151] Walter Menzies, Notes of a Holiday Excursion, 1897, p. 89.
[152] Work cited, pp. 154-5.
[153] Id. p. 156.
[154] Id. p. 140.
[155] "Il est à supposer," are M. Loisy's words. Jésus et la
trad. évang., p. 107.
[156] Myth, Magic, and Morals, 2nd edit. p. 297.
[157] G.B. iv, 56. Cp. 154.
[158] 1 Cor. x, 21. I say "Paul" as I say "Matthew" or "John,"
for brevity's sake, not at all as accepting the ascriptions of
the books. Van Manen's thesis that all the Epistles of "Paul" are
pseudepigraphic is probably very near the truth.
[159] The retention of "devils" in the Revised Version, with
"Gr. demons" only in the margin, is an abuse. For the Greeks,
there were good daimons as well as bad; and "demon" is not the real
equivalent of "daimon."
[160] C.M. 179, note.
[161] Cp. Athenæus, vi, 26-27; Schömann, Griechische Alterthümer,
3te Aufl. ii, 418-19; Foucart, Des associations religieuses, 50-52;
Miss Harrison, Themis, p. 154; Menzies, History of Religion, p. 292.
[162] P.C. 194 sq., 306; C.M. 381, note.
[163] G.B. ix, 374 sq.
[164] On the points enumerated under heads 4-7 see Schürer, Jewish
People in the Time of Christ, Eng. tr. Div. II, i, 11-36. In regard to
my former specification of such influences (P.C. 204), Dr. Conybeare
alleges (p. 49) that I "hint" that the Jesuist mystery-play was
performed "in the temples (sic) built by Herod at Damascus and Jericho,
and in the theatres of the Greek town at Gadara." This cannot be
regarded as one of Dr. Conybeare's hallucinations: it is one of his
random falsifications. No "hint" of the kind was ever given. The
mystery-play is always represented by me as secretly performed.
[165] Cp. Ezra and Nehemiah.
[166] P.C. 168 sq.
[167] Schürer, as cited, iii, 225.
[168] Thus Dr. Conybeare, constantly. Upon his view, the Essenes can
never have existed.
[169] Schürer, as cited, i, 3-4.
[170] Cp. Gunkel, Zum Verständnis des N.T., as cited, p. 20.
[171] The later documentists in such cases substituted an angel;
but that was certainly not the early idea. See C.M. 112; Etheridge,
Targums on the Pentateuch, i, 1862, p. 5.
[172] Jer. xi, 13.
[173] Ezek. viii, 14.
[174] P.C. 162.
[175] P.C. 321.
[176] E.g. the Biblical accounts of the adoption of Canaanite Gods
by Israelites who married Canaanite women.
[177] E.g. the special adoption of Greek deities by Romans, apart
from the political practice of enrolling deities of conquered States
in the Roman Pantheon.
[178] S.H.F. i, 44-45.
[179] S.H.F. i, 48-49.
[180] C.M. 35, and note.
[181] See many details in C.M., pp. 52-57.
[182] Refs. in P.C. 51, note 6. Dr. Conybeare (pp. 29, 30) meets such
conclusions of scholars (Stade, Winckler, Sayce, etc.) by excluding
them from his list of "serious Semitic scholars."
[183] Exod. xviii, 12.
[184] Gen. xiv, 18; Ps. cx, 4.
[185] Heb. vii, 3. Cp. v, 6, 10; vii, 11, 17.
[186] P.C. 179.
[187] E.S. 115; Hatch, Hibbert Lectures, p. 291 sq.
[188] Or Jehoshua--the Hebrew name of which Iesous is the Greek
equivalent.
[189] P.C. 163.
[190] The miracle of hastening the sun's setting is in Homer
(Il. xviii, 239) assigned to Hêrê, the chief Goddess.
[191] P.C. 220.
[192] Josh. v, 13-15 is clearly late. In ch. xxiv the angel is not
mentioned.
[193] P.C. 314, 315.
[194] Etheridge, The Targums on the Pentateuch, 1862, p. 5.
[195] The Samaritans have a late book ascribing to him many feats
not given in the Jewish records. Concerning this Professor Drews
wrote (Christ Myth, p. 57, note):--"The Samaritan Book of Joshua
(Chronicon Samaritanum, published 1848) was written in Arabic
during the thirteenth century in Egypt, and is based upon an old
work compiled in the third century B.C." Dr. Conybeare (Hist. Christ,
p. 33) declares the last statement to be "founded on pure ignorance,"
adding: "and the Encyclopædia Biblica declares it to be a medieval
production of no value to anyone except the student of the Samaritan
sect under Moslem rule." Be it observed (1) that Dr. Drews had
actually described the book as a medieval production; (2), that
his whole point was that it was legendary, not historical; and (3)
that the Ency. Bib. article, which bears out both propositions,
uses no such language as Dr. Conybeare ascribes to it after the word
"production," and says nothing whatever on the hypothesis that the
book is founded on a compilation of the third century B.C. That
hypothesis, framed by Hebraists, is one upon which Dr. Conybeare
has not the slightest right to an opinion. Dr. A. E. Cowley, in the
Encyc. Brit., describes the book as derived from "sources of various
dates." That being so, Dr. Conybeare, who as usual has wholly failed
to understand what he is attacking, has never touched the position,
which is that Joshua legends so flourished among the Samaritans that
they are preserved in a medieval book--unless he means to allege that
the legends are of medieval invention, a proposition which, indeed,
would fitly consummate his excursion.
[196] Yeho-shua = "Yah [or Yeho] is welfare."
[197] Cp. Josh. v, 2-10.
[198] Canon Charles, The Book of Jubilees, 1902, p. 9, note 29.
[199] This thesis was substantially put by me in the first edition of
Pagan Christs (1903). Dr. Conybeare, who appears incapable of accuracy
in such matters, ascribes the Joshua theory (Hist. Christ, pp. 32,
35) and the special hypothesis that Joshua was mythically the son of
Miriam, to Professor Smith, who never broached either. His pretext
is a passage in the preface to the second edition of Christianity
and Mythology, which he perverts in defiance of the context. On this
basis he proceeds to charge "imitation." Aspersion in Dr. Conybeare's
polemic is usually thus independent of fact.
[200] Historical Christ, p. 17.
[201] Id. pp. 8-9.
[202] Neither is it put by Prof. Drews, who merely cites (above,
p. 41, note) from Niemojewski, without endorsing it, an "astral"
theory of Jesus and Pilate. Dr. Conybeare appears incapable of giving
a true account of anything he antagonizes, whether in politics
or in religion. Elsewhere Drews speaks of astral elements in the
Christ story; but so do those adherents of the biographical school
who recognize the zodiacal source of the Woman-and-Child myth in
Revelation.
[203] At another point (p. 87, note) Dr. Conybeare triumphantly
cites Winckler as saying that "the humanization of the Joshua myth
was complete when the book of Joshua was compiled." This grants
the whole case. "Humanization" tells of previous deity; and just as
Achilles remained a God after being presented in the Iliad, Joshua
was "human" only for those whose sole lore concerning him was that
of the Hexateuch.
[204] Der vorchristliche Jesus, p. 1 sq.
[205] Mk. v, 27; Lk. xxiv, 19; Acts xviii, 25; xxviii, 31.
[206] Perhaps an exception should be made of Dr. Conybeare,
who believes Jesus to have been a "successful exorcist"
(M.M.M. p. 142). This writer sees no difficulty in the fact that in
Mark Jesus is no exorcist at Nazareth, and refuses to work wonders.
[207] P.C. 164.
[208] Rev. xxi, 14.
[209] iv, 4.
[210] Cp. ii, 9; iii, 9.
[211] iii, 14, 15; xix, 13.
[212] Origins of Christianity, ed. 1914, p. 27.
[213] Found in the Alexandrian and Vatican codices, and preferred by
Lachmann, Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort.
[214] to deuteron. The R.V. puts "afterward" in the text, with
"Gr. the second time" in the margin. Mr. Whittaker reads "afterward"
also, after "the second time"--apparently by oversight.
[215] Deane, Pseudepigrapha, 1891, p. 312.
[216] Josh. xxiv, 31, in Septuagint.
[217] C.M. 352.
[218] Art. by H. G. Wood in The Cambridge Magazine, Jan. 20, 1917,
p. 216.
[219] P.C. 202.
[220] Cambridge Magazine, Feb. 3, 1917, p. 289.
[221] G.B. v, 45 sq., 223; P.C. 364, 373-4.
[222] P.C. 112 sq., 131 sq., 140, 142, 144, 352, 362-4, 368.
[223] C.M. 354. I find that Volkmar (there cited) had in one of his
later works put the theory that the traitor, whom he held to be an
invention of the later Paulinists, would be named Juda as typifying
Judaism. The myth-theory is not necessarily committed to the whole of
this thesis, but the objections of Brandt (Die evang. Gesch. pp. 15-18)
seem to me invalid. He always reasons on the presupposition of
a central historicity, and argues as if Mark could not have been
interpolated at the points where Judas is named.
[224] C.M. 208, notes.
[225] Der vorchristliche Jesus, 1906, Vorwort by Schmiedel, p. vii,
and pp. 27-28. Ecce Deus, 1912, pp. 18, 332.
[226] Ecce Deus, pp. 16, 18, 50 sq., 70, 135; Der vorchr. Jesus,
p. 40. But see Ecce Deus, pp. 66 and 196, where the thesis is modified.
[227] In the Literary Guide of June, 1913, Professor Smith defends his
thesis against another critic. The reader should consult that article.
[228] S.H.C. 33 sq.
[229] Id. 35-36.
[230] On this problem cp. Prof. Smith, Ecce Deus, 251 sq.; and
Prof. Drews, Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus, Eng. tr. p. 19.
[231] Enoch, xxxviii, 2; liii, 6.
[232] Id. xl, 5, and often.
[233] Id. xlvi, 2, 3, etc.
[234] Id. xlviii, 10; lii, 4.
[235] Id. lxii, 5.
[236] Schodde's introd. p. 51.
[237] Dr. Rendel Harris, Odes of Solomon, 1909, introd. p. 72.
[238] Harris, as cited, pp. 118, 125, 128, etc.
[239] Dr. Harris pronounces that an account in the Odes of the Virgin
Birth (xix) must be later than the first century (p. 116). But this
begs the question as to the source of that myth.
[240] Apropos d'hist. des religions, p. 272.
[241] Refutation of all Heresies, v, 5 (11).
[242] Cp. Drews, The Christ Myth, p. 54; and 2nd ed. of original,
p. 24.
[243] Drews, p. 59; Loisy, p. 273.
[244] C.M. 316 sq.
[245] C.M. 363.
[246] Id. 364.
[247] Hæres. XXX.
[248] S.H.C. 6; C.M. 316.
[249] C.M. 314.
[250] Der vorchristliche Jesus, pp. 42-70; Ecce Deus, pt. vi.
[251] C.M. 314.
[252] Paper on "The Syriac Forms of New Testament Names," in Proc. of
the British Academy, vol. v, 1912, pp. 17-18.
[253] C.M. 312. The thesis was put by me twenty-eight years ago.
[254] Der vorchr. Jesus, p. 54 sq.
[255] C.M. 316.
[256] Der vorchr. Jesus, pp. 56, 65.
[257] Cp. Philo Judæus, De Profugis:--"The Divine Word ... existing
as the image of God, is the eldest of all things that can be known,
placed nearest, and without anything intervening, to him who alone
is the self-existent."
[258] Friedländer's thesis that the Minim were early Gnostics seems to
be completely upset by Mr. Herford, Christianity in Talmud, p. 368 sq.
[259] Id. pp. 255-266.
[260] The fact that the Talmudic allusions to the Minim include no
discussion of the Christist doctrine of the Messiah (Herford, pp. 277,
279) goes to show that a Messianic doctrine had been no part of the
early cult, and that among the Jesuists who kept up their connection
with Judaism it gathered, or kept, no hold.
[261] Cp. Volkmar, Die Religion Jesu, 1857, p. 287.
[262] Justin, 1 Apol. 26.
[263] Id. ib.
[264] See the whole subject discussed in Appendix B.
[265] C. 120, end.
[266] See H. J. 182.
[267] Ecce Deus, p. 68. In his article in the Literary Guide, June,
1913, Professor Smith argues that only as a protest against idolatry
and a crusade for monotheism could Proto-Christianity have succeeded
with the Gentiles. But that was simply the line of Judaism, which had
no Son-God to cloud its monotheism. Surely Jesuism appealed to the
Gentiles primarily as did other Saviour-cults, ultimately distancing
these by reason of organization.
[268] Cp. Les Apôtres, p. 107; Saint Paul, pp. 562-3.
[269] Cp. S.H.C. 82.
[270] 19 Antiq. iii, 3.
[271] Ecce Deus, p. 230 sq.
[272] 20 Antiq. xi, 3.
[273] Life, § 2.
[274] XVIII, i, 6.
[275] 20 Antiq. ix, 1.
[276] Ecce Deus, pp. 235-6.
[277] The Jesus of History and the Jesus of Tradition Identified. By
George Solomon. Reeves and Turner, 1880.
[278] Here Mr. Solomon, without offering any explanation, identifies
Josephus's Jesus son of Sapphias, who was chief magistrate in Tiberias,
with Jesus the robber captain of the borders of Ptolemais (§ 22)--a
different person. I give his theory as he puts it. (Work cited,
pp. 164-179.)
[279] Dr. Conybeare puts it as axiomatic that Jesus always speaks in
Mark "as a Jew to Jews." Thus are facts "gross as a mountain, open,
palpable," sought to be outfaced by verbiage.
[280] This aspect of the problem seems to be ignored by Erich Haupt
(Zum Verständnis des Apostolats im neuen Testament 1896), who finds
the choice of the twelve historical.
[281] See the passage in Baring Gould's Lost and Hostile Gospels,
1874, p. 61; and in Herford's Christianity in Talmud and Midrash,
1903, p. 90.
[282] Hibbert Journal, July, 1911, cited by Prof. Smith, Ecce Deus,
p. 318.
[283] C.M. 344. For the convenience of the reader I reprint in an
Appendix an annotated translation I published in 1891--a revision of
that of Messrs. Hitchcock and Brown, compared with a number of others.
[284] Cp. "His Servant Jesus" in Acts iii, 13, 26; iv, 27, 30.
[285] C.M. 415 sq.
[286] Supernatural Religion, R.P.A. rep. p. 153.
[287] See the notes to translation in Appendix.
[288] It goes back to Jeremiah, xxi, 8.
[289] Encyc. Bib. i, 261.
[290] Cp. Prof. A. Seeberg, Die Didache des Judentums und der
Urchristenheit, 1908, p. 8; and his previous works, cited by him.
[291] C.M. 344.
[292] A. Seeberg, work cited, p. 1.
[293] Dr. Conybeare nevertheless (Histor. Christ, p. 3) calls it a
"characteristically Christian document," in an argument which maintains
the early currency and general historicity of Mark.
[294] This thesis was put in C.M. 345. Yet Dr. Conybeare alleges
(p. 20) that I represent Jesus as surrounded by twelve disciples solely
because of the twelve signs of the zodiac. The latter item is given
simply as an explanation of the calling of the twelve on a mountain
(412), which Dr. Conybeare finds quite historical.
[295] It was probably about the year 80 that the Jewish authorities
framed the formula by which they sought to mark off "the Minim"
from the Judaic fold.--Herford, Christianity in Talmud, pp. 135, 385-7.
[296] Mr. Lester (The Historic Jesus, p. 84) argues that the baptism
of Jesus by John must be historical, since to invent it would be
gratuitously to make him "in a way subordinate to John." But when
John is put as the Forerunner, acclaiming the Messiah, where is the
subordination?
[297] C.M. 396.
[298] H.J. 135-6.
[299] Encyc. Bib. art. Baptism.
[300] A temporary Messianic Kingdom is set forth about 100 B.C. in
the Book of Jubilees (ed. Charles, 1902, introd. p. lxxxvii).
[301] Charles, introd. to the Assumption of Moses, 1897, pp. xiii-xiv,
liv.
[302] Id. pp. xi, 41.
[303] Charles, introd. to the Apocalypse of Baruch, 1896, pp. vii-viii.
[304] Id. p. lv, and refs.
[305] See above, p. 117, n.
[306] Above, p. 66.
[307] Cp. Mk. i, 8.
[308] In Hebrews vi, 2, also, baptism appears to be disparaged. But
vv. 1-2 are incoherent. Green's translation gives a passable sense:
the R.V. does not.
[309] Acts x, 48.
[310] Mt. xxviii, 19. Cp. Mk. xvi, 16.
[311] Testaments, ed. Charles, 1908, pp. xvi, 121.
[312] H.J. ch. vi.
[313] Van Manen, as summarized by Mr. Whittaker, Origins of
Christianity, ed. 1914, p. 78, citing Epiphanius, Hær. xxx, 16.
[314] Id. pp. 124-5, 199.
[315] Eusebius, Eccles. Hist. iii, 24.
[316] Cp. Van Manen in Whittaker, p. 182.
[317] E.g. the dating of the rising of Theudas before the "enrolment"
of Luke (6 C.E.); whereas Josephus places it about the year 45.
[318] The reference to "Aretas the King" in 2 Cor. xi, 32, one of the
few possible clues in the Epistles, yields no certain date, and indeed
creates a crux for the historians. See art. Aretas in Encyc. Bib.
[319] Cp. Van Manen, as cited.
[320] H.J. 199-203.
[321] Cp. Schmiedel, art. Gospels in Encyc. Bib. col. 1890.
[322] P.C. 316 n.
[323] P.C. 281.
[324] See S.H.F., chs. iii and v; and cp. Whittaker, Priests,
Philosophers, and Prophets, 1911.
[325] P.C. 67 sq.
[326] S.H.F. ch. iv.
[327] First put by M. Maurice Vernes, Du prétendu polythéisme des
Hebreux, 1891.
[328] See The Source of the Christian Tradition, by E. Dujardin:
Eng. trans. R.P.A., p. 32; and the citations from MM. Vernes and
Dujardin in Mr. Whittaker's Priests, Philosophers, and Prophets,
1911, pp. 124-127.
[329] Mr. Whittaker (p. 128) puts the view that Jewish monotheism was
really a reduction of the universalist monotheism of the Mesopotamian
priesthoods to the purposes of a nationalist God-cult.
[330] S.H.F. i, 44-46.
[331] Even Dean Inge avows that "The distinctive feature of the Jewish
religion is not, as is often supposed, its monotheism. Hebrew religion
in its golden age was monolatry rather than monotheism; and when
Jehovah became more strictly the only God, the cult of intermediate
beings came in, and restored a quasi-polytheism."--Art. "St. Paul"
in Quarterly Review, Jan. 1914, p. 54.
[332] See, however, the contrary thesis maintained by Dr. A. Causse,
Les Prophètes d'Israel et les religions de l'orient, 1913.
[333] Ecce Deus, pp. 71, 75.
[334] Cp. Whittaker, Priests, Philosophers, and Prophets, p. 45.
[335] Cp. Supernatural Religion, ch. iv.
[336] E.g. Art. in The Atlantic Monthly, Nov. 1916, p. 605.
[337] Cp. J. A. Farrer, Paganism and Christianity, R.P.A. rep. pp.,
19-20; Dr. J. E. Carpenter, Phases of Early Christianity, 1916,
p. 57 sq.
[338] It may be argued that the really swift triumph of Islam in a
later age goes to support Professor Smith's thesis. But the triumph
of Islam was primarily military. And Islam too kept its cortège of
"demons."
[339] E.g. in modern China.
[340] P.C. 62-63.
[341] S.H.F. i, 34, 72.
[342] Cp. Weizsäcker, The Apostolic Age, Eng. trans, i, 55. It is
just possible that among people devoutly awaiting the imminent end
of the world, some such communions might have a brief existence.
[343] A good support to Hobbes's thesis that the sin against the Holy
Ghost is sin against the ecclesiastical power.
[344] S.H.C. 70.
[345] Cp. Acts xiii, 1; xv, 32; Rev. xvi, 6; xviii, 20, 24.
[346] Bampton Lectures on The Organization of the Early Christian
Churches, 3rd. ed. 1888, p. ix.
[347] E.S. 113-115.
[348] Hatch, 26. Cp. his Hibbert Lectures, p. 291 sq.
[349] Id. Organization 28.
[350] Id. 28; Foucart, as there cited.
[351] As Hatch notes, p. 35, Clemens Romanus (ii, 16) echoes Tobit,
xii, 8, 9, as to the blessedness of almsgiving. Cp. his citations
from Lactantius, Chrysostom, and the Apostolical Constitutions.
[352] Hatch, p. 35.
[353] Id. p 35.
[354] Hatch, p. 37.
[355] S.H.C. 87 sq.
[356] Hatch, 29.
[357] "The Broken" is used as a noun: bread is only
understood. Evidently the breaking was vitally symbolic, as is
explained in the context. Cp. Luke xxiv, 30, 35.
[358] Irenæus, Against Heresies, v, 3.
[359] See Introd. to Messrs. Hitchcock and Brown's (American) ed.,
1885, p. lxxviii.
[360] Above, p. 132.
[361] C.M. 422.
[362] Bousset in Encyc. Bib. i, 209, following Gunkel, Schöpfung
und Chaos.
[363] Cp. R. Brown, Jr., Primitive Constellations, 1899, i, 64-65,
104, 119, etc.; G. Schiaparelli, Astronomy in the O. T., 1905, p. 72;
Hon. Emmeline M. Plunket, Ancient Calendars and Constellations, 1903,
117-123, and maps; and Hippolytus, Ref. of all Heresies, v, 47-49.
[364] Rev. xviii, 2, 21.
[365] Encyc. Bib. art. James.
[366] A view independently put before his (1896) by the present writer.
[367] Admirably summarized by Mr. T. Whittaker in his Origins of
Christianity. Cp. Van Manen's art. Paul in Encyc. Bib.
[368] Dr. F. C. Conybeare has indicated the view that, Van Manen's
chair having been offered to him after Van Manen's death, he is in
a position to dispose of Van Manen's case by expressing his contempt
for it. And Dr. Conybeare is prepared to accept as genuine the whole
of the epistles, a position rejected by all the professional critics
except the extreme traditionalists.
[369] Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii, 39, end.
[370] This term, it will be noted, tells of an abstract or generalized
and not of a "personal" tradition.
[371] Irenæus, Against Heresies, v, 33.
[372] Canon Charles, note on Apoc. Baruch, xxix, 5.
[373] Myth, Magic, and Morals, 2nd ed. p. 58.
[374] Id. p. 53.
[375] E. B. Nicholson, The Gospel according to the Hebrews, 1879,
p. 101.
[376] Id. p. 104.
[377] C.M. 403 sq.
[378] Art. Gospels in Encyc. Bib. cols. 1868, 1872.
[379] Art. Gospels in Encyc. Bib. cols. 1767, 1846.
[380] 2 Kings i, 8: R.V. marg.
[381] This thesis is put by the Professor in art. Gospels in
Encyc. Bib. col. 1881; also, at greater length, in his lecture,
Jesus in Modern Criticism, and his work on The Johannine Writings
(Eng. trans.; Black, 1907, 1908).
[382] I have dealt with the nine texts seriatim in C.M. 441 sq.,
and P.C. 229 sq. They are more fully and very ably discussed by
Prof. Smith (Ecce Deus, Part III), with most though not with all of
whose criticism I am in agreement.
[383] Eng. trans. p. 31.
[384] P.C. 234.
[385] Pref. to Eng. trans. of Arno Neumann's Jesus, 1906, p. xx.
[386] Work cited, p. 9.
[387] Unless we take the story of Thomas to be an invention to
confute doubters.
[388] See above, p. 113 sq., as to the Nazaræans.
[389] De Principiis, iv, 22.
[390] B. v, c. 61.
[391] Cp. Neander, Church Hist. Bohn trans. i, 482-3. Jerome speaks
(In Matt. xii, 13) of the gospel quo utuntur Nazaraei et Ebionitae,
as if they held it in common. Cp. Nicholson, p. 28.
[392] Hippolytus, Ref. of all Heresies, vii, 22.
[393] Dialogue with Trypho, 47-49.
[394] Neander, as cited, p. 482 and refs.
[395] Epiphanius, Hær. xxx, 16.
[396] Nicholson, pp. 15, 34, 61, 77.
[397] Jesus in Modern Criticism, p. 33.
[398] Cp. the Professor's work on The Johannine Writings, p. 90,
where the same query: "Who could have invented them?" is put as
establishing special sayings of Buddha, Confucius, Zarathustra,
and Mohammed. I cannot follow the logic.
[399] The argument is the same whether we say "inventions of the
evangelists" or "appropriations from other documents, or from hearsay."
[400] P.C. 218 sq.; C.M. 395.
[401] P.C. 206, 223, 228; C.M. 395.
[402] Compare the story of Joseph, Gen. xxxix.
[403] Irenæus, Against Heresies, i, 26.
[404] Ecce Deus, p. 60.
[405] Id. pp. 171-2.
[406] Cp. Ecce Deus, p. 26.
[407] Dr. Thorburn (Mythical Interpretation, p. 34) sees fit to argue
that the Christian phatnê was a "totally different thing" from the
pagan liknon (that is, if he argues anything at all). He carefully
ignores the sculptures which show them to be the same. (C.M. 192, 307.)
[408] Cp. Soltau on the appeal made by the story (Birth of Jesus
Christ, Eng. tr. p. 4). "What is there," he asks, "that can be compared
with this in the religious literature of any other people?" The critic
should compare the literature of Krishnaism.
[409] Ludwig Conrady argues (Die Quelle der kanonischen
Kindheitsgeschichte Jesus', 1900, p. 272 sq.) that the stories of
the Infancy in the Apocryphal Gospels, which appear to be at that
point the sources for Matthew and Luke, probably derive from Egypt,
where the hieratic ideals of virginity were high. This may be, but
the evidence is very imperfect.
[410] The precedents of the divine paternity of Alexander and Augustus,
stressed by Soltau, would surely be inadequate. Heathen emperors
would hardly be "types" for early Christians.
[411] The Rev. Dr. Thorburn idly argues (Mythical Interpretation,
pp. 38-39) that such stories do not affirm parthenogenesis where
a Goddess or a woman is described as married. As if Mary were not
in effect so described! But in Greek mythology we have the special
case of the spouse-goddess Hêrê, who is repeatedly represented as
conceiving without congress. (C.M. 295.)
[412] P.C. 166, note 3.
[413] C.M. 99; P.C. 165.
[414] C.M. 191 sq., 306 sq.
[415] Encyc. Bib. art. Moses, col. 3206.
[416] C.M. 298.
[417] Id. 167 sq.
[418] C.M. 168-9. Cp. Dr. G. Contenau, La déesse nue Babylonienne,
1914, pp. 7, 15, 16, 57, 78, 80, 101, 129, 131.
[419] C.M. 180-205.
[420] Soltau argues not only that the belief in the Virgin Birth
"could not have originated in Palestine; anyhow, it could never
have taken its rise in Jewish circles," but that "the idea that the
Holy Spirit begat Jesus can have no other than a Hellenic origin"
(Birth of Jesus Christ, Eng. trans, pp. 47-48). He forgets the "sons
of God" in Genesis vi, 2. The stories of the births of Isaac and
Samson inferribly had an original form less decorous than the Biblical.
[421] It is doubly edifying to remember that the writer who pretends
to find in avowed analogies of divine names, functions, and epithets
a theory of a philological "equation," himself insists on finding
in every New Testament naming of a Jesus, and every pagan allusion
to a "Chrestus" or "Christus," a biographical allusion to Jesus of
Nazareth. For Dr. Conybeare, the Jesus of the Apocalypse and the
"Chrestus" of Suetonius are testimonies to the existence of Jesus
the son of Mary and Joseph. The very absurdity he seeks to find in
the myth-theory is inherent in his own method.
[422] C.M. 301-2 and refs.
[423] The Rev. Dr. Thorburn (Mythical Interpretation, p. 21) cites
from the Encyc. Bib. as "the words of Dr. Cheyne" words which are not
Cheyne's at all, but those of Robertson Smith. Smith, so scientific
in his anthropology, is always irrationalist in his theology.
[424] R.V. "enrolment." Dr. Thorburn appears to argue (p. 39) that the
"taxing" story in the Krishna-myth is derived from "ignorant copying"
of the English Authorized Version! The "to be taxed" of the A.V. of
course represents the traditional interpretation--that taxing was
the object of the enrolment.
[425] C.M. 189-90.
[426] C.M. 273.
[427] I have been represented, by scholars who will not take the
trouble to read the books they attack, as deriving the Christ-myth in
general from the Krishna-myth. This folly belongs solely to their own
imagination. Dr. Conybeare's assertion (Histor. Christ, p. 69) that in
my theory the Proto-Christian Joshua-God was a composite myth "made up
of memories of Krishna ... and a hundred other fiends," is of the same
order. In his case, of course, I do not charge omission to read the
statement he falsifies: it is simply a matter of his normal inability
to understand any position he attacks. As regards the Krishna-myth I
suggest only in the detail of the "taxing" the possibility of Christian
borrowing through an intermediate source: in another, that of "the bag"
which is carried by a hostile demon-follower of Krishna (C.M. 241-3),
I suggest the possibility of Indian borrowing from the fourth gospel,
where "the bag" is presumptively derived from a stage accessory in
the mystery-drama, Judas carrying a bag to receive his reward.
[428] C.M. 205 sq.
[429] C.M. 207.
[430] Id. 347 sq.; Drews, Die Petrus Legende (pamphlet), 1910.
[431] Dr. Conybeare, undeviating in error, represents me
(Histor. Christ, p. 73) as suggesting that the epithet bifrons led to
the invention of the story of Peter's Denial. I had expressly pointed
out that the epithet bifrons did not carry an aspersive sense, and
suggested that the figure of Janus, with its Petrine characteristics,
might have inspired the story of the Denial (C.M. 350-1). The subject
of iconographic myth is evidently unknown matter to Dr. Conybeare.
[432] C.M. 318 sq.
[433] Die Versuchung Jesu (in Zur Gesch. und Litt. des Urchristentums,
III, ii, 1907, pp. 53, 65.)
[434] The simple principle of holding Mark for primary wherever it
is brief has meant many such assumptions, in which many of us once
uncritically acquiesced.
[435] As cited, p. 85.
[436] Id. pp. 92-93.
[437] Test. Naphtali, viii, 4.
[438] This is ably argued by Prof. Smith.
[439] C.M. 329 sq.
[440] Id. 335 sq.
[441] Cp. Soltau, Das Fortleben des Heidentums in d. altchr. Kirche,
1906; S.H.C. 67 sq., 101 sq.; J. A. Farrer, Paganism and Christianity,
R.P.A. rep. passim.
[442] C.M. 220 and note 2. Cp. W. J. Wilkins, Paganism in the Papal
Church, 1901.
[443] Cp. Saint-Yves, Les Saints successeurs des Dieux, 1907; J. Rendel
Harris, The Dioscuri in the Christian Legends, 1903.
[444] Compare Soltau's remarks on the hostility still shown to
professional scholars who merely reject the Virgin Birth (work
cited, p. 2), and the plea of Brandt for his piety (Die evangelische
Geschichte, Vorwort).
[445] Apropos d'histoire des religions, end.
[446] Compare the recent volume of debate between Dr. Sanday
and the Rev. N. P. Williams on Form and Content in the Christian
Tradition. Mr. Williams argues against Dr. Sanday--who is less
destructive in his criticism than M. Loisy--in this very fashion.
[447] Essay on Dr. Johnson (1884).
[448] Apropos d'histoire des religions, p. 320.
[449] Jésus et la trad. évang. pp. 286, 288.
[450] Id. p. 277.
[451] Jesus in Modern Criticism, p. 85.
[452] Id. p. 86.
[453] Id. p. 12.
[454] Id. p. 87.
[455] Jesus in Modern Criticism, pp. 79-81.
[456] C.M. 392.
[457] C.M. p. 90.
[458] So far as I am aware, the only explicit condemnation passed in
the German Reichstag on the German submarine policy has been delivered
by the Socialist Adolf Hoffmann, a professed Freethinker. He pronounced
it "shameful," and was duly called to order.
[459] I have briefly put the case in pref. to S.H.C.
[460] Dr. Rendel Harris, on the other hand, in effect avows that his
heart is warmed by fictitious "Odes of Solomon," in which the writer
puts imaginary language in the mouth of the Christ.
[461] See J. McCabe, Sources of the Morality of the Gospels, R.P.A.,
1914.
[462] C.M. 403 sq.
[463] Test. Gad, vi, 1-7.
[464] Canon Charles, in loc.
[465] There are many such close parallels of thought and diction
between the two books. See Canon Charles's introduction, § 26.
[466] In The Historical Jesus, pp. 23-26, I had to point out how two
Doctors of Divinity, of high pretensions, had scornfully denied that
that story had ever been transcended, and how signally they erred. The
second, the Rev. Dr. T. J. Thorburn, has since produced another work,
in which the subject is carefully ignored. When theologians thus
exhibit themselves as morally colour-blind, they relieve us of the
necessity of proving at any length how congenitally incompetent they
are to determine the moral problems of sociology by the authority
they presume to flaunt.
[467] Schmiedel, Jesus, end.
[468] Art. Acts in Encyc. Bib., citing iv, 20; xiv, 22; xx, 24; xxi,
13; xxiv, 16.
[469] Egyptian Magic, 1899, pref.
[470] Comparative Religion, 1912, p. 57.
[471] Set forth in the National Reformer, May 15, 1887. Barnabas in
effect avows that he is copying previous teaching.
[472] There are two titles. It is surmised, with good reason, that this
was the original, though Mr. Gordon argues that it may be Sabellian,
and of the third or fourth century. The "Lord" (the name is here used
without the article, which was normally used in Christian writings)
refers to the God of the Jews, not to Jesus.
[473] A pagan as well as a Jewish commonplace. Cp. Jeremiah xxi,
8; Hesiod, Works and Days, 285 sq.; Xenophon, Memorabilia, ii, 1;
Persius, Sat. iii, 56. Persius followed Pythagoras, who taught that
the ways of virtue and vice were like the thin and thick lines of the
letter Y. This is the origin of the Christian formula of the broad
and the narrow path. The conception of "the right way" is found among
the ancient Persians. Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, i, 539 (§ 448).
[474] Cp. Levit. xix, 18; Matt. xxii, 37-39.
[475] Cp. Tobit iv, 15; Matt. vii, 12. Hillel (Talmud, Sabbath, 306)
puts the rule, as here, in the sane negative form, which is also the
Chinese. The gospel form is less rational. The sentiment is the first
principle of morals, and is common to all religions and all races.
[476] Cp. Matt. v, 44; Prov. xxv, 21; Talmud refs. in C.M. 406;
and Test. of Twelve Patr. Dan. iii, iv; Gad, iii-vi. Canon Spence
notes that the resemblance between the Testaments and the Didachê is
"very marked." Note that in the Revised Version the text in Matthew
is cut down--a recognition of tampering, in imitation of Luke vi, 27-8.
[477] Gr. "the nations" = "the Gentiles." Here, as elsewhere, we render
by an English idiom, which gives the real force of the original. It
will be observed that the compilers of the first gospel (v, 46)
substitute "tax-gatherers" for the original, by way of applying the
discourse to Jews in Palestine, where the tax-gatherers represented
foreign oppression.
[478] A probable interpolation.
[479] Cp. Lament. iii, 30, and the pagan parallels cited by Mr. McCabe,
Sources of Mor. of Gospels, pp. 229, 231.
[480] This clause, which is not in Matthew, is intelligible only as
an exhortation to Jews in foreign lands. The reference to 1 Cor. vi,
1, cannot make it plausible as a Christian utterance.
[481] This is otherwise translated by the Rev. Mr. Heron, Church of
the Sub-Apostolic Age, p. 16, thus: "the Father wisheth men to give to
all from their private portion"; and by Dr. Taylor, Teaching, 1886,
p. 122, thus: "the Father wills that to all men there be given of
our own free gifts."
[482] Cp. Acts xx, 35. That passage probably derives from this,
and loses point in the transference.
[483] Mr. Heron renders this "under discipline," because the early
Church had no prison for its backsliders. Quite so. The reference is to
Pagan prisons, and the warning is to Jewish beggars. The Greek phrase,
en synochê, here clearly refers to a prison, though in Luke xxi, 25,
it is rendered "distress" and in 2 Cor. ii, 4, "anguish." Cp. Josephus,
8 Ant. iii, 2. Canon Spence, who translates "being in sore straits,"
offers the alternative "coming under arrest."
[484] Cp. Ecclesiasticus, xii, 1 sq. It will be observed that the
concluding clause modifies the earlier precept of indiscriminate
giving. It may be an addition.
[485] A more developed teaching is found in the Testaments of the
Patriarchs, as above cited.
[486] Gr. zêlôtês. The American editors translate this "jealous";
but Mr. Heron and Dr. Taylor more faithfully render it "a zealot,"
though this, a natural warning to Jews, would come oddly to
Christians. "Zealot" specified a fanatical Jewish type (Luke vi, 15;
Acts i, 13; xxi, 20), but the Jesuists were exhorted to be "zealous"
(same word) in 1 Cor. xiv, 12; Tit. ii, 14. Nowhere are Christian
"zealots" rebuked; but Jewish fanatics in foreign lands needed warning
from peace-loving teachers. On the other hand, the rendering "jealous"
is evidently adopted because of the very difficulty of conceiving
that Christian teachers would warn their flocks against being either
"zealous" or "zealots." The context, however, clearly justifies
our translation.
[487] Gr. "high-eyed." The meaning evidently is "always looking at
people," and there is implied the injunction to look down, as is
the wont of nuns. Since deciding on the rendering given, we notice
that the Rev. A. Gordon, in his translation (sold at Essex Hall,
Essex Street), has "bold of eye." Dr. Taylor has "of high looks."
[488] Mr. Gordon has "a diviner from birds"; M. Sabatier "augure";
Dr. Taylor "given to augury."
[489] Mr. Gordon has "a fire lustrator."
[490] Cp. Matt. v, 5.
[491] Gr. "the high" = the upper or ruling classes.
[492] Cp. Heb. xiii, 7.
[493] Gr. hê kyriotês. Messrs. Gordon and Heron render "whence the
lordship is spoken" or "proclaimed." In the New Testament (Eph. i,
21; Col. i, 16; Jude viii; 2 Pet. ii, 10) the same word is rendered
"dominion" by the Revisers.
[494] Mr. Gordon adds here "in praying" in brackets. This is a guess,
which seems to have no warrant, though Canon Spence leans to it. The
sentence connects with the preceding one.
[495] Cp. Dan. iv, 27; Test. Patr. Zabulon, viii.
[496] Cp. Acts iv, 32. Here we seem to have the hint for the legend.
[497] Cp. Prov. xiii, 24; xxii, 15; xxiii, 13-14; xxix, 17;
Ecclus. vii, 23-4; xxx, 1-2. A common Jewish sentiment, not found in
the New Testament. Cp. Eph. vi, 4.
[498] Or type. Here, as in the New Testament, there is not the faintest
pretence of impugning slavery. The resistance to that began among
Pagans, not among Jews or Christians.
[499] Gr. zêlotypia. This is the normal Greek word for jealousy. Here,
however, Mr. Heron has "envy," perhaps rightly.
[500] The American editors have "pursuing revenge."
[501] So Mr. Heron, we think rightly. M. Sabatier agrees. The American
editors have "toiling for," and Mr. Gordon "labouring for."
[502] Or, handiwork.
[503] Probably a river or the sea. Cp. Carpenter, Phases of
Christianity, p. 244, citing the Canons of Hippolytus.
[504] The Syrian method, introduced into Europe after the Crusades.
[505] The Jews, at least the Pharisees, fasted on Monday and Thursday,
the days of the ascent and descent of Moses to and from Sinai.
[506] That is, Friday, called "the preparation" (for the Sabbath) by
the Jews. Mr. Heron notes that the Christians fasted on Wednesdays
and Fridays, but does not explain how a Christian document came to
use the Jewish expression with no Christian qualification.
[507] After all the previous allusions to "the Lord" (without the
article, save once in ch. iv and once in ch. vi) had plainly signified
"God," we here have "the Lord" (with the article) suddenly used in a
clearly Christian sense, to signify Jesus. The transition is flagrant.
[508] That is, in the original sense, thank-offering, as Mr. Gordon
notes. Now, the sacrament, as instituted in the gospels, is not
a thank-offering. It is evidently from the Didachê, or similar
early lore, that the word comes to be used for the sacrament by the
Fathers. It is never so used in the New Testament.
[509] As the American editors note, Clement of Alexandria (Quis
Dives Salvetur, § 29) calls Jesus "the vine of David." As Jesus is
"the vine" in the fourth gospel, but not in the synoptics, we may
surmise that the Didachê was current at Alexandria.
[510] Gr. paidos. Canon Spence and Mr. Heron render "Son"; but this
is not the normal word for son (huios), and the same term is used
for David and Jesus. It is rendered "servant" in Acts iii, 13, 26;
iv, 27, R.V.
[511] Gr. "in the ages."
[512] Cp. Matt. vii, 6. There is no such application there.
[513] Mr. Heron takes this to signify that the love-feast accompanied
the Eucharist. But he notes, from Dr. Taylor, that the Jews had
their chagigah before the Passover, in order that the latter might
be eaten "after being filled." Mr. Gordon translates: "After the
full reception."
[514] Gr. despota. The American editors (who render it "Master")
note that this word becomes rare in Christian literature towards the
latter part of the second century.
[515] So in the MS. Bryennios conjectures huiô (Son) for theô, but
this does not justify the alteration of the text by several editors.
[516] A Syriac phrase meaning not, as is sometimes said, "The Lord
cometh," but "The Lord is come." It was presumably an ancient formula
in the prayers hailing the rise of the sun.
[517] It is difficult to reconcile this arrangement with any of the New
Testament data as to the practice of the Jesuist apostles. Cp. Canon
Spence, p. 91, as to "the Jewish habit of wandering from place
to place."
[518] Cp. Mk. iii, 28-30; Matt. xii, 31; 1 Thess. v, 19, 20.
[519] The American editors have "a meal"; Canon Spence "a
Love-Feast." See his note. And cp. Jevons, Introd. to Hist. of
Religion, p. 333, as to the Greek agyrtes.
[520] On this obscure passage Mr. Heron has a long note, which,
however, supplies little light. Dr. Taylor notes that a "cosmic
mystery" [Gr. mystêrion kosmikon] is "the manifestation in the
phenomenal world of a 'mystery of the upper world,'" citing the
Zohar. Canon Spence suggests that the "table" connects with the
"mystery."
[521] Gr. christemporos. Warnings of this kind are given in the
Epistles of Barnabas, Ignatius, and Polycarp. See Canon Spence's note.
[522] Note the remarkable advance in the economic provision for the
preacher, clearly a later item than ch. xi.
[523] Canon Spence rightly translates: "on the Lord's Lord's-day." This
singular phrase is obscured by the American editors, who simply
translate "the Lord's day." The Greek is kyriakên Kyriou. It is
thus clear that the expression "Lord's day" was in Pagan use, and
that the phrase "Lord's-day of [the] Lord" was an adaptation of the
standing expression to either Jewish or Jesuist use. This chapter may
have belonged to the pre-Christian document. There is no allusion to
the crucifixion.
[524] Here the reference is clearly to Yahweh. The document cannot
have been originally written with the same title used indifferently
of Yahweh and Jesus.
[525] Mal. i, 11.
[526] Literally, "perform the liturgy" = "serve the (public) service."
[527] Here we have the Christist expression.
[528] This may have been a Jesuist allusion to Bar Cochab, about the
year 135.
[529] Or "outspreading."
[530] An early support for the "Conditional Immortality Association."
[531] Apol. i, 26.
[532] If we could but trust the assertion of Origen in the next century
(Against Celsus, vi, 11) that there were then no Simonians left,
the presumption would be that they had been absorbed by another cult.
[533] Ovid, Fasti, vi, 213; Livy, viii, 20.
[534] Cory's Ancient Fragments, ed. 1876, p. 92; Lenormant's Chaldean
Magic, Eng. tr., p. 131.
[535] Sanchoniathon, in Cory, as cited, p. 5.
[536] Eratosthenes' Canon of Theban Kings, in Cory as cited,
pp. 139-141.
[537] Diodorus Siculus, ii, 4.
[538] Bible Folk Lore, 1884, p. 45; cp. Steinthal on Samson, Eng. tr.,
with Goldziher, p. 408.
[539] Movers, Die Phönizier, i, 558.
[540] Goldziher, Hebrew Mythology, Eng. tr., p. 132; cp. Buttmann,
Mythologus, 1828, i, 221, and Sanchoniathon, as above.
[541] Volkmar, Die Religion Jesu, 1857, p. 281.
[542] Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, 1884, i, 214 n.
[543] McClintock and Strong's Bib. Cycl. s. v.
[544] Chaldean Magic, Eng. tr., p. 44.
[545] Against Celsus, v, 45.
[546] See it in McClintock and Strong's Cycl. s. v.; cp. Schürer,
Jewish Nation in Time of Christ, Eng. tr., Div. ii, Vol. ii, p. 83,
where the prayer is given as the Shemoneh Esreh.
[547] Schürer, p. 88.
[548] McClintock and Strong's Bib. Cycl. s. v.
[549] 1 Samuel xxviii, 13.
[550] 1 Kings xvi, 24.
[551] Die Religion Jesu, as cited.
[552] 12 Antiq. v, 5.
[553] G. L. Bauer, Theol. of the Old Test., Eng. tr., 1837, p. 5;
Etheridge, The Targums on the Pentateuch, i (1862), introd., pp. 5,
14, 17.
[554] Bauer and Etheridge, as cited.
[555] Gieseler, Comp. of Ec. Hist., Eng. tr., i, 48.
[556] De Dea Syria, c. 33.
[557] Die Phönizier, i, 417, 634.
[558] Lenormant, as cited, p. 129.
[559] Justin, Apol. i, 26; Irenæus, i, 23, § 2; Tertullian, De
Anima, 34.
[560] Die christliche Gnosis, 1835, p. 309.
[561] De Dea Syria, 40.
[562] Id. 32.
[563] Lenormant, as cited, p. 117.
[564] Irenæus, as cited.
[565] Lucian, as cited.
[566] Reland, Dissertat. Miscellan., Pars i, 1706, p. 147;
cp. Enc. Bib. art. Samaritans, 4a. The dove was everywhere regarded in
Syria as sacred, in connection with the myth of Semiramis (Diodorus,
ii, 4), which bears so closely on the name Samaria.
[567] John viii, 48.
[568] Mem. the aged Simeon of Luke ii, who blessed the child
Jesus. "The Holy Spirit was upon him" (v. 25). With him is associated
Anna the Prophetess. Cp. Hannah, mother of Samuel.
[569] Professor Smith, who accepts the historicity of Simon (Ecce Deus,
pp. 11, 103) does so without noting that it has been challenged. It
would be interesting to have his grounds for discriminating between
the God and the man.
[570] McClintock and Strong's Bib. Cyc.
[571] Kuenen, Religion of Israel, Eng. tr., iii, 314.
[572] 1 Cor. xv, 10; 2 Cor. xi, 13, 23; Gal. i, 7; ii, 11.
[573] 1 Cor. xv, 9; 2 Cor. xii, 4; Gal. i, 12.
[574] Even a late copyist or reader of one of the Clementine
MSS. confusedly recognised a hostility to Paul as underlying his
text. See Anti-Nicene Lib. trans., Recog. i, 70.
[575] Acts iii, 1-12, etc.; xiv, 8-15, etc.
[576] Gal. ii, 11-14.
[577] See the whole data discussed in Baur, Ch. Hist. of the First
Three Cent., Eng. tr., i, 91-98, etc.; Paul, Eng. tr., i, 88, 95,
etc.; Zeller, Contents and Origin of the Acts, Eng. tr., i, 250 sq.;
Volkmar, Die Religion Jesu; Schmiedel, art. Simon Magus in Encyc. Bib.
[578] Cp. 2 Cor. xi, 4.
[579] John iv, 21.