Full Text for The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters (Text)

(!lnurnrbtu UJl1rnlngtrul :!Inut41y Continuing Lehre und Wehre (Vol. LXXVI) Magazin fuer Ev.-Luth. Homiletik (Vol. LIV) Theol. Quarterly (1897-1920) -Theol. Monthly (Vol. X) Vol. I June, 1930 No.6 CONTENTS Page PIEPER, F.: Thesen, die dem "theologischen Schluss- examen" dienen koennen... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 401 DALLMANN, W.: How Peter Became Pope .. . ............ 406 ENGELDER, TH.: Marburg: Der Sieg ueber den Unionis- mus. (Fortsetzung.)... . . ... ...... . . .. ...... . ........... 416 KRETZMANN, P. E.: The Place and the Time of the Cap- tivity Letters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 426 WISMAR, O. W.: Sermon Study 011 Eph. 2, 19-22 .... . ... 434 Dispositionen ueber die Eisenacher Evangelienreihe... .. .. . 440 Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches .... " 450 Vermischtes und zeitgeschichtliche Notizen ................ 468 Book Review. - Literatur. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 470 Ein Predlger muss nlcht all.in ","'den, also dass er die Schafe unterweise, wie ele rechte Ohr~en BOllen seln, sondem auch dllneben den Woelfen wehren, dan • • ie die Schaf. nlcht angreifen und mit falscher Lehre verfuehren und Irrtum eln· fuehren. - Luther. Es ist keln Ding, daB die Leute mehr bei der Kirche behaelt, denn die gute Predlgt. - Apo!ogt.., Art. Iij. If the trumpet give an uncertain Bound, who shall prepare himself to the battle t 100'.14,8. Published for the Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States CONCORDIA PU:BLISHING HOUSE, St. Louis, Mo. 426 The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters.* Four letters ascribed to the Apostle Paul have from ancient times been called the Oaptivity Letters, namely, those to the Oolossians, to Philemon, to the Ephesians, and to the Philippians, and the tradi- tional view is that they were written during Paul's first captivity in Rome, from 61 to 63 A. D. But some recent scholars in the field of New Testament isagogics are inclined to reject the traditional view, preferring to assume that either Oaesarea, between 58 and 60, is to be accepted or Ephesus, between 54 and 57. The proponents of Oaesarea have some difficulty in adjusting historical data, however, while those who would speak in favor of Ephesus seem to have a much stronger case. For that reason it may be profitable to make a somewhat more careful examination of the theory which attempts to place the Oap- tivity Letters in the time of the Ephesine sojourn. The investigation is not a mere bit of pastime in the field of introduction, but touches upon certain critical questions which may impugn the veracity of certain statements in various books of the New Testament. Which view, then, may most safely and correctly be held concerning the place and the time of the Captivity Letters, that which ascribes them to the Ephesine sojourn of Paul, between 54 and 57, or the traditional account, which states that they were written in Rome, during the first captivity? Before we take up the arguments for the writing of the Oaptivity Letters during the Ephesine sojourn of Paul, it ought to be noted that Feine places both Oolossians and Ephesians in the time of the Oaesarean captivity, chiefly on the basis of negative, subjective reasons. On that account even Appel brushes Feine's contention .aside when he writes: "Oaesarea as the place of writing Philippians, Philemon, Oolossians, and Ephesians is excluded by the traveling plans of Paul. According to Acts 19, 21 Paul, even in Ephesus, had the definite intention to travel to Jerusalem via Achaia and thence to Rome. This intention he also expresses in the letter to the Romans, written from Oorinth, chap. 15,23, and in a dream he re- ceives the assurance from the Lord, Acts 23, 11, that this intention should be realized in spite of his arrest. Now, indeed, this realization was considerably retarded by his arrest, but that very fact would be a stimulus for the apostle to lose no time in carrying it out after his release. Thus he cannot have written Philippians from Oaesarea, for according to chap. 2, 24 he intends to visit Philippi immediately after his release, nor the other letters, for according to Philemon 22 he * Although in the isagogical question here treated absolute certainty cannot be attained, a study of its various aspects will prove stimulating and helpful. - EDITORIAL NOTE. The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. 427 plans a journey to Oolossae. He might still have determined to make a trip to Rome in a roundabout way if the condition in those con- gregations to which he addressed letters had been one to cause him apprehension. But that was not the case (cp. Phil. 1, 3 ff.; 2,12; 4, 1; 001. 1, 3 f. ; 2, 5, and all of Ephesians)." (Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 52.) The reasons for assuming an Ephesine captivity of Paul are found entirely in a number of passages contained in the two letters to the Oorinthians. In 1 Oor. 15,32 the apostle writes: "If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what ad- vantageth it me if the dead rise not?" This is interpreted as a reference to a gladiatorial combat in which the apostle was forced to take part after being arrested by the Roman authorities. In further support of this contention several passages in Second Oorinthians are ad- duced, such as chap. 1, 8-10: "For we would not have you ignorant, brethren, of our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, above strength, insomuch that we despaired even of life; but we had the sentence of death in ourselves that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God, which raiseth the dead, who delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver." The reasons for placing Oolossians, Philemon, and Ephesians at Ephesus are given by Appel (p. 54) as follows: "1. The statements made concerning the captivity; for the tribulations referred to in Phil. 2,27; 4,14; Eph. 3, 13 remind one of 1 Oor. 4, 9; 15,30 ff.; 2 Oor. 1, 8 ff.; and in any event the apostle, during a captivity as- sociated with so many tribulations, could not preach the Word of God, Phil. 1, 13 f.; 001.4, 3; Eph. 6, 19. - 2. The local circumstances presupposed in the letters. From Ephesus the apostle could easily make the short trip to Oolossae, Philemon 22, and even Philippi was located so near that the trip there and back would not consume very much time, to which the further consideration must be added that the sojourn planned for that place, according to 2, 24, could be carried out during the trip to Achaia, which was announced in 1 001'. 16, 5. If Paul was in Ephesus, he might have the intention to send Timothy to Philippi and to await his return and yet give them the prospect of his early arrival in Philippi, chap. 2, 19 ff. Moreover, the news of the concern of the Philippians over the condition of Epaphroditus might have gotten back from Philippi before it had been possible to send a report of his recovery, Phil. 2, 25 ff., just as Paul might have sent Onesimus to Oolossae, even if he intended to use his service dur- ing his captivity, and he could have made arrangement for quarters at the house of Philemon, Philemon 11 ff." The reasons for placing the letter to the Philippians in the alleged Ephesine captivity are enumerated by Feine as follows (Einleitung in das N Bue Testament, 150 ff.): "1. Ohapter 3 is an arraignment 428 The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. of Judaism, ... but we may not think of these J udaists as being present in Philippi. . .. 2. In language, literary form, and presenta- tion of thought Philippians is closer to the older letters than to the Oaptivity Letters. . .. 3. The case against Paul (Phil. 1 and 2) cannot be the same as the one which was brought against him according to Acts 23. . .. 4. The local statements of the letter fit not only Rome, but may be claimed also for Ephesus. . .. 5. The assumption that Paul wrote in Ephesus will more easily explain certain statements in Philippians (the travel plans of Paul, the conflict of Phil. 1, 30, the exchange of co=unications between Paul and the Philippians)." Such are the points which are adduced by Feine in support of the hypothesis concerning the writing of the Oaptivity Letters during an alleged captivity in Ephesus, sometime between 54 and 57, prefer- ably in 56. Before we take up the counter-arguments from the historical data of the Book of Acts and the epistles themselves, let us register the objections made recently by other scholars in the field. Barth writes (Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 67 f.): "Ooncerning Paul's ex- periences during his Roman captivity we learn in the Oaptivity Letters to the Ephesians, Philippians, Oolossians, and to Philemon. These are not written in Oaesarea (as Schneckenburger, Thiersch, Haupt, Feine - in part - assume), since Paul intended to travel from there to Rome and therefore would hardly have announced visits in Asia Minor and in Macedonia, as he does in Philemon 22 and Phil. 2, 24, since furthermore the escaped slave Onesimus could much more easily hope to remain undiscovered in populous Rome than in Oaesarea, and since the complaint of Paul that he had only a few fellow-workers of the circumcision in his neighborhood would not fit for Oaesarea, where, among others, Philip lived. On the other hand, all these references are easily explained if Paul wrote the letters in Rome. There he was not altogether alone, but he was visited by disciples, who came and went, such as Timothy, Luke, Aristarchus, Mark, Jesus Justus. Through these and by his daily intercession before God he remained in fellowship with his congregations. He felt the bodily absence from them as a distinct interference with his activity; sometimes presentiments of death came upon him, Phil. 1,20 f.; 2, 17 f.; he felt that he had become older (Philemon 9) and occasionally resented the fact that some preachers of the Gospel in Rome believed that they no longer owed the captive any consideration, Phil. 1,15 f.; 2, 21. But stronger than all such impressions was the joy over the successes which he as a captive had, for example, among the soldiers, Phil. 1, 13, which made his sufferings appear as a con- tinuation of the saving sufferings of Jesus by virtue of the communion of his life with the exalted Lord; but joy also over the powerfully advancing evangelization of the Orient and the Occident, through The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. 429 which he saw the joyful message even now proclaimed in the whole world, yea, almost to every creature which is under heaven, Col. 1, 6.23." And Knopf writes (Einfuehrtmg in das Neue Testament, 80): ""When Paul, soon after writing Romans, made the trip to Jerusalem, he was there taken captive and at first kept in captivity in Caesarea, then, after a tedious journey, two years in Rome. To the time of this captivity, and very likely that of Rome, are to be ascribed these letters." Let us now take up the points which have been adduced in favor of Ephesus as the place of the Captivity Letters and see whether they are tenable in view of the historical data presented in the Book of Acts and the historical sections of the epistles. 1. As to the Ephesine captivity, on which the entire theory is based. The assertion that 1 Cor. 4, 9; 15, 30 ff.; 2 Cor. 1,8 ff., es- pecially when compared with Phil. 2, 27; 4,14; Eph. 3, 13, refer to a captivity, and in particular 2 Cor. 1, 8 ff. even to a gladiatorial combat, is not warranted by the content of the passages. The tribula- tions and affiictions of which Paul speaks there may well have been such as pertained to the spirit alone, having their basis in the dif- ficulties with which the apostle was battling, not only in establishing the congregation in Ephesus on a sounder basis, but also in removing -the obstacles which had arisen in the congregation at Corinth, as his two letters to Corinth so amply demonstrate. If 1 Cor. 15,32 is to be taken as referring to an actual physical encounter with wild beasts in the arena at Ephesus, then we should practically be compelled to construe the word of 2 Tim. 4, 17, in the same manner, for there Paul speaks of being delivered out of the mouth of the lion. There is no evidence for assuming either a local or a general persecution of the Christians on the part of the Roman government as early as the year 56, and if Paul had at any time been condenmed to a gladiatorial combat, it is more than likely that at least one of the early Christian writers would have given us an account of that encounter. That the apostle frequently had to deal with the hostility of the Jews and that there might occasionally have been a sudden flare-up of the author- ities, is shown by the experience which he had at Philippi and his almost casual reference "in prisons more frequent" of 2 Cor. 11,23.- But the case of the alleged Ephesine captivity becomes still weaker if we carefully read the account given in Acts 19 and 20. In these chapters there is not one word to indicate that Paul was im- prisoned by the Roman authorities for as much as one day. The account gives him an uninterrupted activity, and even the tumult of Demetrius did not stop the work. It can hardly be called an exag- geration when Paul says of himself, Acts 20, 31: "Remember that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn everyone night and day with tears." Cpo v. 18. Moreover, when the town clerk of Ephesus 430 The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. addressed the assembly in the theater, he did not intimate with one syllable that any gladiatorial combat of Ohristian leaders had been held or was contemplated, and this man can certainly not be accused of a bias in favor of Paul. And the probability becomes still stronger against the Ephesine captivity of Paul, especially one instigated by the Roman authorities, if we remember that some of the Asiarchs, sent word to him, warning him not to go out among the people, Acts 19, 31. Whether these Asiarchs were religio-political officers who presided over the annual assembly of civic deputies, as Mommsen, Lightfoot, Ramsay, and others think, or municipal delegates of individual cities to the provincial assembly, as Brandis insists, would make little difference in the significance of the incident alluded to. rt is clear that some of the most prominent men in all of Proconsular Asia were deeply concerned for the welfare of the apostle, a solicitude which would have been impossible if Paul had at this period been under suspicion from the Roman government or had been in prison or in the arena shortly before. For if he had been vindicated at this time, he would certainly not have continued his complaipt about the afHictions which continued to bother him, even after he left Ephesus and traveled northward along the coast, first to Troas and then over' to Macedonia. Op.2 Oor. 2, 13; 7,5-7. Every reason of probability and historical background speaks against an Ephesine captivity of Paul. 2. But what about the long array of points of probability offered by Appel and Feine, not to mention others, who offer little or no, evidence for their placing the Oaptivity Letters at Ephesus ~ Surely the proposed visit of Paul at Oolossae, Philemon 22, could be made, from Rome after the release of the apostle; for a trip of this length would hardly hold terrors to one who had traveled so often and so far. And as for the trip to Philippi, Phil. 2,24, the difference in the journey between Ephesus and Philippi, on the one hand, and Rome- and Philippi, on the other, was by no means as great as has been implied. The roads along the Aegean Sea north of Pergamos were- not of the best kind, and the trip by coastwise vessel could well con- sume more than a week. On the other hand, the roads leading from Rome toward the southeast and connecting with the famous Via Egnatia, which crossed Macedonia, would take a traveler to Philippi in less than two weeks. And, as a matter of fact, such a comparison was not even necessary; for Paul might well, after his release, have made a trip through the entire East, through Achaia and Macedonia as well as through Proconsular Asia and all of Asia Minor. - The argument brought by Feine, based on style and vocabulary, is ad- mittedly always tenuous, if not entirely unreliable. Since the occasion for writing to the Philippians was of a different nature than that which incited the apostle to write to the congregations at Oolossae The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. 431 :and Ephesus, since also the circumstances by this time had taken on an entirely different character, one could well expect a different style. The assertion that the congregation at Philippi was not bothered with J udaistic teachers is entirely subjective, even if it is not based upon a false conception of the nature of this menace to the Apostolic Ohurch. - Even the statement of Feine, based apparently upon ,careful research, that the word R(!at7:W(!IOY in Phil. 1,13 and the ex- pression OL 8X 'tiJq KairJa(!or; olx{aq in Phil. 4, 22 does not necessarily refer only to Rome, is not decisive for concluding the argument. For -even if the palaces of the proconsuls in the senatorial provinces were also designated as praet01'ia, and even if the expression domtis or familia Caesaris was used for the servants in charge of imperial property or possessions throughout the empire, this does not change the fact that the designations were eminently correct in Rome, where they had originated, and could therefore be used with the highest propriety. Besides, it is most fitting that Rome should be thought of in connection with Phil. 1, 19-25 and 2,23; for these passages, as compared with Acts 28, 16.30, clearly show that Paul enjoyed the custodia libera for two years, until his case came up for its hearing in the imperial court. He was then removed to the pretorium of Rome, in the immediate neighborhood of the imperial palace, where he had an opportunity to do more extensive mission-work among the soldiers of the imperial barracks. 3. However, our investigations would not be complete without an examination of the many passages referring to Paul's companions during the captivity in question, men whose whereabouts give us a number of clues as to the circumstances of Paul's life at this time. Let us take Aristarchus first. It is true that this man is mentioned in Acts 19, 29 as Paul's companion in travel, whence we conclude that he was with Paul during the latter's Ephesine sojourn, at least for some time. But this same Aristarchus, of Thessalonica, who was one of the delegates that brought the collection of the Macedonian brethren to the needy Ohristians in Jerusalem and Judea, Acts 20, 4, was a companion of Paul on the voyage from Oaesarea to Rome, Acts 27, 2, and he may have been a fellow-prisoner even then, as he is called by Paul in 001. 4, 10. These facts surely point with great ,definiteness to Rome, also for the writing of the letter to Philemon; for Aristarchus is mentioned in v. 24 of that epistle as a fellow- 1aborer of the great apostle. In the case of Ephesus a captivity of Paul and Aristarchus is conjecture, pure and simple; in the case ,of Rome the four passages concerned agree in making Aristarchus a fellow-laborer and a fellow-prisoner. - Timothy may well be taken next, for he is named by Paul in the address of three of the four Oaptivity Letters, namely, 001. 1, 1, Philemon 1, and Phil. 1,1. He was clearly with Paul during the time when these letters were written. 432 The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. But if the Ephesine theory is to be accepted, there is a difficulty on account of Acts 19, 22; for according to Luke's account, Paul, during the Ephesine sojourn and before the tumult of Demetrius, sent Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia, the final goal of this trip being Corinth, 1 Cor. 16,10. It is also clear that Timothy was again with Paul toward the end of the su=er or in the fall of the year 57, when he wrote Second Corinthians from some station in Macedonia, very likely Philippi. See 2 Cor. 1, 1. But all these references greatly complicate matters if we place the letter to the Philippians in Ephesus, for in Phil. 2, 19 Paul announces the early coming of Timothy to the congregation at Philippi. If the theory should stand, we are obliged to place Second Corinthians, or at least First Corin- thians, into the same period of Paul's labors as Philippians, and there the discrepancy offers obstacles which defy harmonization. But if the letter to the Philippians is placed at Rome, there is no such difficulty. - The case of Tychicus, who apparently hailed from Ephesus, is very much like that of Aristarchus. He was among the men who accompanied Paul to Jerusalem, Acts 20,4, and he was clearly in Paul's company when he wrote the letter to the Ephesians, for the apostle testifies that Tychicus was a beloved brother and faith- ful minister in the Lord, Eph. 6, 21. 22. He was the bearer of this letter, as he may have been of that to the Colossians. That he was with Paul in Rome at least during the second captivity appears from 2 Tim. 4, 12. The only way in which we could straighten out this difficulty according to the Ephesine theory is by making the letter addressed to the saints at Ephesus an encyclical sent from Ephesus, a procedure which is hardly tenable on a number of counts, as we shall indicate below. But the entire difficulty disappears if we con- sider Tychicus a companion of Paul during the first captivity in Rome; for in that event he becomes the bearer of the letters to Ephesus and to Colossae (also to Philemon), and the recommendation given by Paul, after an interval of approximately four years, is one which might be expected in the circumstances. - It would be in- teresting to place Onesimus and Epaphras into the picture, since they were both associated with Paul in the captivity here concerned, the former according to Col. 4, 9 and the letter to Philemon, the latter according to Philemon 23; Col. 1, 7; 4, 12; but we have no reference to these men in the Book of Acts and hence have no means of telling the connection on the basis of parallel accounts. - But there is one more name that must be added in this part of our dis- cussion, namely, that of Luke, the beloved physician. This man was clearly in the company of Paul at the time when the Captivity Letters were written; for Paul refers to him in Col. 4, 14 as one who sends greetings to the brethren at Colossae, and in Philemon 24 as a fellow- laborer who saluted Philemon. Here the Ephesine theory breaks The Place and the Time of the Captivity Letters. 433 down completely; for, as the "we" sections show, Luke was not with Paul during the Ephesine sojourn, since the first section of this kind closes with Acts 16, 17, during the apostle's stay at Philippi. Luke does not again join the apostle till Acts 20, 4, evidently being one of the delegates from Macedonia, specifically Philippi, and a companion of Paul on the way to Jerusalem, Acts 20, 4-16; 21,1-18. On the other hand, there can be no doubt that Luke was a companion of Paul during the latter's journey to Rome, and the indication is that he remained in Rome with the apostle, according to Acts 27, 1-28, 16. Thus Luke, being a companion of Paul during the latter's first Roman captivity, was with him when the Oaptivity Letters were written, at least Oolossians and Philemon and, by implication, Ephesians, which is so intimately related to Oolossians. Thus the evidence of the books concerned, if carefully analyzed, clearly disposes of the theory that the Oaptivity Letters were written during an alleged captivity of St. Paul in Ephesus and decidedly strengthens the traditional view of their composition during the first Roman captivity, between the spring of the year 61 and the early summer of 63. While little depends upon the exact chronological sequence of these letters, a study of the internal factors concerned will very likely lead to the following conclusions: Epaphras, the founder of the congregation at Oolossae and its first pastor, having learned that the apostle was in Rome awaiting the adjustment of the charges against him in the emperor's court, came to the capital and brought Paul news of the Oolossian congregation, 001. 1,7. 8. Thereupon Paul, late in 61 or early in 62, wrote the letter, which he intended to send to Oolossae at the earliest opportunity. A certain degree of agitation and the adjustment to the situation in Oolossae mark it as being the first of the Oaptivity Letters. After this letter was finished, and most likely before it was sent off, the apostle had leisure to plan and write the letter to the Ephesians, a more formal epistle, almost a doctrinal essay, whose language of lofty and sus- tained eloquence gives it a position among Paul's letters second onlJ1 to the letter to the Romans. This letter was also written in 62. Meanwhile the runaway slave Onesimus had somehow found his way to Paul or had been found by the apostle. He was gained for the Gospel, and Paul, desiring to return him to his master, wrote the remarkable letter to Philemon. His own circumstances had mean- while so shaped themselves that he was looking forward to his release at a not distant date. Therefore this letter may well be placed late in 62. In the same year Epaphroditus, one of the pastors of the con- gregation at Philippi, made the journey to Rome, partly to give the apostle news of this Macedonian congregation, partly to be the bearer of the gifts of the Philippians to the beloved and honored apostle, Phil. 2, 25 ff.; 4,10.11.15-19. Paul then, late in 62 or early in 63, 28 434 Sermon Study on Eph. 2, 19-22. wrote the letter to the Philippians, which was most likely delivered by Epaphroditus upon the latter's return to his home town. In conclusion it may be well to list the arguments against the theory which has attempted to make the letter to the Ephesians an encyclical epistle. 1. The introductory sentence of the epistle surely did not read ror. O{;U, ••. xai muwr., for that would be almost nonsensical in view of the careful manner in which the apostle at other times designates his readers. If the Holy Ghost had intended this letter for an encyclical epistle, He would undoubtedly have given the names of all the congregations concerned, just as He does in 1 Pet. 1, 1 and with regard to the seven letters of the Apocalypse. 2. Though the words 8V 'E