340

CHAPTER VII.

THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS.

DOCETIC DEVELOPMENT OF GNOSTICISM.

VII.

The
Author.

This is that spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.'-1 John iv. 3.

CHAP. THE Epistle attributed to Barnabas has probably been written towards the end of the first century. The destruction of Jerusalem is referred to as an event which had lately taken place. Although you have seen so great signs and wonders done among the people of the Jews, yet this notwithstanding the Lord hath forsaken them." On the other hand it has been remarked,2 that if the writer had composed this Epistle as late as in the time of Hadrian (119), when referring to the destruction of the temple by the Romans, he could hardly have failed to point out the Ælia Capitolina' as a striking proof of God's wrath against the Jews. Again, the omission of every allusion to persecutions of the Christians, as far as an indirect proof goes, would seem to refer to the time immediately preceding or directly following upon the reign of Domitian (87-96). For Eusebius informs us, that before the time of Marcus Aurelius (161-180), the Christians had been persecuted only under Nero and under Domitian.

This Epistle was certainly written after the Epistle to iii. 16. We have accepted the classical though faulty translation of Archbishop Wake contained in 'The Apocryphal New Testament, London, 1820.' 2 Hilgenfeld, 'Die Apost. Väter.' 3 H. E iv. 26.

If the

the Hebrews, and before the Gospel after John. apocalypse was written at the time when this Epistle was composed, which is more than probable, the writer of the latter shows that he did not share, or did not wish to enlarge upon, the apocalyptic views about Antichrist.

Respecting the authorship of this Epistle, all that can be said with certainty is that Barnabas, the Levite of Cyprus, cannot have written the same. It is true, that the Clementine homilies1 speak of Barnabas as having preached in Alexandria, and that according to Eusebius, John Marcus, the cousin and companion of Barnabas, was the founder of the Alexandrian church. But it is quite impossible that a man like Barnabas, to whom in Scripture the title and dignity of an Apostle is given,2 could have spoken in so very disrespectful terms about the twelve Apostles, whilst never mentioning Paul. Again, Barnabas, who had been at Antioch, could not have written that all Syrians were circumcised. The unknown writer seems to have belonged to the Alexandrian church, and he certainly addresses Gentile-Christians. Clement of Alexandria and Origen repeatedly quote it, and they regard the same as the work of Barnabas, whilst Origen calls it a 'Catholic Epistle.' Although Tertullian attributes the same to Barnabas, yet neither by the Church of Rome nor by that of Africa was it considered as of canonical authority. It formed part of the Athanasian canon, and its complete Greek text has been transmitted to us by the lately-discovered Sinaitic gospel-manuscript of the 4th century.

6

The writer states, that he is a teacher;'" he addresses some whom he calls his sons and daughters,' and in whom he has 'perceived abundance of knowledge of the great and excellent laws of God,' a spirit having been infused into them from the pure fountain of God,'5 who has put the engrafted gift of his doctrine within us.'6

4

3 i. 10, 4; viii. 14.
viii. 14.

CHAP.

VII.

CHAP.
VII.

The two
Covenants.

not as a teacher' but as more than ordinary good

Yet he wishes to address them
one of themselves ;1 having had
success in the way of the law of the Lord, which is in
Christ,' he will take care to communicate a part of that
which he has received,' so that together with their 'faith,'
their knowledge also may be perfect.' '3

2

Like his forerunner and probable contemporary Apollos, the writer develops the great Paulinic doctrine of righteousness without the deeds of the law, and only by faith in the power of the Divine Spirit in man. He does not regard righteousness as a condition, but as a consequence of grace, and he shows that the Gentiles were always intended to become the first people and heirs of the covenant,' that is of that original covenant of faith made with Abraham, and which, as Paul had taught, the law which was 430 years after cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.'5 He refers to the two nations which should descend from Rebecca's twin children; then speaking of Ephraim and Manasseh, he says that Jacob 'by the spirit foresaw the figure of the people that was to come,' and therefore refused to put his hand on Manasseh the first-born, inasmuch as the greater should serve the lesser. This is what God had in view already when he told Abraham that he had made him a father of the nations which without circumcision believe in the Lord.' And though Moses did receive of the Lord (through the mediation of angels) two tables written with the finger of the Lord's hand in the Spirit,' 6 yet because Israel turned aside in the wilderness from the ways which God had commanded them, 'Moses cast the two tables out of his hands, and their covenant was broken, that the love of Jesus might be scaled in your hearts unto the hope of his faith."7 "They were not worthy;' therefore the Lord himself has given them (the tables) unto us, that we might be the people of his inheritance, having suffered for us.

He was

6

therefore made manifest, that they should fill up the
measure of their sins, and that we being made heirs by
him, should receive the covenant of the Lord Jesus.'1
The writer then points out, that according to the pro-
phecies of Isaiah, the servant and elect of God whom he
would uphold, and on whom the Spirit of the Lord would
rest, was promised to be given for a covenant of the
people, for a light of the Gentiles.'" Now in his opinion,
Christ came only as 'a light to lighten the Gentiles,' and
not likewise as the glory' of God's people Israel; for
the Jews had the offer of a covenant, but refused and
therefore never possessed it. To the Gentiles only Christ's
coming was a blessing; to the Jews it was a curse. He
writes to the Gentile congregation which he addresses as
standing on the same foundation of hope, that Christ was
for that very end prepared, that by his own appearing
he might redeem our hearts, already devoured by death,
and delivered over to the irregularity of error, from dark-
ness; and establish a covenant with us by his word, .
to prepare unto himself a holy people.' According to
this 'gnosis,' or more perfect
more perfect knowledge, not as first
openly revealed by Paul, but as further developed by the
'teachers' or 'doceta' of Alexandria, salvation is not
for the Jews first;' that which is done away is not 'glo-
rious; there was no 'first Testament,' and Christ is not
the mediator of the New Testament, that by means of
death, for the redemption of the transgressions (that were)
under the first Testament, they which were called might
receive the promise of eternal inheritance.' No, those
(who were) heretofore,' those who called themselves the
people of God, 'have for ever lost what Moses received.'
Therefore he beseeches the members of the Church which
he addresses: Look well to yourselves, and be not like
to those who add sin to sin, and say that their covenant is
ours also; nay, but it is ours only.' What is called the

1 xii. 15-17. 3 xii. 18-20.

3

CHAP.

VII.

CHAP.

VII.

law of Moses is therefore a mere invention of man in the form in which it has been transmitted. And even that

1

6

which Moses did receive on Sinai, and which the Jews
have lost, could not disannul the original covenant made
with Abraham 430 years earlier. The Jewish law, with its
'new moons and sabbaths,' 'appointed feasts' and 'sacri-
fices,' and 'fasts,' is put away; for even the solemn
meeting, . . . is iniquity.'
.. is iniquity.' These things therefore hath
God abolished, that the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ,
which is without the yoke of any such necessity, might
have the spiritual offering of men themselves.' This sort
of sacrifice is the only acceptable one to God. To them
therefore who believed in the doctrine of atonement by
the blood of beasts, God says: 'Ye shall no more tread
my courts.' But very different is God's message to the

3

2

Gentiles. Forasmuch then as we are not without understanding, we ought to apprehend the design of our merciful Father. For he speaks to us, being willing that we who have been in the same error about the sacrifices, should seek and find how to approach unto him. And therefore he thus bespeaks us: "the sacrifice of God (is a broken spirit), a broken and contrite heart God will not despise." Wherefore, brethren, we ought the more diligently to inquire after those things that belong to our salvation, that the adversary may not have any entrance into us, and deprive us of our spiritual life.'4

This life in the spirit is the life in Christ, who is the spirit, as Paul had taught. But the Alexandrian writer goes beyond Paul in the doctrine of the spirit, as in the doctrine of the covenants; and he goes also beyond the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews. He insists on the personal existence of Christ before the days of His flesh. Thus the Scripture saith concerning us, where it introduceth the Father speaking to the Son... before the beginning of the world; . . . let us make man after our likeness and similitude; . . and when the Lord saw the man

1 ii. 7, 14.