6. See further _ib._ xv 24 and 28.

[48] ‘Christ, who is the image of God’ 2 Cor. iv 4; ‘he brightly reflects God’s glory and is the exact representation of His being’ Hebr. i 3. [49] ‘Christ is the visible representation of the invisible God, the First-born and Lord of all creation’ Col. i 15; ‘it is in Christ that the fulness of God’s nature dwells embodied’ _ib._ ii 9. [50] ‘in him were all things created ...; all things have been created through him and unto him’ _ib._ i 16 (Revised Version); ‘through whom [God] made the ages’ Hebrews i 2. Compare the discussion on the four causes above, § 179, and the phrase of Marcus Aurelius: ἐκ σοῦ πάντα, εἰς σὲ πάντα, ἐν σοὶ πάντα _To himself_, iv 23. [51] ‘Those he has also predestined to bear the likeness of his Son’ Rom. viii 29; ‘a man is the image and glory of God’ 1 Cor. xi 7. [52] ‘woman is the glory of man; woman takes her origin from man’ 1 Cor. xi 7 and 8 (with special reference to Eve); cf. 1 Thess. iv 4 (R. V.), 1 Pet. iii 7. [53] ‘there were heavens which existed of old, and an earth, the latter arising out of water by the [word] of God’ 2 Pet. iii 5. [54] ‘the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, the elements be destroyed in the fierce heat, and the earth and all the works of man be utterly burnt up’ _ib._ 10. But compare 1 Cor. iii 13 to 15. [55] The omission is due to contempt of dumb creatures, see 1 Cor. ix 9. [56] ‘It is in closest union with Him that we live and move and have our being’ Acts xvii 28; ‘one God and Father of all ... rules over all, acts through all, and dwells in all’ Eph. iv 6. [57] ‘God is dealing with you as sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline?’ Heb. xii 7. [58] ‘for those who love God all things are working together for good’ Rom. viii 28. [59] ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself’ 2 Cor. v 19; cf. Col. i 20. [60] ‘these men are without excuse, for ... their senseless minds were darkened ... in accordance with their own depraved cravings’ Romans i 20 to 24. The point is brought out still more plainly by a writer of the opposite party, James i 13 to 15. [61] ‘ours is not a conflict with mere flesh and blood, but with the despotisms, the empires, the forces that control and govern this dark world, the spiritual hosts of evil arrayed against us in the heavenly warfare’ Eph. vi 12. [62] ‘let your thanks to God the Father be presented in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ’ _ib._ v 20. [63] ‘it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins’ Hebr. x 4. [64] ‘in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any importance’ Gal. v 6. [65] ‘if you receive circumcision Christ will avail you nothing’ _ib._ v 2. [66] ‘you scrupulously observe days and months, special seasons, and years. I am alarmed about you’ _ib._ iv 10 and 11; cf. Col. ii 16 to 19. [67] παρακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς παραστῆσαι τὰ σώματα ὑμῶν θυσίαν ζῶσαν ἁγίαν, τὴν λογικὴν λατρείαν ὑμῶν Rom. xii 1. [68] 2 Cor. xiii 5. [69] 1 Cor. xiv 15. [70] 1 Tim. ii 8. [71] Rom. xvi 25 to 27; 1 Cor. i 4; 2 Cor. i 3; Eph. i 3 to 14, iii 20 and 21; 1 Tim. i 17. Compare 1 Peter i 3 to 5. [72] ‘The whole body—its various parts closely fitting and firmly adhering to one another—grows by the aid of every contributory link, with power proportioned to the need of each individual part’ Eph. iv 16; cf. Rom. xii 4 and 5. [73] 1 Cor. xv 44. [74] The point is continually emphasized that there is only one spirit. In English translations the double printed form, Spirit and spirit, disguises the real meaning, ‘if there is any common sharing of the spirit’ Philipp. ii 1. [75] ‘You may, one and all, become sharers in the very nature of God’ 2 Peter i 4. [76] ἐσκοτίσθη ἡ ἀσύνετος αὐτῶν καρδία Rom. i 21. [77] ‘our mortal bodies cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor will what is perishable inherit what is imperishable’ 1 Cor. xv 50; ‘if we have known Christ as a man (κατὰ σάρκα), yet now we do so no longer’ 2 Cor. v 16. The Pauline doctrine of the spiritual resurrection, in spite of its place in the sacred canon, has never been recognised by popular Christianity, but it has found notable defenders in Origen in ancient times, and in Bishop Westcott recently. ‘No one of [Origen’s] opinions was more vehemently assailed than his teaching on the Resurrection. Even his early and later apologists were perplexed in their defence of him. Yet there is no point on which his insight was more conspicuous. By keeping strictly to the Apostolic language he anticipated results which we have hardly yet secured. He saw that it is the “spirit” which moulds the frame through which it is manifested; that the body is the same, not by any material continuity, but by the permanence of that which gives the law, the _ratio_ as he calls it, of its constitution (Frag. _de res._ ii 1, p. 34). Our opponents say now that this idea is a late refinement of doctrine, forced upon us by the exigencies of controversy. The answer is that no exigencies of controversy brought Origen to his conclusion. It was, in his judgment, the clear teaching of St Paul’ Westcott, _Religious Thought in the West_, p. 244. [78] ‘my earnest desire being to depart and to be with Christ’ Philipp. i 23. [79] ‘We shall be with the Lord for ever’ 1 Thess. iv 17. So another Paulist writer: ‘we see them eager for a better land, that is to say, a heavenly one. For this reason God has now prepared a city for them’ Heb. xi 16. [80] The term used is κόκκος ‘grain’ in 1 Cor. xv 37, but σπέρμα ‘seed’ _ib._ 38. The Stoic term σπερματικὸς λόγος is found in Justin Martyr _Apol._ ii 8 and 13. [81] 1 Cor. xv 16, 17. [82] ‘while we are at home in the body we are banished from the Lord; for we are living a life of faith, and not one of sight’ 2 Cor. v 6; ‘we by our baptism were buried with him in death, in order that we should also live an entirely new life’ Rom. vi 4; ‘surrender your very selves to God as living men who have risen from the dead’ _ib._ 13. [83] ‘He is not the God of dead, but of living men’ Matt. xxii 32. [84] Matt. x 39, xvi 25, John xii 25. [85] John v 24. [86] ‘the end eternal life’ Rom. vi 22 (Revised version); ‘you have the Life of the ages as the final result’ _ib._ (Weymouth). [87] ‘the end sought is the love which springs from a pure heart, a clear conscience, and a sincere faith’ 1 Tim. i 5. [88] ‘it is as the result of faith that a man is held to be righteous, apart from actions done in obedience to Law’ Rom. iii 28. [89] Titus i 15. [90] Romans xiv 14. [91] 1 Cor. xii 23. [92] 1 Tim. iv 4. [93] Eph. ii 19. [94] ‘in Him the distinctions between Jew and Gentile, slave and free man, male and female, disappear’ Gal. iii 28. [95] See above, § 355. [96] πρᾳότης καὶ ἐπιείκεια 2 Cor. x 1. [97] 1 Cor. xiii. For the constancy of Caution see § 460, note 20. [98] Justice (δικαιοσύνη) 1 Tim. vi 11; Courage (ὑπομονή) 1 Tim. vi 11, (δύναμις) 2 Tim. i 7; Soberness (ἐγκράτεια) Gal. v 23. [99] Rom. i 26 to 30; Gal. v 19 and 20; Col. iii 5. [100] 2 Cor. ii 7, vii 10. [101] ‘I shall go on working to promote your progress’ Philipp. i 25; ‘with my eyes fixed on the goal I push on’ _ib._ iii 14. There is also (paradoxically) progress in wrongdoing; ‘they will proceed from bad to worse in impiety’ 2 Tim. ii 16. [102] The technical term used is τὰ ἀνήκοντα (Eph. v 4, Philem. 8), once only (in negative form) καθήκοντα (Rom. i 28). [103] In the sense in which the word ‘political’ is used above, §§ 302-311. [104] Rom. xiii 1 to 9; Ephes. v and vi; Col. iii 18 to 25; Titus ii 1 to 10; 1 Peter ii and iii. [105] ‘You are a priesthood of kingly lineage’ 1 Peter ii 9. [106] ‘as poor, but we bestow wealth on many; as having nothing, and yet we securely possess all things’ 2 Cor. vi 10. [107] ‘where the spirit of the Lord is, freedom is enjoyed’ 2 Cor. iii 17. [108] ‘every one who commits sin is the slave of sin’ John viii 34. [109] ‘if I am destitute of love, I am nothing’ 1 Cor. xiii 2. [110] It is ἱκανότης not αὐτάρκεια (2 Cor. iii 5 and 6), the latter word being used in a different sense, for which see § 480, note 135. [111] The term (ἁμαρτία, _peccatum_) is Stoic. [112] Lightfoot, _Philippians_, p. 296. This view has become familiar through Milton’s treatment of the Fall of man in _Paradise Lost_. There the prohibition of the forbidden fruit is nothing but a test of readiness to obey. This point of view seems quite foreign to St Paul, who always speaks of sin as sinful in itself, not in consequence of the Creator’s will. [113] Eph. v 12 (R. V.). [114] Rom. i 26. [115] 1 Cor. v 1. [116] 1 Cor. vii 1 to 8. [117] ‘It is well for a man to abstain altogether from marriage. But because there is so much fornication every man should have a wife of his own’ 1 Cor. vii i and 2. [118] ‘If you marry, you have not sinned’ _ib._ 28. [119] ‘if a woman will not wear a veil, let her also cut off her hair’ 1 Cor. xi 6. For the savage tabu of women’s hair see Jevons, _Introduction to the History of Religion_, p. 78. [120] 1 Cor. xi 10. [121] _ib._ xiv 34 and 35. [122] Rigveda x 10. [123] See the author’s translation in his _Rigveda_ (London, 1900). [124] See above, § 307. [125] ‘just as through Adam all die, so also through Christ all will be made alive again’ 1 Cor. xv 22. [126] ‘God in his great mercy has begotten us anew’ 1 Peter i 3; ‘you have been begotten again from a germ not of perishable, but of imperishable life’ _ib._ 23. [127] ‘you are all sons of God through faith’ Gal. iii 26. [128] Gal. ii 1. [129] _ib._ 6. [130] _ib._ 12. [131] 1 Cor. xiii 11. [132] _ib._ i 22. [133] James v 8. [134] James i 27, ii 15 to 17, v 1 to 3. [135] 2 Cor. ix 8 (the technical term is αὐτάρκεια); ‘if a man does not choose to work, neither shall he eat’ 2 Thess. iii 10. [136] ‘worldly (i.e. materialistic) stories, fit only for credulous old women, have nothing to do with’ 1 Tim. iv 7. [137] Titus i 14. [138] Galatians ii 9. [139] ‘[Christ] was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit’ 1 Peter iii 18. [140] ‘[Jesus Christ] who, as regards His human descent, belonged to the posterity of David, but as regards the holiness of His Spirit was decisively proved by the Resurrection to be the Son of God’ Romans i 4; ‘God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born subject to Law’ Gal. iv 4. [141] 1 Peter i 3. [142] In the account of the transfiguration in the _Gospel to the Hebrews_ (p. 15, 36 Hilgenfeld; Preuschen _Antileg._ 4) Jesus says ‘Lately my mother, the holy spirit, seized me by one of my hairs and carried me away to the great mountain of Thabor.’ Here Origen restores a philosophical interpretation by referring to Matt. xii 50; ‘whoever shall do the will of my Father ... is my mother’ _Comm. in Joh._ ii 12, p. 64 D. Modern writers find an identification of Mary with the Wisdom (σοφία) of God. See Gruppe, _Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte_, vol. ii p. 1614. [143] Matt. i 23. [144] 1 Cor. i 30. [145] Philipp. ii 6. [146] ‘That which was from the beginning ... concerning the Word of life’ 1 John i 1; ‘his name is the Word of God’ Rev. xix 13. [147] John i 1 to 3. [148] John i 12 to 14. [149] ‘apud vestros quoque sapientes λόγον (id est sermonem atque rationem) constat artificem videri universitatis’ Tert. _Apol._ 21; ‘Zeno opificem universitatis λόγον praedicat, quem et fatum et necessitatem et animum Iovis nuncupat’ Lact. _Div. inst._ iv 9. Naturally the Christian writers regard the Stoic doctrine of the Logos as an ‘anticipation’ of their own, exactly as in modern times the Darwinists, having borrowed from Epicurus the doctrine of atoms, regard the original doctrine as a ‘marvellous anticipation’ of modern science. Justin Martyr goes further, and concludes that all believers in the Logos were (by anticipation) Christians: οἱ μετὰ λόγου βιώσαντες Χριστιανοί εἰσι κἂν ἄθεοι ἐνομίσθησαν _Apol._ i 46. [150] The term is first used by Theophilus (c. 180 A.D.), of God, his Word, and his Wisdom. [151] In this passage an ‘anticipation’ of the doctrine of the Trinity has many times been discovered; for instance in the 18th century by the Jesuit Huet (Winckler, _der Stoicismus_, p. 9); in our own country by Dr Heberden (see Caesar Morgan, _An investigation of the Trinity of Plato_, Holden’s edition, 1853, p. 155); and again recently by Amédée Fleury and others (Winckler, p. 8). [152] See above, § 242. [153] For instance in 1 John v 8, and (in substance) in 1 Cor. xiii 13. [154] Whatever may be the ecclesiastical or legal sense of the word ‘person,’ in its original philosophical meaning it expresses an aspect of individuality, and not an individual: see Cicero’s use of the term quoted above, § 271, note 42. [155] See above, § 470, note 77. [156] This book claims rank as a classic; amongst others of similar purpose may be mentioned R. Garnett’s _Twilight of the gods_ (New edition, London 1903). [157] Amongst these elements we include all that Christianity has drawn from Persism through Judaism. We have indeed referred to the Persian beliefs embodied in the ‘Lord’s prayer’; but it has lain outside our scope to discuss the Eschatology which figures so largely in popular conceptions of Christianity, but is now thought to be but slightly connected with its characteristic message. On this point see especially Carl Clemen, _Religionsgeschichtliche Erklärung des Neuen Testaments_ (Giessen, 1909), pp. 90-135. [158] Matthew Arnold, _St Paul and Protestantism_ (Popular edition, p. 80). [159] The full title of Winckler’s book from which we have often already quoted is _Der Stoicismus eine Wurzel des Christenthums_. [160] Matt. v 37. BIBLIOGRAPHY. The numbers in brackets are those of the British Museum catalogue. The dates given are usually those of the latest available edition. I. ANCIENT WRITERS AND PHILOSOPHERS. =Achilles= (the astronomer). Isagoge ad Arati phaenomena. In Migne’s Patrology. (2001 c.) A better text in E. Maass’ Aratea; see ‘Aratus.’ =Aëtius= (1st cent. A.D.). Placita philosophiae. In ‘Doxographi Graeci’ ed. H. Diels, 1879. (2044 f.) =Alexander= of Aphrodisias (circ. 200 A.D.). In Aristotelis metaphysica, ed. M. Hayduck (Ac. 855/9); in Arist. Top. ed. M. Wallies (Ac. 855/9); de anima, de fato, de mixtione, etc. ed. I. Bruns (2044 f). =Ammonius= (the grammarian) of Alexandria. In Aristotelis analytica, ed. M. Wallies. (Ac. 855/9.) =Antigonus= (of Carystus, circ. 250 B.C.). Mirae auscultationes, ed. A. Westermann, in ‘Paradoxographi Graeci.’ [His life of Zeno is the basis of that given by Diogenes Laertius.] Antigonus von Carystos, by Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, 1881. (12902 ee 25.) =Antipater= (of Tarsus). Fragments in H. von Arnim ‘Stoicorum veterum fragmenta.’ (8460 k.) =Antoninus, M. Aur.= See Aurelius. =Apollonius= (of Tyana; Neo-Pythagorean philosopher, ob. 97 A.D.). Ap. of T., a study of his life and times, by F. W. Groves Campbell, 1908. (10606 l 4.) See also Mead, G. R. S., and Whittaker, T. =Aratus.= Phaenomena, ed. E. Maass, 1893. (11312 f 58.) Comm. in Aratum reliquiae, coll. E. Maass, 1898. (11313 gg 1.) _Maass, E._ Aratea. 1892. =Areius Didymus= (time of Augustus). The presumed fragments collected by H. Diels in ‘Doxographi Graeci.’ 1879. (2044 f.) =Aristo.= De Aristone Chio et Herillo Carthaginiensi Stoicis commentatio. N. Saal, 1852. (10605 e 33.) See also the article by H. von Arnim, in Pauly-Wissowa ii 957 sqq. =Aristotle.= The commentaries on Aristotle are valuable authorities for Stoic teaching; new editions are in course of publication by the Royal Prussian Society of Science. The most important for our purpose are those of Alexander, Dexippus, Philoponus, Simplicius, and Themistius. (Ac. 855/9.) _Butcher, S. H._ Aristotle’s Theory of Poetry and Fine Art. 1902. (2236 cc 9.) [Contains a discussion of the phrase κάθαρσις τῶν παθημάτων.] _Hicks, R. D._ Arist. de anima, 1907. _Wallace, Edwin._ Aristotle’s Psychology in Greek and English, with introd. and notes. 1882. (2236 cc.) =Arrianus, Flavius= (2nd cent. A.D.). Ed. A. G. Roos, in Bibl. Teub. (2047 c.) =Athenaeus.= Ed. G. Kaibel, 3 vols., in Bibl. Teub. (2047 e.) =Augustinus= (353-430 A.D.). In the Corpus Script. Eccles., vols. 25-28. (2003 d.) =Aurelius, M. Antoninus.= Ed. with commentary by Gataker, 1652, with preface ‘de Stoica disciplina cum sectis aliis collata.’ Of this book G. Long says, ‘it is a wonderful monument of learning, and certainly no Englishman has yet done anything like it.’ (12205 ff 3.) Also ed. by J. Stich, in Bibl. Teub. (2047 e.) Also by J. H. Leopold, in Script. Cl. Bibl. Oxon. (2046 b.) There are numerous translations. By M. Casaubon, 5th ed. 1692 (231 c 14), and edited with introd. by W. H. D. Rouse, 1899; by G. Long, 1862, and with an essay by Matthew Arnold attached, 1904 (12204 p 3/15); by J. Collier, revised by Alice Zimmern, 1891 (012207 l 3); by John Jackson, 1906 (8410 ee 23); and by G. H. Rendall, with introductory study on ‘Stoicism and the last of the Stoics,’ 1898 (08461 g 1). Treatises by the following: _Alston, L._ Stoic and Christian in the second century. 1906. (4532 de 6.) _Bach, N._ De M. Aurelio Ant. Imperatore philosophante. _Bodek, Arn._ M. Aur. Ant. als Freund und Zeitgenosse des Rabbi Jehuda ha-Nasi, 1868. (10605 ee 29.) _Braune, A._ M. Aurel’s Meditationen, 1878. _Crossley, Hastings._ The fourth book, with translation, commentary, and appendix on C. Fronto, 1882. (8462 d 12.) _Dartigne-Peyrou, J._ Marc-Aurèle dans ses rapports avec le christianisme, 1897. (4530 ee 30.) _Davis, C. H. S._ Greek and Roman Stoicism and some of its disciples, 1903. (08461 g 11.) _Ellis, Robinson._ The correspondence of Fronto and M. Aurelius. (11312 g 11/4.) _Königsbeck, Max._ De Stoicismo M. Antonini, 1861. (8461 bbb 33.) _Pollock_, Sir _Fred._ See _Mind_, 1st series, vol. iv, pp. 47-68. _Renan, J. E._ Marc-Aurèle et la fin du monde antique. 1882. (A, B 35090.) Translated by W. Hutchinson, 1904. (012208 ee 120.) _Russell, E. W._ Marcus Aurelius and the later Stoics. 1910. _Schuster, J._ Ethices Stoicae apud M. Aur. Ant. fundamenta. 1869. _Smith, B. E._ Selections from the original Greek, with introd. New York, 1899. (8411 de 4.) _Steinhauser, K._ Filosofie stoicka a Cisar Mark Aurel. Caslau, 1892. _Suckau, M. E._ Étude sur Marc-Aurèle, sa vie et sa doctrine,