Epistle (Hastings' Dictionary)

1. In OT.— The epistle is so spontan- eous a form of literature that it may be regarded as one of the earlier applications of the art of writing (see Writi.vo). Letter-wTiting must, however, have been coiilined at tirst to the few ; and official rather than private correspondence would be the prevailing tj'pe. In OT verbal messages alone appear prior to the Kingdom in Israel, the letter of David to Joab toucliin'' Uriah (2 S ll'''-"') being the first recorded example. Here the message was one which could not have been sent verbally through Uriah ; and a similar need for secrecy explains the use of sealed letters by Jezebel in the matter of Naboth (1 K 21»-», cf. 2 K lOi', Jehu and the sons of Ahab ; also 2 Ch 21'). The answer in each case was verbal ; hence we infer that writing was still the rare exception even in high ollicial matters. Other rea.sons for resorting to written messages were the desire to be emjiliatic or peremptory, as in the cases of Benhadad's letter sent with Naaman to Jehoram of Israel (2 K 5°"'), and of Sennacherib's open letter to Hezekiah (2 K 19', Is ZV, 2 Ch 32") ; or the wish to be specially courteous, as with the letters and present sent by Merodachlialadan on hearing of Ilezekiah's re- covery from sickness (2 K 20'- = Is S'j'). So far letters have been chiefly those of kings. Akin to these, in formal or authoritative character, is the letter sent by Jeremiah to the exiles in Babylon (Jer29'), whichalso alludes to similar letters sent by a certain Sheniaiah, a false prophet, to Jerusalem in order to undermine .leremiah's own position (vv^'"). Krom this it would seem fair to infer that the conditions of the Captivity gave a marked stimulus to the use of letters by the Hebrews as a medium for import- ant messages. Certain it is that hereafter we find not only more frequent reference to such corre- spondence, but also a new and more precise ter- minology used to express the notion 'epistle' as a specilic form of writing. Hitherto the term employed, as in 2 S, K, ( = I8), and even Jer, has been quite vague and general. A letter is simply 'a book' (TJB, Si^\iov, /3//3Xos), its precise nature being learnt only from the context. But hence- forth there emerge, in Ch, Ezr, Neb, Est, certain specialized terms, the most distinctive coining from foreign tongues. Besides words for a 'writin-;' (30?> 2 Ch 2" 3095 . . . iriii, Est S"' " H'"- ' with 0-159 hard by in either case ; or ai;;.?, 2 Ch 21'" =7,»^i), as in Dt 10), we find the strange n-;3K of Aiwyr. (fgirtu, so VxA. Delitzsch) or at least I'ers. origin (2 Ch 30'- », Ezr , ->'"'•, Neh 2'-'' 6- "• ", Est 9»-^. Cf. d-rropiiw, Herod, viii. 98; Xen. Cyrop. viii. 6. 9), and |in;f'}, a Pers. form [Err 4'"'-, where fif^i^ 30? (v.') = irjiK (w.»-") = K;!n;'} (v.'^i 730 EPISTLE EPISTLE while Artaxerxes' ncjn? (rescript, v.") also = K:!riv'} {^ .'^)]. The two latter terms are regularly rendered by e-KKTroK-fi in the LXX. From all this it seems probable that familiarity with the royal posting system of the Persians (cf. d-jrya/jeivcic in Alt 5^') helped to make the lett«r stand out more clearly to the Jewish mind as a distinct literary type. In the post-exilic historical books the exact epistolary form 18 often preserved, including a formal address in certain cases. This is a marked feature in the Bks. of Mac, belonging to the Greek period, where also a closin" ' Farewell ' occurs, sometimes with the addition of the exact date (e.g. 2 Mac 1 1"-3^-»« ^'^Ipetv , , . IppwaSc or iiyialfere). As yet, however, we have no models of private correspondence among the Hebrews ; so that here, as often, we are dependent upon the light shed backwards by NT. 2. In NT. — In view of the numbers and influence of the Diaspora, the collateral eWdence of non-Heb. analogies now becomes of moment. But the letters of literary men, like Cicero or Seneca, are hardly to our purpose. It is rather to the " papyri, and to the collections of epistles mostly fathered upon great Greek names during the Alex- andrine age, that we must look for hints of real value. The evidence has been well collected by G. A. Deissmann, who, in his Bibdstudien (pp. 189-252), reaches the following results. A broad line is to be drawn between the letter and the epistle. The one is essentially a spontaneous product, dominated throughout by the image of the reader, his sympathies and interests, iostinct also with the writer's own soul : it is virtually one half of an imaginary dialogue, the suppressed responses of the other party sliaping the course of what is actually written : it is confidential in the sense that it is meant for particular readers known to the writer. The other has a general aim, addressing all and sundry whom it may concern : it is like a public speech, and looks towards publication. But pub- lication is the very note of literature proper. Hence the letter, as private, differs from the epistle in being a ' pre-literary ' type of self-expression, akin to a diary. But, like a diary, if meant ultimately for the public eye a letter may, in spite of its original use, be in fact an epistle (e.g. certain letters of Cicero, Seneca, and Pliny). The literary epistle would arise from actual experience of the postnum- ous value placed on a great man's letters, and might take one of two forms : ( 1 ) those written to make or enhance one's own fame ; (2) those forged under some great name, either for practice, after the fashion of the schools of rhetoric, or to give weight to propaganda of some sort. But in any case it will betray care, efibrt after finish— in a word, art ; whereas the letter proper is unstudied, a thing of nature. This being so, letters require an exegesis all their own, one which seta their contents in vital relations with author and readers. Thus only can their proper sense be ascertained. These principles have a real bearing on NT epp. , and must rank among the tests of authenticity. But certain special features of primitive Christianity modify their application ; and the universal nature of the interests involved makes the line between letter and ej)istle a fainter one, as we see by placing 1 Th alongside an epistle like Romans, or even the encyclical Epliesians. It was, no doubt, by wTiting letters that St. Paul came to feel an epistle a fit medium of exposition. And it seems tliat he, partly in virtue of his unique missionary labours, partly as a Jew of Gr. -Rom. culture, was the creator of the NT type of epistle, itaelf the most character- i«tic blossom of the New Life in the souls of men, the most notable differentia of NT among sacred books. It is even possible that all otlier NT • A certain proportion of the Alexandrine pseudo-epistlea, balas Onoco-Jewisli in orijcin have a special claim to attention. epistles owe their birth to St. Paul as pioneer. B« this as it may, the relevant data can best be grouped as (a) pre-Pauline, (6) Pauline, (c) post- Pauline. (a) Pre-Pauline Epi.stle.s.— Letters of instruc- tion to the synagogal authorities even outside Pal. were sent by the supreme court of the mother- city as occasion arose (Ac 9^ with 22', cf. 28-'). It was, perhaps, not without some vague sense of this analogy that the Jems, community, acting through the apostles and the elder brethren (Ac lo'^- ^, cf. 2 Mac !'• '"), addressed their Gentile brethren of the province Syria -Cdicia touching terms of com- munion. Common use of ' letters of introduction ' is implied in 2 Co 3' (see Ac 18-'', and cf. Ro 16'- » as a sample), and in a slightly different sense in 1 Co 16'. No doubt, too, foreign synagogues were wont to refer doubtful points to Jems, and thus elicit wTitten responses. But we cannot view the letter of the Cor. Church to its spiritual father or ajjostle (1 Co "', 4"-" 9»-'-'=) exactly in this light. Rather it seems a natural result of the unique relation which St. Paul's personality, at once strong and tender, caused to grow up between him and his ' children in the gospel.' This is the secret of the Pauline letters. (6) Pauline Epistles. — There was an impera- tive need for the single Apostle of the Gentiles to multiply his presence, as it were. This he did in part by trusted companions, but in part also by letters. Doubtless, their exact form would have been other than it is had the current models been other than they were. But existing literary usages, whether Jewish or Gentile, gave to them no more than Rabbinism gave to his gospel — certain vehicles of thought that lay readiest to use. What his gospel adopted, it transfigured ; and nowhere more strilcingly than in the conventionalities of the epistolary form. Address, salutation, final bene- diction, all pulsate with life, and expand at his touch into clauses charged with emotion, every word of which reveals his estimate of some group of souls that were ever in his heart's prayers. One may well see in 2 Th 3" (cf. 2-) tokens that Thessalonica was not the first Church addressed by St. Paul. Yet it is equally certain that the true cause of his very first letter lay deep in the same spirit as breathes in 1 Th, the essentially ' pastoral ' instinct. His letters were indeed the life-blood of a noble spirit, ever ready to be poured forth to nourish its spiiitual offspring (1 Th 2'-). Of a temper too ardent for the more studied forms of writing, St. Paul could yet by letter, and so on the spur of occa- sion, concentrate all his wealth of thougnt, feeling, and maturing experience upon some particular re- ligious situation, and sweep away the difficulty or danger. Such ' waiting upon Providence ' was the attitude of the apostolic age, which took no thought for a future the next event of which might be the return of Jesus Messiah in heavenly power. In this sense, likewise, the occasional epistlo was the typical form of its literature. The Pauline letters have a style all their own — though style was far from the writer's thoughts. It was indeed the man. Hence their enormous value : first, as the data for his juumal intime and Life all in one ; and next as the immovable critical basis of historical Christianity. Just as certain of these letters articulate a unique personality, mani- fold yet mastered by one absorbing pa.-ision, so surely must all theories reckon with what they Renan, relying apparently on Talmudic and medieval data, aaserta that 'correspondence between synagoffues already existed in Judaism ; tne envoy charged with sucn letters waf even a dignitary drawn from the synaKOj^ues,' and he iniplie that doubtful pointa of doctrine or practice were thus dis- cussed \st. Paul, 228, 229 and n3). But he gives no reference Sanday speaks more guardedly, and indeed doubts if thfl writing of doctrinal epp. would come to the first generation ol Christians as a matter of course' {Bamp. Lect. 336, S4i. EPISTLE EQUAL rsi imply as to the origins of Christianity. Thev reflect the mood of the time and given circle with perfect vividness of light and shade, ere it fades into the neutral tints of a set narrative. No critici.sm can ignore them. But neither can Christian theology. This means that they are to be read first of all as letters, and by the canons which govern such a reading. Until any reading can be put into relation to both writer and corre- spondents, so far as yet known, it cannot be held real and valid. We must reach the theology, if we reach it truly, through the missionary and man of God. So reached, it is full of qualilication, of the flexibility that marks spirit oil' from letter. And, most valuable of all, a feeling for the practical reference of Christian truth — the ideal of 'being,' even more than ' knowing ' or even ' doing ' — can never be lacking when these writings are read as letters. To this end their very ordering contributes. For the body of the contents falls into two parts. The prophet— for herein lies their continuity with