Eutychus (Hastings' Dictionary)

When St. Paul was at Troas on his final journey to Jerus., on the first day of the week he and his party, with the Christians of the place, assembled in an upper room to break bread. As St. Paul was leaving the next morning, his speech was lengthy, and a young man of the name of Eutychus, who was sitting at the ^vindow (iirl T^s Bvploos), fell asleep (perhaps owing to the heat of the many lamps that were lighted), and, falling down from the third storey, was taken up dead (fipdri ycKpis). St.

Paul went down and em- braced him, and bade them not trouble them- selves, as his life was yet in him. Then he went upstairs, broke bread, and continued talking until the morning. As they departed the young man was brought to them alive ( Ac 20'"'^). The incident occurs in the ' we ' section of the Ac and is clearly authentic, but two opinions are held.

It has been pointed out that it may be capable of a perfectly natural explanation, and it is suggested that it illustrates the growth of mythical stories on a basis of fact, and has been introduced here as a parallel incident to that related concerning Peter (9*1-43) jj^i; Kamsay points out that St. Luke's language is very precise ; that he does not, as in 14'", merely state that E. was thought to be dead, and that weight must be attached to his medical knowledge.

Even if this be (as is perhaps the case) putting an unnatural strain on tne words, it is perfectly clear that the story was related as an inst.ance of the exhibition of power by the apostle, and that the WTiter, who was an eye-witness, be- lieved it to be such. Literature. — Ramsay, St. Paul the Trav. p. 290; HoItB- maUD, Hand-Commentar. p. 402 ; Zeller, Acts, ii. p. 02, Enj?. tr. A. C. Headlam. EVANGELIST {tuayyeXurHit, — ' a.

preacher of good news,' the substantive of eioyyeXifo) — or ti'ay- yeXlt^o/iai, the commoner bibl. form). The verb is used in bibl. Gr. occasionally in the general sense of class. Gr. (I S 31*, Lk 1'"), and, when specialized, stands for the work of Gospel preachers of all kinds: the subst., however — which is rare, and entirely sacred and eccles., occurring in bibl. Gr.

only in Ac 21', Eph 4", 2 Ti4' — is confined strictly to the Christian good tidings, and, ap])arently, to a particular office or function (see Hort, Krclesia, 158). The clearest evidence for the distinctness of office or function lies in Eph 4" '[Christ] gave some to be apostles ; and some, prophets ; and some, evangelists ; and some, pastors and teachers.'

It is true that, in the list at 1 Co 12-*, evangelists are omitted (also (vlctKotroi and SiaKovoi) ; but there the point is, perhaps, to illustrate spiritual aptitude rather than to give an exhaust- ive list of eccles. offices. When a similar omission occurs, Ro 12"", St. Paul seems bent chiefly on distinguishing certain charismata, being content to leave the catalogue incomplete. Possibly, in each case local considerations partly account for the omi.ssions.

But in Eph the context suggests that the writer desires to mention all the principal offices, whereby Christ had provided for the spiritual edification of the Church universal, and ei'ayytXiimis appears to come third in order of institution and of spiritual signilicance.

At the same time it is noticeable that we do not find the word (even in places where it might naturally be looked for) in any of the Pauline Eijistles wliosa 796 EVANGELIST EVANGELIST genuineness meets ■n-ith most general acceptance.

Subsequent reference will be maJe to the passage in the Pastoral Epistles, 2Ti 4' ; it will be sufficient here to say that the phrase Ipyoy irolTjffox ei'077f- XioToC, 'do the work of an evangelist,' is too marked and peculiar to be satisfactorily inter- preted as merely equivalent to ' preach the Gospel.'

The third and liist instance — that in Ac 21" (a verse in one of the ' we ' passages), ' we came unto Coesarea ; and entering into the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, we abode with him ' — must be compared with Ac S*"^, where it is said tliat among those who were scattered from Jerus. after the martyrdom of Stejdien, and went hither and thither preaching the word, Philip preached the Christ at Samaria, without being qualijied (v.'

*'-) to impart the Holy Spirit ; was sent by the Spirit to teach the Ethiopian eunuch in the desert between Jerus. and Gaza ; was afterwards carried off by the Spirit and found at Azotus ; and, finally, having evan- gelized 'all the cities' in his route, took up his abode at Cae-sarea. He may therefore have been called cioyyeXiffT-^s, not because he had been dehn- itely set apart for the office, but because of the missionary work he had done and was perhaps still doing with Ca-sarea as centre.

He had, in fact, been set apart for something else, ' to serve tables ' (Ac 6'"', 21'), but had superadded, and possibly, in the end, substituted, the work of a missionary, because he was, like Stephen, ' full of the Holy Ghost' (Ac 6°), and possessed the charisma for the work of preaching to those who had not heard the Gospel Defore. The three passages, as above discussed and illus- trated, suggest the following conclusions: (1) The evangelists were inferior to the apostles.

They are placed third in order in Eph ; PhUip was unable to impart the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans ; Timothy was the assistant and delegate of St. Paul. Consistent with tliis conclusion is the epigram of Pseudo-Jerome (in Eph 4") 'omnis apostolus evan- gelista, non omnis evangelista apostolus.' (2) They were travelling missionaries, preaching the Gospel to those unacquainted with it, yet sometimes with a settled place of abode, as Philip at Ca3sarea, and Timothy at Ephesus.

Thus they were officers act- ing for the whole Christian community, not for a single church only. Their function could be general, covering wide districts, or it could be, in Practice, local and circumscribed. Thus Theo- oret's apparently contradictory statements can be reconciled : Trcpuoyres iidipvnov, yet ^t] Trepudvrei iraiToxoO. ' Going about they used to preach,' yet ' not going about everywhere ' (as apostles might do). [3) They were charismatically endowed.

Com- pare the influence of the Holy Siiirit iipon Philip, and the x<ipiirMa of Timothy (1 Ti 4>*, 2 Ti 1"). Yet the revelations to the prophet and apostle were of a higher and more striking order.

The apostles were fitted to be the direct authoritative repre- sentatives of Christ (Mt lO", Gal 4", 1 Co U=») ; the prophets, to sway the heart and conscience by the demonstration of the Spirit and of power ( 1 Co 14'^'') ; the evangelists were more ' matter-of-fact men,' preaching the word, communicating the facts of the Gospel, paving the way for the more system- atic work of the pastors and teachers (see order in Eph 4") who watched over and trained the churches when founded (2 Ti 4^"').

But while this may suffice for a distinction in work, it must not be taken as exclusive, so that apostles could not be prophets, or that apostles and prophets could not be evangelists, or that evangelists could not be pastors or teachers, or both. In the floating constitution of the h.olf-organized early Church, different kinds of work were amalgamated (as most always happen) according to qualifications and circumstances (cf. 1 Co 1", .-^c 8", and the mi.xed instructions to Timothy and Titus).

(4) J'hcy were, sometimes at any rate, suh'ninly set apart for the special functivn. Thus Timothy (1 Ti 4", 2 Ti 1') ; and probably Paul and Barnabas (Ac 13'"') were (so far as the Church was concerned) set apart, in the first instance, not as apostles, but as evangelists from among the 'prophets and teachers ' at Antioch. But we are still left in much uncertainty as to the exact position of the eva.

yye\i<rrrii, and this un- certainty is increased ratlier than diminished by the contributions of later literature to the subject. Why, for instance, is there no mention of evan- gelists in the Apostolic Fathers? Because, says Harnack, there was no definite primitive distinc- tion between apostle and evangelist, and in the Didachf the ' apostles ' are just evangelists.

But why should not evangelist have sur\ived, and apostle have been reserved (as in later days) for the first direct representatives of Christ ? And, further, Avhen in the Didachi the ' apostles ' ara forbidden to stay more than two days in the same place, can we regard them as parallels to Paul, oi Philip, or Timothy, especially as in a letter to the last named such constant itinerancy is condemned (1 Ti 5") ?

Of course the strict injunction in the Didachi may be due to the growing opportunities for imposing upon the hospitality of well-to-do Christians, and the missionaries referred to in 1 Ti may have been caricatures of the evangelist type ; but the difference is striking. A partial reply to the former question may be that the ex- tension of the apostolate beyond the Twelve and St.

Paul (an extension obtaining apparently in the apostolic age itself) soon submerged the less familiar and less dignified name of evangelist. This, however, scarcely accounts for the speedy and growing exclusiveness of the apostolic title ; or for the fact that Eusebius recognizes in Pan- tijenus the evangelist a type of an old order still largely survi^-ing in the days of the Alexandrian, but not common in his own days (Eus. HE v. 10).

The material Eusebius attbrds us on this subject, though to some extent unhistorical, throws back light on the primitive use of the term evangelist. He tells how Pant.-enus found that his arrival in India had been anticipated by the written Gospel of Matthew ; he tells how Thaddsus, one of the Seventy, had been sent by the Apostle Thomas, under divine impulse, to Edessa, as a preacher and evangelist of the teaching of Christ (HE i.

13), and this ' teaching ' (also called ' the seed of the word of God') is the story of Jesus (§ 19).

We may combine these hints with the fact that Euse- bius (leaving the rest unmentioned) avowedly re- cords ' the names of those [post-apostolic evan- ''elists] only who have transmitted the apostolic doctrine to us in writings still extant ' ; that Theo- doret definitely restricted the name to this class ; that, finally, (Ecumenius and Chrysostom confined the name to the writers of the Four Gospels ; and that <i'a77eXi<rr^t became (in the Apostolic Ordin- ances, Harnack, Texte, ii.

5) an appellation of the avayvaariji, the reader of the Gospel for the day, who had also to be Snyyv'fis. capable of explaining it.

We may further recall that Philip interpreted the prophet Isaiah to the eunuch ; that Apollos (probably an evangelist) was mighty in the Scrip- tures ; tliat he had been taught the ' way of the Lord' more perfectly by Aquila and Priscilla (i)rob- ably evangelists also, as Theophylact believes) ; that Timothy the evangelist was strong in the Scriptures, one of the reasons doubtless for his choice ; that Paul passes on to Timothy the ' de- posit ' of the Gospel he had received from Christ, exhorts him to keep the original model of sound words, and reminds him of the word that is trust- EVE EVERY 797 worthy, and of the (open) mystery of godliness which is the story of Jesus (2X1 1'-, 1 Ti 0-'"'-l", 2Ti 2"''- ; cf.

'1 it 3», 1 Ti 3"^). We aliall, then, favour the conclusion that tlie NT evanj,'elist3, as such, were depositaries of the facts of the (Jospel as it gradually crystallized ; dealing with these facts orally and in writing, now as missionaries, now as interpreters, without the special <ro<pia. of the apostles, or their peculiar weight and authority ; demi-apostolic men, with a charisma, but one not 80 commanding as that of the apostle, or so strik- ing as that of the prophet.

In a word, they might be called specially inspired teachers ; the eiay-yf- Xi<mj! being distinctively and originally a teacher abroad, aggressive, awakening ; the Si5d<rKa.\os a teacher at home, <juiet and edifying. If this wa-s the practical diflerence between evangelist and teacher, we can better understand Eph 4" ' some (general and missionary) evangelists, and some pastors and teachers' (local officers with the double capacity for moral supervision and for instruction in doctrine).

We can better understand 1 Co 12^, where oiSao-siXoiij (in the third place) would include evangelists. We can better understand how, in the letters to Timothy the 'evangelist,' so great a stress is laid on teach int/. Furthermore, we can better understand the meaning of teacher in the Diilachi, when the phrase, ' whoever ccnneth and teacheth, you,' is followed immediately by ' but in regard to the apostles and prophets' (ch.

11) ; here the teacher seems to be a wandering teacher, that is, an evangelist ; and the order ' apostles and prophets' is so far against the supposition that the apostles are evangelists. This contention is confirmed by the order in other passages, e.g. (ch. 15) ' Bishops and deacons . . they too render you the seiviue o{ prophets and teac/icrs' [when, i.e. you have none such sojourning among you] ; for •prophets and teachers' may 'settle among' them (ch. 13), though apostles may not.

If this progressive convergence of evangelist and teacher be a tact, it is ea.sy to see how the title of ajiostle became increasingly exclusive, and how the title of evangelist gradually confined itself to the writers of the Four Gospels. See CHURCH, p. 433. LiTmATUES. — Zockler, Diaktm^n und EcangelUten ; R6ville, Le orifjinfi de V^pijiajpat ; Sohm, Kirchenrecht ; Weizsacker, ApoKloiie Affe (Kng. tr.) ; llarnack, Texte U. Lehre der Apogtcl ; Zahn, MUmonHinetliOden xm ZeitoUter der Apogtel ; .

Smith, DB, art. • Kvunuclisf J. MaSSIE. EYE (.Tin liavvah),' is the name given in J to the first woman, the wife of Adam, the mother of Cain, Abel, and Seth. In Gn 3™ (whicli is some- times re^'arded as a gloss) it is said that she was so named because 'crSj ck nj;.T ' she was the mother of all living,' i.e. of course, 'all living men.' n;r; is a form of the widesjjread Sem. root nin, n'n, or •■n, and = life, as LXX, Oxf. Heb. Lex.

; rather than liring (liVm Living oT Life), or li/c-giving [Hymin.), as if a shortened Pi. ptcp. W. R. Smith (Kin.thip and Marriage in Arabia, p. 177) makes IJavvah a phonetic variation of hnt/y, and thus a personifica- tion of the bond of kinship, conceived as exclusively mother-kinship (hai/ij). Wellli. (Proleg. 308 n. Eiig. tr.) follows Noldulce in suggesting that /ytccah = serpent, as explained in I'hilo (de agric.

Noe, S 21) and Midrash Uabba on Gn 3", and finds here a trace of the primitive belief that all earthly life originated in a primeval serpent (cf. the function of Tiamat in the Bab. cosmology, and Arab. hayyatnn, serpent). • I.X.X On 8» Z.ii, «1- » Ei. (the E««. of t.» hu no equl- Tali'nt in the Hch), no also in .NT 2 Co Il>, 1 Ti 21». In On .S'» Af). hitf K'ua. or A^«, and Svnini. Zm«>i»«<. TUch. writ+-8 Eva bolh in OTaniiNT, butWIK'ii.

:tl:l)iioint out that in thiialiacnoo of MS evidence as to breatliinu's. the oidy aufe jjuidu in tlic Inltlai n of the Heb. Of. alao the \ uIk. Ufta. l)Oth in OT anil .ST. F'or Eve's relation to Adara, and the account of her in the narrative of the Creation * and the Fall, see Adam. Her utterance on the birth of Cain, Gn 4', is very obscure, — .ti.tt^ v-k 'n-jj ' I have gotten a man,' AV ' from the Lord,' with Targ. Onk. ; RV ' with the help of the Lord,' with LXX, Sii, Tou 6(ov ; Vulg.

per deum ; Synim. avv KMplif. Another Gr. tr. quoted in Field's Ilexapln, inTrjad- firjy Sivdpunrov Kvpiov, ' I have gotten a man, even the Lord,' has been adopted by Luther and others, and understood as expressing Eve's conviction that the promised Messiah of 3" had been born. IJmbreit proposed ' I have gotten J" for a husband.' The U V is the only probable translation. The text is possibly corrupt. (See Cain). W. H. Bennett.