Annunciation of St. Apostle Paul and the Mysteries

Assumptions about the relationship between the apostolic gospel and the mysteries. Consideration of the issue from fundamental aspects and on specific points. St. Paul again frees himself from philosophical dependence. And free authors agree that it is now tendentiously exaggerated, since characteristic cases of agreement concern insignificant points, such as the maintenance of soldiers (1 Cor. 9:7) 1, the honoring of God for good (Rom. 7:18, etc.), the glorification of virtue (Phil. 4:8), the recognition of spirituality, sincerity and carnality 2, the praise of “contentment” with cash (Phil. 4:11) supposedly postoically, a call to attention to the lessons of nature (1 Cor. 11:14), and from here one cannot at all conclude about the invasion and influence of Greek ideas 3 . And these latter differ not only in that they were theories; it is much more important that the most theoretical views were radically disparate, sometimes internally contradictory, for example, on the issue of conscience 5 or regarding morality, for ethics was “evidence of decline, not renewal of life” precisely in Stoicism 6, which, due to internal weakness, was unable to produce a spiritual revolution in the world 7, as is clear from the contrast between Paul and Seneca 8. Christianity was neither the perception nor the application of alien doctrines, even though it was prepared by them 9 . It created from its own depths its own special religious existence, which should be equally original and incomparable with pagan models. Here the other side of the subject is outlined, where dogmatic conviction turns into a spiritual disposition, inseparable from its expression in reverence for God. This is the realm of mysterious understanding of religious relations in a sense of reverent devotion to the Supreme Being. In paganism, this sphere was embraced by the mysteries, 10 and they are used to clarify the primacy of Christianity. Nowadays these influences are so exaggerated 11 that some try to trace all Christian sacraments to pagan rites 12 . This scale also applies to Paul's gospel, where similar contacts are seen 13. Of course, it is more likely for everyone that the Apostle did not personally see the mysteries 14 and was not initiated 15, but this does not eliminate their influence. Philo already tried to mystically illuminate the Jewish religion in his philosophical interpretation of it and used serious efforts for this 16, just as he allegedly used this manual even in his non-original logology 17. For Judaism itself, something similar is equally permissible, if we say that the “magi” were priests of Mithras or Mazdaism 18 . This means that the Apostle Paul could have borrowed from this publicly available source, and then the Stoics had many contacts with mystical parsism, for example, in the doctrine of God-fire 19 and the final world fire 20 . Finally, around the Christian era, the mysteries were very widespread 21, and their terminology was assiduously adopted by Hellenistic Judaism 22. The diversity of the content of the mysteries was quite consistent with the religious syncretism of that time, since they were not purely Greek 23 and bore traces of foreign origin 24 . Thus, in Mithraism there were layers of Iranian, Babylonian, Asia Minor, Hellenic 25, from which they discover indirect contacts with Babylon 26, which has long influenced Asia Minor 27, even in the sacraments of the Eucharist and baptism, while others find in the Apostle Paul (Rom. 11:36) formulas of Egyptian-Greek mysticism 28 or bring Pavlovian Christology closer to the Brahmanian doctrine of Krishna, for both are dominated by the idea of returning from the prevailing dualism to the primordial unity 29 . The cult of Mithra 30 was widely scattered throughout the Roman Empire 31, penetrated to the west 32, prevailed among soldiers 33 and slaves 34 and, under the patronage of the Caesars 35, became permitted 36, almost the dominant religion of the Roman state 37; for the 3rd century, even the question is raised whether there were not more Mithraists then than Christians 38? Cilicia and Tarsus 39 served as prominent stages in this movement. Therefore, it was not difficult for the Hellenic evangelist to become acquainted with the mysteries, at least in Cilicia 40 and in Tapsa itself 41, where he lived from childhood 42 and then, after conversion, for about two years, 43 so that the influence of this city affects even the apostolic Christology 44. Mithraism is associated with Parsism 45, but the latter has long been in Asia Minor 46, and therefore the former was firmly established here, entering into a close community with local religious and cult beliefs - especially with the cult of Cybele 47, which also reached Rome 48. In the Cilician capital there was the birthplace 49 and the center 50 of Parsi mysterism for the Asia Minor regions, in which it acquired great weight and wide scope 51 . Under the above conditions, it is considered completely natural that during his preaching St. Paul was influenced by the Mysteries 52 and Mithraism 53 and adapted to the Mystery language 54, using (for example, in 1 Cor. 2:6 f. Heb. 6:4) its vocabulary 55 and often (Col. 1:26 and passim. Phil. 4:12) giving appropriate metaphors 56. Of course, the Christian faith was first established in the lower strata, but it was in them that all Orientalism first found refuge. From different sides for St. Paul, there was scope for mystical influences on him, and there were no obstacles to eliminating them either in himself or in the being of the influencing elements. Of course, the Apostle lived and thought in the spirit of Christianity, but the latter was not a self-contained and single value. On the contrary, the evangelist is the son of the syncretistic period 58, and the apostolic teaching was also syncretism, where Orientalistic-mystical and Hellenistic-philosophical elements 59 were uniquely generalized in the form of a mixture of Judaism, apocalypticism, Hellenism, mysteries, and popular pagan philosophy 60. True, they say that for a rabbinist the entire New Testament appears to be a rabbinic haggadah 61, and all of Christianity turns out to be one of the stages in the evolution of Judaism 62 so much so that all of Paul’s theology was taught in advance in rabbinical Jerusalem schools and the Epistle to the Romans is covered by rabbinic sources in all the most important points 63. Let this be an exaggeration, which is rightly rejected 64. Now it is important for us that even with the close genetic proximity of Paulinism to Judaism, the former is not at all completely isolated from outside intrusions, for they had support in the latter. Thus, the Haggadah is depicted as similar in ethics to Stoicism 65, which Strabo also equated with Judaism 66, and Sadduceeism is directly related to Hellenism 67. From here, stoic-materialistic metaphysics 68 could penetrate into Paul’s system, embracing the deity itself and subordinating it to the despotism of an unchangeable fate 69, which is why Paul is taught the idea of ​​the dominance of Babylonian-astrological fate in Judaism 70 and even the Apostle himself is considered a fatalist 71. Other observations are also drawn to this, as if - in comparison with Old Testament demonology 72 - in St. Paul here has more orientalistic layers 73 when he fills the air with demons (Eph.2:2) 74, “the elements of the world” (Gal.4:3, 9; Col.2:8, 20) is considered special angelic beings 75. Along with this, Stoicism is brought into relation with Heraclitus 76, being associated with the latter some philosophical concepts, but this philosopher comes into contact with Judaism through the book of the Wisdom of Solomon, for its author is called pseudo-Heraclitus 77, seeing in it also Platonism 78 and Egyptian reflections 79. On the other hand, it is emphasized that the Apostle used this non-canonical creation 80, and if its writer was a disciple of Philo 81, then St. It was not difficult for Paul to become acquainted with the Alexandrian theosophist himself, who, like “a double-minded man” (James 1:8), united in himself two Worlds - Jewish and Hellenic 82 - even in the concept of deity 83 and had his influence in the development of religious and philosophical views 84. We see that the Jewish principles of Paul's gospel do not in the least eliminate the most diverse attacks. And this is quite natural, since later Judaism was involved in the syncretistic process 85 of decomposition and mixing of ancient religions 86, was complicated by the introduction of many borrowings, losing its natural integrity 87, and in eschatology became “a gathering point of alien elements” 88. It is not surprising that Jewish premises could lead to such a Christian construction that some declare the whole of “Christianity” to be a model of religious syncretism 89 . In any case, it is true that Judaism itself drew closer and brought others closer to Hellenism, and this, in turn, was also not united. Syncretism akin to the views of peoples 90 and imparted its diversity to the then Hellenism, which accepted many orientalistic elements 91, was colored by spiritualistic monotheism 92 and imbued with expectations of a special revelation and prophet 93. This later Hellenism reflected the syncretic process of “theocracy” 94 and had a clear impact on modern philosophy, which became the bearer of religious-syncretistic and monotheistic ideas 95 . There is no doubt that the monotheistic features here are greatly exaggerated when the ancient world of the Hellenistic era acquired favor or a direct attraction to biblical monotheism, 96 but still one cannot but agree that religious and philosophical thought was in a mysterious ferment, preparing a religious renewal. From this side, Christianity is portrayed as a natural continuation of syncretistic-Hellenistic religiosity 97, and such “ancient religion is the real Old Testament of our Christianity” 98. It is quite natural that, without in the least renouncing Judeo-biblical premises, the Apostle joined the Hellenistic movement and adopted a lot from it. Such, for example, is the Stoic concept of freedom in general 99 and from the law 100 in particular, or the complication of the Jewish idea of original hereditary sin with the Hellenistic doctrine of sinful carnality and personal imputation 101, while the Jewish concept of “yetzer gara” saw the root cause of sinfulness in God himself, as its creator 102 . Subsequently, they find no less consistently that if Christianity preaches the general resurrection 103 and does not allow optional immortality 104, then this is a deviation from rabbinism, where the idea of ​​the resurrection of some righteous people prevailed 105, and Paul’s concept of resurrection in another body was a concession to Hellenism in comparison with rabbinic doctrines 106, where bodily identity is for every person is ensured by the preservation of an undecaying seed from it in the ground 107. In connection with Hellenic dualism, they consistently state in the Apostle Paul echoes of some world-hatred and asceticism with a humiliating view of women and marriage 108. Let us assume that all these judgments are dominated by tendentious inaccuracies or distortions. There is no dualistic asceticism at all 109, for regarding the flesh the evangelist teaches in such a unique way that this concept is recognized as his personal property 110, acquired not by borrowing from the Greeks, but by individual experience 111. What is most affirmed about life after the resurrection is that it will not be purely illusory and will retain a certain connection with the body 112. Freedom for the Apostle is not at all autonomy or arbitrariness 113, not even a psychological quality, but a property of Christian life, which is why it is explained from it in its origin and content, so incomparable in Christian morality - especially on the issue of love for enemies 114. It is also incorrect that Stoicism, having ennobled the meaning of labor 115, elevated the dignity of women, equating them with men 116 - contrary to Judeo-biblical oppression. On this subject, the practice of the Jews was always above the law 117, and the Old Testament religion did not in the least humiliate women 118, as is noticeable in later Judaism 119, while Christianity directly elevated the personality of women 120. However, all these are just private mistakes, and the most important thing remains that Paul, starting from Jewish principles and preserving them, was brought into ideological connection with syncretistic-philosophical religiosity. Finally, the availability of this source to the Apostle is also indisputable. Sometimes it is assumed that he had a good Greek education 121 and, based on illustrations from pictures of the lists and fights, they conclude that his knowledge is Hellenic 122, emphasizing the likelihood that Saul took advantage of the amenities and benefits of the University of Tarsus 123. At the same time, they find in him, as a Greek who wrote in Greek 124, literary language 125, good style 126 and the art of speech 127. Then all means are available to penetrate into the treasures of philosophy, but opposing views do not eliminate it. They say that Paul was from a poor family 128, did not receive a systematic school education in Greek 129 and then, to quote current proverbs, did not prepare for missionary service by studying Plato and Aristotle 130 or reading poets and philosophers, but only used the speech and wisdom of the Greeks in his evangelistic interests 131, in which we see only a weak philosophical touch 132 without a consistent system. 133. The apostolic Greek language is not at all artificially literary, but more popular 134, although not directly vulgar 135 - with significant kinship to the translation of the LXX, which is especially important here 136, for without it Paul will be incomprehensible either in theology or in activity 137. Given his weakness in the Greek language, the Apostle was forced to resort to the services of assistants and interpreters 138, of whom Luke, identified with Titus, is sometimes singled out 139. These collaborators and scribes supposedly actively participated in Pavlov's writings and contributed to their success in literary and subject matters, 140 but these are still simple letters 141. In these interpretations and fortune-telling there is again a lot of subjective and arbitrary. For example, the influence of scribes could not possibly be significant for the ideological content 142, and the apostolic epistles resemble private letters only in their introductions and endings, but not at all in their central parts 143. With all this, we must not forget that the bearer of religious-intellectual syncretism in the Hellenistic era was not school, but popular philosophy, and Paul could well have borrowed from it 144, even without possessing any special Hellenic culture. As a result, it is formulated that Christian Paulinism is genetically close to the contemporary religious and philosophical heritage and is enriched from it. But there - with the strong spread of secret cults 145 - mysterical influences and movements dominated, which were to leave their mark on the apostolic views. Hence it is stated that - positively or negatively - Christianity is presented (Col. 1:13, 2:15) under the images of the mysteries 146 and imperceptibly begins to be commented on according to their type due to their close similarity 147. From the use of this mystical tropology it is concluded with conviction 148 that concepts drawn from Orphic initiations 149 are also reflected in Christian dogmatics. Christianity, having absorbed and adapted Mithraism 150, receives a mystical understanding 151, which, extending to baptism and the Eucharist 152, transfers it into the circle of mysteric-theurgic religiosity 153, with Greek culture providing significant assistance to Christian development 154. Hellenic mysticism is established, and with it Christian teaching turns out to be a profound change in comparison with the original views 155. Even the central idea of ​​the Logos mediator is in some ways a reflection of the doctrines concerning Mithras 156 . This reinforces the daring idea that everything in Christianity that is beyond Judaism owes directly to myth 157. The true fact is obscured by a mythical fog and becomes doubtful in its existence at the most cardinal points. Thus, the gospel story of the Last Supper, the Gethsemane struggle, betrayal, scourging, crucifixion and resurrection supposedly has a dramatic origin 158, being actually not a story, but a reproduction of a mystery drama, and the latter imprinted the ancient religious practice of human sacrifice, echoes of which are still heard today 159. Others find that baptism and the Eucharist are based on a primitive animistic-spiritualistic concept 160, which was embodied distortedly in other, naturalistic religions 161. From this it is clear that the roots of such a teaching will not be in Christ 162 and not in the Gospel 163. The genesis of the Eucharistic views turns out to be completely special: - at first it was only an Essene-Persian rite, and only then a sacrament was formed under the influence of the cult of Mithra 164, where there are so many parallels regarding the cup and bread 165. This interpretation is also correct for baptism, which acquired a sacramental meaning 166 due to the fact that all Christian sacraments arose under the influence of the mysteries 167 familiar to St. Paul on Cilicia 168. Here the question naturally arises about the consistency of such a biblical view, and we are told 169 that the apostolic history of the Eucharist is absolutely alien to the worldview of the Lord 170, who did not establish either this sacrament or baptism 171, and since both of them were turned into special cocraments 172 - this introduced a particle of pure paganism into the circle of Christian views 173. And the blame for this falls on the Apostle Paul: he was the first Christian theologian 174. however, he preached an enthusiastic mysticism that was kept “outside the sphere of the intellect” 175 and accepted ahistorical traditions about Christ 176 . In this mood, it is not surprising that the Hellenic evangelist, familiar with Mithraism in Tarsus 177, became infected with the bacilli of mysteries that then saturated the entire air 178, where the entire atmosphere was saturated with Orphic and Mithraic mysterism 179. As a result, his entire Christian system is permeated with mythological elements 180 of purely pagan origin 181, and the Christian religion was in danger of degenerating into miraculous mysteries 182. These radical judgments find no solid justification either in points of principle or in detail. The mysteries in many ways remain mysterious until now 183. There are benevolent interpretations that they contained pure primitive religious beliefs, which in mystical mystery were saved from pagan darkness 184. In any case, such well-intentioned apologetic utopias are not confirmed for the mysteries by the living facts of historical reality. The latter was not at all guided by biblical tendencies. Objectively calm research reveals that - in their essence - the mysteries were entirely and systematically built on ontological dualism, 185 trying in vain to achieve reconciliation between God and the world, good and evil, light and darkness; they penetrated and fed on these contrasts, not being able to unite or destroy them 186. It can hardly be argued with success that Christian foundations are completely anti-dualistic, since everything here rests on the incarnation of God and is directed towards the establishment of the closest union of heaven and earth. Hints to the contrary are needlessly and erroneously exaggerated. They say that the apostolic doctrine of sinful flesh was borrowed from mystical contemplations 187, meanwhile for them this sinfulness was naturalistic when St. Paul motivated it not by carnality, but understood and interpreted it ethically, 188 approaching the general biblical view, which in him acquires the most clear disclosure. It is now obvious that in the apostolic concept there was not even a point of support for the application of the mystical categories. Naturally, this does not turn out to be the case after a thorough analysis of the facts themselves. Contrary to this, they note as an indisputable phenomenon that the entire Christian economy is described as a “mystery” or “mystery” 189, and this last name by the Apostle characterizes the essence of Christianity and Christian institutions (Rom. 11:25, 16:25; 1 Cor. 2:1 [with the varant τὸ μαρτύριον], 7, 4:1, 13:2, 14:2, 15:51; Eph. 1:9, 3:32; Col. 1:26, 27; 1 Tim. 3:9, 16; 2 Tim. 1:9-11 190 pagan worship of God 191, but transformed and filled them with its own content, as we see in doctrinal terminology. It is possible that in particular ready-made phrases and sayings are borrowed, for example, φωτίζειν or Paul’s expression (Rom. 14:26) about the eternal God 192, but this does not at all predetermine the dependence by origin, nor a coincidence in meaning. Therefore, regarding (μυστήριον) one should not be deceived by external consonances. The very word with a similar content has already been found in biblical non-canonical books 193 and in the Jewish apocrypha, departing far from mystical accuracy and having its own characteristics in apostolic application 194, where it denoted the actual mystery of God’s unknown plans regarding redemption (Col. 1:26; Eph. 1:9, 3:3,4,9), but in Christ they became a living reality, are assimilated by everyone and are clear to everyone 195. The concepts of εὐαγγέλιον and μυστήριον in the Apostle almost merge 196, which is why the second becomes disparate in comparison with the mystical concepts of that time 197. Here a fundamental difference is revealed, for Christianity is now not darkness, but a revelation (Rom. 16:25,26) in tactile reality 198 for everyone, when mysterism was accessible in its secrets even not to all adherents 199 and completely eliminated women 200; Mithraism was distinguished by its dark isolation and was a kind of Freemasonry 201. In Christianity, this most important moment of pagan mystical mystery was eliminated, so that the apostolic language turned out to be paradoxical, since it meant not the strict secret of a close circle, but a bright truth, clearly communicated and freely perceived 202. From this it must be certain that St. Paul could not equate himself with the hierophant of the Eleusinian mysteries in the dignity of the bearer of divine mysteries 203 if the evangelist transmitted more than revealed them, since they were already revealed in the fulfillment of the feat of Christ and in the life-giving existence of the Church of Christ. The Apostle’s cunning approaches to the mystagogue are extremely unsuccessful. For them, they attract, the letter to the Christians Philip (4:12: μεμύημαι) 204, where, supposedly, every touch of this kind is very impressive, because this Macedonian city, built on the Thracian border, lay on the path of the initial movement to Greece of the mysteries of Dionysus and, perhaps, Demeter; in the mountains closest to it there was a church of Dionysus, whose name was also given to one hill 205; others even guess that the Philippian servant, possessed by the spirit of divination (Acts 16:16 ff.), was a hierodula or priestess of the church of Dionysus 206. All this argumentation is easily destroyed by the simple reference that the term of interest is deprived of special mystical shades and is depersonalized to the current concepts of teaching (see Phil. 4:11: ἔμαθον) and knowledge (4:12: οἶδα). For St. For Paul, Christianity was not a cultic mystery, impenetrable to ordinary eyes; it is not analogous, for example, to the cult of Mithras 207 - and even the initiations themselves are completely different, since among Christians they are preceded by direct instructions in dogmas 208. The presence in Christian churches of “ignorant people” (ἰδιῶται), incapable of comprehending inspired glossolalic broadcasts, is categorically mentioned (1 Cor. 14:16,23), and a place is even reserved for them. Adapted to the pagan religious-cult organization, they tried to understand by this class a group of “alien” people not belonging to the union, but the decisive difference from the “infidels” (1 Cor. 14:23: ἰδιῶται ἢ ἄπιστοι) suggests that these were not unbelievers 209, but persons who are already capable and ready to respond with heartfelt consent to Christian callings. In these properties, they are significantly similar to the “simpletons” (am-haarez) known in rabbinic theology, who are not sufficiently versed in the highest legalistic-ritual wisdom 210, however, it is difficult (cf. 2 Cor. 11:6) to attribute the apostolic witness to poorly educated Christians from the “dark” crowd, for these ἰδιῶται are not directly included in the composition Christian community, being somewhat external to it - like the pagans (see 1 Cor. 14:23). Therefore, it is much more reasonable to assume “catechumens” here, at least after baptism, for in early Christian times it was not only preceded 211, and sometimes only accompanied by a catechumen 212, but both of these moments were closely related to each other, and the Christian catechumenate was always a serious teaching 213. Christian deliverance was alien to mystical exclusivity and therefore did not have the character of closed accommodation to the chosen ones. At this point the question concerns the saving action itself and the corresponding Christian institutions. In the first respect, the term τέλειος is especially put forward, as magical-mystical 214; considering it taken from the mystical vocabulary 215, they connect 216 this word with the mysterical τέλη (τελαταί) 217, or the highest acts of the final purification of candidates (on the eighth day) to the mystical contemplation (on the ninth day) 218, and apostolic expressions (1 Cor. 2:6; Phil.3:12,15; Col.1:29; Heb.2:10, 6:1) comment in this exact sense 219. Believers are, as it were, a caste of “perfects” in the likeness of those who have ascended to the mystical heights and separated from the dark crowd. These echoes are emphasized in the apostolic terminology, according to which Christians will be “initiated,” and τέλειος is identified with μεμυημένος 220. Those blessed are depicted as a solid mass of possessors of a secret hidden from others, as simpletons who have not penetrated the mystical sanctuary. But this contrast (with ἀτέλεστος) is not maintained phraseologically and would require a slightly different turn of phrase (τετελεσμένος) 221. The whole interpretation is based on a false foundation, as if in his ecstatic enthusiasm the evangelist believed that the fullness of Christian grace is immediately perceived, when all believers are equally abundant and have no gradations in the degree of moral growth; St. Paul supposedly forgot reality and saw only his own utopia, in which there were no moral classifications in practice. All this is partly exaggerated and partly actually unfair 222. Grace decisively extracts from previous sinfulness and fully delivers all its privileges of real sonship with God. From this point of view, the redeemed are fundamentally all-perfect and form the sacred kingdom of the chosen ones. Nevertheless, this real right requires its own ethical implementation, and many variations are even inevitable in it, just as the children of the flesh exercise their prerogatives of undisputed and unlimited heirs differently. If the Apostle did not always speak energetically about this side, it was not at all out of denial of it, but out of constant concern for it, for which purpose he put forward an obligatory ideal. Moral differences are categorically assumed and affirmed, since everywhere there is evidence of different assimilation of Christian goods. Accordingly, he admits both errors and improvements in Christians 223, without considering the revival to be completed subjectively due to enthusiastic passion. Here τέλειος, as opposed to νήπιος, will not be a reproduction of the Hebrew tham (thamim, shalem), but is used precisely in Greek in the sense of the Latin adultus 224, having no relation to the mysteries, where the contrast of dedication and complete alienation prevails 225. This means that the Apostle’s τέλειος only points to those who have been more morally successful in the grace of Christ, objectively perfect for everyone forever, and loses all mystical overtones 226, completely belonging to Christian messianism 227. Here Rev. James Moffatt points out (Two Classical Parallels in The Expository Times XX, 4 [January 1909], p. 184b) a parallel in Titus Livy V, 4. On the issue of trichotomy and against its adoption by the Apostle Paul, cf. at o. F.A. Stukova, Note on the meaning of the teaching of the Holy Scriptures about the tripartite composition of man in the “Orthodox Interlocutor” 1885, part I, pp. 255–262, and for biblical psychology cf. Iv. A. Olesnitsky, The teaching of the Old Testament on the immortality of the soul in “Readings in the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment” 1882, book III, pp. 259–298; book xi, pp. 381–447; Ulysses G. W. Pierce, The Soul of the Bible, London 1907. So, at Rev. Prof. T. K. Cheyne in Encyclopedia Biblica IV, col. 2012–2013. This is emphasized by † Prof. Gustav Teichmüller, Aristotelische Untersuchungen III: Geschichte des Begriffs der Parusie (Halle 1873), S. 145. Here, rapprochement with philosophical, stoic ideas, as well as about universal humanitarianism, is also allowed, for example, by Henry Berguer, Le milieu gréco-romain a-t-il fourni un des éléments constitutifs de la pensée et du caractère de saint Paul? in “Revue de théologie et de philosophie” 1908, No. 6 (Novembre), p. 468–469; 466 suiv. See † prof. P.I. Linitsky, Idealism and realism in the magazine “Faith and Reason” 1884, No. 17, pp. 184, 189, 193. Trifon Japaridze, The influence of Christianity on the position of slaves in the Roman state (Stavropol 1904), pp. 93 ff. See even Prof about this. Dr. Wilhelm Soltau, Ursprüngliches Christentum in seiner Bedeutung für die Gegenwart (Lpzg 1902), S. 127 ff. So Lic. Paul Krüger (Hellenismus und Judentum im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter mit einem Geleitwort von Prof. Rud. Kittel, Lpzg 1908, S. 12) says that Cynics and Stoicism prepared the ground for Christian seeds, but what they had in common was not due to borrowing, but was then a widespread spiritual property. Therefore † Prof. D. Otto Pfleiderer (Die Entstihung des Christentums, München 1905, S. 129) thinks that the Apostle Paul and Seneca, while agreeing with each other in many ways, did not know each other and equally drew similar elements from the then education, imbued with Stoic elements. On the mysteries in the age of Christianity, see also Joseph Blötzer S. J., Das heidnische Mysterienwesen zur Zeit der Entstehung des Christentums in “Stimmen aus Maria-Laach” I.XXI, 4 (Oktober 1906), S. 388 ff.; 4 (November 1906), S. 500 ff. See about this y Prof. Dr. Ernst von Dobschütz. Das apostolische Zeitalter in “Religionsgeschichtliche Volksbücher” herausg. von Fr. Michael Schiele I, 9 (Halle a. Saale 1905), S. 28. Kaufmann Kohler, Art. “Saul of Tarsus” in The Jewish Encyclopedia Xl (New York and London 1905), p. 79b. 83a-b. See and Lic. Dr. Alfred Jeremias, Monoteistieche Strömungen innerhalb der babylonischen Religion (Lpzg 1904), S. 17. Prof. Dr. H. J. Holtzmann, Sakramentliches im Neuen Testament st “Archiv für Religionwissen-schaft” VII (1904), 1–2, S. 61 ff. Prof. Paul Wernle, Paulus als Heidenmissionar, S. 10. Prof. S. Cheetham, The Mysteries of Pagan and Christian, p. 112. Dr. phil. Paul Ziegert, Ueber die Ansätze zu einer Mysterienlehre aufgebaut auf den antiken Mysterien bei Philo Judaeus in “Studien und Kritiken” 1894, IV, S. 706 ff. 724. Dr. Emanuel Marius, Die Persénlichkeit Jesu Christi mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Mythologien und Mysterien der alten Völker (Lpzg 1881), S. 150. Prof. Dr. Lawrence H. Mills, in the first part of his work “Zarathushtra, Philo, the Achaemenids, and Israel, being a Treatise upon the Antiquity and Influence of the Avesta” (Parts 1 and 2, Chicago 1906) speaks of the relationship of the “ameshespents” of Mazdaism with the doctrine of the Logos, as dependent on Parsism. Rev. James Moffatt, Zoroastrianism and Primitive Christianity in “The Hibbert Journal” I, 4 (July 1904), p. 773. So does Albrecht Dieterich, who in this whole episode sees simply a later legend (Die Weisen aus dem Morgenlande in “Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft” Ill [1902], 1, S. 4–5), a † Prof. Hermann Usener asserts that the story of the birth and childhood of Christ in all its particulars rests on a pagan foundation (Geburt und Kindheit Christi ibid. IV [1903], 1, S. 21 and in English Art. “Nativity [Narratives]” in Encyclopaedia Biblica III, col. 3352). Prof. Dr. Julius Grill, Die persische Mysterienreligion im römischen Reich und das Christentum, S. 9. Prof. Jul. Grill ibid., S. 18. Prof. S. Cheetham, The Mysteries of Pagan and Christian, p, 71; On the Samothrace Mysteries, see Prof. W. J. Woodhouse, Art. “Samothrace” in Encyclopaedia Biblica IV, col. 4267. Prof. C. F. G. Heinrici, Erklärung der Korinthierbriefe II, S. 564. † Ep. Chrysanthus, Religions of the Ancient World II (St. Petersburg 1875), pp. 556–557. †Prof. M. A. Olesnitsky, Morality of the ancient Greek people in “Proceedings of the Kiev Theological Academy” 1904 No. 6, pp. 235–236. Prof. Hermann Gunkel, Zum religionsgeschichtlichen Verständnis des Neuen Testaments, S. 19. Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra: ein Beitrag zur Religionsgeschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit; autorisierte deutsche Ausgabe von Georg Gehrich (Lpzg 1903), S. 22. See Prof. Heinrich Zimmern , Keilinschriften und Bibel nach ihrem religionsgeschichtlichen Zusammenhang: ein Leitfaden zur Orientierung im sog. Babel-Bibel-Streit mit Einbeziehund auch der neutestamentlichen Problems (Berlin 1903), S. 43–44. See Rev. Prof. A. H. Sayce, The Archeology of the Cuneiform Inscriptions (London 1907), p. 160 sqq. See Prof. R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres: Studien zur griechisch-aegyptischen und frühchristlichen Literatur (Lpzg 1904), S. 39. Lic. Dr. Willy Staerk, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte II (Lpzg 1907), S. 133–134. See Maud, Joynt, Gospel of Krishna and of Christ in “The Hibbert Journal” VI, 1 (October 1907), p. 89. See about him and Prof. Dr. Julius Grill, Die persische Mysterienreligion im römischen Reich und das Christentum, S. 21 ff; cp. † prof. Art. V. Eshevsky, Works I (Moscow 1870), p. 237. Rev. James Moffatt in “The Hibbert Journal” I, 4 (July 1904), p. 772–773. Emil Aust, Die Religion der Römer (Münster i. W. 1899), S. 167. E. Schürer, Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi II, S. 556 – III, S. 111. Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 27 ff. Prof. Johannes Geffcken, Aus der Werdezeit des Christentums: Studien und Charakteristiken (Lpzg 1904), S. 121–122. Prof. W. M. Ramsay, Travel and Correspondence among the Early Christians in “The Expositor” 1903, XII, p. 422 and in: The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia and their Place in the Plan of the Apocalypse (London 1906), p. 34. See also Prof. Jul. Grill, Die persische Mysterienreligion im römischen Reich, S. 34 ff. 36 ff. See Prof. Dr. Paul Wendland, Die hellenistisch-römische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zu Judentum und Christentum in Handbuch zum Neuen Testament herausg. von Hans Lietzmann I, 2 (Tübingen 1907), S. 95. Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 63 ff. Prof. Iv. G. Turtsevich, Orbis in urbe (Nezhin 1902), p. 64 Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. III. Prof. Franz Cumont: Art. “Mithras” in Ausführlicher Lexicon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie herausg. von W. H. Roscher ll, 2 (Lpzg 1894–1897), Sp. 3067; Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 142. See also Prof. W. M. Ramsay, The Cities of St. Paul, Their Influence on his Life and Thought: The Cities of Eastern Asia Minor (London 1907), pp.75–77. And † Ernest Renan even admitted (Marc-Aurèle et la fin du monde, Paris 1882, p. 579) that “if Christianity were to stop growing due to some mortal disease, the whole world would become Mithraic.” Prof. Julius Grill, Die persische Mysterienreligion im römischen Reich, S. 33. John M. Robertson, Pagan Christs (London 1903),’b. 331. † O. Pfleiderer. Das Urchristentum I, S. 44. At the same time, it is repeated again that Paul’s parents moved to Tarsus from Giskala in 4 BC. Chr. during the War of War: see Prof. D. K. F. Nösgen, Paulus der Apostel der Heiden in the publication “Für Gottes Wort und Luthers Lehr!” Biblische Volksbücher herausg. von Lic. theol. Pfarrer Johannes Rump I, 10 (Gütersloh 1908), S. 11. See and Prof. C. Toussaint, Art. “Paul (Saint)” in Dictionnaire de la Bible publié par F. Vigouroux, vol. IV (Paris 1908), p. 2201. Prof. D. Arnold Meyer, Wer hat das Christentum begründet, Jesus oder Paulus? (Tübingen 1907), S. 39. In general, regarding the educational influence on Paul from Tarsus and - especially - Athenodorus, see Henry Berguer in “Revue de theologie et de philosophie” 1908, No. 6 (Novembre), p. 461 suiv. 471; 475. Prof. Dr. Rudolf Glaser, Die Religion des Mithras in “Der Beweis des Glaubens” 1903, VI, S. 214 ff. L. Preller, Römische Mythologie I (Berlin 1881), S. 410 ff. Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. IV. 10. Prof. Franz Cumont ibid., S. 15–16 and cp. 64. 135. E. Schürer, Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi II, S. 556 – III, S. 112. Prof. Iv. G. Turtsevich, Orbis in urbe, p. 56. Prof. Julius Grill, Die persische Mysterienreligion im römischen Reich und das Christentum, S. 33. Prof. Franz Cumont in Ausführliches Lexicon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie herausg. von W. H. Roscher II, 2, Sp. 3032 and Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 23, also see L. Preller, Römische Mythologie II (Berlin 1883), S. 412. Prof. Franz Cumont at W. H. Roscher II, 2, Sp. 3031–3032. Emil Aust, Die Religion der Römer, S. 100. Prof. Dr. Georg Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Römer in Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft herausg. von Prof. Dr. Iwan Müller V, 4 (München 1902) S. 307. See † Prof. Dr. J. M. S. Baljon, Die Früchte des Studiums der Religionsgeschichte für die Behandlung des Neues Testaments in “Studien und Kritiken” 1906, I, S. 56 ff., although this author protests (S. 83-85) against exaggerations in comparisons with the mysteries. † Prof. J. M. S. Baljon in “Studien und Kritiken” 1906, I, S. 67 ff. 73 ff. Rev. Augustine S. Carman, The New Testament Use of Greek Mysteries in “The Bibliotheca Sacra” L, 20 (October, 1893), p. 638. † Edw. Hatch, Griechentum und Christentum, S. 220. Rev. Edw. L. Hicks in Studia Biblica et ecclesiastica IV, p. 7. See “The Expository Times” XV, 7 (April 1904), p. 306b. See Prof. Dr. Adolf Hausrath, Jesus und die neutestamentlichen Schriftsteller (Berlin 1908), S. 265. Adolf Hausrath ibid., pp. 266–267. † Prof. O. Pfleiderer, Die Entstehung des Christentums, S. 142. S. Schechter, Studies in Judaism, second Series (London 1908), p. 106. M. L., L'esprit du Christianisme et du Judaïsme; à propos de quelques publications récentes in “Revue des études juives” LI (1906), p. 206 suiv. Rev. R. Heber Newton, The Outcome of Theological Movement of our Age in “The Hibbert Journal” IV, 2 (January I906), p. 273. See also S. Monteil, Essai sur la Christologie de saint Paul I (Paris 1906), p. 21 suiv. 33 suiv. Rabbiner Dr. J. Bergmann, Jüdische Apologetik im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter (Berlin 1908), S. 2. J. Bergmann ibid., S. 72. See Privatdoz. Dr. Gustav Hölscher, Der Sadduzäismus: eine kritische Untersuchung zur späteren jüdischen Religionsgeschichte (Lpzg 1906), S. 33 ff. 107ff Wilg. Windelband. History of ancient philosophy in Russian translation edited by prof. A.I. Vvedensky (St. Petersburg, 1893), p. 263. Wilg. Windelband ibid., p. 264. Prof. D. Alfred Bertholet, Das religionsgeschichtliche Problem des Spätjudentums (Tübingen 1909), S. 11. †Eduard von Hartmann, Das Christentum des neuen Testaments, zw. Auflage (Sachsa im Harz 1905), S. 181, 233. Wed. for her and Rev. W. O. E. Oesterley. The Demonology of the Old Testament in “The Expositor” 1907, IV, p. 316–332. Prof. D. August Wünsche, Art. “Teufel” in Realencyklopädie von Herzog-Hauck XIX (Lpzg 1907), S. 569. Privatdoz. Johannes Leipoldt, Christentum und Stoizismus in “Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte” XXVII (Gotha 1906), 2, S. 147. See and Lic. theol. Paul Fiebig, Die Offenbarung des Johannes und die jüdische Apokalyptik der römischen Kaiserzeit (Gotha 1907), S. 26. Wilg. Windelband, History of Ancient Philosophy, pp. 260 and 263. Prof. D. Alfred Bertholet in Die Literaturen des Ostens in Einzeldarstellungen VII, 1 (Lpzg 1906), S. 412. Alfred Bertholet, Das religionsgeschichtliche Problem des Spätjudentums, S. 9–10. Alfred Bertholet ibid., S. 13. Cp. above p. 478. Adolf Hausrath, Jesus und die neutestamentliche Schriftsteller, S. 266. Adolf Hausrath ibid., S. 263. Lic. th. Paul Krüger , Hellenismus und Judentum im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter mit einem Geleitwort von Prof. D. Rud. Kittel (Lpzg 1908), S. 45. Cp. and Dr. H. Guyot, L'infinité divine de Philon jusqúà Plotin (I-er s. av. J.-C. – Ill-e s. ap. J.-C.), Paris 1906. Cp. and Dr. H. Guyot, Les réminiscences de Philon le Juif chez Plotin, Paris 1906. Lic. Dr. Willy Staerk, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte II (Lpzg 1907), S. 119 ff. Privatdoz. Gustav Hoennicke, Das Judenchristentum im ersten und zweiten Jahrhundert (Berlin 1908), S. 34, 36, 38. Prof. Alfred Bertholet, Das religionsgeschichtliche Problem des Spätjudentums, S. 3–4. Alfred Bertholet ibid. S. 12. See y Rev. Prof. D. James Denney, The Cup of the Lord and the Cup of Demons in “The Expositor” 1908. IV, p. 294. Prof. Paul Wendland, Christentum und Hellenismus in ihren literarischen Beziehungen, S. 5. Prof. Dr. Erast von Dobschütz, Griechentum und Christentum in the collection Das Christentum from the series Wissenschaft und Bildung: Einzeldarstellungen aus allen Gebieten des Wissens, herausg. von Privatdoz. Dr. Paul Herre, Heft (Nr.) 50 (Lpzg 1908), S. 42. Privatdoz. W. Staerk, Judentum und Hellenismus ibid., S. 38. Prof. E.v. Dobschütz, Griechentum und Christentum ibid., S. 43. Prof. D. Ernst Sellin, Die israelitisch-jüdische Heilandserwartung in Biblische Zeit-und-Streitfragen zur Aufklärung der Gebildeten herausg. von Prof. O. Friedrich Kropatscheck V, 2–3 (Gr. Lichterfelde – Berlin 1908), S. 79 ff. Henry Berguer in “Revue de théologie et de philosophie” 1908, no. 6 (Novembre), p. 478. Lic. th. Paul Krüger, Hellenismus und Judentum im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, S. 14, 24. Prof. Paul Wendland, Christentum und Hellenismus in ihren literarischen Beziehungen, S. 7. See † Prof. about this. Ernest Lucius. Die Anfänge des Heiligenkults in der christlichen Kirche, herausg. von Prof. Gustav Anrich (Tübingen 1904), S. 5 ff. Rabbiner Dr. Joseph Eschelbacher, Das Judentum im Urteile der modernen protestantischen Theologie (Lpzg 1907), S. 48. Prof. F. Fr. Zelinsky, The character of ancient religion in comparison with Christianity in “Russian Thought” 1908, No. 2, p. 95. See his preface to the Russian translation of the book: Albert Reville, Jesus of Nazareth, vol. I (St. Petersburg 1909), pp. XIII, XIV. In general, this author in his works states “the development of Roman philosophy as the ancestor of Christianity,” referring to “a study of the time when the ancient world was tiredly and anxiously looking for religious answers and created a number of philosophical, monotheistic religions; one of them, victorious, belonging to antiquity in flesh and blood, is Christianity.” (See N.V. Bryullova in the Hermes magazine. No. 3 (29) for February 1, 1909, p. 74. Prof. Dr. Johannes Weiss, Die Aufgaben der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft in Gegenwart (Göttingen 1908). S. 50. Prof. Carl Clemen, Die Entwicklung der christlichen Religion innerhalb des Neuen Testaments, S. 105. Prof. Carl Clemen : ibid., S. 19: Religionsgeschichtliche Erklärung des Neuen Testaments: Die Abhängigkeit des Ältesten Christentums von nichtjüdischen Religionen und philosophischen Systemen zusammenfassend untersucht (Giessen 1909), S. 285. Rev. W. O. E. Oesterley und G. H. Box, The Religion and Worship of the Synagogue (London 1907), p. 242. W. O. E. Oesterley, The Evolution of the Messianic Idea (London 1908), p. 185. For this, see Seraphim Bulgakov, Dogma of the Resurrection of the Human Body, Kursk 1904. Wed. about this and from Prince V.M. Golitsyna, New doctrine of conditional immortality, Moscow 1900. Rabbiner Dr. J. Bergmann, Jüdische Apologetik im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, S. 120–121. J. Bergmann, Jüdische Apologetik im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, S. 122. K. Köhler, Zum Verständnis des Apostels Paulus, Breslau (1908?) S. 10. J. Bergmann ibid., S. 127. J. Bergmann ibid., S. 112. K. Köhler, Zum Verständnis des Apostels Paulus, S. 12. Prof. C. Clemen, Die Entwicklung der christlichen Religion innerhalb des Neuen Testaments, S. 103. Prof. D. W. Lütgert, Freiheitspredigt und Schwarmgeister in Korinth in “Beiträge zur Förderung christlichen Theologie” herausg. von Proff. A. Schlatter und W. Lütgert XII (Gütersloh 1908), 5, S. 36. Prof. C. Clemen, Religionsgeschichtliche Erklärung des Neuen Testaments, S. 47. Rev. Principal Alfred E. Garvie, Studies in the Pauline Theology in “The Expositor” 1909, III, p. 247. See Lewis A. Muirhead, The Terms of Life and Death in the Old and New Testament, and Other Papers (London 1908), p. 25, 29. Prof. W. Lütgert in “Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie” XII (1908), 5, S. 13, 31. Wed. to this and M. L., Comparison of ancient morality with Christian morality on the issue of love for enemies in the magazine “Faith and Reason” 1908, No. 22, pp. 485–498; No. 23, pp. 619–630; No. 24, pp. 752–766. Rabbiner Dr. J. Bergmann, Jüdische Apologetik im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, S. 2. Prof. C. Clemen, Religionsgeschichtliche Erklärung des Neuen Testaments, S. 285. See Prof. D.Dr. Max Löhr, Die Stellung des Weibes zu Jahve Religion und Kult (Lpzg 1908), S. 33. Max Löhr ibid., S. 40 ff. 42 ff. 49 ff. Max Löhr ibid., S. 52 ff. 54. Wed. and Trifon Japaridze, The influence of Christianity on the position of slaves in the Roman state, p. 111. Prof. W. M. Ramsay, Dr. Milligan's Edition of the Epistles to the Thessalonians in “The Expositor” 1909, I, p. 288–291. For this purpose Prof. Caspar René Gregory notes (The Reading of Scripture in the Church in the Second Century in “The American Journal of Theology” XIII, 1 [January, 1909], p. 87) that the Apostle Paul, recommended by 2 Cor. 11:6 ἰδιώτης τῷ λόγῳ, however, does not call himself ᾀγραμματος. Prof. W. M. Ramsay, Luke the Physician and other Studies in the History of Religion (London 1908), p. 5. Prof. Dr. Caspar René Gregory, Einleitung in das Neue Testament (Lpzg 1909), S. 651. Moreover, Henry Berguer emphasizes in “Revue de théologie et de philosophie” 1908, no. 6 (Novembre), p. 462.475 that Paul came from a noble family. Prof. Dr. Johannes Weiss, Die Aufgaben der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft in der Gegenwart, S. 117. Prof. Dr. Johannes Weiss ibid., pp. 10–11. Prof. Dr. Johannes Weiss ibid., S. 12 ff. Prof. Dr. Johannes Weiss ibid., S. 19. Prof. Constantin Toussaint in Dictionnaire de la Bible par F. Vigouroux IV (Paris 1908), col. 2191. In favor of this Ad. Harnack referred to Porphyry's hostility to Paul (Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in der ersten drei Jahrhunderten, zw. Aufl., Bd I, Lpzg 1906, S. 415: see and above pp. 906, 550), but such a conclusion in this case is considered unfounded by Privatdoz. Johannes Leipoldt, Christentum und Stoizismus in “Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte” XXVII (1906), 2, S. 146 Anm. F. Prat, La théologie de Saint Paul I, p. 20–21. Prof. Paul Wendland, Christentum und Hellenismus in ihren literarischen Beziehungen. S. 5–6. Prof. D. K. F. Nösgen, Paulus der Apostel der Heiden in the publication “Für Gottes Wort und Luthers Lehr!” Biblische Volksbücher herausg. von Lic. theol. Pfarrer Johannes Rump I, 10 (Gutersloh 1908), S. 13. Prof. D. Adolf Deissmann, Das Christentum und die unteren Schichten. S. 35. K. Köhler, Zum Verständnis des Apostels Paulus, S. 9. Prof. D. Adolf Deissmann, Das Urchristentum und die unteren Schichten, S. 20–22. Prof. D. Adolf Deissmann, Licht von Osten, S. 41. Lic. Dr. W. Staerk, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte I, S. 114 ff. Prof. D. Adolf Deissmann. Evangelium und Urchristentum (München 1907). S. 117. Rev. Prof. H. B. Swete, The Old Testament in Greek in “The Interpreter” V, 2 (January 1909), p. 130. Prof. Adolf Hausrath, Jesus und die neutestamentlichen Schriftsteller, S. 381. Rev. E. R. Boys-Smith, Titus and Luke in “The Expository Times” XVIII, 8 (May 1907), p. 380–381. Prof. W. M. Ramsay, Luke the Physician and Other Studies in the History of Religion, p. 18. Prof. Johannes Weiss, Die Aufgaben der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft in der Gegenwart, S. 34. Prof. Paul Wendland, Christentum und Hellenismus in ihren literarischen Beziehungen. S. 3. Prof. W. M. Ramsay in “The Expositor” 1909, I, p. 7. Prof. Johannes Weiss, Die Aufgaben der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft in der Gegenwart, S. 35. For comparison, see Gustav Adolf Gerhard. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des griechischen Briefes I: Die Anfangsformel, Tübingen 1903. Prof. Carl Clemen, Religionsgeschichtliche Erklärung des Neuen Testaments, S. 23. See also Erich Ziebart, Das griechische Vereinwesen (Lpzg 1896), S. 205. † O. Pfleiderer; Der Paulinismus, pp. 385–386. Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 144 ff. Dr. Emanuel Marius, Die Persönlichkeit Jesu Christi mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Mythologien und Mysterien der alten Völker (Lpzg 1881), S. 166. Dr. Emanuel Marius ibid., pp. 167–168. John M. Robertson, Pagan Christs, p. 331 sqq. 346 sqq. Prof. H. J. Holtzmann, Lehrbuch der neutestamentlichen Theologie Il, S. 174–175. Prof. Dr. Paul Wendland, Die hellenistisch-römische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zu Judentum und Christentum in Handbuch zum Neuen Testament herausg. von Hans Lietzmann I, 2 (Tübingen 1907), S. 127. Prof. H. J. Holtzmann, Lehrbuch der neutest. Theologie II, S. 186. Prof. H. J. Holtzmann ibid., II, S. 209. Prof. P. Wernle (on A. Titius's Die neutestamentl. Lehre von der Seligkeit) in “Theologische Rundschau” IV, 2 (Februar 1901), S. 51. See and Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 95. 101. 145, as well as above on page 477. Thus Hermann Cohen, Religion und Sittlichkeit: eine Betrachtung zur Grundlegung der Religionsphilosophie (Berlin 1907), S. 37 ff. 43ff; but see against this in Prof. C. F. G. Heinrici, Der literarische Charakter der neutestamentlichen Schriften (Lpzg 1908), S. 14. John M. Robertson, Pagan Christs, p. 189. John M. Robertson, Pagan Christs, b. XI. Liс. theol. Privatdoz. W. Heitmüller, Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus: Darstellung und religionsgeschichtliche Beleuchtung (Göttingen 1903), S. 36, 47, 49. Even Prof. Dr. Johannes Weiss asserts (Die Aufgaben der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft in der Gegenwart, S. 51) that - in general - the idea of ​​mystical-sacramental unity is an echo and remnant of the animistic cult. W. Heitmüller, Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus, S. 40–42 ff. 50–51. 51–52. W. Heitmüller ibid., S. 38 ff. W. Heitmüller ibid., S. 54. Kaufmann Kohler, Art. “Lord's Supper” in The Jewish Encyclopedia VIII (New York and London 1904, p. 184a. W. Heitmüller, Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus, S. 46. W. Heitmüller ibid., S. 14. Prof. W. Bousset, Die Religionsgeschichte und das Neue Testament, in “Theologische Rundschau” VII (1904), 8 (August), S. 315; 9 (September) S. 355. See regarding baptism and the Eucharist in † Prof. D. Otto Pfleiderer, Die Entstehung des Christentums (München 1905), pp. 129–131, 154–155. W. Heitmüller, Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus, S. 7. Prof. Oscar Holtzmann, Das Abendmahl im Urchristentum in “Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft” V (1904), 2, S. 106. Prof. Arthur Cushman McGiffert, Was Jesus or Paul the Founder of Christianity? in The American Journal of Theology XIII, 1 (January, 1909), p. 10; his History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age (New York 1897), p. 61 sqq. 69. Prof. A. C. MeGiffert in “The American Journal of Theology” XIII, 1 (January, 1909), p. 11, 12. Prof, O. Holtzmann in “Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft” V (1904), 2, S. 107. Lic. Alfred Juncker, Die Ethik des Apostels Paulus, S. 5. Alfred Juncker ibid., pp. 4–5. M. Brückner, Zum Thema Jesus und Paulus in “Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft” VII (1906), 2, S. 165. W. Heitmüller, Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus, S. 52. W. Heitmüller ibid., S. 52. † Eduard von Hartmann, Das Christentum des neuen Testaments, S. 172. W. Heitmüller, Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus, S. 12–13. See † Prof. Otto Pfleiderer, Die Entwicklung des Christentums (München 1907), S. 24–25. Wed. Prof. Adolf Harnack, Der erste Klemensbrief: eine Studie zur Bestimmung des Charakters des ältesten Heidenchristentums (Berlin 1909), S. 41. See about them † ep. Chrysanthus, Religions of the Ancient World II, p. 529. In general, about the mysteries, cf. † prof. I.A. Chistovich, The Ancient Greek World and Christianity in Relation to the Question of Immortality and the Future Life of Man (St. Petersburg, 1871), pp. 15 ff.; Academician V.V. Latyshev, Essay on Greek Antiquities, Part II (St. Petersburg, 1899), pp. 208 ff.; N.P., Ancient Greek mysteries in the magazine “Faith and Reason” 1900, No. 11, pp. 493–524; Jean Réville, Die Religion zu Rom unter den Severern übers. von Dg. Gustav Krüger (Lpzg 1888), S. 179–182, and briefly about the Eleusinians in Prof. Dr. Paul Stengel, Die griechischen Kultusaltertüms (in Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft herausg. von Prof. Iwan Müller V, 4, München 1898), S. 153. So does N.P., Ancient Greek mysteries in the magazine “Faith and Reason” 1900, No. 11, p. 495 ff. Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 103. Cf. and † prof. M.A. Olesnitsky in “Proceedings of the Kiev Theological Academy” 1904, No. 6, p. 240. See below p. Prof. G. Nathanael Bonwetsch, Wesen, Entstehung und Fortgang der Arcandisciplin in “Zeitschrift für historische Theologie” 1873, II, S. 222. Cf. and † prof. I.A. Chistovich, The ancient Greek world and Christianity in relation to the question of immortality and the future life of man, p. 43. Prof. Percy Gardner, A Historical View of the New Testament (London 1901), p. 224–225. Cp. u Prof. Justus Köberle, Sünde und Gnade im religiösen Leben des Volkes Israel bis auf Christum, S. 513. See also Rev. Prof. Alexander Stewart, Art. “Mystery” in A Dictionary of the Bible ed. by J. Hastings III, p. 469b. See Rev. Augustine S. Carman in “The Bibliotheca Sacra” L, 200 (October, 1893), p. 630, 631, 632, 634, 635. See also Hippolyte Delehaye S. J. Die hagiographischen Legenden, übersetzt von E. A. Stückelberg (Kempten und München 1907), S. 149. Prof. Carl Clemen, Die religionsgeschichtliche Erklärung des Neuen Testaments: Die Abhängigkeit des ältesten Christentums von nichtjüdischen Religionen und philosophischen Systemen zusammenfassend untersucht (Giessen 1909), S. 268. See † Edw. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford 1889), p. 57–58. See Dean of Westminster J. Armitage Robinson, St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians (London 1904), p. 31, 234–240, and cp. † Prof. St. D. F. Salmond in The Critical Review XIV, 2 (March, 1904), p. 171. Prof. Gustav Anrich, Die antike Mysterienwesen in seinem Einfluss auf das Christentum (Göttingen 1894), S. 143–145. See Prof. D. Alfred Seeberg, Das Evangelium Christi (Lpzg 1905), S. 49 ff. See Prof. D. Alfred Seeberg. Das Evangelium Christi, S. 54–55. Prof. S. Cheetham, The Mysteries Pagan and Christian. p. 136. Prof. T. K. Abbott, Essays chiefly on the Original Texts of the Old and New Testaments (London 1891), p. 89 sqq. See, and † ep. Chrysanthus, Religions of the Ancient World II, p. 537. See Prof. Franz Cumont, Die Mysterien des Mithra, S. 130–131. So † Ernest Renan, Marc-Aurèle et la fin du monde antique (Paris 1882), p. 577. † Bishop J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul's Epistle to the Colossians and to Philemon (London 1899), p. 166. So † E. Kurtius in Gesammelte Abhandlungen II, S. 537 and no translation † by prof. A.P. Lopukhin in “Christian Reading” 1894 IV, p. 18 and on reprint, p. 16. † E. Kurtius 1. cit. Rev. Aug. S. Carman in “The Bibliotheca Sacra” L. 200 (October, 1893), p. 633. Rev. Aug. S. Carman ibid. L. 200 (October, 1893), p. 634. See Rev. Joseph Williams Blakesley, Art. “Philippi” in A Dictionary of the Bible ed. by William Smith II (London 1863), p. 837b. This analogy was argued, for example, by E. Havet according to Prof. S. F. G. Heinrici, Forschungen über die paulinischen Briefe: ihr gegenwärtiger Stand und ihre Aufgaben (Giessen 1887), S. 116. Prof. S. Cheetham, The Mysteries of Pagan and Christian, p. 95. See Prof. S. F. G. Heinrici, Die Christengemeinde Korinths und die religiösen Genossenschaften der Griechen in “Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie” XIX (1876), 4, S. 496, 512 and cp. his Der erste Brief an die Korinther in H. Aug. W. Meyer V, S. 422. Ad. Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte II, S. 119. Prof. P. W. Schmiedel in Hand-Commentar zu Neuen Testament II (Freiburg i. B. 1892), 1, S. 177. Prof. Alfred Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten und der Juden zu den Fremden i. B. und Leipzig 1896), S. 296. Dr. lgnaz Rohr, Paulus und die Gemeinde von Korinth auf Grund der beiden Korintherbriefe in “Biblische Studien” herausg. von Prof. O. Bardenhewer IV, 4 (Freiburg im Breisgau 1899), S. 30 (=394), Prof. Carl Clemen, Religionsgeschichtliche Erklärung des Neuen Testaments, S. 165. In this sense, Louis Ginzberg, Art. “Amen” in The Jewish Encyclopedia I, p. 492a fin. Wed. above on pp. 961, 916. See Th. Zahn, Einleitung in das Neue Testament II (Lpzg 1899), S. 360 = II (Lpzg 1907), S. 366; Dr. Anton Beck, Der Prolog des Lukas Evangeliums (Amberg 1900), S. 14–15, although the second refutes (S. 13) Zahn’s thought (cf. and Paul Ewald, Art. “Lukas der Evangelist” in Realencyklopädie von Herzog-Hauck XI, S. 695) that when the third Gospel was written, Theophilus was also unacknowledged and unbaptized. So † Prof. Dr. Paul Schanz, Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Lucas (Tübingen 1883), S. 57. This is especially clearly revealed in Prof. D. Alfred Seeberg, Der Katechismus der Urchristenheit (Lpzg 1903), S. 50. 168 ff., and on the connection with baptism, see S. 43, 111, 143, 144–145, 174, 176 ff. 184, 211–213. 247, 260, 265, 268. Kaufmann Kohler in The Jewish Encyclopedia XI, p. 85a. So does Rev. Prof. Alexander Stewart, Art. “Mystery” in A Dictionary of the Bible ed. by J. Hastings III, p. 469b. † J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul's Epistle to the Colossians and to Philemon, p. 168–169. † E. Kurtius in Gesammelte Abhandlungen II, S. 437 and in † prof. A.P. Lopukhin in "Christian Readings" 1894, IV, pp. 18–19 and on reprint, pp. 16–17. Mystical terminology is also revealed in Prof. S. Cheetham, The Mysteries of Pagan and Christian, p. 135–138. See and † Prof. K.Fr. Hermann, Lehrbuch der griechischen Antiquitäten II: Die gottesdienstlichen Alterthümer (Heidelberg 1846), S. 151. For a condensed description of the mysteries and mystical actions, see also Rev. Augustine S. Carman in “The Bibliotheca Sacra” L, 200 (October, 1893), p. 614–623, and about the Eleusinians - † Edw.Hutch Griechentum und Christentum, S. 211 ff; Prof. Paul Stengel, Die griechischen Kultusaltertümer, S. 162 ff. Rev. Augustine S. Carman in “The Bibliotheca Sacra” L, 200 (October, 1893), p. 630–631, 633, 634, 636 4 cp. 623. Prof. C. F. G. Heinrici, Erklärung der Korinthierbriefe II, S. 40–41, 108; Wed his and Der erste Brief an die Korinther y H. Aug. W. Meyer V, S. 93. Prof. Gust. Anrich, Die antike Mysterienwesen in seinem Einfluss auf das Christentum, S. 146. See Walter Bauer, Mündige und Unmündige bei dem Apostel Paulus (Marburg 1902), S. 18 ff. Lic. Alfred Juncker, Die Ethik des Apostels Paulus, S. 205–222. Alfred Juncker ibid., S. 203, 205. Alfred Juncker ibid., S. 203. See Walter Bauer, Mündige und Unmündige bei dem Apostel Paulus, S. 5 ff. See Prof. Dr. A. Schlatter , Jesu Demut, ihre Missdeutungen, ihr Grund in “Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie” herausg. von Proff. A. Schlatter und W. Lütgert VIII (Gütersloh 1904), 1, S. 53.