ing it as typical for all who had thus been made ambassadors for God and witnesses of the resurrection. It goes as far beyond the brief glimpses afforded us in Galatians, as Galatians itself goes beyond the mere externalities of Acts in the insight it gives us into the basis of Paul's religious experience. Study of the beginnings of the great controversy over Paul's apostleship in Galatians should never be dissociated from its climax and close in II Cor. 3-6.

Time will not allow me to follow in detail the majestic progress of the thought as Paul compares his revelation with that which Moses had received, still less to adduce the parallels from the Hermetic writings and similar sources which show the significance which it bears to him.9 I will only remind you of the familiar story of Exodus, how Moses, after the people's sin, goes up to intercede on their behalf with God. On the height of Horeb he entreats that his own name may be blotted from God's book of life, if only Israel may be pardoned. Last of all he prays: "I beseech thee, show me thy glory." To that the answer is given: Thou canst not see my face; for no man shall see me and live. But I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cause my glory to pass before thee." Then, as Moses stands hidden in the cleft of the rock, Jehovah passes by and a voice proclaims: "Jehovah, a God merciful and gracious, forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin." And as Moses descended from the mount with his message of pardon his face was transfigured with the reflection of the glory of God. But Paul was not the first to think of this reflected glory on the intercessor's face as preparing him for immortality. Perhaps it may help us to appreciate what the apostle sees in

9 See Kennedy, St. Paul and the Mystery Religions, and Morgan, Religion and Theology of Paul, pp. 113-145.

this story of the intercession of Moses, and his revelation of the "grace" and mercy of the forgiving God, if we remember that to the orthodox Jew this is the supreme instance of intercession for the forgiveness of sin. It is the Mosaic gospel of the "reconciliation " (Karaλλay) manifesting the "grace" of God in not imputing unto the people their trespasses. Paul's reference to the passing glory on the face of Moses, a transfiguration that caused him to put a veil upon his face that the people might not see how soon it was gone, may seem strange to our mode of thought. If so it may help us to know that Philo, thirty years before this time, had already advanced the doctrine of a transfiguration of Moses through his intercourse with God and that Philo also makes this Moses' preparation for immortality. Describing his departure into Heaven at the summons of the Father (μετακληθεῖς ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός) Philo declares that by the vision of God Moses' soul and body had been blended into a single new substance, an immortal mind-substance having the appearance of the sun.10 It is not in the words of Philo, but in the mystic language of the mystery-religions that we read in Paul of the gnosis that conveys immortality by reflecting the image of the glorified Savior-god on the mirror of the retina. Paul borrows the phraseology of this religious mysticism to describe the experience of new creation which qualifies for the ministry of the new covenant. Unlike Moses those who receive this ministry have no veil upon their face. As they gaze upon the glorified Master, who for their sakes died and for their sakes was raised again from the dead, the radiant figure is reflected in them as in a mirror. As the retina forms the image of the object gazed upon, so Christ is "formed in them." They are progressively "trans

10 Vita Mos. II, 39.

formed by the renewing of their minds" in preparation for immortality, they are "transfigured into the same image, from glory to glory."

So the long conflict of Paul for his God-given apostleship comes back to its starting-point, the manifestation of the Son of God in him, even as he had been manifested to Peter first of all. Only now he speaks not merely of apostleship, but of a "ministry" of the new covenant whose revelation surpasses the revelation to Moses. He speaks of an "ambassadorship” of the reconciliation; for in it both he and all his fellow witnesses of the resurrection are heralds of peace to the world. He speaks of an immortality for which we were created in the image of God. For that same God who in the creation commanded the light to shine out of darkness had made a new creation; and of this Paul was made a "witness" when the God that "forgiveth iniquity, transgression and sin" shined in his heart to give the light of the knowledge of this his glory “in the face of Jesus Christ."

LECTURE IV

THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE GOSPEL (Continued)

II. THE MESSAGE OF THE RECONCILIATION

1. Historical Interpretation

The attempt was made in the preceding lecture to show from Paul's own references to his experience in conversion that the ordinary way of reasoning from it almost inverts the true principles of religious psychology. We must learn to look upon the vision as effect rather than cause. Paul had indeed a theory of salvation before his conversion. But the vision of the glorified Jesus did not come into this as a new, inexplicable datum supplying the needed deus ex machina. On the contrary it was the collapse of preconceived ideas which brought about the vision. And however unexpected to him, the vision was by no means without its antecedents. Of these the most obvious are two: on the one side an utterly unbearable strain upon his own soul to achieve peace with God through obedience; on the other the testimony of men who like Peter had found this peace through the grace of the Lord Jesus. There was also the spectacle of men such as Stephen transfigured by the vision of their Advocate with the Father. Paul's knowledge of his victims' experience unconsciously predisposed him to repeat it. At his conversion it was indeed as though scales had fallen from his eyes, so sudden was the change from darkness to light. But this does not mean that others, conscious, as Paul was not, of the hopelessness of his effort to achieve the

79

come.

ideal of the Pharisee, might not have foreseen the outIt only means that Paul was blind to it, so blind that afterwards he stood in amazement at himself. In fact this is the very basis of his conviction of the divine origin of his apostleship and his gospel, inseparable as we have seen them to be in his thought, that they were wrought in him," not of himself, but by the direct intervention of God.

It is not the purpose of these lectures to argue for Paul's idea of the supernatural method of the divine action in his case. There is just as much of God in it if the process turn out to be intelligible under known psychological laws. It is not my purpose to argue for Paul's theory of vicarious suffering and piacular atonement. It seems to me far superior to the mediæval caricatures which are supposed to represent it in the later theologies. The piacular conception entertained by Paul may represent only a transition stage in our philosophy of religion. I do not aspire to be a theologian but a historian; not an advocate, but an interpreter. Suppose Paul to have been quite wrong as to the modus operandi of the divine action in bringing him to the knowledge of the eternal Son of God; still he was brought into reconciliation with God, and it was an effect beyond his own capacity. The same is true of piacular atonement. Suppose that the spiritual new creation to which men testify would be otherwise characterized by the technical psychologist. Men speak of it as an experience of peace with God and of participation through Jesus in the eternal life and eternal activity of God, victory over evil propensity, victory over fear, victory over death. This may not be put in proper philosophical language when we describe it as reconciliation with the Father." Still the peace, the new creation, are there. Let experts in the psychology of religion use their own terminology in explaining it, the