apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

THE GENUINENESS. 417
the New Testament seems to me more certain than that the Acts of the
Apostles was written by a companion of S. Paul. Again, few books in
the New Testament are better authenticated than the First Epistle of S.
Peter, which was known to Clement of Rome, to Polycarp, and to
Papias, which was never contested in the ancient Church, and of which
therefore it would be an excess of scepticism to question that it was
written by the Apostle whose name it has always borne.
The name is twice mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles. The
earlier passage (xi. 26) contains an account of the preaching of Barnabas
and Saul at Antioch, about a.d. 44, concluding with the words, 'It came
to pass that... they taught a large multitude (ox^ov Uavov)
and that the
disciples were called Christians first in Antioch' (xprj/xaTLorat re Trpcorw iv
*AvT(oxeta tous ixaOrjTa XP^""'""**'''^) '. It has been commonly assumed
that the writer here states the name to have been given simultaneously
with the preaching of Paul and Barnabas in this city. It would indeed
be difficult to show any valid reason why this might not have been the
case ;
but it does not seem to be required by the language of the narrative
itself. The mission of Barnabas and Saul had gathered together a
considerable church at Antioch ; the Gospel now for the first time
obtained a firm footing on heathen ground ;
and so the historian
naturally records in connexion with these incidents the fact that the
name Christian was first given in this city. But whether this was an
immediate or an ulterior result of the success of this mission, we are not
told. The word seems to have been in the first instance a nickname
fastened by the heathen populace of Antioch on the followers of Christ",
who still continued to style themselves the 'disciples' or the 'saints' or
The biting gibes of the
the 'brethren' or the 'believers', and the like.
Antiochene populace which stung to the quick emperors—
successive
Hadrian, M. Aurelius, Severus, Julian
— would be fittle
disposed to spare
the helpless adherents of this new 'superstition'. Objection indeed has
been taken to the Antiochene origin of the name on the ground that the
termination is Roman^, like Pompeianus, Caesarianus, and the like.
^
The correct reading is irpuTws, not ^
See Conybeare and Howson Life and
irpwTov ; see Ps-Magn. A lo. later tra- Epistles of St Paul i. p. 148.
dition ascribed the origin of the name ^
to So Baur, Renan, and others. Farrar
Euodius (see Joann. Malalas Chron. p. {S. Paul i. p. 296 sq) adopts an intenne-
247, ed. Bonn.;comp. Suidas p. 1675, ed. diate course and contends that, 'though
Bernhardy). This is explained by the fact tjvbi and ivh% are Greek terminations', yet
'
that Euodius was reputed the first bishop anus \s
mainly Roman', and ascribes
of Antioch after S. Peter and according the origin of the name 'to the prevalence
to the received chronology entered on his of Roman terminology at Antioch'. Simiepiscopate
A.D. 42, so that he would larly Lewin Life and Epistles of St Paul
already be occupying the see at this time. i. p. 97.
IGN. I. 27