1
10
1
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1c5db4232b198360ae6aef4e0b289a03.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=NNxIw4RIuavAvB1mCi1vGUyI1Xnwg%7EUlTQMO83V6H3uv9FnamJiBUexzMJ0rx52LAhsfLv-FLAhylRTMed4ormVzIx1krviaSRoXvfDKhKqzARwzohjAVkgCOMvXy1nN9n34OntTQVSZKqByQ9QOyzkCguilz9fkh9My5RLHbZ2Ck0rCAwea3-3mov9sJqN7vn35jLPBg6CIgUtaIr-zU1HOs-7evkAQiNjszwjPkkrNuyHx0gkrrlMm6qIBUlVGTvvC3w%7E2ZtPrCDW6tJxxrLDxdJgmV9cCs5d%7ETlGPzPjkxuyaonbWbupYVVYCG-936cqxGAN982Q2geLV-9EkDQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
16d57c13f427d8d05db33bc528cd0db6
PDF Text
Text
THE
s
ADVERSARIES OF ST. PAUL
IN 2nd CORINTHIANS.
BY
R. W. MACKAY.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Sixpence.
��THE ADVERSARIES OF ST. PAUL IN
2nd CORINTHIANS.
OST of the difficulties in this Epistle will disappear
if we can succeed in coining to a clear under
standing as to the main subject of difference between
Paul and his adversaries.
These adversaries are here denounced in the strongest
terms as mountebanks and impostors (chap. xi. 13);
and the controversy assumes a tone of greater exas
peration than in Galatians, where personal authority
was less directly at issue, or, at least, was made subor
dinate to the difference as to circumcision and other
Jewish practices.
The first clear reference to the adversaries is in
chap. ii. 17, where they are described as “huckster
ing the word of God,” i.e., treating the cause of
Christianity in a mercenary mechanical way.
It
may be remarked in passing that the same word—
xd'T?jXoc and
—is often applied by Plato to the
Sophists; and, perhaps, a distinct idea of the censure
intended in one case may assist the comprehension of
the other. The quarrel of the Socratic school with
the Sophists arose out of the disparity between mere
instruction and true mental education •— between
scepticism concealed under a mask of showy accom
plishment, and the profounder subjectivity cherishing
belief in truth and the mind’s capacity to reach it.
The initial manifestations of sophistry were not the
M
�4
The Adversaries of St. Paid
captious and palpably immoral inferences which event
ually resulted from it, but only those first fruits of
theoretic scepticism—the conventional and catechetical
teaching which either disregarded truth altogether, or
else confounded relative truth with absolute. The
sins against education and morals with which the
Sophists were charged, may not furnish an exact
parallel to the delinquencies of the adversaries of Paul,
yet there are resemblances traceable to an analogous
cause—namely, absence of true principle, and, as we
shall presently see, an appeal to estimates merely
external.
The censure implied in the word xa^Z.05 has been
supposed to include corruption of doctrine, a fault in
the matter as well as manner, which from the sequel
must be presumed to have consisted in Judaising
practices and tenets; this is to some extent confirmed
by the strongly marked contrast of spirit and letter,—
of New and Old Testaments in the third chapter, and
also by the charge of veiling and sophisticating the
word—“
Xoyov ”—(chap. iii. 14 and iv. 2),
compared with the “ plainness ” and “ simplicity ” pro
fessed by Paul (chap. i. 12; iii. 12; xi. 3). But these
indications, though not to be overlooked, leave un
solved the main question,—whence these incidental
perversities, and what are we to consider the chief
object for which Paul is here contending?
This, there can be little doubt, was the question as
to apostolic authority, and the protest of internal prin
ciple against one merely external. The older apostles
would not recognise Paul’s official status as equal to
theirs, and their emissaries, who could not expect a
directly favourable reception for Jewish doctrines in a
Gentile community, found it convenient to lay the
main stress of their attack on the admitted absence in
Paul’s case of personal connection with Christ. The
recommendatory letters mentioned in chap. iii. must
have emanated from persons in authority; and these
�in 2nd Corinthians.
5
could only have been those “ very chiefest apostles, ’
the “ highly exalted ” according to “ outward appear
ance,” to whom allusion is made in the 10th and 11th
chapters. In the same spirit of independence which
he manifests in Galatians, Paul scornfully disclaims any
such help, adding that his doctrine already possessed
the best seal of a true mission in the response of the
hearts of the converts. The climax of the controversy
is reached in the 7th verse of chap. x.—“Ye look to
[the person or the] outward appearance; but if any
one trusts to himself that he is of Christ, let him
of himself consider this again, that as he is Christ’s,
even so are we Christ’s.” But the “ belonging to
Christ ” contemplated by Paul was quite different from
theirs ; it was a spiritual connection or “ son ship ”
independent of external vouchers,—an internal light
comparable, as he says, to the divine irradiation of
primeval darkness, and owing nothing to human inter
mediation (chap. iv. 6 ; comp. Gal. iv. 6, Rom. viii. 14,
15); its manifestations implied in many respects a
reversal of men’s usual estimates—its wisdom appear
ing to worldly wisdom foolishness;—its evidence was
the “ demonstration of the Spirit and of power ” men
tioned in the first epistle (chap. ii. 4); in other words,
intuitive conviction. There has often occurred a crisis
in theological annals, when it became necessary to
appeal from the scholasticism of arguments and “ evi
dences ” to the internal testimony of reason and con
science, as the sole source of a satisfactory conviction
not merely as to the external supports of religion, but
also as to its matter and substance.
*
But such appeals
find an echo only in a congenial state of feeling, and
the apostle had many disadvantages to contend with
in maintaining his ground against those relying on
the more obvious claims of ordinary legitimacy and
personal transmission.
* See Dodwell’s “Christianity not founded on Argument;”
and Lessing’s Works, vol. x. pp. 39, 40, 53, &c.
�6
The Adversaries of St. Patil
The position of these is tersely summed up in the
12th verse of the fifth chapter—as that of men “ glory
ing in conventional seeming and not in heart”_
zai ov -/.aobia ; the latter word
denoting, in the apostle’s usual language, the centre of
his religious consciousness, as in chap. iii. 3 ; ix. 7 ;
Gal. iv. 6; the former meaning not “appearance”
or*yS but, as in chap. x. 7, comp. Gal. ii. 6, any pre
b
tensions founded on external and personal considera
tions^ and here to be understood as the boast of those
claiming to be the only legitimate apostles as actual
followers of Jesus. It is, in short, the same contrast
as that before indicated between internal and external
religion, or Voluntaryism and Establishment; though,
properly speaking, the latter being destitute of true
principle, and irrespective of intrinsic worth, is not so
much religion as party spirit.
The cause of the religion of intuitive conviction or
pure idealism advocated by Paul is invariably by him
associated with the idea of Christ, considered as a
spirit present in the heart (comp. Gal. iv. 6) ; and,
undoubtedly, there is in the human mind and the
exercise of reason something mysterious—a com
bination of finite and infinite—which nominalistic
logic vainly tries to explain away.
*
But this idea
of Christ formed a strong contrast to that of the adver
saries, who, holding the Jewish notion of the Mes
siah, accordingly required the external attestation of
those who had attended him in life. The counterpart
to Paul s appeal to Christ as an internal pi’inciple is
the reliance on personal vouchers—in other words, the
principle of apostolical succession on the part of the
Mill’s “Logic,” Bookii., chap. 5.—“Allowing that, with our
present means, we are unable to explain the antinomy as to the
principle of morals being transcendent in regard to man considered
as a finite being, while immanent in him as a rational one, still we
are not justified in pronouncing an ultimate explanation impos
sible.’ Pliilosophische Monatshefte, by Bergmann and others,
vol. vm., p. 176.
�in 2nd Corinthians.
7
adversaries ; the antithesis being that between human
*
intermediation and immediate spiritual contact or affi
liation with God (comp. Gal. i. 12; 1 Cor. iii. 23).
The difficult sixteenth verse of the fifth chapter is also
thus explained. The expression here used, disclaiming
“ knowledge of Christ after the flesh, cannot refer to
personal acquaintance with Jesus, not merely because
it were superfluous so to speak of one dead, but also
because this interpretation would be inapplicable to
the first clause of the sentence, and also because any
personal contact of Paul with Jesus before his conver
sion could onlv have been of a hostile character, and,
consequently, no way comparable to the sentiments of
those whom he is here controverting. The meaning,
thus limited, can only be—“ if we have ever thought
of Christ as the Jewish Messiah;” this thought, as
well as the every-day view of man in general, the
apostle here declares himself to have abandoned, look
ing exclusively to the regenerate or spiritual man; he is so thoroughly an idealist that he admits himself
to be blind, foolish, and even insane in the world’s
estimate (chap. v. 13), like the philosophically blinded
in Plato (Repub. 7, 517); but he retorts the charge of
blindness on the spiritually blind (chap. iii. 1.4 ; iv. 4).
And corresponding to a different view of Christ’s
nature and office was the divergency between the two
doctrines as to the significancy of his death. To
those looking on Christ as the J ewish Messiah, his
death was an anomaly and a “ stumbling-block ”—an
incongruous interpolation between the two important
Messianic epochs, the earthly career and the coming
in glory; whereas for St. Paul it formed the very
essence of his teaching (1 Cor. i. 18, 23, &c.), being by
him treated not so much as an historical event as a
* See chap. x. 12, taken in connection with the preceding
verses. Personal homage or following is similarly contrasted with
spiritual or moral allegiance in Lessing’s “ Nathan,” 2nd Act,
Scene 1: “Ye would be Christians, forsooth, not men,” &c.
�8
The Adversaries of St. Paul
symbol of mental regeneration or a new spiritual life ;
and that not merely in individuals, but the race (chan"
iii. 18; v. 14, 15).
X
The import of the veil of Moses in the third chapter
seems plain enough—it means the ambiguous character
of the old covenant with its connected ordinances, as
contrasted with Paul’s conception of the full, unim
peded light of the new—that hesitation between life
and death, concession and retractation, at which the
apostle glances contemptuously in the first chapter,
and which, it may be added, was inseparable from a
system of mere legality (Gal. iii. 12). By virtue of
the ministry of the spirit as contrasted with that of
the letter, Paul often exercises the right of breaking
through this veil, and claims the same right for others;
though it must be admitted that his arbitrary style
of proceeding in the way of allegorical interpretation,
though strikingly illustrative of his own position and
the nature of spirituality as then understood, is not an
altogether unexceptionable one.
*
It was impossible
for any one under the circumstances to abandon en
tirely the Old Testament revelation; on the other
hand, new ideas and circumstances called for readjust
ment in the mode of dealing with it: hence Paul’s
appeal to the promise as paramount to the law, and
his fanciful allegorising, not very unlike the quibbling
mystifications of scripture which he complained of in
the adversaries (chap. iv. 2).
But how are we to understand the singular phrase,
ra KgV'-ra
aifffvr^—the hidden things of dis
honesty, which in chapter iv. 2 he professes to have
renounced ? The words, it need scarcely be remarked,
are not to be understood of secret vices, but rather of
subtle machinations calculated to support a peculiar
theological theory.! It has been observed that
* See 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10; x. 2, 4, 11; Gal. iv. 25; and still more
reckless is the use of allegory in the Epistle of Barnabas.
+ Klopper’s Commentary, p. 222.
�in 2nd Corinthians.
9
KPvvrat and zaXuTrroi are correlated ; and thus renun
ciation of the z^uTrra would seem to be the natural
result or equivalent of Paul’s a-TrXonj;, siXi/teivt'ia,
and va,p^7)ffia (chap. i. 12; iii. 12; xi. 3)—or of the
“ unveiled face ” claimed at the end of chapter iii. for
all true Christians. Paul often declares that his gos
pel was not one to be ashamed of. This leaves open
*
the assumption that there was a gospel which could
not well bear the light of day or that of general criti
cism ; and such, we must infer, was the character of
the rival gospel (chap. xi. 4)—namely, that of those
hesitating followers of Moses who clung to the veil, in
the sense of those “ beggarly elements ” and observ
ances of which, however, they were already half
ashamed. Those who are but half-convinced of the
truth of their own principles are apt to vacillate be
tween old and new -—- dallying between inconsistent
creeds, and uniting with their novel profession the
incongruous practices of another. Thus, in Philippians iii. 7, Paul is made to say that the work-right
eousness, formerly counted by him as gain, he now
found to be loss; the source of his former pride was
now his shame, the object of his contempt. The
“ crypts of shame ” may, therefore, refer to trivial
mystifications of ritual and subtleties of rabbinical
interpretation ; and the “ walking in craftiness ” may
be understood of various crafty insinuations by which
the adversaries tried to ruin Paul’s personal credit,
such as those of lightness and vacillation (i. 17), vain
gloriousness (v. 12), sheer insanity (v. 13), self-suffi
ciency (iii. 5), a craving for lucre (viii. 20; xii. 15, 20),
mysticism (iv. 3).
After having in various ways insisted on the superi
ority of the spiritual or ideal view of things to the
common-place or carnal, exposing at the same time
the subterfuges and superstitions of his opponents, the
* Rom. i. 16; 2 Cor. vii. 11; x. 8.
�io
The Adversaries of St. Paul
apostle proceeds in chap. vi. to recapitulate the
essential characteristics of that view in a series of
striking antitheses,—of the same kind as those which
first occurring in the so-called “ beatitudes ” of the
gospel, and repeated in the Epistle to Diognetus, con
stitute what Bacon terms “ the Christian paradox,”
and form the subject of Schiller’s noble poem on the
contrast of the actual life and the ideal. Then, after
adverting to certain practical matters less immediately
connected with the subject before us, he continues the
*
vindication of his personal efficiency in comparison
with his rivals; and having before referred to the'
ready welcome with which he was received, and the tes
timony to his usefulness recorded in the hearts and con
sciences of the Corinthians, now points to the evidences
of a genuine apostleship afforded by his revelations,
his signs and wonders, and above all by his labours
and infirmities, since there could not be a more strik
ing exemplification of the truth of his principles than
the heroic resolve defying bodily disadvantages, and
*
even succeeding in spite of them. Some obscure
allusions in the first and second chapters will now
become more clearly intelligible in their connection
with the general argument. The apostle here de
scribes himself as accompanying the triumph of the
Almighty, in men’s hearts (chap. ii. 14), and as the
herald of a uniformly consistent doctrine summing up
all prior religious developments (chap. i. 18, 19).
Some change of plan in regard to going to Corinth
seems to have occasioned ill-natured remarks as to his
consistency. In repudiating these he points to the
general spirit of his teaching as affording the best
evidence as to his character and dealings, saying in
effect: “ the change of plan was not preconcerted, but
a consequence of your own altered demeanour. You
* Such is indeed the essence of all heroism and of genuine
tragedy, as at large explained by Schiller in his “ Essay on the
Tragic Art.”
�in 2nd Corinthians.
11
should judge my conduct from my general principles.
The vacillation imputed to me would have been incon
sistent with the entire character of a doctrine which,
unlike the ill-assorted affirmations and negations of
Jewish law, in which life and death, blessing and
cursing, incongruously intermingle (comp. Gal. iii.),
is simply and clearly affirmative —an affirmative
character, it may be added, which is in accordance
with the essential nature of idealism."'
The tone of exasperation becomes fiercer towards the
close, where, in chap. x. and xi., the main subject, the
question of personal authority, is more distinctly brought
forward. Against the boasters of their own better claims
the apostle declares himself compelled to boast in return,
asserting his equality as an Israelite, and insisting on
a “ belonging to Christ ” not a whit inferior to theirs,
or even that of the very chiefest pretenders to that
dignity; bitterly rallying the Corinthians (chap. xi. 4)
for their ready servility to the pretensions of foolish
vain-glorious men, which no one really understanding
the doctrine impugned would have tolerated. Yet he
ironically avails himself of this tolerant humour in
those he addresses to answer folly with folly, though
varying the ground of self-laudation; adding to the
rest of his vindication the boast of his more abundant
labours, and especially his infirmities, because it was
the great aim of the preacher of “ Christ crucified ” to
be like him in suffering as in triumph.
With this latter idea is probably connected the
peculiar aspect under which “the adversary” is here
represented. In the first epistle (1 Cor. xv. 32 ; xvi.
9) “ beast ” is the name not unreasonably given to
men acting with brutal malignity and ferocity ; for the
notion of a literal fighting with beasts is given up
* Comp. Aristotle’s “ Metaphysics,” 8, 9, and 11,10, where it is
said that there is no absolute evil—no antagonism to the first
Cause ;—and the scene in Faust’s study, where “ the denier” is the
devil.
�12
The Adversaries of St. Paul
by the commentators {see Neander’s “ Auslegung,”
p. 255), and is excluded by the subsequent recapitula
tion of the apostle’s labours and sufferings, in which
no such struggle is named; whereas a desperate
struggle of another kind is pointedly here alluded to
(chap. i. 8, 9), and may be sufficiently explained by
what we read in Eusebius (E. Hist. iii. 23) as to
John’s succeeding Paul as head of the Church of
Ephesus. The animus of the party of John is abun
dantly manifested by the denunciations of the second
and third chapters of the Apocalypse, where the
Asiatic churches are congratulated seriatim on having
detected and exposed certain lying pretensions to
apostleship, put forth on the part of persons pretending
to be Jews, but not really so, and rather belonging to
the “Synagogue of Satan;”—pretenders comparable
to Balaam, the well-known type of false and adverse
prophecy, who sought to cast a stumbling-block before
the Israelites, and to persuade them to eat meats
offered to idols. In a similar style of invective St.
Paul here (chap. xi. 13, 15) denounces the “ false
apostles transforming themselves into apostles of
Christadding that since Satan himself sometimes
assumes the aspect of an angel of light, there need be
no wonder if his ministers are similarly transformed.
The language here used, and that of the first epistle,
will be better understood if we bear in mind that Satan
was in Jewish phraseology often termed
Srjo, a
“ dragon ” or “ roaring lion,” and that Jesus was him
self traditionally said to have contended with those
“ doleful creatures of the wilderness, in whom the
notions of beast and demon intermingled. {See Mark
i. 13, comp, with Isaiah xiii. 21, and Winer’s Dic
tionary, art. Gespenster.)
Does the language here and elsewhere (see Gal. i.
8, 9) used by the apostle seem too intemperately
violent? According to the well-known saying of
Aristotle, the corruptions of the best things are the
�in 2nd Corinthians.
*3
worst; and religion is of so peculiarly delicate a nature
that the very means employed to promote its interests
are apt to turn into the means of its debasement. “You
want a form,” says Lessing; “ but it so happens that the
form does not simply subsist alongside of the essential,
it invariably tends to weaken and supersede the essen
tial.” It is a common characteristic of all established
religions, as well as of the rival “ gospel,” alluded to
in 2nd Corinthians (chap. xi. 4), to treat these acces
sory forms as entitled to the same deference and
permanent authority as the truth, often of a very
evanescent and subtle kind, which they seem to accom
pany ; so that by an easy process of misconstruction
the outside is mistaken for the inside, and the human
obtains exclusive possession of the homage due only to
the divine. Considering the actual wants of human
nature, Kant and Fichte admit the utility of such
forms in relation to the mental condition of those who
resort to them, and the Papacy and the Levitical
priesthood have been defended in the same sense; for
there has been, and, unfortunately, still continues a
state of things in which these and the like institutions
may be said to be beneficial. But then how deplorably
low must human nature have sunk to need such ex
pedients, and how questionable even the advantage
immediately accruing from them when it is recollected
how they tend to perpetuate the degradation which
alone authorises their use ! Formalities of observance
and other “ bfeggarly elements ” are commonly treated
as “ possessions for ever,” instead of imperfect rudi
ments (aesthetic culture being their true philosophical
equivalent) from which it is desirable as soon as may
be to escape.
It has been said that Paul was driven out of Ephesus
by riots raised against him by the Pagans : a presump
tion based on the account given in Acts of the riot of
Demetrius. But if the book giving this account is
elsewhere found deliberately misrepresenting Paul’s
�14
The Adversaries of St. Paul
character and proceedings as conveyed by himself, and
in particular describing him as contending not with
the adversaries now tolerably familiar to us, but with
Jews and Pagans, we shall be prepared to expect that in
this instance also a simitar spirit of misrepresentation
has been at work, and that the only reliable inference
to be drawn from the narrative, in some respects not
even plausibly adjusted to existing data (comp. Acts
xix. 30 with 2 Cor. i. 8) is, that the apostle’s success
ful career at Ephesus ended in riotous disturbances.
But these must be construed according to the writer’s
genera] mode of treatment; and if one of his most pro
minent characteristics be a studied determination to
ignore differences among Christians, and, in particular,
to throw a veil over the true nature of the antagonism
by which Paul’s career was obstructed—for, with the
exception of the quarrel about Mark, and a vague pre
diction in Paul’s parting address at Miletus, we discover
no trace of them—we must infer that his object was
not properly historical, especially when considering
that the suggestion as to Pagan hostility is rendered
improbable by the fact recorded in Eusebius as to
John’s succeeding Paul at Ephesus, and—with the
exception of the exile to Patmos, an event which the
fanatically seditious spirit of the Apocalypse may
readily account for—continuing there undisturbed to
the time of Trajan. No where is it more necessary
than when consulting Acts to look to general pro
bability, and, if possible, to compare the particulars
questioned with independent authority. Fortunately
the Pauline Epistles afford the best means of doing
so; and the information given by them, differing
as it does so materially from Acts, leaves no option
but to infer that the aim of the latter being irenic
and not historical, it purposely sacrifices accuracy of
fact to the more immediately pressing object of Chris
tian union, endeavouring to conceal by a decent veil
of retrospective unanimity the elements of dissension
�in 2nd Corinthians.
15
at their source. But the strong language of this
epistle—especially that of the 11th chapter—leaves no
doubt as to the true character of the dissentient
parties. If the simple arrangement between Paul
and the other apostles, as recorded in Galatians, be
came—as Professor Zeller has shown to be the inevi
table inference—the Apostolic Council of Acts xv.—
if the gift of “ speaking with tongues,” as described
in Corinthians in connection with the theory of the
“ distribution ” of the various gifts of the one spirit
"—expanded into the elaborate details of the descent of
the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost—with all its
various carefully adjusted analogies to the giving of
the law on Sinai, —-we need not be surprised if the
*
bare intimation of Acts ix. 29, as to Paul disputing
with the Grecians—who answered by endeavouring to
kill him—became in the sequel expanded into a formal
outbreak of heathen vengeance against him in the
metropolis of Asiatic heathenism • a narrative cer
tainly life-like, yet not more so than the humours of
the Roman rabble in Julius C'cesar, or any wellexecuted imaginative exercise in a Jesuit Retreat. A
careful comparison of Acts with the genuine Pauline
Epistlest is, indeed, the first step in the critical study
of the New Testament.
* The day of Pentecost was that on which, in Jewish tradition,
the “fiery law ” was given on Mount Sinai; and to account for its
universal obligation, it was said that though pronounced once
only, it was heard by every nation in its own language. “ When
the voice went out from Sinai,” says the Talmud, “it was parted
into seven voices, and from seven voices into seventy tongues.
Just as from a glowing piece of metal, when struck on the anvil
with a hammer, many sparks issue from one blow, so from the one
voice of God proceeded a great multitude of voices.” See Wettstein’s Note to Acts ii., p. 463.
f Only Galatians, the two Corinthians, and Romans, are here
understood to be Paul’s.
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The adversaries of St. Paul in 2nd Corinthians
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Mackay, Robert William
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 15 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Includes bibliographical references. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh. Date of publication from KVK.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1876]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5514
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bible
Saints
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The adversaries of St. Paul in 2nd Corinthians), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Bible
Bible-N.T.-2 Corinthians
Conway Tracts
Saint Paul