ܞ

Introductory Note to the Epistle of Barnabas
[a.d. 100.] The writer of this Epistle is supposed to have been an Alexandrian Jew of the times
of Trajan and Hadrian. He was a layman; but possibly he bore the name of “Barnabas,” and so has
been confounded with his holy and apostolic name-sire. It is more probable that the Epistle, being
anonymous, was attributed to St. Barnabas, by those who supposed that apostle to be the author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews, and who discovered similarities in the plan and purpose of the two
works. It is with great reluctance that I yield to modern scholars, in dismissing the ingenious and
temperate argument of Archbishop Wake¹⁴³⁸ for the apostolic origin of this treatise. The learned
Lardner¹⁴³⁹ shares his convictions; and the very interesting and ingenious views of Jones¹⁴⁴⁰ never
appeared to me satisfactory, weighed with preponderating arguments, on the other side.¹⁴⁴¹
The Maccabæan spirit of the Jews never burned more furiously than after the destruction of
Jerusalem, and while it was kindling the conflagration that broke out under Barchochebas, and
blazed so terribly in the insurrection against Hadrian.¹⁴⁴² It is not credible that the Jewish Christians
at Alexandria and elsewhere were able to emancipate themselves from their national spirit; and
accordingly the old Judaizing, which St. Paul had anathematized and confuted, would assert itself
again. If such was the occasion of this Epistle, as I venture to suppose, a higher character must be
ascribed to it than could otherwise be claimed. This accounts, also, for the degree of favour with
which it was accepted by the primitive faithful.
It is interesting as a specimen of their conflicts with a persistent Judaism which St. Paul had
defeated and anathematized, but which was ever cropping out among believers originally of the
Hebrews.¹⁴⁴³ Their own habits of allegorizing, and their Oriental tastes, must be borne in mind, if
we are readily disgusted with our author’s fancies and refinements. St. Paul himself pays a practical
tribute to their modes of thought, in his Epistle to the Galatians iv. 24. This is the ad hominem form
of rhetoric, familiar to all speakers, which laid even the apostle open to the slander of enemies (2
Cor. xii. 16),—that he was “crafty,” and caught men with guile. It is interesting to note the more
Occidental spirit of Cyprian, as compared with our author, when he also contends with Judaism.
Doubtless we have in the pseudo-Barnabas something of that oeconomy which is always capable
of abuse, and which was destined too soon to overleap the bounds of its moral limitations.
It is to be observed that this writer sometimes speaks as a Gentile, a fact which some have found
it difficult to account for, on the supposition that he was a Hebrew, if not a Levite as well. But so,
¹⁴³⁸ Discourse (p. 148) to his Genuine Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers. Philadelphia, 1846.
¹⁴³⁹ Works, ii. 250, note; and iv. 128.
¹⁴⁴⁰ On the Canon, vol. ii. p. 431.
¹⁴⁴¹ To those who may adhere to the older opinion, let me commend the eloquent and instructive chapter (xxiii.) in Farrar’s Life of St. Paul.
¹⁴⁴² Hadrian’s purpose to rebuild their city seems to be pointed out in chap. xvi.
¹⁴⁴³ M. Renan may be read with pain, and yet with profit, in much that his Gallio-spirit suggests on this subject. Chap. v., St. Paul, Paris, 1884.