Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 24:2 (Jun 1981)
Article: The Provenance Of The Term “Saints”: "A Religionsgeschichtliche" Study
Author: Stephen Woodward

JETS 24:2 (June 1981) p. 107

The Provenance Of The Term “Saints”:
A Religionsgeschichtliche Study

Stephen Woodward*

We do not read very far into the NT before it becomes apparent that in its journey from the OT era the term “saints” (hagioi/qds̆m) has experienced a revolution in its customary usage.1 OT writers characteristically apply the title to celestial beings rather than to men. To be sure, apart from two OT books—Dan-iel, where the title is used eschatologically seven times, and Ps 34:9, where the term is employed cultically—the designation occurs 16 more times in eight books and without exception refers to celestial beings.2 This trend continues in intertes-tamental literature though, interestingly, the usage is slightly more fluid. The designation refers approximately 31 times to heavenly beings and 15 times to the redeemed. For at least two reasons, however, this statistic needs to be qualified. First, many occurrences in QL are obscured due to lacunae and contextual uncertainty and so could not be listed in the above totals. Second, the term is not developing in all areas of Judaism. Rabbinic writers use the term on only three occasions (=men), while Philo and Josephus do not employ the designation at all. Nevertheless it is clear that intertestamental usage follows the OT pattern though there is some increasing fluidity in usage.3 Surprisingly, however, NT

*Stephen Woodward is chairman of the department of NT languages and literature at Winnipeg Theological Seminary in Otterburne, Manitoba.

JETS 24:2 (June 1981) p. 108

writers characteristically—perhaps absolutely—apply the title hoi hagioi to men, not to celestial beings. Of 61 occurrences, only twice does it possibly refer to celestial beings (1 Thess 3:13; 2 Thess 1:10).4 Obviously a wholesale reversal in characteristic usage such as this signals that an important conceptual reversal has occurred as well.

Unfortunately, however, there has been no attempt5 to offer a comprehensive explanation of the above development. Writers concentrate on only one aspect6 of

JETS 24:2 (June 1981) p. 109

the equation—that is, on isolating pre-NT texts in which the term refers to men.You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe