ep Ee oun 
 
 eM 
 
 eo 
 
 Cee ee ee et rere ry 
 
 ey 
 
ee 2 ae eee el 
 
42, J 
 gy 
 
 oe 
 Ts 
 
 ap - Beer ae ee — 
 + < wee 
 
 PE et me 1 
 
 — ~_ 
 
208 
 
 1/5 
 177 LORE PAULINA: 
 
 OR, 
 
 THE TRUTH 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SCRIPTURE HISTORY OF ST. PAUL EVINCED 
 
 By A COMPARISON of THE 
 
 EPISTLES WHICH BEAR HIS NAME 
 
 WITH 
 
 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 
 
 AND WITH ONE ANOTHER. 
 
 By WILLIAM PALEY, M.A. 
 
 ARCHDEACON OF CARLISLE. 
 
 A New Evition, with Potes, Appendiy, & Preface, 
 By J. S. HOWSON, D.D. 
 
 DEAN OF CHESTER, 
 
 LONDON: 
 THE CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE COMMITTEE OF THE 
 ; SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE; 
 
 SOLD AT THE DEPOSITORIES: 
 77, GREAT QUEEN STREET, LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS; 
 4, ROYAL FXCHANGE; 48, PICCADILLY; 
 AND BY ALL BOOKSELLERS, 
 
 isry, Buswell Memoria’ Library 
 Wheaton College 
 Wheaton, lilinois 60187 
 
Tue Christian Evidence Committee of theS.P.C.K., 
 while giving its general approval to the works of 
 the Christian Evidence Series, does not hold itself 
 
 responsible for every statement or every line of 
 
 argument. 
 The responsibility of each writer extends to his 
 own work only. 
 
 oe ee 
 
PAGE 
 . PREFACE, BY THE EDITor. 
 Exposition of the Argument 1 
 The Epistle to the Romans ; 19 
 The First Epistle to the Gorinthidns! s : 60 
 The Second Epistle to the Corinthians 90 
 The Epistle to the Galatians 138 
 The Epistle to the Ephesians 189 
 The Epistle to the Philippians E 231 
 The Epistle to the Colossians . : A 252 
 The First Epistle to the Thessalonians 265 
 The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians . 282 
 The First Epistle to Timothy 293 
 The Second Epistle to Timothy . 308 
 The Epistle to Titus . : 324 
 The Epistle to Philemon 334 
 The Subscriptions of the Bpistles 343 
 The Conclusion . : ‘ : ° 351° 
 Index to Passages illustrated 387 
 APPENDIX, BY THE EpIrTor. 
 I. Coincidences connected with Geography . 391 
 II. The Three Accounts of St. Paul’s Conversion . 400 
 ‘ILI. The Unity of St. Paul’s Character 406 
 IV. Coincidences connected with St. Luke 418 
 VY. The Date of the Epistle to the Galatians . 425 
 VI. St. Paul’s Journeys to Jerusalem 431 
 VII. The Epistles to the Sona and the Gcibastene 
 compared ., : 436 
 VIII. St. Paul’s Otaadutertatid Mata hora : 442 
 IX, The‘ Faithful Sayings” of the Pastoral Epistles 463 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 ASD 
 
Wl od 
 heated 
 we aca . 
 
 Vong 
 
PREFACE BY THE EDITOR. 
 
 In discharging the duty committed to me by 
 the authorities of the Society for Promoting 
 Christian Knowledge, I have been engaged in 
 a very congenial task; and this for two reasons, 
 to which I hope it is not indiscreet to refer. I 
 have myself, in conjunction with a friend, gone 
 with great care over the theological ground 
 which is formed by combining together the 
 Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of St. 
 Paul." It happens, too, that I was educated in 
 the school where, eighty years earlier, Paley was 
 a pupil under his father, and that in my boyhood 
 I was surrounded by anecdotes concerning him 
 and his family.” Thus I have stronger reasons 
 
 1 Life and Epistles of St. Paul, by Conybeare and Howson, 
 completed in 1852, and published in successive editions 
 since. 
 
 2 The Rev. W. Paley and the Rev. R. Ingram, who suc- 
 ceeded him, were together, I believe, Head Masters of 
 Giggleswick School, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, a 
 
v1 PREFACE, 
 
 than almost any one else for studying the 
 Hore Pauline with lively and abiding interest. 
 
 A few words may be permitted here, first, on 
 the characteristics of the original work, and then, 
 on what has been attempted in the present edition. 
 
 The writing of this book belongs to the period 
 of Archdeacon Paley’s residence in Westmor- 
 Jand and Cumberland, and its chronological place 
 is intermediate between the Moral Philosophy, 
 which preceded it, and the Hvidences of Chris- 
 tianity, published afterwards. 
 
 These two works were elaborated from copious 
 notes delivered by Paley when a College Tutor 
 in Cambridge, and after a careful consideration 
 of what had been written by other authors on 
 the same subjects. No such materials seem to 
 have been used in the composition of the Hore 
 Pauline. ‘here is every reason to believe that 
 it was a far more strictly original work than the 
 others. Among the older papers, indeed, is one 
 which clearly contains its germ.* ‘This paper 
 does not correspond with the chapter upon 
 “ Undesigned Coincidences” in the Hvidences.* 
 
 hundred years, the former having been in office fifty-five 
 years, and the latter forty-five. 
 
 3 See the Life of Paley (1848), vol. i., p. clv. 
 
 4 Part II., ch. vii. See Mr. Litton’s Edition of the 
 Evidences, published by the Society for Promoting Christian 
 Knowledge, p. 476. 
 
PREFACE. vil 
 
 It contains some instances which are not found 
 there, and some, on the other hand, which are 
 brought forward in the Hore Pauling. Thus 
 it is probable that the line of argument, which 
 marks this book, had been long in the writer’s 
 mind; that he: made some use of it in his 
 lectures at Cambridge; but that the book was 
 written, freshly and separately, long afterwards. 
 We have no means of knowing: how long he was 
 engaged in this task. We can imagine him 
 occupied upon it with great delight during his 
 rides from Appleby, or in his garden at Dalston, 
 and referring to such authors as he had in his 
 _library—Locke, Grotius, Pearce, Benson, Lard- 
 
 ner, Wetstein, Griesbach, Pearson—whom he 
 quotes, though not to any great extent, in the 
 course of his writing. 
 
 The paper to which allusion has been made 
 is divided into two parts, the first relating to the 
 evidence which lies on the surface of the Epistles. 
 “ Nothing but reality could have inspired them,” 
 is Paley’s remark on this aspect of the matter. 
 The second part has regard to the comparison of 
 the Epistles with the Acts, and those points of 
 connexion between them which are coincidences 
 and yet undesigned. It is worth while to ob- 
 serve that in this part of the paper there occurs 
 a very curious mistake. Referring to 2 Tim. 
 
Vill PREFACE. 
 
 iv. 11, Paley says the Apostle “urges Timothy 
 and Mark to come to him at Rome; accord- 
 ingly we find that Timothy and Mark were with 
 him at Rome when the Epistles to Philemon, 
 Ephesians, and Colossians were written.” It is 
 significant that this instance did not appear in 
 the Hore Pauline, as actually published. Paley 
 had hastily hit off a coincidence which was 
 very attractive at first sight, but which on 
 further inquiry broke down. The Epistles to 
 Philemon, Colossians, and Ephesians were written 
 in a different imprisonment from that during 
 which St. Paul sent his final letter to Timo- 
 thy.’ It is remarkable, however, that the same 
 error, in another form, does still appear in the 
 book.°® 
 
 While the treatises on the “ Evidences” and 
 on “ Moral Philosophy ” can hardly be regarded 
 as great and permanent works of genius, this 
 treatise is strictly unique in its character, and 
 can never be superseded. Yet this was not the 
 view taken of their relative merits at the time 
 of their publication. The following sentences, 
 
 5 For a very conclusive, though brief statement of the 
 crounds for believing in a second imprisonment, I may be 
 allowed to refer to Saint Paul, sa double Captivité d Rome: 
 par Louis Buffet. Paris, 1860. 
 
 6 See note, p. 221. 
 
PREFACE, 1x 
 
 written by Paley’s eldest son and biographer, will 
 now be read by many persons with surprise :— 
 “In 1790 he published his ‘ Hore Pauline.’ 
 This, though perhaps the most original of his 
 works, and containing as much accuracy of in- 
 vestigation, as much shrewdness in eliciting 
 probable motives, is not calculated so well for 
 general reading as his other works. It never 
 met with a demand at all equal to the rest. 
 Whether it be that the subject is more confined, 
 that it has too distant a bearing upon general 
 information, that it contains only a part of the 
 Evidences of Christianity, that it is a repetition 
 of the same proof, that the mind of the reader 
 is satisfied with proof long before the writer 
 leaves his subject, is has never been much 
 noticed in comparison with other writings of 
 the same author. It is a fair specimen, how- 
 ever, of original criticism, and proves him to 
 have been thoroughly versed in St. Paul’s 
 writings.” " Still stranger, perhaps, is Arch- 
 deacon Paley’s own estimate of the relative 
 claims of his works on public reputation. When 
 the second and third of his chief works. were 
 ready for publication, he wrote to his book- 
 seller: “I adhere to my proposal of 500/. for 
 - the ‘Evidences’ and ‘Hore Pauline.’ I be- 
 
 7 Life, p. cliv. 
 
~ 
 
 x : PREFACE. 
 
 lieve I do not undervalue the ‘ Evidences’ at 
 that price, whether the ‘ Hore Pauline’ be 
 worth anything or not.” * 
 
 One point of considerable interest, in studying. 
 the Hore Pauline, is to connect the speciality 
 of this work with certain features of the author’s 
 own mind and character: and in two respects 
 this 1s very possible. 
 
 In all parts of Paley’s life he was remarkable 
 for shrewd observation and close attention to 
 details. In his boyhood he was never weary of 
 such occupations as watching: an old woman at 
 her knitting or a joiner at his work. At that 
 time he has been known to sit up through the 
 night, that he might make himself acquainted 
 with the whole process of soap-boiling. Just 
 so, in the latest period of his life, when he was 
 Rector of Bishop Wearmouth, he would be found 
 at the end of the pier, on a stormy day, “ con- 
 versing with seafaring men upon their way of 
 life, and acquainting himself with their feelings 
 and sensations in a storm.” This habit of mind 
 receives a good illustration from a letter which 
 he wrote (May 22, 1799) to his friend Dr. 
 Carlyle, who accompanied Lord Elgin to 
 the Levant: “ Compare everything,’ he says, 
 “with Cumberland and English scenery—de- 
 
 8 Life, p. clxxx. 
 
PREFACE. X1 
 
 scribe minutely how you pass one day on ship- 
 board — give us one day at Constantinople 
 minutely from morning to night—if you see a 
 man working in the fields, call to him to bring 
 the dinner he has with him, and describe it 
 minutely—get into the inside of a cottage, and 
 describe what you find actually doing—describe 
 your impressions upon first seeing things.” ° 
 It is evident to any careful reader of the treatise 
 before us that this mental habit of the author 
 has much to do with its characteristic features. 
 But there was another feature of Paley’s 
 mind which it is much to our purpose to note. 
 He had a peculiar fondness for matters of 
 judicature, and especially for such proceedings 
 as take place in criminal courts. When he 
 was a young man, engaged in education at 
 9 A letter to Dr. Paley from Dr. Carlyle, when on his 
 Hastern journey, is in another way illustrative of the 
 Hore Pauline. He went very nearly along St. Paul’s 
 route (Acts xy. 41; xvi. 1) in inverse order, through 
 Lycaonia and Cilicia to Chelendris, where he “took shipping 
 for Cyprus ;” and writing from thence on Feb. 16, 1800, he 
 says he “travelled through one plain near 200 miles long, 
 and from 18 to 20 over, the plain where Lystra and Derbe 
 and a number of other cities stood—a plain, I believe, 
 nearly half as big as Yorkshire.” It is hardly possible that 
 Paley can have read this letter without thinking of what he 
 himself had written a few years before, on the verge of 
 
 Yorkshire, concerning the experiences of Paul and Timothy 
 in these regions. See on 2 Tim., No. v. 
 
Xl PREFACE. 
 
 Greenwich, he spent much of his spare time in 
 attending trials, and showed the greatest in- 
 terest in watching the fate of prisoners. All 
 through life he displayed marked cleverness in 
 weighing evidence, and a great love of that kind 
 of pointed investigation which is required in 
 the cross-examination of witnesses. In the 
 fore Pauline this bent of his mind found full 
 scope. A writer on legal studies’ says that 
 this book is “remarkably adapted for the profit- 
 able exercise of the minds of Law Students;” 
 and, quoting Archbishop Whately’s’ observation, 
 that the book is “an incomparable specimen of 
 reasoning,’ he adds, that this is pre-eminently 
 true in regard to “that kind of reasoning with 
 which lawyers are peculiarly conversant, and 
 in which they do and ought to excel.” Pro- 
 fessor Blunt has truly said’ that “it would 
 not be in the power of the most suspicious 
 lawyer at the Old Bailey to subject two wit- 
 nesses to a stricter cross-examination than that 
 by which Paley has tried the testimony of St. 
 Paul and St. Luke.” 
 
 The peculiar value of the argument in this 
 
 1 Warren’s Law Studies, 2nd Edition (1845), pp. 224, 
 225. 
 
 2 Whately’s Rhetoric, 5th Edition, p. 94, n. 
 
 3 Quarterly Review, Oct., 1828. 
 
PREFACE. XU 
 
 treatise was perceived at an early date on the 
 Continent, where, at the end of the last century 
 and the beginning of this, unbelief was mani- 
 fested still more seriously than in England. 
 Translations appeared both in French and Ger- 
 man. Both are now extremely difficult to pro- 
 cure: and, if I may presume to judge of the 
 theological needs of foreign countries, I think 
 they might be republished with great advantage. 
 I possess a copy of the former, which is simply 
 a version without any notes." The latter, which 
 is to be found in the libraries of Gottingen and 
 the British Museum, has some useful additions 
 by the translator.° There was, moreover, an 
 earlier proposal to translate the work into Ger- 
 man, which, though it led to no results, is 
 recorded in some letters of permanent value.° 
 A Zurich theologian, named Hess, wrote to 
 Paley two most interesting letters, which showed 
 that he fully appreciated the significance of the 
 work, though in fact he had never seen it, and 
 
 4 This French version by Levade was first published at 
 Nimes in 1809, and then republished in Paris in 1821. 
 
 5 Published by Henke at Helmstadt, in 1797. In Ersch 
 and Griber’s Encyclopedia it is said truly of Paley, in 
 reference to the Hore Pauline, ‘‘ mit bewundernswiir- 
 digen Scharfsinne hat er die kleinsten Umstiinde hervor- 
 zuheben und fiir seine Untersuchung zu benutzen gewusst.” 
 
 6 See the Life, by his Son, p. clviii. 
 
X1V PREFACE. 
 
 knew it only through reviews.’ It is well worth 
 while to quote a few words from the first of these 
 letters, for they fit the necessity of our times, ‘as 
 well as the necessity of his. . He writes, ashe 
 says, “‘ persuasum habens, vix ull alid ratione, 
 hoe presertim tempore, rei Christiane melius 
 posse consuli, quam ostendendo firmis eam cer- 
 tissimisque Histor fide dignissimee fundamentis 
 niti, Et in ejusmodi rerum tractatione ne mi- 
 nutissima quidem parvi habenda, sed ipsas illas 
 mepiotacets a lectoribus plerumque neglectas 
 multum sepe momenti ad firmiorem animi 
 persuasionem adferre seepissime expertus sum.’ 
 This letter was written on the Ist of June, 
 1792. It is clear that a copy of the book was 
 sent by Paley to Zurich; but whether it ever 
 reached its destination we cannot tell. It had 
 not been received when Hess wrote again on the 
 5th of November, in the same year. 
 
 Various editions of the Hore Pauline have, 
 of course, been published in England: and 
 there is no probability that the peculiar value 
 of the work will ever cease to be understood in 
 this country. That which has been attempted 
 in the present Edition may be sufficiently stated 
 in a single paragraph. 
 
 7 The difference between those times and ours is curiously 
 illustrated by what Hess says on this point; “ Inspicere 
 
PREFACE. XV 
 
 I have not thought it right to add or change 
 a single syllable in the text, though here and 
 there, for the sake of additional clearness, new 
 divisions of paragraphs have been adopted, and 
 words have been printed in italics. Where it 
 has seemed to me that Paley is in error, or 
 where some additional comment has appeared 
 to me required, I have placed notes in square 
 brackets,. with the letter H, at the foot of the 
 page. But my chief contribution to the argument 
 has been a series of Appendices at the end of 
 the Volume, upon the following topics, in 
 order: (1) Coincidences connected with Geo- 
 graphy; (2) The Three Accounts of St. Paul’s 
 Conversion; (3) The Unity of St. Paul’s Cha- 
 racter; (4) Coincidences connected with St. 
 Luke; (5) The Date of the Epistle to the 
 Galatians; (6) St. Paul’s Journeys to Jeru- 
 salem; (7) The Epistles to the Ephesians and 
 the Colossians compared; (8) St. Paul’s charac- 
 teristic Metaphors; (9) The “ Faithful Sayings” 
 of the Pastoral Epistles. The trains of subtle . 
 and ingenious thought suggested by the method 
 of Paley’s Hore Pauline are very attractive: 
 and some parts of the Appendices may be 
 thought fanciful and overstrained. But, even if 
 
 nondum contigit; cum inter Bibliopolas Londinenses ac 
 nostrates nullum intercidit commercium.” 
 
XVI PREFACE. 
 
 this is the case, no harm is done. Each unde- 
 signed coincidence rests on its own merits. If 
 one that is suggested will not stand the test of 
 fair criticism, it simply collapses, without in- 
 juring other evidence of the same kind; while 
 the addition of even one such coincidence to the 
 general stock is a sensible help to existing 
 testimony. 
 
 Jeo 
 
THE TRUTH 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SCRIPTURE HISTORY OF ST. PAUL 
 
 EVINCED. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. 
 
 Tue volume of Christian Scriptures contains 
 thirteen letters purporting to be written by 
 St. Paul; it contains also a book, which, among 
 other things, professes to deliver the history, or 
 rather memoirs of the history, of this same 
 person. By assuming the genuineness of the 
 letters, we may prove the substantial truth of 
 the history; or, by assuming the truth of the 
 history, we may argue strongly in support of 
 the genuineness of the letters. But I assume 
 neither one nor the other. The reader is at 
 B 
 
2 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 liberty to suppose these writings to have been 
 lately discovered in the library of the Escurial, 
 and to come to our hands destitute of any ex- 
 trinsic or collateral evidence whatever; and the 
 argument I am about to offer is calculated to 
 show, that a comparison of the different writings 
 would, even under these circumstances, afford 
 good reason to helieve the persons and trans- 
 actions to have been real, the letters authentic, 
 and the narration in the main to be true. 
 
 Agreement or conformity between letters 
 bearing the name of an ancient author, and a 
 received history of that author’s life, does not 
 necessarily establish the credit of either: be- 
 cause, 
 
 1. The history may, like Middleton’s Life of 
 Cicero, or Jortin’s Life of Erasmus, have been 
 wholly, or in part, compiled from the letters; 
 in which case it is manifest that the history adds 
 nothing to the evidence already afforded by the 
 letters: or, 
 
 2. The letters may have been fabricated out 
 of the history; a species of imposture which is 
 certainly practicable; and which, without any 
 accession of proof or authority, would neces- 
 sarily produce the appearance of consistency and 
 agreement : or, 
 
 3. The history and letters may have been 
 
EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. 3 
 
 founded upon some authority common to both; 
 as upon reports and traditions which prevailed 
 in the age in which they were composed, or 
 upon some ancient record now lost, which both 
 writers consulted ; in which case also, the letters, 
 without being genuine, may exhibit marks of 
 conformity with the history, and the history, 
 without being true, may agree with the letters. 
 
 Agreement, therefore, or conformity, is only 
 to be relied upon so far as we can exclude these 
 several suppositions. Now the point to be 
 noticed is, that, in the three cases above enume- 
 rated, conformity must be the effect of design. 
 Where the history is compiled from the letters, 
 which is the first case, the design and com- 
 position of the work are in general so confessed, 
 or made so evident by comparison, as to leave 
 us in no danger of confounding the production 
 with original history, or of mistaking it for 
 independent authority. The agreement, it is 
 probable, will be close and uniform, and will 
 easily be perceived to result from the intention 
 of the author, and from the plan and conduct of 
 his work.— Where the letters are fabricated 
 from the history, which is the second case, it is 
 always for the purpose of imposing a forgery 
 upon the public; and, in order to give colour 
 and probability to the fraud, names, places, and | 
 
 B 2 
 
4, HORE PAULINA. 
 
 circumstances, found in the history, may be 
 studiously introduced into the letters, as well as 
 a general consistency be endeavoured to be 
 maintained. But here it is manifest, that 
 whatever congruity appears, is the consequence 
 of meditation, artifice, and design.—The third 
 case is that wherein the history and the letters, 
 without any direct privity or communication 
 with each other, derive their materials from the 
 same source; and, by reason of their common 
 original, furnish instances of accordance and 
 -correspondency. This is a situation in which 
 we must allow it to be possible for ancient 
 writings to be placed; and it is a situation in 
 which itis more difficult to distinguish spurious 
 from genuine writings than in either of the 
 cases described in the preceding suppositions ; 
 inasmuch as the congruities observable are so 
 far accidental, as that they are not produced 
 by the immediate transplanting of names and 
 circumstances out of one writing into the other. 
 But although, with respect to each other, the 
 agreement in these writings be mediate and 
 secondary, yet is it not properly or absolutely 
 undesigned; because, with respect to the com- 
 mon original from which the information of the 
 writers proceeds, it is studied and factitious. 
 The case of which we treat must, as to the 
 
EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. 5 
 
 letters, be a case of forgery; and when the 
 writer, who is personating another, sits down to 
 his composition—whether he have the history 
 with which we now compare the letters, or some 
 other record, before him; or whether he have 
 only loose tradition and reports to go by—he 
 must adapt his imposture, as well as he can, to 
 what he finds in these accounts; and his adap- 
 tations will be the result of counsel, scheme, and 
 industry: art must be employed; and vestiges 
 will appear of management and design. Add 
 to this, that, in most of the following examples, 
 the circumstances in which the coincidence is 
 remarked are of too particular and domestic a 
 nature to have floated down upon the stream of 
 general tradition." 
 
 Of the three cases which we have stated, the 
 difference between the first and the two others 
 is, that in the first the design may be fair and 
 honest, in the others it must be accompanied 
 with the consciousness of fraud ; but in all there 
 
 1 [This remark should be carefully noted. The “ par- 
 ticular and domestic”? nature of the circumstances on 
 which many of the following coincidences depend, goes far 
 to exclude the possibility of a vague traditional origin, in 
 regard to St. Paul’s Epistles, while yet it exposes these 
 Epistles to a severe strain of another kind: and it is, in a 
 great measure, because they can bear this strain, that we 
 are convinced of their genuineness and authenticity.—H. | 
 
6 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 is design. In examining, therefore, the agree- 
 ment between ancient writings, the character of 
 truth and originality is undesignedness: and 
 this test applies to every supposition; for, 
 whether we suppose the history to be true, but 
 the letters spurious ; or the letters to be genuine, 
 but the history false; or, lastly, falsehood to 
 belong to both—the history to be a fable, and 
 the letters fictitious; the same inference will 
 result—that either there will be no agreement 
 between them, or the agreement will be the 
 effect of design. Nor will it elude the principle 
 of this rule, to suppose the same person to have 
 been the author of all the letters, or even the 
 author both of the letters and the history; for 
 no less design is necessary to produce coinci- 
 dence between different parts of a man’s own 
 writings, especially when they are made to take 
 the different forms of a history and of original 
 letters, than to adjust them to the circumstances ~ 
 found in any other writing. ; 
 
 With respect to those writings of the New 
 Testament which are to be the subject of our 
 present consideration, I think that, as to the 
 authenticity of the Epistles, this argument, 
 where it is sufficiently sustained by instances, is 
 nearly conclusive; for I cannot assign a suppo- 
 sition of forgery, in which coincidences of the 
 
EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. 7 
 
 kind we inquire after are hkely to appear. As 
 to the history, it extends to these points ;—It 
 proves the general reality of the circumstances ; 
 it proves the historian’s knowledge of these cir- 
 cumstances. In the present instance it con- 
 firms his pretensions of having been a contem- 
 porary, and in the latter part of his history a 
 companion of St. Paul. In a word, it esta- 
 blishes the substantial truth of the narration: 
 and substantial truth is that which, in every 
 historical inquiry, ought to be the first thing 
 sought after and ascertained; it must be the 
 groundwork of every other observation. 
 
 The reader then will please to remember this 
 word wnudesignedness, as denoting that upon 
 which the construction and validity of our 
 argument chiefly depend. 
 
 As to the proofs of undesignedness, I shall in 
 this place say little; for I had rather the 
 reader’s persuasion should arise from the in- 
 stances themselves, and the separate remarks 
 with which they may be accompanied, than 
 from any previous formulary or description of 
 argument. Ina great plurality of examples, I 
 trust he will be perfectly convinced that no 
 design or contrivance whatever has been exer- 
 cised: and if some of the coincidences alleged 
 appear to be minute, circuitous, or oblique, let 
 
8 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 him reflect that this very indirectness and sub- 
 tilty is that which gives force and propriety to 
 the example. Broad, obvious, and explicit 
 agreements prove little; because it may be sug- 
 gested that the insertion of such is the ordinary 
 expedient of every forgery: and though they 
 may occur, and probably will occur, in genuine 
 writings, yet it cannot be proved that they are 
 peculiar to these. ' 
 
 Thus what St. Paul declares in chap. xi. of 
 1 Cor. concerning the institution of the Eucha- 
 vist: “ For I have received of the Lord that 
 which I also delivered unto you, That the Lord 
 Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed, 
 took bread ; and when He had given thanks, He 
 brake it, and said, Take, eat; this is My body, 
 which is broken for you; this do in remembrance 
 of Me’’—though it be in close and verbal con- 
 formity with the account of the same transac- 
 tion preserved by St. Luke, is yet a conformity 
 of which no use can be made in our argument ; 
 for if it should be objected that this was a mere 
 recital from the Gospel, borrowed by the author 
 of the Epistle, for the purpose of setting off his 
 composition by an appearance of agreement 
 with the received account of the Lord’s Supper, 
 I should not know how to repel the insinuation. 
 In like manner, the description which St. Paul 
 
EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. 9 
 
 gives of himself, in his Epistle to the Philip- 
 plans (i. 5)— Circumcised the eighth day, of 
 the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an 
 Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, 
 a Pharisee; concerning zeal, persecuting the 
 church; touching the righteousness which is in 
 the law, blameless ”"—is made up of particulars 
 so plainly delivered concerning him, in the Acts 
 of the Apostles, the Epistle to the Romans, and 
 the Epistle to the Galatians, that I cannot deny 
 but that 1t would be easy for an impostor, who 
 was fabricating a letter in the name of St. Paul, 
 to collect these articles into one view. ‘This, 
 therefore, is a conformity which we do not 
 adduce. | 
 
 But when I read in the Acts of the Apostles, 
 that “when Paul came to Derbe and Lystra, 
 behold, a certain disciple was there, named 
 Timotheus, the son of a certain woman which 
 was a Jewess;” and when, in an Epistle ad- 
 dressed to Timothy, I find him reminded of his 
 “having known the holy Scriptures from a 
 child,” which implies that he must, on one side 
 or both, have been brought up by Jewish 
 parents; I conceive that I remark a coincidence 
 which shows, by its very obliquity, that scheme 
 
 2 [Compare Acts xvi. 1, with 2 Tim. iii. 15.—H.] 
 
EO HORE PAULINA. 
 
 was not employed in its formation. In like 
 manner, if a coincidence depend upon a com- 
 parison of dates, or rather of circumstances 
 from which the dates are gathered, the more 
 intricate that comparison shall be, the more 
 numerous the intermediate steps through which 
 the conclusion is deduced ; ina word, the more 
 circuitous the investigation is, the better; be- 
 cause the agreement which finally results is 
 thereby farther removed from the suspicion of 
 contrivance, affectation, or design.* And it 
 should be remembered, concerning these coin- 
 eidences, that it is one thing to be minute, and 
 another to be precarious; one thing to be 
 
 3 [A careless reasoner might say that because it has 
 required ingenuity to find out these coincidences, there- 
 fore it must have required ingenuity to put themin. But 
 the truth is exactly the contrary of this. The greater the 
 ingenuity may have been in the discovery of these coinci- 
 dences, the more complete has been the absence of inge- 
 nuity as regards their existence. In the case of a cross- 
 examination in a court of justice, the simple honesty of the 
 witness will often come to view precisely in proportion to 
 the cunning of the lawyer. Paley has been very crafty in 
 this treatise; but this only proves the absence of craft on 
 the part of St. Paul and St. Luke. 
 
 And another general remark may here be permitted. It 
 is quite possible that a coincidence, which has been dis- 
 covered with difficulty and only after careful thought, may 
 be clear as the noonday, when once pointed out. The greater 
 the sagacity required in the search, the more pellucid and 
 more undoubted may be the result in the end.—H. | 
 
EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. iy 
 
 unobserved, and another to be obscure; one 
 thing to be circuitous or oblique, and another 
 to be forced, dubious, or fanciful. And this 
 distinction ought always to be retained in our 
 thoughts. 
 
 The very particularity of St. Paul’s Epistles; 
 the perpetual recurrence of names of persons 
 and places; the frequent allusions to the inci- 
 dents of his private life, and the circumstances 
 of his condition and history ; and the connexion 
 and parallelism of these with the same circum- 
 stances in the Acts of the Apostles, so as to 
 enable us, for the most part, to confront them 
 with one another; as well as the relation which 
 subsists between the circumstances, as men- 
 tioned or referred to in the different Epistles,— 
 afford no inconsiderable proof of the genuine- 
 ness of the writings and the reality of the 
 transactions. For as no advertence is sufficient 
 to guard against slips and contradictions, when 
 circumstances are multiplied, and when they 
 are liable to be detected by contemporary 
 accounts equally circumstantial; an impostor, 
 I should expect, would either have avoided 
 particulars entirely, contenting himself with 
 doctrinal discussions, moral precepts, and gene- 
 ral reflections ; * or if, for the sake of imitating 
 
 4 This, however, must not be misunderstood. A person 
 
12 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 St. Paul’s style, he should have thought it 
 necessary to intersperse his composition with 
 names and circumstances, he would have placed 
 them out of the reach of comparison with the 
 history. And I am confirmed in this opinion 
 by an inspection of two attempts to counterfeit 
 St. Paul’s Epistles, which have come down to 
 us; and the only attempts, of which we have 
 any knowledge, that are at all deserving of 
 regard. One of these is an epistle to the Laodi- 
 ceans, extant in Latin, and preserved by 
 Fabricius in his collection of apocryphal Serip- 
 tures. The other purports to be an epistle of 
 St. Paul to the Corinthians, in answer to an 
 
 writing to his friends, and upon a subject in which the 
 transactions of his own life were concerned, would pro- 
 bably be led in the course of his letter, especially if it was 
 a long one, to refer to passages found in his history. A 
 person addressing an epistle to the public at large, or 
 under the form of an epistle delivering a discourse upon 
 some speculative argument, would not, it is probable, meet 
 with an occasion of alluding to the circumstances of his life 
 at all: he might, or he might not; the chance on either 
 side is nearly equal. This is the situation of the catholic 
 Epistles. Although, therefore, the presence of these allu- 
 sions and agreements be a valuable accession to the argu- 
 ments by which the authenticity of a letter is maintained, 
 yet the want of them certainly forms no positive objection. 
 
 [These remarks have an important bearing on some ~ 
 questions connected with the Epistle to the Ephesians, as 
 will be seen below.—H. } 
 
EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. 13 
 
 epistle from the Corinthians to him. This was 
 translated by Scroderus from a copy in the 
 Armenian language which had been sent to W. 
 Whiston, and was afterwards, from a more 
 perfect copy procured at Aleppo, published by 
 his sons, as an appendix to their edition of 
 Moses Chorenensis. No Greek copy exists of 
 either: they are not only not supported by an- 
 cient testimony, but they are negatived and 
 excluded; as they have never found admission 
 into any catalogue of apostolical writings, ac- 
 knowledged by, or known to, the early ages of 
 Christianity. In the first of these, I found, as I 
 expected, a total evztation of circumstances.’ It 
 is simply a collection of sentences from the 
 canonical Epistles, strung together with very 
 little skill. The second, which is a more ver- 
 sute and specious forgery, is introduced with a 
 list of names of persons who wrote to St. Paul 
 from Corinth; and is preceded by an account 
 
 5 [The most complete account of the “ Epistle to the 
 Laodiceans’’ is given by Professor Lightfoot (Comm. on 
 Colossians, pp. 340—366), who describes it as ‘‘ a cento of 
 Pauline phrases strung together without any definite con- 
 nexion or. clear object,” and who says at the conclusion 
 that “‘the dawn of the Reformation epoch effectually 
 scared away this ghost of a Pauline Epistle, which has 
 been laid for ever, and will not again be suffered to haunt 
 the mind of the Church.’—H. ] 
 
14 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 sufficiently particular of the manner in which 
 the epistle was sent from Corinth to St. Paul, 
 and the answer returned. But they are names 
 which no one ever heard of; and the account it 
 is impossible to combine with anything found in 
 the Acts, or in the other Epistles.° It is not 
 necessary for me to point out the internal marks 
 of spuriousness and imposture which these com- 
 positions betray ; but 1t was necessary to observe, 
 that they do not afford those coincidences which 
 we propose as proofs of authenticity in the 
 Epistles which we defend. 
 
 Having explaimed the general scheme and 
 formation of the argument, I may be permitted 
 to subjoin a brief account of the manner of con- 
 ducting it. 
 
 I have disposed the several instances of 
 agreement under separate numbers; as well to 
 
 6 [For the apocryphal Epistles of the Corinthians to St. 
 Paul, and of St. Paul to the Corinthians, see the Appendix 
 to the Commentary on 1 Cor. and 2 Cor., by Dean Stanley, 
 who observes that it is ‘important to call attention to the 
 irreconcilable difference both of fact and style between 
 two indisputably genuine Hpistles of St. Paul on the one 
 hand, and two indisputably spurious Epistles on the other: 
 —first, as showing the impossibility of confounding the 
 two together; secondly, as showing the ignorance and 
 clumsiness with which forgers of later times compiled 
 their imitations of genuine Apostolic works.’’—H. ] 
 
~ 
 
 EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. 15 
 
 mark more sensibly the divisions of the subject, 
 as for another purpose, namely, that the reader 
 may thereby be reminded that the instances are 
 independent of one another. I have advanced 
 nothing which I did not think probable; but 
 the degree of probability, by which different 
 instances are supported, is undoubtedly very 
 different. If the reader, therefore, meets with 
 a number which contains an instance that ap- 
 pears to him unsatisfactory, or founded in mis- 
 take, he will dismiss that number from the 
 arzument, but without prejudice to any other.’ 
 He will have occasion also to observe, that the 
 coincidences discoverable in some Epistles are 
 much fewer and weaker than what are supplied 
 by others. But he will add to his observation 
 this important circumstance—that whatever 
 ascertains the original of one Epistle, in some 
 measure establishes the authority of the rest. 
 
 7 [In other words, to use the expression which Paley 
 employs elsewhere, the argument is cumulative. This is a 
 most important feature of the Hore Pauline. In some 
 cases an argument on Christian Evidence is of the nature 
 of a chain, which gives way entirely if a single link is 
 broken. Not so here. The instances of undesigned coin- 
 cidence, given in this volume, vary very much in relative 
 value. One or two rest on a mistake; a few are only 
 moderately persuasive; but most of them furnish us with 
 positions which are impregnable.—H. ] 
 
16 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 For, whether these Epistles be genuine or spu- 
 rious, everything about them indicates that 
 they come from the same hand. The diction, 
 which it is extremely difficult to imitate, pre- 
 serves its resemblance and peculiarity throughout 
 all the Epistles. Numerous expressions and 
 singularities of style, found in no other part of 
 the New Testament, are repeated in different 
 Epistles; and occur, in their respective places, 
 without the smallest appearance of force or art. 
 An involved argumentation, frequent obscurities, 
 especially in the order and transition of thought, — 
 piety, vehemence, affection, bursts of rapture, 
 and of unparalleled sublimity, are properties, all 
 or most of them, discernible in every letter of 
 the collection. But although these Epistles 
 bear strong marks of proceeding from the same 
 hand, I think it is still more certain that they 
 were originally separate publications. They 
 form no continued story; they compose no 
 regular correspondence; they comprise not the 
 transactions of any particular period; they carry 
 on ‘no connexion of argument: they depend not 
 
 8 [The general truth of this statement is crossed by a 
 partial exception in the case of the Pastoral Epistles, which 
 exception itself may be used to support the general con- 
 clusions in this book. See more on this subject in Ap- 
 PENDIX IX.—H.] 
 
EXPOSITION OF THE ARGUMENT. ve 
 
 upon one another; except in one or two in- 
 stances, they refer not to one another. I will 
 further undertake to say, that no study or care 
 has been employed to produce or preserve an ap- 
 pearance of consistency among them. All which 
 observations show that they were not intended 
 by the person, whoever he was, that wrote them, 
 to come forth or to be read together; that they 
 appeared at first separately, and have been 
 collected since. 
 
 The proper purpose of the following work is, 
 to bring together, from the Acts of the Apostles, 
 and from the different Epistles, such passages 
 as furnish examples of undesigned coincidence ; 
 but I have so far enlarged upon this plan, as to 
 take into it some circumstances found in the 
 Epistles, which contributed strength to the 
 conclusion, though not strictly objects of com- 
 parison. 
 
 It appeared also a part of the same plan, to 
 examine the difficulties which presented them- 
 selves in the course of our inquiry. 
 
 I do not know that the subject has been 
 proposed or considered in this view before, 
 Ludovicus Capellus, Bishop Pearson, Dr. Benson, 
 and Dr. Lardner, have each given a continued 
 history of St. Paul’s life,” made up from the 
 
 9 [Ludovicus Capellus, in his Historia Apostolica, ex 
 C 
 
5O%} HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles joined 
 together. But this, it 1s manifest, is a different 
 undertaking from the present, and directed to a 
 different purpose. 
 
 If what is here offered shall add one thread 
 to that complication of probabilities by which 
 the Christian history is attested, the reader’s 
 attention will be repaid by the supreme impor- 
 tance of the subject; and my design will be 
 fully answered. 
 
 Actis Apostolorum et Epistolis inter se collatis collecta 
 (1683), reprinted in vol. vii. of the Critict Sacri; Bishop 
 Pearson, in his Annales Paulini (1688), reprinted in his 
 Minor Theological Works, by Archdeacon Churton. The 
 title of Benson’s work is given below, p. 88. On the 
 question of the originality of the Hore Pauline, see the 
 Preface.—H. | 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 19 
 
 CHAPTER Il. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 Tue first passage I shall produce from this 
 Hpistle, and upon which a good deal of obser- 
 vation will be founded, is the following :— 
 
 *‘ But now I go unto Jerusalem, to minister 
 unto the saints; for it hath pleased them of 
 Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain con- 
 tribution for the poor saints which are at 
 Jerusalem.” Rom. xy. 25, 26. 
 
 In this quotation three distinct circumstances 
 are stated—a contribution in Macedonia for the 
 relief of the Christians of Jerusalem, a contri- 
 bution in Achaia for the same purpose, and an 
 intended journey of St. Paul to Jerusalem. 
 These circumstances are stated as taking place 
 at the same time, and that’ to be the time when 
 the Epistle was written. Now let us inquire 
 
 c 2 
 
20 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 whether we can find these circumstances else- 
 where; and whether, if we do find them, they 
 meet together in respect of date. Turn to the 
 Acts of the Apostles, chap. xx. ver. 2, 3, and 
 you read the following account: “ When he had 
 gone over those parts (namely, Macedonia), 
 and had given them much exhortation, he came 
 into Greece, and there abode three months; 
 and when the Jews laid wait for him, as he was 
 about to sail into Syria, he purposed to return 
 through Macedonia.” From this passage, com- 
 pared with the account of St. Paul’s travels 
 given before, and from the sequel of the chapter, 
 it appears, that upon St. Paul’s second visit to 
 the peninsula of Greece,’ his intention was, when 
 he should leave the country, to proceed from 
 Achaia directly by sea to Syria; but that, to 
 avoid the Jews, who were lying in wait to 
 intercept him in his route, he so far changed 
 his purpose as to go back through Macedonia, 
 embark at Philippi, and pursue his voyage from 
 thence towards Jerusalem. Here therefore is 
 a journey to Jerusalem; but not a syllable of 
 any contribution, And as St. Paul had taken 
 ‘several journeys to Jerusalem before, and one 
 
 1 [It is worth while to note here, that though this was 
 
 St. Paul’s second visit to the Greek peninsula, it was a 
 part of his Third Missionary Journey.—H. | 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. oT 
 
 also immediately after his jirs¢ visit into the 
 peninsula of Greece (Acts xvii. 21), it cannot 
 from hence be collected in which of these visits 
 the Epistle was written, or, with certainty, that 
 it was written in either. The silence of the 
 historian, who professes to have been with St. 
 Paul at the time (xx. 6), concerning any contri- 
 bution, might lead us to look out for some 
 different journey, or might induce us perhaps to 
 question the consistency of the two records, did 
 not a very accidental reference, in another part 
 of the same history, afford us sufficient ground 
 to believe that this silence was omission. When 
 St. Paul made his reply before Felix, to the 
 accusations of Tertullus, he alleged, as was 
 natural, that neither the errand which brought 
 him to Jerusalem, nor his conduct while he 
 remained there, merited the calumnies with 
 which the Jews had aspersed him. “ Now after 
 many years (that is, of absence), I came to bring 
 alms to my nation and offerings ; whereupon 
 certain Jews from Asia found me purified in 
 the temple, neither with multitude nor with 
 tumult; who ought to have been here before 
 thee, and object, if they had ought against me.” 
 Acts xxiv. 17—19. This mention of alms and 
 offerigs certainly brings the narrative in the 
 Acts nearer to an accordance with the Epistle; 
 
22 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 yet no one, I am persuaded, will suspect that 
 this clause was put into St. Paul’s defence, 
 either to supply the omission in the preceding 
 narrative, or with any view to such accordance. 
 
 After all, nothing is yet said or hinted con- 
 cerning the place of the contribution; nothing 
 concerning Macedonia and Achaia. Turn there- 
 fore to the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 
 chap. xvi. ver. 1—4, and you have St. Paul 
 delivering the following directions: ‘‘ Concern- 
 ing the collection for the saints, as I have given 
 orders to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye: 
 upon the first day of the week let every one ot 
 you lay by him in store as God hath prospered 
 him, that there be no gatherings when I come. 
 And when I come, whomsoever you shall ap- 
 prove by your letters,’ them will I send to bring 
 your liberality unto Jerusalem; and if it be 
 meet that I go also, they shall go with me.” 
 In this passage we find a contribution carrying 
 on at Corinth, the capital of Achaia, for the 
 Christians of Jerusalem; we find also a hint 
 given of the possibility of St. Paul’s going up 
 to Jerusalem himself, after he had paid his visit 
 into Achaia: but this is spoken of rather as a 
 possibility than as any settled intention; for 
 his first thought was, “ Whomsoever you shall 
 
 2 [See note below, p. 99.—H. ] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. we 
 
 approve by your letters, them will I send to 
 bring your liberality to Jerusalem ;” and, in the 
 sixth verse he adds, “ That ye may bring me 
 on my journey whithersoever I go.’ This 
 Epistle purports to be written after St. Paul 
 had been at Corinth; for it refers throughout 
 to what he had done and said among them while 
 he was there. The expression therefore, “ when 
 I come,” must relate to a second visit; against 
 which visit the contribution spoken of was 
 desired to be in readiness. 
 
 But though the contribution in Achaia be 
 expressly mentioned, nothing is here said con- 
 cerning any contribution in Macedonia. Turn, 
 therefore, in the third place, to the Second 
 Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. vii. ver. 1—4, 
 and you will discover the particular which re-. 
 mains to be sought for: ‘‘ Moreover, brethren,. 
 we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed 
 on the churches of Macedonia; how that, in a 
 great trial of affliction, the abundance of their: 
 joy and their deep poverty abounded unto the- 
 riches of their liberality; for to their power 
 I bear record, yea, and beyond their power, they 
 were willing of themselves; praying us, with 
 much entreaty, that we would receive the gift, 
 and take upon us the fellowship of the minister- 
 ing to the saints.” To which add chap. 1x. ver. 
 
24, HORE PAULIN®. 
 
 2: “JT know the forwardness of your mind, for 
 which I boast of you to them of Macedonia, that 
 Achaia was ready a year ago.” In this Epistle 
 we find St. Paul advanced as far as Macedonia, 
 upon that second visit to Corimth which he 
 promised in his former Epistle; we find also, in 
 the passages now quoted from it, that a con- 
 tribution was going on in Macedonia at the 
 same time with, or soon however following, the 
 contribution which was made in Achaia; but 
 for whom the contribution was made does not 
 appear in this Epistle at all: that information 
 must be supplied from the first Epistle. 
 
 Here therefore, at length, but fetched from 
 three different writings, we have obtained the 
 several circumstances we inquired after, and » 
 which the Epistle to the Romans brings together, 
 namely, a contribution in Achaia for the 
 Christians of Jerusalem; a contribution in Ma- 
 cedonia for the same; and an approaching jour- 
 ney of St. Paul to Jerusalem. We have these 
 circumstances—each by some hint in the pas- 
 sage in which it is mentioned, or by the date of 
 the writing in which the passage occurs—fixed 
 to a particular time; and we have that time 
 turning out, upon examination, to be in all the 
 same; namely, towards the close of St. Paul’s 
 second visit to the peninsula of Greece. Thisis 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 29 
 
 an instance of conformity beyond the possibility, 
 I will venture to say, of random writing to pro- 
 duce. I also assert, that it is in the highest 
 degree improbable that it should have been the 
 effect of contrivance and design. The imputa- 
 tion of design amounts to this, that the forger of 
 the Epistle to the Romans inserted in it the 
 passage upon which our observations are founded, 
 for the purpose of giving colour to his forgery 
 by the appearance of conformity with other 
 writings which were then extant, I reply, in 
 the first place, that, if he did this to countenance 
 his forgery, he did it for the purpose of an ar- 
 gument which would not strike one reader in 
 ten thousand.’ Coincidences so circuitous as 
 this answer not the ends of forgery ; are seldom 
 I believe, attempted by it. In the second place, 
 I observe, that he must have had the Acts of 
 the Apostles, and the two Epistles to the Corin- 
 thians, before him at the time. In the Acts of 
 the Apostles (I mean that part of the Acts 
 which relates to this period) he would have 
 found the journey to Jerusalem; but nothing 
 
 3 [An intentional and contrived coincidence must be of 
 such a character as to strike the reader. Otherwise it fails 
 of its purpose. If it was kept latent for the intelligent 
 and ingenious critics of a later age to find out, it has not 
 
 attained the end for which it was meant at the time of its 
 contrivance.—H. | 
 
26 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 about the contribution. In the First Epistle to 
 the Corinthians he would have found a contribu- 
 tion going on in Achaia for the Christians of 
 - Jerusalem, and a distant hint of the possibility 
 of the journey ; but nothing concerning a con- 
 tribution in Macedonia. In the Second Epistle 
 to the Corinthians he would have found a con- 
 tribution in Macedonia accompanying that in 
 Achaia; but no intimation for whom either was 
 intended, and not a word about the journey. It 
 was only by a close and attentive collation of 
 the three writings, that he could have picked 
 out the circumstances which he has united in 
 his Epistle; and by a still more nice examina- 
 tion, that he could have determined them to 
 belong to the same period. In the third place, 
 I remark, what diminishes very much the 
 suspicion of fraud, how aptly and connectedly 
 the mention of the circumstances in question,— 
 namely, the journey to Jerusalem, and of the 
 occasion of that journey,—arises from the con- 
 text. ‘ Whensoever I take my journey into 
 Spain, I will come to you: for I trust to see 
 you in my journey, and to be brought on my 
 way thitherward by you, if first I be somewhat 
 filled with your company. but now I go unto 
 Jerusalem, to minister unto the saints; for rt hath 
 pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. Q7 
 
 a certain contribution for the poor saints which 
 are at Jerusalem. It hath pleased them verily, 
 and their debtors they are; for if the Gentiles 
 have been made partakers of their spiritual 
 things, their duty is also to minister unto them 
 in carnal things. When therefore I have per- 
 formed this, and have sealed to'them this fruit, I 
 will come by you into Spain.” Is the passage 
 in étalics like a passage foisted in for an ex- 
 traneous purpose? Does it not arise from what 
 goes before, by a junction as easy as any exam- 
 ple of writing upon real business can furnish ? 
 Could anything be more natural than that St. 
 Paul, in writing to the Romans, should speak of 
 the time when he hoped to visit them; should 
 mention the business which then detained him ; 
 and that he purposed to set forwards upon his 
 journey to them when that business was com- 
 pleted ? 
 
 No. II. 
 
 By means of the quotation which formed the 
 subject of the preceding number, we collect, that 
 the Epistle to the Romans was written at the 
 conclusion of St. Paul’s second visit to the 
 peninsula of Greece: but this we collect, not 
 
28 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 from the Epistle itself, not from anything de- 
 clared concerning the time and place in any 
 part of the Epistle, but from a comparison of 
 circumstances referred to in the Epistle, with 
 the order of events recorded in the Acts, and 
 with references to the same circumstances, 
 though for quite: different purposes, in the two 
 Epistles to the Corinthians. Now would the 
 author of a forgery, who sought to gain credit 
 to a spurious letter by congruities, depending 
 upon the time and place in which the letter was 
 supposed to be written, have left that time and 
 place to be made out, in a manner so obscure 
 and indirect as this is? If, therefore, coin- 
 cidences of circumstances can be pointed out in 
 this Epistle, depending upon its date, or the 
 place where it was written, while that date and 
 place are only ascertained by other circum- 
 stances, such coincidences may fairly be stated 
 as undesigned. Under this head I adduce, 
 Chap. xvi. 21—23: “ Timotheus, my work- 
 fellow, and Lucius, and Jason, and Sosipater, 
 my kinsmen, salute you. I, Tertius, who wrote 
 this epistle, salute you in the Lord. Gaius, 
 mine host, and of the whole Church, saluteth 
 you;... and Quartus, a brother.”” With this 
 passage I compare Acts xx.4: “ And there ac- 
 companied him into Asia, Sopater of Berea; and 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 29 
 
 of the Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus ; 
 and Gaius of Derbe, and Timotheus; and, of 
 Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus.” The Epistle 
 to the Romans, we have seen, was written just 
 before St. Paul’s departure from Greece, after 
 his second visit to that peninsula: the persons 
 mentioned in the quotation from the Acts are 
 those who accompanied him in that very de- 
 parture. Of seven whose names are joined in 
 the salutation of the church of Rome, three, 
 namely, Sosipater, Gaius, and Timothy, are 
 proved, by this passage in the Acts, to have 
 been with St. Paul at the time. And this is 
 perhaps as much coincidence as could be ex- 
 pected from reality, though less, I am apt to 
 think,'than would have been produced by design. 
 Four are mentioned in the Acts who are not 
 joined in the salutation ; and it is in the nature 
 of the case probable that there should be many 
 attending St. Paul in Greece, who knew no- 
 thine of the converts at Rome, nor were known 
 by them. In like manner, several are joined in 
 the salutation who are not mentioned in the 
 passage referred to in the Acts. This also was 
 to be expected. The occasion of mentioning 
 them in the Acts was their proceeding with St. 
 Paul upon his journey. But we may be sure 
 that there were many eminent Christians with 
 
30 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 St. Paul in Greece, besides those who accom- 
 panied him into Asia.’ 
 
 4 Of these Jason is one, whose presence upon this occa- 
 sion is very naturally accounted for. Jason was an inba- 
 bitant of Thessalonica, in Macedonia, and entertained St. 
 Paul in his house upon his first visit to that country. 
 Acts xvii. 7.—St. Paul, upon this his second visit, passed 
 through Macedonia on his way to Greece, and, from the 
 situation of Thessalonica, most likely through that city. 
 It appears, from various instances in the Acts, to have 
 been the practice of many converts to attend St. Paul 
 from place to place. It is therefore highly probable, I 
 mean that it is highly consistent with the account in the 
 history, that Jason, according to that account a zealous 
 disciple, the inhabitant of a city at no great distance from 
 Greece, and through which, as it should seem, St. Paul 
 had lately passed, should have accompanied St. Paul into 
 Greece, and have been with him there at this time. 
 
 Lucius is another name in the Epistle. A very slight 
 alteration would convert Aovxios into Aovxas, Lucius into 
 Luke, which would produce an additional coincidence: for, 
 if Luke was the author of the history, he was with St. 
 Paul at this time; inasmuch as, describing the voyage 
 which took place soon after the writing of this Epistle, 
 the historian uses the first person—“ We sailed away from 
 Philippi.””—Acts xx. 6. 
 
 [ What is said in this note concerning Jason is reasonably 
 probable ; but the reference to Luke is in two ways un- 
 satisfactory. It seems certain that the Latin equivalent 
 of AotvKeas is not Lucius, but Lucanus: and the sudden 
 appearance of the first person in Acts xx. 6 is a strong 
 indication that St. Luke was not with St. Paul when this 
 Epistle:was written, i.e. at the point of time corresponding 
 with Acts xx. 3. | 
 
 From xx. 6 the narrative begins to be given in the first 
 person. Previously it had been given in the third person.—H. | 
 
+ 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. ol 
 
 But if any one shall still contend that a forger 
 of the Epistle, with the Acts of the Apostles 
 before him, and having settled his scheme of 
 writing a letter as from St. Paul upon his 
 second visit into Greece, would easily think of 
 the expedient of putting in the names of those 
 persons who appeared to be with St. Paul at the 
 time, as an obvious recommendation of the im- 
 posture; I then repeat my observations; first, 
 that he would have made the catalogue more 
 complete; and secondly, that with this con- 
 trivance in his thoughts, it was certainly his 
 business, in order to avail himself of the artifice, 
 to have stated in the body of the Epistle that 
 St. Paul was in Greece when he wrote it, and 
 that he was there upon his second visit. Neither 
 of which he has done, either directly, or even so 
 as to be discoverable by any circumstance found 
 in the narrative delivered in the Acts. 
 
 Under the same head, namely, of coincidences 
 depending upon date, I cite from the Epistle 
 the following salutation: “ Greet Priscilla and 
 Aquila, my helpers in Christ Jesus; who have 
 for my life laid down their own necks; unto 
 whom not only I give thanks, but also all the 
 churches of the Gentiles.” Chap. xvi. 3.—It 
 appears, from the Acts of the Apostles, that 
 Priscilla and Aquila had originally been inhabi- 
 
co 
 re) 
 
 HORA PAULINE. 
 
 tants of Rome; for we read, Acts xvii. 2, that 
 “Paul found a certain Jew, named Aquila, 
 lately come from Italy with his wife Priscilla ; 
 (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews 
 to depart from Aome).” They were connected 
 therefore with the place to which the salutations 
 are sent. That is one coincidence; another is 
 the following: St. Paul became acquainted with 
 these persons at Corinth during his first visit 
 into Greece. _ They accompanied him upon his 
 return into Asia; were settled for some time at 
 Ephesus, Acts xvill. 19—26; and appear to 
 have been with St. Paul when he wrote from 
 that place his first Epistle to the Corinthians, 
 1 Cor. xvi. 19. Not long after the writing of 
 which Epistle St. Paul went from Ephesus into 
 Macedonia, and “after he had gone over those 
 parts” proceeded from thence upon his second 
 visit into Greece; during which visit, or rather 
 at the conclusion of it, the Epistle to the 
 Romans, as hath been shown, was written. We 
 have therefore the time of St. Paul’s residence at 
 Ephesus after he had written to the Corinthians, 
 the time taken up by his progress through Ma- 
 cedonia (which is indefinite, and was probably 
 considerable), and his three months’ abode in 
 Greece ; we have the sum of these three periods 
 allowed for Aquila and Priscilla going back to 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 38 
 
 Rome, so as to be there when the Epistle before 
 us was written. Now what this quotation leads 
 us to observe is, the danger of scattering names 
 and circumstances in writings like the present, 
 how implicated they often are with dates and 
 places, and that nothing but truth can preserve 
 consistency. Had the notes of time in the 
 Epistle to the Romans fixed the writing of it to 
 any date prior to St. Paul’s first residence at 
 Corinth, the salutation of Aquila and Priscilla 
 would have contradicted the history, because it 
 would have been prior to his acquaintance with 
 these persons. If the notes of time had fixed it 
 to any period during ¢/at¢ residence at Corinth, 
 during his journey to Jerusalem, when he first 
 returned out of Greece, during his stay at 
 Antioch, whither he went down from Jerusalem, 
 or during his second progress through the 
 Lesser Asia, upon which he proceeded from 
 Antioch, an equal contradiction would have been 
 incurred; because from Acts xvii. 2—18, 
 19—26, it appears that during all this time 
 Aquila and Priscilla were either along with St. 
 Paul, or were abiding at Ephesus. Lastly, had 
 the notes of time in this Epistle, which we have 
 seen to be perfectly incidental, compared with 
 the notes of time in the First Epistle to the 
 Corinthians, which are equally incidental, fixed 
 D 
 
34 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 this Epistle to be either cotemporary with that, 
 or prior to it, a similar contradiction would 
 have ensued ; because, first, when the Epistle to 
 the Corinthians was written, Aquila and Pris- 
 cilla were along with St. Paul, as they joined in 
 the salutation of that church, 1 Cor. xvi. 19; 
 and because, secondly, the history does not 
 allow us to suppose, that between the time of 
 their becoming acquainted with St. Paul, and 
 the time of St. Paul’s writing to the Corin- 
 thians, Aquila and Priscilla could have gone to 
 Rome, so as to have been saluted in an Epistle 
 to that city; and then come back to St. Paul at 
 Ephesus, so as to be joined with him in saluting 
 the church of Corinth. — As it is, all things are 
 consistent. The Epistle to the Romans is pos- 
 terior even to the Second Epistle to the Corin- 
 thians; because it speaks of a contribution in 
 Achaia being completed, which the Second 
 Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. viii., is only 
 soliciting. It is sufficiently, therefore, posterior 
 to the First Epistle to the Corinthians, to allow 
 time in the interval for Aquila and Priscilla’s 
 return from, Ephesus to Rome. 
 
 Before we dismiss these two persons, we may 
 take notice of the terms of commendation in 
 which St. Paul describes them, and of the 
 agreement of that encomium with the history. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 35 
 
 « My helpers in Christ Jesus, who have for my 
 ~ life laid down their necks ; unto whom not only 
 I give thanks, but also all the churches of the 
 Gentiles.” In the eighteenth chapter of the 
 Acts we are informed that Aquila and Priscilla 
 were Jews; that St. Paul first met with them 
 at Corinth ; that for some time he abode in the 
 same house with them; that St. Paul’s conten- 
 tion at Corinth was with the unbelieving Jews, 
 who at first “opposed and blasphemed, and 
 afterwards with one accord raised an insurrec- 
 tion against him;” that Aquila and Priscilla 
 adhered, we may conclude, to St. Paul through- 
 out this whole contest; for, when he left the | 
 city, they went with him (Acts xvii. 18). 
 Under these circumstances, it is highly probable 
 that they should be involved in the dangers and 
 persecutions which St. Paul underwent from the 
 Jews, being themselves Jews; and, by adhering 
 to St. Paul in this dispute, deserters, as they 
 would be accounted, of the Jewish cause. 
 Further, as they, though Jews, were assistants 
 to St. Paul in preaching to the Gentiles at 
 Corinth, they had taken a decided part in the 
 great controversy of that day, the admission of 
 the Gentiles to a parity of religious situation 
 with the Jews. For this conduct alone, if-there 
 was no other reason, they may seem to have 
 D 2% 
 
36 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 been entitled to “thanks from the churches of 
 the Gentiles.” They were Jews taking part 
 with Gentiles. Yet is all this so indirectly in- 
 timated, or rather so much of it left to inference 
 in the account given in the Acts, that I do not 
 think it probable that a forger either could or 
 would have drawn his representation from 
 thence: and still less probable do I think it, 
 that, without having seen the Acts, he could by 
 mere accident, and without truth for his guide, 
 have delivered a representation so conformable 
 to the circumstances there recorded. 
 
 The two congruities Jast adduced depended 
 upon the time, the two following regard the 
 place, of the Epistle. 
 
 1. Chap. xvi. 23: “ Erastus, the chamberlain 
 of the city, saluteth you’’—of what city? We 
 have seen, that is, we have inferred from circum- 
 stances found in the Epistle, compared with 
 circumstances found in the Acts of the Apostles, 
 and in the two Epistles to the Corinthians, that 
 our Epistle was written during St. Paul’s second 
 visit to the peninsula of Greece. Again, as St. 
 Paul, in his Epistle to the church of Corinth, 
 1 Cor. xvi. 38, speaks of a collection going on in 
 that city, and of his desire that it might be 
 ready against he came thither; and as in this 
 Epistle he speaks of that collection being ready, it 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 37 
 
 follows that the Epistle was written either while 
 he was at Corinth, or after he had been there. 
 Thirdly, since St. Paul speaks in this Epistle of 
 his journey to Jerusalem, as about instantly to 
 take place; and as we learn, Acts xx. 3, that 
 his design and attempt was to sail upon that 
 journey immediately from Greece, properly so 
 called, that is, as distinguished from Macedonia ; 
 it is probable that he was in this country when 
 he wrote the Epistle, in which he speaks of 
 himself as upon the eve of setting out. Ifin 
 Greece, he was most likely at Corinth; for the 
 two Epistles to the Corinthians show that the 
 principal end of his coming into Greece was to 
 visit that city, where he had founded a church. 
 Certainly we know no place in Greece in which 
 his presence was so probable; at least, the 
 placing of him at Corinth satisfies every circum- 
 stance. Now that Erastus was an inhabitant 
 at Corinth, or had some connexion with Corinth, 
 is rendered a fair subject of presumption, by © 
 that which is accidentally said of him in the 
 Second Epistle to Timothy, iv. 20, “ Erastus 
 abode at Corinth.’ St. Paul complains of his 
 solitude, and is telling Timothy what was 
 become of his companions: “ Erastus abode at 
 Corinth; but Trophimus have [ left at Miletum 
 sick.” Erastus was one of those who had 
 
38 HORZ PAULINA. 
 
 attended St. Paul in his travels, Acts xix. 22; 
 and when those travels had, upon some occasion, 
 brought our Apostle and his train to Corinth, 
 Erastus stayed there, for no reason so probable 
 as that it was his home. I allow that this 
 coincidence is not so precise as some others,’ yet 
 I think it too clear to be produced by accident ; 
 for, of the many places which this same Epistle 
 has assigned to different persons, and the innu- 
 merable others which it might have mentioned, 
 how came it to fix upon Corinth for Erastus ? 
 And, as far as it is a coincidence, it is certainly 
 undesigned on the part of the author of the 
 Epistle to the Romans; because he has not told 
 us of what city Erastus was the chamberlain ; 
 or, which is the same thing, from what city the 
 Epistle was written, the setting forth of which 
 was absolutely necessary to the display of the 
 coincidence, if any such display had been thought 
 of: nor could the author of the Epistle to 
 
 5 [ This article is a good illustration of the general remark 
 made above (p. 15) concerning the cumulative nature of 
 this argument. The identification of this Erastus with 
 the person or persons bearing the same name in Acts xix. 
 22, and 2 Tim. iv. 20, is somewhat precarious. But this 
 identification might be given up, and yet leave all the rest 
 of the argument precisely where it was. St. Paul’s fellow- 
 traveller, Erastus, is the subject of some observations 
 below, in the chapter on the First Epistle to the Corin- 
 thians, No. iii.—H. | 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 39 
 
 Timothy leave Erastus at Corinth, from any- 
 thing he might have read in the Epistle to the 
 Romans, because Corinth is nowhere in that 
 Epistle mentioned either by name or description. 
 
 2. Chap. xvi. 1—3: “I commend unto you 
 Phoebe our sister, which is a servant of the 
 church which is at Cenchrea: that ye receive 
 her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that 
 ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath 
 need of you; for she hath been a succourer of 
 many, and of myself also.” Cenchrea adjoined 
 to Corinth; St. Paul, therefore, at the time of 
 writing the letter,° was in the neighbourhood of 
 the woman whom he thus recommends. But, 
 further, that St. Paul had before this been at 
 Cenchrea itself appears from the eighteenth 
 chapter of the Acts; and appears by a circum- 
 stance as incidental, and as unlike design, as 
 any that can be imagined. “ Paul after this 
 tarried there (namely, at Corinth) yet a good 
 while, and then took his leave of the brethren, 
 and sailed thence into Syria, and with him 
 Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head iz 
 Cenchrea: for he had a vow” (xviii. 18). The 
 shaving of the head denoted the expiration of 
 
 6 [Here we first touch the question of undesigned coin- 
 
 cidences having connexion with Geography. See APPEN- 
 pix I. on this subject.—H. | 
 
40 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 the Nazaritic vow. The historian, therefore, by 
 the mention of this circumstance virtually tells 
 us that St. Paul’s vow was expired before he 
 set forward upon his voyage, having deferred 
 probably his departure until he should be 
 released from the restrictions under which his 
 vow laid him. Shall we say that the author of 
 the Acts of the Apostles feigned this anecdote 
 of St. Paul at Cenchrea, because he had read in 
 the Epistle to the Romans that “ Phebe, a 
 servant of the church of Cenchrea, had been a 
 succourer of many, and of him also”? or shall 
 we say that the author of the Epistle to the 
 Romans, out of his own imagination, created 
 Phoebe “a servant of the church at Cenchrea,’ 
 because he read in the Acts of the Apostles, that 
 Paul had “shorn his head” in that place? 
 
 No. III. 
 
 Chap. 1. 13: “ Now I would not have you 
 ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes [ purposed to 
 come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that L 
 might have some fruit among you also, even as 
 among other Gentiles.” Again, xv. 23, 24, 28: 
 “ But now having no more place in these parts, 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 4} 
 
 and having a great desire these many years 
 (zoAAa, oftentimes) to come unto you; when- 
 soever I take my journey into Spain I will come 
 to you; for I trust to see you in my journey, 
 and to be brought on my way thitherward by 
 you.u—But now I go up unto Jerusalem, to 
 minister to the saints. When therefore I have 
 performed this, and have sealed to them this 
 fruit, I will come by you into Spain.” 
 
 With these passages compare Acts xix. 21: 
 “ After these things were ended (namely, at 
 Ephesus) Paul purposed in the spirit, when he 
 had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to 
 zo to Jerusalem; saying, After I have been 
 there, I must also see Rome.” 
 
 Let it be observed that our Epistle purports 
 to have been written at the conclusion of St. 
 _ Paul’s second journey into Greece: that the 
 quotation from the Acts contains words said to 
 have been spoken by St. Paul at Ephesus, some 
 time before he set forwards upon that journey. 
 Now I contend that it is impossible that two 
 independent fictions should have attributed to 
 St. Paul the same purpose, especially a purpose 
 so specific and particular as this, which was not 
 merely a general design of visiting Rome, but a 
 design of visiting Rome after he had passed 
 through Macedonia and Achaia, and after he 
 
42 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 had performed a voyage from these countries to 
 Jerusaiem. The conformity between the history 
 and the Epistle is perfect. In the first quotation 
 from the Epistle, we find that a design of visit- 
 ing Rome had long dwelt in the Apostle’s mind : 
 in the quotation from the Acts we find that 
 design expressed a considerable time before the 
 Kpistle was written. In the history we find 
 that the plan which St. Paul had formed was to 
 pass through Macedonia and Achaia; after that, 
 to go to Jerusalem; and, when he had finished 
 his visit there, to sail for Rome. When the 
 Epistle was written, he had executed so much 
 of his pian, as to have passed through Mace- 
 donia and Achaia; and was preparing to pursue 
 the remainder of it, by speedily setting out 
 towards Jerusalem: and in this point of his ~ 
 travels he tells his friends at Rome, that, when 
 he had completed the business which carried 
 him to Jerusalem, he would come to them. 
 Secondly, I say that the very inspection of the 
 passages will satisfy us that they were not made 
 up from one another. 
 
 “ Whensoever I take my journey into Spain, 
 I will come to you; for I trust to see you in my 
 journey, and to be brought on my way thither- 
 ward by you: but now I go up to Jerusalem, 
 to minister to the saints. When, therefore, I 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 43 | 
 
 have performed this, and have sealed to them 
 this fruit, I will come by you into Spain.”— 
 This from the Epistle. 
 
 “Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had 
 passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to 
 Jerusalem; saying, After I have been there, I 
 must also see Rome.”—This from the Acts. 
 
 If the passage in the Epistle was taken from 
 that in the Acts, why was Spain put in? If 
 the passage in the Acts was taken from that in 
 the Hpistle, why was Spain left out? If the 
 two passages were unknown to each other, 
 nothing can account for their conformity but 
 truth. Whether we suppose the history and 
 the Epistle to be alike fictitious, or the history 
 to be true but the letter spurious, or the letter 
 to be genuine but the history a fable, the meet- 
 ing with this circumstance in both, if neither 
 borrowed it from the other, is, upon all these 
 suppositions, equally inexplicable. 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 The following quotation I offer for the purpose 
 of pointing out a geographical coincidence of so 
 much importance, that Dr. Lardner considered 
 
44 HORA) PAULINA. 
 
 it as a confirmation of the whole history of St. 
 Paul’s travels. 
 
 Chap. xv. ver. 19: “So that from Jerusalem, 
 and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully 
 preached the gospel of Christ.” 
 
 I do not think that these words necessarily 
 import that St. Paul had penetrated into Illyri- 
 cum, or preached the gospel in that province ; 
 but rather that he had come to the confines of 
 Ilyricum (wéype tod “IdAvpixovd) and that these 
 confines were the external boundary of his 
 travels. St. Paul considers Jerusalem as the 
 centre, and is here viewing the circumference to 
 which his travels had extended. The form of 
 expression in the original conveys this idea— 
 amo lepovaadnp Kat KUKAw wéxpt TOD IAAvpLKOD. 
 Illyricum was the part of this circle which he 
 mentions in an Epistle to the Romans, because 
 it lay in a direction from Jerusalem towards 
 that city,’ and pointed out to the Roman readers 
 the nearest place to them, to which his travels 
 from Jerusalem had brought him. The name 
 of Illyricum nowhere occurs in the Acts of the 
 Apostles; no suspicion, therefore, can be con- 
 ceived that the mention of it was borrowed 
 from thence. Yet I think it appears, from 
 
 7 (Viz. Rome.—H. | 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 45 
 
 these same Acts, that St. Paul, before the time 
 when he wrote his Epistle to the Romans, had 
 reached the confines of Illyricum; or, however, 
 that he might have done so, in perfect con- 
 sistency with the account there delivered. 
 Illyricum adjoins upon Macedonia; measuring 
 from Jerusalem towards Rome, it les close 
 behind it. If, therefore, St. Paul traversed the 
 whole country of Macedonia, the route would 
 necessarily bring him to the confines of Illyri- 
 cum, and these confines would be described as 
 the extremity of his journey.* Now the account 
 of St. Paul’s second visit to the peninsula of 
 Greece is contained in these words: “He de- 
 parted for to go into Macedonia; and when he 
 had gone over these parts, and had given them 
 much exhortation, he came into Greece.” Acts 
 xx. 2. This account allows, or rather leads us 
 to suppose, that St. Paul, in going over Mace- 
 donia (dveAP@v ta pépn éxetva) had passed so far 
 to the west, as to come into those parts of the 
 
 § [It should be noted that from the time when St. Paul 
 was at Philippi, he was on the great Via Egnatia, which 
 ran across Illyricum to the Adriatic. In all discussions of 
 this kind account must be taken, not simply of the proximity 
 of one district to another, but of the lines of easy and con- 
 venient communication between one district and another. 
 See AppEnpIx I. on Coincidences connected with Geo- 
 graphy.—H. | 
 
46 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 country which were contiguous to Illyricum, if 
 he did not enter Ilyricum itself. The history, 
 therefore, and the Epistle so far agree ; and the 
 agreement is much strengthened by a coinci- 
 dence of ¢ime.. At the time the Epistle was 
 written, St. Paul might say, in conformity with 
 the history, that he had ‘‘ come into Illyricum :” 
 much before that time he could not have said 
 so; for, upon his former journey to Macedonia, 
 his route 1s laid down from the time of his 
 landing at Philippi to his sailing from Corinth. 
 We trace him from Philippi to Amphipolis and 
 Appollonia; from thence to Thessalonica; from 
 Thessalonica to Berea; from Berea to Athens; 
 and from Athens to Corinth: which track con- 
 fines him to the eastern side of the peninsula, 
 and therefore keeps him all the while at a con- 
 siderable distance from L[llyricum. Upon his 
 second visit to Macedonia, the history, we have 
 seen, leaves him at liberty. It must have been, 
 therefore, upon that second visit, if at all, that 
 he approached Illyricum; and. this visit, we 
 know, almost immediately preceded the writing 
 of the Epistle. It was natural that the Apostle 
 should refer to a journey which was fresh in his 
 thoughts. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 47 
 
 ON. SY. 
 
 Chap. xv. 80: “ Now I beseech you, brethren, 
 for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the 
 love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with 
 me in your prayers to God for me, that I may 
 be delivered from them that do not believe in 
 Judea.”—With this compare Acts xx. 22, 23: 
 
 “ And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit 
 unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that 
 shall befall me there: save that the Holy Ghost 
 witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and 
 afflictions abide me.” 
 
 Let it be remarked that it is the same journey 
 to Jerusalem which is spoken of in these two 
 passages; that the Epistle was written imme- 
 diately before St. Paul set forwards upon this 
 journey from Achaia; that the words in the 
 Acts were uttered by him when he had pro- 
 ceeded in that journey as far as Miletus, in 
 Lesser Asia. This being remembered, I observe 
 that the two passages, without any resemblance 
 between them that could induce us to suspect 
 that they were borrowed from one another, 
 represent the state of St. Paul’s mind,’ with 
 
 9 [This remark concerning St. Paul’s “state of mind” 
 should be very carefully noted: for it points our thoughts 
 to evidence of a peculiar and very valuable kind, relating 
 
48 HOREH PAULINA. 
 
 respect to the event of the journey, in terms of 
 substantial agreement. They both express his 
 sense of danger in the approaching visit to 
 Jerusalem; they both express the doubt which 
 dwelt upon his thoughts concerning what might 
 there befall him. When, in his Epistle, he 
 entreats the Roman Christians, “ for the Lord 
 Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the love of the 
 Spirit, to strive together with him in their 
 prayers to God for him, that he might be de- 
 livered from them which do not believe in 
 Judea,” he sufficiently confesses his fears. In 
 the Acts of the Apostles we see in him the same 
 apprehensions, and the same uncertainty : “ I go 
 bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing 
 the things that shall befall me there.” The 
 only difference is, that in the history his thoughts 
 are more inclined to despondency than in the 
 Epistle. In the Epistle he retains his hope 
 
 (if terms may be used, which were probably not familiar to 
 Paley) not to objective facts surrounding St. Paul, but to 
 the subjective condition of the Apostle himself. Putting 
 together various notices in the Acts and Epistles, we can 
 clearly trace a singular depression of mind in St. Paul at 
 this time. Whatever the reasons might be (and one very 
 good reason is given in what follows), this state of feeling 
 comes to view on an examination of these various docu- 
 ments ; and it is incredible that such a coincidence should 
 be the result of design. See Appenpices III. and LY.—H.] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 49 
 
 “that he should come unto them with joy by 
 the will of God ;” in the history, his mind yields 
 to the reflection that the Holy Ghost witnessed 
 in every city that bonds and afflictions awaited 
 him. Now that his fears should be greater and 
 his hopes less in this stage of his journey than 
 when he wrote his Epistle, that is, when he 
 first set out upon it, is no other alteration than 
 might well be expected; since those prophetic 
 intimations to which he refers, when he says, 
 “the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city,” 
 had probably been received by him in the 
 course of his journey, and were’ probably similar 
 to what we know he received in the remaining 
 part of it at Tyre (xxi. 4), and afterwards from 
 Agabus at Cesarea (xxi. 11). 
 
 No. VI. 
 
 There is another strong remark arising from 
 the same passage in the Epistle ; to make which 
 understood, it will be necessary to state the 
 passage over again, and somewhat more at 
 length. 
 
 “T beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus 
 Christ’s sake, aud for the love of the Spirit, that 
 
 E 
 
50 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 ye strive together with me in your prayers to 
 God for me, that I may be delivered from them 
 that do not believe in Judzea—that I may come 
 unto you with joy by the will of God, and may 
 with you be refreshed.” 
 
 I desire the reader to call to mind that part 
 of St. Paul’s history which took place after his 
 arrival at Jerusalem, and which employs the 
 seven last chapters of the Acts: and I build 
 upon it this observation—that supposing the 
 Hpistle to the Romans to have been a forgery, 
 and the author of the forgery to have had the 
 Acts of the Apostles before him, and to have 
 there seen that St. Paul in fact “was not de- 
 livered from the unbelieving Jews,” but, on the 
 contrary, that he was taken ito custody at 
 Jerusalem, and brought to Rome a prisoner—it 
 is next to impossible that he should have made 
 St. Paul express expectations so contrary to 
 what he saw had been the event; and utter 
 prayers, with apparent hopes of success, which 
 he must have known were frustrated in the = 
 issue. 
 
 This single consideration convinces me that 
 no concert or confederacy whatever subsisted 
 between the Epistle and the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles; and that whatever coincidences have been 
 or can be pointed out between them, are un- 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 51 
 
 sophisticated, and are the result of truth and 
 reality. 
 
 It also convinces me that the Epistle was 
 written not only in St. Paul’s lifetime, but 
 before he arrived at Jerusalem ; for the important 
 events relating to him which took place after 
 his arrival at that city must have been known 
 to the Christian community soon after they 
 happened : they form the most public part of his 
 history. But had they been known to the 
 author of the Epistle—in other words, had they 
 then taken place—the passage which we have 
 quoted from the Epistle would not have been 
 found there.’ 
 
 No. VII. 
 
 I now proceed to state the conformity which 
 exists between the argument of this Epistle and 
 the history of its reputed author. It is enough 
 for this purpose to observe, that the object. of 
 the Epistle, that is, of the argumentative part 
 of it, was to place the Gentile convert upon a 
 parity of situation with the Jewish, in respect 
 
 1 [These considerations help us to narrow within very 
 strict limits the date of the Epistle to the Romans, and 
 throw us back for it very decisively to Acts xx. 3.—H.] 
 
 BE 2 
 
52 HORE PAULINA. e 
 
 fal ern 2d ees Pe ee ee eee eS EE ee 
 of his religious condition and his rank in the 
 Divine favour. The Epistle supports this point 
 by a variety of arguments; such as, that no 
 man of either description was justified by the 
 works of the law—for this plain reason, that no 
 man had performed them ; that it became there- 
 fore necessary to appoint another medium or 
 condition of justification, in which new medium 
 the Jewish peculiarity was merged and lost ; 
 that Abraham’s own justification was anterior 
 to the law, and independent of it; that the 
 Jewish converts were to consider the law as now 
 dead, and themselves as married to another ; that 
 what the law in truth could not do, in that it 
 was weak through the flesh, God had done by 
 sending His Son; that God had rejected the 
 unbelieving Jews, and had substituted in their 
 place a society of believers in Christ, collected 
 indifferently from Jews and Gentiles. Soon 
 after the writing of this Epistle, St. Paul, 
 agreeably to the intention intimated in the 
 Epistle itself, took his journey to Jerusalem. 
 The day after he arrived there he was introduced 
 to the Church. What passed at this interview 
 is thus related, Acts xxi. 19: “ When he had 
 saluted them, he declared particularly what 
 things God had wrought among the Gentiles — 
 by his ministry. And when they heard it, they 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 53 
 
 glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou 
 seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews 
 there are which believe ; and they are all zealous 
 of the law; and they are informed of thee, that 
 thou teachest all the Jews which are among the 
 Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying, that they 
 ought not to circumcise their children, neither 
 to walk after the customs.” St. Paul disclaimed 
 the charge; but there must have been something 
 to have led to it. Now it is only to suppose 
 that St. Paul openly professed the principles 
 which the Epistle contains; that, in the course 
 of his ministry he had uttered the sentiments 
 which he is here made to write ; and the matter 
 is accounted for. Concerning the accusation 
 which public rumour had brought against him 
 to Jerusalem, I will not say that it was just ; 
 but I will say, that, if he was the author of the 
 Epistle before us, and if his preaching was 
 consistent with his writing, it was extremely 
 natural; for, though it be not a necessary, surely 
 it is an easy inference, that if the Gentile con- 
 vert, who did not observe the law of Moses, held 
 as advantageous a situation in his religious 
 interests as the Jewish convert who did, there 
 could be no strong reason for observing that law 
 at all. The remonstrance, therefore, of the 
 Church of Jerusalem, and the report which occa- 
 
54 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 sioned it, were founded in no very violent mis- 
 construction of the Apostle’s doctrine. His 
 reception at Jerusalem was exactly what I should 
 have expected the author of this Epistle to have 
 met with. Iam entitled therefore toargue that 
 a separate narrative of effects experienced by St. 
 Paul, similar to what a person might be expected 
 to experience who held the doctrines advanced 
 in this Epistle, forms a proof that he did hold 
 these doctrines; and that the Epistle bearing 
 his name, in which such doctrines are laid down, 
 actually proceeded from him. 
 
 No. VIII. 
 
 This number is supplemental to the former. 
 I propose to point out in it two particulars in 
 the conduct of the argument, perfectly adapted 
 to the historical cireumstances under which the 
 Epistle was written; which yet are free from 
 all appearance of contrivance, and which it would 
 not, I think, have entered into the mind of a 
 sophist to contrive. 
 
 1. The Epistle to the Galatians relates to the 
 same general question as the Epistle to the 
 Romans. St. Paul had founded the Church at 
 Galatia ; at Rome he had never been. Observe 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 55 
 
 now a difference in his manner of treating of 
 the same subject, corresponding with this 
 difference in his situation. In the Epistle to 
 the Galatians he puts the point in a great 
 measure upon authority :* “I marvel that ye are 
 so soon removed from him that called you into 
 the grace of Christ unto another gospel.” Gal. 
 i. 6. “I certify you, brethren, that the gospel 
 which was preached of me, is not after man. 
 For I neither received it of man, neither was I 
 taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ 7 
 (chap.1. 11,12). “I am afraid of you, lest I 
 have bestowed upon you labour in vain” (iv. 
 11). “I desire to be present with you now ;— 
 for I stand in doubt of you” (iv. 20.)  Be- 
 hold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circum- 
 cised, Christ shall profit you nothing” (v. 2). 
 *« This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth 
 you” (v. 8). This is the style in which he 
 accosts the Galatians. In the Epistle to the 
 converts of Rome, where his authority was not 
 established, nor his person known, he puts the 
 same point entirely upon argument. The perusal 
 of the Epistle will prove this to the satisfaction 
 of every reader ; and, as the observation relates 
 
 2 [It will be important to bear this in mind, when con- 
 sidering what is said concerning the Epistle to the Gala- 
 tians below.—H. | 
 
56— HORE PAULINA. 
 
 to the whole contents of the Epistle, I forbear 
 adducing separate extracts. I repeat, therefore, 
 that we have pointed out a distinction in the 
 two Epistles, suited to the relation in which the 
 author stood to his different correspondents. 
 
 Another adaptation, and somewhat of the 
 same kind, is the following :— 
 
 2. The Jews we know were very numerous at 
 Rome, and probably formed a principal part 
 among the new converts: so much so, that the 
 Christians seem to have been known at Rome 
 rather as a denomination of Jews, than as any- 
 thing else. In an Epistle, consequently, to the 
 Roman believers, the point to be endeavoured 
 after by St. Paul was, to reconcile the Jewish 
 converts to the opinion, that the Gentiles were 
 admitted by God to a parity of religious situation 
 with themselves, and ¢iat without their being 
 bound by the law of Moses. The Gentile con- 
 verts would probably accede to this opinion very 
 readily. In this Epistle, therefore, though 
 directed to the Roman Church in general, it is 
 in truth a Jew writing to Jews. Accordingly, 
 you will take notice, that as often as his argu- 
 ment leads him to say anything derogatory from 
 the Jewish institution, he constantly follows it 
 by a softening clause. Having (11. 28, 29) pro- 
 nounced, not much perhaps to the satisfaction of 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 57 
 
 the native Jews, “that he is not a Jew which 
 is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision 
 which is outward in the flesh,” he adds imme- 
 diately, “ what advantage then hath the Jew, or 
 what profit is there in circumcision ? much every 
 way.” Waving, in the third chapter, ver. 28, 
 brought his argument to this formal conclusion, 
 “that a man is justified by faith, without the 
 deeds of the law,” he presently subjoins, ver. 31, 
 “do we then make void the law through faith ? 
 God forbid; yea, we establish the law.” In the 
 seventh chapter, when in the sixth verse he had 
 advanced the bold assertion, that “now we are 
 delivered from the law, that being dead wherein 
 we were held ;” in the very next verse he comes 
 in with this healing question, “‘ What shall we 
 say then? Is the law sin? God forbid; nay, 
 I had not known sin but by thelaw.” Having 
 in the following words insinuated, or rather 
 more than insinuated, the inefficacy of the 
 Jewish law (vii. 3), “for what the law could 
 not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, 
 God sending His own Son in the hkeness of 
 sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the 
 flesh ;” after a digression indeed, but that sort 
 of a digression which he could never resist, a 
 rapturous contemplation of his Christian hope, 
 and which occupies the latter part of this 
 
58 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 chapter ; we find him in the next, as if sensible 
 that he had said something which would give 
 offence, returning to his Jewish brethren in 
 terms of the warmest affection and respect. ‘I 
 say the truth in Christ, I lie not ; my conscience 
 also bearing me witness, ia the Holy Ghost, that 
 I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in 
 my heart. For I could wish that myself were 
 accursed from Christ, for my brethren, my kins- 
 men according to the flesh, who are Israelites: 
 to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, 
 and the covenants, and the gwing of the law, and 
 the service of God, and the promises ; whose are 
 the fathers ; and of whom, as concerning the flesh, 
 Christ. came.’ When, in the thirty-first and 
 thirty-second verses of this ninth chapter, he 
 represented to the Jews the error of even the 
 best of their nation, by telling them that 
 “Israel, which followed after the law of right- 
 eousness, had not attained to the law of right- 
 eousness, because they sought it not by faith, 
 but as it were by the works of the law ; for they 
 stumbled at that stumbling stone,’ he takes 
 care to annex to his declaration these conciliating 
 expressions: “‘ Brethren, my hearts desire and 
 prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be 
 saved; for I bear them record that they have a 
 zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.” 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 59 
 Lastly, having, chap. x. 20, 21, by the applica- 
 tion of a passage in Isaiah, insinuated the most 
 ungrateful of all propositions to a Jewish ear, 
 the rejection of the Jewish nation as God’s pecu- 
 liar people; he hastens, as it were, to qualify 
 the intelligence of their fall by this interesting 
 expostulation: ‘I say, then, hath God cast 
 away His people (that is, wholly and entirely) ? 
 God forbid ; for I also am an Israelite, of the 
 seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 
 God hath not cast away His people which He fore- 
 knew :*? and follows this thought, throughout 
 the whole of the eleventh chapter, in a series of 
 reflections calculated to soothe the Jewish con- 
 verts, as well as to procure from their Gentile ~ 
 brethren respect to the Jewish institution. Now 
 all this is perfectly natural. In a real St. Paul 
 writing to real converts, it is what anxiety to 
 bring them over to his persuasion would natu- 
 rally produce ; but there is an earnestness and a 
 personality, if I may so call it, in the manner,’ 
 which a cold forgery, I apprehend, would neither 
 have conceived nor supported. 
 
 8 [There is a similar instance near the end of the Acts of 
 the Apostles (xxviii. 19): and each is an illustration of 
 St. Paul’s characteristic tact and persuasive skill. We 
 should call it adroitness, if it were not combined with the 
 deepest sympathy. See Appenprx III. on the Unity of 
 St. Paul’s Character.—H.] : 
 
60 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 BEFORE we proceed to compare this Epistle with 
 the history, or with any other Epistle, we will 
 employ one number in stating certain remarks 
 - applicable to our argument, which arise from a 
 perusal of the Epistle itself. 
 
 By an expression in the first verse of the 
 seventh chapter, “now concerning the things 
 whereof ye wrote unto me,” it appears that this 
 letter to the Corinthians was written by St. 
 Paul in answer to one which he had received 
 from them; and that the seventh, and some of 
 the following chapters, are taken up in resolving 
 certain doubts, and regulating certain points of 
 order, concerning which the Corinthians had in 
 their letter consulted him. This alone is a 
 circumstance considerably in favour of the au- 
 thenticity of the Epistle: for it must have been 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 61 
 
 a far-fetched contrivance in a forgery, first to 
 have feigned the receipt of a letter from the 
 Church of Corinth, which letter does not appear ; 
 and then to have drawn up a fictitious answer 
 to it, relative to a great variety of doubts and 
 inquiries, purely economical and domestic; and 
 which, though likely enough to have occurred 
 to an infant society, in a situation and under 
 an institution so novel as that of a Christian 
 Church then was, it must have very much ex- 
 ercised the author’s invention, and could have 
 answered no imaginable purpose of forgery, to 
 introduce the mention of at all. Particulars of 
 the kind we refer to are such as the following ;— 
 the rule of duty and prudence relative to enter- 
 ing into marriage, as applicable to virgins, to 
 widows; the case of husbands married to un- 
 converted wives, of wives having unconverted 
 husbands; that case where the unconverted 
 party chooses to separate, where he chooses to 
 continue the union; the effect which their 
 conversion produced upon their prior state, of 
 circumcision, of slavery; the eating of things 
 offered to idols, as it was in itself, as others 
 were affected by it; the joining in idolatrous 
 sacrifices; the decorum to be observed in their 
 religious assemblies, the order of speaking, the 
 silence of women, the covering or uncovering of 
 
62 HORZ PAULINA. 
 
 the head, as it became men, as it became women. 
 These subjects, with their several subdivisions, 
 are so particular, minute, and numerous, that, 
 though they be exactly agreeable to the circum- 
 stances of the persons to whom the letter was 
 written, nothing, I believe, but the existence 
 and reality of those circumstances could have 
 suggested them to the writer’s thoughts. 
 
 But this is not the only, nor the principal 
 observation upon the correspondence between 
 the Church of Corinth and their Apostle which 
 I wish to point out. It appears, I think, in this 
 correspondence, that although the Corinthians 
 had written to St. Paul, requesting his an- 
 swer and his direction in the several points 
 above enumerated, yet that they had not said 
 one syllable about the enormities and disorders 
 which had crept in among them, and in the 
 blame of which they all shared; but that St. 
 Paul’s information concerning the irregularities 
 then prevailing at Corinth had come round to 
 him from other quarters. The quarrels and 
 disputes excited by their contentious adherence 
 to their different teachers, and by their placing 
 of them in competition with one another, were 
 not mentioned in ¢heir letter, but communicated 
 to St. Paul by more private intelligence: “It 
 hath been declared unto me, my brethren, dy 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 63 
 
 them which are of the house of Chloe, that there 
 are contentions among you. Now this I say, 
 that every one of you saith, I am of Paul, and 
 I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ”? 
 (i. 11,12). The incestuous marriage “ of a man 
 with his father’s wife,’ which St. Paul repre- 
 hends with so much severity in the fifth chapter 
 of our Epistle, and which was not the crime of 
 an individual only, but a crime in which the 
 whole Church, by tolerating and conniving at 
 it, had rendered themselves partakers, did not 
 come to St. Paul’s knowledge by the Jetter, but 
 by a rumour which had reached his ears: “ J¢ 
 is reported commonly that there is fornication 
 among you, and such fornication as is not so 
 much as named among the Gentiles, that one 
 should have his father’s wife; and ye are puffed 
 up, and have not rather mourned that he that 
 hath done this deed might be taken away from 
 among you” (v. 1, 2). Their going to law 
 before the judicature of the country, rather than 
 arbitrate and adjust their disputes among them- 
 selves, which St. Paul animadverts upon with 
 his usual plainness, was not intimated to him 
 in the letter, because he tells them his opinion 
 of this conduct. before he comes to the contents 
 of the letter. Their litigiousness is censured by 
 St. Paul in the sixth chapter of his Epistle, 
 
64 WORE PAULINE. 
 
 and it is only at the beginning of the seventh 
 chapter that he proceeds upon the articles which 
 he found in their letter; and he proceeds upon 
 them with this preface: “ Now concerning the 
 things whereof ye wrote unto me” (vii. 1); 
 which introduction he would not have used, if 
 he had been already discussing any of the sub- 
 jects concerning which they had written. Their 
 irregularities in celebrating the Lord’s Supper, 
 and the utter perversion of the institution which 
 ensued, were not in the etter, as is evident from 
 the terms in which St. Paul mentions the notice 
 he had received of it: “ Now in this that I 
 declare unto you, I praise you not, that ye come 
 together not for the better, but for the worse. 
 For first of all when ye come together in the 
 church, J hear that there be divisions among 
 you, and J partly believe w.’? Now that the 
 Corinthians should, in their own letter, exhibit © 
 the fair side of their conduct to the Apostle, 
 
 and conceal from him the faults of their be- 
 haviour, was extremely natural, and extremely 
 probable: but it was a distinction which would 
 not, I think, have easily occurred to the author 
 of a forgery ; and much less likely is it that it 
 should have entered into his thoughts to make 
 the distinction appear in the way in which it 
 does appear, namely, not by the original letter, 
 
; 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 65 
 
 not by any express observation upon it in the 
 answer, but distantly, by marks perceivable in 
 the manner, or in the order, in which St. Paul 
 takes notice of their faults. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 Our Epistle purports to have been written 
 after St. Paul had already been at Corinth: “I, 
 brethren, when I came to you, came not with 
 excellency of speech or of wisdom” (i. 1): and 
 in many other places to the same effect. It 
 purports also to have been written upon the eve 
 of another visit to that Church: “I will come 
 to you shortly, if the Lord will” (iv. 19); and 
 again, “I will come to you when I shall pass 
 through Macedonia” (xvi. 5). Now the history 
 relates’ that St. Paul did in fact visit Corinth 
 twice ; once as recorded at length in the eigh- 
 teenth, and a second time as mentioned briefly 
 in the twentieth chapter of the Acts. The same 
 history also informs us, Acts xx. 1, that it was 
 
 1 [It should be added that on the second occasion, as 
 well as on the first, he did actually pass through Mace- 
 donia on his way to Corinth. See Acts xix. 21, 22; xx.1,2. 
 Compare Archdeacon Paley’s notes on the second Epistle 
 to the Corinthians, No. ii—H.} 
 
 F 
 
66 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 from Ephesus St. Paul proceeded upon his second 
 journey into Greece. Therefore, as the Epistle 
 purports to have been written a short time pre- 
 ceding that journey ; and as St. Paul, the history 
 tells us, had resided more than two years at 
 Ephesus before he set out upon it, it follows 
 that it must have been from Ephesus, to be 
 consistent with the history, that the Epistle 
 was written; and every note of place in the 
 Epistle agrees with this supposition. “ If, after 
 the manner of men, I have fought with beasts 
 at Lphesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead 
 rise not ?” (xv. 32). I allow that the Apostle 
 might say this, wherever he was; but it was 
 more natural and more to the purpose to say it, 
 if he was at Ephesus at the time, and in the 
 midst of those conflicts to which the expression 
 relates. ‘‘The churches of Asia salute you” 
 (xvi. 19). Asia, throughout the Acts of the 
 Apostles and the Epistles of St. Paul, does not 
 mean the whole of Asia Minor or Anatolia, nor 
 even the whole of the proconsular Asia, but a 
 district in the anterior part of that country, 
 called Lydian Asia, divided from the rest, much 
 as Portugal is from Spain, and of which district 
 Ephesus was the capital. Aquila and Priscilla 
 salute you” (xvi. 19). Aguila and Priscilla 
 were at Hphesus during the period within which 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 67 
 
 this Epistle was written (Acts xvi. 18, 26). 
 —“<J will tarry at Lphesus until Pentecost” 
 (xvi. 8). This, I apprehend, is in terms almost 
 asserting that he was at Ephesus at the time of 
 writing the Epistle—‘‘ A great and effectual 
 door is opened unto me”’ (xvi. 9). How well 
 this declaration corresponded with the state of 
 things at Ephesus, and the progress of the 
 Gospel in these parts, we learn from the reflec- 
 tion with which the historian concludes the 
 account of certain transactions which passed 
 there: “So mightily grew the word of God 
 and prevailed” (Acts xix. 20); as well as from 
 the complaint of Demetrius, “ that not only at 
 Ephesus, but also throughout all Asia, this Paul 
 hath persuaded and turned away much people” 
 (xix. 26).— And there are many adversaries,” 
 says the Epistle (xvi. 9). Look into the history 
 of this period: “ When divers were hardened 
 and believed not, but spake evil of that way 
 before the multitude, he departed from them, 
 and separated the disciples.” The conformity 
 therefore upon this head of comparison is cir- 
 cumstantial and perfect. If any one thinks 
 that this is a conformity so obvious, that any 
 forger of tolerable caution and sagacity would 
 have taken’ care to preserve it, I must desire 
 such an one to read the Epistle for himself ; 
 F 2 
 
68 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 and, when he has done so, to declare, whether 
 he has discovered one mark of art or design 
 whether the notes of ¢ame and place appear to 
 him to be inserted with any reference to each 
 other, with any view of their being compared 
 with each other, or for the purpose of establish- 
 ing a visible agreement with the history, in 
 respect of them. 
 
 No. III. 
 
 Chap. iv. 17—19: “ For this cause I have 
 sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved 
 son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring 
 you into remembrance of my ways which be in 
 Christ, as I teach everywhere in every Church. 
 Now some are puffed up, as though I would not 
 come unto you; but I will come unto Me 
 shortly, if the Lord will.” 7 
 
 With this I compare Acts xix. 21, 22: 
 “ After these things were ended, Paul purposed 
 in the spirit, when he had passed through 
 Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem; 
 saying, After I have been there, I must also 
 see Rome. So he sent unto Macedonia two of 
 them that ministered unto him, Zimotheus and 
 Erastus,” 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 69 
 
 Though it be not said, it appears, I think, 
 with sufficient certainty, I mean from the 
 history, independently of the Epistle, that 
 Timothy was sent upon this occasion into 
 Achaia, of which Corinth was the capital city, 
 as well as into Macedonia; for the sending of 
 Timothy and Erastus is, in the passage where it 
 is mentioned, plainly connected with St. Paul’s 
 own journey ; he sent them before him. As he 
 therefore purposed to go into Achaia himself, it 
 is highly probable that they were to go thither 
 also. Nevertheless they are said only to have 
 been sent into Macedonia, because Macedonia 
 was in truth the country to which they went 
 immediately from Ephesus; being directed, as 
 we suppose, to proceed afterwards from thence 
 into Achaia. If this be so, the narrative agrees 
 with the Epistle; and the agreement is attended 
 with very little appearance of design. One 
 thing at least concerning it is certain; that if 
 this passage of St. Paul’s history had been 
 taken from his letter, it would have sent 
 Timothy to Corinth by name, or expressly how- 
 ever into Achaia. 
 
 But there is another circumstance in these 
 two passages much less obvious, in which an 
 agreement holds, without any room for suspicion 
 _ that it was produced by design. We have 
 
70 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 observed that the sending of Timothy into the 
 peninsula of Greece was connected in the narra- 
 tive with St. Paul’s own journey thither ; it is 
 stated as the effect of the same resolution. 
 Paul purposed to go into Macedonia; “ so he 
 sent two of them that ministered unto him, 
 Timotheus and Erastus.”? Now, in the Epistle 
 also you remark that, when the Apostle mentions 
 his having sent Timothy unto them, in the 
 very next sentence he speaks of: his own visit ; 
 “for this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, 
 who is my beloved son, &. Now some are 
 puffed up, as though I would not come to you ; 
 but I will come to you shortly, if the Lord 
 will.” 'Timothy’s journey we see is mentioned 
 in the history, and in the Epistle, in close 
 connexion with St. Paul’s own. Here’ is the 
 same order of thought and intention; yet con- 
 veyed under such diversity of circumstance and 
 expression, and the mention of them in the 
 Epistle so allied to the occasion which introduces 
 it—namely, the insinuation of his adversaries 
 that he would come to Corinth no more—that I 
 am persuaded no attentive reader will believe 
 that these passages were written in concert with 
 one ‘another, or will doubt but that the agree- 
 ment is unsought and uncontrived. 
 
 But, in the Acts, Erastus accompanied Timo- 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 71 
 
 thy in this journey, of whom no mention is 
 made in the Epistle. From‘what has been said, 
 in our observations upon the Epistle to the 
 Romans, it appears probable that Erastus was a 
 Corinthian. If so, though he accompanied 
 Timothy to Corinth, he was only returning 
 home, and Timothy was the messenger charged 
 with St. Paul’s orders. At any rate, this dis- 
 crepancy shows that the passages were not taken 
 from one another. 
 
 No; LY} 
 
 Chap. xvi. 10,11: ‘ Now, if Timotheus come, 
 see that he may be with you without fear; for 
 he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do. 
 Let no man therefore despise him,” but conduct 
 him forth in peace, that he may come unto me, 
 for I look for him with the brethren.” 
 
 From the passage considered in the preceding 
 number, it appears that Timothy was sent to 
 Corinth, either with the Epistle or before it: 
 “ for this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus.” 
 From the passage now quoted, we infer that 
 
 2 [See below, No. ix., and the remarks there on the 
 character of Timothy.—H. } 
 
72 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Timothy was not sent with the Epistle, for had 
 he been the bearer of the letter, or accompanied 
 it, would St. Paul in that letter have said, “7f 
 Timothy come?” Nor is the sequel consistent 
 with the supposition of his carrying the letter ; * 
 for if Timothy was with the Apostle when he 
 wrote the letter, could he say, as he does, “ I 
 look for him with the brethren?” I conclude, 
 therefore, that Timothy had left St. Paul to 
 proceed upon his journey before the letter was 
 written. Further, the passage before us seems 
 to imply, that Timothy was not expected by 
 St. Paul to arrive at Corinth till after they had 
 received the letter. He gives them directions 
 in the letter how to treat him when he should 
 arrive: “if he come,’ act towards him so and 
 so. Lastly, the whole form of expression is 
 most naturally applicable to the supposition of 
 
 Timothy’s coming to Corinth, not directly from 
 
 St. Paul, but from some other quarter; and 
 that his instructions had been, when he should 
 reach Corinth, to return. Now, how stands 
 this matter in the history? Turn to the 
 nineteenth chapter and the twenty-first verse of 
 the Acts, and you will find that Timothy did 
 not, when sent from Ephesus, where he left St. 
 
 % [This reasoning is not quite conclusive, nor is it neces- 
 sary for the argument.—H. | 
 
 net dicot 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 73 
 
 Paul, and where the present Epistle was written, 
 proceed by a straight course to Corinth, but 
 that he went round through Macedonia. This 
 clears up everything; for, although Timothy 
 was set forth upon his journey before the letter 
 was written, yet he might not reach Corinth 
 till after the letter arrived there ; and he would 
 eome to Corinth, when he did come, not directly 
 from St. Paul at Ephesus, but from some part 
 of Macedonia.* Here, therefore, is a eircum- 
 stantial and critical agreement, and unquestion- 
 ably without design; for neither of the two 
 passages in the Epistle mentions Timothy’s 
 journey into Macedonia at all, though nothing 
 but a circuit of that kind can explain and 
 reconcile the expressions which the writer uses. 
 
 No. V. 
 
 Chap. 1. 12: “ Now this I say, that every 
 one of you saith, [am of Paul ; and I of Apollos ; 
 and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.” 
 
 Also, ii. 6: “ Ihave planted, Apollos watered ; 
 but God gave the increase.” 
 
 4 [With a fair wind a letter might be sent across from 
 Ephesus to Corinth in a very short time; and there was 
 constant communication between these two great mer- 
 cantile cities on opposite sides of the Archipelago.—H. ] 
 
74 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 This expression, “I have planted, Apollos 
 watered,’ imports two things : first, that Paul 
 had been at Corinth before Apollos; secondly, 
 that Apollos had been at Corinth after Paul, but 
 before the writing of this Epistle. This implied 
 account of the several events, and of the order 
 in which they took place, corresponds exactly 
 with the history. St. Paul, after his first visit 
 into Greece, returned from Corinth into Syria 
 by the way of Ephesus; and, dropping his com- 
 panions Aquila and Priscilla at Ephesus, he 
 proceeded forwards to Jerusalem: from Jeru- 
 salem he descended to Antioch ; and from thence 
 made a progress through some of the upper or 
 northern’ provinces of the lesser Asia (Acts xviii. 
 19, 23); during which progress,and consequently 
 in the interval between St. Paul’s first and 
 second visit to Corinth, and consequently also 
 before the writing of this Epistle, which was at 
 
 5 [In this expression, “‘ wpper or northern,” ‘there’ is a 
 mistake so curious that we wonder how so acute a writer 
 as Paley could have made it; and it occurs again below in 
 No. x., p. 86. The words “up” and “down” denote 
 ideas quite different from those denoted by “ north’? and 
 “south.” There is no reason to believe that in St. Paul’s 
 day even maps were used, in which the north was placed 
 at the top. The avwrepixa uépn of Acts xix. 1,are the more 
 elevated or inland regions of the peninsula, as contrasted 
 with places on the coast. See Appenprx I. on Coincidences 
 connected with Geography.—H. | 
 
/ 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 75 
 
 Ephesus, two years at least after the Apostle’s 
 return from his progress, we hear of Apollos, 
 and we hear of him at Corinth. While St. Paul 
 was engaged, as hath been said, in Phrygia and 
 Galatia, Apollos came down to Ephesus; and 
 being, in St. Paul’s absence, instructed by Aquila 
 and Priscilla, and having obtained letters of 
 recommendation from the Church at Ephesus, 
 he ‘passed over to Achaia; and when he was 
 there, we read that he “helped them much 
 which had believed. through grace, for he 
 mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly.” 
 Acts xvii. 27, 28. To have brought Apollos 
 into Achaia, of which Corinth was the capital 
 city, as well as the principal Christian Church, 
 and to have shown that he preached the Gospel 
 in that country, would have been sufficient for 
 our purpose. But the history happens also to 
 mention Corinth by name as the place in which 
 Apollos, after his arrival in Achaia, fixed his 
 residence ; for, proceeding with the account of 
 St. Paul’s travels, it tells us, that while Apollos 
 was at Corinth, Paul, having passed through 
 the upper coasts, came down to Ephesus (xix. 1). 
 What is said therefore of Apollos, in the Epistle, 
 coincides exactly, and especially in the point of 
 chronology, with what is delivered concerning 
 him in the history. The only question now is, 
 
76 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 whether the allusions were made with a regard 
 to this coincidence. Now, the occasions and 
 purposes for which the name of Apollos is intro- 
 duced in the Acts and in the Epistles, are so 
 independent and so remote, that it is impossible 
 to discover the smallest reference from one to 
 the other. Apollos is mentioned in the Acts, 
 in immediate connexion with the history of 
 Aquila and Priscilla, and for the very singular 
 circumstance of his “ knowing only the Baptism 
 of John.” In the Epistle, where none of these 
 circumstances are taken notice of, his name first 
 occurs for the purpose of reproving the conten- 
 tious spirit of the Corinthians; and it occurs 
 only in conjunction with that of some others: 
 “Every one of you saith, I am of Paul, and I 
 of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ.’ 
 The second passage in which Apollos appears, 
 “T have planted, Apollos watered,” fixes, as we 
 have observed, the order of time among three 
 distinct events; but it fixes this, I will venture 
 to pronounce, without the writer perceiving that 
 he was doing any such thing. The sentence 
 fixed this order in exact conformity with the 
 history ; but it is itself introduced solely for the 
 sake of the reflection which follows: “ Neither 
 is he that planteth any thing, neither he that 
 watereth, but God that giveth the increase.” 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 77 
 
 No VI. 
 
 Chan. iv. 11, 12: “Even unto this present 
 hour we both hunger and thirst, and are naked, 
 and are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling- 
 place; and labour, working with our own 
 hands.” 
 
 We are expressly told, in the history, that at 
 Corinth St. Paul laboured with his own hands: 
 “ He found Aquila and Priscilla; and, because 
 he was of the same craft, he abode with them, 
 and wrought; for by their occupation they were 
 tent-makers.”’ But in the text before us, he is 
 made to say, that “he laboured even unto the 
 present hour,” that is, to the time of writing 
 the Epistle at Ephesus. Now, in the narration 
 of St. Paul’s transactions at Ephesus, delivered 
 in the nineteenth chapter of the Acts, nothing 
 is said of his working with his own hands; but 
 in the twentieth chapter we read, that upon his 
 return from Greece, he sent for the elders of the 
 Church of Ephesus, to meet him at Miletus; 
 and in the discourse which he there addressed to 
 them, amidst some other reflections which he 
 calls to their remembrance, we find the following : 
 “T have coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or 
 apparel; yea, ye yourselves also know, that 
 these hands have ministered unto my necessities, 
 
78 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 and to them that were with me.” ‘The reader 
 will not forget to remark, that though St. Paul 
 be now at Miletus, it is to the elders of the 
 Church of Ephesus he is speaking, when he says, 
 ‘““Ye yourselves know that these hands have 
 ministered to my necessities;” and that the 
 whole discourse relates to his conduct during his 
 last preceding residence at Ephesus. That 
 manual labour, therefore, which he had exercised 
 at Corinth, he continued at Ephesus; and not 
 only so, but continued it during that particular 
 residence at Ephesus, near the conclusion of 
 which this Epistle was written; so that he 
 might, with the strictest truth, say, at the time 
 of writing the Epistle, “Even wnto this present 
 hour we labour, working with our own hands.” 
 The correspondency is sufficient then, as to the 
 undesignedness of it. It is manifest to my 
 judgment, that if the history, in this article, had 
 been taken from the Epistle, this circumstance, 
 if it appeared at all, would have appeared in its 
 place, that is, in the direct account of St. Paul’s 
 transactions at Ephesus. The correspondency 
 would not have been effected, as it is, by a kind 
 of reflected stroke, that is, by a reference in a 
 subsequent speech, to what in the narrative was 
 omitted. Nor is it likely, on the other hand, 
 that a circumstance which is not extant in the 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 79 
 
 history of St. Paul at Ephesus, should have been 
 made the subject of a factitious allusion, in an 
 Kpistle purporting to be written by him from 
 that place; not to mention that the allusion 
 itself, especially as to time, is too oblique and 
 general to answer any purposes of forgery what- 
 ever.° 
 
 No. VII. 
 
 Chap. ix. 20: “ And unto the Jews I became 
 as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to 
 them that are under the law, as under the 
 law.” 
 
 We have the disposition here described, ex- 
 emplified in two instances which the history 
 records; one, Acts xvi. 3: “Him (Timothy) 
 would Paul have to go forth with him, and took 
 and circumcised him because of the Jews im 
 those quarters ; for they knew all that his father 
 ‘was a‘ Greek.” This was before the writing of 
 
 6 [We should observe further that this allusion to his con- 
 tinued habit of working with his own hands is of peculiar 
 force in this Epistle. It would tend to produce a strong 
 effect on the minds of the Corinthian Christians, because 
 they had been witnesses of St. Paul’s personal self-denial 
 
 in this respect, ‘See also 1 Thess. ii. 9, and 2 Thess. iii. 8 
 —H.} 
 
80 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 the Epistle. The other, Acts xxi. 23, 24, 26, 
 was after the writing of the Epistle: ‘ Do this, 
 that we say of thee: We have four men which 
 have a vow on them: them take, and purify 
 thyself with them, that they may shave their 
 heads: and all may know that those things, 
 whereof they were informed concerning thee, 
 are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest 
 orderly, and keepest the law.—Then Paul took 
 the men, and the next day, purifying himself 
 with them, entered into the temple.’ Nor does 
 this concurrence between the character and the 
 instances look like the result of contrivance. 
 St. Paul, in the Epistle describes, or 1s made 
 to describe, his own accommodating conduct 
 towards Jews and towards Gentiles, towards the 
 weak and over-scrupulous, towards men, indeed, 
 of every variety of character; “to them that 
 are without law as without law, (being not 
 without law to God, but under the law to 
 Christ,) that I might gain them that are with- 
 out law; to the weak became I as weak, that I 
 might gain the weak; I am made all things to 
 all men, that I might by all means save some.” 
 This is the sequel of the text which stands at 
 the head of the present number. ‘Taking there- 
 fore the whole passage together, the Apostle’s 
 condescension to the Jews is mentioned only as 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 81 
 
 a part of his general disposition towards all. 
 It is not probable that this character should 
 have been made up from the instances in the 
 Acts, which relate solely to his dealings with 
 the Jews. It is not probable that a sophist 
 should take this hint from those instances, and 
 then extend it so much beyond them, and it is 
 still more incredible, that the two instances in 
 the Acts circumstantially related, and inter- 
 woven with the history, should have been fabri- 
 eated in order to suit the character which St. 
 Paul gives of himself in the Epistle. 
 
 No. VIII. 
 
 Chap. 1. 14—17: “I thank God that I 
 baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius ; 
 lest any should say that I baptized in my own 
 name. And I baptized also the household of 
 Stephanas: besides, I know not whether TI 
 baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to 
 baptize, but to preach the gospel.” 
 
 It may be expected that those whom the 
 Apostle baptized with his own hands were 
 converts distinguished from the rest by some 
 circumstance, either of eminence, or of connexion 
 with him. Accordingly, of the three names 
 
 G 
 
82 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 here mentioned, Crispus, we find, from Acts 
 xvill. 8, was a “chief ruler of the Jewish 
 synagogue at Corinth, who believed in the 
 Lord, with all his house.’ Gaius, it appears 
 from Romans xvi. 23, was St. Paul’s host at 
 Corinth, and the host, he tells us, “ of the 
 whole church.”’ The household of Stephanas, 
 we read in the sixteenth chapter of this Epistle, 
 “ were the first-fruits of Achaia.””? Here there- 
 fore is the propriety we expected: and itis a 
 proof of reality not to be contemned; for their 
 names appearing in the several places in which 
 they occur, with a mark of distinction belong- 
 ing to each, could hardly be the effect of 
 chance, without any truth to direct it: and, 
 on the other hand, to suppose that they were 
 picked out from these passages, and brought 
 together in the text before us, in order to 
 display a conformity of names, is both im- 
 probable in itself, and is rendered more so by 
 the purposes for which they are introduced. 
 
 7 [See 1 Cor. xvi. 15. It would appear, on the surface 
 of the Authorized Version, that there is a contradiction 
 between this passage and Rom. xvi. 5, where Hpzenetus is 
 said to be “the first-fruits of Achaia ;’? though indeed we 
 might, if necessary, suppose that Epzenetus was a member 
 of “ the household of Stephanas.” But in fact, ‘ Asia,” 
 and not ‘‘ Achaia,” is the true reading in that passage of 
 the Epistle to the Romans.— “H. 5 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 83 
 
 They come in to assist St. Paul’s exculpation of 
 himself against the possible charge of having 
 assumed the character of the founder of a 
 separate religion, and with no other visible, or, 
 as I think, imaginable design.° 
 
 * Chap. i. 1: “ Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus 
 Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes, our brother, 
 unto the church of God which is at Corinth.”—The only 
 account we have of any person who bore the name of 
 Sosthenes is found in the eighteenth chapter of the Acts. 
 When the Jews at Corinth had brought Paul before Gallio, 
 and Gallio had dismissed their complaint as unworthy of 
 his interference, and had driven them from the judgment- 
 seat; ‘‘then all the Greeks,” says the historian, “took 
 Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him 
 before the judgment-seat.’’ The Sosthenes here spoken 
 of was a Corinthian ; and if he was a Christian, and with 
 St. Paul when he wrote this Epistle, was lkely enough to 
 be joined with him in the salutation of the Corinthian 
 Church. But here occurs a difficulty. If Sosthenes was a 
 Christian at the time of this uproar, why should the 
 Greeks beat him? The assault upon the Christians was 
 made by the Jews. It was the Jews who had brought 
 Paul before the magistrate. Ifit had been the Jews also 
 who had beaten Sosthenes, I should not have doubted but 
 that he had been a fayourer of St. Paul, and the same 
 person who is joined with him in the Epistle. Let us see, 
 therefore, whether there be not some error in our, present 
 text. The Alexandrian manuscript gives mdyres alone, 
 without of “EAAnves, and is followed in this reading by the 
 Coptic version, by the Arabic version, published by 
 ‘Erpenius, by the Vulgate, and by Bede’s Latin version. 
 ‘Three Greek manuscripts again, as. well as Chrysostom, 
 give of “Iovdatol, in the place of of “EAAnves. A great plu- 
 
 ger 
 
84, HORE PAULINA. 
 
 No. IX. 
 
 Chap. xvi. 10, 11: “ Now, if Timotheus 
 come,—let no man despise him,”’—Why despise 
 
 rality of manuscripts authorize the reading which is 
 
 retained in our copies. In this variety it appears to me _ 
 
 extremely probable that the historian originally wrote 
 awdyres alone, and that of “EAAnves and of *Iovdato: have been 
 respectively added as explanatory of what the word mdyres 
 was supposed to mean. The sentence, without the addi- 
 
 tion of either name, would run very perspicuously thus: 
 
 “Kal amfhAacey avtols ard Tod Bhuaross émiAdBomevor de 
 
 mavres Swobevnv Tov apxicuvadywyov, EtuTTov Eumpoobev Tov 
 ABnuaros: and he drove them away from the judgment-seat : 
 and they all,” namely, the crowd of Jews whom the judge 
 had bid begone, ‘‘ took Sosthenes, and beat him before the 
 judgment-seat.” It is certain that, as the whole body of 
 the people were Greeks, the application of all to them is 
 unusual and hard. If I was describing an insurrection at 
 Paris, I might say all the Jews, all the Protestants, or all 
 the English acted so and so; but I should scarcely say all 
 the French, when the whole mass of the community were 
 of that description. As what is here offered is founded 
 upon a various reading, and that in opposition to the 
 greater part of the manuscripts that are extant, I have not 
 given it a place in the text. 
 
 (The true reading in Acts xviii. 17 appears undoubtedly 
 to be rdvres, without the addition of either of “EAAnves or of 
 *Iovdaior. The former gloss was probably added because 
 Greeks were presumed to be the persons who acted thus 
 violently: the latter probably for the sake of identifying 
 this Sosthenes with the person whose name appears in the 
 opening salutation of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 We are quite at liberty, however, to suppose that. this 
 Sosthenes, though a Jew at the time of the disturbance, 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 85 
 him? ‘This charge is not given concerning 
 any other messenger whom St. Paul sent; and 
 in the different Epistles many such messengers 
 are mentioned. Turn to 1 Tim.« iv. 12, and 
 you will find that Timothy was a young man, 
 younger probably than those who were usually 
 employed in the Christian mission; and that 
 St. Paul, apprehending lest he should, on that 
 account, be exposed to contempt, urges upon 
 him the caution which is there inserted, “ Let 
 no man despise thy youth.” 
 
 No. X. 
 
 Chap. xvi. 1: ‘Now, concerning the col- 
 lection for the saints, as I have given order to 
 the churches of Galatia, even so do ye.” 
 
 The Churches of Galatia and Phrygia were 
 the last Churches which St. Paul had visited 
 before the writing of this Epistle. He was 
 now at Ephesus; and he came thither im- 
 
 became a Christian afterwards, like Crispus, his predecessor 
 at the head of the synagogue. But the identification must 
 be pronounced precarious: and here again it may be re- 
 marked that Paley’s argument is cumulative, and that if 
 the case of Sosthenes breaks down, this does not affect any- 
 thing else.—H. ] 
 
86 HORA PAULINA, 
 
 mediately from visiting these Churches : “ He 
 went all over the country of Galatia and Phrygia, 
 in order, strengthening all the disciples. And 
 it came to pass that Paul having passed through 
 the upper coasts (namely, the above-named 
 countries, called the upper coasts, as being the 
 northern’ part of Asia Minor) came to Ephesus.” 
 Acts xvii. 23; xix. 1. These therefore, pro- 
 bably, were the last Churches, at which he had 
 left directions for their public conduct during 
 his absence. Although two years intervened 
 between his journey to Ephesus and his writing 
 this Epistle, yet it does not appear that during 
 that time he visited any other Church. That 
 he had not been silent when he was in Galatia, 
 upon this subject of contribution for the poor, 
 is further made out from a hint which he lets 
 fall in his Epistle to that Church: “ Only they 
 (namely, the other Apostles) would that we 
 should remember the poor; the same which I 
 also was forward to do.” Gal. ii. 10. 
 
 No. XI. 
 
 Chap. iv. 18: “ Now some are puffed up, as 
 though I would not come unto you.” 
 / ® [See note above, p. 74.—H.] 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 87 
 
 Why should they suppose. that he would not 
 come? Turn to the first chapter of the second 
 Epistle to the Corinthians, and you will find 
 that he had already disappointed them : “I was 
 minded to come unto you before, that you might 
 have a second benefit; and to pass by you into 
 Macedonia, and to come again out of Macedonia 
 unto you, and of you to be brought on my 
 way toward Judea. When I, therefore, was thus 
 minded, did I use lightness? Or the things 
 that I purpose, do I purpose according: to the 
 flesh, that with me there should be yea, yea, and 
 nay, nay? But, as God is true, our word toward 
 you was not yea and nay.” It appears from this 
 quotation, that he had not only intended, but 
 that he had promised them a visit before; for, 
 otherwise, why should he apologize for the change 
 of his purpose, or express so much anxiety lest 
 this change should be imputed to any culpable 
 fickleness in his temper; and lest he should 
 thereby seem to them as one whose word was 
 not, in any sort, to be depended upon? Besides 
 which, the terms made use of plainly refer to a 
 promise: “ Our word toward you was not yea, 
 and nay.” St. Paul therefore had signified an 
 intention which he had not been able to execute ; 
 and this seeming breach of his word, and the 
 delay of his visit, had, with some who were evil 
 
88 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 affected towards him, given birth to a suggestion 
 that he would come no more to Corinth. 
 
 No. XII. - 
 
 Chap. v. 7, 8: “ For even Christ our passover 
 is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the feast, 
 not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of 
 malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened 
 bread of sincerity and truth.” 
 
 Dr. Benson tells us, that from this passage, 
 compared with chapter xvi. 8, it has been con- 
 jectured that this Epistle was written about the 
 time of the Jewish passover; and to me the 
 conjecture appears to be very well founded. The 
 passage to which Dr. Benson refers us is this: 
 “ Twill tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.’ With 
 this passage he ought to have joimed another in 
 the same context: ‘ And it may be that I will 
 abide, yea and winter with you;” for, from the 
 two passages laid together, it follows that the 
 
 1 [“Paraphrase and Notes on Six of the Epistles of 
 St. Paul, to which are annexed critical dissertations on 
 several subjects for the better understanding of St. Paul’s 
 Epistles,” by G. Benson, D.D., 2nd ed., 1752. He says that 
 this conjecture is a fine one (p. 213): and the remark is 
 just.—H.] 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 89 
 
 Epistle was written before Pentecost, yet after 
 winter ; which necessarily determines the date 
 to the part of the year within which the passover 
 falls. It was written before Pentecost, because 
 he says, “I will tarry at Ephesus until Pente- 
 cost.” It was written after winter, because he 
 tells them, ‘‘ It may be that I may abide, yea, 
 and winter with you.” The winter which the 
 Apostle purposed to pass at Corinth was un- 
 doubtedly the winter next ensuing to the date 
 of the Epistle; yet it was a winter subsequent 
 to the ensuing Pentecost, because he did not 
 intend to set forwards upon his journey till after 
 that feast. The words, “let us keep the feast, 
 not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of 
 malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened 
 bread of sincerity and truth,” look very like 
 words suggested by the season; at least they 
 have, upon that supposition, a force and signifi- 
 cance which do not belong to them upon any 
 other; and it is not a little remarkable, that the 
 hints casually dropped in the Epistle, concerning 
 particular parts of the year, should coincide with 
 this supposition. 
 
90 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 I witu not say that it is impossible, having seen 
 the first Epistle to the Corinthians, to construct 
 a second with ostensible allusions to the first; 
 or that it is impossible that both should be 
 fabricated, so as to carry on an order and con- 
 tinuation of the story, by successive references to 
 the same events. But I say, that this in either 
 case must be the effect of craft and design. 
 Whereas, whoever examines the allusions’ to the 
 former Epistle which he finds in this, while he 
 
 1 [It may be convenient to mark beforehand the sub- 
 jects of the three allusions brought forward in this article. 
 They are (1) the Apostle’s intention of passing through 
 Macedonia on his way to Corinth; (2) the case of the 
 incestuous marriage which had taken place at Corinth; 
 (3) the collection for the poor Christians in Judea, which 
 he was actively promoting at this time.—H.]. 
 
4 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 91 
 
 will acknowledge them to be such as would rise. 
 spontaneously to the hand of the writer, from 
 the very subject of the correspondence, and the 
 situation of the corresponding parties, supposing 
 these to be real; will see no particle of reason 
 to suspect, either that the clauses containing 
 these allusions were insertions for the purpose, 
 or that the several transactions of the Corinthian 
 Church were feigned, in order to form a train of 
 narrative, or to support the appearance of con- 
 nexion between the two Epistles. 
 
 1. In the first Epistle, St. Paul announces 
 his intention of passing through Macedonia, in 
 his way to Corinth: “I will come to you when 
 I shall pass through Macedonia.’”?? In the second 
 Epistle, we find him arrived in Macedonia, and 
 about to pursue his journey to Corinth. But 
 observe the manner in which this is made to 
 appear: “ I know the forwardness of your mind, 
 for which I boast of you to them of Macedonia, 
 that Achaia was ready a year ago; and your 
 zeal hath provoked very many. Yet have I sent 
 the brethren, lest our boasting of you should be 
 in vain in this behalf; that, as I said, ye may 
 be ready : lest haply, if they of Macedonia come 
 with me, and find you unprepared, we (that we 
 
 2 [1 Cor. xvi. 5.—H.] 
 
92 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 say not, ye) be ashamed in this same confident 
 boasting” (ix. 2, 3, 4). St. Paul’s being in 
 Macedonia at the time of writing the Epistle is, 
 in this passage, inferred only from his saying, 
 that he had boasted to the Macedonians of the 
 alacrity of his Achaian converts; and from the 
 fear which he expresses, lest, if any of the Mace- 
 donian Christians should come with him into 
 Achaia, they should find his boasting unwar- 
 ranted by the event. The business of the contri- 
 bution is the sole cause of mentioning Macedonia 
 at all. Will it be insinuated that this passage 
 was framed merely to state that St. Paul was 
 now in Macedonia; and by that statement, to 
 produce an apparent agreement with the pur- 
 pose of visiting Macedonia, notified in the first 
 Epistle? Or will it be thought probable, that, 
 if a sophist had meant to place St. Paul in 
 Macedonia, for the sake of giving countenance 
 
 to his forgery, he would have done it in so oblique 
 a manner as through the medium of the contri- 
 bution? The same thing may be observed of 
 another text in the Epistle, in which the name 
 of Macedonia occurs: “ Furthermore, when I 
 came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a 
 door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no 
 rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my 
 brother: but taking my leave of them, I went 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 93 
 
 from thence into Macedonia” (2 Cor. 11. 12, 18). 
 I mean, that it may be observed of this passage 
 also, that there is a reason for mentioning Mace- 
 donia, entirely distinct from the purpose of show- 
 ing St. Paul to be there. Indeed, if the passage 
 before us show that point at all, it shows it so 
 obscurely, that Grotius,* though he did not doubt 
 that Paul was now in Macedonia, refers this text 
 to a different journey. Is this the hand of a 
 forger, meditating to establish a false conformity ? 
 The text, however, in which it is most strongly 
 implied that St. Paul wrote the present Epistle 
 from Macedonia, is found in the fourth, fifth, and 
 sixth verses of the seventh chapter: ‘ I am filled 
 with comfort, I am exceeding joyful in all our 
 tribulation ; for, when we were come into Mace- 
 donia, our flesh had no rest;—without were 
 fightings, within were fears. Nevertheless God 
 that comforteth those that are cast down, com- 
 forted us by the coming of Titus.” Yet even 
 here, I think, no one will contend, that St. Paul’s 
 coming to Macedonia, or being in Macedonia, 
 was the principal thing intended to be told; or 
 that the telling of it, indeed, was any part of the 
 intention with which the text was written; or 
 that the mention even of the name of Macedonia 
 
 3 [Annot. in Acta Apost.—H. ] 
 
94 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 was not purely incidental, in the description of 
 those tumultuous sorrows with which the writer’s 
 mind had been lately agitated, and from which 
 he was relieved by the coming of Titus. The 
 five first verses of the eighth chapter, which com- 
 mend the liberality of the Macedonian Churches, 
 do not, in my opinion, by themselves, prove St. 
 Paul to have been in Macedonia at the time of 
 writing the Epistle. 
 
 2. In the first Epistle, St. Paul denounces a 
 severe censure against an incestuous marriage, 
 which had taken place among the Corinthian 
 converts, with the connivance, not to say with 
 the approbation, of the Church; and enjoins 
 the Church to purge itself of this scandal, by 
 expelling the offender from its society: “It is 
 reported commonly that there is fornication 
 among you, and such fornication as is not so 
 much as named amongst the Gentiles, that one 
 should have his father’s wife. And ye are 
 puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that 
 he that hath done this deed might be taken 
 away from among you. For I verily, as absent 
 in body, but present in spirit, have judged 
 already, as though I were present concerning 
 him that hath so done this deed, in the Name 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered 
 together, and my spirit, with the power of our 
 
 - > a 
 a “ ea 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 95 
 
 Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto 
 Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the 
 
 spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord 
 Jesus” (v. 1—5). In the second Epistle we 
 find this sentence executed, and the offender to 
 be so affected with the punishment, that St. 
 Paul now intercedes for his restoration: “ Suffi- 
 cient to such a man is this punishment, which 
 was inflicted of many. So that, contrariwise, 
 ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort 
 him, lest perhaps such an one should be swal- 
 lowed up with over-much sorrow ; wherefore I 
 beseech you, that ye would confirm your love 
 toward him” (2 Cor. 1. 6—8). Is this whole 
 business feigned for the sake of carrying on a 
 continuation of story through the two Epistles ? 
 The Church also, no less than the offender, was 
 brought by St. Paul’s reproof to a deep sense 
 of the impropriety of their conduct. Their 
 penitence, and their respect to his authority, 
 were, as might be expected, exceedingly grate- 
 ful to St. Paul: ‘‘ We were comforted, not by 
 Titus’ coming only, but by ‘the consolation 
 wherewith he was comforted in you, when he 
 told us your earnest desire, your mourning, 
 your fervent mind towards me, so that I re- 
 joiced the more. For though I made you sorry 
 with a letter, I do not repent, though I did 
 
96 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 repent; for I perceive that the same Epistle 
 made you sorry, though it were but for a season. 
 Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, 
 but that ye sorrowed to repentance; for ye 
 were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye 
 might receive damage by us in nothing”? (vil. 
 7—9). That this passage is to be referred to 
 the incestuous marriage, is proved by the 
 twelfth verse of the same chapter: “Though 
 I wrote unto you, I did it not for his cause that 
 had done the wrong, nor for his cause that 
 suffered wrong; but that our care for you, in 
 the sight of God, might appear unto you.” 
 There were, it 1s true, various topics of blame 
 noticed in the first Epistle; but there was none 
 except this of the incestuous marriage which 
 could be called a transaction between private 
 parties, or of which it could be said that one 
 particular person had “done the wrong,” and 
 another particular person “ had suffered it.” 
 Could all this be without foundation? or could 
 it be put into the second Epistle, merely to 
 furnish an obscure sequel to what had been said 
 about an incestuous marriage in the first ? 
 
 3. In the sixteenth chapter of the first 
 Epistle, a collection for the saints is recom- 
 mended to be set forward at Corinth: “ Now, 
 concerning the collection for the saints, as I 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, 97 
 
 have given order to the Churches of Galatia, so 
 do ye” (xvi. 1). In the ninth chapter of the 
 second Epistle, such a collection is spoken of, as 
 in readiness to be received: “ As touching the 
 ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for 
 me to write to you; for I know the forwardness 
 of your mind, for which I boast of you to them 
 of Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a year 
 ago; and your zeal hath provoked very many ” 
 (ix. 1, 2). This is such a continuation of the 
 transaction as might be expected; or, possibly 
 it will be said, as might easily be counterfeited : 
 but there is a circumstance of nicety in the 
 agreement between the two Epistles, which, I 
 am convinced, the author of a forgery would 
 not have hit upon, or which, if he had hit upon 
 it, he would have set forth with more clearness. 
 The second Epistle speaks of the Corinthians as 
 having begun this eleemosynary business a year 
 before: “This is expedient for you, who have 
 begun before, not only to do, but also to be for- 
 ward a year ago” (vil. 10). “I boast of you 
 to them of Macedonia, that Achaia was ready a 
 year ago” (ix. 2). From these texts it is 
 evident, that something had been done in the 
 business a year before. It appears, however, 
 from other texts in the Epistle, that the contri- 
 bution was not yet collected or paid; for bre- 
 H 
 
98 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 thren were sent from St. Paul to Corinth, “ to 
 make up their bounty” (ix. 5). They are 
 urged to “ perform the doing of it” (vii. 11). 
 “ And every man was exhorted to give as he 
 purposed in his heart” (ix. 7). The contri- 
 bution therefore, as represented in our present 
 Epistle, was in readiness, yet not received from 
 the contributors ; was begun, was forward long 
 before, yet not hitherto collected. Now this 
 representation agrees with one, and only: with 
 one, supposition, namely, that every man had 
 laid by in store, had already provided the fund, 
 from which he was afterwards to contribute— 
 the very case which the first Epistle authorizes 
 us to suppose to have existed ; for in that Epistle 
 St. Paul had charged the Corinthians, “ upon 
 the first day of the week, every one of them to 
 lay by in store as God had prospered him” * 
 (1 Cor. xvi. 2). 
 
 “ The following observations will satisfy us concerning 
 the purity of our Apostle’s conduct in the suspicious busi- 
 ness of a pecuniary contribution. 
 
 1. He disclaims the having received any inspired autho- 
 rity for the directions which he is giving: “I speak not 
 by commandment,* but by occasion of the forwardness of 
 
 * [The true meaning of od kat’ émirayhy is that he sets 
 this matter before them as a request, ‘not by way of com- 
 mand.’ He is not opposing his own personal authority to 
 inspired authority, but he is using no authority at all. 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 99 
 
 ONG Lis 
 
 In comparing the second Epistle to the 
 
 others, and to prove the sincerity of your love.” (2 Cor. 
 viii. 8.) Who, that had a sinister purpose to answer by 
 the recommending of subscriptions, would thus distinguish, 
 and thus lower the credit of his own recommendation ?P 
 
 2. Although he asserts the general right of Christian 
 ministers to a maintenance from their ministry, yet he pro- 
 tests against the making use of this right in his own per- 
 son: ‘‘ Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they which 
 preach the gospel should live of the gospel; but I have 
 used none of these things, neither have I written these 
 things that it should be so done unto me; for it were 
 better for me to die, than that any man should make my 
 glorying (that is, my professions of disinterestedness) 
 void.” (1 Cor, ix. 14, 15.) 
 
 3. He repeatedly proposes that there should be associates 
 with himself in the management of the public bounty; not 
 colleagues of his own appointment, but persons elected for 
 that purpose by the contributors themselves: ‘‘ And when 
 I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters,t 
 them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem ; 
 and if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me.’ 
 (1 Cor. xvi. 3, 4). And in the second Epistle, what is here 
 proposed, we find actually done, and done for the very 
 purpose of guarding his character against any imputation 
 
 Even thus, however, the argument, used by Paley retains 
 no inconsiderable force.—H. | 
 
 + [The words 6” émoroAdév here belong to the verb 
 meuyw, not to the verb doximdonre, and the meaning is 
 that he will give credentials to whomsoever they approve. 
 This, however, strengthens the force of the argument in 
 this place.—H. ] 
 
 HH)? 
 
100 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Corinthians with the Acts of the Apostles, we 
 are soon brought to observe, not only that there 
 exists no vestige either of the Epistle having 
 been taken from the history, or the history 
 from the Epistle; but also that there appears 
 in the contents of the Epistle positive evidence, 
 that neither was borrowed from the other. Titus, 
 who bears a conspicuous part in the Epistle, is 
 not mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles at all. 
 St. Paul’s sufferings, enumerated chap. xi. 24, 
 25,— of the Jews five times received I forty 
 stripes save one; thrice was I beaten with rods ; 
 once was I stoned ; thrice I suffered shipwreck ; 
 a night and aday I have been in the deep,’”— 
 cannot be made out from his history, as delivered 
 in the Acts, nor would this account have been 
 given by a writer who either drew his knowledge 
 
 that might be brought upon it, in the discharge of a 
 pecuniary trust: ‘‘ And we have sent with him the brother, 
 whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the churches 
 and not that only, but who was also chosen of the churches 
 to travel with us with this grace (gift), which is admi- 
 nistered by us to the glory of the same Lord, and the 
 declaration of your ready mind; avoiding this, that no 
 man should blame us in this abundance which is admi- 
 nistered by us: providing for things honest, not only in 
 the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men” (2 Cor. 
 viii. 18—21) ; that is, not resting in the consciousness of 
 our own integrity, but, in such a subject, careful also to 
 approve our integrity to the public judgment. 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 101 
 
 of St. Paul from that history, or who was careful 
 to preserve a conformity with it. The account 
 in the Epistle of St. Paul’s escape from Damascus, 
 though agreeing in the main fact with the ac- 
 count of the same transaction in the Acts, is 
 related with such difference of circumstance, as 
 renders it utterly improbable that one should be 
 derived from the other. The two accounts, placed 
 by the side of each other, stand as follows :-— 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 32, 33: “‘ In Da- Acts ix, 23—25: “And 
 
 mascus, the governor under 
 Aretes the king, kept the 
 city of the Damascenes with 
 a garrison, desirous to ap- 
 prehend me; and through a 
 window in a basket was I 
 let down by the wall, and 
 escaped his hands.” 
 
 after many days were ful. 
 filled, the Jews took counsel 
 to kill him; but their laying 
 in wait was known of Saul. 
 And they watched the gates 
 day and night to kill him. 
 Then the disciples took him 
 by night, and let him down 
 by the wall in a basket.” 
 
 Now if we be satisfied, in general, concerning 
 these two ancient writings, that the one was 
 not known to the writer of the other, or not 
 consulted by him; then the accordances which 
 may be pointed out between them, will admit 
 of no solution so probable, as the attributing of 
 them to truth and reality as to their common 
 foundation. 
 
102 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 No. III. 
 
 The opening of this Epistle exhibits a con- 
 nexion with the history which alone would satisfy 
 my mind that the Epistle was written by St. 
 Paul, and by St. Paul in the situation in which 
 the history places him. 
 
 Let it be remembered, that in the nineteenth 
 chapter of the Acts, St. Paul is represented as 
 driven away from Ephesus, or as leaving, how- 
 ever, Ephesus, in consequence of an uproar in 
 that city, excited by some interested adversaries 
 of the new religion. ‘The account of the tumult 
 is as follows: “ When they heard these sayings,” 
 namely, Demetrius’ complaint of the danger to 
 be apprehended from St. Paul’s ministry to the 
 established worship of the Ephesian goddess, 
 “they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, 
 Great is Diana of the Ephesians. And the whole 
 city was filled with confusion ; and having caught 
 Gaius and <Aristarchus, Paul’s companions in . 
 travel, they rushed with one accord into the 
 theatre. And when Paul would have entered in 
 unto the people, the disciples suffered him not. 
 And certain of the chief of Asia, which were his 
 friends, sent unto him, desiring that he would 
 not adventure himself into the theatre. Some, 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 103 
 
 therefore, cried one thing, and some another; 
 for the assembly was confused, and the more 
 part knew not wherefore they were come together. 
 And they drew Alexander out of the multitude, 
 the Jews putting him forward; and Alexander 
 beckoned with his hand, and would have made 
 his defence unto the people. But when they 
 knew that he was a Jew, all with one voice 
 about the space of two hours cried out, Great is 
 Diana of the Ephesians.—And after the uproar 
 was ceased, Paul called unto him the disciples, 
 and embraced them, and departed for to go into 
 Macedonia.” 
 
 When he was arrived in Macedonia, he wrote the 
 second Epistle to the Corinthians which is now 
 before us; and he begins his Epistle in this wise: 
 ““ Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God 
 of all comfort, who comforteth us in all our tribu- 
 lation, that we may be able to comfort them 
 which are in any trouble, by the comfort where- 
 with we ourselves are comforted of God. For, as 
 the sufferings of Christ abound in us, so our con- 
 solation also aboundeth by Christ: and whether 
 we be afflicted, it is for your consolation and salva- 
 tion, which is effectual in the enduring of the 
 same sufferings which we also suffer ; or whether 
 we be comforted, it is for your consolation and 
 
104 HORZ PAULINE. 
 
 salvation. And our hope of you is steadfast, 
 knowing that, as ye are partakers of the suffer- 
 ings, so shall ye be also of the consolation. For 
 we would not, brethren, have you ignorant of 
 our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we 
 were pressed out of measure, above strength, 
 insomuch that we despaired even of life; but we 
 had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we 
 should not trust in ourselves, but in God which 
 raiseth the dead, who delivered us from so great a 
 death, and doth deliver; in whom we trust that 
 He will yet deliver us.” Nothing could be more 
 expressive of the circumstances in which the 
 history describes St. Paul to have been, at the 
 time when the Epistle purports to be written ; 
 or rather, nothing could be more expressive of 
 the sensations arising from these circumstances, 
 than this passage. It is the calm recollection of 
 a mind emerged from the confusion of instant 
 danger. It is that devotion and solemnity of 
 thought which follows a recent deliverance. There 
 is Just enough of particularity in the passage to 
 show that it is to be referred to the tumult at 
 Ephesus: “ We would not, brethren, have you 
 ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia.” 
 And there is nothing more; no mention of De- 
 metrius, of the seizure of St. Paul’s friends, of 
 the interference of the town-clerk, of the occasion 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 105 
 
 or nature of the danger which St. Paul had 
 escaped, or even of the city where it happened ; 
 in a word, no recital from which a suspicion could 
 be conceived, either that the author of the Epistie 
 had made use of the narrative in the Acts; or, 
 on the other hand, that he had sketched the 
 outline, which the narrative in the Acts only 
 filled up. 
 
 That the forger of an Epistle, under the name 
 of St. Paul should borrow circumstances from a 
 history of St. Paul then extant; or, that the 
 author of a history of St. Paul should gather 
 materials from letters bearing St. Paul’s name, 
 may be credited: but I cannot believe that any 
 forger whatever should fall upon an expedient so 
 refined, as to exhibit sentiments adapted to a 
 situation, and to leave his readers to seek out 
 the situation from the history; still less, that 
 the author of a history should go about to frame 
 facts and circumstances fitted to supply the senti- 
 ments which he found in the letter. It may be 
 be said, perhaps, that it does not appear from the 
 history, that any danger threatened St. Paul’s 
 life in the uproar at Ephesus, so imminent as 
 that from which in the Epistle he represents 
 himself to have been delivered. This matter, it 
 is true, is not stated by the historian in form ; 
 but the personal danger of the Apostle, we can- 
 
106 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 not doubt, must have been extreme, when the 
 “whole city was filled with confusion ;”? when 
 the populace had seized his companions; when, 
 in the distraction of his mind, he insisted upon 
 coming forth among them ; when the Christians 
 who were about him would not suffer him ; when 
 his friends, certain of the chiefs of Asia, sent to 
 him, desiring that he would not adventure him- 
 self in the tumult; when, lastly, he was obliged 
 to quit immediately the place and the country, 
 and when the tumult was ceased, to depart into 
 Macedonia. All which particulars are found in 
 the narration, and justify St. Paul’s own account, 
 “that he was pressed out of measure, above 
 strength, insomuch that he despaired even of 
 life; that he had the sentence of death in him- 
 self ;”? that is, that he looked upon himself as a 
 man condemned to die. 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 It has already been remarked that St. Paul’s 
 original intention was to have visited Corinth 
 on his way to Macedonia: “I was minded to 
 come unto you before, and to pass by you into 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 107 
 
 Macedonia” (2 Cor. i. 15,.16). It has also 
 been remarked that he changed this intention, 
 and ultimately resolved upon going through 
 Macedonia jirst. Now, upon this head there 
 exists a circumstance of correspondency between 
 our Epistle and the history, which is not very 
 obvious to the reader’s observation ; but which, 
 when observed, will be found, I think, close and 
 exact. Which circumstance is this: that though 
 the change of St. Paul’s intention be expressly 
 mentioned only in the second Epistle, yet it ap- 
 pears both from the history and from the second 
 Epistle, that the change had taken place before 
 the writing of the first Epistle; that it appears 
 however from neither, otherwise than by an in- 
 ference, unnoticed perhaps by almost every one 
 who does not sit down professedly to the exa- 
 mination. 
 
 First, then, how does this point appear from 
 the history? In the nineteenth chapter of the 
 Acts, and the twenty-first verse, we are told that 
 “‘ Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed 
 through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jeru- 
 salem. So he sent into Macedonia two of them 
 that ministered unto him, Timotheus and Eras- 
 tus; but he himself stayed in Asia for a season.” 
 A short time after this, and evidently in pursu- 
 ance of the same intention, we find (chap. xx. 
 
108 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 1, 2) that ‘ Paul departed from Ephesus for to 
 go into Macedonia ;” and that, “ when he had 
 gone over those parts, he came into Greece.” 
 The resolution therefore of passing first through 
 Macedonia, and from thence into Greece, was 
 formed by St. Paul previously to the sending 
 away of Timothy. The order in which the two 
 countries are mentioned shows the direction of 
 his intended route, “ when he had passed through 
 Macedonia and Achaia.” Timothy and Erastus, 
 who were to precede him in his progress, were 
 sent by him from Ephesus into Macedonia. He 
 himself, a short time aftérwards, and, as hath 
 been observed, evidently in continuation and 
 pursuance of the same design, ‘‘ departed for to 
 go into Macedonia.” If he had, therefore, enter- 
 tained a different plan of his journey, which is 
 not hinted in the history, he must have changed 
 that plan before this time. But, from the seven- 
 teenth verse of the fourth chapter of the first 
 Epistle to the Corinthians, we discover that 
 Timothy had been sent away from Ephesus be- 
 fore that Epistle was written: “ For this cause 
 have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my be- 
 loved son.” ‘The change therefore of St. Paul’s 
 resolution, which was prior to the sending away 
 of Timothy, was necessarily prior to the writing 
 of the first Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 109 
 
 Thus stands the order of dates, as collected 
 from the history, compared with the first Epistle. 
 Now let us inquire, secondly, how this matter is 
 represented in the Epistle before us. In the 
 sixteenth verse of the first chapter of this Epistle, 
 St. Paul speaks of the intention which he had once 
 entertained of visiting Achaia, in his way to 
 Macedonia: “In this confidence I was minded 
 to come unto you before, that ye might have a 
 second benefit; and to pass by you into Mace- 
 donia.” After protesting, in the seventeenth 
 verse, against any evil construction that might 
 be put upon his laying aside of this intention, in 
 the twenty-third verse he discloses the cause of 
 it: “ Moreover I call God for a record upon my 
 soul, that, to spare you, I came not as yet unto 
 Corinth.” And then he proceeds as follows: 
 “ But I determined this with myself, that I 
 would not come again to you in heaviness. For 
 if I make you sorry, who is he then that maketh 
 me glad, but the same which is made sorry by 
 me? And I wrote this same unto you, lest when 
 I came I should have sorrow from them of whom 
 I ought to rejoice ; having confidence in you all, 
 that my Joy is the joy of you all. For, out of 
 much affliction and anguish of heart, [ wrote 
 unto you with many tears ; not that ye should be 
 grieved, but that ye might know the love which 
 
110 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 I have more abundantly unto you. But if any 
 have caused grief, he hath not grieved me but in 
 part; that I may not overcharge you all. Suf- 
 ficient to such a man is this punishment, which 
 was inflicted of many.” In this quotation, let 
 the reader first direct his attention to the clause 
 marked by italics, “‘and I wrote this same unto 
 you;” and let him consider, whether from the 
 context, and from the structure of the whole 
 passage, it be not evident that this writing was 
 after St. Paul had “ determined with himself 
 that he would not come again to them in heavi- 
 ness” ? whether, indeed, it was not in conse- 
 quence of this determination, or at least with 
 this determination upon his mind? And, in the 
 next place, let him consider whether the sen- 
 tence, “I determined this with myself, that I 
 would not come again to you in heaviness,” do 
 not plainly refer to that postponing of his visit, 
 to which he had alluded in the verse but one 
 before, when he said, ‘‘I call God for a record 
 upon my soul, that, to spare you, I came not as 
 yet to Corinth ;” and whether this be not the 
 visit of which he speaks in the sixteenth verse, 
 wherein he informs the Corinthians, “that he 
 had been minded to pass by them into Mace- 
 donia;” but that, for reasons which argued no 
 levity or fickleness in his disposition, he had 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 11] 
 been compelled to change his purpose. If this 
 be so, then it follows that the writing here men- 
 tioned was posterior to the change of his inten- 
 tion. The only question, therefore, that remains, 
 will be, whether this writing relate to the letter 
 which we now have under the title of the first 
 Epistle to the Corinthians, or to some other letter 
 not extant? And upon this question I think 
 Mr. Locke’s observation decisive ; namely, that 
 the second clause marked in the quotation by 
 italics, “ I wrote unto you with many tears,” 
 and the first clause so marked, “I wrote this 
 same unto you,” belong to one writing, whatever 
 that was; and that the second clause goes on to 
 advert to a circumstance which is found in our 
 present first Epistle to the Corinthians ; namely, 
 the case and punishment of the incestuous per- 
 son. Upon the whole then we see, that it is 
 capable of being inferred from St. Paul’s own 
 words, in the long extract which we have quoted, 
 that the first Epistle to the Corinthians was 
 written after St. Paul had determined to post- 
 pone his journey to Corinth; in other words, 
 that the change of his purpose, with respect to 
 the course of his journey, though expressly men- 
 tioned only in the second Epistle, had taken 
 place before the writing of the first; the point 
 which we made out to be implied in the history, 
 
112 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 by the order of the events there recorded, and 
 the allusions to those events in the first: Epistle, 
 Now this is a species of congruity of all others 
 the most to be relied upon. It is not an agree- 
 ment between two accounts of the same trans- 
 action, or between different statements of the same 
 fact ; for the fact is not stated ; nothing that can 
 be called an account is given; but it is the 
 junction of two conclusions, deduced from in- 
 dependent sources, and deducible only by in- 
 vestigation and comparison. 
 
 This point, namely, the change of the route 
 being prior to the writing of the first Epistle, 
 also falls in with, and accounts for, the manner 
 in which he speaks in that Epistle of his journey. 
 His first intention had been, as he here declares, 
 to ‘pass by them into Macedonia ;” that inten- 
 tion having been previously given up, he writes, 
 in his first Epistle, “ that he would not see them 
 now by the way,” that is, as he must have done 
 upon his first plan; “but that he trusted to 
 tarry awhile with them, and possibly to abide, 
 yea and winter with them” (1 Cor. xvi. 5, 6). 
 It also accounts for a singularity in the text re- 
 ferred to, which must strike every reader ; “ Iwill 
 come to you when I pass through Macedonia, 
 for I do pass through Macedonia.” The sup- 
 plemental sentence, “for I do pass through 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 113 
 Macedonia,” imports that there had been some 
 previous communication upon the subject of the 
 journey; and also that there had been some 
 vacillation and indecisiveness in the Apostle’s 
 plan; both which we now perceive to have been 
 the case. The sentence is as much as to say, 
 “this is what I at last resolve upon.” ‘The 
 expression ‘ dtav Makedoviay 6:é\Ow,” is am- 
 biguous; it may denote either “‘ when I pass, 
 or, when I shall have passed, through Mace- 
 donia:” the considerations offered above fix it 
 to the latter sense. Lastly, the point we have 
 endeavoured to make out confirms, or rather 
 indeed is necessary to the support of a conjec- 
 ture, which forms the subject of Number XI. in 
 our observations upon the first Epistle, that the 
 insinuation of certain of the Church of Corinth, 
 that he would come no more among them, was 
 founded on some previous disappointment of their 
 expectations. 
 
 No. V. 
 
 But if St. Paul had changed his purpose be- 
 fore the writing of the first Epistle, why did he 
 defer explaining himself to the. Corinthians, 
 concerning the reason of that change, until he 
 
 I 
 
114 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 wrote the second? This is a very fair question ; 
 and we are able, I think, to return to it a satis- 
 factory answer. The real cause, and the cause. 
 at length assigned by St. Paul for postponing 
 his visit to Corinth, and not travelling by the 
 route which he had at first designed, was the 
 disorderly state of the Corinthian Church at the 
 time, and the painful severities which he should 
 have found himself obliged to exercise, if he had 
 come among them during the existence of these 
 irregularities. He was willing therefore to try, 
 before he came in person, what a letter of autho- 
 ritative objurgation would do among them, and 
 to leave time for the operation of the experiment. 
 That was his scheme in writing the first Epistle. 
 But it was not for him to acquaint them with 
 the scheme. After the Epistle had produced its 
 effect (and to the utmost extent, as it should 
 seem, of the Apostle’s hopes); when it had 
 wrought in them a deep sense of their fault, 
 and an almost passionate solicitude to restore 
 themselves to the approbation of their teacher ; 
 when Titus (vil. 6, 7, 11) had brought him in- 
 telligence ‘‘ of their earnest desire, their mourn- 
 ing, their fervent mind towards him, of their 
 sorrow and their penitence; what carefulness, 
 what clearing of themselves, what indignation, 
 what fear, what vehement desire, what zeal, 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 115 
 
 what revenge,” his letter, and the general con- 
 cern occasioned by it, had excited among them ; 
 he then opens himself fully upon the subject. 
 The affectionate mind of the Apostle is touched 
 by this return of zeal and duty. He tells them 
 that he did not visit them at the time proposed, 
 lest their meeting should have been attended 
 with mutual grief; and with grief to him em- 
 bittered by the reflection that he was giving 
 pain to those from whom alone he could receive 
 comfort: “I determined this with myself, that 
 I would not come again to you in heaviness. 
 For if I make you sorry, who is he that maketh 
 me glad, but the same which is made sorry by 
 me?” (ii. 1, 2) that he had written his former 
 Epistle to warn them beforehand of their fault, 
 “lest when he came he should have sorrow of 
 them of whom he ought to rejoice”’ (i. 3) ; that 
 he had the further view, though perhaps unper- 
 ceived by them, of making an experiment of 
 their fidelity, “to know the proof of them, 
 whether they were obedient in all things” (ii. 9). 
 This full discovery of his motive came very 
 naturally from the Apostle, after he had seen the 
 success of his measures, but would not have been 
 a seasonable communication before. The whole 
 composes a train of sentiment and of conduct 
 resulting from real situation, and from real cir- 
 12 
 
116 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 cumstance, and as remote as possible from fiction 
 or imposture. 
 
 No. oN: 
 
 Chap. xi. 9: “ When I was present with you 
 and wanted, I was chargeable to no man; for 
 that which was lacking to me, the brethren which 
 came from Macedonia supplied.” * The principal 
 fact set forth in this passage, the arrival at 
 Corinth of brethren from Macedonia during St. 
 Paul’s first residence in that city, is explicitly 
 recorded (Acts xvi. 1, 5): “ After these things 
 Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth. 
 And when Silas and Timotheus were come from 
 Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and 
 testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.” 
 
 No. VII. 
 The above quotation from the Acts proves that 
 Silas and Timotheus were assistants to St. Paul 
 in preaching the gospel at Corinth. With which 
 
 5 [There is a secondary fact, too, which ought to be 
 remembered in the same connexion. He worked with his 
 own hands at Corinth, during the residence to which allu- 
 sion is made. He met there Aquila and Priscilla: “ and 
 because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and 
 wrought” (Acts xviii. 2, 3).—H.] 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 117 
 
 correspond the words of the Epistle (1. 19) : “ For 
 the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached 
 among you by us, even by me, and Silvanus, and 
 -'Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was 
 yea.” I do admit that the correspondency, con- 
 sidered by itself, is too direct and obvious; and 
 that an impostor with the history before him 
 might, and probably would, produce agreements 
 of the same kind. But let it be remembered, 
 that this reference is found in a writing, which, 
 from many discrepancies, and especially from 
 those noted No. II., we may conclude, was not 
 composed by any one who had consulted, and 
 who pursued the history. Some observation also 
 arises upon the variation of the name. We read 
 Silas in the Acts, Silvanus in the Epistle, The 
 similitude of these two names, if they were the 
 names of different persons, is greater than could 
 easily have proceeded from accident; I mean 
 that it is not probable, that two persons placed 
 in situations so much alike, should bear names so 
 nearly resembling each other.° On the other 
 hand, the difference of the name in the two pass- 
 ages negatives the supposition of the passages, 
 or the account contained in them, being tran- 
 scribed either from the other. 
 
 6 That they were the same person is further confirmed 
 by 1 Thess. i. 1, compared with Acts xvii. 10. 
 
118 HORZ PAULINA. 
 
 Nias ayLLl 
 
 Chap. 11. 12, 18: “ When I came to Troas to 
 preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened 
 unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, 
 because I found not Titus, my brother; but 
 taking my leave of them, I went from thence 
 into Macedonia.” 
 
 To establish a conformity between this passage 
 and the history, nothing more is necessary to be 
 presumed, than that St. Paul proceeded from 
 Ephesus to Macedonia, upon the same course by 
 which he came back from Macedonia to Ephesus, 
 or rather to Miletus in the neighbourhood of 
 Ephesus ; in other words, that, in his journey 
 to the peninsula of Greece, he went and returned 
 the same way. St. Paul is now in Macedonia, 
 where he had lately arrived from Ephesus. Our 
 quotation imports that in his journey he had 
 stopped at Troas. Of this, the history says no- 
 thing, leaving us only the short account, “ that 
 Paul departed from Ephesus, for to go into Mace- 
 donia.” But the history says (Acts xx.), that 
 in his ve¢wrn from Macedonia to Ephesus, Paul 
 sailed from Philippi to Zroas ; and that, when the 
 disciples came together on the first day of the 
 week to break bread, Paul preached unto them 
 all night; that from Troas he went by land to 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 119 
 
 Assos; from Assos, taking ship and coasting 
 along the front of Asia Minor, he came by Mity- 
 lene to Miletus. Which account proves, first, 
 that Troas layin the way by which St. Paul passed 
 between Ephesus and Macedonia; secondly, that 
 he had disciples there. In one journey between 
 these two places, the Epistle, and in another 
 journey between the same places, the history, 
 makes him stop at this city. Of the first journey, 
 he is made to say, “ that a door was in that city 
 opened unto him of the Lord ;”’ in the second 
 we find disciples there collected around him, and 
 the Apostle exercising his ministry, with what 
 was even in‘him more than ordinary zeal and 
 labour. The Epistle therefore is in this instance 
 confirmed, if not by the terms, at least by the 
 probability of the history ; aspecies of confirma- 
 tion by no means to be despised, because, as far 
 as it reaches, it is evidently uncontrived. 
 Grotius, I know, refers the arrival at Troas, to 
 which the Epistle alludes, to a different period, 
 but I think very improbably ; for nothing ap- 
 pears to me more certain, than that the mecting 
 with Titus, which St. Paul expected at Troas, 
 was the same meeting which took place in Mace- 
 donia, namely, upon Titus’ coming out of Greece. 
 In the quotation before us, he tells the Corin- 
 thians, “ When I came to Troas, I had no rest in 
 
120 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 my spirit, because I found not Titus, my brother;. 
 but, taking my leave of them, I went from thence 
 into Macedonia.’ Then in the seventh chapter 
 he writes, “ When we were come into Macedonia 
 our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled on 
 every side; without were fightings, within were 
 fears; nevertheless God, that comforteth them 
 that are cast down, comforted us by the coming 
 of Titus.” These two passages plainly relate to 
 the same journey of Titus, in meeting with whom 
 St. Paul had been disappointed at Troas, and 
 rejoiced in Macedonia. And among other reasons 
 which fix the former passage to the coming of 
 Titus out of Greece, is the consideration, that 16 
 was nothing to the Curinthians that St. Paul. 
 did not meet with Titus at Troas, were it not 
 that he was to bring intelligence from Corinth. 
 The mention of the disappointment in this place, 
 upon any other supposition, is irrelative.’ 
 
 7 [The prominent appearance of Titus in this second 
 Epistle to the Corinthians is a matter of some moment in 
 regard to the line of reasoning pursued in this volume. 
 And the same may be said of the prominent appearance of 
 this same disciple in the Epistle to the Galatians. Titus 
 is rot mentioned at all in the Acts of the Apostles. He 
 could hardly have been omitted in a narrative artificially 
 constructed out of materials supplied by these Epistles. 
 He could have found no place at all in these Epistles, if 
 
 they had been forged by some one who drew his inspira- 
 tion and information from the Narrative. Yet the ap- 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 12] 
 
 No. IX. 
 
 Chap. xi. 24, 25: “Of the Jews five times 
 received I forty stripes save one; thrice was I 
 beaten with rods; once was I stoned; thrice I 
 suffered shipwreck; a night and a day I have 
 been in the deep.” 
 
 These particulars cannot be extracted out of 
 the Acts of the Apostles; which proves, as hath 
 been already observed, that the Epistle was not 
 framed from the history ; yet they are consistent 
 with it, which, considering how numerically 
 circumstantial the account is, is more than could 
 happen to arbitrary and independent fictions. 
 When I say that these particulars are consistent 
 with the history, I mean, first, that there is no 
 article in the enumeration which is contradicted 
 by the history; secondly, that the history, though 
 
 pearance of Titus in these letters causes no difficulty or 
 confusion to us in an attempt to draw out the history of 
 St. Paul, at this period, from all these materials. A person 
 of some importance is conspicuous in these Epistles, who 
 is not named in the Narrative: and yet so far from dis- 
 turbing the sequence of events, he helps to bind them 
 together. That St. Luke should omit to notice some cir- 
 cumstances and persons of consequence is quite natural. 
 That St. Paul, writing with deep feeling, should refer very 
 particularly to a friend with whom he had close personal 
 relations, in connexion with circumstances full of interest 
 for those to whom he was writing, is no less natural.—H, | 
 
122 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 silent with respect to many of the facts here 
 enumerated, has left space for the existence of 
 these facts, consistent with the fidelity of its own 
 narration. 
 
 First, no contradiction is discoverable between 
 the Epistle and the history. When St. Paul says, 
 thrice was I beaten with rods, although the his- 
 tory records only ove beating with rods, namely, 
 at Philippi (Acts xvi. 22), yet is there no con- 
 tradiction. It is only the omission in one book 
 of what is related in another. But had the 
 history contained accounts of four beatings with 
 rods, at the time of writing this Epistle, in which 
 St. Paul says that he had only suffered ¢hree, 
 there would have been a contradiction properly 
 so called. The same observation applies generally 
 to the other parts of the enumeration, concerning 
 which the history is silent: but there is one 
 clause in the quotation particularly deserving of 
 remark; because, when confronted with the 
 history, it furnishes the nearest approach to a 
 contradiction, without a contradiction being ac- 
 tually incurred, of any I remember to have met 
 with. ‘“ Once,” saith St. Paul, “ was I stoned.” 
 Does the history relate that St. Paul, prior to 
 the writing of this Epistle, had been stoned more 
 than once? The history mentions distinctly one 
 occasion upon which St. Paul was stoned, namely, 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 123 
 
 at Lystra in Lycaonia: “Then came thither 
 certain Jews from Antioch and Jeonium, who 
 persuaded the people; and, having stoned Paul, 
 drew him out of the city, supposing he had been 
 dead” (xiv. 19). And it mentions also another 
 occasion in which “an assault was made both of 
 the Gentiles, and also of the Jews with their 
 rulers, to use them despitefully, and to stone 
 them; but they were aware of it,’ the history 
 proceeds to tell us, “and fled into Lystra and 
 Derbe.” This happened at Iconium, prior to the 
 date of the Epistle. Now, had the assault been 
 completed; had the history related that a stone 
 was thrown, as it relates that preparations were 
 made both by Jews and Gentiles to stone Paul 
 and his companions; or even had the account 
 of this transaction stopped without going on 
 to inform us that Paul and his companions were 
 *‘ aware of their danger and fled,’’—a contradic- 
 tion between the history and the Epistle would 
 have ensued. ‘Truth is necessarily consistent ; 
 but it is searcely possible that independent ac- 
 counts, not having truth to guide them, should 
 thus advance to the very brink of contradiction 
 without falling into it. 
 
 Secondly, I say, that if the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles be silent concerning many of the instances 
 enumerated in the Epistle, this silence may be 
 
124 HORM PAULINA. 
 
 accounted for from the plan and fabric of the his- 
 tory. The date of the Epistle synchronizes with 
 the beginning of the twentieth chapter of the 
 Acts. The part, therefore, of the history which 
 precedes the twentieth chapter is the only part in 
 which can be found any notice of the persecu- 
 tions to which St. Paul refers. Now it does not 
 appear that the author of the history was with 
 St. Paul until his departure from Troas, on his 
 way to Macedonia, as related (xvi. 10) ; or rather, 
 indeed, the contrary appears. It is in this point 
 of the history that the language changes. In 
 the seventh and eighth verses of this chapter the 
 third person is used: “ After they were come to 
 Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia, but the 
 spirit suffered them not; and they passing by 
 Mysia, came to Troas:” and the third person is 
 in lke manner constantly used throughout the 
 foregoing part of the history. In the tenth 
 verse of this chapter, the first person comes in: 
 “« After Paul had seen the vision, immediately 
 we endeavoured to go into Macedonia;. assuredly 
 gathering that the Lord had called ws to preach 
 the Gospel unto them.”* Now, from this time 
 to the writing of the Epistle, the history occupies 
 
 8 [See AppenDIx IV. on Coincidences connected with 
 St. Luke,—H.] 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 125 
 
 four chapters: yet it is in these, if in any, that 
 a regular or continued account of the Apostle’s 
 life is to be expected; for how succinctly his 
 history is delivered in the preceding part of the 
 book, that is to say, from the time of his con- 
 version to the time when the historian joined 
 him at Troas, except the particulars of his con- 
 version itself, which are related circumstantially, 
 may be understood from the following obser- 
 vations. 
 
 The history of a period of sixteen years is 
 “comprised in less than three chapters; and of 
 these a material part is taken up with discourses, 
 After his conversion, he continued in the neigh- 
 bourhood of Damascus, according to the history, 
 for a certain considerable, though indefinite, 
 length of time ; according to his own words (Gal. 
 i. 18), for three years ; of which no other account 
 is given than this short one, that “ straightway 
 he preached Christ in the synagogues, that He 
 is the Son of God; that all that heard him were 
 amazed’; and said, Is not this he that destroyed 
 them which called on this Name in Jerusalem ? 
 that he increased the more in strength, and con- 
 founded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus; 
 and that, after many days were fulfilled, the 
 Jews took counsel to kill him.” From Damascus 
 he proceeded to Jerusalem; and of his residence 
 
126 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 there nothing more particular is recorded than 
 that “he was with the Apostles, coming in and 
 going out; that he spake boldly in the name 
 of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the 
 Grecians, who went about to kill him.’ From 
 Jerusalem, the history sends him to his native 
 city of Tarsus.? It seems probable, from the — 
 order and disposition of the history, that St. 
 Paul’s stay at Tarsus was of some continuance ; 
 for we hear nothing more of him, until, after a 
 long apparent interval, and much interjacent 
 narrative, Barnabas, desirous of Paul’s assistance 
 upon the enlargement of the Christian mission, 
 “went to Tarsus for to seek him.’ We cannot 
 doubt but that the new Apostle had been busied 
 in his ministry; yet of what he did, or what he 
 suffered, during this period, which may include 
 three or four years, the history professes not to 
 deliver any information. As Tarsus was situated 
 upon the sea-coast, and as, though Tarsus was 
 his home, yet it is probable he visited from 
 thence many other places, for the purpose of 
 preaching the Gospel, it is not unlikely that in 
 the course of three or four years he might 
 undertake many short voyages to neighbouring 
 countries; in the navigating of which we may 
 
 9 Acts ix. 30, 1 Chap. xi. 25. 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 127 
 
 be allowed to suppose that some of those disas- 
 ters ands hipwrecks befell him to which he refers 
 in the quotation before us, “thrice I suffered 
 shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the 
 deep.” ‘This last clause I am inclined to inter- 
 pret of his being obliged to take to an open 
 boat, upon the loss of the ship,” and his con- 
 tinuing out at sea, in that dangerous situation, 
 anight andaday. St. Paul is here recounting 
 his sufferings, not relating miracles. From 
 Tarsus, Barnabas brought Paul to Antioch, and 
 there he remained a year; but of the transac- 
 tions of that year no other description is given 
 than what is contained in the four last verses of 
 the eleventh chapter. After a more solemn 
 dedication to the ministry, Barnabas and Paul 
 proceeded from Antioch to Cilicia, and from 
 thence they sailed to Cyprus, of which voyage 
 no particulars are mentioned. Upon their 
 return from Cyprus, they made a_ progress 
 together through the Lesser Asia; and though 
 two remarkable speeches be preserved, and a few 
 incidents in the course of their travels circum- 
 stantially related, yet is the account of this pro- 
 gress, upon the whole, given professedly with 
 conciseness: for instance, at Iconium it is said 
 
 2 [Or, more probably, on some plank or spar after a 
 shipwreck.—H. | 
 
128 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 that they abode a long time;* yet of this long 
 abode, except concerning the manner in which 
 they were driven away, no memoir is inserted in 
 the history. The whole is wrapped up in one 
 short summary, ‘‘ They spake boldly in the 
 Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of 
 _ His grace, and granted signs and wonders to be 
 done by their hands.” Having completed their 
 progress, the two Apostles returned to Antioch, 
 “and there they abode long time with the 
 disciples.” Here we have another large portion 
 of time passed over in silence. To this suc- 
 ceeded a journey to Jerusalem, upon a dispute — 
 which then much agitated the Christian Church, 
 concerning: the obligation .of the law of Moses. 
 When the object of that journey was completed, 
 Paul proposed to Barnabas to go again and visit 
 their brethren in every city where they had 
 preached the word of the Lord. The execution 
 of this plan carried our Apostle through Syria, 
 Cilicia, and many provinces of the Lesser Asia ; 
 yet is the account of the whole journey despatched 
 in four verses of the sixteenth chapter. 
 
 If the Acts of the Apostles had undertaken 
 to exhibit regular annals of St. Paul’s ministry, 
 or even any continued account of his life, from 
 
 3 Chap. x.y. 3. 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 129 
 
 conversion at Damascus to his imprisonment 
 at Rome, I should have thought the omission of 
 the circumstances referred to in our Epistle a 
 matter of reasonable objection. But when it 
 appears, from the history itself, that large por- 
 tions of St. Paul’s life were either passed over 
 in silence, or only slightly touched upon, and 
 that nothing more than certain detached inci- 
 dents and discourses are related; when we ob- 
 serve also that the author of the history did not 
 join our Apostle’s society till a few years before 
 the writing of the Epistle, at least that there is 
 “no proof in the history that he did so; in com- 
 paring the history with the Epistle, we shall not 
 be surprised by the discovery of omissions; we 
 shall ascribe it to truth that there 1s no contra- 
 diction. 
 
 No. X. 
 
 Chap. ui. 1: “Do we begin again to com- 
 mend ourselves? or need we, as some others, 
 epistles of commendation to you ?” 
 
 “As some others.’ ‘Turn to Acts xviil. 27, 
 and you will find that, a short time before the 
 writing of this Epistle, Apollos had gone to 
 Corinth with letters of commendation from the 
 
 K 
 
130 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Ephesian Christians: “and when Apollos was 
 disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren 
 wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him.” 
 Here the words of the Epistle bear the appear- 
 ance of alluding to some specific instance, and 
 the history supplies that instance ; it supplies at 
 least an instance as apposite as possible to the 
 terms which the Apostle uses, and to the date 
 and direction of the Epistle in which they are 
 found. The letter which Apollos carried from 
 Ephesus was precisely the letter of commenda- 
 tion which St. Paul meant; and it was to 
 Achaia, of which Corimth was the capital, and 
 indeed to Corinth itself (Acts xix. 1), that 
 Apollos carried it; and it was about two years 
 before the writing of this Epistle. If St. Paul’s 
 words be rather thought to refer to some general 
 usage which then obtained among Christian 
 Churches, the case of Apollos exemplifies that 
 usage ;* and affords that species of confirmation 
 to the Epistle which arises from seeing the 
 manners of the age, in which it purports to be 
 written, faithfully preserved. 
 
 4 [See note above (p. 99) on the words 8” émortéAwy (1 
 Cor. xyi..3).—H. | 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 181 
 
 No. XI. 
 
 Chap. xui. 1: “ This is the third time I am 
 coming to you” (rpirov rovro ~pyopat). 
 
 Do not these words import that the writer 
 had been at Corinth twice before? yet, if they 
 import this, they overset every congruity we 
 have been endeavouring to establish. The Acts 
 of the Apostles record only two journeys of St. 
 Paul to Corinth. We have all along supposed, 
 what every mark of time except this expression 
 indicates, that the Epistle was written between 
 the first and second of these journeys. If St. 
 Paul had been already twice at Corinth, this 
 supposition must be given up; and every argu- 
 ment or observation which depends upon it falls 
 to the ground. Again, the Acts of the Apostles 
 not only record no more than two journeys of 
 St. Paul to Corinth, but do not allow us to 
 suppose that more than two such journeys could 
 be made or intended by him within the period 
 which the history comprises; for, from his first 
 journey into Greece to his first imprisonment at 
 Rome, with which the history concludes, the 
 Apostle’s time is accounted for. If, therefore, 
 the Epistle was written after the second journey 
 to Corinth, and upon the view and expectation 
 of a third, it must have been written after his 
 
 K 2 
 
io> HORE PAULINA. 
 
 first imprisonment at Rome, that is, after the 
 time to which the history extends. When I 
 first read over this Epistle with the particular 
 view of comparing it with the history, which I 
 chose to do without consulting any commentary 
 whatever, I own that I felt myself confounded 
 by this text. It appeared to contradict the 
 opinion, which I had been led by a great variety 
 of circumstances to form, concerning the date 
 and occasion of the Epistle. At length, how- 
 ever, it occurred to my thoughts to inquire 
 whether the passage did necessarily imply that 
 St. Paul had been at Corinth twice ; or whether, 
 when he says, “this is the third time I am 
 coming to you,” he might mean only that this 
 was the third time that he was ready, that he 
 was prepared, that he intended, to set out upon 
 his journey to Corinth. I recollected that he 
 had once before this purposed to visit Corinth, 
 and had been disappointed in his purpose ; which 
 disappointment forms the subject of much 
 apology and protestation, in the first and second 
 chapters of the Epistle. Now, if the journey 
 in which he had been disappointed was reckoned 
 by him one of the times in which “he was 
 
 5 [This confession on the part of Paley is an indication 
 that the plan of this treatise was original. See the Pre- 
 face.—H. | 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 133 
 
 coming to them,” then the present would be 
 the third time, that is, of his beng ready and 
 prepared to come ; although he had been actually 
 at Corinth only oxce before. This conjecture 
 being taken up, a further examination of the 
 passage and the Epistle produced proofs which 
 placed it beyond doubt. “This is the third 
 time I am coming to you:” in the verse follow- 
 ing these words he adds, “I told you before, and 
 foretell you, as if I were present the second time; 
 and being absent, now I write to them which 
 heretofore have sinned, and to all other, that if 
 I come again, I will not spare.” In this verse 
 the Apostle is declaring beforehand what he 
 would do in his intended visit: his expression, 
 therefore, “as if I were present the second 
 time,” relates to that visit. But, if his future 
 visit would only make him present among them 
 a second time, it follows that he had been already 
 there but once. Again, in the fifteenth verse of 
 the first chapter, he tells them, “In this confi- 
 dence, I was minded to come unto you before, 
 that you might have a second benefit.” Why a 
 second, and not a third benefit? why cdcurépay, 
 and not roirny xdprv, if the rpirov zpyomat, in 
 the thirteenth chapter, meant a third visit? for, 
 though the visit in the first chapter be that visit 
 in which he was disappointed, yet, as it is evi- 
 
134 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 dent from the Epistle that he had never been at 
 Corinth, from the time of the disappointment 
 to the time of writing the Epistle, it follows, 
 that if it was only a second visit in which he 
 was disappointed then, it could only be a second 
 visit which he proposed now. But the text 
 which I think is decisive of the question, if any 
 question remain upon the subject, is the four- 
 teenth verse of the twelfth chapter: “ Behold, 
 the third time I am ready to come to you” 
 (Idov, rpirov Erofuwe Exw 2AOsiv). It is very 
 clear that the rpirov troiuwe Exw 2dAOeiv of the 
 twelfth chapter and the rpirov rotro Epyopmar of 
 the thirteenth chapter are equivalent expressions, 
 were intended to convey the same meaning, and 
 to relate to the same journey. The comparison 
 of these phrases gives us St. Paul’s own expla- 
 nation of his own words; and it is that very 
 explanation which we are contending for, namely, 
 that rpirov rovro Epxonat does not mean that he 
 was coming a third time, but that this was the 
 third time he was in readiness to come, rpirov 
 troluwe Exwv. I do not apprehend, that after 
 this it can be necessary to call to our aid the 
 reading of the Alexandrian manuscript,° which 
 gives érofuwe txw éAGetv in the thirteenth chap- 
 
 6 [The Sinaitic MS. has the customary reading, about 
 which no question can now be raised.—H. | 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 135 
 
 ter as well as in the twelfth; or of the Syrian 
 and Coptic versions, which follow that reading ; 
 because I allow that this reading, besides not 
 being sufficiently supported by ancient copies, is 
 probably paraphrastical, and has been inserted 
 for the purpose of expressing more unequivo- 
 cally the sense, which the shorter expression 
 tolrov rovTo zoxouar was supposed to carry. 
 Upon the whole, the matter is sufficiently cer- 
 tain; nor do I propose it as a new interpreta- 
 tion of the text which contains the difficulty, 
 for the same was given by Grotius long ago; 
 but I thought it the clearest way of explaining 
 the subject, to describe the manner in which 
 the difficulty, the solution, and the proofs of 
 that solution successively presented themselves 
 to my inquiries. Now, in historical researches, 
 a reconciled inconsistency becomes a positive 
 argument. First, because an impostor gene- 
 rally guards against the appearance of incon- 
 sistency ; and secondly, because when. apparent 
 inconsistencies are found, it is seldom that any- 
 thing but truth renders them capable of recon- 
 ciliation. The existence of the difficulty proves 
 the want «or absence of that caution which 
 usually accompanies the consciousness of fraud; 
 and the solution proves, that 1t isnot the col- 
 lusion of: fortuitous: propositions which we have 
 
136 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 to deal with, but that a thread of truth winds 
 through the whole, which preserves every cir- 
 cumstance in its place. 
 
 INO; wide 
 
 Chap. x. 14—16: “ We are come as far as to 
 you also, in preaching the Gospel of Christ ; 
 not boasting of things without our measure, 
 that is, of other men’s labours; but having 
 hope, when your faith is increased, that we 
 shall be enlarged by you, according to our rule 
 abundantly, to preach the Gospel in the regions 
 beyond you.” 
 
 This quotation affords an indirect, and there- 
 fore unsuspicious, but at the same time a distinct 
 and indubitable recognition of the truth and 
 exactness of the history. I consider it to be 
 implied by the words of the quotation, that 
 Corinth was the extremity of St. Paul’s travels 
 hitherto. He expresses to the Corinthians his 
 hope, that in some future visit he might “ preach 
 the Gospel to the regions beyond them ;”” which 
 imports that he had not hitherto proceeded 
 “beyond them,” but that Corinth was yet the 
 furthest point or boundary of his travels. Now, 
 how is St. Paul’s first journey into Europe, 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 137 
 
 which was the only one he had taken before the 
 writing of the Epistle, traced out in the his- 
 tory? Sailing from Asia, he landed at Philippi ; 
 from Philippi, traversing the eastern coast of 
 the peninsula, he passed through Amphipolis 
 and Apollonia to Thessalonica; from thence 
 through Berea to Athens, and from Athens to 
 Corinth, where he stopped; and from whence, 
 after a residence of a year and a half, he sailed 
 back into Syria.’ So that Corinth was the last 
 place which he visited in the peninsula; was 
 the place from which he returned into Asia; 
 and was, as such, the boundary and limit of his 
 progress. He could not have said the same 
 thing, namely, “I hope hereafter to visit the 
 regions beyond you,” in an Kpistle to the 
 Philippians, or in an Epistle to the Thessa- 
 lonians, inasmuch as he must be deemed toh ve 
 already visited the regions beyond ¢hem, having 
 proceeded from those cities to other parts of 
 Greece. But from Corinth he returned home; 
 every part therefore, beyond that city, might 
 properly be said, as it is said in the passage 
 before us, to be unvisited. Yet is this propriety 
 the spontaneous effect of truth, and produced 
 without meditation or design. 
 
 7 [See Appenprix I. on Coincidences connected with Geo- 
 graphy. —H. | 
 
1388 HORE PAULINE, 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE EPISTLE. TO THE GALATIANS. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 THE argument of this Epistle in some measure 
 proves its antiquity. It will hardly be doubted, 
 but that it was written while the dispute con- 
 cerning the circumcision of Gentile converts was 
 fresh in men’s minds; for, even supposing it to 
 have been a forgery, the only credible motive 
 that can be assigned for the forgery, was to 
 bring the name and authority of the Apostle 
 into this controversy. No design could be so 
 insipid, or so unlikely to enter into the thoughts 
 of any man, as to produce an Epistle, written 
 earnestly and pointedly upon one side of a 
 controversy, when the controversy itself was 
 dead, and the question no longer interesting to 
 any description of readers whatever. Now the 
 controversy concerning the circumcision of the 
 Gentile Christians was of such a nature, that, if 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. - 1389 
 
 it arose at all, it must have arisen in the 
 beginning of Christianity. As Judea was the 
 scene of the Christian history; as the author 
 and preachers of Christianity were Jews; as the 
 religion itself acknowledged and was founded 
 upon the Jewish religion, in contradistinction to 
 every other religion then professed among man- 
 kind; it was not to be wondered at, that some 
 of its teachers should carry it out in the world 
 rather as a sect and modification of Judaism, 
 than as a separate, original revelation; or that 
 they should invite their proselytes to those 
 observances in which they lived themselves. 
 This was likely to happen: but if it did not 
 happen at jirst ; if, while the religion was in the 
 hands of Jewish teachers, no such claim was 
 advanced, no such condition was attempted to 
 be imposed ; it is not probable that the doctrine 
 would be started, much less that it should 
 prevail, in any future period. I likewise think, 
 that those pretensions of Judaism were much 
 more likely to be insisted upon, while the Jews 
 continued a nation, than after their fall and 
 dispersion; while Jerusalem and the temple 
 stood, than after the destruction brought upon 
 them by the Roman arms, the fatal cessation of 
 the sacrifice and the priesthood, the humiliating 
 loss of their country, and, with it, of the great 
 
140 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 rites and symbols of their institution. Itshould 
 seem therefore, from the nature of the subject 
 and the situation of the parties, that this con- 
 troversy was carried on in the interval between 
 the preaching of Christianity to the Gentiles 
 and the invasion of Titus; and that our present 
 Epistle, which was undoubtedly intended to bear 
 a part in this controversy, must be referred to 
 the same period. 
 
 But, again, the Epistle supposes that certain 
 designing adherents of the Jewish law had crept 
 into the Churches of Galatia; and had been 
 endeavouring, and but too successfully, to 
 persuade the Galatian converts that they had 
 been taught the new religion imperfectly and at 
 second hand; that the founder of their Church 
 himself possessed only an inferior and deputed 
 commission, the seat of truth and authority 
 being in the Apostles and elders of Jerusalem ; 
 moreover, that whatever he might profess 
 among them, he had himself at other times, and 
 in other places, given way to the doctrine of 
 circumcision.—The Epistle is unintelligible with- 
 out supposing all this. Referring therefore to 
 this, as to what had actually passed, we find St. 
 Paul treating so unjust an attempt to undermine 
 his credit, and to introduce among his converts 
 a doctrine which he had uniformly reprobated, 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 141 
 in terms of great asperity and indignation. And 
 in order to refute the suspicions which had been 
 raised concerning the fidelity of his teaching, as 
 well as to assert the independence and Divine 
 original of his mission, we find him appealing 
 to the history of his conversion, to his conduet 
 under it, to the manner in which he had con- 
 ferred with the Apostles when he met with them 
 at Jerusalem; alleging that so far was his 
 doctrine from being derived from them, or they 
 from exercising any superiority over him, that 
 they had simply assented to what he had already 
 preached among the Gentiles, which preaching 
 was communicated not by them to him, but by 
 himself to them; that he had maintained the 
 liberty of the Gentile Church, by opposing, 
 upon one occasion, an Apostle to the face, when 
 the timidity of his behaviour seemed to endanger 
 it; that from the first, that all along, that to 
 that hour, he had constantly resisted the claims 
 of Judaism ; and that the persecutions which he 
 daily underwent, at the hands or by the instiga- 
 tion of the Jews, and of which he bore in his 
 person the marks and scars, might have been 
 avoided by him, if he had consented to employ 
 his labours in bringing, through the medium of 
 Christianity, converts over to the Jewish insti- 
 tution, for then “ would the offence of the cross 
 
142 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 have ceased.”” Now an impostor’ who had 
 forged the Epistle for the purpose of producing 
 St. Paul’s authority in the dispute, which, as 
 has been observed, is the only credible motive 
 that can be assigned for the forgery, might have 
 made the Apostle deliver his opinion upon the 
 subject in strong and decisive terms, or might 
 have put his name to a train of reasoning and 
 argumentation upon that side of the question 
 which the imposture was intended to recom- 
 mend. I can allow the possibility of such a 
 scheme as that. But for a writer, with this 
 purpose in view, to feign a series of transactions 
 supposed to have passed among the Christians 
 of Galatia, and then to counterfeit expressions 
 of anger and resentment excited by these trans- 
 actions; to make the Apostle travel back into 
 his own history, and into a recital of various 
 passages of his life, some indeed directly, but 
 others obliquely, and others even obscurely bear- 
 ing upon the point in question; in a word, to 
 substitute narrative for argument, expostulation 
 and complaint for dogmatic positions and con- 
 troversial reasoning, in a writing properly con- 
 troversial, and of which the aim and design was 
 to support one side of a much agitated question 
 —is a method so intricate, and so unlike the 
 methods pursued by all other impostors, as to 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 143 
 
 require very flagrant proofs of imposition to 
 induce us to believe it to be one.’ 
 
 No. II. 
 
 In this number I shall endeavour to prove, 
 
 1. That the Epistle to the Galatians, and the 
 Acts of the Apostles, were written without any 
 communication with each other. 
 
 2. That the Epistle, though written without 
 any communication with the history, by recital, 
 implication, or reference, bears testimony to 
 many of the facts contained in it. 
 
 J. The Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles 
 were written without any communication with 
 each other. 
 
 To judge of this point, we must examine those 
 passages in each which describe the same trans- 
 
 1 [This article states the impression which the Epistle 
 to the Galatians gives us on its own internal evidence. 
 There is an air of reality and business in the whole docu- 
 ment which cannot be mistaken. To use Paley’s own 
 words in a later part of this volume, we can perceive in 
 almost every line “the language of a mind actuated by 
 real occasions and operating on real circumstances.” This 
 gives us a very strong starting-point for the subsequent 
 evidence, which ig derived from comparison with other 
 documents. The conclusions from such comparison become 
 
 the buttresses of a structure which, even independently, is 
 very firm.—H. ] 
 
144 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 action; for, if the author of either writing 
 derived his information from the account which 
 he had seen in the other, when he came to speak 
 of the same transaction, he would follow that 
 account. The history of St. Paul at Damascus, 
 as read in the Acts, and as referred to by the 
 Hpistle, forms an instance of this sort. Accord- 
 ing to the Acts, Paul, after his conversion, “ was 
 certain days with the disciples which were at 
 Damascus; and straightway he preached Christ 
 in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God. 
 But all that heard him were amazed, and said: 
 Is not this he which destroyed them which 
 called on this Name in Jerusalem, and came 
 hither for that intent, that he might bring them 
 bound unto the chief priests? But Saul in- 
 creased the more in strength, confounding the 
 Jews which were at Damascus, proving that 
 this 1s the very Christ. And after many days 
 were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him ; 
 but their laying await was known of Saul; and 
 they watched the gates day and night to kill 
 him. ‘Then the disciples took him by night, 
 and let him down by the wall in a basket. And 
 when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed 
 to join himself to the disciples.” Acts ix. 
 19—26. 
 
 According to the Epistle, “ When it pleased 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 145 
 
 God, who separated me from my mother’s 
 womb, and called me by His grace, to reveal 
 His Son in me, that I might preach Him among: 
 the heathen; immediately I conferred not with 
 flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem 
 to them which were Apostles before me; but I 
 went into Arabia, and returned again to Da- 
 mascus. ‘Then, after three years, [ went up to 
 Jerusalem” (i. 15—18). 
 
 Besides the difference observable in the terms 
 and general complexion of these two accounts, 
 “the journey into Arabia,” mentioned in the 
 Hpistle, and omitted in the history, affords full 
 proof that there existed no correspondence be- 
 tween these writers. If the narrative in the 
 Acts had been made up from the Epistle, it is 
 impossible that this journey should have been 
 passed over in silence; if the Epistle had been 
 - composed out of what the author had read of 
 St. Paul’s history in the Acts,’ it is unaccount- 
 able that it should have been inserted.’ 
 
 2 [It is worth while to put this mention of certain facts 
 connected with Arabia (i. 15—12) side by side with an 
 allegory in the same Epistle (iv. 21—26), where Arabia 
 plays a great part. This thought of Arabia was evidently 
 running strongly in the Apostle’s mind when he wrote to 
 the Galatians.—H. | 
 
 3 N.B.—The Acts of the Apostles simply inform us that 
 St. Paul left Damascus in order to go to Jerusalem, “ after 
 
 I, 
 
146 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 The journey to Jerusalem related in the 
 second chapter of the Epistle (“then, fourteen 
 years after, I went up again to Jerusalem ”’) 
 supplies another example of the same kind. 
 Either this was the journey described in the 
 fifteenth chapter of the Acts, when Paul and 
 Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem, 
 to consult the Apostles and elders upon the 
 question of the Gentile converts; or it was 
 some journey of which the history does not take 
 notice. If the first opinion be followed, the 
 discrepancy in the two accounts is so conside- 
 rable, that it is not without difficulty they can 
 be adapted to the same transaction; so that, 
 upon this supposition, there is no place for sus- 
 pecting that the writers were guided or assisted 
 by each other. If the latter opinion be preferred, 
 we have then a journey to Jerusalem, and a 
 conference with the principal members of the 
 Church there, circumstantially related in the 
 Epistle, and entirely omitted in the Acts: and 
 
 many days were fulfilled.” If any one doubt whether the 
 words “‘many days” could be intended to express a period 
 which included a term of three years, he will find a com- 
 plete instance of the same phrase used with the same lati- 
 tude in the first book of Kings, chap. ii. 38, 39: “‘ And 
 Shimei dwelt at Jerusalem many days; and it came to 
 pass, at the end of thee years, that two of the servants of 
 Shimei ran away.” 
 
 oF -; 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 147 
 
 we are at liberty to repeat the observation 
 which we before made, that the omission of so 
 material a fact in the history is inexplicable, if 
 the historian had read the Epistle; and that the 
 insertion of it in the Epistle, if the writer de- 
 rived his information from the history, is not 
 less so.’ 
 
 St. Peter’s visit to Antioch, during which the 
 dispute arose between him and St. Paul, is not 
 mentioned in the Acts.’ 
 
 If we connect with these instances the general 
 observation, that no scrutiny can discover the 
 smallest trace of transcription or imitation 
 either in things or words, we shall be fully 
 satisfied in this part of our case; namely, that 
 the two records, be the facts contained in them 
 true or false, come to our hands from inde- 
 pendent sources. 
 
 Secondly, I say that the Epistle, thus proved 
 to have been written without any communi- 
 cation with the history, bears testimony to a great 
 variety of particulars contained in the history. 
 
 4 [See Aprenpix VI. on this visit to Jerusalem.—H. | 
 
 5 [Gal. ii. 11—14. The date at which this collision 
 between the two Apostles occurred at Antioch is very 
 doubtful. This doubt, however, does not affect the con- 
 clusion drawn from the fact. See what is said below cn 
 this subject, at the close of the notes on the Epistle to the 
 Galatians.— H. ] 
 
 T3% 
 
148 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 1. St. Paul, in the early part of his life, had 
 addicted himself to the study of the Jewish 
 religion, and was distinguished by his zeal for 
 the institution and for the traditions which had 
 been incorporated with it. Upon this part of 
 his character the history makes St. Paul speak 
 thus: “I am verily a man which am a Jew, 
 born in Tarsus, a city of Cilicia, yet brought 
 up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and 
 
 “taught according to the perfect manner of the 
 law of the fathers; and was zealous toward 
 God, as ye all are this day.””? Acts xxu. 38. 
 
 The Epistle as follows: “I profited in the 
 Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine 
 own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of 
 the traditions of my fathers” (i. 14). 
 
 2. St. Paul, before his conversion, had been a 
 fierce persecutor of the new sect: “ As for Saul, 
 he made havock of the church; entering into 
 every house, and haling men and women, com- 
 mitted them to prison.” Acts vii. 3. 
 
 This is the history of St. Paul, as delivered 
 in the Acts: in the recital of his own history in 
 the Epistle, “ Ye have heard,” says he, “ of my 
 conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, 
 how that beyond measure I persecuted the 
 church of God”? (i. 13). 
 
 3. St. Paul was miraculously converted on his 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 149 
 
 way to Damascus: ‘And as he journeyed, he 
 came near to Damascus: and suddenly there 
 shined round about him a lght from heaven ; 
 and he fell to the earth, and heard a voice 
 saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest 
 thou Me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord ? 
 And the Lord said, I am Jesus, whom thou 
 persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against 
 the pricks. And he trembling and astonished 
 said, Lord, what: wilt Thou have me to do?” 
 Acts ix. 83—6. With this compare the Epistle 
 (i. 15—17) : “ When it pleased God, who sepa- 
 rated me from my mother’s womb, and called 
 me by His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that 
 Imight preach Him among the heathen; imme- 
 diately I conferred not with flesh and blood: 
 neither went I up to Jerusalem, to them that 
 were Apostles before me; but I went into 
 Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.” 
 
 In this quotation from the Epistle, I desire it 
 to be remarked, how incidentally it appears that 
 the affair passed at Damascus. In what may be 
 called the direct part of the account, no mention 
 is made of the place of his conversion at all; a 
 casual expression at the end, and an expression 
 brought in for a different purpose, alone fixes it 
 to have been at Damascus: “I returned again 
 to Damascus.” Nothing can be more lke 
 
150 HORM PAULINA. 
 
 simplicity and undesignedness than this is. » It 
 also draws the agreement between the two 
 quotations somewhat closer, to observe that 
 they both: state St. Paul to have preached 
 the Gospel immediately upon his call: “ And 
 straightway he preached Christ in the syna- 
 gogues, that He is the Son of God.” Acts 
 ix. 20. “When it pleased God to: reveal His 
 Son in me, that I might preach Him among 
 the heathen, immediately I conferred not with 
 flesh and blood.’? Gal. i. 15, 16. 
 
 4. The course of the Apostle’s travels after 
 his conversion was this :—He went from Damas- 
 cus to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem into 
 Syria and Cilicia. ‘‘ At Damascus the disciples 
 took him by night, and let him down by the 
 wall in a basket; and when Saul was come to 
 Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the 
 disciples.” Actsix. 25, 26. Afterwards, “ when 
 the brethren knew” the conspiracy formed 
 against him at Jerusalem, “they brought him 
 down to Cesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus” 
 (ix. 30), a city in Cilicia. In the Epistle St. 
 Paul gives the following brief account of his 
 proceedings, within the same period: ‘ After 
 three years I went up to Jerusalem to.see Peter, 
 and abode with him fifteen days; afterwards I 
 came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia.” 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 151 
 
 The history had told us that Paul passed from 
 Cesarea to Tarsus; if he took this journey 
 by land, it would carry him through Syria into 
 Cilicia; and he would come, after his visit at 
 Jerusalem, “into the regions of Syria and 
 Cilicia,” in the very order in which he mentions 
 them in the Epistle. This supposition of his 
 going from Cesarea to Tarsus by land clears up 
 also another point.® It accounts for what St. 
 Paul says in the same place concerning the 
 Churches of Judea: “ Afterwards I came into 
 the regions of Syria and Cilicia; and was 
 unknown by face unto the churches of Judea, 
 which were in Christ: but they had heard only, 
 
 6 [“‘ His own expression in the Epistle to the Galatians 
 (i. 21) is that he went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 
 From this it has been inferred that he went first from 
 Czesarea to Antioch, and then from Antioch to Tarsus. 
 And such a course would have been perfectly natural ; for 
 the communication of the city of Cesar and the Herods 
 with the metropolis of Syria, either by sea and the harbour 
 of Seleucia, or by the great coast-road through Tyre and 
 Sidon, was easy and frequent. But the supposition is 
 unnecessary. In consequence of the range of Mount 
 Tarsus, Cilicia has a greater geographical affinity with 
 Syria than with Asia Minor. Hence it has existed in 
 frequent political combination with it from the time of the 
 old Persian satrapies to the modern pachalics of the 
 Sultan : and Syria and Cilicia appears in history almost 
 as a generic geographical term, the more important dis- 
 trict being mentioned first.”’”—Conybeare and Howsons’ 
 ‘Life and Epistles of St. Paul,” vol. i. pp. 129, 130,—H.]. 
 
152 ' HORE PAULINA. 
 
 that he which persecuted us in times past now 
 preacheth the faith which once he destroyed ; 
 and they glorified God in me.” Upon which 
 passage I observe, first, that what is here said of 
 the Churches of Judea, is spoken in connexion 
 with his journey into the regions of Syria and 
 Cilicia. Secondly, that the passage itself has 
 little significance, and that the connexion is 
 inexplicable, unless St. Paul went through 
 Judea‘ (though probably by a hasty journey) 
 at the time that he came into the regions of 
 Syria and Cilicia. Suppose him to have passed 
 
 7 Dr. Doddridge thought that the Czsarea here men- 
 tioned was not the celebrated city of that name upon the 
 Mediterranean sea, but Czesarea Philippi, near the borders 
 of Syria, which lies in a much more direct line from Jeru- 
 salem to Tarsus than the other. The objection to this, Dr. 
 Benson remarks, is, that Czesarea, without any addition, 
 usually denotes Czesarea Palestinze.* 
 
 * [The mistake of Doddridge has been shared by 
 Olshausen and others. Whenever ‘‘ Cesarea” is spoken 
 of absolutely, it always means Ceesarea Stratonis: and 
 though it is true that Czesarea Philippi is nearer the 
 Syrian frontier, the physical character of the country is 
 such that St. Paul would naturally go by the other 
 Ceesarea, unless, indeed, he travelled by Damascus to 
 Antioch, which is highly improbable. Moreover the 
 phrase, ‘they brought him down to Ceesarea,’’ implies a 
 descent to the sea-coast. See APPENDIX I. on Coincidences. 
 connected with Geography.—H. ] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 153 
 
 by land from Cesarea to Tarsus, all this, as 
 hath been observed, would be precisely true. 
 
 5. Barnabas was with Paul at Antioch: 
 “Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to 
 seek Saul;* and when he had found him, he 
 brought him unto Antioch. And it came to 
 pass, that a whole year they assembled them- 
 selves with the church.” Acts xi. 25, 26. 
 Again, and upon another occasion, “ they (Paul 
 and Barnabas) sailed to Antioch; and there 
 they continued a long time with the disciples ”’ 
 (xiv. 26, 28). 
 
 Now what says the Epistle? ‘ When Peter 
 was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the 
 face, because he was to be blamed; and the 
 other Jews dissembled likewise with him ; inso- 
 much that Barnabas also was carried away with 
 their dissimulation” (i. 11, 18). 
 
 6. The stated residence of the Apostles was at 
 Jerusalem: ‘At that time there was a great 
 persecution against the church which was at 
 
 8 [It appears from the Acts (xi. 25, 26; xiv. 26, 
 28; xv. 2) that Barnabas was with St. Paul at Antioch on 
 two occasions at least, and that on each of those two occa- 
 sions they were there together for a considerable time. It 
 appears also from the Epistle to the Galatians (ii. 11, 13), 
 that Barnabas was at Antioch when St. Peter and St. Paul 
 met there. This is quite enough for the purposes of the 
 argument.—H. | 
 
154 HORZ PAULINA. 
 
 Jerusalem ; and they were all scattered abroad 
 throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, 
 except the apostles.” Acts vil. 1. “They (the 
 Christians at Antioch) determined that Paul 
 and Barnabas should go up to Jerusalem, unto 
 the apostles and elders, about this question” 
 (xv. 2). With these accounts agrees the de- 
 claration in the Epistle: “ Neither went I up to 
 Jerusalem to them which were apostles before 
 me” (i. 17): for this declaration implies,’ or 
 rather assumes 1t to be known, that Jerusalem’ 
 was the place where the Apostles were to be met 
 with. 
 
 7. There were at Jerusalem two Apostles, or 
 at the least'two eminent members of the Church, 
 of the name of James. This is directly inferred 
 from the Acts of the Apostles, which, in the 
 second verse of the twelfth chapter, relates the 
 death of James, the brother of John; and yet, 
 in the fifteenth chapter, and in a subsequent 
 part of the history, records a speech delivered 
 by James in the assembly of the Apostles and 
 elders. It is also strongly implied by the form 
 of expression used in the Hpistle: “ Other apos- 
 tles saw I none, save James, the Lord’s brother ;” 
 that is, to distinguish him from James the 
 brother of John. 
 
 To us who have long been conversant with 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 155 
 
 the Christian history, as contained in the Acts 
 of the Apostles, these points are obvious and 
 familiar; nor do we readily apprehend any 
 greater difficulty in making them appear in a 
 letter purporting to have been written by St. 
 Paul, than there is in introducing them into a 
 modern sermon. But to judge correctly of the 
 argument before us, we must discharge this 
 knowledge from our thoughts. We must pro- 
 pose to ourselves the situation of an author who 
 sat down to the writing of the Epistle without 
 having seen the history; and then the con- 
 currences we have deduced will be deemed of 
 importance. They will at least be taken for 
 separate confirmations of the several facts; and 
 not only of these particular facts, but of the 
 general truth of the history. 
 
 Vor what is the rule with respect to cor- 
 roborative testimony which prevails in courts of 
 justice; and which prevails only because ex- 
 perience has proved that it is an useful guide to 
 truth? A principal witness in a cause delivers 
 his account; his narrative, in certain parts of it, 
 is confirmed by witnesses who are called after- 
 wards. The credit derived from their testimony 
 belongs not only to the particular circumstances 
 in which the auxiliary witnesses agree with the 
 principal witness, but in some measure to the 
 
156 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 whole of his evidence ; because it is improbable 
 that accident or fiction should draw a line which 
 touched upon truth in so many points. 
 
 In like manner, if two records be produced, 
 manifestly independent, that is, manifestly writ- 
 ten without any participation of intelligence, an 
 agreement between them, even in few and 
 slight circumstances, (especially if, from the 
 different nature and design of the writings, few 
 points only of agreement, and those incidental, 
 could be expected to occur,) would add a sensible 
 weight to the authority of both, in every part 
 of their contents. 
 
 The same rule is applicable to history, with 
 at least as much reason as to any other species 
 of evidence. 
 
 No. IIT. 
 
 But although the references to various par- 
 ticulars in the Epistle, compared with the direct 
 account of the same particulars in the history, 
 afford a considerable proof of the truth not only 
 of these particulars, but of the narrative which 
 contains them ; yet they do not show, it will be 
 said, that the Epistle was written by St. Paul : 
 for admitting (what seems to have been proved) 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 157 
 
 that the writer, whoever he was, had no recourse 
 to the Acts of the Apostles, yet many of the 
 facts referred to, such as St. Paul’s miraculous 
 conversion, his change from a virulent persecutor 
 to an indefatigable preacher, his labours among 
 the Gentiles, and his zeal for the liberties of the 
 Gentile Church, were so notorious, as to occur 
 readily to the mind of any Christian who should 
 choose to personate his character and counterfeit 
 his name; it was only to write what everybody 
 knew. Now I think that this supposition— 
 namely, that the Epistle was composed upon 
 general information, and the general publicity 
 of the facts alluded to, and that the author did 
 no more than weave into his work what the 
 common fame of the Christian Church had 
 reported to his ears—is repelled by the par- 
 ticularity of the recitals and references. This 
 particularity is observable: in the following 
 instances ; in perusing which, I desire the reader 
 to reflect, whether they exhibit the language of 
 a man who had nothing but general reputation 
 to proceed upon, or of a man actually speaking of 
 himself and of his own history, and consequently 
 of things concerning which he possessed a clear, 
 intimate, and circumstantial knowledge. 
 
 1. The history, in giving an account of St. 
 Paul after his conversion, relates “that, after 
 
158 HORE PAULINE. 
 many days,” effecting, by the assistance of the 
 disciples, his escape from Damascus, “he pro- 
 ceeded to Jerusalem.’’? Acts ix. 25. The Epistle, 
 speaking of the same period, makes St. Paul say 
 that “he went into Arabia,” that he returned 
 again to Damascus, that after three years he 
 sae up to Jerusalem (i. 17, 18). 
 
 . The history relates that, when Saul was — 
 come from Damascus, “ he was with the disciples 
 coming in and going out.” Acts ix. 28. The 
 Epistle, describing the same journey, tells us 
 that he “went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, 
 and abode with him fifteen days” (1. 18). 
 
 3. The history relates that, when Paul was 
 come to Jerusalem, “ Barnabas took him and 
 brought him to the Apostles.” Acts ix. 27. 
 The Epistle, “that he saw Peter; but other of 
 the apostles saw he none, save James, the Lord’s 
 brother” (i. 19). 
 
 Now this is as it should be. The historian 
 delivers his account in general terms, as of facts 
 at which he was not present. The person who 
 is the subject of that account, when he comes 
 to speak of these facts himself, particularizes 
 time, names, and circumstances.’ 
 
 9 [Comparison with another similar instance may be 
 
 useful. See what is said below on the second Epistle to 
 Timothy, in reference to Eunice. Jt was most natural 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS., 159 
 
 4, The like notation of places, persons, and 
 dates is met with in the account of St. Paul’s 
 journey to Jerusalem, given in the second 
 chapter of the Epistle. It was fourteen years 
 after his conversion; it was in company with 
 Barnabas and Titus; it was then that he met 
 with James, Cephas, and John; it was then 
 also that it was agreed among them that they 
 should go to the circumcision, and he unto the 
 Gentiles. 
 
 5. The dispute with Peter, which occupies 
 the sequel of the second chapter, is marked with 
 the same particularity. It was at Antioch; it 
 was after certain came from James; it was 
 while Barnabas was there, who was carried away 
 by their dissimulation. These examples nega- 
 tive the insinuation, that the Epistle presents 
 nothing but indefinite allusions to public facts. 
 
 No. IV. 
 Chap iv. 11—16: “Iam afraid of you, lest 
 
 that St. Paul, dealing with the personal and domestic 
 circumstances of Timothy, should mention his grand- 
 mother, and most natural that St. Luke, writing a general 
 history, should not name her. Yet it happens that the 
 specific notice of the Epistle confirms the truthfulness of 
 the General History.—H. | 
 
160 HORE PAULINE. 
 I have bestowed upon you labour in yain. 
 Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am, for I am 
 as ye are: ye have not injured me at all. Ye 
 know how through infirmity of the flesh I 
 preached the gospel unto you at the first; and 
 my temptation which was in the flesh, ye despised 
 not, nor rejected ; but received me as an angel 
 of God, even as Christ Jesus. Where is then 
 the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you 
 record, that, if it had been possible, ye would 
 have plucked out your own eyes, and have given 
 them to me. Am I therefore become your 
 enemy, because I tell you the truth ? ” 
 
 With this passage compare 2 Cor. xii. 1—9; 
 “Tt is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. 
 I will come to visions and revelations of the 
 Lord. I knew a man in Christ about fourteen 
 years ago, (whether in the body I cannot tell, 
 or whether out of the body I cannot tell; God 
 knoweth) ; such an one caught up to the third 
 heaven; and I knew such a man (whether in 
 the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell, God 
 knoweth) ; how that he was caught up into 
 Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which 
 it is not lawful for a man to utter. Of such an 
 one will I glory ; yet of myself will I not glory, 
 but in mine infirmities: for, though I would 
 desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will 
 
e 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 161 
 
 say the truth. But now I forbear, lest any man 
 should think of me above that which he seeth 
 me to be, or that he heareth of me. And lest I 
 should be exalted above measure, through the 
 abundance of the revelations, there was given 
 to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan 
 to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above 
 measure. For this thing I besought the Lord 
 thrice, that it might depart from me. And 
 He said unto me, My grace is sufficient for 
 thee; for My strength is made perfect in 
 weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather 
 glory in my infirmities, that the power of 
 Christ may rest upon me.” 
 
 There can be no doubt but that “the temp- 
 tation which was in the flesh,” mentioned in 
 the Epistle to the Galatians, and “the thorn 
 in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet 
 him,” mentioned in the Epistle to the Corin- 
 thians, were intended to denote the same thing. 
 Either therefore it was, what we pretend it to 
 have been, the same person in both, alluding, as 
 the occasion led him, to some bodily infirmity 
 under which he laboured; that is, we are read- 
 ing the real letters of a real Apostle; or, it was 
 that a sophist, who had seen this circumstance 
 in one Epistle, contrived, for the sake of corre- 
 spondency, to bring it into another; or, lastly 
 
 M 
 
162 . HORE PAULINA. 
 
 it was a circumstance in St. Paul’s personal 
 condition, supposed to be well known to those 
 into whose hands the Epistle was likely to fall; 
 and, for that reason, introduced into a writing 
 designed to bear his name. I have extracted 
 the quotations at length, in order to enable the 
 reader to judge accurately of the manner in 
 which the mention of this particular comes in, 
 in each; because that judgment, I think, will 
 acquit the author of the Epistle of the charge of 
 having studiously inserted it, either with a view 
 of producing an apparent agreement between 
 them, or for any other purpose whatever. 
 
 The context, by which the circumstance before 
 us is introduced, is in the two places totally 
 different, and without any mark of imitation ; 
 yet in both places does the circumstance rise 
 aptly and naturally out of the context, and that 
 context from the train of thought carried on in 
 the Epistle. , 
 
 The Epistle to the Galatians, from the be- 
 ginning to the end, runs in a strain of angry 
 complaint of their defection from the Apostle, 
 and from the principles which he had taught 
 them. It was very natural to contrast with 
 this conduct the zeal with which they had once 
 received him ; and it was not less so to mention, 
 as a proof of their former disposition towards 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 163 
 
 him, the indulgence which, while he was among 
 them, they had shown to his infirmity: “My 
 temptation which was in the flesh ye despised 
 not, nor rejected, but received me as an angel of 
 God, even as Christ Jesus. Where is then the 
 blessedness ye spake of, (that is, the benedic- 
 tions which you bestowed upon me?) for I bear 
 you record, that if it had been possible, ye 
 would have plucked out your own eyes, and 
 have given them to me.” 
 
 In the two Epistles to the Corinthians, 
 especially in the second, we have the Apostle 
 contending with certain teachers in Corinth, 
 who had formed a party in that Church against 
 him. To vindicate his personal authority, as 
 well as the dignity and credit of his ministry 
 among them, he takes occasion (but not without 
 apologizing repeatedly for the folly, that is, for 
 the indecorum of pronouncing his own pane- 
 gyric’) to meet his adversaries in their boast- 
 ings: “ Whereinsoever any is bold (1 speak 
 foolishly), I am bold also. Are they Hebrews ? 
 soam I. Are they Israelites? so am J. Are 
 
 1 “ Would to God you could bear with me a little in my 
 folly: and indeed bear with me” (xi.1). 
 
 ‘That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, hut 
 as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting” (xi. 17). 
 
 “T am become a fool in glorying: ye have compelled 
 me” (xii. 11). 
 
 M 2 
 
164 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 they the seed of Abraham? soam I. Are they 
 the ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool,) I 
 am more; in labours more abundant, in stripes 
 above measure, in prisons more frequent, in 
 deaths oft.’ Being thus led to the subject, he 
 goes on, as was natural, to recount his trials and 
 dangers, his incessant cares and labours in the 
 Christian mission. From the proofs which he 
 had given of his zeal and activity in the service 
 of Christ, he passes (and that with the same 
 view of establishing his claim to be considered 
 as “not a whit behind the very chiefest of the 
 Apostles ”’) to the visions and revelations which 
 from time to time had been vouchsafed to him. 
 And then, by a close and easy connexion, comes 
 in the mention of his infirmity: ‘ Lest I should 
 be exalted,” says he, “above measure, through 
 the abundance of the revelations, there was 
 given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger 
 of Satan to buffet me.” 
 
 Thus then, in both Epistles, the notice of his 
 infirmity is suited to the place in which it is 
 found. In the Epistle to the Corinthians, the 
 train of thought draws up to the circumstance 
 by a regular approximation. In this Epistle it 
 is suggested by the subject and occasion of the 
 Kpistle itself. Which observation we offer as 
 an argument to prove that it is not, in either 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 165 
 
 Epistle, a cireumstance industriously brought 
 forward for the sake of procuring credit to an 
 imposture. 
 
 A reader will be taught to perceive the force 
 of this argument, who shall attempt to intro- 
 duce a given circumstance into the body of a 
 writing. To do this without abruptness, or 
 without betraying marks of design in the tran- 
 sition, requires, he will find, more art than he 
 expected to be necessary, certainly more than 
 any one can believe to have been exercised in 
 the composition of these Epistles. 
 
 No. V. 
 
 Chap. iv. 29: “ But as then he that was born 
 after the flesh persecuted him that was born 
 after the Spirit, even so is it now.” 
 
 Chap. v. 11: “And I, brethren, if I yet 
 preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer perse- 
 eution ? Then is the offence of the cross ceased.” 
 
 Chap. vi. 17: “ From henceforth let no man 
 trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of 
 the Lord Jesus.” 
 
 From these several texts, it is apparent that 
 the persecutions which our Apostle had under- 
 gone were from the hands or by the instigation 
 
166 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 of the Jews; that it was not for preaching 
 Christianity in opposition to heathenism, but it 
 was for preaching it as distinct from Judaism, 
 that he had brought upon himself the sufferings 
 which had attended his ministry. And this 
 representation perfectly coincides with that 
 which results from the detail of St. Paul’s his- 
 tory, as delivered in the Acts. At Antioch, in 
 Pisidia, ‘the word of the Lord was published 
 throughout all the region; but the Jews stirred 
 up the devout and honourable women, and the 
 chief men of the city, and raised persecution 
 against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them 
 out of their coasts.” Acts xi. 49,50. Not 
 long after, at Iconium, “a great multitude of 
 the Jews and also of the Greeks believed; but 
 the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and 
 made their minds evil affected against the 
 brethren ” (xiv. 1,2). “ At Lystra there came 
 certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who 
 persuaded the people; and having stoned Paul, 
 drew him out of the city, supposing he had been 
 dead’? (xiv. 19). The same enmity, and from 
 the same quarter, our Apostle experienced in 
 Greece: ‘‘At Thessalonica, some of them (the 
 Jews) believed, and consorted with’ Paul and 
 Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multi- — 
 tude, and of the chief women not afew. But 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 167 
 
 the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, 
 took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser 
 sort, and gathered a company, and set all the 
 city in an uproar, and assaulted the house of 
 Jason, and sought to bring them out to the 
 people.” Acts xvi. 4, 5. Their persecutors 
 follow them to Berea: “When the Jews of 
 Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of 
 God was preached of Paul at Berza, they came 
 thither also, and stirred up the people” (xvil. 
 13). And lastly, at Corinth, when Gallio was 
 deputy of Achaia, “the Jews made insurrection 
 with one accord against Paul, and brought him 
 to the judgment-seat ”” (xvii. 12). I think it 
 does not appear that our Apostle was ever set 
 upon by the Gentiles, unless they were first 
 stirred up by the Jews, except in two instances ; 
 in both-which the persons who began the assault 
 were immediately interested in his expulsion 
 from the place. Once this happened at Philippi, 
 after the cure of the Pythoness: “ When her 
 masters saw that the hope of their gains was 
 gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew 
 them into the market-place unto the rulers” 
 (xvi. 19). And a second time, at Ephesus, at 
 the instance of “ Demetrius, a silversmith, which 
 made silver shrines for Diana,” ‘‘ who called 
 together the workmen of like occupation, and 
 
168 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have 
 our wealth; moreover, ye see and hear that not 
 alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout al} 
 Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away 
 much people, saying, that they be no gods which 
 are made with hands; so that not only this our 
 craft is in danger to be set at nought, but also 
 that the temple of the great goddess Diana 
 should be despised, and her magnificence should 
 be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world 
 worshippeth” (xix. 24—27), 
 
 INDIONSL. 
 
 I observe an agreement in a somewhat pecu- 
 liar rule of Christian conduct, as laid down in 
 this Epistle, and as exemplified in the second 
 Epistle to the Corinthians. It is not the repe- 
 tition of the same general precept, which would 
 have been a coincidence of little value; but it is 
 the general precept in one place, and the appli- 
 cation of that precept to an actual occurrence in 
 the other. In the sixth chapter and first verse 
 of this Epistle, our Apostle gives the following 
 direction: “ Brethren, if a man be overtaken in 
 a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an 
 one in the spirit of meekness.” In 2 Cor. il. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 169 
 
 6—8, he writes thus: ‘Sufficient to such a 
 man (the incestuous person mentioned in the 
 first Epistle) is this punishment, which was in- 
 flicted of many; so that, contrariwise, ye ought 
 rather to forgive him and comfort him, lest per- 
 haps such a one should be swallowed up with 
 over-much sorrow ; wherefore I beseech you that 
 ye would confirm your love towards him.” I 
 have little doubt but that it was the same mind 
 which dictated these two passages. 
 
 No. VII. 
 
 Our Epistle goes further than any of St. 
 Paul’s Epistles ; for it avows in direct terms the 
 supersession of the Jewish law, as an instrument 
 of salvation, even to the Jews themselves. Not 
 only were the Gentiles exempt from its authority, 
 but even the Jews were no longer either to place 
 any dependence upon it, or consider themselves 
 as subject to it on a religious account: “ Before 
 faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up 
 unto the faith which should afterwards be re- 
 vealed ; wherefore the law was our schoolmaster 
 to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justi- 
 fied by faith; but, after that faith is come, we 
 
170 HORA! PAULINA. 
 
 are no-longer under a schoolmaster” (in. 28— 
 25). 
 
 This was undoubtedly spoken of Jews, and to 
 Jews. In like manner, chap. iv. 1—5: “ Now 
 I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, 
 differeth nothing from a servant, though he be 
 lord of all; but is under tutors and governors 
 until the time appointed of the father : even so 
 we, when we were children, were in bondage 
 under the elements of the world; but, when the 
 fulness of time was come, God sent forth His 
 Son, made of a woman, made under the law, fo 
 redeem them that were under the law, that we 
 might receive the adoption of sons.’ These 
 passages are nothing short of a declaration, that 
 the obligation of the Jewish law, considered as a 
 religious dispensation, the effects of which were 
 to take place in another life, had ceased, with 
 respect even to the Jews themselves. What 
 then should be the conduct of a Jew (for such 
 St. Paul was) who preached this doctrine? To 
 be consistent -with himself, either he would no 
 longer comply, in his own person, with the 
 directions of the law; or, if he did comply, it 
 would be for some other reason than any con- 
 fidence which he placed in its efficacy as a 
 religious institution. Now so it happens, that 
 whenever St. Paul’s compliance with the Jewish 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. live 
 
 law is mentioned in the history, it is mentioned 
 in connexion with circumstances which point 
 out the motive from which it proceeded :” and 
 this motive appears to have been always exoteric, 
 namely, a love of order and tranquillity, or an 
 unwillingness to give unnecessary offence. 
 Thus (Acts xvi. 3): ‘ Him (Timothy) would 
 Paul have to go forth with him, and took and 
 circumcised him, decause of the Jews which were 
 im those quarters.’ Again (Acts, chap. xxi. 
 26), when Paul consented to exhibit an example 
 of public compliance with a Jewish rite, by 
 purifying himself in the temple, it is plainly 
 intimated that he did this to satisfy “many 
 thousands of Jews who believed, and who were 
 all zealous of the law” (ver. 20). So far the 
 instances related in one book correspond with 
 the doctrine delivered in another. 
 
 No. VIII. 
 Chap. i. 18: “Then, after three years, I went 
 
 2 [There was also a higher motive than this, and one 
 which, following Paley’s phraseology, we may term 
 esoteric. There was his desire of, exercising spiritual 
 persuasion by the method of compliance in things neutral. 
 It was part of his becoming “all things ta all men, that 
 he might by all means save some.”—H. | 
 
172 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with 
 him fifteen days.” 
 
 The shortness of St. Paul’s stay at Jerusalem 
 is what I desire the reader to remark. The 
 direct account of the same journey in the Acts 
 (ix. 28—30) determines nothing concerning the 
 time of his continuance there: “And he was 
 with them (the Apostles) coming in and going 
 out at Jerusalem ; and he spake boldly in the 
 name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against 
 the Grecians ; but they went about to slay him ; 
 which when the brethren knew, they brought 
 him down to Cesarea.”? Or rather this account, 
 taken by itself, would lead a reader to suppose 
 that St. Paul’s abode at Jerusalem had been 
 longer than fifteen days. But turn to the twenty- 
 second chapter of the Acts, and you will find a 
 reference to this visit to Jerusalem, which plainly 
 indicates that Paul’s continuance in that city 
 had been of short duration: “ And it came to 
 pass, that when I was come again to Jerusalem, 
 even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a 
 trance; and saw Him saying unto me, Make 
 haste, get thee quickly out of Jerusalem, for 
 they will not receive thy testimony concerning 
 Me.” Here we have the general terms of one 
 text so explained by a distant text in the same 
 book, as to bring an indeterminate expression 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 173 
 
 into close conformity with a specification de- 
 livered in another book ; a species of consistency 
 not, I think, usually found in fabulous relations. 
 
 No. IX. 
 
 Chap. vi. 11: “Ye see how large a letter I 
 have written unto you with mine own hand.” 
 
 These words imply that he did not always 
 write with his own hand; which is consonant 
 to what we find intimated in some other of the 
 Epistles. The Epistle to the Romans was 
 written by Tertius: “ I Tertius, who wrote this 
 Epistle, salute you in the Lord ” (xvi. 22). The 
 first Epistle to the Corinthians, the Epistle to 
 the Colossians, and the second to the Thessa- 
 lonians, have all, near the conclusion, this 
 clause: “The salutation of me, Paul, with mine 
 own hand;” which must be understood, and is 
 universally understood, to import that the rest 
 of the Epistle was written by another hand. I 
 do not think it improbable that an impostor, 
 who had remarked this subscription in some 
 other Epistle, should invent the same in a 
 forgery ; but that is not done here. The author 
 of this Epistle does not imitate the manner of 
 
174 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 giving St. Paul’s signature; he only bids the 
 Galatians observe how large a letter he had 
 written to them with his own hand. He does 
 not say this was different from his ordinary 
 usage; that is left to implication. Now to 
 suppose that this was an artifice to procure 
 credit to an imposture, is to suppose that the 
 author of the forgery, because he knew that 
 others of St. Paul’s were not written by himself, 
 therefore made the Apostle say that this was : 
 which seems an odd turn to give to the cireum- 
 stance, and to be given for a purpose which 
 would more naturally and more directly have 
 been answered by subjoining the salutation or 
 signature in the form in which it is found in 
 other Epistles.’ 
 
 8 The words mnAikos ypdupaci may probably be meant 
 to describe the character in which he wrote, and not the 
 length of the letter. But this will not alter the truth of 
 our observation. I think, however, that as St. Paul by 
 the mention of his own hand designed to express to the 
 Galatians the great concern which he felt for them, the 
 words, whatever they signify, belong to the whole of the 
 Epistle; and not as Grotius, after St. Jerome, interprets 
 it, to the few verses which follow.* 
 
 * [‘* At this point the Apostle takes the pen from his 
 amanuensis, and the concluding paragraph is written with 
 his own hand. From the time when letters began to be 
 forged in his name (2 Thess. ii. 2; iii. 17), it seems to have 
 been his practice to close with a few words in his own 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS., 175 
 
 No. X. 
 
 An exact conformity appears in the manner in 
 which a certain Apostle or eminent Christian, 
 whose name was James, is spoken of in the 
 Epistle and in the history. Both writings refer 
 to a situation of his at Jerusalem, somewhat 
 different from that of the other Apostles ; a kind 
 of eminence or presidency in the Church there, 
 or at least a more fixed and stationary residence. 
 Chap. u. 12: “ When Peter was at Antioch, 
 before that certain came from James; he did 
 eat with the Gentiles.” This text plainly attri- 
 butes a kind of pre-eminence to James, and, as 
 we hear of him twice in the same Epistle dwell- 
 ing at Jerusalem (i..19, and i. 9), we must 
 apply it to the situation which he held in that 
 Church. In the Acts of the Apostles divers 
 intimations occur, conveying the same idea of 
 James’s situation, When Peter was miracu- 
 lously delivered from prison, and had surprised 
 his friends by his appearance among them, after 
 
 kandwriting as a precaution against such forgeries. .. . 
 In the present case he writes a whole paragraph, summing 
 up the main lessons of the Epistle in terse, eager, dis- 
 jointed sentences. He writes it, too,in large, bold characters, 
 that his handwriting may reflect the energy and deter- 
 mination of his soul.”’—Lightfoot ‘On the Galatians,” 
 p- 217.—H. ] 
 
176 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 declaring unto them how the Lord had brought 
 him out of prison, “ Go show,” says he, “ these 
 things unto James, and to the brethren.” Acts 
 xi. 17. Here James is manifestly spoken of in 
 terms of distinction. He appears again with 
 like distinction in ch. xxi. 17, 18: “ And when 
 we (Paul and his company) were come to Jeru- 
 salem; the day following, Paul went in with us 
 unto James; and all the elders were present.” 
 In the debate which took place upon the business 
 of the Gentile converts, in the council at Jeru- 
 salem, this same ‘person seems to have taken the 
 lead. It was he who closed the debate, and 
 proposed the resolution in which the council 
 ultimately concurred: “ Wherefore my sentence 
 is, that we trouble not them which from among 
 the Gentiles are turned to God.” 
 
 Upon the whole, that there exists a conformity 
 intheexpressions used concerning James, through- 
 out the history and in the Epistle, is unquestion- 
 able. But admitting this conformity, and ad- 
 mitting also tho undesignedness of it, what does 
 it prove? It proves that the circumstance it- 
 self is founded in truth; that is, that James 
 was a real person, who held a situation of emi- 
 nence in a real society of Christians at Jerusa- 
 iem. It confirms also those parts of the narra- 
 tive which are connected with this cireumstance. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. ivy) 
 
 Suppose, for instance, the truth of the account 
 of Peter’s escape from prison was to be tried 
 upon the testimony of a witness, who, among 
 other things, made Peter, after his deliverance, 
 say, “Go show these things to James and to 
 the brethren ;”” would it not be material in such 
 a trial, to make out by other independent proofs, 
 or by a comparison of proofs drawn from inde- 
 pendent sources, that there was actually at that 
 time, living at Jerusalem, such a person as James ; 
 that this person held such a situation in the 
 society among whom these things were transacted, 
 as to render the words which Peter is said to have 
 used concerning him proper and natural for him 
 to have used? If this would be pertinent in 
 the discussion of oral testimony, it is still more 
 so In appreciating the credit of remote history. 
 
 It must not be dissembled that the com- 
 parison of our Epistle with the history presents 
 some difficulties, or, to say the least, some 
 questions of considerable magnitude. It may 
 be doubted, in the first place, to what journey 
 the words which open the second chapter of the 
 Epistle, “Then fourteen years afterwards, I 
 went unto Jerusalem,” relate. That which 
 best corresponds with the date, and that to 
 which most interpreters apply the passage, is 
 
 N 
 
178 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 the journey of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, 
 when they went thither from Antioch, upon the 
 business of the Gentile converts; and which 
 journey produced the famous council and decree 
 recorded in Acts xv. To me this opinion ap- 
 pears to be encumbered with strong objections. 
 In the Epistle Paul tells us that “he went up 
 by revelation” (ii. 2). In the Acts, we read 
 that he was sent by the Church of Antioch: 
 “ After no small dissension and disputation, they 
 determined that Paul and Barnabas, and cer- 
 tain other of them, should go up to the Apostles 
 and elders about this question” (Acts xv. 2). 
 This is not very reconcileable. _ In the Epistle 
 St. Paul. writes that, when he came to Jerusalem, 
 “he communicated that Gospel which he 
 preached among the Gentiles, but privately to 
 them which were of reputation” (ii. 2). If by 
 “that Gospel’? be meant the immunity of the 
 Gentile Christians from the Jewish law (and I 
 know not what else it can mean), it is not easy 
 to conceive how he should communicate that 
 privately which was the subject of his public 
 message. Buta yet greater difficulty remains, 
 namely, that in the account which the Epistle 
 gives of what passed upon this visit at 
 Jerusalem, no notice is taken of the delibera- 
 tion and decree which are recorded in the Acts, 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 179 
 
 and which, according to that history, formed 
 the business for the sake of which the journey 
 was undertaken. The mention of the council 
 and of its determination, while the Apostle was 
 relating his proceedings at Jerusalem, could 
 hardly have been avoided, if in truth the 
 narrative belong to the same journey. To me 
 it appears more probable that Paul and 
 Barnabas had taken some journey to Jerusalem, 
 the mention of which is omitted in the Acts.’ 
 Prior to the apostolic decree, we read that 
 “ Paul and Barnabas abode at Antioch a long 
 time with the disciples” (Acts xiv. 28). Is it 
 unlikely that, during this long abode, they 
 might go up to Jerusalem and return to 
 Antioch? Or would the omission of such a 
 journey be unsuitable to the general brevity 
 with which these memoirs are written, especially 
 of those parts of St. Paul’s history which took 
 place before the historian joined his society ? 
 But, again, the first account we find in the 
 Acts of the Apostles of St, Paul’s visiting 
 Galatia, is in chap. xvi. 6: “Now when they 
 had gone through Phrygia and the region of 
 Galatia, they assayed to go unto Bithynia.’’ 
 The progress here recorded was subsequent to 
 4 [See AppEnpix VI., on St. Paul’s Journeys to Jerusa- 
 
 lem.— H. } 
 N 2 
 
180 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 the apostolic decree; therefore that decree must 
 have been extant when our Epistle was written. 
 Now, as the professed design of the Epistle was 
 to establish the exemption of the Gentile con- 
 verts from the law of Moses, and as the decree 
 pronounced and confirmed that exemption, it 
 may seem extraordinary that no notice what- 
 ever is taken of that determination, nor any ap- 
 peal made to its authority. Much, however, of 
 the weight of this objection, which applies also 
 to some other of St. Paul’s Epistles, is removed 
 by the following reflections. 
 
 1. It was not St. Paul’s manner, nor agree- 
 able to it, to resort or defer much to the 
 authority of the other Apostles, especially while 
 he was insisting, as he does strenuously through- 
 out this Epistle insist, upon his own original 
 inspiration.’ He who could speak of the very 
 chiefest of the Apostles in such terms as the fol- 
 lowing —“ of these who seemed to be somewhat, 
 (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to 
 me: God accepteth no man’s person:) for they 
 who seemed to be somewhat in conference added 
 
 5 [Moreover in this case he was writing to his own con- 
 verts, and he proceeds not so much on the method of argu- 
 ment as that of authority. See the two methods con- 
 trasted, according to the occasions on which they were 
 
 used, in what is said above on the Epistle to the Romans, 
 No. vilii— H. | 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 181 
 
 nothing to me”—he, I say, was not likely to 
 support himself by their decision. 
 
 2. The Epistle argues the point upon prin- 
 ciple; and it is not perhaps more to be 
 wondered at, that in such an argument St. Paul 
 should not cite the apostolic decree, than it 
 would be that, in a discourse designed to prove 
 the moral and religious duty of observing the 
 sabbath, the writer should not quote the 
 thirteenth canon. 
 
 3. The decree did not go the length of the 
 position maintained in the Epistle; the decree 
 only declares that the Apostles and elders at 
 Jerusalem did not impose the observance of the 
 Mosaic law upon the Gentile converts as a con- 
 dition of their being admitted into the Christian 
 Church. Our Epistle argues that the Mosaic 
 institution itself was at an end, as to all effects 
 upon a future state, even with respect to the 
 Jews themselves. 
 
 4. They whose error St. Paul combated were 
 not persons who submitted to the Jewish law, 
 because it was imposed by the authority, o1 
 because it was made part of the law of the 
 Christian Church; but they were persons who, 
 having already become Christians, afterwards 
 voluntarily took upon themselves the observance 
 of the Mosaic code, under a notion of attaining 
 
182 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 thereby to a greater perfection. This, I think, 
 is precisely the opinion which St. Paul opposes 
 in this Epistle. Many of his expressions apply 
 exactly to it: ‘Are ye so foolish? having begun 
 in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the 
 flesh ?” (i11.'3). “Tell me, ye that desire to be 
 under the law, do ye not hear the law?” (iv. 
 21). ‘How turn ye again to the weak and 
 beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to 
 be in bondage?” (iv. 9). It cannot be thought 
 extraordinary that St. Paul should resist this 
 opinion with earnestness; for it both changed 
 the character of the Christian dispensation, and 
 derogated expressly from the completeness of 
 that redemption which Jesus Christ had wrought 
 for them that believed in Him. But it was to 
 no purpose to allege to such persons the decision 
 at Jerusalem, for that only showed that they 
 were not bound to these observances by any law 
 of the Christian Church: they did not pretend 
 to be so bound. Nevertheless they imagined 
 that there was an efficacy in these observances, 
 a merit, a recommendation to favour, and a 
 ground of acceptance with God for those who 
 complied with them. This was a situation of 
 thought to which the tenor of the decree did 
 not apply. Accordingly, St. Paul’s address to 
 the Galatians, which is throughout adapted to 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 183 
 
 this situation, runs in a strain widely different 
 from the language of the decree: “ Christ is 
 become of no effect unto you, whosvever of you 
 are justified by the law” (v. 4) ; that is, whoso- 
 ever places his dependence upon any merit he 
 may apprehend there to be in legal observances. 
 The decree had said nothing like this; therefore 
 it would have been useless to have produced the 
 decree in an argument of which this was the 
 burden. In like manner as in contending with 
 an anchorite, who should insist upon the superior 
 holiness of a recluse, ascetic life, and the value 
 of such mortifications in the sight of God, it 
 would be to no purpose to prove that the laws 
 of the Church did not require these vows, or 
 even to prove that the laws of the Church ex- 
 pressly left every Christian to his liberty. This 
 would avail little towards abating his estimation 
 of their merit, or towards settling the point in 
 controversy.° 
 
 6 Mr. Locke’s solution of this difficulty is by no means 
 satisfactory. ‘St. Paul,” he says, ‘‘did not remind the 
 Galatians of the apostolic decree, because they already 
 had it.” In the first place, it does not appear with cer- 
 tainty that they had it; in the second place, if they had 
 it, this was rather a reason than otherwise for referring 
 them to it. The passage in the Acts, from which Mr. 
 Locke concludes that the Galatian Churches were in pos- 
 
 session of the decree, is ch. xvi. 4: “ And as they (Paul 
 and Timothy) went through the cities, they delivered 
 
184 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Another difficulty arises from the account of 
 Peter’s conduct towards the Gentile converts at 
 
 them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the 
 Apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.” In my 
 opinion, this delivery of the decree was confined to the 
 Churches to which St. Paul came, in pursuance of the plan 
 upon which he set out, of “ visiting the brethren in every 
 city where he had preached the word of the Lord;” the 
 history of which progress, and of all that pertained to it, 
 is closed in the fifth verse, when the history informs us 
 that “so were the churches established in the faith, and 
 increased in number daily.” Then the history proceeds 
 upon a new section of the narrative, by telling us that 
 ‘“ when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region 
 of Galatia, they assayed to go into Bithynia.’’ The decree 
 itself is directed ‘ to the brethren which are of the Gen- 
 tiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia ;” that is, to Churches 
 already founded, and in which this question had been 
 stirred. And I think the observation of the noble author 
 of the ‘‘ Miscellanea Sacra” is not only ingenious, but 
 highly probable, namely, that there is, in this place, a dis- 
 location of the text, and that the fourth and fifth verses of 
 the sixteenth chapter ought to follow the last verse of the 
 fifteenth, so as to make the entire passage run thus: “ And 
 they went through Syria and Cilicia (to the Christians of 
 which countries the decree was addressed), confirming the 
 churches ; and as they went through the cities, they deli- 
 vered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of 
 the apostles and elders, which were at Jerusalem ; and so 
 were the churches established in the faith, and increased 
 in number daily.” And then the sixteenth chapter takes 
 up a new and unbroken paragraph: ‘‘Then came he to 
 Derbe and Lystra,” &c. When St. Paul came, as he did 
 into Galatia, to preach the Gospel for the first time, in a 
 new place, it is not probable that he would make mention 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 185 
 
 Antioch, as given in the Epistle, in the latter 
 part of the second chapter; which conduct, it is 
 said, is consistent neither with the revelation 
 communicated to him, upon the conversion of 
 Cornelius, nor with the part he took in the 
 debate at Jerusalem. But, in order to under- 
 stand either the difficulty or the solution, it will 
 be necessary to state and explain the passage 
 itself. “ When Peter was come to Antioch, I 
 withstood him to the face, because he was to be 
 blamed; for, before that certain came from 
 James, he did eat with the Gentiles; but when 
 they were come, he withdrew and separated 
 himself, fearing them which were of the circum- 
 cision; and the other Jews dissembled likewise 
 
 of the decree, or rather letter, of the Church of Jerusalem, 
 which presupposed Christianity to be known, and which 
 related to certain doubts that had arisen in some esta- 
 blished Christian communities. 
 
 The second reason which Mr. Locke assigns for the 
 omission of the decree, namely, ‘that St. Paul’s sole 
 object in the Epistle was to acquit himself of the impu- 
 tation that had been charged upon him of actually preach- 
 ing circumcision,” does not appear to me to be strictly 
 true. Jt was not the sole object. The Epistle is written 
 in general opposition to the Judaizing inclinations which 
 he found to prevail among his converts. The avowal of 
 his own doctrine, and of his steadfast adherence to that 
 doctrine, formed a necessary part of the design of his 
 letter, but was not the whole of it. 
 
186 | HORE PAULINA. 
 
 with him, insomuch that Barnabas also was 
 carried away with their dissimulation: » but 
 when I saw they walked not uprightly, aecord- 
 ing to the truth of the gospel, I said unto 
 Peter, before them all, If thou, being a Jew, 
 livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as 
 do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles 
 to live as do the Jews?” Now the question 
 that produced the dispute to which these words 
 relate, was not whether the Gentiles were 
 capable of being admitted into the Christian 
 covenant; that had been fully settled: nor was 
 it whether it should be accounted essential to 
 the profession’ of Christianity that they should 
 conform themselves to the law of Moses; that 
 was the question at Jerusalem: but it was, 
 whether, upon the Gentiles becoming Christians, 
 the Jews might thenceforth eat and drink with 
 them, as with their own brethren. Upon this 
 point St. Peter betrayed some inconstancy; and 
 so he might, agreeably enough to his history. 
 He might consider the vision at Joppa as a 
 direction for the occasion, rather than as univer- 
 sally abolishing the distinction between Jew and 
 Gentile: I do not mean with respect to final 
 acceptance with God, but as to the manner of 
 their living together in society: at least he 
 might not have comprehended this point with 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 187 
 
 such clearness and certainty, as to stand out 
 upon it against the fear of bringing upon him- 
 self the censure and complaint of his brethren 
 in the Church of Jerusalem, who still adhered 
 to their ancient prejudices. But Peter, it is 
 said, compelled the Gentiles IovéatGev— why 
 compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the 
 Jews?” How did he do that? The only way 
 in which Peter appears to have compelled the 
 Gentiles to comply with the Jewish institution, 
 was by withdrawing himself from their society. 
 By which he may be understood to have made 
 this declaration; “ We do not deny your right 
 to be considered as Christians; we do not deny | 
 your title in the promises of the Gospel, even 
 without compliance with our law: but if you 
 would have us Jews live with you, as we do 
 with one another, that is, if you would in all 
 respects be treated by us as Jews, you must live 
 as such yourselves.” This, I think, was the 
 compulsion which St. Peter’s conduct imposed 
 upon the Gentiles, and for which St. Paul 
 reproved him.’ 
 
 As to the part which the historian ascribes to 
 
 7 [After all, the true solution of the difficulty, if there is 
 any difficulty, is to be found in the inconsistency of St. 
 Peter. The language of St. Paul is very strong, and his 
 rebuke very severe.—H. | 
 
188 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 St. Peter, in the debate at Jerusalem, besides 
 that it was a different question which was there 
 agitated from that which produced the dispute 
 at Antioch, there is nothing to hinder us from 
 supposing that the dispute at Antioch was prior 
 to the consultation at Jerusalem ; or that Peter, 
 in consequence of this rebuke, might have after- 
 wards maintained firmer sentiments. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 189 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 IN OaiL: 
 
 Tuts Epistle, and the Epistle to the Colossians, 
 appear to have been transmitted to their respec- 
 tive Churches by the same messenger: ‘ But 
 that ye also may know my affairs, and how I do, 
 Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful minister 
 in the Lord, shall make known to you all 
 things; whom I have sent unto you for the 
 same purpose, that ye might know our affairs, 
 and that he might comfort your hearts.” (Eph. 
 vi. 21, 22.) This text, if it do not expressly 
 declare, clearly, I think, intimates, that the 
 letter was sent by Tychicus. The words made 
 use of in the Epistle to the Colossians are very 
 similar to these, and afford the same implication 
 that Tychicus, in conjunction with Onesimus, 
 was the bearer of the letter to that Church: 
 
190 HORZ PAULINA. 
 
 “ All my state shall Tychicus declare unto you, 
 who is a beloved brother, and a faithful minister, 
 and fellow-servant in the Lord, whom I have 
 sent unto you for the same purpose, that he 
 might know your estate, and comfort your 
 hearts ; with Onesimus, a faithful and beloved 
 brother, who is one of you: they shall make 
 known unto you all things which are done here.” 
 (Colos. iv. 7—9.) Both Epistles represent the 
 writer as under imprisonment for the gospel ; 
 and both treat of the same general subject. The 
 Epistle therefore to the Ephesians,* and the 
 Epistle to the Colossians, import to be two 
 letters written by the same person, at, or nearly 
 at, the same time, and upon the same subject, 
 and to have been sent by the same messenger. 
 Now, everything in the sentiments, order, and 
 diction of the two writings corresponds with 
 what might be expected from this circumstance 
 
 8 [The Epistle to the Ephesians has, during the last half. 
 century, had to bear the brunt of very serious criticism as 
 to its authenticity; and it is striking to observe how 
 Paley, without knowing the form which this criticism 
 would take, has sagaciously furnished a satisfactory 
 answer. On comparing, according to his method, this 
 Hpistle with that to the Colossians, it seems impossible 
 not to be convinced that they were written by the same 
 person; and yet there are other particulars which he has 
 not noticed within the same field of argument. See more 
 in AppENDIx VII.—H. ] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. ‘ 191 
 of identity or cognation in their original.” The 
 leading doctrine of both Epistles is the union of 
 Jews and Gentiles under the Christian dispen- 
 sation ; and that doctrine in both is established 
 by the same arguments, or, more properly speak- 
 ing, illustrated by the same similitudes:° “one 
 head,” ‘one body,’ “one new man,” “one 
 temple,’ are in both Epistles the figures, under 
 which the society of believers in Christ, and 
 their common relation to Him as such, is repre- 
 sented.’ The ancient, and, as had been thought, 
 the indelible distinction between Jew and Gen- 
 tile is in both Epistles declared to be “‘ now 
 abolished by His cross.” 
 
 9 St. Paul, I am apt to believe, has been sometimes 
 accused of inconclusive reasoning, by our mistaking that 
 for reasoning which was only intended for illustration. 
 He is not to be read as a man whose own persuasion of 
 the truth of what he taught always, or solely, depended 
 upon the views under which he represents it in his writings. 
 Taking for granted the certainty of his doctrine, as resting 
 upon the revelation that had been imparted to him, he 
 exhibits it frequently to the conception of his readers 
 under images and allegories, in which if an analogy may 
 
 be perceived, or even sometimes a poetic resemblance be 
 found, it is all perhaps that is required. 
 
 Ephes.i. 22, Colos. i. 18. 
 1 Compare iv. | wien} i, 19. 
 RY Me 10s us 
 
 Ephes. ii. 14, 15, Colos, i. 14. 
 ato| ii. 16, font i. 18-21. 
 
 ii, 20, ii, 7. 
 
192 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Besides this consent in the general tenor of 
 the two Epistles, and in the run also and warmth 
 of thought with which they are composed, we 
 may naturally expect, in letters produced under 
 the circumstances in which these appear to have 
 been written, a closer resemblance of style and 
 diction, than between other letters of the same 
 person, but of distant dates, or between letters 
 adapted to different occasions. In particular, 
 we may look for many of the same expressions, 
 and sometimes for whole sentences being alike ; 
 since such expressions and sentences would be 
 repeated in the second letter (whichever that 
 was) as yet fresh in the author’s mind from the 
 writing of the first. This repetition occurs in 
 the following examples : *— 
 
 Ephes. i. 7: “ In whom we have redemption 
 through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” * 
 
 Colos. i. 14: “In whom we have redemption 
 through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” * 
 
 2 When verbal comparisons are relied upon, it becomes 
 necessary to state the original ; but that the English reader 
 may be interrupted as little as may be, I shall in general 
 do this in the notes. 
 
 3 Hphes. i. 7: "Ev @ xowev thy amoddtpwow bid Tov 
 aluaros avrov, Thy &perw THY TapaTTwUaTwV. 
 
 4 Colos. i. 14: Ev @ €xouev thy drovvtpwow 514 Tod alwaros 
 abtov, Thy &perw Tov auapti@v.—However it must be ob- 
 
 served, that in this latter text many copies have not dé 
 
 TOv aluaTos avTOV, 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 193 
 
 Besides the sameness of the words, it is further 
 remarkable that the sentence is, in both places, 
 preceded by the same introductory idea. In the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians it is the “deloved” 
 (jyarnpévw) ; in that to the Colossians it is 
 “ His dear Son” (viov rig ayamne avrov), “in 
 whom we have redemption.” ‘The sentence 
 appears to have been suggested to the mind 
 of the writer by the idea which had accompanied 
 it before. 
 
 Ephes. i. 10: “ All things in Christ, both 
 which are in heaven and which are on earth ; 
 even in Him.’ ® 
 
 Colos. i. 20: “All things—by Him, whe- 
 ther they be things in earth, or things in 
 heaven.” ° | 
 
 This quotation is the more observable, because 
 the connecting of things in earth with things 
 in Heaven is a very singular sentiment, and 
 found nowhere else but in these two Epistles. 
 The words also are introduced and followed by 
 a train of thought nearly alike. They are intro- 
 duced by describing the union which Christ had 
 effected, and they are followed by telling the 
 
 5 Hphes. i. 10: Ta re év rots ovpavots kal ra éml THs yijs, 
 ey avTa. 
 6 Colos. i. 20: Ta rdvta... 50 adrov, etre Ta em) THS Vis, 
 elTe TH €v TOs OUpavots. 
 O 
 
194 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Gentile Churches that they were meorporated 
 into it. 
 
 Ephes. i. 2: “ The dispensation of the grace 
 of God, which is given me to you-ward.” ? 
 
 Colos. 1. 25: ‘ The dispensation of God which 
 is given to me for you.”’® 
 
 Of these sentences it may likewise be observed, 
 that the accompanying ideas are similar. In 
 both places they are immediately preceded by 
 the mention of his present sufferings: in both 
 places they are immediately followed by the 
 mention of the mystery which was the great 
 subject of his preaching. 
 
 Ephes. v. 19: “In psalms and hymns and 
 spiritual songs, smging and making melody in 
 your heart to the Lord.” ” 
 
 Colos. in. 16: “In psalms and hymns and 
 spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts 
 to the Lord.” * 
 
 Ephes. vi. 22: “Whom I have sent unto 
 you for the same purpose, that ye might know 
 
 7 Hphes. iii. 2: Tv oikovoulay rijs xdpitos Tov Ocod THs 
 Sodelons por cis bas. 
 
 8 Colos. i. 25: Thy oikovoutay Tov @covd Thy So0ctodv mor eis 
 bas. 
 
 9 Kphes. vy. 19: Wadports ral Suvois nal Sdats mvevpatixais, 
 “SovTes Kal WddAovTes ev TH Kapdia buoy TG Kuply. 
 
 1 Colos. 11. 16: Yarwots kal buvois cal @dals mvevparixais, 
 év xapitt Gdovtes ev TH kapdla bua@y TS Kuplo. 
 
é 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 195 
 
 our affairs, and that he might comfort your 
 hearts.”’* 
 
 Colos. iv. 8: “ Whom I have sent unto you 
 for the same purpose, that he might know your 
 estate, and comfort your hearts.’’* 
 
 In these examples, we do not perceive a cento 
 of phrases gathered from one composition, and 
 strung together in the other; but the occasional 
 occurrence of the same expression to a mind a 
 second time revolving the same ideas. 
 
 2. Whoever writes two letters, or two dis- 
 courses, nearly upon the same subject, and at no 
 great distance of time, but without any express 
 recollection of what he had written before, will 
 find himself repeating some sentences, in the very 
 order of the words in which he had already used 
 them; but he will more frequently find himself 
 employing some principal terms, with the order 
 inadvertently changed, or with the order dis- 
 turbed by the intermixture of other words and 
 phrases expressive of ideas rising up at the time ; 
 or in many instances repeating not single words, 
 nor yet whole sentences, but parts and fragments 
 of sentences. Of all these varieties the exami- 
 
 2 Hphes. vi. 22: “Ov éreupa mpds buas eis avtd TovTo, iva 
 yate Ta TEpl Huey, Kal Tapakadréon Tas Kapdlas duay. 
 3 Colos. iv. 8: “Ov emreupa mpds buds eis ad’td TodTo, tva 
 VG 7 Tepl Vudy, Kat Tapakadréon Tas Kapdias Kuav. 
 0 2 
 
196 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 nation of our two Epistles will furnish plain 
 examples: and I shall rely upon this class of 
 instances more than upon the last; because, 
 although an impostor might transcribe into a 
 forgery entire sentences and phrases, yet the 
 dislocation of words, the partial recollection of 
 phrases and sentences, the intermixture of new 
 terms and new ideas with terms and ideas before 
 used,—which will appear in the examples that 
 follow, and which are the natural properties of 
 writings produced under the circumstances in 
 which these Epistles are represented to have been 
 composed,—would not, I think, have occurred 
 to the invention of a forger; nor, if they had 
 occurred, would they have been so easily exe- 
 euted. This studied variation was a refinement 
 in forgery which I believe did not exist; or, if 
 we can suppose it to have been practised in the 
 instances adduced below, why, it may be asked, 
 was not the same art exercised upon those which 
 we have collected in the preceding class ? 
 
 Ephes. i. 19—11. 5 : “ Toward us who believe : 
 according to the working of His mighty power 
 which He wrought in Christ, when He raised 
 Him from the dead (and set Him at His own 
 right hand, in the heavenly places, far above all 
 principality, and power, and might, and do- 
 minion, and every name that is named, not only 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 197 
 
 in this world, but in that which is to come: and 
 hath put all things under His feet, and gave 
 Him to be the head over all things to the church, 
 which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth 
 allin all). And you hath He quickened, who 
 were dead in trespasses and sins; (wherein in 
 time past ye walked according to the course of 
 this world, according to the prince of the power 
 of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the 
 children of disobedience ; among whom also we 
 all had our conversation in times past in the lusts 
 of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and 
 of the mind; and were by nature the children of 
 wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in 
 mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved 
 us), even when we were dead in sins, hath 
 quickened us together with Christ.’’* 
 
 Colos. u. 12, 13: “ Through the faith of the 
 operation of God, who hath raised Him from the 
 dead. And you being dead in your sins and the 
 uncireumceision of the flesh, hath He quickened 
 together with Him.’ 
 
 4 Hphes. i. 19, 20; ii. 1, 5: Tobs mioredvovras Kata THY 
 evepyeiav Tov Kpatous THs iaxvos avToU, hy evnpynoev ev TH 
 Xpiot@, eyelpas avroy ex vexpav Kal exdOicev ev Seki adTov 
 €v Tots emovpavios .. . Kal Uuas ByTas veKpovs TOls TapamTe- 
 fac. Kal Tals GQuaptiats ... Kal dyTas Huds veKpovs Tots Tapa- 
 TTHMacl, Tvve(woroinoe TH Xpio Ta. 
 
 5 Colos. ii. 12, 13: Ald tis micrews THs evepyelas Tov 
 
198 HORM PAULINA. 
 
 Out of the lone quotation from the Ephesians,° 
 take away the parenthesis, and you have left a 
 sentence almost in terms the same as the short 
 quotation from the Colossians. The resemblance 
 is more visible in the original than in our trans- 
 lation; for what is rendered in one place the 
 “ working,” and in another the “ operation,” is 
 the same Greek term évéoyera ; 1n one place itis, 
 TOE TLoTEVOVTAC KaTa THY evéoyetav; in the other, 
 dla THe TloTEwe TIC Eveoyeiac. Here therefore we 
 have the same sentiment, and nearly in the same 
 words; but, in the Ephesians, twice broken or 
 interrupted by incidental thoughts, which St. 
 Paul, as his manner was, enlarges upon by the 
 way,’ and then returns to the thread of his dis- 
 course. It is interrupted the first time by a 
 view which breaks in upon his mind of the 
 exaltation of Christ; and the second time by a 
 description of heathen depravity. I have only 
 
 Qcod tov eyelpaytos abtoy ex Tay vexpGv. Kal vuads vexpovs 
 éytas ev Tots TapaTTopact Kal TH axpoBvoTia THs capKds buov, 
 ouve(womolnce aby avTe. 
 
 6 [It might be contended here that the longer context 
 in the Ephesians has been formed out of the shorter con- 
 text in the Colossians, by the process of amplification and 
 filling in. It is worth while, then, to observe that the 
 next example of comparison must be explained by imagining 
 precisely the opposite process.—H. } 
 
 7 See Locke on this passage. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 199 
 
 to remark that Griesbach, im his very accurate 
 edition, gives the parentheses very nearly in the 
 same manner in which they are here placed; and 
 that. without any respect to the comparison which 
 we are proposing. 
 
 Ephes. iv. 2—4: “ With all lowliness and 
 meekness, with long-suffering, forbearinge one 
 another in love; endeavouring to keep the unity | 
 of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Thereis one 
 body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one 
 hope of your calling.’’® 
 
 Colos. 111. 12—15: “ Put on, therefore, as the 
 elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, 
 kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long- 
 suffering, forbearing one another and forgiving 
 one another, if any man have a quarrel against 
 any ; even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. 
 And, above ail these things, put on charity, which 
 is the bond of perfectness. And let the peace of 
 God rulein your hearts, to the which also ye are 
 called in one body.”” 
 
 8 Ephes. iv. 2—4: Mer& mdons tarevoppootyns kal mpad- 
 THTOS, meTa parpoOvulas, avexduevor GAAHAwY ev aydTn, 
 omovod(ovTes THPElY THY EvOTNTA TOU TYEvMaTOS ev TO OUV- 
 décuw THs eiphyns. “Ev coua nal ey mvedua, Kados Kal eKAh- 
 Onre ev mid €ATISL THS KAHoEwWS VUGY. 
 
 9 Colos. iil. 12—15: ’Evdvcacbe oby, &s éxAeKTol TOD Ocov 
 &y.or kar Hyamnuevol, onAdYXVa OiKTIPLOY, XpnTTOTNTA, TaTeEL- 
 voppootynv, mpdoTnTa, maxpoOvutav’ avexduevor AAARAWY, Kal 
 
200 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 In these two quotations the words razevvo- 
 ppoobyn, mpaornc, paxpoOuuta, avexdpevor 
 a\\yjAwv, occur in exactly the same order ; 
 aya7n is also found in both, but in a different 
 connexion: otyvdecuoc Tij¢ sipfvnce, answers to 
 cbveesuog Tice TEAEdrnToe; kEKAHOnTE ev Evi 
 aware to tv cwua Kuboc Kat ekAHOnTe ev ma 
 é\widu; yet is this similitude found in the midst 
 of sentences otherwise very different. 
 
 Ephes. iv. 16: ‘ From whom the whole body 
 fitly joimed together, and compacted by that 
 which every joint supplieth, according to the 
 effectual working in the measure of every part, 
 maketh increase of the body.” ? 
 
 Colos. 11. 19: “ From which all the body by 
 joints and bands having nourishment minis- 
 tered, and knit together, increaseth with the 
 increase of God.” * 
 
 XapiCduevor Eavtots, edy Tis mpds Tiva exn mougyy’? Kabws Kad 6 
 Xpiorbs exapicaro viv, o'rw Kad buets* éml maar 5€ TovVTOLs THY 
 aydrny, iris ect) civdecuos THs TeAeidTNTOS. Kal 7 eiphyyn 
 Tov @cov BpaBevétw ev rats kapdiais vuay, eis hv kal exAnOnre 
 ev évl o@mart. 
 
 1 Ephes.iv. 16: °Ef ob ray 7b cGua cvvapmodroyovmevoy Kal 
 ovuBiBaCduevoy Sic mdons apys THs emixopnylas, kat” éevépyeray 
 év méTpy évds ExdorTov pépous, Thy avtnow Tov shmaTos 
 TOLELT AL. 
 
 2 Colos. ii. 19: °Eé ob way 7d cOua bia Tay Abdy kal our- 
 S€opwy emixopnyotmevov kal cvpBiBaCduevor, aver Thy avinow 
 Tov Ocov. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 201 
 
 In these quotations are read 2& ot wav ro 
 cwpa ovufsiPaZduevoy in both places, treyoon- 
 yovuevov answering to émxoonylac; cia tTwv 
 agwv to dia Taone adic; ave tiv avSnow to 
 Toteirar rHVY avsnowv; and yet the sentences are 
 considerably diversified in other parts. 
 
 Ephes. iv. 32: And be kind one to another, 
 tender-hearted, forgiving one another, even as 
 God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.’’® 
 
 Colos. 11. 13: “ Forbearing one another, and 
 forgiving one another, if any man have a 
 quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave 
 you, so also do ye.” * 
 
 Here we have “ forgiving one another, even 
 as God, for Christ’s sake (év Xotorw), hath 
 forgiven you,” in the first quotation, sub- 
 stantially repeated in the second. But in the 
 second the sentence is broken by the inter- 
 position of a new clause, “if any man have a 
 quarrel against any:” and the latter part is a 
 little varied: instead of “ God in Christ,” it is 
 “Christ hath forgiven you.” 
 
 Ephes. iv. 22—24: “That ye put off con- 
 
 3 Ephes. iv. 32: DiveoOe 5 els GAAHAovs yxpnoTol, «d- 
 ordayxvot, xapiCduevor éavTots, Kabws Kal 6 Ocds ev Xpiot@ 
 exapicaro duty. 
 
 * Colos. iii. 13: "Avexduevor GAAhAwy, Kal xapiCduevor 
 
 c a / 
 
 €avTois, edy Tis mpds Tiva xn mouphy? Kabws Kal 6 Xpirrds 
 / “a a 
 
 €xapioato viv, obtw Kal duets. 
 
202 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 cerning the former conversation the old man, 
 which is corrupt according to the deceitful 
 lusts; and be renewed in the spirit of your 
 mind; and that ye put on the new man, which 
 after God is created in righteousness and true 
 holiness.”’? 
 
 Colos. 11. 9, 10: “ Seeing that ye have put 
 off the old man with his deeds; and have put 
 on the new man, which is renewed in know- 
 ledge, after the image of Him that created 
 him? se 
 
 In these quotations, “putting off the old 
 man, and putting on the new,” appears in 
 both. The idea is further explained by calling 
 it a renewal; in the one, “ renewed in the spirit 
 of your mind;” in the other, “renewed in 
 knowledge.’ In both, the new man is said to 
 be formed according to the same model; in the 
 one, he is “ after God created in righteousness 
 and true holiness;”? in the other, “he is re- 
 newed after the image of Him that created 
 
 5 Ephes. iv. 22—24: ’Amo@éo@at vuas, Kata THY mpoTépay 
 avaotpodhy, Tov maday &vOpwrov roy Pbeipdmevoy KaTa TAS 
 ériOuplas THs amarns dvaveodaba S& TH MvEevMaTL TOU vods 
 tuav, Kal evdtoac0a Thy Kawdy avOpwrov, Thy Kata Oedy 
 KTicbevra ev Sixatoovyy Kad doidtynTL TIS GAnOelas. 
 
 6 Colos. iii. 9—10: ’AmexSvoduevor thy madady &vOpwrov 
 ov tals mpdterw avtod’ Kal evdvoduevor Toy veoy, Tv 
 avakawvovmevov eis erlyywow Kat cixdva Tov KTLoavTOS avTOV. 
 
roe) 
 a) 
 G2 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 him.” In a word, it is the same person writing 
 
 upon a kindred subject, with the terms and 
 ideas which he had before employed still floating 
 in his memory.’ 
 
 Ephes. v. 6—8: “ Because of these things 
 cometh the wrath of God upon the children of 
 disobedience: be not ye therefore partakers with 
 them ; for ye were sometimes darkness, but now 
 are ye light in the Lord;* walk as children of 
 heht.” ° 
 
 Colos. 11. 6—8: “ Lor which things’ sake the 
 wrath of God cometh on the children of dis- 
 obedience ; in the which ye also walked some- 
 time, when ye lived in them; but now ye also 
 
 put off all these.” ? 
 
 7 In these comparisons, we often perceive the reason 
 why the writer, though expressing the same idea, uses a 
 different term: namely, because the term before used is 
 employed in the sentence under a different form: thus, in 
 the quotations under our eye, the new man is kaivds dvOpw- 
 mos in the Ephesians, and tbyv veéoy in the Colossians; but 
 then it is because roy kawdy is used in the next word, 
 GVAKALVOUMEVOY. 
 
 8 {For remarks on this word Light, see below, p. 219.— H. | 
 
 9 Hphes. v. 6—8: Ai& Tatra yap epxetat 7 dpyt Tov Oeov 
 én) rovs viovs THs amebelas. Mh ody ylverde oupméetoxor 
 atv. "“Hre yap wore oxdros, viv dé pas év Kuply* as Téxva 
 pwrds Tepimareire, 
 
 1 Colos. iii. 6—8: Av & Epxerat | Opyi) TOU Oeod emt Tods 
 viods THs ameWelas, ev ois Kad Suets meprematioaté wore, OTE 
 eCare ev avrots* vuvi 5¢ ardbeoOe Kal bucts TA TavTa. 
 
204 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 These verses afford a specimen of that 
 partial resemblance which is only to be met 
 with when no imitation is designed, when no 
 studied recollection is employed; but when 
 the mind, exercised upon the same subject, is 
 left to the spontaneous return of such terms and 
 phrases, as, having been used before, may hap- 
 pen to present themselves again. The sen- 
 timent of both passages is throughout alike: 
 half of that sentiment, the denunciation of 
 God’s wrath, is expressed in identical words ; 
 the other half, namely, the admonition to quit 
 their former conversation, in words entirely dif- 
 ferent. 
 
 Ephes. v. 15, 16: “See then that ye walk 
 circumspectly ; not as fools, but as wise, re- 
 deeming the time.” ? 
 
 Colos. iv. 5: “ Walk in wisdom towards 
 them that are without, redeeming the time.”’* 
 
 This is another example of that mixture, 
 which we remarked, of sameness and variety, 
 in the language of one writer. ‘‘ Redeeming 
 the time” (é&ayopatduevor tov Kaipov) is a 
 literal repetition, ‘‘ Walk not as fools, but as 
 
 2 Ephes. v. 15,16: BAémrere ody mas axpiBas wepimareite® 
 BY &s Eropot, GAN’ os cohol, eLayopaCduevor Toy Kaipdv. 
 
 3 Colos. iv. 5: "Ev copia mepimarette mpds Tovs ew, Tov 
 xatpdy efaryopaCduevot, 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 205 
 
 wise” (repirareire uy we doogot aXN we codoi) 
 answers exactly in sense, and nearly in terms, 
 to “walk in wisdom” (Ev copia weouraréize). 
 Ileoirareire axoiSwe is a very different phrase, 
 but is intended to convey precisely the same 
 idea as mepurareite TOG Tod EEw. “Axpiece is 
 not well rendered “ circumspectly.” It means 
 what in modern speech we should call “ cor- 
 rectly ;” and when we advise a person to behave 
 “correctly,” our advice is always given with a 
 reference to ‘‘ the opinion of others,” mode rove 
 zw. “ Walk correctly, redeeming the time,” 
 that is, suiting yourselves to the difficulty and 
 ticklishness of the times in which we live, 
 because the days are evil.” 
 
 Ephes. vi. 12, 29: “ And (praying) for me, 
 that utterance may be given unto me, that I 
 may open my mouth boldly, to make known the 
 mystery of the gospel, for which I am an am- 
 bassador in bonds; that therein I may speak 
 boldly, as I ought to speak.” * 
 
 Colos, iv. 3, 4: “ Withal praying also for us, 
 that God would open unto us a door of utterance 
 to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am 
 
 4 Hphes. vi. 19, 20: Kal drép euod, tva por d00ein Adyos ev 
 dvotter ToD orduatds ov év mappycia, yywpica To muoThptov 
 Tod evayyeArlou, trtp oF mperBevw ev adrvoel, va ev abT@ 
 Tappnoidcwmat, ws Jet we AaAROAL. 
 
206 HORH PAULINA. 
 
 also in bonds; that I may make it manifest, as 
 I ought to speak.’’® 
 
 In these quotations, the phrase “as I ought 
 to speak” (we dei we AaAjoa), the words “ ut- 
 terance” (Adyoc), “mystery”? (uvaorfpior),° 
 “open” (avoiém and év avoi&a), are the same. 
 “No make known the mystery of the Gospel ” 
 (yuwploat 7d prvoThptov), answers to ‘‘ make it 
 manifest” (iva gavepwow avrd) ; “ for which I 
 am an ambassador in bonds”’ (u7vép ov rpeoebw 
 év adtboe), to “for which I am also in bonds (6 
 
 aA 
 
 0 kal d¢depat). 
 
 Ephes. v. 22—vi. 9: “ Wives, submit yourselves 
 to your own husbands, as unto the Lord: for the 
 husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ 
 is the head of the church, and He is the saviour 
 of the body. ‘Therefore, as the church is sub- 
 ject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their 
 own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love 
 your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, 
 and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify 
 
 ‘4 
 
 5 Colos. iv. 3, 4: Tpocevxduevor &ua nal wep) nudv, va 6 
 Ocds avolin juiv OUpay Tov Adyou, AaATjoa TL uvoeThploy Tod 
 Xpicrod, O° 0 Kal dédeun, Wa pavepdow aitd, ws Set pe 
 AaAjoat. 
 
 6 [St. Paul’s use of the word ‘mystery ” is a bond of 
 connexion, not only between these two Epistles, but among. 
 a large number of his Epistles. See AppENnDIx VIII. on his 
 metaphorical language.—H. | 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 207 
 
 and cleanse it with the washing of water by 
 the word; that He might present it to Himself 
 a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, 
 or any such thing; but that it should be holy 
 and without blemish. So ought men to love 
 their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth 
 his wife, loveth himself; for no man ever yet 
 hated his own flesh, but nourisheth it, even as 
 the Lord the church; for we are members of 
 His body, of His flesh, and of His bones. For 
 this cause shall a man leave his father and 
 mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and 
 they two shall be one flesh. This is a great 
 mystery ; but I speak concerning Christ and the 
 church. Nevertheless, let every one of you, in 
 particular, so love his wife, even as himself; and 
 the wife see that she reverence her husband. 
 Children, obey your parents in the Lord ; for this 
 _ as right. Honour thy father and mother (which 
 is the first commandment with promise) ; that 
 it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live 
 long on the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not 
 your children to wrath; but bring them up in 
 the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Ser- 
 vants, be obedient to them that are your masters - 
 according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in 
 singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; not with 
 eyeservice, as menpleasers ; but as the servants of 
 
208 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Christ, doing the will of God from the heart ; 
 with good will doing service, as to the Lord, and 
 not to men; knowing that whatsoever good thing 
 any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the 
 Lord, whether he be bond or free, And, ye 
 masters, do the same things unto them, for- 
 bearing threatening ; snowing that your master 
 also 1s im heaven; neither is there respect of 
 persons with Him.’’? 
 
 Colos. ii. 18—iv. 1:° ‘“ Wives, submit 
 
 7 Ephes. v. 22: Afi yuvatkes, Tots iSlois avipdow brotrdac- 
 gecbe, ws TH Kupig. 
 
 ® Colos. iii. 18: Ai yuvaikes, brotdcoeabe Tots idlos avopa- 
 ov, &s avijkev ev Kuplo. 
 
 Ephes. Of &vdpes, ayamare Tas yuvaikas EavTav. 
 
 Colos. Oi &vdpes, Gyamare Tas yuvaikas. 
 
 Ephes. Ta réxva, vmakovete Tois yovetow vuay ev Kupig* 
 ToUTO yap éoTt Sixaiov. 
 
 Colos. Ta rékva, vmaxoveTe Tols yovetor Kata mavTa* 
 TovTo ydp eat evdpertoy TH Kuply. 
 
 Ephes. Kal, of marépes, ui) mapopyilere Ta TéKVA Uudr. 
 
 Colos. Of marépes, wh épebiCere * Ta Téxva buar. 
 
 Ephes. Of d00A01, vraxovete Tots Kuplos KaTd odpKa, meTa 
 géBov kal tpduov, ev amAdTyTt THs Kapdlias vuav, ws TH 
 Xpiot@’ oi) Kat’ db0adrpodovaclay ws avOpwrdpeckot, GAN ws 
 SovAor TOV Xpiotov, woovvtes Td OEANUa TOV Ocod ex Wux7js* 
 pet evvolas Sovdevoytes ws TH Kupiy, kal otk dvOpémois* 
 eiddtes OTL O edy TL ExaoTos Toihon wyabdy, TovTO KomserT at 
 mapa Tov Kuplov, etre Saya, elTe sec 
 
 Colos. Ot S0vA01, btwaxoveTe Kata mdyTa TOs KaTa odpKa 
 kupiows, mi) €v OPOarpodovaAcias, Ws avOpwrdperkot, GAN év 
 
 * mapopyiCere, lectio non spernenda. Griesbach. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 209 
 
 yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit 
 in the Lord. Husbands, love your’ wives, and 
 be not bitter against them. Children, obey your 
 parents in all things; for this is well pleasing 
 unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your 
 children to anger, lest they be discouraged. 
 Servants, obey in all things your masters ac- 
 cording to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as 
 menpleasers: but in singleness of heart, fearing 
 God ; and whatever ye do, do it heartily, as to 
 the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of 
 the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the in- 
 heritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. But 
 he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong 
 which he hath done; and there is no respect of 
 persons. Masters, give unto your servants that 
 which is just and equal; knowing that ye also 
 have a master in heaven.” 
 
 The passages marked by italics in the quota- 
 tion from the Ephesians bear a strict resem- 
 blance, not only in signification but in terms, 
 to the quotation from the Colossians. Both the 
 words and the order of the words are in many 
 clauses a duplicate of one another. In the 
 
 amAdT nt. Kapdlas, poBovmevor Thy Oedy' Kad may 6 TL ea TOLATE, 
 éx Wuxiis épydeabe, ws TS Kuplo, kad ovk avOpdrais, €iddrTes 
 dT. Grd Kuplov amrodnverde Thy avtamddoaw THs KAnpovoulas* 
 Tp yap Kupiw XpioT@ SovdAevere. 
 
 P 
 
210 HORA PAULINA, 
 
 Epistle to the Colossians, these passages are 
 laid together; in that to the Ephesians, they 
 are divided by intermediate matter, especially 
 by a long digressive allusion to the mysterious 
 union between Christ and His Church; which © 
 possessing, as Mr. Locke hath well observed, 
 the mind of the Apostle, from being an inci- 
 dental thought grows up into the principal sub- 
 ject.” The affinity between these two passages 
 in signification, in terms, and in the order of the 
 words, is closer than can be pointed out between 
 any parts of any two Hpistles in the volume. 
 
 If the reader would see how the same subject 
 is treated by a different hand, and how dis- 
 tinguishable it is from the production of the 
 same pen, let him turn to the second and third 
 chapters of the first Epistle of St. Peter. The 
 duties of servants, of wives, and of husbands, 
 are enlarged upon in that Epistle, as they are in 
 the Hpistle to the Ephesians; but the subjects 
 both occur in a different order, and the train of 
 sentiment subjoined to each is totally unlike. 
 
 3. In two letters issumg from the same per- 
 son, nearly at the same time, and upon the same 
 general occasion, we may expect to trace the 
 influence of association in the order in which 
 the topics follow one another. Certain ideas 
 
 9 [Paraphrase and Notes, p. 400.—H. ] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 911 
 
 universally or usually suggest others. Here 
 the order is what we call natural, and from such 
 an order nothing can be concluded. But when 
 the order is arbitrary, yet alike, the concurrence 
 indicates the effect of that principle, by which 
 ideas which have been once joined, commonly 
 revisit the thoughts together. The Epistles 
 under consideration furnish the two following 
 remarkable instances of this species of agree- 
 ment :— 
 
 Ephes. iv. 24, 25: “ And that ye put on the 
 new man, which after God is created in righteous- 
 ness and true holiness. Wherefore, putting away 
 lying, speak every man truth with his neigh- 
 bour: for we are members one of another.’ * 
 
 Colos. 11. 9,10: Lie not one to another, seeing 
 that ye have put off the old man, with his deeds ; 
 and have put on the new man, which is renewed 
 in knowledge.” * 
 
 The vice of “lying,” or a correction of that 
 vice, does not seem to bear any nearer relation 
 to the “ putting on the new man,” than a re- 
 
 3 
 
 1 Ephes. iv. 24, 25: Kal évdtcacOa: Tov Kavdy &vOpwroy, 
 Tov Kata Oedy nTicbevTa ev Sikatociyyn Kat doiTHTL TIS GAN- 
 Geias. Ard amroOguevor TH Wevdos, AaAcitTE GANOELaY ExagToS 
 Meta TOU WANGLoy avTod® OTL eomey GAAHAWY MEAN. 
 
 2 Colos. iii. 9,10: Mi Wevdea0e cis GAANAOUS, amreKdvodmevor 
 Tov Tadaby dvOpwrov, oly Tals mpdtecivy avTov, Kal évdvcd- 
 Mevot Toy Vveor, ToY avaKoLvoUmeEvoY els emiyywoL. 
 
 Pp 2 
 
212 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 formation in any other article of morals. Yet 
 these two ideas, we see, stand in both Epistles 
 in immediate connexion. 
 
 Ephes. v. 20—22: “ Giving thanks always 
 for all things unto God and the Father, in the 
 name of our Lord Jesus Christ; submitting 
 yourselves one to another, in the fear of God. 
 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own hus- 
 bands, as unto the Lord.’”? 
 
 Colos. 11. 17, 18: “ Whatsoever ye do in 
 word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by 
 Him. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own 
 husbands, as it 1s fit in the Lord.’’* 
 
 In both these passages, submission follows 
 giving of thanks, without any similitude in the 
 ideas which should account for the transition. 
 
 It is not necessary to pursue the comparison 
 between the two Hpistles further. The argu- 
 ment which results from it stands thus; No two 
 other Epistles contain a circumstance which in- 
 
 3 Ephes. v. 20—22: Evxapiototytes mavTote Umep mavTwr, 
 év ovduatt TOU Kuplov nuey *Inood Xpiotov, TG Oe wal Marpu 
 vToTagcdmevot GAATAaS ev PdBm@ Oeod. Af yuvatkes, Tots 
 idfors avipdow vrotdcoecbe, ws TG Kupig. 
 
 4 Colos. iii. 17, 18: Kal way 8, te bv roujre, ev Adyw 9 ev 
 Zpye, wavra ev dvduatt Kuplov “Inood, evyapiorobdvtes TH OCG 
 kal marp) 5° abtov. Ai yuvatkes, vrotdooecbe Tots (tdlois 
 avipdor, os avixev év Kupio. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 2138 
 
 dicates that they were written at the same, or 
 nearly at the same time. No two other Epistles 
 exhibit so many marks of correspondency and 
 resemblance. If the original which we ascribe 
 to these two Epistles be the true one, that is, 
 if they were both written by St. Paul, and both 
 sent to their respective destination by the same 
 messenger, the similitude is, in all points, what 
 should be expected to take place. If they were 
 forgeries, then the mention of Tychicus in both 
 Epistles, and in a manner which shows that he 
 either carried or accompanied both Epistles, was 
 inserted for the purpose of accounting for their 
 similitude; or else the structure of the Epistles 
 was designedly adapted to that circumstance ; 
 or, lastly, the conformity between the contents 
 of the forgeries, and what is thus indirectly 
 intimated concerning their date, was only a 
 happy accident. Not one of these three suppo- 
 sitions will gain credit with a reader who peruses 
 the Epistles with attention, and who reviews 
 the several examples we have pointed out, and 
 the observations with which they were accom- 
 panied. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 There is such a thing as a peculiar word or 
 
214 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 phrase cleaving, as it were, to the memory of a 
 writer or speaker, and presenting itself to his 
 utterance at every turn. When we observe this, 
 we call it a cant word, or a cant phrase. Itisa 
 natural effect of habit; and would appear more 
 frequently than it does, had not the rules of good 
 writing taught the ear to be offended with the 
 iteration of the same sound, and oftentimes 
 caused us to reject, on that account, the word 
 which offered itself first to our recollection. With 
 a writer who, like St. Paul, either knew not 
 these rules, or disregarded them, such words will 
 not be avoided. The truth is, an example of 
 this kind runs through several of his Epistles, 
 and in the Epistle before us abounds ; and that 
 is in the word riches (wXovroc), used metapho- 
 rically as an augmentative of the idea to which 
 it happens to be subjoined. Thus the “ r7ches of 
 His glory,” “ His rzches in glory,” “riches of 
 the glory of His inheritance,’ “riches of the 
 glory of this mystery,” Rom. ix. 23, Ephes. ii. 
 16, Phil. iv. 19, Ephes. 1. 18, -Colos. 4.. 27; 
 “giches of His grace,” twice in the Ephesians, 
 1.7, and u. 7; “7zches of the full assurance of 
 understanding,” Colos. 1. 2; “‘rzches of His 
 goodness,” Rom. u. 4; “ rzehes of the wisdom 
 and knowledge of God,’’? Rom. x1. 33; “ riches 
 of Christ,’ Ephes. 11. 8. In a like sense the 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 215 
 
 adjective, Rom. x. 12, “ich unto all that call 
 upon Him;” Ephes. ii. 4, “rich in merey ;” 
 1 Tim, vi. 18, “v2ch in good works.” Also the 
 adverb, Colos. 11. 16, “let the word of Christ 
 dwell in you richly.’ This figurative use of the 
 word, although so familiar to St. Paul, does not 
 occur in any part of the New Testament except 
 once in the Epistle of St. James (u. 5), “ Hath 
 not God chosen the poor of this world, 77ch in 
 faith?” where it is manifestly suggested by 
 the antithesis. I propose the frequent, yet 
 seemingly unaffected use of this phrase, in the 
 Epistle before us, as one internal mark of its 
 ‘ genuineness.” 
 
 No. III. 
 
 There is another singularity in St. Paul’s 
 style, which, wherever it is found, may be 
 deemed a badge of authenticity; because, if it 
 were noticed, it would not, I think, be imitated, 
 inasmuch as it almost always produces embar- 
 rassment and interruption in the reasoning. 
 This singularity is a species of digression which 
 may properly, I think, be denominated gowng off 
 
 5 [See Appenpix VIII. on St. Paul’s metaphorical lan- 
 guage.—H. | 
 
216 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 ata word. It is turning aside from the subject. 
 upon the occurrence of some particular word, for- 
 saking the train of thought then in hand, and 
 entering upon a parenthetic sentence in which 
 that word is the prevailing term. I shall lay 
 before the reader some examples of this, collected 
 from the other Epistles, and then propose two 
 examples of it which are found in the Epistle 
 to the Ephesians. 
 
 2 Cor. u. 14, at the word savour: “Now 
 thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to 
 triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the 
 savour of His knowledge by us in every place 
 (for we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, 
 in them that are saved, and in them that perish ; 
 to the one we are the savour of death unto death, 
 and to the other the savour of life unto life; 
 and who is sufficient for these things?) For 
 we are not as many which corrupt the word of 
 God, but as of sincerity, but as of God; in the 
 sight of God, speak we in Christ.” 
 
 Again, 2 Cor. in. 1—3, at the word epistle- 
 “Need we, as some others, epistles of commen- 
 dation to you, or of commendation from you? 
 Ye are our epist/e, written in our hearts, known 
 and read of all men; forasmuch as ye are mani- 
 festly declared to be the epistle of Christ, 
 ministered by us, written not with ink, but. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. OE, 
 
 with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables 
 of stone, but in the fleshy tables of the heart.” 
 _ The position of the words in the original, shows 
 more strongly than in the translation that 1t was 
 the occurrence of the word émioroAy which gave 
 birth to the sentence that follows: 2 Cor, 11. 1. 
 Ei ph) xpySoper, We tivec, ovatatikwv emiotoAwy 
 mTpoc vac, 7) && vuwv ovotatiKwy; H emistoAy 
 HMOV UpElc zoTe, eyyeypaupévn ev Talc Kapolac 
 HOV, YlwwoKopévyn Kal avayiwwoKomévyn WTO 
 ravtwy avOpwrwrv, pavepobmevor Ort tat? emic- 
 TOAH Xptorov StaxovnOeica VP Huw, tyyeypap- 
 pévn ov pérav, addAa mvebpuate Ocov Gwvtoc’ 
 ovk év wAagt AOivac, aAN ev wraEL Kapdiac 
 oapkivaie. 
 
 Again, 2 Cor. 11. 12, &c. at the word vai ; 
 “ Seeing then that we have such hope, we use 
 great plainness of speech: and not as Moses, 
 which put a vail over his face, that the children 
 of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of 
 that which is abolished. But their minds were 
 blinded ; for until this day remaineth the same 
 vail untaken away in the reading of the Old 
 Testament; which vad is done away in Christ. 
 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the 
 vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it 
 shall turn to the Lord, the vai/ shall be taken 
 away. (Now the Lord is that Spirit; and 
 
218 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.) 
 But we all, with open face, beholding as in a 
 olass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the 
 same image from glory to glory, even as by the 
 Spirit of the Lord. ‘Therefore, seeing we have 
 this ministry, as we have received mercy, we 
 faint not.” Who sees not that this whole alle- 
 gory of the vaié arises entirely out of the occur- 
 rence of the word, in telling us that “ Moses put 
 a vail over his face,’ and that it drew the Apostle 
 away from the proper subject of his discourse, 
 the dignity of the office in which he was en- 
 gaged : which subject he fetches up again almost 
 in the words with which he had left it; ‘‘ there- 
 fore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have 
 received mercy, we faint not”? The sentence 
 which he had before been going on with, and in 
 which he had been interrupted by the vaz/, was, 
 “seeing then that we have such hope, we use 
 great plainness of speech.” 
 
 In the Epistle to the Ephesians, the reader 
 will remark two instances in which the same 
 habit of composition obtains; he will recognize 
 the same pen. One he will find (chap. iv. 8—11) 
 at the word ascended: “ Wherefore he saith, 
 When He ascended up on high, He led. captivity 
 captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that 
 He ascended, what is it but that He also descended 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 219 
 
 first into the lower parts of the earth? He that 
 descended is the same also that ascended up far 
 above all heavens, that He might fill all things.) 
 And He gave some apostles,” &e. 
 
 The other appears (chap. v. 12—15) at the 
 word light: “For it is a shame even to speak 
 of those things which are done of them in secret: 
 but all things that are reproved are made mani- 
 fest by the Zight; (for whatsoever doth make 
 manifest is /ight; wherefore he saith, Awake, 
 thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and 
 Christ shall give thee digit :) see then that ye 
 walk cireumspectly.”’® 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 Although it does not appear to have ever been 
 disputed that the Epistle before us was written 
 by St. Paul, yet 16 is well known that a doubt 
 has long been entertained concerning the per- 
 sons to whom it was addressed. The question is 
 
 6 [This illustration of St. Paul’s manner becomes far 
 more palpable and striking, if we begin the quotation at 
 ver. 8, and write the whole continuously, remembering that 
 the true reading in ver. 9 is not.“ the fruit of the Spirit,” 
 but the “ fruit of Light.’? It is, in fact, very unfortunate 
 that an error has occurred here in our Authorized Version, 
 through imperfection of textual criticism.—H. | 
 
220 HORE PAULINA. , 
 
 founded partly in some ambiguity in the exter- 
 nal evidence. Marcion, a heretic of the second 
 century, as quoted by Tertullian, a father in the 
 beginning of the third, calls it the Epistle to the 
 Laodiceans. From what we know of Marcion, 
 his judgment is little to be relied upon; nor is it 
 perfectly clear that Marcion was rightly under- 
 stood by Tertullian. If, however, Marcion be 
 brought to prove that some copies in his time 
 gave év Aaocikeia in the superscription, his testi- 
 “mony, if it be truly interpreted, is not diminished 
 by his heresy; for, as Grotius observes, “‘ cur a 
 ed re mentiretur nihil erat cause,’ [he had no 
 motive to deceive in this.| The name év ’Edéow, 
 in the first verse, upon which word singly de- 
 pends the proof that the Epistle was written to 
 the Ephesians, is not read in all the manuscripts 
 now extant.’ I admit, however, that the ex- 
 ternal evidence preponderates with a manifest 
 excess on the side of the received reading. The 
 objection therefore principally arises from the 
 contents of the Epistle itself, which, in many 
 
 7 [The words ev ’Epéow are not found in the Sinaitic 
 MS., which thus affords strong evidence that this was a 
 circular letter, addressed to the churches of Asia, and per- 
 haps to some churches beyond the limits of ‘Asia :” and 
 in reaching this position we find that the chief arguments 
 against the authenticity of the Epistle to the Ephesians dis: 
 appear. See the note atthe end of this number, p. 225.—H. } 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. aye | 
 
 respects, militate with the supposition that it 
 was written to the Church of Ephesus. 
 According to the history, St. Paul had passed 
 two whole years at Ephesus (Acts xix. 10). 
 And in this point, namely, of St. Paul having 
 preached for a considerable length of time at 
 Ephesus, the history is confirmed by the two 
 ‘Epistles to the Corinthians, and by the two 
 Epistles to Timothy: “I will tarry at Ephesus 
 until Pentecost,” 1 Cor. xvi. 8. ‘“ We would 
 not have you ignorant of our trouble which came 
 to us in Asia,’ 2 Cor. 1.8; “As I besought 
 thee to abide still at Hphesus, when I went into 
 Macedonia,” 1 Tim.i. 38. ‘* And in how many 
 things he ministered to me at Hphesus, thou 
 knowest very well,” 2 Tim. 1i.18.° I adduce 
 these testimonies, because, had it been a compe- 
 tition of credit between the history and the 
 
 ® [This reference to the first and second Epistles to 
 Timothy is quite in error, and is in contradiction to Paley’s 
 own view of the date of the Pastoral Epistles (see p.295). Itis 
 a most curious oversight on the part of so shrewd a writer. 
 The first Epistle to Timothy was written after St. Paul’s 
 deliverance from his first imprisonment; and the visit to 
 Ephesus, implied in 1 Tim. i. 3, was subsequent to the 
 writing of the Epistle before us. The second Epistle to 
 Timothy was written ata still later time; nor is it at all 
 likely that the circumstance referred to in 2 Tim. 1. 18 can 
 have been contemporaneous with the occurrences named 
 in 1 Cor, xvi. 8, and 2 Cor. i. 8.—H. ] 
 
922 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Epistle, £ should have thought myself bound to 
 have preferred the Epistle. Now, every Epistle 
 which St. Paul wrote to Churches, which he 
 himself had founded, or which he had visited, 
 abounds with references, and appeals to what 
 had passed during the time that he was present 
 among them; whereas, there is not a text in 
 the Epistle to the Ephesians, from which we can 
 collect that he had ever been at Ephesus at all. 
 The two Epistles to the Corinthians, the Epistle 
 to the Galatians, the Epistle to the Philippians, 
 and the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, are 
 of this class ; and they are full of allusions to the 
 Apostle’s history, his reception, and his conduct, 
 while amongst them; the total want of which, 
 in the Epistle before us, is very difficult to ac- 
 count for, if it was in truth written to the 
 Church of Ephesus, in which city he had resided 
 for so long a time. This is the first and strongest 
 objection. 
 
 But further, the Epistle to the Colossians was 
 addressed to a Church, in which St. Paul had 
 never been. ‘This we infer from the first verse 
 of the second chapter; “ For I would that ye 
 knew what great conflict I have for you and for 
 them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not 
 seen my face in the flesh.” There could be no 
 propriety in thus joining the Colossians and 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 205 
 
 _ Laodiceans with those “who had not seen his 
 face in the flesh,” if they did not also belong to 
 the same description.” Now, his address to the 
 Colossians, whom he had not visited, is precisely 
 the same as his address to the Christians, to 
 whom he wrote in the Epistle, which we are now 
 considering : “ We give thanks to God and the 
 Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying 
 always for you, sce we heard of your faith in 
 Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to 
 all the saints,’ Col. 1.3, 4. Thus he speaks in 
 the Epistle’ before us, as follows; “ Wherefore 
 I also, after [ heard of your faith in the Lord 
 Jesus, and love unto all the saints, cease not to 
 give thanks for you, making mention of you in 
 my prayers” (1. 15, 16). The terms of this ad- 
 dress are observable. The words “ having heard 
 of your faith and love,” are the very words, we 
 see, which he uses towards strangers ; and it is 
 not probable that he should employ the same in 
 accosting a Church in which he had long exer- 
 cised his ministry, and whose “ faith and love ” 
 he must have personally known.* The Epistle 
 
 9 Dr. Lardner contends against the validity of this con- 
 clusion; but, I think, without success.—Lardner, vol. xiv. 
 p. 473, edit. 1757. 
 
 1 Mr. Locke endeavours to avoid this difficulty by ex- 
 plaining “their faith, of which St. Paul had heard,” to 
 
224 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 to the Romans was written before St. Paul had 
 been at Rome; and his address to them runs in 
 the same strain with that just now quoted; “I 
 thank my God, through Jesus Christ, for you 
 all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the 
 whole world,” Rom. 1. 8. Let us now see what 
 was the form in which our Apostle was accus- 
 tomed to introduce his Epistles, when he wrote 
 to those with whom he was already acquainted. 
 To the Corinthians it was this; “I thank my 
 God always on your behalf, for the grace of God 
 which is given you by Jesus Christ,’ 1 Cor. 
 i. 4. To the Philippians; “I thank my God 
 upon every remembrance of you,” Phil. i. 3. 
 To the Thessalonians ; ‘‘ We give thanks to God 
 always for you all, making mention of you in 
 our prayers; remembering without ceasing your 
 work of faith, and labour of love,” 1 Thess. 1. 3. 
 To Timothy, “I thank God, whom I serve from 
 my forefathers with pure conscience, that with- 
 
 mean the steadfastness of their persuasion that they were 
 called into the kingdom of God, without subjection to the 
 Mosaic institution. But this interpretation seems to me 
 extremely hard, for, in the manner in which faith is here 
 joined with love, in the expression, “ your faith and love,” 
 it could not be meant to denote any particular tenet which 
 distinguished one set of Christians from others ; forasmuch 
 as the expression describes the general virtues of the 
 Christian profession. See Locke on this passage. 
 
~ 
 «we 
 Or 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 
 
 out ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my 
 prayers night and day,” 2 Tim. i. 3. In these 
 quotations, it is usually his remembrance, and 
 never his hearing of them, which he makes the 
 subject of his thankfulness to God. 
 
 As great difficulties stand in the way of 
 supposing the Epistle before us to have been 
 written to the Church at Ephesus, so I think it 
 probable that 1t is actually the Epistle to the 
 Laodiceans, referred to in the fourth chapter of 
 the Epistle to the Colossians.” The text which 
 contains that reference is this; ‘ When this 
 Epistle is read among you, cause that it be read 
 also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that 
 ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea”’ (iv. 
 16). The “ Epistle from Laodicea” was an 
 Kpistle sent by St. Paul to that Church, and by 
 them transmitted to Colosse. The two Churches 
 were mutually to communicate the Epistles they 
 had received. This is the way in which the 
 
 * {Concerning the spurious “‘ Epistle to the Laodiceans,” 
 see Professor Lightfoot’s Commentary on the Colossians, 
 as referred to above, p. 13. The same writer, commenting 
 on Coloss. iv. 16, says, ‘‘There are good reasons for the 
 belief that St. Paul here alludes to the so-called Epistle to 
 the Ephesians, which was in fact a circular letter addressed 
 to the principal churches of proconsular Asia. ... Tychicus 
 was obliged to pass through Laodicea on his way to Colosse, 
 
 and would leave a copy there, before the Colossian letter 
 was delivered,” p. 310.—H. | 
 
 Q 
 
226 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 direction is explained by the greater part of com- 
 mentators, and is the most probable sense that 
 can be given to it. It is also probable that the 
 Epistle alluded to was an Epistle which had 
 been received by the Church of Laodicea dately. 
 It appears then, with a considerable degree of 
 evidence, that there existed an Epistle of St. 
 Paul’s nearly of the same date with the Epistle 
 to the Colossians, and an Epistle directed to a 
 Church (for such the Church of Laodicea was) 
 in which St. Paul had never been. What has 
 been observed concerning the Epistle before 
 us, shows that it answers perfectly to that 
 character. : 
 
 Nor does the mistake seem very difficult to 
 account for. Whoever inspects the map of 
 Asia Minor will see, that a person proceeding 
 from Rome to Laodicea would probably land at 
 Ephesus, as the nearest frequented sea-port in 
 that direction. Might not Tychicus, then, in 
 passing through Ephesus, communicate to the 
 Christians of that place the letter, with which 
 he was charged? And might not copies of that 
 letter be multiplied and preserved at Ephesus ? 
 Might not some of the copies drop the words of 
 designation gy 77 Aaodckefa,’ which it was of 
 
 3 And it is remarkable that there seem to have been 
 some ancient copies without the words of designation, 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. Pah 
 
 no consequence to an Ephesian to retain ? 
 Might not copies of the letter come out into the 
 Christian Church at large from Ephesus ; and 
 might not this give occasion to a belief that the 
 letter was written to that Church? And, lastly, 
 might not this belief produce the error which 
 we suppose to have crept into the inscrip- 
 tion ? 
 
 No. V. 
 
 As our Epistle purports to have been written 
 during St. Paul’s imprisonment at Rome, 
 
 either the words in Ephesus, or the words in Laodicea. 
 St. Basil, a writer of the fourth century, speaking of the 
 present Epistle, has this very singular passage: ‘‘ And 
 writing to the Ephesians, as truly united to Him who is, 
 through knowledge, he (Paul) calleth them in a peculiar 
 sense such who are; saying, to the saints who wre, and (or 
 even) the faithful in Christ Jesus; for so those before us 
 have transmitted it, and we have found it in ancient 
 copies.” Dr. Mill interprets (and, notwithstanding some 
 objections that have been made to him, in my opinion 
 rightly interprets) these words of Basil, as declaring that 
 this father had seen certain copies of the Epistle in which 
 the words “in Ephesus” were wanting. And the passage, 
 I think, must be considered as Basil’s fanciful way of 
 explaining what was really a corrupt and defective read- 
 ing; for I do not believe it possible that the author of the 
 Epistle could have originally written aylois tots obo, 
 without any name of place to follow it. . 
 
 Q 2 
 
2298 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 which lies beyond the period to which the Acts 
 of the Apostles brings up his history; and as 
 we have seen and acknowledged that the 
 Epistle contains no reference to any transaction 
 at Ephesus during the Apostle’s residence in 
 that city, we cannot expect that it should sup- 
 ply many marks of agreement with the narra- 
 tive. One coincidence however occurs, and a 
 coincidence of that minute and less obvious 
 kind, which, as hath been repeatedly observed, 
 is of all others the most to be relied upon. 
 Chap. vi. 19, 20, we read: “ Praying for me, 
 that I may open my mouth boldly, to make 
 known the mystery of the gospel, for which I am 
 an ambassador in bonds.” “ Jn bonds,” év addboe, 
 inachaim. In Acts xxvill. we are informed, 
 that Paul, after his arrival at Rome, was 
 suffered to dwell by himself with a soldier that 
 kept him. Dr. Lardner has shown that this 
 mode of custody was in use among the Romans, 
 and that whenever it was adopted the prisoner 
 was bound to the soldier by a single chain; in 
 reference to which, St. Paul, in the twentieth 
 verse of this chapter, tells the Jews, whom he 
 had assembled, “‘ For this cause therefore have 
 I called for you to see you, and to speak with 
 you, because that for the hope of Israel I am 
 
 bound w2tt this chain,” rhv advow rabtnv mepl- 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. 2299 
 
 kemeat, It is in exact conformity therefore 
 with the truth of St. Paul’s situation at the time, 
 that he declares of himself in the Epistle, 
 mpeofcevw ev advo. And the exactness is the 
 more remarkable, as aXvace (a chain) is nowhere 
 used in the singular number to express any 
 other kind of custody. When the prisoner’s 
 hands or feet were bound together, the word 
 was Ceouot (bonds), as in Acts xxvi., where Paul 
 replies to Agrippa, “I would to God that not 
 only thou, but also all that hear me this day, 
 were both almost, and altogether such as I am, 
 except these bonds,” mapextoc THv Oeauwv TObTwV. 
 When the prisoner was confined between two 
 soldiers, as in the case of Peter (Acts xi. 6), two 
 chains were employed ; and it is said, upon his 
 miraculous deliverance, that the “ chains” 
 (aAvoetc, in the plural) “fell from his hands.” 
 Ascouoc the noun and égoua the verb, being 
 general terms, were applicable to this in com- 
 mon with any other species of personal coercion ; 
 but aAvore, in the single number, to none but 
 this. 
 
 If it can be suspected that the writer of the 
 present Epistle, who, in no other particular, ap- 
 pears to have availed himself of the information 
 concerning St. Paul delivered in the Acts, had, 
 in this verse, borrowed the word which he read 
 
230 HOREHZ PAULINA. 
 
 in that book, and had adapted his expression to 
 what he found there recorded of St. Paul’s treat- 
 ment at Rome; in short, that the coincidence 
 here noted was effected by craft and design; I 
 think it a strong reply, to remark, that, in the 
 parallel passage of the Epistle to the Colossians, 
 the same allusion is not preserved: the words 
 there are, “ praying also for us, that God would 
 open unto us a door of utterance to speak the 
 mystery of Christ, for which J am also in bonds,” 
 ov 6 cat dédsuar. After what has been shown in 
 a preceeding number, there can be little doubt 
 but that these two Epistles were written by the 
 same person. If the writer, therefore, sought for, 
 and fraudulently inserted, the correspondency 
 into one Epistle, why did he not do it in the 
 other? <A real prisoner might use either gene- 
 ral words, which comprehended this among 
 many other modes of custody ; or might use ap- 
 propriate words which specified this, and distin- 
 guished it from any other mode. It would be 
 accidental which form of expression he fell upon. 
 But an impostor, who had the art, in one place, 
 to employ the appropriate term for the purpose 
 of fraud, would have used it in both places, 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 231 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 WueEN a transaction is referred to in such a 
 manner, as that the reference is easily and im- 
 mediately understood by those who are before- 
 hand, or from other quarters, acquainted with 
 the fact, but is obscure, or imperfect, or requires 
 investigation, ora comparison of different parts, 
 ‘in order to be made clear to other readers, the 
 transaction so referred to is probably real ; 
 because, had it been fictitious, the writer would 
 have set forth his story more fully and plainly, 
 not merely as conscious of the fiction, but as 
 conscious that his readers could have no other 
 knowledge of the subject of his allusion than 
 from the information of which he put them in 
 possession. 
 
 The account of Epaphroditus, in the Epistle 
 
Parayd HORE PAULINA. 
 
 to the Philippians, of his journey to Rome, and 
 of the business which brought him thither, is 
 the article to which I mean to apply this obser- 
 vation. Thereare three passages in the Epistle, 
 which relate to this subject.’ The first, chap. 1. 
 7, “Even as it is meet for me to think this of 
 you all, because I have you in my heart; in- 
 asmuch as both in my bonds, and in the defence 
 and confirmation of the gospel, ye all are ovy- 
 KOLVWVOL frou THC XaotToC, joint contributors to 
 the gift which I have received.”? Nothing 
 
 1 [This is a good instance of Paley’s method of tracing 
 undesigned coincidences within the document which he is 
 examining. He is not here comparing an Epistle with the 
 Acts of the Apostles, or one Epistle with another, but 
 simply taking one Epistle and comparing its parts, with a 
 view to see how they hang honestly and without contri- 
 vance together.—H. | 
 
 2 Pearce, I believe, was the first commentator who gave: 
 this sense to the expression; and I believe also, that his 
 exposition is now generally assented to. He interprets 
 in the same sense the phrase in the fifth verse, which our 
 translation renders, “‘ your fellowship in the gospel ;” but 
 which in the original is not kowwviqa rod evayyedlov, or, 
 kowwvia ev TP evayyeAlw ; but kowwvia eis Tb edvaryyéeAtov.* 
 
 * [Bishop Pearce: “Comm. on the Evangelists and 
 the Acts.’ It must, however, be admitted that more 
 mature thought, represented in the later commenta- 
 tors, assigns a spiritual sense to the word xdpis in ver. 
 7, and also to the phrase kowwvia eis Td evayyéAtovy im 
 ver. 5, though in this earlier passage the expression of 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 2393 
 
 more is said in this place. In the latter part of 
 the second chapter, and at the distance of half 
 the Epistle from the last quotation, the subject 
 appears again: “ Yet I suppose it necessary to 
 send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and 
 companion in labour, and fellow-soldier, but 
 your messenger, and he that ministered to my 
 wants : for he longed after you all, and was full 
 of heaviness, because that ye had heard that he 
 had been sick: for indeed he was sick nigh 
 unto death; but God had mercy on him ; and 
 not on him only, but on me also, lest I should 
 have sorrow upon sorrow. I sent him there- 
 fore the more carefully, that, when ye see him 
 again, ye may rejoice, and that I may be the 
 less sorrowful. Receive him therefore in the 
 Lord with all gladness; and hold such in re- 
 putation: because for the work of Christ he 
 was nigh unto death, not regarding his life, 
 to supply your lack of service toward me” 
 (u. 25—30). The matter is here dropped, and 
 no further. mention made of it till it is taken up 
 near the conclusion of the Epistle as follows: 
 “ But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that now at 
 the last your care of me hath flourished again ; 
 
 Christian sympathy by almsgiving may very properly be 
 included. See Professor Lightfoot ‘‘on the Philippians,’ 
 pp. 81 and 83.—H. ] 
 
934 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 wherein ye were also careful, but ye lacked 
 opportunity: not that I speak in respect of 
 want; for I have learned, in whatsoever state I 
 am, therewith to be content. I know both how 
 to be abased, and I know how to abound; 
 everywhere and in all things I am _ instructed 
 both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound 
 and to suffer need. I can do all things through 
 Christ which strengtheneth me. Notwithstand- 
 ing ye have well done, that ye did communi- 
 cate with my affliction. Now ye, Philippians, 
 know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, 
 when I departed from Macedonia, no. church 
 communicated with me as concerning giving 
 and receiving, but ye only: for even in Thessa- 
 lonica ye sent once and again unto my neces- 
 sity: not because I desire a gift; but I desire 
 fruit that may abound to your account. But I 
 have all, and abound; Iam full;; having re- 
 ceived of Epaphroditus the things which were 
 sent from you”’ (iv. 10—18). To the Philippian 
 reader, who knew that contributions were wont 
 to be made in that Church for the Apostle’s 
 subsistence and relief, that the supply which 
 they were accustomed to send to him had been 
 delayed by the want of opportunity, that 
 Epaphroditus had undertaken the charge of 
 conveying their liberality to the hands of the 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 235 
 
 Apostle, that he had acquitted himself of this 
 commission at the peril of his life, by hasten- 
 ing to Rome under the oppression of a grievous 
 sickness; to a reader who knew all this before- 
 hand, every line in the above quotations would 
 be plain and clear. But how is it with a 
 stranger? The knowledge of these several par- 
 ticulars is necessary to the perception and ex- 
 planation of the references ; yet that knowledge 
 must be gathered from a comparison of passages. 
 lying at a great distance from one another. 
 Texts must be interpreted by texts long sub- 
 sequent to them; which necessarily produces 
 embarrassment and suspense. ‘The passage 
 quoted from the beginning of the Epistle con- 
 tains an acknowledgment on the part of the 
 Apostle, of the liberality which the Philippians 
 had exercised towards him ;. but the allusion is 
 so general and indeterminate, that had nothing 
 more been said in the sequel of the Epistle, it 
 would hardly have been applied to this occasion 
 at all. In the second quotation, Epaphroditus 
 is declared to have “ ministered to the Apostle’s 
 wants,” and “to have supplied their lack of 
 service towards him :’ but ow, that is, at 
 whose expense, or from what fund, he “ minis- 
 tered,” or what was the “Jack of service ?”? which 
 he supplied, are left very much unexplained, 
 
236 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 till we arrive at the third quotation, where we 
 find that Epaphroditus ministered to St. Paul’s” 
 wants, only by conveying to his hands the con- 
 tributions of the Philippians; “I am_ full, 
 having received of Epaphroditus the things 
 which were sent from you;”’ and that “the 
 lack of service which he supplied” was a delay 
 or interruption of their accustomed bounty, 
 occasioned by the want of opportunity; “ I re- 
 joiced in the Lord greatly, that now at the last 
 your care of me hath flourished again; wherein 
 ye were also careful, but ye lacked opportunity.” 
 The affair at length comes out clear; but it 
 comes out by piecemeal. The clearness is the 
 result of the reciprocal illustration of divided 
 texts. Should any one choose therefore to in- 
 sinuate, that this whole story of Epaphroditus, 
 of his journey, his errand, his sickness, or even 
 his existence, might, for what we know, have 
 no other foundation than in the invention of the 
 forger of the Epistle; I answer, that a forger 
 would have set forth his story connectedly, and 
 also more fully and more perspicuously. If the 
 Epistle be authentic, and the transaction real, 
 then everything which is said concerning Epa- 
 phroditus and his commission, would be clear 
 to those into whose hands the Epistle was ex- 
 pected to come. Considering the Philippians 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 237 
 
 as his readers, a person might naturally write 
 upon the subject, as the author of the Epistle 
 has written; but there is no supposition . of 
 forgery with which it will suit. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 The history of Epaphroditus supplies another 
 observation: “ Indeed he was sick, nigh unto 
 death ; but God had mercy on him, and not on 
 him only, but on me also, lest I should have 
 sorrow upon sorrow.” In this passage, no in- 
 timation is given that Epaphroditus’ recovery 
 was miraculous. It is plainly, I think, spoken 
 of as a natural event. This instance, together 
 with one in the second Epistle to Timothy 
 (“Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick”’), 
 affords a proof that the power of performing 
 cures, and, by parity of reason, of working 
 other miracles, was a power which only visited 
 the Apostles occasionally, and did not at 
 all depend upon their own will. Paul undoubt- 
 edly would have healed Epaphroditus if he 
 could. Nor, if the power of working cures had 
 awaited his disposal, would he have left his fellow- 
 traveller at Miletus sick. This, I think, isa 
 fair observation upon the instances adduced ; 
 
938 . HORE PAULINA. 
 
 but it is not the observation I am concerned to 
 make. It is more for the purpose of my argu-), 
 ment to remark, that forgery, upon such an 
 oecasion, would not have spared a miracle; 
 much less would it have introduced St. Paul pro- 
 fessing the utmost anxiety for the safety of his 
 friend, yet acknowledging himself unable to help 
 him: which he does almost expressly, in the 
 case of Trophimus, for he “ left him sick ;” and 
 virtually in the passage before us, in which he 
 felicitates himself upon the recovery of Epa- 
 phroditus, in terms which almost exclude the 
 supposition of any’ supernatural means being 
 employed to effect it. This is a reserve which 
 nothing but. truth would have imposed. 
 
 No. ITI. 
 
 Chap. iv. 15, 16: “ Now ye, Philippians, 
 know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, 
 when I departed from Macedonia, no church 
 communicated with me as concerning giving 
 and receiving, but ye only: for even in Thes- 
 salonica ye sent once and again unto my neces- 
 sity.” | is 
 It will be necessary to state the Greek of this 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 239 
 
 passage, because our translation does not, I 
 think, give the sense of it accurately. 
 
 Oidare 6? Kal buic, Pirlummijo.olr, Ste ev apyy 
 tov svayyedlov, Ore 2&nADov azd Makedoviac, 
 
 > U 2 , 3 ? ,’ , 
 ovdguia poe éxkAnola ekowwwvyncev sic Adyov 
 
 , A rd Pp] \ ¢e ~ Vd ¢e Ss 
 ddaewe Kal Ar ewc, ci pry uEic povor, dre Kat 
 2 , <a NN \ 5) Q , 
 év Oeooadovixy kal ama kal dle sic thy xpelav 
 pot éméupare. 
 
 The reader will please to direct his attention 
 to the corresponding particles ore and ort kal, 
 which connect the wordstv apxy Tov evayyedlou, 
 ore t&nADov dw Maxedoviac, with the words 
 tv Ozeooadoviky, and denote, as I interpret the 
 passage, two distinct donations, or rather dona- 
 tions at two distinct periods, one at Thessalonica, 
 araé cat dic, the other after his departure from 
 Macedonia, ore 2&7A00v azo Makedoviac. I 
 would render the passage, so as to mark these 
 different periods, thus: “ Now ye, Philippians, 
 
 3 Luke ii. 15: Kal éyévero, as am7nAOov am’ abtay eis Toy 
 ovpavoy of &yyeAo., “as the angels were gone away,” that 
 is, after their departure, of moiméves elroy mpds aAAHAous. 
 Matt. xii. 43: “Otay 5¢ 7d axabaproy mvevua efeAOn amd Tod 
 avOpwmov, when the unclean spirit is gone,” that is, after 
 his departure, d:épxerou. John xiii. 30: “Ore etre (Iovbas) 
 ‘when he was gone,’ that is, after his departure, A€éyet 
 "Incovs. Acts x. 7: ws 5 amqrAdev 6 ayyeAos 6 AaAay TH 
 KopynAl@, ‘and when the angel which spake unto him was 
 
 departed,” that is, after his departure, pwvhcas dio Tay 
 oixerav, &. 
 
240 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 know also that in the beginning of the gospel, 
 when I was departed from Macedonia, no church 
 communicated with me as concerning giving 
 and receiving, but ye only; and that also in 
 Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my 
 necessity.’ Now with this exposition of the 
 passage compare 2 Cor. x1. 8, 9: “I robbed 
 other churches, taking wages of them to do you 
 service: and when I was present with you and 
 wanted, [ was chargeable to no man; for that 
 which was lacking to me the brethren which 
 came from Macedonia supplied.” , 
 It appears from St. Paul’s history, as related 
 in the Acts of the Apostles, that upon leaving 
 Macedonia he passed, after a very short stay at 
 Athens, into Achaia. It appears, secondly, 
 from the quotation out of the Epistle to the 
 Corinthians, that in Achaia he accepted no 
 pecuniary assistance from the converts of that 
 country; but that he drew a supply for his 
 wants from the Macedonian Christians.* Agree- 
 
 4 [It ought to be noted here, as a collateral and corro- 
 borating fact, that he worked with his own hands, both at 
 Corinth, to which place he went on leaving Macedonia, and 
 also at Thessalonica, which he took in his way from Philippi. 
 See Acts xviii. 3, and 1 Cor. iv. 12, with 1 Thess. ii. 9, and 
 2 Thess. iii. 8,9. This brings out all the more clearly into 
 view the isolated fact of his receiving help from Philippi. 
 He 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 241 
 ably whereunto it appears, in the third place, 
 from the text which is the subject of the present 
 number, that the brethren in Philippi, a city of 
 Macedonia, had followed him with their muni- 
 ficence, ore ¢&jA90v azo Makxedoviac, when he 
 was departed from Macedonia, that is, when he 
 was come into Achaia. 
 
 The passage under consideration affords 
 another circumstance of agreement deserving 
 of our notice. The gift alluded to in the 
 Epistle to the Philippians is stated to have 
 been made “in the beginning of the gospel.” 
 This phrase is most naturally explained to 
 signify the first preaching of the gospel in these 
 parts; namely, on that side of the Al‘gean sea. 
 The succours referred to in the Epistle to the 
 Corinthians, as received from Macedonia, are 
 stated to have been received by him upon his: 
 first visit to the peninsula of Greece. The: 
 dates therefore assigned to the donation ia the. 
 two Epistles agree; yet is the date in one 
 ascertained very incidentally, namely, by the 
 considerations which fix the date of the Epistle 
 itself; and in the other, by an expression (“the 
 beginning of the gospel’) much too general to 
 have been used, if the text had been penned with 
 any view to the correspondency we are remark- 
 ing. 
 
 R 
 
242 HOREZ PAULINE. 
 
 Further, the phrase, “in the deginning of the 
 gospel,” raises an idea in the reader’s mind, that 
 the gospel had been preached there more than 
 once. The writer would hardly have called the 
 visit to which he refers the “ beginning of the 
 gospel,” if he had not also visited them in some 
 other stage of it. The fact corresponds with 
 this idea. If we consult the sixteenth and 
 twentieth chapters of the Acts, we shall find 
 that St. Paul, before his imprisonment at Rome, 
 during which this Epistle purports to have been 
 written, had been ¢wzce in Macedonia, and each 
 time at Philippi. 
 
 NOeiiw 
 
 That Timothy had been along with St. Paul 
 at Philippi is a fact which seems to be implied 
 in this Epistle twice. First, he joins in the 
 salutation with which the Epistle opens, “ Paul 
 and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to 
 all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at 
 Philippi.” Secondly, and more directly, the 
 point is inferred from what is said concerning 
 him, chap. i. 19—22: “But I trust in the 
 Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly unto you, 
 that I also may be of good comfort when I know 
 
13) 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 2498 
 
 your state; for I have no man likeminded, who 
 will naturally care for your state; for all seek 
 their own, not the things which are Jesus 
 Christ’s: but ye know the proof of him, that as 
 a son with the father, he hath served with me 
 in the gospel.” Had Timothy’s presence with 
 St. Paul at Philippi, when he preached the 
 gospel there, been expressly remarked in the 
 Acts of the Apostles, this quotation might 
 be thought to contain a contrived. adaptation 
 to the history ; although, even in that case, the 
 averment, or rather the allusion in the Epistle, 
 is too oblique to afford much room for such 
 suspicion. But the truth is, that in the history 
 of St. Paul’s transactions at Philippi, which 
 occupies the greatest part of the sixteenth 
 chapter of the Acts, no mention is made of 
 Timothy at all. What appears concerning 
 Timothy in the history, so far as relates to 
 the present subject, is this: “ When Paul came 
 to Derbe and Lystra, behold a certain disciple 
 was there named Timotheus; him Paul would 
 have to go forth with him.” The narrative 
 then proceeds with the account of St. Paul’s 
 progress through various provinces of the Lesser 
 Asia, till it brings him down to Troas. At 
 Troas he was warned in a vision to pass over 
 into Macedonia. In obedience to which he 
 R 2 
 
244 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 crossed the AZgean sea to Samothracia, the next 
 day to Neapolis, and from thence to Philippi. 
 His preaching, miracles, and persecutions at 
 Philippi follow next; after which Paul and his 
 company, when they had passed through Am- 
 phipolis and Apollonia, came to Thessalonica, 
 and from Thessalonica to Berea. From Berea 
 the brethren sent away Paul; “but Silas and 
 Timotheus abode there still.” The itinerary, of 
 which the above is an abstract, is undoubtedly 
 sufficient to support an inference that Timothy 
 was along with St. Paul at Philippi. We find 
 them setting out together upon this progress 
 from Derbe, in Lycaonia; we find them to- 
 gether, near the conclusion of it, at Berea, in 
 Macedonia. It is highly probable, therefore, 
 that they came together to Philippi, through 
 which their route between these two places lay. 
 If this be thought probable, it is sufficient. 
 For what I wish to be observed is, that in com- 
 paring, upon this subject, the Epistle with the 
 history, we do not find a recital in one place of 
 what is related in another; but that we find, 
 what is much more to be relied upon, an oblique 
 allusion to an implied fact.’ 
 
 5 [This argument concerning Timothy may be continued 
 and strengthened by taking in the third missionary journey 
 in addition to the second. The Epistle was written after 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 24.3 
 
 No. V. 
 
 Our Epistle purports to have been written 
 near the conclusion of St. Paul’s imprisonmont 
 at Rome, and after a residence in that city of 
 considerable duration.’ These circumstances are 
 made out by different intimations, and the in- 
 timations upon the subject preserve among 
 themselves a just consistency, and a consistency 
 certainly unmeditated. First, the Apostle had 
 already heen a prisoner at Rome so long, as that 
 the reputation of his bonds, and of his constancy 
 under them, had contributed to advance the suc- 
 cess of the gospel: “ But I would ye should 
 understand, brethren, that the things which 
 happened unto me have fallen out rather unto 
 the furtherance of the gospel ; so that my bonds 
 
 that third missionary journey ; and that journey had given 
 the Philippians a further opportunity of knowing Timothy, 
 while yet this circumstance is not directly mentioned in 
 the Acts. Indirectly we can infer that he was there (see 
 Acts xx. 21 and xxi. 4, 5, 6) on both the outward and the 
 return routes: but there is no such explicit statement of 
 this as could have suggested the passage before us in the 
 Epistle to the Philippians.—H. | 
 
 6 [The Epistle to the Philippians was sent from Rome 
 at a different time from those to the Ephesians, Colossians, 
 and Philemon, and by a different messenger: and the 
 reasons are very weighty for believing that the date of 
 this Epistle was later than that of the other three.—H. | 
 
24.6 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in 
 all other places; and many of the brethren in 
 the Lord waxing confident by my bonds, are 
 much more bold to speak the word without 
 fear.” Secondly, the account given of Epaphro- 
 ditus imports, that St. Paul, when he wrote 
 the Epistle, had been in Rome a considerable 
 time: “ He longed after you all, and was full of 
 heaviness, because that ye had heard that he had 
 been sick.” Epaphroditus was with St. Paul 
 at Rome. He had been sick. The Philippians 
 had heard of his sickness, and he again had re- 
 ceived an account how much they had been 
 affected by the intelligence. The passing and 
 repassing’ of these advices must necessarily have 
 occupied a large portion of time, and must have 
 all taken place during St. Paul’s residence at 
 Rome. Thirdly, after a residence at Rome thus 
 proved to have been of considerable duration, he 
 now regards the decision of his fate as nigh at 
 hand. He contemplates either alternative, that 
 of his deliverance (ii. 23), “Him therefore 
 (Timothy) I hope to send presently, so soon as I 
 shall see how it will go with me; but I trust 
 in the Lord that I also myself shall come 
 shortly ;—” that of his condemnation (ver. 17), 
 “Yea, and if I be offered’ upon the sacrifice and 
 
 7°AAN ei Kalomevdouat em) TH Ovola Tis mictews bua, “if 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 247 
 
 service of your faith, I joy and rejoice with you 
 all.’ This consistency is material, if the con- 
 sideration of it be confined to the Epistle. It is 
 farther material, as it agrees, with respect to the 
 duration of St. Paul’s first imprisonment at 
 Rome, with the account delivered in the Acts, 
 which, having brought the Apostle to Rome, 
 closes the history by telling us “ that he dwelt 
 there two whole years in his own hired house.” 
 
 No. VI. 
 
 Chap.1. 23: “ For I am in a strait betwixt 
 two, having a desire to depart, and to be with 
 Christ ; which is far better.” 
 
 With this compare 2 Cor. v. 8: “We are 
 confident, and willing rather to be absent from 
 the body, and to be present with the Lord.” 
 
 The sameness of sentiment in these two 
 quotations is obvious. I rely, however, not so 
 much upon that, as upon the similitude in the 
 train of thought which in each Epistle leads up 
 to this sentiment, and upon the suitableness of 
 that train of thought to the circumstances under 
 which the Epistles purport to have been written. 
 
 my blood be poured out as a libation upon the sacrifice of 
 your faith.” 
 
248 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 This, I conceive, bespeaks the production of the 
 same mind, and of a mind operating upon real 
 circumstances. The sentiment is in both places 
 preceded by the contemplation of imminent per- 
 sonal danger. To the Philippians he writes, in 
 the twentieth verse of this chapter, ‘ According 
 to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in 
 nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all 
 boldness, as always, so now also, Christ shall be 
 magnified in my body, whether it be by life or by 
 death.” To the Corinthians, “ Troubled on every 
 side, yet not distressed ; perplexed, but not in 
 despair ; persecuted, but not forsaken ; cast down, 
 Lut not destroyed; always bearing about in the 
 bedy the dying of the Lord Jesus” (2 Cor. © 
 iv. 8—10). This train of reflection is continued 
 to the place from whence the words which we 
 compare are taken. The two Epistles, though 
 written at different times, from different places, 
 and to different Churches, were both written 
 under circumstances which would naturally re- 
 call to the author’s mind the precarious condition 
 of his life, and the perils which constantly 
 awaited him. When the Epistle to the Philip- 
 pians was written, the author was a prisoner at 
 Rome, expecting his trial. When the Second 
 Epistle to the Corinthians was written, he had 
 lately escaped a danger in which he had given 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 249 
 
 himself over for lost. The Epistle opens with 
 a recollection of this subject, and the impres- 
 sion accompanied the writer’s thoughts through- 
 out. 
 
 I know that nothing is easier than to trans- 
 plant into a forged epistle a sentiment or ex- 
 pression which is found in a true one; or, sup- 
 posing both Epistles to be forged by the same 
 hand, to insert the same sentiment or expression 
 m both. But the difficulty is to introduce it 
 in just and close connexion with the train of 
 thought going before, and with a train of 
 thought apparently generated by the circum- 
 stances under which the Epistle is written. In 
 two Epistles purporting to be written on dif- 
 ferent occasions, and in different periods of the 
 author’s history, this propriety would not easily 
 be managed. 
 
 Nor Vit 
 
 Chap. 1. 29, 80; 11.1, 2: “For unto you it 
 is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to be- 
 heve on Him, but also to suffer for His sake; 
 having the same conflict which ye saw in me, 
 and now hear to bein me. If there be, there- 
 fore, any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of 
 
250 HORE PAULINA. . 
 
 love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any 
 bowels and mercies, fulfil ye my joy, that ye be 
 likeminded, having the same love, being of one 
 accord, of one mind.” 
 
 With this compare Acts xvi. 22—24: “ And 
 the multitude (at Philippi) rose up against them 
 (Paul and Silas); and the magistrates rent off 
 their clothes, and commanded to beat them; 
 and when they had laid many stripes upon them, 
 they cast them into prison, charging the jailor 
 to keep them safely ; who, having received such 
 a charge, thrust them into the inner prison, and 
 made their feet fast in the stocks.” 
 
 The passage in the Epistle is very remarkable. 
 I know not an example in any writing of a 
 juster pathos, or which more truly represents 
 the workings of a warm and affectionate mind, 
 than what is exhibited in the quotation before 
 us.© The Apostle reminds his Philippians of 
 their being joined with himself in the endurance 
 of persecution for the sake of Christ. He con- 
 jures them, by the ties of their common profes- 
 sion and their common sufferings, to “ fulfil his 
 joy ;” to complete, by the unity of their faith, 
 and by their mutual love, that joy with which 
 
 8 The original is very spirited. EY ris ody mapaxAnots ev 
 Xpior@, ef TL mapauvO.oy ayamns, ef Tis Kowwvia Tvevpmaros, et 
 TWa oTAdyxva Kal olkTipmol, TAnpooaTe pov THY Xapay. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 251 
 
 the instances he had received of their zeal and 
 attachment had inspired his breast.’ Now if 
 this was the real effusion of St. Paul’s mind, of 
 which it bears the strongest internal character, 
 then we have in the words “the same conflict 
 which ye saw in me,” an authentic confirma- 
 tion of so much of the Apostle’s history in the 
 Acts as relates to his transactions at Philippi, 
 and through that of the intelligence and general 
 fidelity of the historian. 
 
 9 [This again is an instance of the subjective feeling of 
 the Apostle coming to view quite naturally and unde- 
 signedly. For a kindred instance in another Kpistle, but 
 relating to this same place, see 1 Thess. 1i. 2 : “ We suffered 
 before, and were shamefully treated, as ye know, at Phi- 
 lippi.” Of that passage, too, it is to be remarked that it 
 fits its context quite easily, and rises naturally out of it. 
 —H. | 
 
252 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 
 
 No. T. 
 
 THERE is a circumstance of conformity between 
 St. Paul’s history and his letters, especially 
 those which were written during his first im- 
 prisonment at Rome, and more especially the 
 Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians, which, 
 being too close to be accounted for from accident, 
 yet too indirect and latent to be imputed to 
 design, cannot easily be resolved into any 
 other original than truth. Which circumstance 
 is this, that St. Paul in these Epistles attri- 
 butes his imprisonment not to his preaching 
 of Christianity, but to his asserting the right 
 of the Gentiles to be admitted into it with- 
 out conforming themselves to the Jewish 
 law. 
 
 This was the doctrine to which he considered 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 200 
 
 himself as a martyr. Thus in the Epistle 
 before us (1. 24), (I Paul) “who now rejoice in 
 my sufferings for you ”—“/or you,” that is, for 
 those whom he had never seen ; for a few verses 
 afterwards ke adds, “I would that ye knew 
 what great conflict I have for you, and for 
 them in Laodicea, and for as many as have not 
 seen my face in the flesh.” His sufferings 
 therefore were for ‘Hem, in their general capacity 
 of Gentile Christians, agreeably to what he 
 explicitly declares in his Epistle to the Ephesians 
 (ii. 1), “ For this cause, I Paul, the prisoner 
 of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles”’ Again in 
 the Epistle now under consideration (iv. 3), 
 “ Withal praying also for us, that God would 
 open unto us a door of utterance to speak the 
 mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds.” 
 What that “mystery of Christ” ’ was, the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians distinctly informs us 
 (iii. 4—6); “whereby when ye read ye may 
 understand my knowledge in the mystery of 
 Christ, which in other ages was not made known 
 unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed 
 unto His holy Apostles and Prophets by the 
 Spirit; that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, 
 and of the same body, and partakers of His 
 
 1 [See note above (p. 206) on St. Paul’s use of the word 
 ‘ mystery.”—H. | 
 
254 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 promise mm Christ by the gospel.’ This, there- 
 fore, was the confession for which he declares 
 himself to be in bonds. 
 
 Now let us inquire how the occasion of St. 
 Paul’s imprisonment is represented in the his- 
 tory. The Apostle had not long returned to 
 Jerusalem from his second visit into Greece, 
 when an uproar was excited in that city by the 
 clamour of certain Asiatic Jews, who, “ having 
 seen Paul in the temple, stirred up all the 
 people, and laid hands on him.” ‘The charge 
 advanced against him was, that “he taught all 
 men everywhere against the people, and the law, 
 and this place; and further, brought Greeks also 
 into the temple, and polluted that holy place.” 
 The former part of the charge seems to point at 
 the doctrine, which he maintained, of the ad- 
 mission of the Gentiles, under the new dispen- 
 sation, to an indiscriminate participation of 
 God’s favour with the Jews. But what follows 
 makes the matter clear. When, by the inter- 
 ference of the chief captain, Paul had been 
 rescued out of the hands of the populace, and 
 was permitted to address the multitude who had 
 followed him to the stairs of the castle, he 
 delivered a brief account of his birth, of the 
 early course of his life, of his miraculous con- 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 955 
 
 version;”* and is proceeding in his narrative, 
 until he comes to describe a vision which was 
 presented to him, as he was praying in the 
 temple; and which bade him depart out of 
 Jerusalem, “for I will send thee far hence 
 anto the Gentiles.’ Acts xxi. 21. “They 
 gave him audience,” says the historian, “ wato 
 this word ; and then lifted up their voices, and 
 said, Away with such a fellow from the earth.” 
 Nothing can show more strongly than this 
 account does, what was the offence which drew 
 down upon St. Paul the vengeance of his 
 countrymen. His mission to the Gentiles, and 
 his open avowal of that mission, was the in- 
 tolerable part of the Apostle’s crime. 
 
 But although the real motive of the prosecution 
 appears to have been the Apostle’s conduct to- 
 wards the Gentiles ; yet, when his accusers came 
 before a Roman magistrate, a charge was to be 
 framed of a more legalform. The profanation of 
 the temple was the article they chose to rely upon. 
 This, therefore, became the immediate subject 
 of Tertullus’ oration before Felix, and of Paul’s 
 defence. But that he all along considered his 
 ministry among the Gentiles as the actual 
 
 4 [See AppEnpix II. on the three accounts of St. Paul’s 
 Conversion.—H. | 
 
256 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 source of the enmity that had been exercised 
 against him, and in particular as the cause of 
 the insurrection in which his person had been 
 seized, is apparent from the conclusion of his 
 discourse before Agrippa (Acts xxvi.) : ‘ Ihave 
 appeared unto thee,” says he, describing what 
 passed upon his journey to Damascus, “ for this 
 purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness, 
 both of these things which thou hast seen, and 
 of those things in the which I[ will. appear unto 
 thee; delivering thee from the people, and from 
 the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to 
 open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness 
 to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, 
 that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and 
 inheritance among them which are sanctified 
 by faith that is in me. Whereupon, O King 
 Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly 
 vision; but showed first unto them of Damascus, 
 and of Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts 
 of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they 
 should repent and turn to God, and do works 
 meet for repentance. or these causes the Jews 
 caught mein the temple, and went about to 
 kill me.” The seizing, therefore, of St. Paul’s 
 person, from which he was never discharged 
 until his final liberation at Rome, and of which, 
 therefore, his imprisonment at Rome was the 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. peat) 
 
 continuation and effect, was not in consequence 
 of any general persecution set on foot against 
 Christianity; nor did it befall him simply as 
 professing or teaching Christ’s religion, which 
 James and the elders at Jerusalem did as well 
 as he (and yet for anything that appears re- 
 mained at that time unmolested); but it was 
 distinctly and specially brought upon him by 
 his activity in preaching to the Gentiles, and by 
 his boldly placing them upon a level with the 
 once-favoured and still self-flattered posterity 
 of Abraham. How well St. Paul’s letters, pur- 
 porting to be written during this imprisonment, 
 agree with this account of its cause and origin, 
 we have already seen. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 Chap. iv. 10, 11: “ Aristarchus my fellow- 
 prisoner saluteth you, and Marcus, sister’s son 
 to Barnabas, (touching whom ye received com- 
 mandments ; if he come unto you, receive him ;) 
 and Jesus, which is called Justus, who are of 
 the circumcision.” 
 
 We find Aristarchus as a companion of our 
 Apostle in Acts xix. 29: “ And the whole city (of 
 Ephesus) was filled with confusion ; and having 
 
 s 
 
258 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 eaught Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Mace- 
 donia, Paul’s companions in travel, they rushed. 
 with one accord into the theatre.” And we find 
 him upon his journey with St. Paul to Rome, in 
 chap. xxvu. 1, 2: “ And when it was deter- 
 mined that we should sail into Italy, they deli- 
 vered Paul and certain other prisoners unto one 
 named Julius, a centurion of Augustus’ band ; 
 and, entering into a ship of Adramyttium, we 
 Jaunched, meaning to sail by the coasts of Asia; 
 one Aristarchus,® a Macedonian of Thessalonica, 
 being with us.’ But might not the author of 
 the Epistle have consulted the history; and, 
 observing that the historian had brought Aris- 
 tarchus along with Paul to Rome, might he not 
 for that reason, and without any other founda- 
 tion, have put down his name among the saluta- 
 tions of an Epistle, purporting to be written by 
 the Apostle from that place? I allow so much 
 of possibility to this objection, that I should 
 not have proposed this in the number of coin- 
 cidences clearly undesigned, had Aristarchus 
 stood alone. The observation that strikes me in 
 
 3 [It is difficult to understand why our Translators 
 should have written “one Aristarchus,’ as if this com- 
 panion of the Apostle had never been heard of before and 
 never would be mentioned again. The mistake, however, 
 
 is unfortunate, because it tends to obscure a personal 
 identity which involves an undesigned coincidence.—H, ] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 259 
 
 reading the passage is, that together with Aris- 
 - tarchus, whose journey to Rome we trace in the 
 history, are joined Marcus and Justus, of whose 
 coming to Rome the history says nothing. 
 Aristarchus alone appears in the history, and 
 Aristarchus alone would have appeared in the 
 Hpistle, if the author had regulated himself 
 by that conformity. Or if you take it the other 
 way; if you suppose the history to have been 
 made out of the Epistle, why the journey of 
 Aristarchus to Rome should be recorded, and 
 not that of Marcus and Justus, if the ground- 
 work of the narrative was the appearance of 
 Aristarchus’ name in the Epistle, seems to be 
 unaccountable. 
 
 * Marcus, szster’s son to Barnabas.”? Does not 
 this hint account for Barnabas’ adherence to 
 Mark in the contest that arose with our Apostle 
 ~ eoncerning him? ‘ And some days after Paul 
 said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit 
 our brethren in every city where we have 
 preached the word of the Lord, and see how 
 they do: and Barnabas determined to take with 
 them John, whose surname was Mark; but Paul 
 thought not good to take him with them, who 
 departed from them from Pamphylia, and went 
 not with them to the work; and the contention 
 was so sharp between them, that they departed 
 
 s 2 
 
 I 
 
960 HORA PAULINE. 
 
 ewe 
 
 asunder one from the other; and so Barnabas 
 took Mark and sailed unto Cyprus.” Acts xv. 
 36—39. The history which records the dispute 
 has not preserved the circumstance of Mark’s 
 relationship to Barnabas. It is nowhere noticed 
 but in the text before us. As far, therefore, as it 
 applies, the application is certainly undesigned. 
 
 “ Sister’s son to Barnabas.” This woman, the 
 mother of Mark, and the sister of Barnabas,’ 
 was, as might be expected, a person of some 
 eminence among the Christians of Jerusalem. 
 It so happens that we hear of her in the history. 
 When Peter was delivered from prison, “he 
 came to the house of lary the mother of John, 
 whose surname was Mark; where many were 
 gathered together praying.’ Acts xu. 12. 
 There is somewhat of coincidence in this ; some- 
 what bespeaking real transactions among real 
 persons. 
 
 No. III. 
 The following coincidence, though it bear the 
 
 ‘ [This precise interpretation of dvedids, which makes 
 Mark to be the son of a sister of Barnabas, cannot be sus- 
 tained ; and, this being given up, the slight argument con- 
 tained in this concluding paragraph breaks down. The 
 general argument, however, depending on Mark’s near 
 relationship to Barnabas, remains.—H. ] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 261 
 
 appearance of great nicety and refinement, 
 ought not, perhaps, to be deemed imaginary. 
 In the salutations with which this, like most of 
 St. Paul’s Epistles, concludes, we have “ Aris- 
 tarchus, and Marcus, and Jesus, which is called 
 Justus, who are of the circumcision” (iv. 10,11). 
 Then follow also “ Epaphras, Luke the beloved 
 physician, and Demas.” Now as this descrip- 
 tion, “who are of the circumcision,’ is added 
 after the three first names, it is inferred, not 
 without great appearance of probability, that 
 the rest, among whom is Luke, were not of the 
 circumcision. Now can we discover any expres- 
 sion in the Acts of the Apostles, which ascer- 
 tains whether the author of the book was a Jew 
 or not? If we can discover that he was not a 
 Jew, we fix a circumstance in his character, 
 which coincides with what is here, indirectly 
 indeed, but not very uncertainly, intimated con- 
 cerning Luke; and we so far confirm both the 
 testimony of’ the primitive Church, that the 
 Acts of the Apostles was written by St. Luke, 
 and the general reality of the persons and cir- 
 cumstances brought together in this Epistle. 
 The text in the Acts, which has been construed 
 to show that the writer was not a Jew, is in 
 chap. i. 19, where, in describing the field which 
 had been purchased with the reward of Judas’ 
 
HORA PAULINA, 
 
 oo 
 eon) 
 wo 
 
 iniquity, it is said, “that it was known unto all 
 the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that 
 field is called, in their proper tongue, Aceldama, 
 that is to say, the field of blood.’ These words 
 are by most commentators taken to be the words 
 and observation of the historian, and not a part 
 of St. Peter’s speech, in the midst of which they 
 are found. If this be admitted, then it is 
 argued that the expression, “in ¢heir proper 
 tongue,’ would not have been used by a Jew, 
 but is suitable to the pen of a Gentile writing 
 concerning Jews.’ The reader will judge of the 
 probability of this conclusion, and we urge the 
 coincidence no further than that probability 
 extends. The coincidence, if it be one, is so 
 remote from all possibility of design, that 
 nothing need be added to satisfy the reader 
 upon that part of the argument.° 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 Chap. iv. 9: “With Onesimus, a faithful 
 and beloved brother, who is one of you.” 
 
 5 Vide Benson’s Dissertation, vol. i. p. 318 of his works, 
 Ed. 1756. 
 
 6 [This is only a fragment of the illustration which this 
 treatise might receive from coincidences connected with St. 
 Luke. See ArpenpDIx IV. on this subject.—H. ] 
 
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 263 
 
 Observe how it may be made out that Onesi- 
 mus was a Colossian. Turn to the Epistle to 
 Philemon, and you will find that Onesimus was 
 the servant or slave of Philemon. The question 
 therefore will be to what city Philemon be- 
 longed. In the Epistle addressed to him this is 
 not declared. ‘It appears only that he was of the 
 same place, whatever that place was, with an 
 eminent Christian named Archippus. “ Paul, 
 a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our 
 brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved and 
 fellow-labourer ; and to our beloved Apphia, and 
 Archippus our fellow-soldier, and to the church 
 in thy house.” Now turn back to the Epistle 
 to the Colossians, and you will find Archippus 
 saluted by name among the Christians of that 
 Church. ‘‘Say to Archippus, Take heed to the 
 ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, 
 that thou fulfil it” (iv. 17). The necessary 
 result is, that Onesimus also was of the same 
 city, agreeably to what is said of him, “he is 
 one of you.” And this result is the effect, 
 either of truth which produces consistency 
 without the writer’s thought or care, or of a 
 contexture of forgeries confirming and falling 
 in with one another by a species of fortuity of 
 which I know no example. The supposition of 
 design, I think, is excluded, not only because 
 
964. HOR#Z PAULINA. 
 
 the purpose to which the design must have 
 been directed, namely, the verification of the 
 passage in our Epistle, in which it is said con- 
 cerning Onesimus, “ he is one of you,” is a pur- 
 pose which would be lost upon ninety-nine 
 readers out of a hundred ; but because the means 
 made use of are too circuitous to have been the 
 subject of affectation and contrivance. Would 
 a forger, who had this purpose in view, have left 
 his readers to hunt it out, by going forward and 
 backward from one Epistle to another, in order 
 to connect Onesimus with Philemon, Philemon 
 with Archippus, and Archippus with Colossze ? 
 All which he must do before he arrive at his 
 discovery, that it was truly said of Onesimus 
 “he is one of you.” 
 
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 265 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 Ir is known to every reader of Scripture, that 
 the first Epistle to the Thessalonians speaks of 
 the coming of Christ in terms which indicate an 
 expectation of His speedy appearance: “ For 
 this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, 
 that we which are alive and remain unto the 
 coming of the Lord shall not prevent them 
 which are asleep. For the Lord Himself shall 
 descend from heaven with a shout, with the 
 voice of the archangel, and with the trump of 
 God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; 
 then we which are alive and remain, shall be 
 caught up together with them in the clouds.— 
 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that 
 day should overtake you as a thief” (iv. 15—17; 
 v. 4). 
 
266 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 oa ev — $a 
 
 Whatever other construction these texts may 
 bear, the idea they leave upon the mind of an 
 ordinary reader, is that of the author of the 
 Epistle looking for the day of judgment to take 
 place in his own time, or near to it. Now the 
 use which I make of this circumstance, is to de- 
 duce from it a proof that the Epistle itself was 
 not the production of a subsequent age. Would 
 an impostor have given this expectation to St. 
 Paul, after experience had proved it to be erro- 
 neous ? or would he have put into the Apostle’s 
 mouth, or, which is the same thing, into writings 
 purporting to come from his hand, expressions, 
 if not necessarily conveying, at least easily in- 
 terpreted to convey, an opinion which was then 
 known to be founded in mistake? I state this 
 as an argument to show that the Epistle was 
 contemporary with St. Paul, which is little less 
 than to show that it actually proceeded from his 
 pen. For I question whether any ancient for- 
 geries were executed in the lifetime of the 
 person whose name they bear; nor was the 
 primitive situation of the Church likely to give 
 birth to such an attempt. 
 
 No,, 1. 
 Our Epistle concludes with a direction, that it 
 
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 267 
 
 should be publicly read in the Church to which 
 it was addressed: “I charge you by the Lord, 
 that this Epistle be read unto all the holy 
 brethren.” The existence of this clause in the 
 body of the Epistle is an evidence of its authen- 
 ticity ; because to produce a letter purporting 
 to have been publicly read in the Church of 
 Thessalonica, when no such letter in truth had 
 been read or heard of in that Church, would be 
 to produce an imposture destructive of itself. 
 At least, it seems unlikely that the author of an 
 imposture would voluntarily, and even officiously, 
 afford a handle to so plain an _ objection. 
 Either the Epistle was publicly read in the 
 Church of Thessalonica during St. Paul’s life- 
 time, or it was not. If it was, no publication 
 could be more authentic, no species of notoriety 
 more unquestionable, no method of preserving 
 the integrity of the copy more secure. If it 
 was not, the clause we produce would remain a 
 standing condemnation of the forgery, and, one 
 would suppose, an invincible impediment to its 
 success. 
 
 If we connect this article with the preceding, 
 we shall perceive that they combine into one 
 strong proof of the genuineness of the Epistle. 
 The preceding article carries up the date of the 
 Epistle to the time of St. Paul; the present article 
 
268 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 fixes the publication of it to the Church of 
 Thessalonica. Either, therefore, the Church of 
 Thessalonica was imposed upon by a false 
 Hipistle, which in St. Paul’s lifetime they re- 
 ceived and read publicly as his, carrying on a 
 communication with him all the while, and the 
 lpistle referring to the continuance of that 
 communication ; or other Christian Churches, in 
 the same lifetime of the Apostle, received an 
 Kpistle purporting to have been publicly read in 
 the Church of Thessalonica, which nevertheless 
 had not been heard of in that Church ; or lastly, 
 the conclusion remains, that the Epistle now in 
 our hands is genuine, 
 
 Not iit 
 
 Between our Epistle and the history the ac- 
 cordance in many points js circumstantial and 
 complete. The history relates, that, after Paul - 
 and Silas had been beaten with many stripes at 
 Philippi, shut up in the inner prison, and their 
 feet made fast in the stocks; as soon as they 
 were discharged from their confinement they de- 
 parted from thence, and, when they had passed 
 through Amphipolis and Apollonia, came to 
 Thessalonica, where Paul opened and alleged 
 
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSATLONIANS. 269 
 
 that Jesus was the Christ (Acts xvi. 23, &e., 
 xvii. 1—8,17). The Epistle written in the 
 name of Paul and Sylvanus (Silas), and of 
 Timotheus, who also appears to have been along 
 with them at Philippi (see Phil. No. iv.), speaks 
 to the Church of Thessalonica thus: “Even 
 after that we had suffered before, and were 
 shamefully entreated, as ye know, at Philippi, | 
 we were bold in our God to speak unto you 
 the gospel of God with much contention ” 
 (it. 2). 
 
 The history relates, that after they had been 
 some time at Thessalonica, “the Jews who 
 believed not set all the city in an uproar, 
 and assaulted the house of Jason (where Paul 
 and Silas were), and sought to bring them out 
 to the people.” Acts xvu. 5. The Epistle 
 declares, “ when we were with you, we told you 
 before that we should suffer tribulation ; even as 
 it came to pass, and ye know” (ill. 4). 
 
 The history brings Paul and Silas and 
 Timothy together at Corinth, soon after the 
 preaching of the gospel at Thessalonica: “ And 
 when Silas and Timotheus were come from 
 Macedonia (to Corinth), Paul was pressed in 
 the spirit.” Acts xvii. 5. The Epistle is 
 written in the name of these three persons, 
 who consequently must have been together 
 
270 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 at the time, and speaks throughout of their 
 ministry at Thessalonica as a recent trans- 
 action: “We, brethren, deing taken from you 
 jor a short time in presence, not in _ heart, 
 endeavoured the more abundantly to see your 
 face with great desire” (ii. 17). 
 
 _ The harmony is undubitable; but the points 
 of history in which it consists, are so expressly 
 set forth in the narrative, and so directly 
 referred to in the Epistle, that it becomes 
 necessary for us to show, that the facts in 
 one writing were not copied from the other. 
 Now, amidst some minuter discrepancies, which 
 will be noticed below, there is one circumstance 
 which mixes itself with all the allusions in the 
 Epistle, but does not appear in the history any- 
 where; and that is of a visit which St. Paul 
 had intended to pay to the Thessalonians during 
 the time of his residing at Corinth; “ Where- 
 fore we would have come unto you, even I 
 Paul, once and again; but Satan hindered us” 
 (ii. 18). “ Night and day praying exceedingly 
 that we might see your face, and might perfect 
 that which is lacking in your faith. Now God 
 Himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, direct our way unto you” (i. 10, 11). 
 Concerning a design which was not executed, 
 although the person himself, who was conscious 
 
TIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 271 
 
 of his own purpose, should make mention in his 
 letters, nothing is more probable than that his 
 historian should be silent, if not ignorant. The 
 author of the Epistle could not, however, have 
 learnt this circumstance from the history, for it 
 is not there to be met with; nor, if the historian 
 had drawn his materials from the Epistle, is it 
 likely that he would have passed over a cireum- 
 stance, which is among the most obvious and 
 prominent of the facts to be collected from that 
 source of information. 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 Chap. ili. 1, 2, 6, 7: “ Wherefore when we 
 could no longer forbear, we thought it good to 
 be left at Athens alone; and sent Timotheus, our 
 brother, and minister of God, to establish you, 
 and to comfort you concerning your faith :— 
 but now when Timotheus came from you unto 
 us, and brought us good tidings of your faith 
 and charity, we were comforted over you in all 
 our affliction and distress by your faith.” 
 
 The history relates, that when Paul came out 
 of Macedonia to Athens, Silas and Timothy 
 stayed behind at Berea; “'The brethren sent 
 away Paul to go as it were to the sea; but 
 
2712 HORM PAULINA. 
 
 Silas and Timotheus abode there still: and they 
 that conducted Paul brought him to Athens.” 
 Acts xvii. 14,15. The history further relates, 
 that after Paul had tarried some time at Athens, 
 and had proceeded from thence to Corinth, 
 while he was exercising his ministry in that 
 city, Silas and Timothy came to him from 
 Macedonia (Acts xvi. 5). But to reconcile 
 the history with the clause in the Epistle which 
 makes St. Paul say, “I thought it good to be 
 left at Athens alone, and to send Timothy unto 
 you,” it 1s necessary to suppose that Timothy 
 had come up with St. Paul at Athens;' a cir- 
 cumstance which the history does not mention. 
 I remark therefore, that, although the history 
 does not expressly notice this arrival, yet it 
 contains intimations which render it extremely 
 probable that the fact took place. First, as 
 soon as Paul had reached Athens, he sent a 
 message back to Silas and Timothy “for to 
 come to him with all speed.” Acts xvu. 15. 
 
 1 [The language here is too strong. It is not absolutely 
 ‘necessary ’’ to suppose that Timothy had “come up with 
 St. Paul at Athens’’ before the words just quoted were 
 written. The words might have been written if he felt 
 that, by sending Timothy to Thessalonica, he himself 
 would be ‘left in Athens alone.’ Paley’s view, however, 
 is the more probable. In either case the reasoning and 
 the conclusion would be the same.—H. | 
 
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 273 
 
 Secondly, his stay at Athens was on purpose 
 that they might join him there; ‘ Now whilst 
 Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was 
 stirred in him.” Acts xvi. 16. Thirdly, his 
 departure from Athens does not appear to have 
 been in any sort hastened or abrupt. It is said, 
 “after these things,’ namely, his disputation 
 with the Jews, his conferences with the phi- 
 losophers, his discourse at Areopagus, and the 
 gaining of some converts, “he departed from 
 Athens, and came to Corinth.” It is not 
 hinted that he quitted Athens before the time 
 that he had intended to leave it; it is not 
 suggested that he was driven from thence, as he 
 was from many cities, by tumults or persecu- 
 tions, or because his life was no longer safe. 
 Observe then the particulars which the history 
 does notice,—that Paul had ordered Timothy to 
 follow him without delay, that he waited at 
 Athens on purpose that Timothy might come 
 up with him, that he stayed there as long as his 
 own choice led him to continue. Laying these 
 circumstances which the history does disclose 
 together, it 1s highly probable that Timothy 
 came to the Apostle at Athens, a fact which 
 the Epistle, we have seen, virtually asserts, 
 when it makes Paul send Timothy back from 
 Athens to Thessalonica, The sending back of 
 T 
 
274, HORE PAULINE. 
 
 Timothy into Macedonia accounts also for his not 
 coming to Corinth till after Paul had been fixed 
 in that city for some considerable time. Paul 
 had found out Aquila and Priscilla, abode with 
 them and wrought, being of the same craft; 
 and reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath- 
 day, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks 
 (Acts xvii. 2—4). All this passed at Corinth 
 before Silas and Timotheus were come from 
 Macedonia (Acts xvii. 5). If this was the 
 first time of their coming up with him after 
 their separation at Berea, there is nothing to 
 account for a delay so contrary to what appears 
 from the history itself to have been St. Paul’s 
 plan and expectation. This is a conformity 
 of a peculiar species. The Epistle discloses 
 a fact which is not preserved in the history ; 
 but which makes what is said in the history 
 more significant, probable, and consistent. The 
 history bears marks of an omission; the Epistle 
 by reference furnishes a circumstance which 
 supplies that omission. | 
 
 % 
 
 No. V. 
 
 Chap. 1, 14: “For ye, brethren, became 
 followers of the churches of God which in Judea 
 
FIRST EPISTLE TO TIIE THESSALONIANS. 275 
 
 are in Christ Jesus; for ye also have suffered 
 like things of your own countrymen, even as they 
 have of the Jews. 
 
 To a reader of the Acts of the Apostles, it 
 might seem, at first sight, that the persecutions 
 which the preachers and converts of Christianity 
 underwent, were suffered at the hands of their 
 old adversaries the Jews. But if we attend 
 carefully to the accounts there delivered, we 
 shall observe, that, though the opposition made 
 to the gospel usually orzginated from the enmity 
 of the Jews, yet in almost all places the Jews 
 went about to accomplish their purpose, by 
 stirrme up the Gentile inhabitants against 
 their converted countrymen. Out of Judea 
 they had not power to do much mischief in any 
 other way. This was the case at Thessalonica 
 in particular; “The Jews which believed not, 
 moved with envy, set all the city in an uproar.” 
 Acts xvi. 5. It was the same a short time 
 afterwards at Berea: “ When the Jews of Thes- 
 salonica had knowledge that the word of God 
 was preached of Paul at Berea, they came 
 thither also, and stirred up the people.” Acts 
 xvii. 13. And before this our Apostle had 
 met with a like species of persecution, in his 
 progress through the Lesser Asia; in every 
 city “the unbelieving Jews stirred up the 
 
 T 2 
 
DEG HORZ PAULINE. 
 
 Gentiles, and made their minds evil affected 
 against the brethren.’ Acts xiv. 2. The 
 Epistle therefore represents the case accurately 
 as the history states it. It was the Jews 
 always who set on foot the persecutions against 
 the Apostles and their followers. He speaks 
 truly therefore of them, when he says in this 
 Epistle, “they both killed the Lord Jesus and 
 their own prophets, and have persecuted us— 
 forbidding us to speak unto the Gentiles” (ii. 
 15,16). But out of Judea it was at the hands 
 of the Gentiles, it was ‘ of their own country- 
 men,” that the injuries they underwent were 
 immediately sustained ; “ Ye have suffered like 
 things of your own countrymen, even as they 
 have of the Jews.” 
 
 No. VI. 
 
 The apparent discrepancies between our 
 Epistle and the history, though of magnitude 
 sufficient to repel the imputation of confederacy 
 or transcription (in which view they form a 
 part of our argument), are neither numerous, nor 
 very difficult to reconcile. 
 
 One of these may be observed in chap. 1. 9, 
 
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 277 
 
 10; “For ye remember, brethren, our Jabour 
 and travail; for labouring night and day, be- 
 cause we would not be chargeable unto any of 
 you, we preached unto you the Gospel of God. 
 Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily and 
 justly and unblameably we behaved ourselves 
 among you that believe.’”’ A person who reads 
 this passage is naturally led by it to suppose, 
 that the writer had dwelt at Thessalonica for 
 some considerable time; yet of St. Paul’s 
 ministry in that city, the history gives no other 
 account than the following: “that he came to 
 Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the 
 Jews; that, as his manner was, he went in unto 
 them, and three sabbath-days reasoned with 
 them out of the scriptures; that some of them 
 believed and consorted with Paul and Silas.” 
 The history then proceeds to tell us, that the 
 Jews which believed not set the city in an 
 uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, where 
 Paul and his companions lodged; that the 
 consequence of this outrage was, that “ the 
 brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas 
 by night unto Berea.” Acts xvi. 1—10. 
 From the mention of his preaching three sabbath- 
 days in the Jewish synagogue, and from the want 
 of any further specification of his ministry, it 
 has usually been taken for granted that Paul 
 
278 HORZ PAULIN. 
 
 did not continue at Thessalonica more thaw 
 three weeks. This, however, is inferred without 
 necessity. It appears to have been St. Paul’s. 
 practice, in almost every place that he came to, 
 upon his first arrival to repair to the syna- 
 gogue. He thought himself bound to propose 
 the Gospel to the Jews first, agreeably to what 
 he declared at Antioch in Pisidia; “it was 
 necessary that the word of God should first 
 have been spoken to you.” Acts xii. 46. If 
 the Jews rejected his ministry, he quitted the 
 synagogue, and betook himself to a Gentile 
 audience. At Corinth, upon his first coming 
 thither, he reasoned in the synagogue every 
 sabbath ; “ but when the Jews opposed them- 
 selves, and blasphemed, he departed thence,” 
 expressly telling them, ‘from henceforth I will 
 go unto the Gentiles; and he remained in that 
 city a year and six months.” Acts xvii. 6, 11. 
 At Ephesus, in like manner, for the space of 
 three months he went into the synagogue ; but, 
 “when divers were hardened and believed not, 
 but spake evil of that way, he departed from 
 them and separated the disciples, disputing 
 daily in the school of one Tyrannus; and this 
 continued by the space of two years.” Acts 
 xix. 9, 10. Upon inspecting the history, I see 
 nothing in it which negatives the supposition, 
 
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 279 
 that St. Paul pursued the same plan at Thes- 
 salonica which he adopted in other places; and 
 that, though he resorted to the synagogue only 
 three sabbath days, yet he remained in the city, 
 and in the exercise of his ministry among the 
 Gentile citizens, much longer; and until the 
 success of his preaching had provoked the Jews 
 to excite the tumult and insurrection by which 
 he was driven away. 
 
 Another seeming discrepancy is found in 
 chap. 1. 9, of the Epistle: “ For they them- 
 selves show of us, what manner of entering in 
 we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from 
 zdols, to serve the living and true God.” This 
 text contains an assertion, that, by means of 
 St. Paul’s ministry at Thessalonica, many 
 idolatrous Gentiles had been brought over to 
 Christianity. Yet the history, in describing 
 the effects of that ministry, only says, that 
 “some of the Jews believed, and of the devout 
 Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief 
 women not a few.” Acts xvu.4. The devout 
 Greeks were those who already worshipped the 
 one true God; and therefore could not be said, 
 by embracing Christianity, “to be turned to 
 God from idols.” 
 
 This is the difficulty. The answer may be 
 assisted by the following observations. The 
 
280 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 Alexandrian and Cambridge manuscripts read 
 (for. rwv osBouévwn “EXAijjvwv tANIo¢e TOAD) TWV 
 seBougvwy Kal “EAAhvwy wAniDoc wodv. In 
 which reading they are also confirmed by the 
 Vulgate Latin. And this reading is in my 
 opinion strongly supported by the considera- 
 tions, first, that of o¢(3duevor alone, that is, with- 
 out “EAAnvec, is used in this sense in this same 
 chapter, Paul being come to Athens, éteAéyero év 
 T suvaywyn ToI¢ lovdatote Kal Tote cePopevorc 
 secondly, that, o¢Sdéuevor and “EXAnvec nowhere 
 come together. The expression is redundant. 
 The of ceBdpevor must be "EAAnvec. Thirdly, 
 that the xat is much more likely to have been left 
 out incurid mantis than to have been put in.’ 
 Or, after all, if we be not allowed to change the 
 present reading, which is undoubtedly retained 
 by a great plurality of copies, may not the 
 passage in the history be considered as deserib- 
 ing only the effects of St. Paul’s discourses 
 during the three sabbath-days in which he 
 
 2 [ This speculation concerning the reading in Acts xvii. 4, 
 breaks down. Though Lachmann took the same view as 
 Paley, the evidence of the Sinaitic Manuscript is decisive 
 in favour of the common reading. We must therefore 
 adopt the author’s second hypothesis; and there is no 
 difficulty in the case; for many idolaters may have joined 
 the Christian community at Thessalonica after St. Paul 
 began his work there.—H. | 
 
FIRST. EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. XS] 
 
 preached in the synagogue? and may it not 
 be true, as we have remarked above, that his 
 application to the Gentiles at large, and his 
 success among them, was posterior to this ? 
 
282 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 CHAPTER X. m 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 
 
 INO: 
 
 Ir may seem odd to allege obscurity itself as an 
 argument, or to draw a proof in favour of a 
 writing from that which is usually considered 
 as the principal defect in its composition. The 
 present Hpistle, however, furnishes a passage, - 
 hitherto unexplained, and probably inexplicable 
 by us, the existence of which, under the darkness 
 and difficulties that attend it, can only be ac- 
 counted for upon the supposition of the Epistle 
 being genuine; and upon that supposition is 
 accounted for with great ease. The passage 
 which I allude to is found in chap. u. 3—8: 
 “That day shall not come, except there come a 
 falling away first, and that man of sin be re- 
 vealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and 
 exaiteth himself above all that is called God, or 
 
SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 283 
 
 that is worshipped ; so that he as God sitteth in 
 the temple of God, showing himself that he is 
 God. Remember ye not, that, wHen I was Yer 
 wirH you, I toLp you THESE THINGS? And now 
 ye know what withholdeth, that he might be revealed 
 im his time; for the mystery of iniquity doth 
 already work, only he that now letteth will let, 
 until he be taken out of the way ; and then shall 
 that wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall 
 consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall 
 destroy with the brightness of His coming.” 
 It were superfluous to prove, because it is in 
 vain to deny, that this passage is involved in 
 great obscurity, more especially the clauses dis- 
 tinguished by italics.’ Now the observation I 
 have to offer is founded upon this, that the pas- 
 sage expressly refers to a conversation which the 
 author had previously holden with the Thessa- 
 lonians upon the same subject: “ Remember ye 
 not, that, when I was yet with you, J told you 
 these things? And now ye know what with- 
 holdeth.” If such conversation actually passed ; 
 if, while he was yet with them, “he ¢o/d them 
 those things,” then it follows that the Epistle is 
 authentic. And of the reality of this conversa- 
 
 1 [It may be observed by the way that the fact of the 
 obscurity of the passage in no way affects the clearness of 
 the evidence for the sake of which it is quoted.—H. ] 
 
284 HORA PAULINE. 
 
 tion it appears to be a proof that what is said in 
 the Epistle might be understood by those who 
 had been present at such conversation, and yet 
 be incapable of being explained by any other. 
 No man writes unintelligibly on purpose. But 
 it may easily happen, that a part of a letter 
 which relates to a subject upon which the parties 
 had conversed together before, which refers to — 
 what had been before sazd, which is in truth a 
 portion or continuation of a former discourse, 
 may be utterly without meaning to a stranger, 
 who should pick up the letter upon the road, and 
 yet be perfectly clear to the person to whom it 
 is directed, and with whom the previous com- 
 munication had passed. And if, in a letter which 
 thus accidentally fell into my hands, I found a 
 passage expressly referring to a former conver- 
 sation, and difficult to be explained without 
 knowing that conversation, I should consider 
 this very difficulty as a proof that the conversa- 
 tion had actually passed, and consequently that 
 the letter contained the real correspondence of 
 real persons,” 
 
 2 [This article, like the first on the Epistle to the 
 Philippians, is an instance of the examination of a docu- 
 ment on its own merits, without comparison with other 
 documents. Strong presumptive evidence may come to 
 view from such independent examination : and then, if it is 
 
SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 285 
 
 Noxith 
 
 Chap. iii. 8, 9: “ Neither did we eat any man’s 
 bread for nought; but wrought with labour and 
 travail might and day, that we might not be 
 chargeable to any of you: not because we have 
 not power, but to make ourselves an ensample 
 unto you to follow us.” 
 
 In a letter purporting to have been written to 
 another of the Macedonian Churches, we find the 
 following declaration :— 
 
 “ Now ye, Philippians, know also that in the 
 beginning of the gospel, when I departed from 
 Macedonia no church communicated with me as con- 
 cerning giving and receiving, but ye only” (iv. 15), 
 
 The conformity between these two passages is 
 strong and plain. They confine the transaction 
 to the same period. The Epistle to the Philip- 
 pians refers to what passed “in the beginning 
 of the gospel,” that is to say, during the first 
 preaching of the gospel on that side of the 
 /Migean sea.” The Epistle to the Thessalonians 
 speaks of the Apostle’s conduct in that city upon 
 ‘his first entrance in unto them,” which the 
 history informs us was in the course of his first 
 visit to the peninsula of Greece. 
 confirmed by other evidence arising from comparison, it 
 
 acquires new force.—H. ] 
 3 [See above on the Philippians, No. iii.—H. ] 
 
286 HOR PAULINA. 
 
 As St. Paul tells the Philippians, ‘that no 
 church communicated with him, as concerning 
 giving and receiving, but they only,’ he could: 
 not, consistently with the truth of this declara- 
 tion, have received anything from the neigh- 
 bouring Church of Thessalonica. What thus 
 appears by general implication in an Epistle to 
 another Church, when he writes to the Thessa- 
 lonians themselves is noticed expressly and par- 
 ticularly: ‘‘ Neither did we eat any man’s bread 
 for nought, but wrought night and day, that we 
 might not be chargeable to any of you.” 
 
 The texts here cited further also exhibit a 
 mark of conformity with what St. Paul is made 
 to say of himself in the Acts of the Apostles. 
 The Apostle not only reminds the Thessalonians 
 that he had not been chargeable to any of them, 
 but he states likewise the motive which dictated 
 this reserve ; ‘ Not because we have not power, 
 but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to 
 follow us” (ii. 9).* This conduct, and what is 
 
 * [As regards St. Paul’s habit in this respect, we ought 
 to add Acts xvili. 3, and 1 Cor. iv. 11,12. As regards the 
 principle which this habit enforced, we ought to add 
 Ephes. iv. 28. Even in respect of the habit, it is a note- 
 worthy circumstance that it comes to view at different 
 places and at different times, at Thessalonica and Corinth 
 on the second missionary journey, and at Ephesus on the 
 third, and that the proof appears in three different Epistles 
 
SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 287 
 
 much more precise, the end which he had in 
 view by it, was the very same as that which the 
 history attributes to St. Paul in a discourse, 
 which it represents him to have addressed to the 
 elders of the Church of Ephesus: “ Yea, ye 
 yourselves also know that these hands have 
 ministered unto my necessities, and to them 
 that were with me. I have showed you all things, 
 how that so labouring ye ought to support the 
 weak.’ Acts xx.34,45. The sentiment in the 
 Epistle and in the speech isin both parts of it so 
 much alike, and yet the words which convey it 
 show so little of imitation or even of resemblance, 
 that the agreement cannot well be explained 
 without supposing the speech and the letter to 
 have really proceeded from the same person. 
 
 1 Ged 
 
 Our reader remembers the passage in the first 
 Epistle to the Thessalonians, in which St. Paul 
 
 and in the Acts. So the principle is enunciated, by 
 example or by precept, in the narrative and in a letter. 
 And yet in all these cases the language used on these sub- 
 jects arises quite easily and naturally out of the context. 
 If further we compare Acts xx. 34 with Ephes. iv. 28, it is 
 impossible to conceive that one suggested the other. See 
 1 Thess. iv. 11, 12.—H. ] 
 
288 HORA PAULINE. 
 
 spoke of the coming of Christ: “This we say 
 unto you by the word of the Lord, that we 
 which are alive, and remain unto the coming of 
 the Lord, shall not prevent them which are 
 asleep ; for the Lord Himself shall descend from 
 heaven; and the dead in Christ shall rise first ; 
 then we which are alive and remain, shall be 
 caught up together with them in the clouds, 
 and so shall we be ever with the Lord.—But ye, 
 brethren, are not in darkness, that that day 
 should overtake you as a thief.’ 1 Thess. iv. 
 15—17, and v. 4. It should seem that the 
 Thessalonians, or some however among them, 
 had from this passage conceived an opinion (and 
 that not very unnaturally) that the coming of 
 Christ was to take place instantly, 67 évéornxev;” 
 and that this persuasion had produced, as it well 
 might, much agitation in the Church. The 
 Apostle, therefore, now writes, among other 
 purposes, to quiet this alarm, and to rectify the 
 misconstruction that had been put upon his 
 words : “ Now we beseech you, brethren, by the 
 coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our 
 gathering together unto Him, that ye be not 
 soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by 
 
 5 “Or. évéornxev, nempe hoc anno, says Grotius, évéornrev 
 hic dicitur de re preesenti, ut Rom. viii. 38. 1 Cor. iii. 22. 
 Galoi.4,> Hebias.: 
 
SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 289 
 
 spirit nor by word, nor by letter, as from us, as 
 that the day of Christ is at hand.’ (2 Thess. 
 i. 1,2. Ifthe allusion which we contend for 
 be admitted, namely, if it be admitted that the 
 passage in the second Epistle relates to the pas- 
 sage in the first, it amounts to a considerable 
 proof of the genuineness of both Epistles. I 
 have no conception, because I know no example, 
 of such a device in a forgery, as first to frame an 
 ambiguous passage in a letter, then to represent 
 the persons to whom the letter is addressed as 
 mistaking the meaning of the passage, and 
 lastly to write a second letter in order to correct 
 this mistake. 
 
 I have said that this argument arises out of 
 the text, if the allusion be admitted; for I am 
 not ignorant that many expositors understand 
 the passage in the second Hpistle, as referring 
 to some forged letters, which had been pro- 
 duced in St. Paul’s name, and in which the 
 Apostle had been made to say that the coming of 
 Christ was then at hand. In defence, however, 
 of the explanation which we propose, the reader 
 is desired to observe,— 
 
 1. The strong fact, that there exists a passage 
 in the Epistle, to which that in the second is 
 capable of being referred; that is, which ac- 
 counts for the error the writer is solicitous to 
 
 U 
 
290 HORM PAULINA. 
 
 remove. Had no other Epistle than the second 
 been extant, and had it under’ these cireum- 
 stances come to be considered, whether the text 
 before us related to a forged Epistle or to some 
 misconstruction of a true one, many conjectures. 
 and many probabilities might have been ad- 
 mitted in the inquiry, which can have little 
 weight, when an Epistle is produced, contain- 
 ing the very sort of passage we were seeking, 
 that is, a passage liable to the misinterpretation 
 which the Apostle protests against. 
 
 2. That the clause which introduces the 
 passage in the second Epistle bears a particular 
 affinity to what is found in the passage cited 
 from the first Epistle. The clause is this: “We 
 beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, and dy our gathering to- 
 gether unto Him.’ Now in the first Epistle the 
 description of the coming of Christ is accom- 
 panied with the mention of this very cireum- 
 stance of His saints being collected round Him. 
 “The Lord Himself shall descend from heaven 
 with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, 
 and with the trump of God, and the dead 
 in Christ shall rise first; then we which are 
 alive and remain shall be caught up together 
 with them in the clouds, fo meet the Lord in the 
 ar.” 1 Thess. iv. 16, 17. This I suppose to 
 
SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 29] 
 
 + _____— — 
 
 be the ‘‘gathering together unto Him ” in- 
 tended in the second Epistle; and that the 
 author, when he used these words, retained in 
 his thoughts what he had written on the subject 
 before. 
 
 3. The second Epistle is written in the joint 
 name of Paul, Sylvanus, and Timotheus, and it 
 cautions the Thessalonians against being misled 
 “by letter as from us” (we de judy). Do not 
 these words “é.’ nuwv” appropriate the reference 
 to some writing which bore the name of these 
 three teachers ? Now this circumstance, which 
 is a very close one, belongs to the Epistle at 
 present in our hands; for the Epistle which we 
 eall the first Epistle to the Thessalonians 
 contains these names in its superscription. 
 
 4. The words in the original, as far as they 
 are material to be stated, are these: ele 76 uy 
 taxéwe carevPivac vuag azd Tov vode, phrE 
 Oposioba, parte Oia wvetparoc, jute dca Adyou, 
 unre Ov eriaroXje, we Oe uw, we Ore evéaTnKEv 
 H NMépa Tov Xpiorov.. Under the weight of the 
 
 6 | No stress is to be laid on the phrase as 6? jay, as 
 though it included Timotheus and Silvanus, as well as the 
 Apostle himself. St. Paul very often uses the plural 
 pronoun, when he refers to himself alone. Hardly any- 
 thing, however, is lost, by this abatement, to the general 
 force of Paley’s reasoning in this place.—H. | 
 
 ww 
 
 U 
 
992 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 preceding observations may not the words 
 , ‘ Ud , tus) ~ e ae ~ 
 
 unre ova Aoyou, pnre Ov emtatoAne, we ce Tov 
 
 be construed to signify quasi nos quid tale aut 
 
 poet q 
 
 dixerimus aut scripserimus,’ intimating that 
 
 their words had been mistaken, and that they 
 
 had in truth said or written no such thing. 
 
 7 Should a contrary interpretation be preferred, I do not 
 think it implies the conclusion that a false epistle had 
 then been published in the Apostle’s name. It will com- 
 pletely satisfy the allusion in the text to allow, that some 
 one or other at Thessalonica had pretended to have been 
 told by St. Paul and his companions, or to have seen a 
 letter from them in which they had said, that the day of 
 Christ was at hand. In like manner as Acts xy. 1, 24, it 
 is recorded that some had pretended to have received 
 instructions from the Church of Jerusalem, which had not 
 been received ;—‘‘to whom we gave no such command- 
 ment.” And thus Dr. Benson interpreted the passage 
 unre Cpoctcbat, ute did svetuaros, unte did Adyou, uhte BC 
 emg TOA7s, ws dV judy, “nor be dismayed by any revelation, 
 or discourse, or epistle, which any one shall pretend to 
 have heard or received from us.” 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 293 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. ' 
 
 From the third verse of the first chapter, “as I 
 besought thee to abide still at Ephesus when I 
 went into Macedonia,” it is evident that this 
 Epistle was written soon after St. Paul had gone 
 to Macedonia from Ephesus. Dr. Benson fixes 
 its date to the time of St. Paul’s journey, re- 
 corded in the beginning of Acts xx.: “ And 
 after the uproar (excited by Demetrius at 
 Ephesus) was ceased, Paul called unto him the 
 disciples, and embraced them, and departed for 
 to go into Macedonia.” And in this opinion 
 Dr. Benson is followed by Michaelis, as he was 
 preceded by the greater part of the commen- 
 tators who have considered the question. There 
 is, however, one objection to the hypothesis, 
 which these learned men appear to me to have 
 overlooked ; and it is no other than this, that 
 the superscription of the second Epistle to the 
 Corinthians seems to prove, that at the time St. 
 
294, HORE PAULINA. 
 
 Paul is supposed by them to have written this 
 Epistle to Timothy, Timothy in truth was with 
 St. Paul in Macedonia. Paul, as is related in 
 the Acts, left Ephesus “for to go into 
 Macedonia.” When he had got into Macedonia 
 he wrote his second Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 Concerning this point there exists little variety 
 of opinion. It is plainly indicated by the con- 
 tents of the Epistle. It is also strongly im- 
 plied that the Epistle was written soon after the 
 Apostle’s arrival in Macedonia; for he begins 
 his letter by a train of reflection, referring to his 
 persecutions in Asia as to recent transactions, 
 as to dangers from which he had lately been 
 delivered. But in the salutation with which 
 the Epistle opens Zimothy is joined with St. Paul, 
 and consequently could not at that time be left 
 behind at Ephesus. And as to the only solu- 
 tion of the difficulty which can be thought of, 
 namely, that Timothy, though he was left | 
 behind at Ephesus upon St. Paul’s departure 
 from Asia, yet might follow him so soon after, - 
 as to come up with the Apostle in Macedonia, 
 before he wrote his Epistle to the Corinthians ; 
 that supposition is inconsistent with the terms 
 and tenor of the Epistle throughout. For the 
 writer speaks uniformly of his intention to re- 
 turn to Timothy at Ephesus, and not of his ex- 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 295 
 
 pecting Timothy to come to him in Macedonia; 
 “These things write I unto thee, hoping to come 
 unto thee shortly ; but if I tarry long, that thou 
 mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thy- 
 self in the house of God” (chap. in. 14, 15). 
 ““Tili I come, give attendance to reading, to ex- 
 hortation, to doctrine” (iv. 13). 
 
 Since, therefore, the leaving of ‘Timothy 
 behind at Ephesus, when Paul went into 
 Macedonia, suits not with any journey into 
 Macedonia, recorded in the Acts, I concur with 
 Bishop Pearson in placing the date of this 
 Epistle, and the journey referred to in it, ata 
 period subsequent to St. Paul’s first imprison- 
 ment at Rome, and consequently subsequent to 
 the era up to which the Acts of the Apostles 
 brings its history. The only difficulty which 
 attends our opinion is, that St. Paul must, 
 according to us, have come to Ephesus after his 
 liberation at Rome, contrary as it should seem 
 to what he foretold to the Ephesian elders, 
 “that they should see his face no more,”* And 
 
 1 [The difficulty here is connected, not with any ques- 
 tion of fact, but with a theory of inspiration. We may 
 observe, however, that even on the most rigid view of 
 verbal inspiration, the difficulty can be overcome: for it is 
 not certain that St. Paul, on being delivered from his first 
 imprisonment, ever did see again those particular Ephesian 
 
996 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 it is to save the infallibility of this prediction, 
 and for no other reason of weight, that an 
 earlier date is assigned to this Epistle. The 
 prediction itself however, when considered 
 in connexion with the circumstances under 
 which it was delivered, does not seem to demand 
 so much anxiety. The words in question are 
 found in Acts, chap. xx. 25: “ And now, behold, 
 I know that ye all, among whom I have gone 
 preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my 
 face no more.” In ver. 22 and 23 of the same 
 chapter, that is, two verses before, the Apostle 
 makes this declaration: ‘‘ And now, behold, I 
 go bound in the spint unto Jerusalem, not 
 knowing the things that shail befall me there ; 
 save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every 
 city, saying, that bonds and afflictions abide 
 me.” This “witnessing of the Holy Ghost” 
 was undoubtedly prophetic and supernatural. 
 But it went no farther than to foretell that 
 bonds and afflictions awaited him. And I can 
 very well conceive, that this might be all which 
 was communicated to the Apostle by extraordi- 
 nary revelation, and that the rest was the con- 
 clusion of his own mind, the desponding in- 
 ference which he drew from strong and repeated 
 
 presbyters whom he addressed, several years before, at 
 Miletus.—H. | 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 297 
 
 intimations of approaching danger.’ And the 
 expression “I know,” which St. Paul here 
 uses, does not perhaps, when applied to future 
 events affecting himself, convey an assertion so 
 positive and absolute as we may at first sight 
 apprehend. In the Epistle to the Philippians, 
 chap. 1. 25, “I know,” says he, “ that I shall 
 abide and continue with you all for your joy 
 and furtherance of faith.” Notwithstanding 
 this strong declaration, in chap. u. 23, of this 
 same Epistle, and speaking also of the very 
 same event, he is content to use a language of 
 some doubt and uncertainty: “ Him therefore I 
 hope to send presently, so soon as J shall see 
 how it will go with me; but J trust in the Lord 
 that I also myself shall come shortly.” And a 
 few verses preceding these, he not only seems to 
 doubt of his safety, but almost to despair; to 
 contemplate the possibility at least of his con- 
 demnation and martyrdom: “ Yea, and if I be 
 offered upon the sacrifice and service of your 
 faith, I joy, and rejoice with you all.” 
 
 2 {On,the despondency of St. Paul, when on his return 
 to Palestine at the close of his third missionary journey, 
 see above, pp. 47—49.—H. | 
 
298 HORA PAULINA”. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 But can we show that St. Paul visited 
 Ephesus after his hberation at Rome? or rather, 
 ean we collect any hints from his other letters 
 which make it probable that he did? If we can, 
 then we have a coincidence. If we cannot, we 
 have only an unauthorized supposition, to which 
 the exigency of the case compels us to resort. 
 Now, for this purpose, let us examine the 
 Epistle to the Philippians and the Epistle to 
 Philemon. These two Epistles purport to be 
 written while St. Paul was yet a prisoner at 
 Rome. To the Philippians he writes as follows: 
 “T trust in the Lord that I also myself shall 
 come shortly ” (1. 24). To Philemon, who was - 
 a Colossian, he gives this direction: “ But 
 withal, prepare me also a lodging: for I trust 
 that through your prayers I shall be given unto 
 you” (ver. 22). An inspection of the map 
 will show us that Colosse was a city of the 
 Lesser Asia, lying eastward, and at no great 
 distance from Ephesus.’ Philippi was on the 
 
 3 [In a case like this we are called on to consider, not 
 simply proximity, but convenience of communication. A 
 good and well-travelled road led from Ephesus to Colosszx. 
 See AppenpIx I. on Coincidences connected with Geogra- 
 ‘phy.—H. | 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 299 
 
 other, that is, the western side of the Agean 
 Sea. If the Apostle executed his purpose ; if, 
 in pursuance of the intention expressed in his 
 letter to Philemon, he came to Colosse soon 
 after he was set at liberty at Rome, it is very 
 improbable that he would omit to visit Ephesus, 
 which lay so near to it, and where he had spent 
 three years of his ministry. As he was also 
 under a promise to the Church of Philippi to 
 see them “shortly :” if he passed from Colosse 
 to Philippi, or from Philippi to Colosse, he could 
 hardly avoid taking Ephesus in his way. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 Chap. v. 9: “ Let not a widow be taken into 
 the number under threescore years old.” 
 
 This accords with the account delivered in 
 Acts, chap. vi.: 1 “ And in those days, when the 
 number of the disciples was multiplied, there 
 arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the 
 Hebrews, decause their widows were neglected in 
 the daily ministration.” It appears that, from 
 the first formation of the Christian Church, 
 provision was made out of the public funds of 
 the society for the indigent w:dows who belonged 
 to it. The history, we have seen, distinctly re- 
 
300 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 cords the existence of such an institution at 
 Jerusalem, a few years after our Lord’s ascen- 
 sion; and is led to the mention of it very inci- 
 dentally, namely, by a dispute, of which it was 
 the occasion, and which produced important 
 consequences to the Christian community. The 
 Epistle, without being suspected of borrowing 
 from the history, refers, briefly indeed, but de- 
 cisively, to a similar establishment, subsisting 
 some years afterwards at Ephesus. This agree- 
 ment indicates that both writings were founded 
 upon real circumstances.* 
 
 But, in this article, the material thing to be 
 noticed is the mode of expression: “ Let not a 
 widow be taken into the number.” No pre- 
 vious account or explanation is given, to which 
 these words, “into the number,” can refer; but 
 the direction comes concisely and unpreparedly : 
 “Let not a widow be taken into the number.” 
 Now this is the way in which a man writes, 
 who is conscious that he is writing to persons 
 
 4 [If the “widows” named in Acts vi. 1, were official 
 persons in the Church, appointed not simply to receive 
 but to dispense charitable funds, as is the opinion of 
 Mosheim and others, then the harmony between that 
 passage and this which is before us becomes more close, 
 and the reasoning resting on such harmony more forcible. 
 It is clear that the “widows” of the Pastoral Epistles had 
 oficial duties.—H.] 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 301 
 
 already acquainted with the subject of his 
 letter ; and who, he knows, will readily appre- 
 hend and apply what he says by virtue of their 
 being so acquainted: but it is not the way in 
 which a man writes upon any other occasion ; 
 and least of all, in which a man would draw up 
 a feigned letter, or introduce a supposititious 
 fact.’ 
 
 > It is not altogether unconnected with our general pur- 
 pose to remark, in the passage before us, the selection and 
 reserve which St. Paul recommends to the governors of 
 the Church of Ephesus, in the bestowing relief upon the 
 poor, because it refutes a calumny which has been in- 
 sinuated, that the liberality of the first Christians was an 
 artifice to catch converts ; or one of the temptations, how- 
 ever, by which the idle and mendicant were drawn into 
 this society : ‘‘ Let not a widow be taken into the number 
 under threescore years old, having been the wife of one 
 man, well reported of for good works; if she have brought 
 up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have 
 washed the saints’ feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, 
 if she have diligently followed every good work: but the 
 younger widows refuse”? (v. 9—11). And, in another 
 place (ver. 16): ‘(If any man or woman that believeth 
 have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the Church 
 be charged, that it may relieve them that are widows 
 indeed.’ And to the same effect, or rather more to our 
 present purpose, the Apostle writes in his second Epistle 
 to the Thessalonians (iii. 1O—12): ‘‘ Even when we were 
 with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not 
 work, neither should he eat,’”’ that is, at the public ex- 
 pense; ‘‘for we hear that there are some which walk 
 among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busy- 
 
302 HORA PAULIN. 
 
 No. III. 
 
 Chap. ili. 2, 8: ‘A bishop must be blameless, 
 the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good 
 behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach ; 
 net given to wine, no striker, not greedy of 
 filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not 
 covetous; one that ruleth well his own house.” 
 
 “No striker ;’—That is the article which I 
 single out from the collection as evineing the 
 antiquity at least, if not the genuineness, of the 
 Epistle, because it is an article which ne man 
 would have made the subject of caution who 
 lived in an advanced era of the Church. It 
 agreed with the infancy of the society, and with 
 no other state of it. After the government of 
 the Church had acquired the dignified form 
 which it soon and naturally assumed, this in- 
 junction could have no place. Would a person 
 who lived under a hierarchy, such as the Chris- 
 tian hierarchy became when it had settled into 
 a regular establishment, have thought 1t neces- 
 
 bodies: now them that are such, we command and exhort, 
 by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, 
 and eat their own bread.” Could a designing or dissolute 
 poor take advantage of bounty regulated with so much 
 caution ? or could the mind which dictated these sober and 
 prudent directions be influenced in his recommendations of 
 public charity by any other than the properest motives of 
 beneficence ? 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 303 
 
 ‘sary to prescribe concerning the qualification of 
 a bishop, “ that he should be no striker” ? And 
 this injunction would be equally alien from the 
 imagination of the writer, whether he wrote in 
 his own character, or personated that of an 
 Apostle.° 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 Chap. v. 23: “Drink no longer water, but 
 use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake, and 
 thine often infirmities.” 
 
 Imagine an impostor sitting down to forge 
 an Epistle in the name of St. Paul. Is it 
 eredible that it should come into his head to 
 give such a direction as this; so remote from 
 everything of doctrine or discipline, everything 
 of public concern to the religion or to the 
 Church, or to any sect, order, or party in it, and 
 
 6 [There does not seem to be much force in the reason- 
 ing of this article. No one supposes that the Pastoral 
 Epistles were written so late as in the time when the 
 organization of the Church had reached the form of a 
 dignified hierarchy. Moreover, it is not by any means 
 certain that in a comparatively late period, in the age of 
 Chrysostom for instance, or even in the Middle Ages, such 
 an injunction as this in reference to the qualifications of a 
 bishop would be superfluous. The story of St. Columba and 
 
 the “ Fighting Psalter’? might be referred to in illustra- 
 tion.—H. | 
 
304 HORM PAULINA. 
 
 from every purpose with which such an Epistle 
 could be written ? It seems to me that nothing 
 but reality, that is, the real valetudinary situa- 
 tion of a real person, could have suggested a 
 thought of so domestic a nature. 
 
 But if the peculiarity of the advice be obser- 
 vable, the place in which it stands is more so. 
 The context is this: “ Lay hands suddenly on 
 no man, neither be partaker of other men’s 
 sins; keep thyself pure. Drink no longer 
 water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s 
 sake, and thine often infirmities. Some men’s 
 sins are open beforehand, going before to judg- 
 ment; and some men they follow after.” The 
 direction to Timothy about his diet stands 
 between two sentences, as wide from the subject 
 as possible. The train of thought seems to be 
 broken to let it in. Now when does this hap- 
 pen? It happens when a man writes as he 
 remembers: when he puts down an article that 
 occurs the moment it occurs, lest he should 
 afterwards forget it. Of this the passage before 
 us bears strongly the appearance. In actual 
 letters, in the negligence of a real correspon- 
 dence, examples of this kind frequently take 
 place ; seldom I believe in any other production. 
 For the moment a man regards what he writes 
 as a composition, which the author of a forgery 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 305 
 
 would, of all others, be the first to do, notions 
 of order, in the arrangement and succession of 
 his thoughts, present themselves to his judg- 
 ment, and guide his pen.’ 
 
 Now iV, 
 
 Chap. 1. 15, 16: “ This is a faithful saying, 
 and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus 
 came into the worid to save sinners ; of whom I 
 am chief. Howbeit, for this cause I obtained 
 mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show 
 forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them 
 
 7 [The indication, too, of St. Paul’s sympathetic nature, 
 which is here afforded, should be carefully noted and com- 
 pared with similar indications in connexion with the delicate 
 health of Epaphroditus. See the first two articles on the 
 Epistle to the Philippians. It is evidently the same man 
 who writes on both occasions, with a heart full of interest 
 in the safety and comfort of his friends; nor could any 
 critic venture to suggest that the anxious thoughts respect- 
 ing the health of Epaphroditus, expressed in the Epistle to 
 the Philippians, were ingeniously interwoven there because 
 St. Paul advised Timothy to “drink a little wine for his 
 stomach’s sake:’’ or that this advice to Timothy was a 
 happy thought suggested by the Apostle’s solicitude on 
 behalf of Epaphroditus, and introduced here to give point 
 to a forgery. Jn both cases, too, there is this characteristic 
 in St. Paul’s allusions to health, that they occur side by 
 side with serious and elevated religious instruction. Com- 
 pare 2 Tim. iv. 12; and see Apprnpix III. on St. Paul’s 
 Character.—H. } 
 
 XxX 
 
306 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 which should hereafter believe on Him to life 
 everlasting.” 
 
 What was the mercy which St. Paul here 
 commemorates, and what was the crime of 
 which he accuses himself, is apparent from the 
 verses immediately preceding: “I thank Christ 
 Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that 
 He counted me faithful, putting me into the 
 ministry; who was before a blasphemer, and a 
 persecutor, and injurious ; but I obtained mercy, 
 because I did it ignorantly in unbelief” (ver. 
 12,13). The whole quotation plainly refers to 
 St. Paul’s original enmity to the Christian 
 name, the interposition of Providence in his 
 conversion, and his subsequent designation to 
 the ministry of the gospel; and by this re- 
 ference affirms indeed the substance of the 
 Apostle’s history delivered in the Acts. But 
 what in the passage strikes my mind most 
 powerfully, is the observation that is raised out 
 of the fact: “ For this cause I obtained mercy, 
 that in me first Jesus Christ might show forth 
 all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which 
 should hereafter believe on Him to life everlast- 
 ing.” It is a just and solemn reflection, spring- 
 ing from the circumstances of the author’s con- 
 version, or rather from the impression of which 
 that great event had left upon his memory. It 
 
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 5307 
 
 will be said, perhaps, that an impostor, ac- 
 quainted with St. Paul’s history, may have put 
 such a sentiment into his mouth; or, which is 
 the same thing, into a letter drawn up in his 
 name. But where, we may ask, is such an 
 impostor to be found? The piety, the truth, 
 the benevolence of the thought ought to pro- 
 tect it from this imputation. Tor, though we 
 ‘should allow that one of the great masters of 
 the ancient tragedy could have given to his 
 scene a sentiment as virtuous and as elevated as 
 this is, and, at the same time, as appropriate, 
 and as well suited to the particular situation of 
 the person who delivers it; yet whoever is con- 
 versant in these inquiries will acknowledge, that 
 to do this in a fictitious production is beyond 
 the reach of the understandings which have 
 been employed upon any fabrications that have 
 come down to us under Christian names. 
 
 8 [An ingenious critic might say that an impostor 
 acquainted with St. Paul’s character might have put such 
 a sentiment into his mouth. But there is no passage in 
 any other writing or speech of his sufficiently similar to 
 this, to have furnished the suggestion: while yet, when 
 we read it, we feel it to be in harmony with the whole 
 tenor of his feeling and thought. Moreover this suppo- 
 sition accepts the character of St. Paul, as inferred from 
 the other Epistles and the Acts, as a reality, and therefore 
 concedes the trustworthiness and harmony of those docu- 
 ments.—H. | 
 
 +P 
 
308 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 Ir was the uniform tradition of the primitive 
 Church, that St. Paul visited Rome twice, and 
 twice there suffered imprisonment ; and that he 
 was put to death at Rome at the conclusion of 
 his second imprisonment. This opinion con- 
 cerning St. Paul’s ¢wo journeys to Rome, is 
 confirmed by a great variety of hints and 
 allusions in the Epistle before us, compared 
 with what fell from the Apostle’s pen in other 
 letters purporting to have been written from 
 Rome. That our present Epistle was written 
 while St. Paul was a prisoner, is distinctly in- 
 timated in chap. 1.8: “ Be not thou therefore 
 ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of 
 me His prisoner.’ And while he was a prisoner 
 at Rome, in verses 16 and 17 of the same 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 309 
 
 chapter: “The Lord give mercy unto the 
 house of Onesiphorus: for he oft refreshed me, 
 and was not ashamed of my chain: but when 
 he was in Rome he sought me out very dili- 
 gently, and found me.” Since it appears from 
 the former quotation that St. Paul wrote this 
 Epistle in confinement, it will hardly admit of 
 doubt that the word chain, in the latter quota- 
 tion, refers to that confinement; the chain by 
 which he was ¢Hez bound, the custody in which 
 he was then kept. And if the word chain 
 designate the author’s confinement at the time 
 of writing the Epistle, the next words determine 
 it to have been written from Rome: ‘‘ He was 
 not ashamed of my chain; but when he was in 
 Rome he sought me out very diligently.” Now 
 that it was not written during the Apostle’s 
 first imprisonment at Rome, or during the same 
 imprisonment in which the Epistles to the 
 Ephesians, the Colossians, the Philippians, and 
 Philemon, were written, may be gathered, with 
 considerable evidence, from a comparison of 
 these several Epistles with the present. 
 
 I. In the former Epistles the author con- 
 fidently looked forward to his liberation from 
 confinement, and his speedy departure from 
 Rome. He tells the Philippians (ii. 24), “I 
 trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come 
 
310 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 shortly.” Philemon he bids to prepare for 
 him a lodging; “for I trust,” says he, “ that 
 through your prayers, I shall be given unto 
 you” (ver. 22). In the Epistle before us he 
 holds a language extremely different: “I am 
 now ready to be offered, and the time of my 
 departure is at hand. I have fought a good 
 fight; I have finished my course; I have kept 
 the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a 
 crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the 
 righteous judge, shall give me at that day” 
 (iv. 6—S). 
 
 II. When the former [Epistles were written 
 from Rome, Timothy was with St. Paul; and 
 is Joined with him in writing to the Colossians, 
 the Philippians, and to Philemon. ‘The present 
 Hpistle, implies that he was absent. 
 
 III. In the former Epistles, Demas was with 
 St. Paul at Rome; ‘ Luke, the beloved phy- 
 sician, and Demas, greet you” (Col. iv. 14). 
 In the Epistle now before us; “ Demas hath 
 forsaken me, having loved this present world, 
 and is departed unto Thessalonica” (iv. 10). 
 
 IV. In the former Epistle, Mark was with 
 St. Paul, and joins in saluting the Colossians. 
 In the present Epistle, Timothy is ordered to 
 bring him with him, “ for he is profitable to me 
 for the ministry ” (iv. 11). 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 311 
 
 The case of Timothy and of Mark might be 
 very well accounted for, by supposing the 
 present Epistle to have been written before the 
 others; so that Timothy who is here exhorted 
 “to come shortly unto him” (iv. 9), might 
 have arrived, and that Mark, whom he was to 
 bring with him, might have also reached Rome 
 in sufficient time to have been with St. Paul 
 when the four Epistles were written: but then 
 such a supposition is inconsistent with what is 
 said of Demas, by which the posteriority of this 
 to the other Epistles is strongly indicated ; for 
 in the other Epistles Demas was with St. Paul, 
 in the present he hath “forsaken him, and is 
 departed unto Thessalonica.” The opposition 
 also of sentiment, with respect to the event of 
 the persecution, is hardly reconcileable to the 
 same Imprisonment. 
 
 The two following considerations, which were 
 first suggested upon this question by Ludovicus 
 Capellus,’ are still more conclusive ;— 
 
 1. In chap. iv. 20, St. Paul informs Timothy 
 “that Erastus abode at Corinth,’ ”Epaoroc 
 Eucivev ev KoptvOw. The form of expression im- 
 plies, that Erastus had stayed behind at Corinth, 
 
 1 [“ Historia Apostolica, ex Actis Apostolorum et Epis- 
 tolis inter se collatis collecta.”” Reprinted also in vol. 
 vii. of the “ Critici Sacri.’’—H. ] 
 
ole HOREH PAULINA. 
 
 when St. Paul left it. But this could not be 
 meant of any journey from Corinth which St. 
 Paul took prior to his first imprisonment at 
 Rome; for when Paul departed from Corinth, 
 as related in Acts xx., Timothy was with him: 
 and this was the last time the Apostle left 
 Corinth before his coming to Rome; because 
 he left it to proceed on his way to Jerusalem, 
 soon after his arrival at which place he was 
 taken into custody, and continued in that 
 custody till he was carried to Ceesar’s tribunal. 
 There could be no need therefore to inform 
 Timothy that “Erastus stayed behind at 
 Corinth” upon this occasion, because, if the 
 fact was so, it must have been known to 
 Timothy who was present, as well as to St. 
 Paul. 
 
 2. In the same verse our Epistle also states 
 the following article: “'Trophimus have I left 
 at Muiletum sick.” When St. Paul passed 
 through Miletus on his way to Jerusalem, as 
 related Acts xx., Trophimus was not left behind, 
 but accompanied him to that city. He was 
 indeed the occasion of the uproar at Jerusalem, 
 in consequence of which St. Paul was appre- 
 hended ; for “ they had seen,” says the historian, 
 “before with him in the city, Trophimus an 
 Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 313 
 
 brought into the temple.” This was evidently 
 the last time of Paul’s being at Miletus before 
 his first imprisonment; for, as hath been said, 
 after his apprehension at Jerusalem, he remained 
 in custody till he was sent to Rome. 
 
 In these two articles we have a journey 
 referred to, which must have taken place sub- 
 sequently to the conclusion of St. Luke’s 
 history, and of course after St. Paul’s libera- 
 tion from his first imprisonment. The Epistle, 
 therefore, which contains this reference, since it 
 appears from other parts of it to have been 
 written while St. Paul was a prisoner at Rome, 
 proves that he had returned to that city again, 
 and undergone there a second imprisonment. 
 
 I do not produce these particulars for the 
 sake of the support which they lend to the 
 testimony of the Fathers concerning St. Paul’s 
 second imprisonment, but to remark their con- 
 sistency and agreement with one another. 
 They are all resolvable into one supposition : 
 and although the supposition itself be in some 
 sort only negative, namely, that the Epistle was 
 not written during St. Paul’s first residence at 
 Rome, but in some future imprisonment in that 
 city; yet is the consistency not less worthy of 
 observation ; for the Epistle touches upon names — 
 and circumstances connected with the date and 
 
314 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 with the history of the first imprisonment, and 
 mentioned in letters written during that 1m- 
 prisonment, and so touches upon them, as to 
 leave what is said of one consistent with what 
 is said of others, and consistent also with what 
 is said of them in different Epistles. Had one 
 of these circumstances been so described, as to 
 have fixed the date of the Epistle to the first 
 imprisonment, 1t would have involved the rest 
 in contradiction. And when the number and 
 particularity of the articles which have been 
 brought together under this head are considered ; 
 and when it is considered also, that the com- 
 parisons we have formed among them, were in 
 all probability neither provided for, nor thought 
 of, by the writer of the Epistle, it will be 
 deemed something very like the effect of truth, 
 that no invincible repugnaney is perceived 
 between them. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 In the Acts of the Apostles, chap. xvi. 1, we 
 are told that Paul “came to Derbe and Lystra, 
 and, behold, a certain disciple was there named 
 Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, who 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 315 
 
 was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was 
 a Greek.” In the Epistle before us, chap. i. 
 4, 5, St. Paul writes to Timothy thus: “ Greatly 
 desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, 
 that I may be filled with joy; when I call to 
 remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in 
 thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother 
 Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am per- 
 suaded that in thee also.” Here we have a 
 fair. unforced example of coincidence. In the 
 history Timothy was the “son of a Jewess that 
 believed:”? in the Epistle St. Paul applauds 
 “the faith which dwelt in his mother Hunice.” 
 In the history it is said of the mother, “ that 
 she was a Jewess, and believed ;” of the father, 
 “that he was a Greek.” Now when it is said 
 of the mother alone “that she believed,’ the 
 father being nevertheless mentioned in the same 
 sentence, we are led to suppose of the father, 
 that he did not believe, that is, either that he 
 was dead, or that he remained unconverted. 
 Agreeably hereunto, while praise is bestowed in 
 the Epistle upon one parent, and upon her 
 sincerity in the faith, no notice is taken of the 
 other. The mention of the grandmother is the 
 addition of a circumstance not found in the. 
 history : but it is a circumstance which, as well 
 as the names of the parties, might naturally be 
 
316 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 SS Se EEE 
 
 expected to be known to the Apostle, though 
 overlooked by his historian.’ 
 
 No.l ET: 
 
 Chap. 11. 15: “And that from a child thou 
 hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able 
 to make thee wise unto salvation.” 
 
 This verse discloses a circumstance which 
 agrees exactly with what is intimated in the 
 quotation from the Acts, adduced in the last 
 number. In that quotation it is recorded of 
 Timothy’s mother, that she was a Jewess. This 
 description is virtually, though, I am satisfied, 
 undesignedly, recognized in the Epistle, when 
 Timothy is reminded in it, “that from a child 
 he had known the holy Scriptures.’? “ The 
 holy Scriptures ”’ undoubtedly meant the Serip- 
 tures of the Old Testament. The expression 
 bears that sense in every place in which it 
 occurs. ‘Those of the New had not yet acquired 
 
 2 (‘There is no reason whatever why St. Luke, in his his- 
 torical narrative, should have given the name of the grand- 
 mother of Timotheus, but every reason why St. Paul, 
 writing under the influence of strong personal feeling, 
 should mention that name here, especially as Timotheus 
 was under great religious obligations to Eunice.— H. | 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 317 
 
 the name, not to mention that in Timothy’s 
 childhood probably none of them existed. In 
 what manver then could Timothy have known 
 “from a child” the Jewish Scriptures, had he 
 not been born, on one side or on both, of Jewish 
 parentage ? Perhaps he was not less likely to be 
 earefully instructed in them, for that his mother 
 alone professed that religion.’ 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 Chap. 11. 22: “ Flee also youthful lusts ; but 
 follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with 
 them that call on the Lord out of a pure 
 heart.” 
 
 “ Flee also youthful lusts.” The suitableness 
 of this precept to the age of the person to whom 
 it is addressed,’ is gathered from 1 Tim. iv. 12: 
 “Let no man despise thy youth.” Nor do I 
 deem the less:of this coincidence, because the 
 propriety resides in a single epithet ; or because 
 this one precept is Joined with, and followed by, 
 a train of others, not more applicable to Timothy, 
 
 3 [The reader will not fail to observe either the shrewd- 
 ness or the beauty of this remark.—H. | 
 
 4 [See on the first Epistle to the Corinthians, No, ix. 
 —H.| 
 
318 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 than to any ordinary convert. It is in these 
 transient and cursory allusions that the argu- 
 ment is best founded. When a writer dwells 
 and rests upon a point in which some coincidence 
 is discerned, it may be doubted whether he him- 
 self had not fabricated the conformity, and was 
 endeavouring to display and set it off. But 
 when the reference is contained in a single word, 
 unobserved perhaps by most readers, the writer 
 passing on to other subjects, as unconscious that 
 he had hit upon a correspondency, or unsolici- 
 tous whether it were remarked or not, we may 
 be pretty well assured that no fraud was exer- 
 cised, no imposition intended. 
 
 Nov. 
 Chap. i. 10, 11: “But thou hast fully 
 
 known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, 
 faith, long-suffering, charity, patience, persecu- 
 tions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, 
 at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I | 
 endured: but out of them all the Lord deli- 
 vered me.” 
 
 The Antioch here mentioned was not Antioch 
 the capital of Syria, where Paul and Barnabas 
 resided ‘a long time ;” but Antioch in Pisidia, 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 319 
 
 to which place Paul and Barnabas came in their 
 first apostolic progress, and where Paul deli- 
 vered a memorable discourse, which is preserved 
 in Acts xii. At this Antioch the history re- 
 lates, that ‘‘the Jews stirred up the devout and 
 honourable women, and the chief men of the 
 city, and raised persecution against Paul and 
 Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts. 
 But they shook off the dust of their feet against 
 them, and came unto Jconiwm. ..... And. it 
 came to pass in Iconium, that they went both 
 together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so 
 spake that a great multitude both of the Jews 
 and also of the Greeks believed; but the unbe- 
 heving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made 
 their minds evil-affected against the brethren. 
 Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly 
 in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the 
 word of His grace, and granted signs and won- 
 ders to be done by their hands. But the multi- 
 tude of the city was divided; and part held 
 with the Jews, and part with the Apostles. 
 And when there was an assault made both of 
 the Gentiles and also of the Jews, with their 
 rulers, to wse them despitefully and to stone them, 
 they were ware of it, and fled unto Lystra and 
 Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and unto the region 
 that lieth round about ; and there they preached 
 
820 HORH PAULINA. 
 
 the gospel... 0.0.) 5 And there came thither 
 certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who 
 persuaded the people, and having stoned Paul, 
 drew him out of the city, supposing he had 
 been dead. Howbeit, as the disciples stood 
 round about him, he rose up and came into the 
 city; and the next day he departed with Bar- 
 nabas to Derbe: and when they had preached 
 the gospel in that city, and had taught many, 
 they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, 
 and to Antioch.”” This account comprises the 
 period to which the allusion in the Epistle is to 
 be referred. We have so far therefore a con- 
 formity between the history and the Epistle, 
 that St. Paul is asserted in the history to have 
 suffered persecutions in the three cities, his per- 
 secutions at which are appealed to in the 
 Epistle; and not only so, but to have suffered 
 these persecutions both in immediate succession, 
 and in the order in which the cities are men- 
 tioned in the Epistle. The conformity also ex- 
 tends to another circumstance. In the apostolic 
 history Lystra and Derbe are commonly men- 
 tioned together: in the quotation from the 
 Kpistle Lystra is mentioned, and not Derbe. 
 And the distinction will appear on this occasion 
 to be accurate ; for St. Paul is here enumerating 
 his persecutions: and although he underwent. 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 321 
 
 grievous persecutions in each of the three cities 
 through which he passed to Derbe, at Derbe 
 itself he met with none: “The next day he 
 departed,” says the historian, ‘to Derbe; and 
 when they had preached the gospel to that city, 
 and had taught many, they returned again to 
 Lystra.” The Epistle, therefore, in the names 
 of the cities, in the order in which they are 
 enumerated, and in the place at which the enu- 
 meration stops, corresponds exactly with the 
 history.’ 
 
 But a second question remains, namely, how 
 these persecutions were “known” to Timothy, 
 or why the Apostle should recall these in par- 
 ticular to his remembrance, rather than many 
 other persecutions with which his ministry had 
 been attended. When some time, probably 
 three years, afterwards (vide Pearson’s Annales 
 Paulini), St. Paul made a second journey through 
 the same country, “in order to go again and 
 
 5 [The exactitude of the geographical order in which 
 these places are enumerated, is a matter of very great 
 importance in regard to the manner in which we are here 
 looking at St. Paul’s Epistles. The order is of no moment, 
 as respects the mere facts that occurred at these places: 
 but if we are dealing with a natural reminiscence, on the 
 part of St. Paul, of events which affected him very deeply, 
 the case is much altered. See AppEnp1x I. on Coincidences 
 connected with Geography.—H. | 
 
 x 
 
322 HOR PAULINA. 
 
 visit the brethren in every city where he had 
 preached the word of the Lord,” we read, Acts, 
 xvi. 1, that, “when he came to Derbe and 
 Lystra, behold, a certain disciple was there 
 named Timotheus.” One or other therefore of 
 these cities was the place of Timothy’s abode. 
 We read moreover that he was well reported of 
 by the brethren that were at Lystra and 
 Iconium; so that he must have been well 
 acquainted with these places. Also again, when 
 Paul came to Derbe and Lystra, Timothy was 
 already a disciple; “ Behold a certain disciple 
 was there named Timotheus.” He must, there- 
 fore, have been converted defore. But since it 
 is expressly stated in the Epistle, that Timothy 
 was converted by Paul himself, that he was 
 “his own son in the faith;” it follows that he 
 must have been converted by him upon his 
 former journey into those parts; which was the 
 very time when the Apostle underwent the per- 
 secutions referred to in the Epistle. Upon the 
 whole then, persecutions at the several cities 
 named in the Epistle are expressly recorded in 
 the Acts; and Timothy’s knowledge of this 
 part of St. Paul’s history, which knowledge is 
 appealed to in the Epistle, is fairly deduced 
 from the place of his abode, and the time of his 
 conversion. It may further be observed, that it 
 
THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. 323 
 
 is probable from this account, that St. Paul was 
 in the midst of these persecutions when Timothy 
 became known to him. No wonder then that 
 the Apostle, though in a letter written long 
 afterwards, should remind his favourite convert 
 of those scenes of affliction and distress in which 
 they first met. 
 
 Although this coincidence, as to the names of 
 the cities, be more specific and direct than many 
 which we have pointed out, yet I apprehend 
 there is no just reason for thinking it to be 
 artificial; for had the writer of the Epistle 
 sought a coincidence with the history upon this 
 head, and searched the Acts of the Apostles for 
 the purpose, I conceive he would have sent us 
 at once to Philippi and Thessalonica, where 
 Paul suffered persecution, and where, from what 
 is stated, it may easily be gathered that Timothy 
 accompanied him, rather than have appealed to 
 persecutions as known to Timothy, in the ac- 
 count of which persecutions Timothy’s presence 
 is not mentioned; it not being till after one 
 entire chapter, and in the history of a journey 
 three years future to this, that Timothy’s name 
 occurs in the Acts of the Apostles for the first 
 time. 
 
324 HOR# PAULINA, 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. 
 
 No.1, 
 A very characteristic circumstance in this 
 Epistle, is the quotation from Epimenides (i. 
 12); “One of themselves, even a prophet of 
 their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, 
 evil beasts, slow bellies.’’ 
 Kpiites dél Wevorat, kaxd Onpla, yaorépes apyal. 
 
 I call this quotation characteristic, because 
 no writer in the New Testament, except St. 
 Paul, appealed to heathen testimony ; and be- 
 cause St. Paul repeatedly did so. In his cele- 
 brated speech at Athens, preserved in Acts xvi.., 
 he tells his audience (ver. 28,) that “in God we 
 live, and move, and have our being; as certain 
 also of your own poets have said, For we are 
 also His offspring.” 
 
 Tov yap Kal yévos omer. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. 329 
 
 The reader will perceive much similarity of 
 manner in these two passages. The reference 
 in the speech is to a heathen poet; it is the 
 same in the Epistle. In the speech the Apostle 
 urges his hearers with the authority of a poet 
 of thew own ; in the Epistle he avails himself of 
 the same advantage. Yet there is a variation, 
 which shows that the hint of inserting a quota- 
 tion in the Epistle was not, as it may be sus- 
 pected, borrowed from seeing the like practice 
 attributed to St. Paul in the history ; and it is 
 this, that in the Epistle the author cited is 
 called a prophet, “one of themselves, even a 
 prophet of their own.” Whatever might be 
 the reason for calling Epimenides a prophet; 
 whether the names of poet and prophet were 
 occasionally convertible; whether Epimenides 
 in particular had obtained that title, as Grotius 
 seems to have proved; or whether the appella- 
 tion was given to him, in this instance, as 
 having delivered a description of the Cretan 
 character, which the future state of morals 
 among them verified; whatever was the reason 
 (and any of these reasons will account for the 
 variation, supposing St. Paul to have been the 
 author), one point is plain, namely, if the 
 Epistle had been forged, and the author had 
 inserted a quotation in it merely from having 
 
326 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 seen an example of the same kind in a speech 
 ascribed to St. Paul, he would so far have 
 imitated his original, as to have introduced his 
 quotation in the same manner; that is, he 
 would have given to Epimenides the title which 
 he saw there given to Aratus. The other side 
 of the alternative is that the history took the 
 hint from the Epistle. But that the author of 
 the Acts of the Apostles had not the Epistle to 
 Titus before him, at least that he did not use it 
 as one of the documents or materials of his 
 narrative, is rendered nearly certain by the 
 observation that the name of Titus does not once 
 occur in his book. 
 
 It is well known, and was remarked by St. 
 Jerome, that the apothegm, 1 Cor. xv. 33, 
 “evil communications corrupt good manners,” 
 is an iambic of Menander’s ; 
 
 hbelpova HOn xphoO duiAla karat. 
 
 Here we have another unaffected instance of 
 the same turn and habit of composition. Pro- 
 bably there are some hitherto unnoticed; and 
 more, which the loss of the original authors 
 renders impossible to be now ascertained. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 There exists a visible affinity between the 
 
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. $27 
 
 Epistle to Titus and the first Epistle to Timothy. 
 Both letters were addressed to persons left by 
 the writer to preside in their respective Churches 
 during hisabsence. Both letters are principally 
 occupied in describing the qualifications to be 
 sought for, in those whom they should appoint 
 to offices in the Church; and the ingredients of 
 this description are in both letters nearly the 
 same. Timothy and Titus are likewise cautioned 
 against the same prevailing corruptions, and, in 
 particular, against the same misdirection of their 
 cares and studies. This affinity obtains, not 
 only in the subject of the letters, which from 
 the similarity of situation in the persons to 
 whom they were addressed, might be expected 
 to be somewhat alike, but extends in a great 
 variety of instances, to the phrases and ex- 
 pressions. The writer accosts his two friends 
 with the same salutation, and passes on to the 
 business of his letter by the same transition. 
 “Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith : 
 Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father, 
 and Jesus Christ our Lord.’ As I besought thee 
 1 [It is worthy of note that the two Epistles to Timothy 
 are bound together by the peculiar salutation, “‘ grace, 
 mercy, and peace,’ which St. Paul does not use in his 
 general Epistles. In the corresponding place of the letter 
 
 to Titus the word “mercy,” according to the best MSS., is 
 not found,—H. } 
 
828 — HORE PAULINA. 
 
 to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Mace- 
 donia,”’ &e., 1 Tim. 1. 2, 3. 
 
 “To Titus, mine own son after the common 
 faith: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the 
 Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour, 
 For this cause left I thee im Crete,’ &e. Tit. 1. 
 4, 5. 
 
 If Timothy was “ not to give heed to fables and 
 endless genealogies, which minister questions” 
 (1 Tim. i. 4), Titus also was to “avoid foolish 
 questions, and genealogies, and contentions” (iil. 
 9 ;) and was to rebuke them sharply, “ not giving 
 heed to Jewish fables”? (i. 14). If Timothy was 
 to bea pattern (rézoc), 1 Tim. iv. 12; so was 
 Titus (ii. 7). If Timothy was to “let no man 
 despise his youth,” 1 Tim. iv. 12; Titus also 
 was to “let no man despise him” (ii. 15). 
 This verbal consent is also observable in some 
 very peculiar expressions, which have no relation 
 to the particular character of Timothy or Titus. 
 
 The phrase “it is a faithful saying” (morc 
 6 Adyoc), made use of to preface some sentence 
 upon which the writer lays a more than ordinary 
 stress, occurs three times in the first Hpistle to 
 Timothy, once in the second, and once in the 
 Epistle before us, and in no other part of St. 
 Paul’s writings; and it is remarkable that these 
 
 three Epistles were probably all written towards 
 
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. 329 
 
 the conclusion of his life; and that they are the 
 only Epistles which were written after his first 
 imprisonment at Rome.” 
 
 The same observation belongs to another 
 singularity of expression, and that is in the 
 epithet “ sound” (vytatvwv), as applied to words 
 or doctrine. It is thus used, twice in the first 
 Epistle to Timothy, twice in the second, and 
 three times in the Epistle to Titus, besides two 
 cognate expressions vyraivovrag ty wioree and 
 Adyov vy, and it is found, in the same sense, 
 in no other part of the New Testament. 
 
 The phrase “God our Saviour” stands in 
 nearly the same predicament. It is repeated 
 three times in the first Epistle to Timothy, as 
 many in the Epistle to Titus, and in no other 
 book of the New Testament occurs at all, except 
 once in the Epistle of Jude. 
 
 Similar terms intermixed indeed with others, 
 are employed, in the two Epistles, in enumerating 
 the qualifications required in those, who should 
 be advanced to stations of authority in the 
 Church. 
 
 “A bishop must be blameless, the husband of 
 one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given 
 to hospitality, apt to teach, not given to wine, no 
 
 2 [See APPENDIX IX. on the “ Faithful Sayings” of the 
 Pastoral Epistles.—H. | 
 
830 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, 
 not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth 
 well his own house, having his children in sub- 
 jection with all gravity.”* 1 Tim. i. 2—4. 
 
 “Tf any be blameless, the husband of one wife, 
 having faithful children not accused of riot, or 
 unruly; for a bishop must be blameless, as the 
 steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, 
 not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy 
 lucre ; but a lover of hospitality, a lover of good 
 men, sober, just, holy, temperate.”* Titus 1. 
 6—8. 
 
 The most natural account which can be given 
 of these resemblances, is to suppose that the two 
 Epistles were written nearly at the same time, 
 and while the same ideas and phrases dwelt in 
 the writer’s mind. Let us inquire therefore, 
 whether the notes of time, extant in the two 
 Epistles, in any manner favour this supposition. 
 
 3 Ae? oty thy érickoToy avemiAnmrov elvat, mids ‘yuvaiKds 
 avdpa, vnpddrcov, Tappova, Kdomioy, pirdtevoy, Sidaktindy, wh 
 Tapowvoy, MI) TANKTHY, MH aloxpoKepdy’ GAA” emierkH, auaxoy, 
 apiAdpyupov* Tov idlov ofkov KaA@s mpoiorduevoy, Téxva ExovTa 
 év bmoTayh META Taons TeuvdTNTOS. 
 
 4 EY tis é€otly avéyKAntos, mids yuvainds ayip, Tévea exwv 
 mioTd, wh ev KaTnyopla dowrlas, }) dvumétraxta, Ae? yap Toy 
 éxickomov aveyKAntoy elvot, @s @cod oikovduov* wy avOddn, wh 
 dpylAov, mh wdpowvov, mh TAHKTHY, My aloxpoKepdy’ GAAG piAd- 
 tevov, pirdyabov, cHppova, Sixaoy, Sovov, eykparh. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. 831 
 
 We have seen that it was necessary to refer 
 the first Epistle to Timothy to a date subsequent 
 to St. Paul’s first imprisonment at Rome, be- 
 cause there was no journey into Macedonia prior 
 to that event, which accorded with the circum- 
 stance of leaving “ Timothy behind at Ephesus.” 
 The journey of St. Paul from Crete, alluded to 
 in the Epistle before us, and in which Titus 
 “was left in Crete to set in order the things 
 that were wanting,’ must, in like manner, be 
 carried to the period which intervened between 
 his first and second imprisonment. For the 
 history, which reaches, we know, to the time of 
 St. Paul’s first imprisonment, contains no ac- 
 count of his going to Crete, except upon his 
 voyage as a prisoner to Rome; and that this 
 could not be the occasion referred to in our 
 Epistle is evident from hence, that when St. 
 Paul wrote this Epistle, he appears to have been 
 at liberty ; whereas, after that voyage, he con- 
 tinued for two years at least in confinement. 
 Again, it is agreed that St. Paul wrote his first 
 Epistle to Timothy from Macedonia;* “As I 
 besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I 
 
 5 [It cannot be absolutely concluded from the form of 
 expression, that St. Paul was in Macedonia when he wrote 
 this, though it is most probable that the first Epistle to 
 Timothy was written there.—H. | 
 
ooe _ HORE PAULINA. 
 
 went (or came) into Macedonia.” And that he 
 was in these parts, that is, in this peninsula, 
 when he wrote the Epistle to Titus, is rendered 
 probable by his directing Titus to come to him 
 to Nicopolis: “ When I shall send Artemas unto 
 thee or Tychicus, be diligent (make haste) to 
 come unto me to Nicopolis; for I have deter- 
 mined there to winter.” The most noted city 
 of that name was in Epirus, near to Actium. 
 And I think the form of speaking, as well as 
 the nature of the case, renders it probable, that 
 the writer was at Nicopolis, or in the neighbour- 
 hood thereof, when he dictated this direction to 
 Titus. 
 
 Upon the whole, if we may be allowed to 
 suppose that St. Paul, after his liberation at 
 Rome, sailed into Asia, taking Crete in his way ; 
 that from Asia, and from Ephesus, the capital of 
 that country, he proceeded into Macedonia, and 
 crossing the peninsula in his progress, came into 
 the neighbourhood of Nicopolis; we havea route 
 which falls in with everything. It executes the 
 intention expressed by the Apostle of visiting 
 Colosse and Philippi as soon as he should be set 
 at liberty at Rome. It allows him to leave Titus 
 at Crete, and Timothy at Ephesus, as he went 
 into Macedonia; and to write to both not long 
 after from the peninsula of Greece, and probably 
 
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. 3393 
 
 from the neighbourhood of Nicopolis ; thus 
 bringing together the dates of these two letters, 
 and thereby accounting for that affinity between 
 them, both in subject and language, which our 
 remarks have pointed out.° I confess that the 
 journey, which we have thus traced out for St. 
 Paul, is, in a great measure, hypothetical; but 
 it should be observed, that it is a species of con- 
 sistency, which seldom belongs to falsehood, to 
 admit of an hypothesis, which includes a great 
 number of independent circumstances without 
 contradiction. 
 
 6 [There are more ways than one in which a journey 
 can be hypothetically arranged to meet the case. See 
 ‘“‘ Life and Epistles of St. Paul” and the “‘ Horz Apostolicae” 
 of Professor Birks. It is, however, quite enough, if it is 
 
 possible to construct one journey which fits the notices of 
 time and place that must be harmonized.— H. | 
 
334 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 THE singular correspondency between this Epistle 
 and that to the Colossians has been remarked 
 already. An assertion in the Epistle to the 
 Colossians, namely, that ‘“ Onesimus was one of 
 them,” is verified by the Epistle to Philemon ; 
 and is verified, not by any mention of Colosse, 
 by any the most distant intimation concerning 
 the place of Philemon’s abode; but simply by 
 stating Onesimus to be Philemon’s servant, and 
 by joining in the salutation Philemon with 
 Archippus; for this Archippus, when we go 
 back to the Epistle to the Colossians, appears to 
 have been an inhabitant of that city, and, as it 
 should seem, to have held an office of authority 
 in that Church. The case stands thus. Take 
 the Epistle to the Colossians alone, and no cir- 
 
THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON, 335 
 
 cumstance is discoverable which makes out the 
 assertion, that Onesimus was “one of them.” 
 Take the Epistle to Philemon alone, and nothing 
 at all appears concerning the place to which 
 Philemon or his servant Onesimus belonged. 
 For anything that is said in the Hpistle, Phile- 
 mon might have been a Thessalonian, a Philip- 
 pian, or an Ephesian, as well as a Colossian. 
 Put the two Epistles together and the matter is 
 clear. The reader perceives a junction of circum- 
 stances, which ascertains the conclusion at once. 
 Now, all that is necessary to be added in this 
 place is, that this correspondency evinces the 
 genuineness of one Epistle, as well as of the 
 other. It is like comparing the two parts of a 
 -cloven tally. Coincidence proves the authen- 
 ticity of both. 
 
 No. II. 
 
 And this coincidence is perfect; not only in 
 the main article of showing, by implication, 
 Onesimus to be a Colossian, but in many depen- 
 dent circumstances. 
 
 1. “I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, 
 whom Jf have sent again” (ver. 10—12). It 
 appears from the Epistle to the Colossians, that, 
 
336 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 in truth, Onesimus was sent at that time to 
 Colosse: ‘* All my state shall Tychicus declare, 
 whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, 
 with Onesimus, a faithful and beloved brother.” 
 Coloss. iv. 7—9. 
 
 2. “I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, 
 whom I have begotten in my bonds” (ver. 10). 
 It appears from the preceding quotation, that 
 Onesimus was with St. Paul when he wrote the 
 Epistle to the Colossians; and that he wrote 
 that Epistle in emprisonment is evident from his 
 declaration, chap. iv. 3: “ Praying also for us, 
 that God would open unto usa door of utterance, 
 to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am 
 also in bonds.” 
 
 3. St. Paul bids Philemon prepare for him a 
 lodging :* “ For I trust,” says he, “ that, through 
 your prayers, I shall be given unto you.” This 
 agrees with expectation of speedy deliverance, 
 which he expressed in another Epistle written 
 during the same imprisonment: “ Him” 
 (Timothy) “I hope to send presently, so soon 
 as I shall see how it will go with me; but J trust 
 
 1 [It might have been better to have thrown this para- 
 graph into the form of a note at the foot of the page: for 
 it is to be observed that it relates to a coincidence be- 
 tween the Epistle to Philemon and—not the Epistle to the 
 Colossians, but—that to the Philippians.—H. ] 
 
THE EPISTLE OF PHILEMON. Sore 
 
 én the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly.’ 
 Phil. ii. 23, 24. 
 
 4. As the letter to Philemon, and that to the 
 Colossians, were written at the same time, and 
 sent by the same messenger, the one to a par- 
 ticular inhabitant, the other to the Church of 
 Colosse, it may be expected that the same, or 
 nearly the same persons would be about St. 
 Paul, and join with him, as was the practice, in 
 the salutations of the Epistles. Accordingly, we 
 find the names of Aristarchus, Marcus, Epa- 
 phras, Luke, and Demas, in both Epistles. 
 Timothy, who is joined with St. Paul in the 
 superscription of the Epistle to the Colossians, 
 _ is joined with him in this. Tychicus did not 
 salute Philemon, because he accompanied the 
 Epistle to Colosse, and would undoubtedly there 
 see him. Yet the reader of the Epistle to Phile- 
 mon will remark one considerable diversity in 
 the catalogue of saluting friends, and which 
 shows that the catalogue was not copied from 
 that to the Colossians. In the Epistle to the 
 Colossians, Aristarchus is called by St. Paul his 
 fellow-prisoner (Coloss. iv. 10); im the Epistle 
 to Philemon, Aristarchus is mentioned without 
 any addition, and the title of fellow-prisoner is 
 given to Epaphras.’ 
 
 2 Dr. Benson observes, and perhaps truly, that the 
 
 Z 
 
338 HOREH PAULINA. ~ 
 
 And let it also be observed, that notwithstand- 
 ing the close and circumstantial agreement 
 between the two Epistles, this is not the case of 
 an opening left in a genuine writing, which an 
 impostor is induced to fill up; nor of a reference 
 to some writing not extant, which sets a sophist 
 at work to supply the loss, in like manner as, 
 because St. Paul was supposed (Coloss. iv. 16), 
 to allude to an Epistle written by him to the 
 Laodiceans, some person has from thence taken 
 the hint of uttering a forgery under that title. 
 The present, I say, is not that case; for Phile- 
 mon’s name is not mentioned in the Epistle to 
 the Colossians; Onesimus’ servile condition is 
 nowhere hinted at, any more than his crime, his 
 flight, or the place or time of his conversion. 
 The story therefore of the Epistle, if it be a 
 fiction, is a fiction to which the author could not 
 have been guided, by anything he had read in 
 St. Paul’s genuine writings. 
 
 appellation of fellow-prisoner, as applied by St. Paul to 
 Epaphras, did not imply that they were imprisoned to- 
 gether at the time; any more than your calling a person 
 your fellow-traveller, imports that you are then upon your 
 travels. If he had upon any former occasion travelled 
 with you, you might afterwards speak of him under that 
 title. It is just so with the term fellow-prisoner. 
 
THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. 339 
 
 No. IIL. 
 
 Ver. 4, 5: “I thank my God, making men- 
 tion of thee always in my prayers; hearing of 
 thy love and faith, which thou hast toward the 
 Lord Jesus, and toward all saints.’ 
 
 “ Hearing of thy love and faith.” This is the 
 form of speech which St. Paul was wont to use 
 towards those Churches which he had not seen, 
 or then visited: see Rom. 1. 8; Ephes.1. 15; 
 Col. i. 38,4. Towards those Churches and _per- 
 sons with whom he was previously acquainted, 
 he employed a different phrase; as, “I thank 
 my God always on your behalf,” 1 Cor. i. 4; 
 2 Thess. 1.3; or, “upon every remembrance of 
 you,” Phil. i.3; 1 Thess. 1. 2,3; 2 Tim.i. 38; 
 and never speaks of hearing of them. Yet, I 
 think, it must be concluded, from verse 19 of 
 this Epistle, that Philemon had been converted 
 by St. Paul himself: “ Albeit, I do not say to 
 thee, how thou owest unto me even thine own 
 self besides.” Here then is a peculiarity. Let 
 us inquire whether the Epistle supplies any cir- 
 cumstance which will account for it. We have 
 seen that it may be made out, not from the 
 Epistle itself, but from a comparison of the 
 Epistle with that to the Colossians, that Phile- 
 mon was an inhabitant of Colosse ; and it further 
 
 Z 2 
 
340 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 appears, from the Epistle to the Colossians, that 
 St. Paul had never been in that city : “ I would 
 that ye knew what great conflict I have for you 
 and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as 
 have not seen my face in the flesh.” Col. 11. 1. 
 Although, therefore, St. Paul had formerly met 
 with Philemon at some other place, and had 
 been the immediate instrument of his conver- 
 sion, yet Philemon’s faith and conduct after- 
 wards, inasmuch as he lived in a city which St. 
 Paul had never visited, could only be known to 
 him by fame and reputation. 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 The tenderness and delicacy of this Epistle 
 have been long admired: “ Though I might be 
 much bold in Christ to enjoin thee that which 
 is convenient, yet for love’s sake I rather beseech 
 thee, being such a one as Paul the aged, and 
 now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ. I beseech 
 thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have be- 
 gotten in my bonds.” There is something cer- 
 tainly very melting and persuasive in this, and 
 every part of the Epistle. Yet, in my opinion, 
 the character of St. Paul prevails in it throughout. 
 The warm, affectionate, authoritative teacher 
 
THE EPISTLE OF PHILEMON. 341 
 
 is interceding with an absent friend for a beloved 
 convert. He urges his suit with an earnestness, 
 
 befitting perhaps not so much the occasion, as" 
 the ardour and sensibility of his own mind. 
 Here also, as everywhere, he shows himself con- 
 scious of the weight and dignity of his mission ; 
 nor does he suffer Philemon for a moment to 
 forget it: “I meght be much bold in Christ to 
 enjoin thee that which is convenient.” He is 
 careful also to recall, though obliquely, to Phile- 
 mon’s memory, the sacred obligation under 
 which he had laid him, by bringing to him the 
 knowledge of Jesus Christ: “I do not say to 
 thee, how thou owest to me even thine own self 
 besides.” Without laying aside, therefore, the 
 apostolic character, our author softens the im- 
 perative style of his address, by mixing with it 
 every sentiment and consideration that could 
 move the heart of his correspondent. Aged and 
 in prison, he is content to supplicate and entreat. 
 Onesimus was rendered dear to him by his con- 
 version and his services; the child of his afflic- 
 tion, and “ ministering unto him in the bonds 
 of the gospel.” This ought to recommend him, 
 whatever had been his fault, to Philemon’s for- 
 giveness: “ Receive him as myself, as my own 
 bowels.” Everything, however, should be volun- 
 tary. St. Paul was determined that Philemon’s 
 
d42 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 compliance should flow from his own bounty ; 
 « Without thy mind would I do nothing, that 
 thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, 
 but willingly ;” trusting nevertheless to his 
 gratitude and attachment for the performance of 
 all that he requested, and for more; “ Having 
 confidence in thy obedience, I wrote unto thee, 
 knowing that thou wilt also do more than I 
 say.” 
 
 St. Paul’s discourse at Miletus; his speech 
 before Agrippa; his Epistle to the Romans, as 
 hath been remarked (No. VIII.) ; that to the 
 Galatians, iv. 11—20; to the Philippians, i. 29 
 —ii. 2; the second to the Corinthians, vi. 1— 
 13; and indeed some part or other of almost 
 every Epistle, exhibit examples of a similar 
 application to the feelings and affections of the 
 persons whom he addresses. And it is observy- 
 able, that these pathetic effusions, drawn for the 
 most part from his own sufferings and situation, 
 usually precede a command, soften a rebuke, or 
 mitigate the harshness of some disagreeable 
 truth. | 
 
 1 [See AprEnpDIx III. on St. Paul’s Character.—H. | 
 
THK SUBSCRIPTIONS OF THE EPISTLES, 343 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 THE SUBSCRIPTIONS OF THE EPISTLES, 
 
 Sx of these swbscriptions are false or improbable; 
 that is, they are either absolutely contradicted by 
 the contents of the Epistle, or are difficult to be 
 reconciled with them. 
 
 I. The subscription of the first Epistle to the 
 Corinthians states that it was written from 
 Philippi, notwithstanding that, in chap. xvi. 8, 
 St. Paul informs the Corinthians, that he will 
 “tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost ;” and not- 
 withstanding that he begins the salutations in 
 the Epistle, by telling them ‘the churches of 
 Asia salute you;” a pretty evident indication 
 that he himself was in Asia at this time. 
 
 IH. The Epistle to the Galatians is by the 
 subscription dated from Rome; yet, in the 
 Epistle itself, St. Paul expresses his surprise 
 “ that they were so soon removed from him that 
 
34.4 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 called them ;”’ whereas his journey to Rome was 
 ten years posterior to the conversion of the 
 Galatians.’ And what, I think, is more con- 
 clusive, the author, though speaking of himself 
 in this more than any other Epistle, does not 
 once mention his bonds, or call himself a 
 prisoner ; which he has not failed to do in every 
 one of the four Epistles written from that city, 
 and during that imprisonment.” 
 
 III. The first Epistle to the Thessalonians 
 was written, the subscription tells us, from 
 Athens; yet the Epistle refers expressly to the 
 coming of Timotheus from Thessalonica (iii. 6) ; 
 and the history informs us, Acts xvii. 5, that 
 Timothy came out of Macedonia to St. Paul at 
 Corinth.* 
 
 1 [Gal. i. 6. The word taxéws in this place probably 
 refers, not to any point of time, but (as in 1 Tim. i. 22) to 
 acting hastily and without due consideration. Hence no 
 inference can be drawn from this passage as to the date of 
 the Epistle to the Galatians. Other circumstances, how- 
 ever, decide that the subscription, which dates it from 
 Rome, is incorrect. See APPENDIX Y. on the date of this 
 Epistle.—H. | 
 
 2 [The phrase “had not failed” seems to imply that 
 Paley held the Epistle to the Galatians to be later in date 
 than those addressed to the Ephesians, Colossians, Philip- 
 pians, and Philemon, whereas it was much earlier. See 
 APPENDIX, as above.—H. | 
 
 3 [It is conceivable, however, that St. Paul may have 
 written this Epistle at Athens, after Timotheus rejoined 
 
THE SUBSCRIPTIONS OF THE EPISTLES. 3405» 
 
 IV. The second Epistle to the Thessalonians 
 is dated, and without any discoverable reason, 
 from Athens also. If it be truly the second; if 
 it refer, as it appears to do (ii. 2), to the first, 
 and the first was written from Corinth, the 
 place must be erroneously assigned, for the his- 
 tory does not allow us to suppose that St. Paul, 
 after he had reached Corinth, went back to 
 Athens.‘ 
 
 V. The first Epistle to Timothy the subscrip - 
 tion asserts to have been sent from Laodicea; 
 yet, when St Paul writes, “I besought thee to 
 abide still at Ephesus, ropevdpevoc cic Maxedoviav 
 (when I set out for Macedonia),” the reader is 
 naturally led to conclude, that he wrote the 
 letter upon his arrival in that country. 
 
 VI. The Epistle to Titus is dated from 
 Nicopolis in Macedonia, while no city of that 
 name is known to have existed in that pro- 
 vince. 
 
 The use, and the only use, which I make of 
 these observations is to show how easily errors 
 and contradictions steal in where the writer is 
 him there, and before he sent him back into Macedonia. 
 See on 1 Thessalonians, No. iv.—H. ] 
 
 4 [Athens is so near to Corinth, that it is possible St. 
 Paul might have revisited the former place, and written an 
 
 Epistle there during his stay of eighteen months at the 
 latter place. See Acts xviii, 11.—H.] 
 
346 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 not guided by original knowledge. There are 
 only eleven distinct assignments of date to St. 
 Paul’s Epistles (for the four written from Rome 
 may be considered as plainly contemporary) ; 
 and of these, six seem to be erroneous. J do 
 not attribute any authority to these subscrip- 
 tions. I believe them to have been conjectures 
 founded sometimes upon loose traditions, but 
 more generally upon a consideration of some 
 particular text, without sufficiently comparing it 
 with other parts of the Epistle, with different 
 Epistles, or with the history. Suppose then 
 that the subscriptions had come down to us as 
 authentic parts of the Epistles, there would 
 have been more contrarieties and difficulties 
 arising out of these final verses, than from all 
 the rest of the volume. Yet, if the Epistles had 
 been forged, the whole must have been made up 
 of the same elements as those of which the sub- 
 scriptions are composed, namely, tradition, con- 
 jecture, and inference: and it would have 
 remained to be accounted for, how, while so 
 many errors were crowded into the concluding 
 clauses of the letters, so much consistency 
 should be preserved in other parts.’ 
 
 5 [These remarks tend to show how completely this 
 
 kind of investigation belongs to modern times, and how - 
 
THE SUBSCRIPTIONS OF THE EPISTLES. 347 
 
 The same reflection arises from observing the 
 oversights and mistakes which learned men have 
 committed, when arguing upon allusions which 
 relate to time and place, or when endeavouring 
 to digest scattered circumstances into a con- 
 tinued story. It is indeed the same case; for 
 these subscriptions must be regarded as ancient 
 scholia, and as nothing more. Of this liability 
 to error I can present the reader with a notable 
 instance ; and which I bring forward for no 
 other purpose than that to which I apply the 
 erroneous subscriptions. Ludovicus Capellus, 
 in that part of his Historia Apostolica Illustrata, 
 which is entitled De Ordine Epist. Paul., writ. 
 ing upon the second Epistle to the Corinthians, 
 triumphs unmercifully over the want of sagacity 
 in Baronius, who, it seems, makes St. Paul 
 write his Epistle to Titus from Macedonia upon 
 his second visit into that province ; whereas it 
 appears from the history, that Titus, instead 
 of being in Crete where the Epistle places him, 
 was at that time sent by the Apostle from 
 Macedonia to Corinth. ‘‘ Animadvertere est,”’ 
 says Capellus, “magnam hominis illius aPrAeyriav 
 qui vult Titum a Paulo in Cretam abductum, 
 illicque relictum, cum inde Nicopolim navigaret, 
 
 much valuable evidence is gained by the exercise of exact 
 criticism.—H. | 
 
348 HORE PAULINA, 
 
 quem tamen agnoscit a Paulo ex Macedonia 
 missum esse Corinthum.” ‘This probably will 
 be thought a detection of inconsistency in 
 Baronius. But what is the most remarkable, 
 is, that in the same chapter in which he thus 
 indulges his contempt of Baronius’ judgment, 
 Capellus himself falls into an error of the same 
 kind, and more gross and palpable than that 
 which he reproves. For he begins the chapter 
 by stating the second Epistle to the Corinthians 
 and the first Epistle to Timothy, to be nearly 
 contemporary ; to have been both written during 
 the Apostle’s second visit into Macedonia: and 
 that a doubt subsisted concerning the immediate 
 priority of their dates: “ Posterior ad eosdem 
 Corinthios epistola, et prior ad Timotheum 
 certant de prioritate, et sub judice lis est; 
 utraque autem scripta est paulo postquam 
 Paulus Epheso discessisset, adeoque dum Mace- 
 doniam peragraret, sed utra tempore precedat, 
 non liquet.”° Now, in the first place, it is 
 highly improbable that the two Epistles should 
 
 6 «The second Epistle to the Corinthians, and the first 
 to Timothy, contend for the priority, and the matter is 
 yet undecided; each, however, was written soon after 
 Paul had departed from Ephesus, and therefore while he 
 was passing through Macedonia, but which was first in 
 time does not appear.” 
 
THE SUBSCRIPTIONS OF THE EPISTLES. 349 
 
 have been written either nearly together, or 
 during the same journey through Macedonia ; 
 for in the Epistle to the Corinthians, Timothy 
 appears to have been with St. Paul: in the 
 Hpistle addressed to him, to have been left be- 
 hind at Ephesus, and not only left behind, but 
 directed to continue there, till St. Paul should 
 return to that city. Inthe second place, it is 
 inconceivable, that a question should be pro- 
 posed concerning the priority of date of the two 
 Epistles; for, when St. Paul, in his Epistle to 
 Timothy, opens his address to. him by saying, 
 “(as [ besought thee to abide still at Ephesus when 
 I went into Macedonia,” no reader can doubt 
 but that he here refers to the /ast interview 
 which had passed between them; that he had 
 not seen him since; whereas if the Epistle be 
 posterior to that to the Corinthians, yet written 
 upon the same visit into Macedonia, this could 
 not be true; for as Timothy was along with St. 
 Paul when he wrote to the Corinthians, he must, 
 upon this supposition, have passed over to St. 
 Paulin Macedonia after he had been left by 
 him at Ephesus, and must have returned to 
 Ephesus again before the Epistle was written. 
 What misled Ludovicus Capellus was simply 
 this, that he had entirely overlooked Timothy’s 
 name 1n the superscription of the second Epistle 
 
350 HOREH PAULINA. 
 
 to the Corinthians. Which oversight appears 
 not only in the quotation which we have given, 
 but from his telling us, as he does, that Timothy 
 came from Ephesus to St. Paul at Corinth, 
 whereas the superscription proves that Timothy 
 was already with St. Paul when he wrote to the 
 Corinthians from Macedonia. 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 351 © 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 THE CONCLUSION. 
 
 In the outset of this inquiry, the reader was 
 directed to consider the Acts of the Apostles 
 and the thirteen Epistles of St. Paul as certain 
 ancient manuscripts lately discovered in the 
 closet of some celebrated library. We have ad- 
 hered to this view of the subject. External 
 evidence of every kind has been removed out of 
 sight; and our endeavours have been employed 
 to collect the indications of truth and authen- 
 ticity, which appeared to exist in the writings 
 themselves, and to result from a comparison of 
 their different parts. It is not however necessary 
 to continue this supposition longer. The testi- 
 mony which other remains of contemporary, or 
 the monuments of adjoining ages afford to the 
 reception, notoriety, and public estimation of a 
 book, forms no doubt the first proof of its 
 genuineness, And in no books whatever is this 
 proof more complete, than in those at present 
 
392 HORZ PAULINA. 
 
 under our consideration. The inquiries of learned 
 men, and, above all, of the excellent Lardner, 
 who never overstates a point of evidence, and 
 whose fidelity in citing his authorities has in no 
 one instance been impeached, have established, 
 concerning these writings, the following pro- 
 positions :— 
 
 I. That in the age immediately posterior to 
 that in which St. Paul lived, his letters were 
 publicly read and acknowledged.’ 
 
 Some of them are quoted or alluded to by 
 almost every Christian writer that followed, by 
 Clement of Rome, by Hermas, by Ignatius, by 
 Polycarp, disciples or contemporaries of the 
 Apostles; by Justin Martyr, by the Churches 
 of Gaul, by Ireneus, by Athenagoras, by Theo- 
 philus, by Clement of Alexandria, by Hermias, 
 by Tertullian, who occupied the succeeding age. 
 Now when we find a book quoted or referred to 
 by an ancient author, we are entitled to con- 
 clude, that it was read and received in the age 
 and country in which that author lived. And 
 this conclusion does not, in any degree, rest upon 
 the judgment or character of the author making 
 such reference. Proceeding by this rule, we 
 
 1 [The facts named in this article, and the conclusions 
 
 drawn from them, are dealt with more fully in Paley’s 
 book on ‘‘ The Evidences of Christianity.”—H.] - 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 3598 
 
 have, concerning the first Epistle to the Corin- 
 thians in particular, within forty years after the 
 Epistle was written, evidence, not only of its 
 being extant at Corinth, but of its being known 
 and read at Rome. Clement, bishop of that 
 city, writing to the Church of Corinth, uses 
 these words; “Take into your hands the Epistle 
 of the blessed Paul the Apostle. What did he 
 at first write unto you in the beginning of the 
 gospel? Verily he did by the spirit admonish 
 you concerning’ himself and Cephas and Apollos, 
 because that even then you did form parties.’’ 
 This was written at a time when probably some 
 must have been living at Corinth, who remem- 
 bered St. Paul’s ministry there, and the receipt 
 of the Epistle. The testimony is still more 
 valuable, as it shows that the Epistles were pre- 
 served in the Churches to which they were sent, 
 and that they were spread and propagated from 
 them to the rest of the Christian community. 
 ' Agreeably to which natural mode and order of 
 their publication, Tertullian, a century after- 
 wards, for proof of the integrity and genuineness 
 of the apostolic writings, bids, “ any one, who 
 is willing to exercise his curiosity profitably in 
 the business of his salvation, to visit the apos- 
 
 2 See Lardner, vol. xii. p. 22. 
 A a 
 
354 HOREZ PAULINA. 
 
 tolical Churches, in which their very authentic 
 letters are recited, ipse authentice liter eorum 
 recitantur.” Then he goes on: “ Is Achaia near 
 you? You have Corinth. If you are not far 
 from Macedonia, you have Philippi, you have 
 Thessalonica. If you can go to Asia, you have 
 Ephesus; but if you are near to Italy, you have 
 Rome.”* I adduce this passage to show, that 
 the distinct Churches, or Christian societies, to: 
 which St. Paul’s Epistles were sent, subsisted. 
 for some ages afterwards; that his several Epistles. 
 were all along respectively read in those Churches; 
 that Christians at large received them from those 
 Churches,.and appealed to those Churches for 
 their original and authenticity. 
 
 Arguing in like manner from citations and 
 allusions, we have, within the space of a hundred 
 and fifty years from the time that the first of 
 St. Paul’s Epistles was written, proofs of almost 
 all of them being read, in Palestine, Syria, the 
 countries of Asia Minor, in Egypt, in that part 
 of Africa which used the Latin tongue, in Greece, 
 Italy, and Gaul.* I do not mean simply to 
 assert, that, within the space of a hundred and 
 fifty years, St. Paul’s Epistles were read in those 
 countries, for I believe that they were read and 
 
 3 Lardner, vol. ii. p. 598. 
 4 See Lardner’s “‘ Recapitulation,” vol. xii. p. 53. 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 355 
 
 circulated from the beginning; but that proofs 
 of their being so read occur within that period. 
 And when it is considered how few of the primi- 
 tive Christians wrote, and of what is written how 
 much is lost, we are to account it extraordinary, 
 or rather as a sure proof of the extensiveness of 
 the reputation of these writings, and of the 
 general respect in which they were held, that so 
 many testimonies, and of such antiquity, are still 
 extant. “In the remaining works of Irenzus, 
 Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian, there are 
 perhaps more and larger quotations of the small 
 volume of the New Testament, than of all the 
 works of Cicero, in the writers of all characters 
 for several ages.”° We must add, that the 
 Epistles of St. Paul come in for their full share 
 of this observation; and that all the thirteen 
 Epistles, except that to Philemon, which is not 
 quoted by Ireneus or Clement, and which pro- 
 bably escaped notice merely by its brevity, are 
 severally cited, and expressly recognized as St. 
 Paul’s, by each of these Christian writers. The 
 Ebionites, an early, though inconsiderable Chris- 
 tian sect, rejected St. Paul and his Epistles ;° that 
 is, they rejected these Epistles, not because they 
 were not, but because they were St. Paul’s; and 
 
 5 Lardner, vol. xii. p. 53, 6 Ibid. vol. ui. p. 808. 
 Aad 
 
356 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 because, adhering to the obligation of the Jewish 
 law, they chose to dispute his doctrine and 
 authority. Their suffrage as to the genuineness 
 of the Epistles does not contradict that of other 
 Christians. Marcion, an heretical writer in the 
 former part of the second century, is said by 
 Tertullian to have rejected three of the Epistles 
 which we now receive, namely, the two Epistles 
 to Timothy, and the Epistle to Titus. It appears 
 to me not improbable, that Marcion might make 
 some such distinction as this, that no apostolic 
 Epistle was to be admitted which was not read 
 or attested by the Church to which it was sent; 
 for it is remarkable, that, together with these 
 Epistles to private persons, he rejected also the 
 catholic Epistles. Now the catholic Epistles 
 and the Epistles to private persons agree in the 
 circumstance of wanting this particular species 
 of attestation. Marcion, it seems, acknowledged 
 the Epistle to Philemon, and is upbraided for 
 his inconsistency in doing so by Tertullian,’ who 
 asks, ‘ why, when he received a letter written to 
 a single person, he should refuse two to Timothy 
 and one to Titus composed upon the affairs of the 
 Church?” This passage so far favours our ac- 
 count of Marcion’s objection, as it shows that 
 
 7 Lardner, vol. xiv. p. 45. 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 357 
 
 the objection was supposed by Tertullian to have 
 been founded in something which belonged to 
 the nature of a private letter. 
 
 Nothing of the works of Marcion remains. 
 Probably he was, after all, a rash, arbitrary, 
 licentious critic (if he deserved indeed the name 
 of critic), and who offered no reason for his de- 
 termination. What St. Jerome says of him 
 intimates this, and is besides founded in good 
 sense: speaking of him and Basilides, “ if they 
 had assigned any reasons,” says he, “ why they 
 did not reckon these Epistles,” namely, the first 
 and second to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus, 
 “to be the Apostle’s, we would have endeavoured 
 to have answered them, and perhaps might have 
 satisfied the reader; but when they take upon 
 them by their own authority, to pronounce one 
 Epistle to be Paul’s, and another not, they can 
 only be replied to in the same manner.” * Let 
 it be remembered, however, that Marcion received 
 ten of these Epistles. Huis authority therefore, 
 even if his credit had been better than it is, 
 forms a very small exception to the uniformity 
 of the evidence. Of Basilides we know still 
 less than we do of Marcion. The same obser- 
 vation however belongs to him, namely, that his 
 
 8 Lardner, vol. xiv. p. 458. 
 
558 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 objection as far as appears from this passage of 
 St. Jerome, was confined to the three private 
 Epistles. Yet is this the only opinion which 
 can be said to disturb the consent of the first 
 two centuries of the Christian era; for as to 
 Tatian, who is reported by St. Jerome alone to 
 have rejected some of St. Paul’s Epistles, the 
 extravagant, or rather delirious notions into 
 which he fell, take away all weight and credit 
 from his judgment. If indeed, St. Jerome’s 
 account of this circumstance be correct; for it 
 appears from much older writers than St. 
 Jerome, that Tatian owned and used sgh of 
 these Epistles.’ 
 
 II. They, who in those ages disputed about 
 so many other points, agreed in acknowledging 
 the Scriptures now before us. Contending sects 
 appealed to them in their controversies with 
 equal and unreserved submission. When they 
 were urged by one side, however they might be 
 interpreted or misinterpreted by the other, their 
 authority was not questioned : ‘* Reliqui omnes,” 
 says Irenzeus, speaking of Marcion, “falso 
 scientiz nomine inflati, scripturas quidem con- 
 fitentur, interpretationes vero convertunt.” ? 
 
 9 Lardner, vol. i. p. 313. 
 1 Tren. advers. Her., quoted by Lardner, vol. xv. p. 425. 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 359 
 
 III. When the genuineness of some other 
 writings which were in circulation, and even of 
 a few which are now received into the canon, 
 was contested, these were never called into dis- 
 pute. Whatever was the objection, or whether, 
 in truth, there ever was any real objection to the 
 authenticity of the second Epistle of St. Peter, 
 the second and third of St. John, the Epistle of 
 St. James, or that of St. Jude, or to the book 
 of the Revelation of St. John, the doubts that 
 appear to have been entertained concerning 
 them, exceedingly strengthen the force of the 
 testimony as to those writings, about which 
 there was no doubt: because it shows that the 
 matter was a subject, among the early Chris- 
 tians, of examination and discussion; and that, 
 where there was any room to doubt, they did 
 ‘doubt. 
 
 What Eusebius hath left upon the subject is 
 directly to the purpose of this observation. 
 Eusebius, it is well known, divided the ecele- 
 siastical writings which were extant in his time 
 into three classes; the “ avavrippyra, uncontra- 
 dicted,’ as he calls them in one chapter, or 
 “scriptures universally acknowledged,” as he 
 calls them in another; the “ controverted, yet 
 well known and approved by many ;” and * the 
 ‘spurious.’ What were the shades of difference 
 
360 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 in the books of the second, or in those of the 
 third class; or what it was precisely that he 
 meant by the term spurious, it is not necessary 
 in this place to inquire. It is sufficient for us 
 to find, that the thirteen Epistles of St. Paul 
 are placed by him in the first class without any 
 sort of hesitation or doubt. 
 
 It is farther also to be collected from the 
 chapter in which this distinction is laid down, 
 that the method made use of by Eusebius, and 
 by the Christians of his time, namely, the close 
 of the third century, in judging concerning the 
 sacred authority of any books, was to inquire 
 after and consider the testimony of those who 
 lived near the age of the Apostles.’ 
 
 IV. That no ancient writing, which is attested 
 as these Epistles are, hath had its authenticity 
 disproved, or is in fact questioned. The contro- 
 versies which have been moved concerning sus- 
 pected writings, as the epistles, for instance, of 
 Phalaris, or the eighteen epistles of Cicero, begin 
 by showing that this attestation is wanting.’ 
 
 .2 Lardner, vol. viii. ‘p. 106. 
 
 3 [Even if this attestation were wanting, we might fall 
 back on the internal evidence of the documents before us: 
 and this would suffice to establish their trustworthiness. 
 But we have the external evidence given to us also as our 
 starting-point.—H. | 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 361 
 That being proved, the question is thrown back 
 upon internal marks of spuriousness or authen- 
 ticity ; and in these the dispute isoceupied. In 
 which disputes 1t 1s to be observed, that the 
 contested writings are commonly attacked by 
 arguments drawn from some opposition which 
 they betray to “authentic history,’ to “ true 
 epistles,” to “the real sentiments or circum- 
 stances of the author whom they personate; ” * 
 which authentic history, which true epistles, 
 which real sentiments themselves, are no other 
 than ancient documents, whose early existence 
 and reception can be proved, in the manner in 
 which the writings before us are traced up to 
 the age of their reputed author, or to ages near 
 to his. A modern who sits down to compose 
 the history of some ancient period, has no 
 stronger evidence to appeal to for the most con- 
 fident assertion, or the most undisputed fact 
 that he delivers, than writings, whose genuine- 
 hess is proved by the same medium through 
 which we evince the authenticity of ours. Nor, 
 while he can have recourse to such authorities 
 as these, does he apprehend any uncertainty in 
 
 4 See the tracts written in the controversy between 
 Tunstal and Middleton upon certain suspected epistles 
 ascribed to Cicero. 
 
362 HORZ PAULINA. 
 
 his accounts, from the suspicion of spuriousness 
 or imposture in his materials. 
 
 V. It cannot be shown that any forgeries 
 properly so called,’ that is, writings published 
 under the name of the person who did not com- 
 pose them, made their appearance in the first 
 century of the Christian era, in which century 
 these Epistles undoubtedly existed. I shall 
 set down under this proposition the guarded 
 words of Lardner himself: “ There are no quo- 
 tations of any of them (the spurious and apo- 
 eryphal books) in the apostolical fathers, by 
 whom JI mean Barnabas, Clement of Rome, 
 Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, whose writings 
 reach from the year of our Lord 70 to the year 
 108. J say this confidently, because I think wt 
 has been proved.” Lardner, vol. xu. p. 158. 
 
 Nor when they did appear were they much 
 used by the primitive Christians. “ Irenzus 
 quotes not any of these books. He mentions 
 some of them, but he never quotes them. The 
 same may be said of Tertullian; he has men- 
 tioned a book called ‘ Acts of Paul and Theela ;’ 
 but it is only to condemn it.° Clement of 
 
 5 IT believe that there is a great deal of truth in Dr. 
 Lardner’s observation, that comparatively few of those 
 books, which we call apocryphal, were strictly and ori- 
 ginally forgeries. See Lardner, vol. xii. p. 167. 
 
 6 [An account of the “ Acts of Paul and Thecla” may 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 363 — 
 Alexandria and Origen have mentioned and 
 quoted several such books, but never as autho- 
 rity, and sometimes with express marks of dis- 
 like. Eusebius quotes no such books in any of 
 his works. He has mentioned them indeed, but 
 how? Not by way of approbation, but to show 
 that they were of little or no value; and that 
 they never were received by the sounder part of 
 Christians.” Now, if with this, which is ad- 
 vanced after the most minute and diligent 
 examination, we compare what the same cautious 
 writer had before said of our received Scriptures, 
 “that in the works of three only of the above- 
 mentioned fathers, there are more and larger 
 quotations of the small volume of the New 
 Testament, than of all the works of Cicero in 
 the writers of all characters for several ages ;’’ 
 and if, with the marks of obscurity or condem- 
 nation, which accompanied the mention of the 
 several apocryphal Christian writings, when 
 they happened to be mentioned at all, we con- 
 trast what Dr. Lardner’s work completely and 
 in detail makes out concerning the writings 
 which we defend, and what, having so made 
 out, he thought himself authorized in his con- 
 clusion to assert, that these books were not only 
 
 be found in the work of Jones on the Canon of Scrip- 
 ture.—H. | 
 
3864, HORH PAULINA. 
 
 received from the beginning, but received with 
 the greatest respect; have been publicly and 
 solemnly read in the assemblies of Christians 
 throughout the world, in every age from that 
 time to this; early translated into the languages 
 of divers countries and peoples; commentaries 
 written to explain and illustrate them ; quoted 
 by way of proof in all arguments of a religious 
 nature; recommended to the perusal of un- 
 believers, as containing the authentic account 
 of the Christian doctrine; when we attend, I 
 say, to this representation, we perceive in it, 
 not only full proof of the early notoriety of 
 these books, but a clear and sensible line of dis- 
 crimination, which separates these from the 
 pretensions of any others. 
 
 The Epistles of St. Paul stand particularly 
 free of any doubt or confusion that might arise 
 from this source. Until the conclusion of the 
 fourth century, no intimation appears of any 
 attempt whatever being made to counterfeit 
 these writings; and then it appears only of a 
 single and obscure instance. St. Jerome, who 
 flourished in the year 392, has this expression: 
 “ Legunt quidam et ad Laodicenses; sed ab 
 omnibus exploditur ;” “ there is also an epistle 
 to the Laodiceans, but it is rejected by every- 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 365 - 
 body.”’ Theodoret, who wrote in the year 423, 
 speaks of this Epistle in the same terms.* Be- 
 sides these I know not whether any ancient 
 writer mentions it. It was certainly unnoticed 
 during the first three centuries of the Church ; 
 and when it came afterwards to be mentioned, 
 it was mentioned only to show, that, though 
 such a writing did exist, it obtained no credit. 
 It is probable that the forgery to which St. 
 Jerome alludes is the Epistle which we now 
 have under that title. If so, as hath been 
 already observed, it is nothing more than a 
 collection of sentences from the genuine 
 Kpistles ; and was perhaps, at first, rather the 
 exercise of some idle pen, than any serious at- 
 tempt to impose a forgery upon the public. Of 
 an epistle to the Corinthians under St. Paul’s 
 name, which was brought into Europe in the 
 present century, antiquity is entirely silent. It 
 was unheard of for sixteen centuries; and at 
 this day, though it be extant, and was first 
 found in the Armenian language, it is not, by 
 the Christians of that country, received into 
 their Scriptures.’ I hope, after this, that there 
 
 7 Lardner, vol. x. p. 103. 8 Ibid. vol. xi. p. 88. 
 
 9 [See Professor Lightfoot and Dean Stanley, as referred 
 to above (pp. 13, 14), on these spurious Epistles to the 
 Laodiceans and Corinthians.—H. | 
 
366 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 is no reader who will think there is any compe- 
 tition of eredit, or of external proof, between 
 these and the received Epistles; or rather who 
 will not acknowledge the evidence of authen- 
 ticity to be confirmed by the want of success 
 which attended imposture. 
 
 When we take into our hands the letters which 
 the suffrage and consent of antiquity has thus 
 transmitted to us, the first thing that strikes 
 our attention is the air of reality and business, 
 as well as of seriousness and conviction, which 
 pervades the whole. Let the sceptic read them. 
 If he be not sensible of these qualities in them, 
 the argument can have no weight with him. If 
 he be, if he perceive in almost every page the 
 language of a mind actuated by real occasions, 
 and operating upon real circumstances, I would 
 wish it to be observed, that the proof which 
 arises from this perception is not to be deemed 
 occult or imaginary, because it is incapable of 
 being drawn out in words, or of being conveyed 
 to the apprehension of the reader in any other 
 way, than by sending him to the books them- 
 selves.’ 
 
 1 [The broad general features of the internal evidence 
 
 of St. Paul’s Epistles, as presented to the reader on the 
 surface of the documents themselves, are very forcibly 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 367 
 
 And here, in its proper place, comes in the 
 argument which it has been the office of these 
 pages to unfold. St. Paul’s Epistles are con- 
 nected with his history by their particularity, 
 and by, the numerous circumstances which are 
 found in them. When we descend to an exami- 
 nation and comparison of these circumstances, 
 we not only observe the history and the Epistles 
 to be independent documents, unknown to, or at 
 least unconsulted by, each other, but we find the 
 substance, and oftentimes very minute articles, 
 of the history, recognized in the Epistles, by 
 allusions and references, which can neither be 
 imputed to design, nor, without a foundation in 
 truth, be accounted for by accident; by hints 
 and expressions and single words dropping as it 
 were fortuitously from the pen of the writer, or 
 drawn forth, each by some occasion proper to 
 the place in which it occurs, but widely removed 
 from any view to consistency or agreement. 
 These, we know, are effects which reality natu- 
 rally produces, but which, without reality at the 
 bottom, can hardly be conceived to exist. 
 
 When therefore, with a body of external evi- 
 dence, which is relied upon, and which experience 
 proves may safely be relied upon, in appreciating 
 
 stated in this short paragraph. Their importance cannot 
 be overrated.—H. | 
 
368 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 the credit of ancient writings, we combine cha- 
 racters of genuineness and originality which are 
 not found, and which, in the nature and order 
 of things, cannot be expected to be found in 
 spurious compositions; whatever difficulties we 
 may meet with in other topics of the Christian 
 evidence, we can have little in yielding our 
 assent to the following conclusions; that there 
 was such a person as St. Paul; that he lived in 
 the age which we ascribe to him; that he went 
 about preaching the religion of which Jesus 
 Christ was the founder, and that the letters 
 which we now read were actually written by 
 him upon the subject, and in the course, of that 
 his ministry. 
 
 And if it be true that we are in possession of 
 the very letters which St. Paul wrote, let us 
 eonsider what confirmation they afford to the 
 Christian history. In my opinion they sub- 
 stantiate the whole transaction. The great 
 object of modern research is to come at the 
 epistolary correspondence of the times. Amidst 
 the obscurities, the silence, or the contradictions 
 of history, if a letter can be found, we regard it 
 as the discovery of a land-mark; as that by 
 which we can correct, adjust, or supply the im- 
 perfections and uncertainties of other accounts. 
 One cause of the superior credit which is attri- 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 369 
 buted to letters is this, that the facts which they 
 disclose generally come out incidentally, and 
 therefore without design to mislead the public 
 by false or exaggerated accounts. This reason 
 may be applied to St. Paul’s Epistles with as 
 much justice as to any letters whatever. No- 
 thing could be farther from the intention of the 
 writer than’ to record any part of his history. 
 That his history was za fact made public by 
 these letters, and has by the same means been 
 transmitted to future ages, is a secondary and 
 unthought of effect. The sincerity therefore of 
 the Apostle’s declarations cannot reasonably be 
 disputed; at least we are sure that it was not 
 vitiated by any desire of setting himself off to 
 the ‘public at large. But these letters form a 
 part of the muniments of Christianity, as much 
 to be valued for their contents, as for their origi- 
 nality. A more inestimable treasure the care of 
 antiquity could not have sent down to us. Be- 
 sides the proof they afford of the general reality 
 of St. Paul’s history, of the knowledge which 
 the author of the Acts of the Apostles had 
 obtained of that history, and the consequent 
 probability that he was, what he professes him- 
 self to have been, a companion of the Apostle’s ; 
 besides the support they lend to these important 
 inferences, they meet specifically some of the 
 
 Bb 
 
370 HORH PAULINA. 
 
 principal objections upon which the adversaries 
 of Christianity have thought proper to rely. 
 In particular they show,— 
 
 I. That Christianity was not a story set on 
 foot amidst the confusions which attended and 
 immediately preceded the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem; when many extravagant reports were 
 circulated, when men’s minds were broken by 
 terror and distress, when amidst the tumults 
 that surrounded them inquiry was impracticable. 
 These letters show incontestably that the religion 
 had fixed and established itself before this state 
 of things took place. 
 
 II. Whereas it has been insinuated, that our 
 Gospels may have been made up of reports and 
 stories, which were current at the time, we may 
 observe that, with respect to the Epistles, this 
 is impossible. A man cannot write the history 
 of his own life from reports ;* nor, what is the 
 same thing, be led by reports to refer to passages 
 and transactions in which he states himself to 
 have been immediately present and active. I do 
 not allow that this insinuation is applied to the 
 historical part of the New Testament with any 
 colour of justice or probability; but I say, that 
 to the Epistles it is not applicable at all. 
 
 2 [Still less can he describe his own character from 
 reports. See No. V. below.—H.] 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 371 
 
 III. These letters prove that the converts to 
 Christianity were not drawn from the barbarous, 
 the mean, or the ignorant set of men, which the 
 representations of infidelity would sometimes 
 make them. We learn from letters the character 
 not only of the writer, but, in some measure, of 
 the persons to whom they are written. To sup- 
 pose that these letters were addressed to a rude 
 tribe, incapable of thought or reflection, is just 
 as reasonable as to suppose Locke’s Essay on 
 Human Understanding to have been written for 
 the instruction of savages. Whatever may be 
 thought of these letters in other respects, either 
 of diction or argument, they are certainly re- 
 moved as far as possible from the habits and 
 comprehension of a barbarous people. 
 
 IV. St. Paul’s history, I mean so much of it 
 as may be collected from his letters, is so wmpli- 
 cated with that of the other Apostles, and with 
 the substance indeed of the Christian history 
 itself, that I apprehend it will be found impos- 
 sible to admit St. Paul’s story (Ido not speak 
 of the miraculous part of it) to be true, and yet 
 to reject the rest as fabulous. For instance, can 
 any one believe that there was such a man as 
 Paul, a preacher of Christianity in the age which 
 we assign to him, and zo¢ believe that there were 
 also at the same time such men as Peter and 
 Bb 2 
 
372 HORE PAULINE. 
 
 James, and other Apostles, who had been com- 
 panions of Christ during His life, and who after 
 His death published and avowed the same things 
 concerning Him which Paul taught? Judea, and 
 especially Jerusalem, was the scene of Christ’s 
 ministry. The witnesses of His miracles lived 
 there. St. Paul, by his own account, as well as 
 that of his historian, appears to have frequently 
 visited this city; to have carried on a commu- 
 nication with the Church there; to have asso- 
 ciated with the rulers and elders of that Church, 
 who were some of them Apostles ; to have acted, 
 as occasions offered, in correspondence, and some- 
 times in conjunction with them. Can it, after 
 this, be doubted, but that the religion and the 
 general facts relating to it, which St. Paul 
 appears by his letters to have delivered to the 
 several Churches which he established at a dis- 
 tance, were, at the same time, taught and pub- 
 lished at Jerusalem itself, the place where the 
 business was transacted; and taught and pub- 
 lished by those who had attended the Founder 
 of the institution in His miraculous, or pre- 
 tendedly miraculous, ministry ? 
 
 It is observable, for so it appears both in the 
 Epistles and from the Acts of the Apostles, that 
 Jerusalem, and the society of believers in that 
 city, long continued the centre from which the 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 373 
 
 — 
 
 missionaries of the religion issued, with which all 
 other Churches maintained a correspondence and 
 connexion, to which they referred their doubts, 
 _and to whose relief, in times of public distress, 
 they remitted their charitable assistance. This 
 observation I think material, because it proves 
 ‘that this was not the case of giving out accounts 
 in one country of what is transacted in another, 
 without affording the hearers an opportunity of 
 knowing whether the things related were credited 
 by any, or even published, in the place where they 
 are reported to have passed. 
 
 V. St. Paul’s letters furnish evidence (and 
 what better evidence than a man’s own letters 
 can be desired ?) of the soundness and sobriety 
 of his judgment. His caution in distinguishing 
 between the occasional suggestions of inspiration, 
 and the ordinary exercise of his natural under- 
 standing, is without example in the history of 
 human enthusiasm. His morality is everywhere 
 calm, pure, and rational; adapted to the con- 
 dition, the activity, and the business of social 
 life, and of its various relations; free from the 
 over-scrupulousness and austerities of supersti- 
 tion, and from, what was more perhaps to be 
 apprehended, the abstractions of quietism, and 
 the soaring’s or extravagances of fanaticism. His 
 judgment concerning an hesitating conscience ; 
 
374 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 cc 
 
 his opinion of the moral indifference of many 
 actions, yet of the prudence and even the duty 
 of compliance, where non-compliance would pro- 
 duce evil effects upon the minds of the persons. 
 who observed it, is as correct and just as the most 
 liberal and enlightened moralist could form at 
 this day. The accuracy of modern ethics has. 
 found nothing to amend in these determina-. 
 tions. 
 
 What Lord Lyttelton has remarked of the- 
 preference ascribed by St. Paul to inward recti-- 
 tude of principle above every other religious. 
 accomplishment, is very material to our present 
 purpose. ‘ In his first Epistle to the Corinthians,. 
 xii. 1—3, St. Paul has these words: ‘ Though 
 L speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and 
 have not charity, [ am become as sounding brass, 
 or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift 
 of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all’ 
 knowledge ; and though L have all faith, so that I 
 could remove mountains, and have not charity, I 
 am nothing. And though I bestow alt my goods to 
 Seed the poor, and though I give my body to be 
 burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me no- 
 thing. Is this the language of enthusiasm ?' 
 Did ever enthusiast prefer that universal bene- 
 volence which comprehendeth all moral virtues,. 
 and which, as appeareth by the following verses, 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 875 
 
 is meant by charity here; did ever enthusiast, I 
 say, prefer that benevolence” (which we may 
 add is attainable by every man) “to faith and 
 to miracles, to those religious opinions which he 
 had embraced, and to those supernatural graces 
 and gifts which he imagined he had acquired; 
 nay even to the merit of martyrdom? Isit not 
 the genius of enthusiasm to set moral virtues 
 infinitely below the merit of faith; and of all 
 moral virtues to value that least which is most 
 particularly enforced by St. Paul, a spirit of 
 candour, moderation, and peace? Certainly 
 neither the temper nor the opinions of a man 
 subject to fanatical delusions are to be found in 
 this passage.”—Lord Lyttelton’s Considerations 
 on the Conversion of St. Paul. 
 
 I see no reason therefore to question the in- 
 tegrity of his understanding. To call him a 
 visionary, because he appealed to visions; or an 
 enthusiast, because he pretended to inspiration, 
 is to take the whole question for granted. Itis 
 to take for granted that no such visions or in- 
 spirations existed; at least it is to assume, con- 
 trary to his own assertions, that he had no other 
 proofs than these to offer of his mission, or of 
 the truth of his relations. 
 
 One thing I allow, that his letters everywhere 
 discover great zeal and earnestness in the cause 
 
376 HORA PAULINA, 
 
 in which he was engaged; that is to say, he was 
 convinced of the truth of what he taught; he 
 was deeply impressed, but not more so than the 
 occasion merited, with a sense of its importance. 
 This produces a corresponding animation and 
 solicitude in the exercise of his ministry. But 
 would not these considerations, supposing them 
 to be well founded, have held the same place, 
 and produced the same effect, in a mind the 
 strongest and most sedate ? 
 
 VI. These letters are decisive as to the suf- 
 ferings of the author; also as to the distressed 
 state of the Christian Church, and the dangers 
 which attended the preaching of the Gospel. 
 
 “ Whereof I Paul am made a minister; who 
 now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up 
 that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ 
 in my flesh, for His body’s sake, which is the 
 church.” Col. 1. 238, 24. 
 
 “Tf in this life only we have hope in Christ, 
 we are of all men most miserable.” 1 Cor. 
 ev bd. 
 
 “ Why stand we in jeopardy every hour? I 
 protest by your rejoicing which I have in 
 Christ Jesus, I die daily. If, after the manner 
 of men, I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, 
 what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not ?” 
 1 Cor. xv. 30, &e. 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 377 
 
 eats appenioonaes 
 
 “Tf childien, then heirs; heirs of God, and 
 joint-heirs with Christ: if so be that we suffer 
 with Him, that we may be also glorified 
 together. For I reckon that the sufferings of 
 this present time are not worthy to be compared 
 with the glory that shall be revealed in us.” 
 Rom. viii. 17, 18. 
 
 “Who shall separate us from the love of 
 Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or per- 
 secution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or 
 sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are 
 killed all the day long; we are accounted as 
 sheep for the slaughter.” Rom. vin. 35, 36. 
 
 “ Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation ; 
 continuing instant in prayer.” Rom. xu. 12. 
 
 “ Now concerning virgins I have no com- 
 mandment of the Lord; yet I give my jude- 
 ment as one that hath obtained mercy of the 
 Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that 
 this is good for the present distress; I say, that 
 it is good for a man so to be.” 1 Cor. vu. 
 25, 26. 
 
 “ For unto you it is given, in the behalf of 
 Christ, not only to believe on Him, but also to 
 suffer for His sake; having the same conflict 
 which ye saw in me, and now hear to be in 
 me.’ Phil. 1, 29, 30. 
 
 “God forbid that I should glory, save in the 
 
378 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the 
 world is crucified unto me, and I unto the 
 world.” 
 
 “ From henceforth let no man trouble me; 
 for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord 
 Jesus.” Gal. vi. 14, 17. 
 
 “ Ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, 
 having received the word in much affliction, 
 with joy of the Holy Ghost.’? 1 Thess. i. 6. 
 
 “ We ourselves glory in you in the churches 
 of God for your patience and faith im all your 
 persecutions and tribulations that ye endure.” 
 2 Thess. 1. 4. 
 
 We may seem to have accumulated texts 
 unnecessarily ; but besides that the point, 
 which they are brought to prove, is of great 
 importance, there is this also to be remarked in 
 every one of the passages cited, that the allusion 
 is drawn from the writer by the argument or 
 the occasion; that the notice which is taken of 
 his sufferings, and of the suffering condition of 
 Christianity, is perfectly incidental, and is dic- 
 tated by no design of stating the facts them- 
 selves. Indeed they are not stated at all: they 
 may rather be said to be assumed. This is a 
 distinction upon which we have relied a good 
 deal in former parts of this treatise; and where 
 the writer’s information cannot be doubted, it 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 379 
 
 always, in my opinion, adds greatly to the value 
 and credit of the testimony. 
 
 If any reader require from the Apostle more 
 direct and explicit assertions of the same thing, 
 he will receive full satisfaction in the following 
 quotations :— 
 
 “ Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a 
 fool) Tam more; in labours more abundant, in 
 stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, 
 in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received 
 I forty stripes save once; thrice was I beaten 
 with rods, once was I stoned; thrice I suffered 
 shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in 
 the deep; in journeys often, in perils of water, 
 in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own 
 countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils 
 in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils 
 in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in 
 weariness and painfulness, in watchings’ often, 
 in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold 
 and nakedness.” 2 Cor. xi. 23—27. 
 
 Can it be necessary to add more? “J think 
 that God hath set forth us the Apostles last, as 
 it were appointed to death; for we are made a 
 spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to 
 men.—LHven unto this present hour we both 
 hunger and thirst, and are naked, and are 
 buffeted, and have no certain dwelling-place ; 
 
380 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 and labour, working with our own hands: being. 
 reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer. 
 it; being defamed, we entreat : we are made as 
 the filth of the earth, and are the off-scouring 
 of all things unto this day.” 1 Cor. iv. 9—13. 
 I subjoin this passage to the former, because it 
 extends to the other Apostles of Christianity 
 much of that which St. Paul declared concern- 
 ing himself. | 
 
 In the following quotations, the reference to 
 the author’s sufferings is accompanied with a 
 specification of time and place, and with an 
 appeal for the truth of what he declares to the 
 knowledge of the persons whom he addresses: 
 “ Even after that we had suffered before, and 
 were shamefully entreated, as ye know, at 
 Philippi, we were bold in our God to speak 
 unto you the gospel of God with much con- 
 tention.” 1 Thess. 11. 2. 
 
 “But thou hast fully known my doctrine, 
 manner of life, purpose, faith, long-suffering, 
 persecutions, afflictions, which came to me at 
 Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecu- 
 tions I endured: but out of them all the Lord 
 delivered me.” 2 Tim. iii. 10, 11. 
 
 I apprehend that to this point, as far as the 
 testimony of St. Paul is credited, the evidence 
 from his letters is complete and full. It appears 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 381 
 
 under every form in which it could appear, by 
 occasional allusions and by direct assertions, by 
 general declarations and by specific examples. 
 
 VII. St. Paul in these letters asserts, in 
 positive and unequivocal terms, his performance 
 of miracles strictly and properly so called. 
 
 “ He therefore that ministered to you the 
 spirit, and worketh miracles (éveoywv Suvapee) 
 among you, doeth he it by the works of the 
 law, or by the hearing of faith?” Gal. ii. 5. 
 
 “ For I will not dare to speak of those things 
 which Christ hath not wrought by me,’ to 
 make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, 
 through mighty signs and wonders (éy duvape 
 onusiwy Kat teoatwv), by the power of the 
 Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and 
 round about unto LTllyricum, I have fully 
 preached the Gospel of Christ.” Rom. xv. 
 £8,019: . 
 
 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought 
 among you in all patience, in signs and wonders 
 and mighty deeds” (év onustore Kal répact, Kat 
 duvapect).’ 2 Cor, xii. 12. 
 
 3 That is, “‘ I will speak of nothing but what Christ hath 
 wrought by me;” or, as Grotius interprets it, “Christ hath 
 wrought so great things by me, that I will not dare to say 
 what He hath not wrought.” 
 
 + To these may be added the following indirect allusions, 
 
382 HORA PAULINA. 
 
 These words, signs, wonders, and mighty 
 deeds (onusia, kat tépata, kal duvapetc), are the 
 specific appropriate terms throughout the New 
 Testament, employed when public sensible 
 miracles are intended to be expressed. This 
 will appear by consulting, among other places, 
 the texts referred to in the note;* and it cannot 
 be shown that they are ever employed to express 
 anything else. : 
 
 Secondly, these words not only denote 
 miracles as opposed to natural effects, but they 
 
 which, though, if they had stood alone, that is, without 
 plainer text in the same writings, they might have been 
 accounted dubious; yet, when considered in conjunction 
 with the passages already cited, can hardly receive any 
 other interpretation than that which we give them. 
 
 ““My speech and my preaching was not with enticing 
 words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit 
 and of power; that your faith should not stand in the 
 wisdom of men, but in the power of God.’ 1 Cor. ii. 4, 5. 
 
 “The gospel, whereof I was made a minister, according 
 to the gift of the grace of God given unto me, by the 
 effectual working of His power.’ Eph. iii. 7. 
 
 “ For He that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostle- 
 ship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me 
 towards the Gentiles.” Gal. ii. 8. 
 
 “For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but 
 also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much 
 assurance.’ 1 Thess. 1. 5. 
 
 5 Mark xvi. 20. Luke xxiii.8. Johnii. 11, 28; iii. 2; 
 iv. 48, 54; xi. 47. Acts ii. 22; iv. 30; v. 12; vi. 8; viii. 6; 
 xiv. 3; xvy.12. Heb. ii. 4, 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 383 
 denote visible, and what may be called external, 
 miracles, as distinguished, 
 
 First, from inspiration. If St. Paul had 
 meant to refer only to secret illuminations of 
 his understanding, or secret influences upon his 
 will or affections, he could not, with truth, have 
 represented them as “signs and wonders 
 wrought by him,’ or “ wrought among them.” 
 
 Secondly, from vzszons. These would not, by 
 any means, satisfy the force of the terms, 
 “sions, wonders, and mighty deeds;” still 
 less could they be said to be “wrought by 
 him,’ or “wrought among them:” nor are 
 these terms and expressions anywhere applied 
 to visions. When our author alludes to the 
 supernatural communications which he had re- 
 ceived, either by vision or otherwise, he uses 
 expressions suited to the nature of the subject, 
 but very different from the words which we have 
 quoted. He calls them revelations, but never 
 signs, wonders, or mighty deeds. “I will 
 come,” says he, “ to visions and revelations of 
 the Lord;” and then proceeds to describe a 
 particular instance, and afterwards adds, “lest 
 I should be exalted above measure through the 
 abundance of the revelations, there was given 
 me a thorn in the flesh.’ 
 
 6 [2 Cor. xii. 1, 7.—H.] 
 
3884 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 —————— 
 
 Upon the whole, the matter admits of no 
 softening qualification, or ambiguity whatever. 
 If St. Paul did not work actual, sensible, public 
 miracles, he has knowingly, in these letters, 
 borne his testimony to a falsehood. I need not 
 add, that, in two also of the quotations, he has 
 advanced his assertion in the face of those per- 
 sons among whom he declares the miracles to 
 have been wrought.’ 
 
 Let it be remembered that the Acts of the 
 Apostles describe various particular miracles 
 wrought by St. Paul, which in their nature 
 answer to the terms and expressions which we 
 have seen to be used by St. Paul himself. 
 
 Here then we have a man of liberal attain- 
 ments, and, in other points, of sound judgment, 
 who had addicted his life to the service of the 
 Gospel. We see him, in the prosecution of his 
 purpose, travelling from country to country, en- 
 during every species of hardship, encountering 
 every extremity of danger, assaulted by the 
 populace, punished by the magistrates, scourged, 
 beaten, stoned, left for dead; expecting, wher- 
 ever he came, a renewal of the same treatment, 
 and: the same dangers, yet, when driven from 
 
 7 [2 Cor. xii. 12; Cal. ii, 5.—H.] 
 
THE CONCLUSION. 385 
 
 one city, preaching in the next; spending his 
 whole time in the employment, sacrificing to it 
 his pleasures, his ease, his safety; persisting in 
 this course to old age, unaltered by the experi- 
 ence of perverseness, ingratitude, prejudice, de- 
 sertion; unsubdued by anxiety, want, labour, 
 persecutions ; unwearied by long confinement, 
 undismayed by the prospect of death. Such 
 was St. Paul. We have his letters in our hands: 
 we have also a history purporting to be written 
 by one of his fellow-travellers, and appearing by 
 a comparison with these letters, certainly to 
 have been written by some person well acquainted 
 with the transactions of his life. From the 
 letters, as well as from the history, we gather 
 not only the account which we have stated of 
 him, but that he was one out of many who acted 
 and suffered in the same manner; and that, of 
 those who did so, several had been the com- 
 panions of Christ’s ministry, the ocular wit- 
 nesses, or pretending to be such, of His 
 miracles, and of His resurrection. We more- 
 over find this same person referring in his letters 
 to his supernatural conversion, the particulars 
 and accompanying circumstances of which are 
 related in the history, and which accompanying 
 circumstances, if all or any of them be true, 
 render it impossible to have been a delusion. 
 CG 
 
386 HORE PAULINA. 
 
 We also find him positively, and in appropriate 
 terms, asserting, that he himself worked miracles, 
 strictly and properly so called, in support of the 
 mission which he executed ; the history, mean- 
 while, recording various passages of his ministry, 
 which come up to the extent of this assertion. 
 The question is, whether falsehood was ‘ever 
 attested by evidence like this. Falsehoods, we 
 know, have found their way into reports, into 
 tradition, into books: but is an example to be 
 met with, of a man voluntarily undertaking a 
 life of want and pain, of incessant fatigue, of 
 continual peril ; submitting to the loss of his 
 home and country, to stripes and stoning, to 
 tedious imprisonment, and the constant expecta- 
 tion of a violent death, for the sake of carrying 
 about a story of what was false, and of what, if 
 false, he must have known to be so? 
 
Actsi.19 . 
 viii. 3. 
 
 _ INDEX TO PASSAGES 
 ILLUSTRATED IN THE PRECEDING WORK. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 . 261 | Acts xx. 22,238 . 
 
 emer as ©: | 
 
 ix. 20. 25. 30... 150 
 ix. 283-25 . . . 100 
 
 xii, 12 
 xii. 17 
 
 S ietgy ev ep eOO 
 e . . 176 
 
 xv. 86—39 . . . 260 
 
 mvic, 
 xvi. 3 
 xvi. 22 
 
 . 314, 315. 323 
 
 “aS Say am yt 
 . 250 
 
 xvii. 1—10 . . . 277 
 
 xvii. 15; 
 
 xviii. 2,19—26 31, 32 
 . 116. 269. 272 
 
 Xviil. 5 
 xviii. 17 
 xviii. 18 
 Xviil. 27 
 xix. 21 
 
 Xviil. 5 
 272. 274 
 
 ae eA ae a ce 
 ole a % 30 
 a ey ae) 
 
 37 
 
 xix. 21,22. . 68.72 
 
 xe 2S 
 +o ey Ee 
 pe opt ae 
 
 - - + 20—26 
 
 EX. 20) 1 sire 
 XXe BA; rei? Alce 
 xa. 17,18. 2 
 xxi. 19 
 
 xxi. 23—26. 
 EX. SD dis es 
 Sty Lisa ie 
 xxiv. 17—19 
 xxvi. 21 
 SEVIS ea 
 xxviii. 16. 20 
 xxvii. 30 . 
 
 Rom. xv. 24 . , 
 
 xv. 23, 24 . 
 xv. 25, 26 . 
 FV 1 GU osoie 
 MVE Asia Ate 
 <Vhe Oils he 
 xvi, 21—23 
 xvi. 23 . 
 
 ° on Fee 45 rl Cor. as LL: Vv. 1 
 
 ree ee rte! 
 ce 2 
 
 i. 12; iii. 6 
 
 ° ° 296 
 
 . 80. 171 
 . « 148 
 se LEZ 
 
 oat 
 256, 257 
 - « 258 
 » + 228 
 - » 247 
 
 - 19. 26 
 
388 
 
 1 Cor. 
 
 2 Cor. 
 
 INDEX TO PASSAGES. 
 
 PAGE 
 i, 1417... aw 81 
 Git AGS be S 77 
 IY. 18 os eee oe OU 
 iv. 17—19 .68—71 
 v.1—5. .. 95 
 WTO te 88 
 ax; 20> 47 79 
 xiii: 1-3); . 874 
 KVADS os Viele sake BOO 
 SVL eee SOD 
 xvi.1—4. . 22 
 SV iso) fret oes Meee OL. 
 xvi. 5, 6 ote ehle 
 ZVEGo1O+ OGL G7 
 xvi 10, LE i 71 84 
 i. 5—10 < 108 
 15,15 3°..9 2% 3407. 415 
 i. 19 ERA 
 ii. 6—8 168, 169 
 yh ines Wa Bs Bi . 118 
 ii. 12; viii. 4; ix. 2 
 92, 93 
 
 li, 14; ti. 1.12. 
 216, 217 
 4c 
 . 247 
 96 
 23 
 
 iL 
 eee 
 vii. 7—9 
 viii. 1—4; ix. 2. 
 
 els 
 ix, 2—7 ?. 
 x. 14—16. 
 xr. Soo. 
 
 Si. 9. ees 
 xi. 24, 25 . 
 xi. 32, 33 . 
 
 99 
 
 97 
 . 136 
 . 240 
 - 116 
 W121 
 AUACGD 
 
 PAGE 
 2 Cor. xii. 1—9 . . . 160 
 xiii. 133 Oo yeaeee aoe 
 Gal.i. 14; ii. 138. 148. 153 
 in18 3 (eae ra yg 
 1,19; ii; 9012 eee 
 SR EDP Se se Ts ig 
 ii, 11—14 . . 185 
 iii, 23; iv. 5 . 170 
 iv. 11—16 . 159 
 Vv. ee - 165 
 vi. ‘1 ee . 168 
 v1. 1s wa73 
 Hph.i. 15. . 223 
 iv. 8—11; v. 12—15 
 218, 219 
 vi. 20 . 228 
 vy. 21, 22 . 189 
 Phil. i.1; di. .19 . 242 
 1.45 
 ii.. 25—80 | . 232 
 iv. 10O—18 
 i, 12—14. e717. 
 23—26 . 245 
 1,204, . 246 
 1.°20's 4112.4 re 240 
 li. 23,24 . 308—336 
 ii. 27 287 
 iv. 15,16 . 238. 285 
 Col.i. 3.15; ii. 1 222, 223 
 i, 24 1) #268 
 iv. 3 230, 248 
 iv.7—9 . . . 8386 
 iv. 9. 17~. ~. 52627268 
 iv. 10. . 257. 336 
 iv. 14-. +.°%, . 261 
 iv.16:. «. «© . 225 
 
2 Thess. 
 
 INDEX TO PASSAGES. 
 
 PAGE 
 eR NOSB I ALi). hey tee +269 
 i. 9 . 279 
 Tae eet s/<, 2OD 
 1i.9,10. 276, 277 
 li. 14 . 274 
 ii. 17,18 . 270 
 Bele gees: Se 
 lii. 4. . 269 
 iv. 15; v. 4 
 265. 288 
 v. 27 . 267 
 Tralee . 289 
 ii. 3—8. . 282 
 o8,9. . . 285 
 iii. 10 . 801 
 1 Tim. i. 3; iii. 14, 15; iv.13 
 293. 327 
 i. 12—16. . 805 
 
 389 
 
 PAGE 
 TPim. i. 8 42° <7, 48 302 
 TVelZ i 86817 
 
 2 Tim. 
 
 Titus. 12°. 
 Ta a ee 
 RYE ol ote eens 
 
 vy. 9—11 . 299, 300 
 
 Vi Sar aes . 803 
 te ne oe . 815 
 ep ee RAY, 
 iii. 10,11 318. 323 
 Wis 4 ee ote 
 iv.6—ll. . . 310 
 
 iv. 20 87. 287.310 
 . 324 
 . 332 
 . 263 
 5.19. . 389, 340 
 GIG gmoney eae 
 10—12. 22. . 335 
 22. . 298 
 Oats) a ter begas 
 
a » 
 
 ae 9 
 Ree RES 
 
 id “+ Pa 
 cays ey ae a¥ \ 
 = 7 
 
APPENDIX I. 
 
 COINCIDENCES CONNECTED WITH 
 GEOGRAPHY. 
 
 An interesting and very useful book might be 
 written on the Geographical Evidences of Chris- 
 tianity. So far at least as confidence in the 
 Bible is concerned, much corroborative testi- 
 mony might be obtained from this source. The 
 Scripture, not being a collection of doctrinal 
 statements, moral precepts, and devotional 
 poetry, but consisting largely of History and 
 Biography, abounds in the most varied allusions 
 to places. If its books were forgeries, this fact 
 would almost infallibly appear in several in- 
 stances on the geographical test being applied 
 -tothem. ‘The application of this test, however, 
 brings their trustworthiness to view ina re- 
 markable manner. This is true, for example, of 
 the Book of Joshua in the Old Testament and 
 of the Gospels in the New. But it is evident 
 that we obtain the largest scope for this kind of 
 
3892 APPENDIX I. 
 
 experiment in that comparison of the Epistles 
 of St. Paul with the Acts of the Apostles 
 which Paley has selected as the subject-matter 
 of this work. 
 
 St. Paul was a missionary, and a very dis- 
 cursive missionary. Hence in both the history 
 of his life and his own letters there must be 
 frequent allusions to places. Geography must 
 be essentially combined alike with the narrative 
 and with his correspondence. Hence our first 
 inquiry is whether in these two distinct sources 
 of information, taken separately, the geographi- 
 cal references are accurate. But a further point, 
 and the main point, relates to the emdependence 
 of these references. There might be geographi- 
 cal accuracy in the Epistles because they were 
 composed2on suggestions drawn from the His- 
 tory, or vice versé. We must, therefore, observe 
 very carefully whether coincidences of this kind, 
 while unquestionable in fact, are also unde- 
 signed. 
 
 Now as to mere accuracy, independently of 
 comparison, great confidence is inspired by what 
 we observe both in the Acts and in the Epistles. 
 Illustrations may be given as they occur to the 
 memory, without any precise regard to order; 
 and the reader will at once recognize their force. 
 St. Paul, in going to Macedonia, lands at 
 
 e 
 
GEOGRAPHICAL COINCIDENCES. 393 
 
 Neapolis, which was practically the harbour of 
 Philippi (Acts xvi. 11, 12). In going from 
 Philippi to Thessalonica he travels through 
 Amphipolis and Apollonia, which lay on the 
 road, and in this order, between the two places 
 (Acts xvi. 40; xvii. 1). The relations which, 
 as interwoven in these documents, we find sub- 
 sisting among different parts of the coast of the 
 fEgean Sea, are the true relations. Writing 
 from Ephesus to Corinth, when he is preparing 
 to visit the latter city, he says, “I do pass 
 through Macedonia” (1 Cor. xvi. 5), implying 
 that this was not the direct and most obvious 
 route. The meaning which he gives to the 
 word “ Asia” is precisely in accordance with 
 the political meaning which this term had at 
 that time. (Paley illustrates the matter very 
 happily by saying that “Asia” had the same 
 general relation to the whole peninsula which 
 we call Asia Minor that Portugal has to the 
 Spanish Peninsula.’) Just so the writer of the 
 Acts of the Apostles (xxv. 27) uses the term 
 “ Adria” in the sense which it bore at that 
 period, denoting the sea that lay to the south 
 of the Adriatic Gulf. The best collection of 
 examples of the geographical accuracy in the 
 Book of Acts would be obtained from a minute 
 1 See p. 66. 
 
394 APPENDIX I. 
 
 examination of the whole account of St. Paul’s 
 Shipwreck and Voyage to Rome. But these in- 
 stances are enough under this general head of 
 accuracy in these several documents. It need 
 only be added that they all find their place quite 
 naturally, and without any symptom of con- 
 trivance, in the texture alike of the narrative 
 and the letters. 
 
 When we enter upon the ‘comparison of the 
 narrative and the letters, with the thought of 
 Geography in our mind, we are brought to new 
 ground, and the main ground of Paley’s general 
 argument. He touches this particular subject 
 slightly in several places; and, though at the 
 risk of some repetition, it may be useful, for 
 the sake of seeing this point clearly, to bring 
 the instances together into one view. 
 
 Writing with deep feeling to Timothy, St. Paul 
 appeals to the memory of this dear friend and 
 companion regarding certain persecutions and 
 sufferings that had befallen him “ at Antioch, at 
 Iconium, at Lystra” (2 Tim. 11. 11).’ The places 
 are enumerated in the geographical order in 
 which they occur on the map, and in which 
 these afflictions, as. recorded in the Acts, came 
 upon.the Apostle (Acts xiii., xiv.).; Moreover, at 
 Derbe, which was in the immediate neighbour- 
 
 2 See p. 318. 
 
GEOGRAPHICAL COINCIDENCES. 395 
 
 hood of Lystra, and which is named in the 
 narrative, he was not persecuted at all; and 
 Derbe is not named in the letter. As to Timo- 
 thy’s intimate knowledge of these events, he 
 lived in that immediate neighbourhood, and 
 was taken from thence by St. Paul as his com- 
 panion on his next journey (Acts xvi. 1—3). 
 Yet he is not mentioned in the account of the 
 persecutions. If we put these things together, 
 we see that the passage in the letter is perfectly 
 natural and artless, and yet in the highest 
 degree confirmatory of the truth of this part of 
 the history. 
 
 Another illustration is supplied by the inci- 
 dental mention of Cenchrea in the Epistle to the 
 Romans (Rom. xvi. 1). This place was the 
 Eastern harbour of Corinth, and practically one 
 of its suburbs. Its name occurs once in the 
 Acts, and once in the Epistles; and in each case 
 in its true connexion with Corinth, but without 
 any ground for a possible suspicion that one 
 passage can have suggested the other. St. 
 Paul concluded a vow there on leaving Corinth, 
 near the close of his Second Missionary Journey 
 (Acts xviii. 18). He names Pheebe as a dea- 
 coness of the Church in this suburb, when, at 
 Corinth again during his Third Missionary Jour- 
 
 3 See p. 39. 
 
396 APPENDIX I. 
 
 ney, he tells the Romans that she is about to 
 sail for Italy. 
 
 The manner in which 7Zroas is mentioned in 
 the second Epistle to the Corinthians (chap. 11. 
 v. 12) is well worthy of note. Not only does this 
 harbour appear in this Epistle, just as in the Acts 
 of the Apostles (xvi. 11; xx. 5, 6), in its nght 
 character of a convenient starting-place and 
 landing-place for travellers between the province 
 of Asia and the province of Macedonia; but there 
 is a peculiar circumstance which sets aside all 
 suspicion that the mention of this place can 
 have been introduced from the history into the 
 Epistle, or from the Epistle into the history. 
 St. Paul names the place because he waited 
 there for his friend Titus, who is very prominent 
 in the Epistle. Now Titus is not mentioned 
 at all in the history. It is not conceivable that 
 this friend should not have been named in the 
 Acts, if a passage of the Apostle’s correspondence, 
 so closely connected with him, led to the inser- 
 tion there of correct topographical notices of 
 Troas. On the other hand, it is equally incon- 
 ceivable that what we read concerning Troas in 
 the Acts should, in a forged letter, have led to 
 an ingenious interweaving of this topographical 
 accuracy into an imaginary story concerning 
 a person unknown to the narrative. 
 
GEOGRAPHICAL COINCIDENCES, 397 
 
 Paley is very acute in pointing out that 
 when the Apostle wrote to the Corinthians he 
 had come, in his missionary progress, “ as far 
 as unto them” (2 Cor. x. 14). This statement 
 exactly fitted the facts of his recorded journeys. 
 When he wrote this he had reached Corinth, 
 but had travelled no further. If at this date 
 he had used this language to the Thessalonians 
 it would not have been correct, for he had 
 travelled beyond them ; if he had used it to the 
 Romans, it would not have been correct, for he 
 had not reached them at all. Yet who will say 
 that the information derived from the Acts of 
 the Apostles was used here to colour a sentence 
 in an imaginary letter ? 
 
 A similar remark may be made concerning 
 our author’s ingenious use of St. Paul’s refe- 
 rence to Ilyricum in another place (Rom. xv. 
 19). Writing to Rome from Corinth, he says 
 that “round about from Jerusalem” he had 
 preached the Gospel “ wnto Ldlyricum.” Taking 
 Jerusalem as his centre, he indicates that part 
 of the circumference reached by him, in the 
 course of his missionary travels, which was 
 nearest to Rome. This statement is in exact, 
 but evidently undesigned, correspondence with 
 the Acts, which show the Apostle travel- 
 ling up to the immediate neighbourhood of 
 
398 APPENDIX I. 
 
 Illyricum, and perhaps to some point within 
 this district, while yet Illyricum itself is never 
 named in the Acts; and when he had reached 
 this circumference, and has not gone beyond it 
 in the Romeward direction, he writes this letter 
 to the Romans. Once more we ask two ques- 
 tions. If this passage in an authentic Epistle 
 gave the inspiration to the description of an 
 imaginary journey, why was Illyricum not 
 mentioned, to make the coincidence exact? If 
 an authentic description of a real journey sup- 
 plied materials for an imaginary letter, why 
 does not the forger retain the phraseology 
 which speaks of “ Macedonia” and. ‘ those 
 parts,” but without naming TIllyricum, on 
 which they bordered ? 
 
 One more example must be given, which is 
 of the greater value, because it connects, by a 
 link of curious geographical accuracy, with the 
 Acts of the Apostles that Epistle to the Gala- 
 tians which is somewhat scanty in its notices 
 of persons and places. St. Paul says that after 
 his sojourn in Arabia,* soon after his conver- 
 
 4 See note above (p. 145) on the strong feeling concern- 
 ing ‘‘ Arabia” which was evidently on St. Paul’s mind 
 when he wrote this Epistle. The district which he 
 describes by this term was probably in the vicinity of 
 
 Damascus: thus the naming of it may be fairly classed 
 among geographical coincidences. 
 
GEOGRAPHICAL COINCIDENCES. 399 
 
 ——$$<—=— 
 
 sion, he “returned unto Damascus” (i, 17). 
 This implies that the neighbourhood of Damascus 
 had been the scene of his conversion; but he 
 does not say so. What language could be more 
 natural, if’ we suppose that the letter was truly 
 written by him? Damascus was indelibly im- 
 pressed on his memory, as we see from his own 
 two accounts of his conversion.” Yet what 
 more improbable than that an inventor should 
 have interwoven into such a context this in- 
 direct and delicate allusion, instead of making 
 more prominent a fact which he desired to im- 
 press upon the credulous reader ? 
 
 All these instances are given, with more or 
 less distinctness, by Paley: but he has not 
 made the most of them ;° and they are presented 
 here on a method somewhat different from his. 
 Hence it is useful to exhibit them in one view. 
 No lengthened commentary is added. They 
 speak for themselves. 
 
 5 See AppENDIX II. 
 
 6 Two instances of geographical inaccuracy in Paley’s 
 Hore Pauline are pointed out in the notes. One is merely 
 a curious oversight, which does not in the least degree 
 vitiate his argument. See pp. 74 and 86, The other relates 
 to the popular use of the phrase “ Syria and Cilicia,’’ which, 
 so far from causing any difficulty in regard to one of St. 
 Paul’s journeys, is really an undesigned coincidence of 
 
 considerable value between Gal. i. 21, and Acts xy. 41. 
 Seé above, pp. 151, 152. 
 
400 APPENDIX II. 
 
 APPENDIX II. 
 
 THE THREE ACCOUNTS OF ST. PAUL’S 
 CONVERSION. 
 
 Tis Appendix is added, not for the purpose of 
 giving an elaborate reconciliation of apparent 
 discrepancies, but for a different reason. These 
 apparent discrepancies are a very small matter ; 
 and it is to be observed that they occur within 
 the limits of the same document, and for this 
 very reason furnish a testimony to the artless 
 simplicity with which it is written. If we were 
 occupied with this question, it might be worth 
 while to say that the companions of St. Paul 
 on the way to Damascus heard a vague and indis- 
 tinct sound, but did not distinguish the words,’ 
 and that they first fell to the ground and then 
 rose. If this were not satisfactory, we might 
 say that the uncertainties which appear on a 
 comparison of the narratives, are a reflection of 
 the vague terror and confusion of the moment. 
 The point of essential importance is that to the 
 intelligence and heart of St. Paul there was an 
 
 7 Acts ix. 7; xxii. 9. 
 § Acts ix. 7; xxvi. 14. 
 
ACCOUNTS OF CONVERSION. 401 
 
 articulate speaking, the effect of which resulted 
 in making him a Christian and an Apostle. 
 
 The things to which the reader’s attention is 
 here directed are these—that on the two occa- 
 sions, when St. Paul himself gave an account of 
 his conversion, he was true to his own character, 
 and true to the circumstances of the moment. 
 If these two thing's can be established, without 
 at the same time any suspicion of artifice being 
 excited, the trustworthiness of the Biblical history 
 of this Apostle receives some appreciable support. 
 
 The first account which he gives of this great 
 event in his life is to an angry mob in the Temple 
 Court, to whom he is speaking from the top of 
 the steps which led up from thence to the Tower 
 of Antonia:” the second is in the audience cham- 
 ber at Czsarea, before Festus, with Agrippa and 
 Bernice seated among the courtiers and officers.’ 
 Thus both accounts were given under apologetic 
 conditions. Both, in fact, are called “ defences.” ” 
 To this circumstance we are indebted for some 
 information upon the subject which, otherwise, 
 we should not possess. It was quite to St. 
 Paul’s purpose, when pleading apologetically, to 
 bring forward certain facts which St. Luke did 
 not care to note in his direct narrative. Thus 
 
 9 Acts xxii. 1—21. 1 Acts xxvi. 2—29. 
 2 Acts xxii. 1; xxvi. 2. 
 pd 
 
4.02 APPENDIX II. 
 
 it was very important, on both occasions, for 
 St. Paul to point out the emphatic nature of the 
 miracle. Hence he says that the light which 
 appeared to him was “a great light:” he says 
 that it was “about noon’’—“at mid-day”— 
 and that it exceeded the brightness even of the 
 sun at that time. He also adds that he “ could 
 not see because of the giory of that lhght,’’ 
 whereas St. Luke simply names the fact of his 
 blindness.’ The omissions too in the accounts 
 given by St. Paul himself are equally observable. 
 It has been remarked that St. Luke, as is natural 
 to a physician, elsewhere observes symptoms.‘ 
 He mentions the “ falling, as it were, of scales ”’ 
 from the Apostle’s eyes; but it would have been 
 beside the mark for St. Paul to have referred to 
 this in either speech. Nor would it have been 
 to his purpose to have introduced the exact topo- 
 graphical details connected with his conversion— 
 “the house of Judas” and the “ Straight Street,” 
 —or to have mentioned the fact that he spent 
 “three days” without food, the naming of which 
 thing's is quite natural to the direct historian.’ 
 And now—to take each speech separately—we 
 
 3 Compare Acts xxii. 6, 11, with xxvi. 13. 
 
 4 See AppEenDIx IY. on Coincidences connected with St. 
 Luke. 
 
 > See Acts ix. 911. 
 
ACCOUNTS OF CONVERSION. 4,03 
 
 must observe that at Jerusalem the speaker 
 has only a few moments to use, and is face 
 to face with an infuriated Jewish mob. His 
 language is thoroughly consistent both with his 
 own character and with the occasion, in its words, 
 its choice of topics, and its omissions. He speaks 
 in Hebrew: he uses the most conciliatory pre- 
 amble, naming his hearers “brethren and fa- 
 thers :” he tells them that he was nurtured in 
 that selfsame sacred city, Jerusalem, where he 
 is speaking: he tells them that he was brought 
 up at the feet of that famous and honoured 
 teacher, Gamaliel (a fact of which we should 
 otherwise have known nothing): he terms the 
 Law “ the Law of the Fathers:” when he says 
 that he was formerly zealous in the cause, he 
 adds, “as ye all are this day:” he says, not 
 simply as St. Luke does, that he asked for letters 
 to Damascus, but that he obtained them, and 
 that (here adding to St. Luke) “ from the whole 
 body of the elders,” some of whom were probably 
 present. When he speaks of the persecuting 
 Jews at Damascus, he calls them “ brethren ;” 
 and of Ananias he does not say that he is a 
 Christian brother or a Christian disciple, but 
 that he is “a man pious according to the Jewish 
 Law,” and having the favourable testimony of 
 “all the Jews at Damascus ;” and in the mouth 
 pd 2 
 
4.04 APPENDIX II. 
 
 of Ananias he puts the words, “ The God of our 
 Fathers hath chosen thee.’ It is to be observed 
 that, while he lays the utmost stress on his 
 own vision in the Jewish Temple, which was a 
 fact likely to arrest their attention,® he says 
 nothing of the vision which Ananias saw. 
 For two reasons this would have been im- 
 politic. He could not have recounted it with- 
 out using expressions to irritate the Jewish 
 mob ;’ and it was no part of 4zs own experience, 
 and therefore not likely to be persuasive. On 
 the other hand there is a true touch of nature in 
 the manner of describing the visit of Ananias. 
 He “stood over” St. Paul, who, when he re- 
 ceived his sight, “looked up” into his face. 
 Under this head of vivid reminiscences may be 
 classed the instinctive naming of “ Damascus” 
 four times in this speech. There is in thisa 
 close resemblance to a passage, elsewhere noted, 
 in the Epistle to the Galatians.® 
 
 On the other occasion the Apostle was speak- 
 ing under less constraint and with no fear of a 
 violent interruption. Hence he can take a wider 
 scope and dwell more largely on doctrine; and 
 this he does admirably. A Creed or a Catechism 
 might be constructed from this speech at Cxsa- 
 
 6 Acts xxii. 17. 7 See Acts ix. 138. 
 § See APPENDIX I., and compare p. 149. 
 
ACCOUNTS OF CONVERSION. 4.05 
 
 rea. He also appeals strongly to personal con- 
 science. It is his best policy to take distinctively 
 Christian ground. He says at the outset that 
 “ Jews” are his accusers; and he adds, further 
 on, “for which hope’s sake I am accused by 
 Jews.” ° Not that he disowns his old heredi- 
 tary Hebrew feeling, and the fact that he was 
 a Pharisee—on the contrary he dwells emphati- 
 cally on both, and is quite consistent with the 
 language which he uses on these subjects in his 
 Epistles.’ But it is his policy here not to iden- 
 tify himself with the unconverted Jews, but to 
 separate himself from them. On the other hand 
 he does identify himself with the Christians at 
 Damascus, calling them “ Saints.’ The omis- 
 sions too which we observe, on comparing this 
 speech with the other, are very significant, and 
 thoroughly in accord with the contrast of the 
 two occasions. At Cesarea he does not mention 
 Ananias at all, on whom he had laid so much 
 stress at Jerusalem—nor does he say anything 
 of his own vision in the Temple. The authority 
 of an obscure Jew of Damascus could have had 
 no weight with Agrippa; and the mention of a 
 vision might have provoked the ridicule of Fes- 
 
 9 Acts xxvi. 2, 7; compare 4, 5, and 21. 
 
 1 Compare his reference to the twelve tribes (Acts xxvi. 
 7) with the naming of his own tribe (Rom. xi. 1; Phil. iii. 5 ; 
 and Acts xiii. 21). 
 
406 APPENDIX IIT. 
 
 tus. We ought to add that he briefly recounts 
 here his labours in Damascus, in Jerusalem, 
 through Judza, and in the heathen world be- 
 yond.? His mission is to the Jew and the 
 Gentile, to Agrippa and to Festus. 
 
 There is an inner harmony between these two 
 speeches and the occasions to which they severally 
 belong, as well as the character of the man who 
 spoke them, which impresses us very forcibly 
 when we study them with this thought in the 
 mind. ‘Yet it is quite certain that the narrative 
 of the Acts was not ingeniously worked up, so as 
 to produce this impression : otherwise those appa- 
 rent discrepancies, which were referred to above, 
 would not have been palpable to every reader. 
 
 APPENDIX III. 
 
 THE UNITY OF ST. PAUL’S 
 CHARACTER. 
 
 THERE is a line of argument, to be quite cor- 
 
 rectly classed under the head of undesigned coin- 
 
 cidences, which Paley has just touched—as, for 
 
 instance, when (p. 59) he points out “ the ear- 
 
 nestness and personality” thrown by St. Paul 
 2 Acts xxvi. 20. 
 
ST. PAUL’S CHARACTER. 407 
 into the appeal which he addresses to Hebrew 
 Christians in the Epistle to the Romans; or 
 (p. 342), the Apostle’s habit of referring to his 
 own sufferings when he is about to say some- 
 thing severe. But this course of reasoning may 
 be carried much further, and it possesses pecu- 
 liar force. 
 
 As to the force of this kind of argument, it is 
 to be observed that it is very difficult to indicate 
 shades of character, indirectly and incidentally, in 
 passages of an imaginary correspondence or an 
 imaginary biography. Even to multiply inci- 
 dents, with various references to persons and 
 places, is hazardous in such a case, and not easy, 
 without betraying the artifice. But to scatter 
 phases of feeling over such a forgery, so as to 
 make it fit the reality, is more hazardous still. 
 This is not the case of the novelist, who imagines 
 a character, and then makes the dialogues and 
 the adventures bring out consistently to view 
 that which he has imagined. In the instance 
 before us there is a real St. Paul, and, accepting 
 the history, it. would be no easy matter to 
 exhibit him in letters full of detail, or, accept- 
 ing the letters, to exhibit him in the history, 
 with his proper characteristics—except in those 
 broad features, which, on such a supposition, 
 - would be reproduced as a matter of course. 
 
408 APPENDIX III. 
 
 To illustrate what I mean, I will take just 
 four characteristic features of the Apostle, with 
 the design of showing how the same man appears 
 both in the letters and in the narrative, and 
 yet how incidentally, and therefore undesignedly. 
 
 Alike in St. Luke’s account of the Third 
 Missionary Journey and in a letter written by 
 the Apostle at that time, there comes to view a 
 remarkable depression of mind. It is not on 
 the fact of this depression that stress is here 
 laid, but on the manner of its appearing, quite 
 casually and indirectly, in connexion with inci- 
 dents in the narrative and sentences of a per- 
 fectly natural kind in the letter, while yet no 
 suggestion can have been conveyed from the 
 one to the other. In writing the Epistle to the 
 Romans from Corinth, he manifestly looks for- 
 ward with great, apprehension to his approaching 
 visit to Jerusalem. He earnestly requests the 
 Roman Christians to “strive with him in their 
 prayers, that he may be delivered from them 
 that do not believe in Judza.”* When he has 
 advanced some distance on his journey, he 
 makes his address at Miletus to the Ephesian 
 Elders. No one can fail to observe the melan- 
 choly tone that pervades that address. St. Paul 
 
 3 Rom. xv. 31. 
 
ST. PAUL’S CHARACTER. 4.09 
 
 says he “knows” he shall see these his friends 
 “no more:” he speaks to them of impending 
 calamities: he tells them that he is going “ bound 
 in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the 
 things that shall befall him there, save that 
 the Holy Spirit witnesseth in every city, say- 
 ing that bonds and afflictions await him.” * 
 The same melancholy foreboding is again con- 
 spicuous at subsequent points of the journey. 
 On arriving at Tyre the disciples earnestly 
 endeavour to persuade him not to endanger 
 himself by going to Jerusalem. The “ kneeling 
 down to pray ” on the sea-shore both at Tyre and 
 Miletus binds tegether these two occasions in a 
 touching manner by a common sentiment.’ At 
 Cesarea, a later stage of his journey, he receives 
 distinctly prophetic intimations from Agabus of 
 his approaching imprisonment, and he is earnestly 
 besought by those around him not to proceed ; 
 and his answer is this: ‘ What mean ye to 
 weep and to break mine heart ? for I am ready 
 not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem 
 for the name of the Lord Jesus.” ° Paley puts 
 some of these passages together with the acute 
 remark, that it would be a strange expedient in 
 a forger to introduce into an imaginary letter 
 
 4 Acts xx. 22, 23. 5 Acts xx. 36; xxi. 5. 
 6 Acts xxi. 13. . 
 
410 APPENDIX III. 
 
 expectations and prayers which were zo¢ fulfilled, 
 and which, on the hypothesis, the forger hnew 
 were not fulfilled.’ Here these circumstances 
 are put together to illustrate a feature of 
 character in St. Paul, which comes to view on 
 a comparison of the Epistle to the Romans 
 with the Acts of the Apostles, and this without 
 any reasonable suspicion of contrivance. 
 
 - It might be argued that this despondency of 
 St. Paul, at this particular time of his life, was 
 a transient state of mind, and not necessarily an 
 indication of real character. If this were con- 
 ceded, the argument from the undesigned con- 
 sistency of the documents would still remain. 
 But it may be urged with truth that the same 
 feature of character in the Apostle Paul is ap- 
 parent elsewhere.* I turn, however, to three 
 other particulars, against which this objection 
 "1s obviously not valid, and which can be eluci- 
 dated alike from the Acts and the Epistles. 
 
 Tact and persuasiveness are eminently cha- 
 racteristic of this Apostle. A striking instance 
 of this is given by the author of the Hore 
 Pauline in his concluding remarks on the 
 
 7 See p. 50. 
 
 8 Especially in the second Epistle to the Corinthians, 
 and the Epistle to the Galatians, which belong to an earlier 
 part of the same missionary journey. See APPENDIX Y. 
 
ST. PAUL’S CHARACTER. 41]. 
 
 Epistle to the Romans. Having to say what 
 was unpalatable to the Jews, who were numerous 
 among the converts at Rome, he qualified by 
 softening clauses whatever might seem deroga- 
 tory to their institutions, and was careful to ex- 
 hibit his own intense Jewish feeling.’ But it 
 might have been added that precisely the same 
 persuasiveness comes to view at the end of 
 the Acts of the Apostles. He has to tell the 
 Jews who met him what they certainly will 
 not like to hear, and is, in fact, a sufferer at the 
 moment because of Jewish persecution; but in 
 the course of his address he throws in this sin- 
 cularly generous and skilful clause: “ not that 
 I have ought to accuse my nation of.’* Can 
 we doubt that it is the same man here speaking 
 to the Jewish Christians, who wrote to them 
 from Corinth some few years before? And can 
 any one imagine that the coincidence has been 
 ingeniously contrived? Another example, which 
 spreads into many particulars, has been given in 
 another part of this Appendix, though not pre- 
 cisely under this point of view, by comparing 
 St. Paul’s two accounts of his own conversion. 
 Under the same head we may class that habit 
 of quoting the Greek poets, which we trace 
 
 9 See p. 59. 1 Acts xxviii. 19, 
 
412 APPENDIX III. 
 
 alike in the Epistles and in the Acts.2 When 
 St. Paul writes to the Corinthians, he takes 
 care to praise before he blames.* When he 
 addresses the Athenians, he begins by giving 
 them credit for their extreme interest in their 
 religion, such as it was.* When he wishes to 
 have the believers in a resurrection on his side, 
 he suddenly exclaims before the court, “I am 
 a Pharisee and the son of a Pharisee,” and thus 
 in a moment separates off the Sadducees from 
 the rest.° When all the passengers on the ship 
 are in danger of being drowned through the 
 selfishness of the sailors, he secures the safety of 
 all by speaking to his friends the centurion and 
 the soldiers, and appealing to their own instinct 
 of self-preservation.° These are illustrations in 
 his own character of his rule that we ought to 
 know how to address every man, having our 
 speech “seasoned with salt.”’ We see him 
 here, as he says of himself, becoming “ all things 
 to all men”—while yet ever (and this ought 
 to be carefully added) seeking “ to save some.” ® 
 
 Sympathy is another marked feature of St. 
 
 2 Acts xvii. 28; 1 Cor. xv. 33; Tit.i.12. See on the 
 
 Epistle to Titus, No. i. 3 See 1 Cor. i. 4, 10. 
 4 This is the true meaning of Acts xvii. 22. 
 § Acts xxii. 6. 6 Acts xxvii. 30—32. 
 
 7 Col. iv. 6. 8 1 Cor. ix. 22. 
 
ST. PAUL’S CHARACTER. 413 
 
 Paul’s character. This quality is perhaps best 
 shown in regard to small matters, and very 
 particularly when small matters are in close 
 contact with great. “ Use a little wine for 
 thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.” ° 
 To write this in the midst of injunctions on 
 lofty religious subjects would be natural to 
 some men, and not to others. It was evidently 
 natural to St. Paul. We observe precisely the 
 same feeling and the same combination in the 
 Epistle to the Philippians, when reference is 
 made to the health of Epaphroditus. ‘“ Indeed 
 he was sick, nigh unto death: but God had 
 mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me 
 also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow.” 
 And presently he adds, ‘ Receive him iu the 
 Lord with all gladness; and hold such in 
 reputation: because for the work of Christ he 
 was nigh unto death.” * Something of the same 
 kind is observed in the account of the ship- 
 wreck. During the height of the storm he 
 had said these noble words: ‘There stood by 
 me this night the angel of God, whose I am, 
 and whom I serve, saying, Fear not, Paul.... 
 lo! God hath given thee all them that sail with 
 thee:” and now, when immediate steps are 
 to be taken for getting safe to land, he says, 
 9 1 Tim. v. 23. 1 Phil, ii. 27, 29. 
 
414 APPENDIX III, 
 
 “This is the fourteenth day that ye have 
 tarried and continued fasting, having taken 
 nothing: wherefore I pray you to take some 
 meat, for this 1s for your health: for there shall 
 not a hair fall from the head of any of you.” ” 
 To take another instance, what a kindly human 
 sympathy he shows with the poor Lystrians, 
 when he tells them how God “ gave them rain 
 from .heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling their 
 hearts with food and gladness!’ * By no mark, 
 perhaps, is a sympathetic nature more surely 
 revealed than in an earnest craving for the 
 sympathy of others. This, too, is conspicuous 
 in St. Paul, and conspicuous everywhere. At 
 Troas, “he had no rest in his spirit, because he 
 found not Titus his brother.””* At Appii Forum 
 and the Three Taverns, when he saw the bre- 
 thren, “he thanked God, and took courage.””* The 
 former of these sentences is in an Epistle, the 
 latter in the Acts. He is constantly refer- 
 ring to his own sufferings. It was “‘ because of 
 sickness,” he tells the Galatians, that he stayed 
 among them at the first. He reminds the 
 Macedonians that they knew how he had been 
 “« shamefully treated” at Philippi.’ He reminds 
 2 Acts xxvii. 23, 33. 3 Acts xiv. 17. 
 
 4 2 Cor. ii. 13. 5 Acts xxviii. 15. 
 6 Gal. iv. 18; 1 Thess. ii. 2. 
 
ST. PAUL?S CHARACTER. 415 
 
 the Ephesian Elders, in the speech at Miletus, 
 how from the day when he came into “ Asia,”’ he 
 had been among them at all seasons, “ serving the 
 Lord with all humility of mind, and with many 
 tears.” The tone of this speech is in harmony 
 with that of the Epistles, in most of which, as 
 Paley has justly remarked in closing his obser- 
 vations on the Epistle to Philemon, are such 
 “pathetic effusions, drawn, for the most part, 
 from his own sufferings and situation.’’ 
 
 This same speech may introduce the fourth 
 selected characteristic of St. Paul, his strict and 
 scrupulous integrity. He appealed to the Ephesian 
 Elders to testify that he had coveted no man’s 
 silver or gold or apparel. ‘“‘ Yea, ye yourselves 
 know that these hands have ministered unto my 
 necessities, and to them that were with me: I 
 have showed you all things, how that, so 
 labouring, ye ought to support the weak.”* So, 
 in writing to the Christians of Corinth he thinks 
 it worth while to say, “I have defrauded no 
 man :”* and there also, as we know, he had 
 laboured with his own hands for his livelihood.’ 
 And similar is his appeal, as regards his own 
 practice, in writing to the Thessalonians. “ For 
 
 7 Acts xx. 18, 19. 8 Acts xx. 33—35. 
 9 2 Cor. vii. 2. 1 Acts xviii. 3. 
 
416 APPENDIX III. 
 
 yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: 
 for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among 
 you: neither did we eat any man’s bread for 
 nought; but wrought with labour and travail 
 night and day, that we might not be charge- 
 able to any of you.”? No doubt one great 
 motive for this course of conduct was that he 
 might make the Gospel more acceptable, by 
 being evidently disinterested. So he says him- 
 self.’ Still it is an observable fact that the 
 duty of strict honesty in money-matters occu- 
 pies a very large place in St. Paul’s ethical 
 teaching. ‘Owe no man anything, but to 
 love one another,” is one of his most emphatic 
 precepts, in writing to the Romans.* And his 
 own character strictly corresponds with the 
 rule which he inculeates, If there has been 
 any fraud in the case of Onesimus, the debt 
 must be paid. He will pay it himself. “If he 
 hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put 
 that on my account; I, Paul, give thee a 
 written promise with my own hand: I will 
 repay it.”° The most marked instance of this 
 fine honour in regard to pecuniary transactions 
 is to be found in his arrangements for the 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 8. 3 1 Thess. ii. 9. See pp. 286, 287. 
 4 Rom. xiii. 8. 5 Philem, 18, 19. 
 
ST. PAUI’7S CHARACTER. 417 
 
 transmission of the collection for the poor 
 Christians in Judea, in which he laboured with 
 so much diligence in Macedonia and Achaia. 
 He is determined “carefully to avoid this, that 
 no man should blame him in dealing with so 
 large a sum.”* He tells the Corinthians that 
 “whomsoever they shall provide, them will he 
 send with letters to take their charitable gift 
 to Jerusalem.”’ And he fortified both his 
 precept and practice, in reference to strict 
 honour and exactitude in money matters, by 
 quoting twice from the Book of Proverbs the 
 rule that we are to “ provide things honest, not 
 only in the sight of God, but of men.”* No 
 doubt this is a part of that general conscientious- 
 ness in all things, which he so strictly practised 
 and so urgently inculcated: but we obtain a 
 more definite impression of personal character, 
 if we restrict our view of this subject to the 
 narrow ground of honesty in monetary busi- 
 ness. 
 
 In Paley’s treatise on the Svidences of 
 Christianity, one of the best chapters is that in 
 which he points out the zdentity of the character of 
 Christ, as exhibited in St. John’s Gospel on the 
 
 6 2 Cor. viii. 20. ? 1 Cor. xvi. 3. See p. 99. 
 8 Prov. iii. 4. See Rom. xii. 17, and 1 Cor. viii. 21. 
 Ee 
 
418° APPENDIX IV. 
 
 one hand, and in the Synoptical Gospels on the 
 other, in such a manner as to strengthen our » 
 confidence in both classes of these documents. 
 The distance is infinite between our Blessed 
 Lord and the highest of His apostles, but the 
 mode of argumentation in the two cases is the 
 same.” 
 
 APPENDIX IV. 
 
 COINCIDENCES CONNECTED WITH 
 ST. LUKE. 
 
 Patey has remarked (p. 261) that the manner 
 in which St. Luke is spoken of in Col. iv. 10, 
 11, implies that he was a Gentile, and that, 
 incidentally, this is in harmony with what we 
 read in Acts i. 9. The Evangelist there says: — 
 that the field which was purchased with the 
 reward of the iniquity of Judas was “called in 
 their proper tongue Aceldama; that is to say, 
 The field of blood,’”? which accords with the in- 
 dications given in the Epistle to the Colossians 
 
 9 I have dealt with this argument more fully in “The 
 
 Hulsean Lectures for 1862,” recently published in a third 
 edition. 
 
ST. LUKE. i 419 
 
 that Luke was wot of the circumcision: and 
 Paley adds, that this coincidence is “ remote from 
 all possibility of design.” This criticism is 
 clearly just; and the argument might be car- 
 ried further by the help of other instances in 
 St. Luke’s Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles. 
 I suggest, however, that we should enter upon 
 different ground in search of coincidences con- 
 nected with St. Luke. 
 
 In this passage St. Paul refers to him as 
 being “a physician.” That this was St. Luke’s 
 profession was a widely-spread tradition in the 
 early Church. Weare not indeed bound te 
 accept such a tradition as a matter of course; 
 but it enhances our interest in the subject, and 
 it is confirmatory ofa Biblical fact, that in more 
 aspects than one we find in St. Luke’s writings 
 indications of the fact that he was a physician. 
 In the first place, he has a medical manner of 
 writing, which we do not trace in the other 
 Evangelists. He describes symptoms, as in the 
 accounts of the healing of the lame man at the 
 temple gate,’ and the coming of blindness upon 
 Elymas.” Again, his language in the descrip- 
 tion of the illness of Publius in Melita is tech- 
 nically exact. The same thing may be said of 
 
 1 Acts iii. 7, 8. 2 Acts xiii. 11. 
 $ Acts xxviii. 8. 
 Re 2 
 
4.20 APPENDIX IV. 
 
 his account of the illness and healing of Peter’s 
 wife’s mother in the Gospel history.’ It is St. 
 * Luke only who mentions the healing of Malchus 
 in Gethsemane:° he only who quotes that pro- 
 verb, “ Physician, heal thyself: ”° and none of 
 the other Evangelists speaks precisely as he does 
 of the “ virtue that went out of Christ.”’ Now 
 no forger could have picked out these indications 
 from the Acts, or from the Acts and this Gospel 
 together, and condensed them, to obtain credit for 
 an imaginary letter to the Colossians, into this 
 description which St. Paul gives of St. Luke; nor, 
 on the other hand, could a forger have taken this 
 description from the Epistle to the Colossians, 
 and diffused it, so to speak, over a number of 
 casual notices in a prolonged narrative. And 
 yet when this verse in the Epistle is placed in 
 comparison with these scattered indications, the 
 harmony thus perceived between the Acts and 
 the Gospel on the one hand, and the Epistle on 
 the other, produces a strong impression upon 
 the mind, and all the more, because the agree- 
 ment is natural and not strained. 
 
 But, further, St. Paul in writing to the Colos- 
 sians, does not simply refer to St. Luke’s pro- 
 fession, but speaks of him as “the Jelored 
 
 4 Luke iv. 38, 39, 5 Luke xxii. 51. 
 6 Luke iv. 23. 7 Luke vi. 19; viii. 46. 
 
ST. LUKE. 421 
 
 physician.” There is evidently a strong personal 
 feeling expressed in this phrase. It seems to 
 speak of gratitude for service received from him 
 in some season of illness. Why, indeed, should 
 he describe his friend as “a physician ” at all, 
 unless this had been the case? This brings us 
 to another circumstance connected with St. 
 Luke, which is used indeed by Paley (p. 124), 
 as an indirect testimony to the trustworthiness 
 of the Acts of the Apostles, but which also in- 
 volves testimony of a different and more subtle 
 kind. 
 
 It is noted that St. Luke’s presence with St. 
 Paul is made suddenly palpable by a change in 
 the pronoun at the moment when the first 
 Apostolic Missionaries went from Asia to 
 Kurope. ‘After they were come to Mysia, 
 they assayed to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit 
 suffered them not; and they, passing by Mysia, 
 eame to Troas.’” This is presently followed by 
 a sentence which shows that St. Luke had 
 joined the party. ‘“ After Paul had seen the 
 vision, immediately we endeavoured to go into 
 Macedonia ; assuredly gathering that the Lord 
 had called ws to preach the Gospel unto them.” 
 Now St. Paul, on his journey to Troas, had 
 travelled through Galatia ;* and in Galatia he 
 
 8 Acts xvi. 6. 
 
422 APPENDIX IV. 
 
 had been detained by severe illness. This we 
 are distinctly told in the Epistle to the Gala- 
 tians.? Is it not most natural to suppose that 
 the recovery of St. Paul from this illness had 
 some connexion with this meeting with St. 
 Luke? If this surmise is correct, we gain from 
 the consideration of this meeting something 
 more than the evidence supplied by the fact 
 that the narrative becomes more copious and 
 detailed, simultaneously with the companionship 
 of St. Luke. We discern something of that 
 other kind of evidence which is supplied by the 
 manifestation of feeling suitable to the occasion. 
 When we reflect upon the matter in this way, 
 we begin to see a world of meaning in St. 
 Luke’s reference, many years after, to “ the 
 beloved Physician ;”? and certainly it was not 
 designed by the writer of the Epistle to procure 
 eredit for a narrative, in which the medical 
 character of the author is not directly named 
 at all. 
 
 I am tempted, though with more hesitation, 
 to add a kindred observation regarding a cer- 
 tain state of feeling which seems to me con- 
 nected with the presence of St. Luke. After 
 the time of sickness in Galatia, and the time of 
 perplexity in Bithynia and Mysia, there is an 
 
 9 Gal. iv. 13. 
 
ST. LUKE. 423 
 
 impression of peculiar cheerfulness in the ac- 
 count of the voyage from Troas and the first 
 entrance of the Gospel into Europe.’ I believe 
 that any thoughtful reader, who has his atten- 
 tion called to this aspect of the matter, will 
 recognize the justice of this observation. I 
 ‘believe, too, 1t is no mere fancy which regards 
 -a certain element of cheerfulness and encourage- 
 ment as characteristic of St. Luke’s writings. 
 It is true that in the history given of St. Paul 
 there is no lack of indications of his consti- 
 tutional tendency to depression: and instances 
 .of this kind are noted elsewhere in this volume ;? 
 but the whole tone and tenor of the book has a 
 cheering and encouraging tendency, as may be 
 illustrated, for example, by the communications 
 made to the Apostle in the Castle at Jerusalem, 
 “* Be of good cheer, Paul; for as thou hast 
 testified of Me here, so must thou bear witness 
 also at Rome;” or on board the ship, in the 
 midst of the storm, when he was enabled to 
 exhort the crew to “ be of good cheer,” through 
 the confidence given to himself, “ Fear not, 
 Paul; lo! God hath given thee all them that 
 sail with thee.”* And to turn from the later to 
 “the former treatise” dedicated to Theophilus, 
 
 1 See Acts xvi. 11. 2 See p. 410. 
 3 Acts xxiii. 11; xxvii. 22—25. 
 
42.4, APPENDIX IV. 
 
 it is enough to point to the peculiar encourage- 
 ments given to prayer in this Gospel, the re- 
 markable profusion which it contains of words 
 expressive of joy and exultation,* and to the fact 
 that here only have we the three jubilant hymns 
 connected with the Nativity. We may well 
 reckon these characteristics of St. Luke’s writ- 
 ings among the “‘ wholesome medicines” which 
 we owe to him as a “ beloved physician.” 
 
 It is easy to become fanciful in pursuing this 
 line of thought; but, at all events, the view 
 here presented is consistent; and whatever re- 
 mains, after due abatements have been made, 
 is in favour of the general argument. It is 
 impossible that mere ingenuity, without truth, 
 could have given this complexion to St. Luke’s 
 writings, and, through them, to the life of St. 
 Paul. And if it were said that I have been 
 leaving our proper subject by introducing re- 
 marks respecting one of the Gospels, this would 
 hardly be a correct criticism: for St. Luke is 
 the biographer of St. Paul; and whatever illus- 
 trates consistency in the recorded or inferred 
 relations between these two characters of the 
 Bible is part of the argument with which we: 
 are concerned. 
 
 4 This point can be established by a careful examination 
 of a Greek Concordance. 
 
DATE OF GALATIANS. 425 
 
 APPENDIX V. 
 
 THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE TO THE 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 White no one of St. Paul’s letters more boldly 
 and more convincingly proclaims its authorship 
 than the Epistle to the Galatians, it does not so 
 easily as do some of the others lend itself to that 
 kind of verification which is obtained by follow- 
 ing the method of the Hore Pauline. In its 
 peculiarity of style and its intensity of personal 
 feeling, manifesting themselves by rapid transi- 
 tions from tenderness to indignation; in its 
 strong and clear statement of theological doc- 
 trine, and, not less, in its practical inculeation 
 of common duties, this letter declares that it 
 was written by St. Paul. Yet it contains com- 
 paratively few of those notices of persons, places, 
 and circumstances which enable us to establish 
 undesigned coincidences between it and the Acts 
 of the Apostles.’ We do not meet here such per- 
 sons as Timotheus, Apollos, or Aquila and Pris- 
 cilla ; such reference to districts through which the 
 
 5 Not that this Epistle is vague in its character, or that 
 
 it evades particulars. On the contrary, as regards certain 
 persons and certain circumstances, it is extremely definite. 
 
426 APPENDIX V. 
 
 Apostle was travelling; such allusions to events 
 that had taken place in cities where he had re- 
 sided, as enable us to fix, with great exactitude, 
 the time and place of writing the Epistles to the 
 Corinthians or the Romans. Something of this 
 difference may be due to the fact that, instead of 
 long residences in great cities, like Ephesus 
 and Corinth, St. Paul seems to have visited 
 scattered towns in Galatia. While we read of 
 the Church of Ephesus or the Church of Corinth, 
 we read of the Churches of Galatia. Moreover, 
 St. Paul is not here writing in anticipation of a 
 personal visit, such as he contemplated when 
 writing to Corinth or Rome. Wemust remem- 
 ber too that the Epistle to the Galatians is a 
 very short document, and that it would be quite 
 unreasonable to expect that all St. Paul’s letters, 
 assuming them to be genuine, are to give equal 
 facilities to the same verifying treatment. But 
 whatever we may say of these things, there 
 is another kind of evidence, another mode of 
 what may truly be termed undesigned coinci- 
 dence, which does enable us to fix the date of 
 the writing of this Epistle with considerable 
 confidence. 
 
 If we observe what was passing in St, Paul’s 
 mind at the time of writing this letter, in refe- 
 rence to the controversies in which he was en- 
 
DATE OF GALATIANS. 427 
 
 gaged and the personal sufferings which he was 
 called to endure; if also we take a comparative 
 view of forms of expression and of methods of 
 reasoning, we come to the conclusion that this 
 letter is one of that important and forcible group 
 of Epistles which were written during the Third 
 Missionary Journey. Later than the first Epistle 
 to the Corinthians, which was written at Ephesus, 
 at the time corresponding to the nineteenth 
 chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, and earlier 
 than the Epistle to the Romans, which was writ- 
 ten in Achaia at the time corresponding to the 
 twentieth chapter, it is probably nearly contem- 
 poraneous with the second Epistle to the Corin- 
 thians, which was written from Macedonia. The 
 place of writing may have been either Mace- 
 donia or Achaia. The time was the year 57. 
 The argument, briefly sketched, is of this 
 kind :—There are perceptible affinities between 
 the Epistle before us and the first to the Corin- 
 thians. This fact may be illustrated by the 
 quotation in both of the proverb, “ A little leaven 
 leaveneth the whole lump.”° When we bring 
 the second Epistle to the Corinthians into com- 
 parison, the resemblance becomes much closer. 
 We see it on the broad scale in abruptness of 
 
 6 See 1 Cor. v. 6; Gal. v. 9. 
 
428 - APPENDIX V. 
 
 style and the expression of intense feeling. Paley 
 has put so side by side the passage in one of these 
 Epistles which refers to “ the thorn in the flesh,” 
 and the passage in the other which refers to the 
 “temptation in the flesh,”’ as to show that they 
 refer to the same thing, while yet the contexts 
 in the two instances display perfect indepen- 
 dence, ‘This tends to prove that St. Paul wrote 
 both Epistles, and that neither of them gave an 
 intentional suggestion to the other.’ I would 
 use the coincidence for another purpose, namely, 
 to furnish an indication that the two letters were 
 written about the same time. I would make the 
 same use of the mention in both Epistles of Titus, 
 who seems to have been much in St. Paul’s mind 
 at this time.* Titus is not named at all in the 
 Acts of the Apostles. This proves independence, 
 while yet I have shown in notes above that no 
 confusion is introduced into the narrative by what 
 is said in the letters concerning him.’ ‘To this 
 we may add the “agreement in a somewhat 
 peculiar rule of Christian conduct” which we 
 trace in Gal. vi. 1 and 2 Cor. 11. 6—8. Paley says, 
 with justice, “ I have little doubt but that it was 
 the same mind which dictated these two pas- 
 sages.” I would add that it is highly probable 
 
 7 See on the Epistle to the Galatians, No. iii. 
 8 2 Cor. ii. 13. Gal. ii. 1, 3. 9 See pp. 120, 121. 
 
DATE OF GALATIANS. 4,9 
 
 that they were written at the same period, when 
 St. Paul was in the midst of the very special expe- 
 riences caused by the state of affairs at Corinth ; 
 and certainly, if this supposition is correct, what 
 we observe is true to nature, and cannot be the 
 result of artifice. Let me note too (as we can 
 fairly gather from an incidental allusion)" that 
 the collection for the poor in Judza, though not 
 properly a topic of the letter, is much in the 
 writer’s mind. And we might pursue the resem- 
 blance between the two Epistles into points of 
 verbal detail. Thus there is a very peculiar use 
 of the strong word kareo@iev in both.” Again, 
 when we read in one of these letters that “he 
 that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly,” 
 we are instantly reminded of what we read in the 
 other that “ whatsoever a man soweth that shall 
 he reap.” * The affinity between the Epistle to the 
 Galatians and the Epistle to the Romans is of a 
 different kind; but it is even more convincing. 
 In tone of thought, inseparate theological phrases, 
 in continuous argumentative passages, the resem- 
 blance is peculiarly close; and we feel this the 
 more, if we keep in mind that in the one case the 
 Apostle is writing indignantly to his own con- 
 verts, while in the other he is writing persua- 
 
 1 See Gal. ii. 10. 2 2 Cor. xi. 20. Gal. v. 15. 
 3/2) Oor, 1x..6.. Gal.wis 7. 
 
4:30 APPENDIX V. 
 
 sively to those whom he has not yet seen. It 
 has been truly remarked that, among St. Paul’s 
 Hpistles, there is no case of resemblance so close, 
 except as regards the letters to the Ephesians 
 and Colossians, which were written at the same 
 time and sent by the same messenger.* It is to 
 be added that the phenomena of the case seem to 
 indicate for the condensed theological statement 
 in the Galatians a shghtly earlier date than for 
 the careful and elaborate theological argument 
 in the Romans. On the whole, I cannot doubt 
 that the date of the Epistle under consideration 
 is to be placed at this point, and that by so 
 placing it, in its relation tothe other three Epistles 
 of the same group, we complete our picture of 
 the tone and spirit of St. Paul’s work and feeling 
 during the Third Missionary Journey. 
 
 So far as this reasoning is sound, it is an 
 important addition to the Hore Pauline. The 
 Hpistle to the Galatians floats loose, so to speak, 
 in Paley’s book, without any moorings of person 
 and place to fasten it to a particular part of the 
 narrative of the Acts of the Apostles; but by 
 another kind of reasoning, or rather by another 
 application of Archdeacon Paley’s own reason- 
 ing, it appears that we can anchor this Epistle’ 
 in its right position. 
 
 4 See Appenpix VII. 
 
JOURNEYS TO JERUSALEM. 431] 
 
 APPENDIX VI. 
 ST. PAUL’S JOURNEYS TO JERUSALEM. 
 
 Bevtevine that the author of the Hore Pauline 
 is in error, when he suggests (pp. 178, 179), to 
 meet the requirements of Gal. 1. 1—10, a 
 journey to Jerusalem not named by St. Luke at 
 all, and agreeing with the majority of commen- 
 tators that the visit here in question is that 
 which is described in Acts xv. 1—31, I will 
 briefly endeavour here to dispose of the diffi- 
 culties raised by Archdeacon Paley, and will then 
 state some positive reasons for this identification. 
 
 The case stands thus: — Five visits of the 
 Apostle to Jerusalem, after his Conversion, are 
 enumerated by St. Luke. Of these the first 
 (Acts ix.) immediately after that event, and the 
 last (Acts xxi.) two years before his voyage to 
 Rome, are not supposed by any one to fit the 
 case. We may also put out of the question the 
 second visit (Acts x1.) shortly before the First 
 Missionary Journey, and the fourth (Acts xviii.) 
 at the close of the Second, partly because, though 
 respectable names can be quoted in favour of 
 them, the arguments in their support are very 
 weak, but chiefly because Paley himself has not 
 
432 APPENDIX VI. 
 
 advocated either of them. He says distinctly 
 (p. 146) that the visit of Gal. i1. is either iden- 
 tical with that of Acts xv., or that it is one 
 omitted by the historian. Against the identifi- 
 cation he brings forward, though not very con- 
 fidently, five objections. 
 
 (1.) In the Epistle it is said that St. Paul 
 went up “ by revelation:”® in the Acts we read 
 that he was sent by the church at Antioch.° 
 This, itis remarked, is ‘‘ not very reconcilable.” 
 But really there is no difficulty in reconciling ° 
 these two aspects of the fact. They are quite 
 consistent with one another. There was a coin- 
 cidence of outward impulse and inward impulse 
 in the mission of St. Peter from Joppa to 
 Cesarea ;’ and we could easily imagine that if 
 we had one account of that occurrence from St. 
 Peter and one from St. Luke, the former would 
 make mention of the inward and the latter of 
 the outward. We have, however, a case pre- 
 cisely in point from the life of St. Paul himself. 
 Speaking to the Jewish mob in the Temple 
 ‘Court he said that he had, on his first visit to 
 Jerusalem after his conversion, been directed by 
 a vision in that Temple to leave the city:* 
 
 5 Gal. ii. 2. 6 Acts xv. 2. 7 Acts x. 17—20. 
 8 Acts xxii. 17,18. See AppENDIXx on the three accounts 
 of St. Paul’s Conversion. 
 
JOURNEYS TO JERUSALEM. 433 
 
 whereas St. Luke’s statement is that the Christian 
 brethren caused him to go to Tarsus, to secure 
 his safety.” There is no inconsistency between 
 these two statements. St. Paul is recounting 
 a part of his own inner experience. St. Luke 
 is giving a general narrative of the Acts of this 
 Apostle. 
 
 (2.) St. Paul says that he communicated on 
 this occasion “ privately”’ with those who were 
 of chief influence in the church; St. Luke says 
 that a public conference was held. But here 
 again there is no inconsistency. Private meet- 
 ings are often the best preparation for a success- 
 ful public meeting, especially when the matter 
 in hand is delicate and difficult. Moreover St. 
 Paul’s own words imply that general as well as 
 private communications took place." And, fur- 
 ther, it is to be remembered that St. Paul is 
 here chiefly thinking of the recognition of his 
 own apostleship, whereas St. Luke is describing 
 an ecclesiastical] transaction. 
 
 (3.) It is urged that in the Epistle “ no notice 
 is taken of the deliberation and decree which are 
 recorded in the Acts, and which, according to 
 that history, formed the business for which that 
 journey was undertaken.” But from St. Paul’s 
 
 9 Acts ix. 29, 30. 1 See Gal. ii. 2. 
 yf 
 
4.34: APPENDIX VI. 
 
 point of view, when he wrote the letter, the 
 journey had been taken for another business, on 
 which it was more to his purpose, in writing to 
 the Galatians, to dwell. There were, in fact, 
 two anxious subjects in his mind, when he made 
 that journey from Antioch to Jerusalem ; and 
 that which related to his own independent 
 Apostolic authority is now chiefly before his 
 recollection. 
 
 (4.) Again, it might be supposed that, to give 
 force to his rebuke of the Judaizing propensities 
 of the Galatians, he would have appealed to the 
 authority of the decree of this Council. But 
 if such an appeal had been requisite, it would 
 have been no more necessary here than in other 
 parts of the letter. He rests his claim through- 
 out on his own authority, and it would have 
 derogated from that claim to have urged any 
 other. Moreover, the Galatians had no special 
 concern with this decree atall. It was addressed 
 to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia; and the 
 Judaizing outbreak in Galatia was subsequent 
 to that in Antioch, and somewhat different in 
 its character. Tor further remarks in answer 
 to this fourth objection I may refer to Arch- 
 deacon Paley himself. 
 
 (5.) Itis thought that another difficulty arises 
 from the account of Peter’s conduct towards the 
 
JOURNEYS TO JERUSALEM. 4.35 
 
 Gentile converts at Antioch, as given in the 
 latter part of the second chapter of this Epistle. 
 But the true answer here is that St. Peter was 
 thoroughly inconsistent;? and it is to be ob- 
 served that he was no less inconsistent with 
 what he had been taught, lone before, at Joppa 
 and Cesarea, than with his own deliberate opinion, 
 as expressed in the Council at Jerusalem. 
 
 To these answers to objections a word may 
 now be added on the positive reasons for identi- 
 fying the journey of the fifteenth chapter of the 
 Acts with that of the second chapter of the Gala- 
 tians. In each case Barnabas was St. Paul’s 
 companion. In the Acts it is said that, besides 
 Paul and Barnabas, “certain others”? went to 
 Jerusalem: and in the Epistle we find Titus 
 ‘specified in this position. At Jerusalem, too, 
 in both cases, Peter and James are conspicuous. 
 Nor should we fail to observe that there is a geo- 
 graphical agreement between the two accounts, 
 St. Paul says that he was in “the regions of 
 Syria and Cilicia” * when the occasion arose for 
 this journey. St. Luke says it was from “ An- 
 tioch,” the chief city in this region, that he was 
 sent, Again, there seems no difficulty im iden- 
 tifying “the false brethren unawares brought 
 
 2 See above, p. 187. 3 See above, p. 151. 
 
 Pere 
 
436 APPENDIX VI. 
 
 in,’ who came in privily to spy out the liberty 
 of the Christians at Antioch with the “ certain 
 men that came down from Judea,” to whom 
 “no such commandment” had really been given.* 
 There is also in each case the same general cha- 
 racter of the subject under discussion, and the 
 same evident proof that the discussion was 
 earnest and even vehement. 
 
 On the whole, when these things are taken 
 into account, it is hard to believe that the two 
 occasions can have been different. And the 
 general result is no loss, but rather a gain to 
 the aggregate of proof that the Epistle to the 
 Galatians is harmonious with the narrative in 
 the Acts, while the circumstances under which 
 it was written were remarkably independent. 
 
 APPENDIX VIL. 
 
 THE EPISTLES TO THE EPHESIANS 
 AND THE COLOSSIANS COMPARED. 
 
 Ir has been remarked in a note above (p. 190) 
 that during the last half-century serious assaults 
 have been made on the Epistle to the Ephesians. 
 
 4 Compare Gal, ii. 4 with Acts xy, 1, 24. 
 
EPISTLES TO EPHESIANS AND COLOSSIANS. 437 
 
 The grounds of the objections against its authen- 
 ticity are mainly two. First, it is thought in- 
 credible that St. Paul, in writing to a place 
 where he had resided long, should not have sent 
 special messages and salutations, as he does, for — 
 instance, in writing to Corinth. Secondly, it 
 is urged that in a letter to the Ephesians he 
 would not have said that he had eard of their 
 religious character, but that, as when writing 
 to the Thessalonians, that he remembered it.’ 
 Much of this hostile attack is swept away, if 
 we believe that the Epistle in question is not 
 specifically a letter to the Ephesians at all, but, 
 as Paley suggests, a circular letter, addressed to 
 several places, of which Ephesus was one; and, 
 as has been observed in a note above (p. 220), 
 this theory has recently derived a strong con- 
 firmation from the fact that the words év 
 *Edéow in the first verse are absent from the 
 Sinaitic manuscript. 
 
 But Paley has, with the utmost sagacity, 
 though without anticipating the criticism which 
 has been developed since his day, suggested 
 another mode of reasoning, which is of the 
 utmost value in this controversy. On a com- 
 parison of the Epistles to the Ephesians and 
 
 5 Compare, for instance, Eph. i. 15, with 1 Thess. i. 3. 
 
438 APPENDIX VII. 
 
 Colossians, it can be shown, almost conclusively, 
 that they were written by the same person at- 
 the same time. If this can be established, then 
 whatever argument is sound for the Pauline 
 authorship of the Epistle to the Colossians (and, 
 let it be added, of the associated Epistle to 
 Philemon) can be carried, as a matter of course,. 
 to the credit of the Epistle to the Ephesians. ~ 
 With the utmost ease, for instance, we add a 
 link to the chain which “connects Onesimus 
 with Philemon, Philemon with Archippus, and 
 Archippus with Colosse,’ and prolong the evi-. 
 dence so as to include the (so-called) Epistle to. 
 the Ephesians ; ° while the reasoning employed to 
 establish an undesigned conformity between the 
 Colossians and the Acts, in that both represent 
 St. Paul’s sufferings to have arisen from his. 
 claiming for the Gentiles the full night to 
 Christian privilege without submitting to the 
 Jewish law, is equally valid for the Ephesians, 
 since to them he writes thus at the beginning of - 
 the letter: ‘ For this cause I Paul, the pri- 
 soner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles.” 
 
 As to the proof that these two Epistles were 
 written by the same person at the same time, 
 this is presented to us in the Hore Pauline 
 
 6 See on the Ephesians, No. iv., comparing the observa-- 
 tions on Philemon, Nos. i. and ii. 
 
EPISTLES TO EPHESIANS AND COLOSSIANS. 499 
 
 by means of a careful and very ingenious com- 
 parison. The author shows that besides a 
 “consent in the general tenor of the two 
 Epistles, and in the run and warmth of thought 
 with which they are composed,” we find “ ex- 
 pressions and whole sentences repeated,” as 
 though, in the writing of the second letter, they 
 were “fresh in the author’s mind from the 
 writing of the first” (p. 192); there are 
 specimens again “of that partial resemblance 
 which is only to be met with when no imitation 
 is designed, when no studied recollection is 
 employed, but when the mind, exercised upon 
 the same subject, is left to the spontaneous 
 return of such phrases as, having been used 
 before, may happen to present themselves 
 again’? (p. 204); and, once more, the associa- 
 tion in which the topics of these two documents 
 follow one another is, in some cases, arbitrary, 
 yet alike, which is just what we should ex- 
 pect in “two letters issuing from the same 
 person, nearly at the same time, and on the 
 same general occasion ” (p. 210, 211). 
 
 It is probable that this kind of comparison 
 could be carried on still more minutely, and 
 with an increasing force of evidence in propor- 
 tion to the ingenuity exercised in the process. 
 I will just add one example of what I mean. 
 
4.40 APPENDIX VII. 
 
 In the Epistle to the Ephesians (v. 18—2v) 
 we find the following passage: “ Be not drunk 
 with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with 
 the Spirit; speaking to yourselves in psalms 
 aud hymns and spiritual songs, singing and 
 making melody in your heart to the Lord; 
 giving thanks always for all things unto God 
 and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ.”” In the Epistle to the Colossians (111. 
 15, 16) the Apostle writes: “ Let the peace of 
 God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye 
 are called in one body; and be ye thankful. 
 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in 
 all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one 
 another in psalms and hymns and spiritual 
 songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the 
 Lord.” It seems to me that a strong sense of 
 the enjoyment and usefulness of sacred poetry 
 and sacred music was in the Apostle’s mind 
 when he wrote these two passages. But in 
 giving an exhortation upon the subject to the 
 Ephesians and Colossians, he proceeds from two 
 different starting-points. In the one case it 1s 
 an admonition against drunkenness, in the other 
 case it is an allusion to the possession of Chris- 
 tian peace in the heart, which leads up to his 
 precept concerning “psalms and hymns and 
 spiritual songs.” The words, however, are in 
 
EPISTLES TO EPHESIANS AND COLOSSIANS. 441 
 
 both instances the same: in each case, too, the 
 whole sentence is surrounded, so to speak, with 
 an atmosphere of thankfulness; and the reference 
 in the Epistle to the Colossians to our being 
 ‘called in one body ” seems like an anticipation 
 or a reminiscence of what is said at length in 
 the Epistle to the Ephesians concerning the 
 unity of the Church of Christ. 
 
 As to the notion that one of these Epistles 
 was somehow composed from the other, with 
 additions or subtractions, it is difficult to 
 imagine a motive for such a forgery. ‘To sup- 
 pose that what we call the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 slans was constructed to supply the want of 
 that Epistle to the Laodiceans, which is men- 
 tioned in Col. iv. 16, is too absurd to deserve 
 refutation. It is indeed probably that very 
 Epistle “from Laodicea,” but supplied to us 
 from St. Paul’s own hands. It should be 
 added, that one long and very important pas- 
 sage in the shorter of the two letters which we 
 are comparing has no correlative whatever in the 
 longer ;* and as to the absence of personal allu- 
 sions in the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians, 
 
 7 ITrefer to Col. i. 8—23. We may reasonably conjec- 
 ture that the other Churches to which the circular letter 
 was addressed were not equally infected with the false 
 philosophy against which St. Paul warns the Colossians. 
 
4.4.2 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 we should not forget how definitely Tychicus 
 comes before us there as the person who took the 
 letter, and with what a warm personal feeling 
 he is named.’ He would certainly be present 
 when the letter was delivered to the several 
 Churches for which it was intended; but it was 
 less natural that Luke, Demas, Mark, Aris- 
 tarchus, and Epaphras should be named in a 
 merely circular letter, than in letters expressly 
 directed to the Church of Colosse and the 
 household of Philemon. 
 
 APPENDIX, :V TUE 
 
 ST. PAUL’S CHARACTERISTIC 
 METAPHORS. 
 
 Tuxse Appendices must necessarily be short. 
 I may, therefore, I hope, without impropriety, 
 refer to a book entitled “The Metaphors of St. 
 Paul,” where I have treated of this subject at 
 greater length. Here we have to deal with it 
 only in its bearing on Christian Evidence. 
 
 The evidential argument, in the present in- 
 stance, stands thus :—We have a series of letters 
 
 8 See Eph. vi. 21, 22. 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 443 
 
 before us, which profess to be written by the 
 same person ; and we inguire whether there is 
 sufficient internal testimony to justify this 
 belief. Among other points which we use as 
 tests, we naturally have recourse to the kind of 
 illustrative language employed by the alleged 
 writer of the letters. If we find it to be the same 
 in all, this is testimony of some value in favour 
 of that which we are seeking to establish,—and 
 all the more, if the writer is a man of imagi- 
 native mind, warm impulse, eager energy, and 
 keen persuasiveness. 
 
 This question is concerned with something 
 more than mere resemblance of language. It 
 regards the customary associations of the man’s 
 mind, the set of his thoughts, the course of his 
 feeling, the traces of what has impressed him, - 
 the indications of the circumstances that have 
 surrounded him, and thus may conduct us to a 
 very confident conclusion regarding his identity. 
 It might, perhaps, be urged that such pecu- 
 liarities of style are easy of imitation; and in 
 this objection it must be acknowledged that 
 there is some truth. We must carefully note, 
 therefore, whether the instances which we find 
 come before us casually, easily, without fore- 
 thought, and in connexion with contexts of 
 various kinds. 
 
4.4.4 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 Now this may be said, in general terms, of 
 St. Paul’s metaphorical langeuage, that it has 
 to do, not with the aspects and operations of 
 Nature, but with the active interests and out- 
 ward manifestations of the life of Man. There 
 is in the one short Epistle of St. James more 
 imagery drawn from the former source than 
 in all the Epistles of St. Paul put together. 
 {lis favourite figures are taken from the midst 
 of the busiest human society, or if they are 
 taken from nature, they are taken from nature in 
 connexion with human industry. Four in- 
 stances are given in the book to which reference 
 has been made. I will briefly call attention to 
 them here, and will add two others which the 
 book does not contain. 
 
 (1.) Wherever St. Paul was residing, at 
 Corinth, at Athens, and in all places where a 
 Greek population was predominant, athletic 
 games came before his notice, as a subject which 
 caused an engrossing and universal attention: 
 and they suggested to him some of his most 
 animated imagery. Among: those lively and 
 exciting games the foot-race was the struggle 
 which created the most eager interest; and this 
 is pre-eminently the image which seems to come 
 obviously to the Apostle, when he employs com- 
 parisons of this kind. Two examples will oceur 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 4.4.5 
 
 to the reader immediately. Writing to the 
 Philippians he says: “ Not as though I had 
 already attained, either were already perfect— 
 but I follow after. This one thing I do, for- 
 getting those things which are behind, and 
 reaching forth unto those things which are 
 before, I press toward the mark for the prize.’”’? 
 In the first Epistle to the Corinthians he writes 
 thus: “ Know ye not that they which run za @ 
 race run all, but one obtaineth the prize? So 
 run, that ye may obtain. And every man that 
 striveth for the mastery is temperate in all 
 things. Now they do it that they may obtain 
 a fading crown; but we an unfading. I there- 
 fore so run, not as uncertainly ; so fight I, not 
 as one that beateth the air: but I seep under 
 my body and bring it into subjection; lest 
 that by any means, when I have preached to 
 others, I myself should be a castaway.”* Here 
 we have brought before us, not only the eager 
 endeavour which the race inspires, but the prize, 
 and the preparatory training. This reminds us 
 of another passage, where this training comes to 
 view. “ Bodily exercise’—the preparation for 
 the gymnastic contests—“ profiteth little; but 
 godliness is profitable unto all things, having 
 
 9 Phil. iii. 12—14. 1 1 Cor. ix. 24—27. 
 
446 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 the promise not only of the life that now is, but 
 of that which is to come.”? Elsewhere the judge, 
 who awards the prize, is named : “ I have fought 
 the good fight: I have finished my course: I 
 have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up 
 for me the crown of righteousness, which the 
 Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me m that 
 day.” * Now nothing could be more different 
 than the contexts in the four Epistles from 
 which these four passages are taken: and yet 
 in each case the imagery appears as naturally as 
 ripples on a stream of water. But perhaps the 
 evidential force of those passages is even 
 stronger, where the allusions to the stadium are 
 slight and incidental, as for instance when in 
 writing to the Thessalonians St. Paul says, 
 “Pray for us, that the Word of the Lord may 
 have free course and be glorified,”* or as when 
 he says to the Romans, “ It is not of him that 
 willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God 
 that showeth mercy,’* or to the Galatians, 
 “Ye were running well: who put a hindrance in 
 your way ?”® And here three new Epistles are 
 brought into the enumeration, different from 
 the other four. To these must be added two 
 2 1 Tim. iv. 8. 2 Timaye aioe 
 
 4 2 Thess. ii. 1. 5 Rom. ix. 16. 
 6 Gal. v. 7. 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 44,7 
 instances from the Acts of the Apostles. 
 Preaching to the Jews at Antioch in Pisidia, 
 St. Paul speaks of John the Baptist as “ fulfil- 
 ling his cowrse.’’ Addressing the Elders at 
 Miletus, he says, ‘‘ None of these things move 
 me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so 
 that I might jinish my course with joy.”* Thus 
 the same characteristic imagery appears, not 
 only over the wide range of St. Paul’s Epistles, 
 but on the scantier ground of his speeches. 
 
 (2.) Another part of St. Paul’s favourite ima- 
 gery is connected with military subjects. And 
 it is extremely natural that this should be the 
 ease. If the narrative of the Acts is true, his 
 mind was, during the period to which the latter 
 part of that narrative belongs, perpetually in 
 contact with such subjects.. During his whole 
 life, indeed, he was familiar with the szght of 
 Roman soldiers: from the time when the tumult 
 took place in the Temple Court, he was never 
 out of their immediate presence, whether in 
 barracks or in prison, or on journeys or on 
 voyages ;° and after he was delivered up in Rome 
 by Julius to the commander of the Pretorian 
 Guard, we find the same association taken up 
 immediately in the correspondence which be- 
 
 7 Acts xiii. 25. f 8 Acts xx. 24, 
 9 See Acts xxii. 24; xxiii.17, 23; xxvii. 1,42,43; xxviii. 16. 
 
448 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 longs to his two years’ captivity. Finishing his 
 letter to the Colossians, with the chain on his 
 wrist, he says, “ The salutation by the hand of 
 me Paul: remember my bonds:” and in this 
 phrase, used as he affixes his signature, there is a 
 striking and obviously unpremeditated coinci- 
 dence with his condition, almost more persuasive 
 than those which Paley has noticed." Imagery 
 drawn from this military source is found through- 
 out the range of St. Paul’s Epistles. We are to 
 put on “the armour of light” (Rom. xii. 12), 
 which elsewhere is described as “ the armour of 
 righteousness on the right hand and on the left” 
 (2 Cor. vi. 7), where weapons of both offence 
 and defence are set clearly before our thoughts. 
 We have details in still greater fulness in an 
 earlier Epistle (1 Thess. v. 8): “ Let us, who are 
 of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate 
 of faith and love ; and for an helmet, the hope of 
 salvation.” But the most copious passage of all is 
 in one of the Epistles of the first captivity (Eph. 
 vi. LI—17): “ Put on the whole armour of God, 
 that ye may be able to stand against the wiles 
 of ;thevdevili. i... Wherefore take unto you 
 the whole armour of God. .... Stand there- 
 fore, having your loins girt about with truth, 
 
 1 See on the Epistle to the Ephesians, No. v. 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 449 
 
 and having on the breastplate of righteousness : 
 and your feet shod with the preparation of the 
 Gospel of peace: above all, taking the shield of 
 faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all 
 the fiery darts of the wicked ; and take the helmet 
 of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which 
 is the word of God.” In this one passage there 
 isa world of argument for the authenticity of an 
 Epistle which has of late been much called in 
 question.” These sentences could hardly have 
 come into existence except in the presence of 
 military life: they compensate, too, in one way, 
 for that want of detai/ in other respects which 
 has been made the ground-work of hostile criti- 
 cisms of this Epistle; while certainly there is 
 nothing in the Epistle to the Colossians out of 
 which this passage could have been developed.’ 
 Slight and indirect references to military asso- 
 ciations should not be overlooked. Writing to 
 the Philippians, St. Paul says that peace shall 
 be the garrison of their hearts (Phil. iv. 7). 
 Writing to the Corinthians, he says that in the 
 Resurrection every man shall be in his own mili- 
 tary company * (1 Cor. xv. 23). And the remarks 
 
 2 See above, p. 190. 
 
 3 See AppenDIx VII., on the comparison of Ephesians 
 and Colossians. 
 
 4 The “trumpet,” too, in this solemn chapter (v. 52), 
 
 is itself a military metaphor. 
 Gs 
 
450 APPENDIX’ VIII. 
 
 made on this part of the subject may close with 
 the mention of two striking references: to cam- 
 paigning. St. Paul says to Timothy. (2 Tim. ii. 
 3, 4), “Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good 
 soldier of Jesus Christ: no man that goeth on a 
 campaign entangleth himself with the affairs of 
 life,’ that he may please him that hath chosen him 
 to be a soldier:”? and in the second Epistle to 
 the Corinthians (x..8—6) we:seem to have remi- 
 niscences of the destruction of those rock forts in 
 Cilicia, which took place not long before St, 
 Paul’s birth, with the: attendant ‘circumstances 
 of taking captives in the war,’ and crushing all 
 rebellion: “Though we walk in the flesh, we 
 do not war after the flesh; for the weapons of 
 our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through 
 God to the pulling down of strongholds ; casting 
 down imaginations and every high thing that 
 exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, 
 and bringing into captivity every thought to 
 the obedience of Christ; and having in a readi- 
 ness to revenge all disobedience, when your 
 obedience is fulfilled.” 
 
 (3.) It has been remarked above that when 
 
 5 Inadvertently the Authorized Version has “ this life.” 
 
 6 In one place there is even a reference to the triumphal 
 procession of a conqueror to the Roman Capitol. See 2 Cor. 
 ii, 14—16. 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. A511 
 
 Nature has a place in St. Paul’s imagery, it is 
 commonly Nature in connexion with Human 
 Industry. Thus agriculture is prominent in his 
 illustrative vocabulary. This fact may be exem- 
 plified, in the first instance, by a single word. 
 Paley, in commenting on the Epistle to the 
 Ephesians, has called attention to St. Paul’s 
 favourite use of the word “riches;”’ and he 
 has given several examples. Something of the 
 same kind may be said of the Apostle’s favourite 
 use of the word “fruit:” and perhaps it was 
 the same exuberant, expansive habit of mind, so 
 to speak, which led, in both instances, to this 
 kind of phraseology. He desires to visit the 
 Romans, that he may “have some /rwi¢ among 
 them also, as among other Gentiles.”* His 
 desire for continuance in life is, as he tells the 
 Philippians, that life is the condition of bring- 
 ing forth “/ruit” in his work.’ He says to the 
 Colossians that the Gospel, in all the world, is 
 ever growing and “ bringing forth /rwzt.’* In 
 the Epistle to the Galatians he describes in — 
 detail all “the /ruc/s of the Spirit.”? He urges 
 
 the Ephesians to “walk as children of the 
 light:” for, he adds, “the frazt of light is in 
 
 7 See p. 214. 8 Rom. i. 13. 
 9 Phils 22, Si COL. tp aGe 
 . 2 Gal. v. 22. 
 
 Gg 
 
462 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 all goodness and righteousness and truth.” * 
 To Titus he says that they who profess Christ’s 
 relision must learn to maintain good works, 
 that they be not “ wnfruitful.”* Nor are those 
 by any means all the passages which illustrate 
 St. Paul’s varied and eager use of this word.’ 
 If agriculture generally is the basis of favourite 
 metaphors, we must of course expect to find 
 images drawn specially from seed-time and har- 
 vest; and this we find under three aspects. 
 The very description of the Resurrection is that 
 the glorified body will correspond with the seed 
 that is sown :° again the character and destiny of 
 each man will be formed according to this prin- 
 ciple, “ whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he 
 also reap ;”’ and once more, a good man’s power 
 of practical benevolence comes, like a farmer’s 
 increase, from God, each harvest “ multiply- 
 ing the seed” from whence the next harvest 
 comes.’ ‘The process of grafting finds a place 
 in a well-remembered and difficult passage of 
 the Romans, of which it is enough to say here 
 that the very point of the passage probably 
 resides in its contrast with what is commonly 
 
 3 Eph. v. 9. See note above, p. 219. 
 * Titus ii. 14. 5 See Rom. vi. 21, 22. 
 6 1 Cor. xv. 86—38. 7 Gal. vi. 7, 8. 
 
 8 2 Cor. ix. 6—9. 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 453 
 
 done with olive-trees.’? One long context, hav- 
 ing reference to Apollos and himself, takes the 
 whole process of horticulture to elucidate great 
 principles regarding thespiritual work of Christian 
 Ministers, their co-operation with one another, 
 and their dependence on God.’ Nor are the 
 Apostle’s illustrations, under this general head, 
 limited to the processes of vegetation. The farmer 
 has to do with the life of animals as well as the 
 life of plants; and from that source likewise 
 images are drawn, which enforce great princi- 
 ples connected with the Christian Ministry. 
 Those who labour for the spiritual good of 
 others have a claim to support. ‘“ Who planteth 
 a vineyard, and eateth not of the profit of the 
 fruit thereof? or, who findeth a flock and eateth 
 not of the profit of the milk of the flock?” ? 
 Once more, when we find a proverbial sentence 
 from the Old Testament twice quoted by St. Paul, 
 and in two very different Epistles, separated 
 from each other by a wide interval of time, we 
 may be sure that the sentiment expressed in 
 that proverb had a strong hold on the Apostle’s 
 mind. It is therefore very important to note 
 that both in the first Epistle to the Corinthians 
 
 9 Rom. xi. 16—24. 1 1 Cor. iii. 6—9. 
 21 /Gor. ix. 7. 
 
454 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 and the first to Timothy we find that precept of 
 the Book of Deuteronomy, ‘Thou shalt not 
 muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn.” * 
 
 (4.) Metaphors of the above-mentioned three 
 classes are brought together in a remarkable _ 
 and most characteristic series of sentences which 
 we find in the second Epistle to Timothy. 
 “ No man that enters on a soldier’s career mixes 
 himself up with the common business of life; 
 no man striving in the games will obtain the 
 prize, unless he has kept the rules; it is the 
 farmer that labours who has the first claim to 
 the profits of the produce of the farm.” * I now 
 turn to another class of metaphors, quite in har- 
 mony with these, as being in close connexion 
 with the human and social aspect of things 
 around him. ‘The first Epistle to the Corin- 
 thians (ii. 9) exhibits a very striking transi- 
 tion from agricultural imagery to architectural. 
 “ Ye are God’s husbandry; ye are God’s daild- 
 ing.’ And the word “ building” being men- 
 tioned, St. Paul proceeds to give, in illustration 
 of the work and responsibilities of the Christian 
 Ministry, an allegory from architecture, as rich 
 and detailed as that which has just been drawn 
 from horticulture. The contrast is presented 
 
 3 Deut. xxv. 4, 4 9 Tim, tae 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 4.55 
 
 between the miserable hovels of the poor, on the 
 one hand, with walls of “ wood,” the interstices 
 filled up with “hay,” and mere “stubble” on 
 the roof, and sumptuous and strong -buildings 
 on the other, with slabs of marble, porphyry 
 and granite, and rich metallic decoration. A 
 fire might easily leave the latter unhurt, whilst 
 the former are destroyed. So with the results of 
 the work of Christian Ministers, according as it 
 is good or bad, even though it be on the right 
 foundation. It is well worthy of remark, that 
 the passage was writtén at Ephesus, during 
 the very interval of time when that great 
 ~~ tumult took place in connexion with the Temple 
 of Diana, which is described with so much ani- 
 mation in the Acts of the Apostles ;° and that 
 two other instances, in which imagery of this 
 kind occurs, are in letters addressed to that 
 very region of “ Asia,’ which is spoken of 
 there as universally devoted to the worship of 
 this goddess.° The Epistles to the Ephesians 
 and Colossians were addressed to those who 
 resided in this region; and in both of them, 
 though with variations of expression and con- 
 text, we find emphatic reference made to Chris- 
 tian life as a “ building” rising upward from a 
 
 5 Acts xix. 23—41. 6 See v. 27. 
 
456 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 strongly-laid foundation.’ In another passage 
 of the Ephesians, to which no correlative is 
 found in the parallel Epistle, we observe a good 
 illustration of what Paley calls St. Paul’s habit 
 of “going off at a word.”* In 1. 19, after he 
 has happened to use the word “household,” it 
 seems asif the whole house rose before him, from 
 foundation to roof, and transformed itself into a 
 temple. “ Ye are built upon the foundation of 
 the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself 
 being the chief corner-stone, in whom all the 
 building fitly framed together, groweth into a 
 holy temple in the Lord ; in whom ye also are 
 being built together for a habitation of God 
 through the Spirit.” ’ We must remember, too, 
 the close association of Ephesus with Timothy, 
 in the second letter to whom the following 
 words occur: “ Nevertheless, the foundation of 
 God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord 
 knoweth them that are His, and, Let every 
 one that nameth the name of Christ depart from 
 iniquity.” * The furniture of a house forms the 
 basis of striking allegorical passages in this 
 
 7 Eph. iii. 17; Col. ii. 7. These are not among the 
 parallelisms which Paley adduces in comparing these two 
 Epistles, but they might with advantage have been added 
 to his list. 
 
 8 See on Eph. No. iii. 9 Eph. ii. 20—22. 
 
 We Latha, ae 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 457 
 
 Epistle and in that to the Romans.’ The cha- 
 racteristic style, too, of much of the architecture 
 of St. Paul’s day gives point to some of his 
 sentences. John, Peter, and James are de- 
 scribed, in the Epistle to the Galatians, as 
 “nillars?” of the Church;* and Timothy is 
 charged himself to maintain this character.’ 
 Perhaps, however, the strongest proof of 
 the predominance of this kind of illustrative 
 thought, in St. Paul’s writings, is found in 
 his use of the word “ edify.’” This verb, or 
 its substantive “ edification,’ occurs in some 
 form or other about twenty times in the New 
 Testament; and in every instance, except one, 
 it is used by St. Paul. And the case becomes 
 stronger, if we take into account all the pas- 
 sages where “ duwild”? and “ buzlding” are em- 
 ployed. The examination of these passages 
 must be left to the reader.” After we have 
 examined them, it is striking to observe (once 
 more we are brought back to the neighbourhood 
 of Ephesus) that the Apostle commends the 
 elders at Miletus “‘to God and to the word of 
 His grace, which is able to duzld them up.° 
 
 2 Rom. ix. 21—23. 2 Tim. ii. 20, 21. $> Gra) tate 93 
 
 * Such I conceive to be the reference of the word 
 “pillar” in 1 Tim. iii. 14, 15. 
 
 5 See, for instance, 2 Cor. v. i. Gal. ii. 18. ® Acts xx. 32. 
 
ABS APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 To the four examples of St. Paul’s metaphorical 
 style, which have been given above, others 
 might be added, fulfilling the same conditions of 
 being taken from the interests and business and 
 outward aspect of social human life. Thus he 
 is in the habit of drawing illustrations from the 
 administration of justice, from the making of 
 wills, from slavery, from marriage. I will refer 
 more specifically to two other examples. 
 
 Elsewhere I have alluded to the large attention 
 bestowed by St. Paul on money-matters. In 
 one or two cases he takes his images from the 
 market. ‘ Owe no man anything, but to love 
 one another,” he says to the Romans.’ In 
 the same Epistle he speaks of himself as “a 
 debtor both to the Greeks and to the bar- 
 barians,”* and says that we all are “ debtors, 
 not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.””* So, 
 in the Galatians, he that causes himself to 
 be circumcised makes himself “a debtor to do 
 the whole law.”* Another phrase of the same 
 kind is that which tells us, in the Epistle to the _ 
 Romans, that “the wages of sin is death.’? 
 Under the same head we might possibly bring 
 
 7 Rom. xiii. 8. 8 Rom. i. 14, 9 Rom. viii. 12. 
 
 1 Gal. v. 3. In Rom. xy. 27 the same word is used in 
 a more literal way. 
 
 2 Rom. vi. 23. 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS, 4.59 
 
 that frequent use of the word “ riches,’ which 
 has been mentioned elsewhere; and undoubtedly 
 we must name in this connexion that precept 
 in the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians 
 which charges us to “vedeem the time.”* This 
 expression is often misunderstood and explained 
 to denote the making up for lost time. But we 
 cannot make up for lost time. The phrase, as: 
 St. Paul uses it, denotes the making the most of 
 an opportunity, as men duy out of the market 
 what they may perhaps never get as cheap again. 
 
 The word “ mystery” is very frequently used 
 by St. Paul; and it is a great help towards our 
 apprehension of the meaning in which he em- 
 ploys it, 1f we view it in this connexion. The 
 “‘ Mysteries” of the Greeks were religious secrets 
 revealed to the initiated; and they formed a 
 permanent institution of the society in the midst 
 of which his work was done. When he travelled 
 from Athens to Corinth (Acts xviii. 1) he passed 
 by the scene of the renowned Eleusinian Mys- 
 teries; and it was as natural that he should 
 borrow some of his illustrative language from 
 this source as from the stadiwm, where the foot- 
 races took place at Corinth, or from the “ temples 
 made with hands” which he saw at Athens. 
 
 3 Eph. v. 16; Col. iv. 5. 
 
460 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 The Gospel was a secret concealed from man- 
 kind till the Apostles were sent to make it known. 
 After it was preached it wasa ‘‘ mystery” in this 
 sense, that it was a secret revealed ; and this is 
 the sense in which St. Paul uses the word. Two 
 of the weightiest passages in the New Testament 
 present themselves at once in confirmation of the 
 statement. At the end of the Epistle to the 
 Romans we read: “ Now to Him that is of 
 power to stablish you according to my Gospel, 
 and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to 
 the revelation of the mystery which was hept secret 
 since the world began, but now is made manifest, 
 and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according 
 to the commandment of the Everlasting God 
 made known, &c.’* With this we should com- 
 pare what we read in the third chapter of the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians: “ If ye have heard of 
 the dispensation of the grace of God which is 
 given me to you-ward: how that by revelation 
 He made known unto me the mystery (as I wrote 
 afore in few words, whereby, when ye read, ye 
 may understand my knowledge in the mystery of 
 Christ) which in other ages was not made known 
 unto the sons of men, as itis wow revealed. ... . 
 Unto me, who am less than the least of all 
 
 4 Rom. xvi. 25, 26. 
 
CHARACTERISTIC METAPHORS. 461 
 
 saints is this grace given, that I should preach 
 among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of 
 Christ, and to make all men see what is the fellow- 
 ship of the mystery, which from the beginning of 
 the'world hath been hid in God.”° We see from 
 these passages that the main point of the word 
 “‘mystery,’ as used by St. Paul, is that it is a 
 revelation. What was a secret is now a secret 
 no longer. The very duty to which he is ap- 
 pointed is that he is to initiate all men. And the 
 same is the case elsewhere, and in other Epistles. 
 Thus three distinct passages, all to the same 
 effect, can be quoted from that which was written 
 to the Colossians.” Thus he says to the Corin- 
 thians, in a passage the main topic of which is 
 the revelation of what had previously been un- 
 known: “ We speak the wisdom of God in a 
 mystery, even the hidden wisdom, . . . . which 
 none of the princes of this world knew, .... 
 but God hath revealed them to us by His Spirit.”’ 
 Thus again, when he writes to Timothy that the 
 Deacons are to “ hold the mystery of the faith in a 
 pure conscience,” it certainly is not meant that 
 they are to conceal it. The case, too, becomes 
 still more evident when we take into account 
 certain specific parts of the revelation of Chris- 
 
 5 Eph iii, 2—9. 6 Col. i. 26, 27; ii. 2; iv. 3. 
 1 Cor. ii, 7—10. 8 1 Tim. iii. 9. 
 
462 APPENDIX VIII. 
 
 tianity to which this word is applied. Of the 
 Incarnation he says, “ Great is the mystery of 
 godliness: God manifest in the flesh.”° Of 
 the Resurrection he says, “ Behold I show youa 
 mystery : we shall not all sleep.”* Similarly, 
 in other Epistles, of the union of Christ with 
 His Church,’ and of the restoration of the Jews 
 to God’s favours Putting all these things to- 
 gether we apprehend more clearly than would 
 otherwise be possible, what St. Paul means when 
 he says of the Apostles (as of all Ministers of the 
 Gospel) that. they are “Stewards of the Mys- 
 teries of God.”’* And it is to be observed that 
 the results of his inquiry into St. Paul’s employ- 
 ment of a remarkable word, are drawn from the 
 whole range of his Epistles, so as to afford a proof 
 of the authenticity of all. 
 
 Itis probable that the use of some of these 
 metaphors might be shown to contain indications 
 of the character of St. Paul. A man’s customary 
 language (at least if he is a man of mark) gene- 
 rally shows something of his disposition and 
 bent of mind,—and_ perhaps especially the lan- 
 guage which he uses in his letters. This Appen- 
 dix, Lowever, is restricted to the argument to 
 
 9 1 Tim. iii. 16. 1 1 Cor. xv. 51. 
 2. Eph. v. 82. 3 Rom. xi. 26. 
 Ao Cor iv. dL. 
 
THE “ FAITHFUL SAYINGS.” 463 
 
 be derived from the fact that the same charac- 
 teristic metaphorical language appears through- 
 out the Epistles of St. Paul. 3 
 
 APPENDIX IX. 
 
 THE “FAITHFUL SAYINGS” OF THE 
 PASTORAL EPISTLES. 
 
 TuE plan of this work embraces the comparison 
 of the Epistles of St. Paul among themselves ; 
 as well as the co-ordinating of them, where it is 
 possible, with definite parts of the narrative in 
 the Acts of the Apostles. Now we are con- 
 scious, even on a superficial study, that the 
 Pastoral Epistles form a group apart from the 
 rest, that they relate to circumstances somewhat 
 different, and belong to a period somewhat 
 different. Nor have we much difficulty in 
 coming to the conclusion that their date is 
 later than that of any of the others. Paley is 
 undoubtedly correct in saying that they pertain 
 to the time which is subsequent to the first 1m- 
 prisonment.’ Thus they are altogether outside 
 of the whole region which is included within 
 
 5 See pp. 238, 239. 
 
4.64 APPENDIX IX. 
 
 the Acts. Hence, what I have ventured to call 
 co-ordination with the history is in this case 
 impossible ; and a comparison of these Epistles 
 with one another is proportionally of greater 
 moment. 
 
 A comparison of this kind leads to such ob- 
 servations as the following. These three Epistles 
 clearly belong to the same general period : hence 
 whatever fixes the date of one of them, approxi- 
 mately fixes the date of the two others. These 
 documents indicate a more developed form of 
 heresy and a more mature system of Church 
 organization than those which we find in the 
 rest of St. Paul’s letters. Peculiar words and 
 phrases are used in these letters which we do 
 not find in the others: and these words and 
 phrases are such as an old man would employ. 
 St. Paul is here more hortatory than elsewhere ; 
 he lays great stress on obedience to conscience, 
 on the discharge of duty, on adhesion to sound 
 doctrine. There is also a peculiar shade of sad- 
 ness perceptible in these letters, as though a long 
 life had given to the writer experience of much 
 disappointment. 
 
 These characteristics of the Pastoral Epistles 
 may be illustrated by an examination of those 
 passages in them which are made emphatic by 
 the addition of the phrase, “it is a faithful 
 
THE *f FAITHFUL SAYINGS.” 465 
 
 * saying,”—“it is a true saying,’”’—a mode of 
 expression found nowhere else in St. Paul’s 
 writings. In doing this I may be allowed to use 
 what I have written on the subject elsewhere at 
 greater length.° Archdeacon Paley has referred 
 to this peculiar mode of expression as charac- 
 teristic of these three letters:? but they are 
 capable of being used, much more fully, as 
 elucidations of the harmony and agreement 
 which subsist among these documents, on the 
 theory that they were written about the same 
 time, in the latter period of St. Paul’s life. 
 _ These “ faithful sayings” are five in number, 
 and they are distributed over the three letters.* 
 They are partly proverbial and partly of a nature 
 which may be termed liturgical. Under each 
 head there are difficulties as to what part of the 
 context, and how much of it, is to be included 
 in the “ faithful saying.” Into these difficulties 
 it is not necessary to enter here. It is sufficient, 
 if we take a single example of each class. 
 “It is a faithful saying and worthy of all 
 men to be received, that Christ Jesus came into 
 the world to save sinners.”* No sentence can be 
 
 6 Four papers in Good Words for 1878, pp. 69, 122, 345, 
 
 497. 7 See p. 328. 
 $1 Tim. i. 15; iii. 1; iv. 9; 2 Tim. ii. 11; Titus iii. 8. 
 94 Tim. i. 15. 
 
 nm b 
 
466 APPENDIX IX. 
 
 — 
 
 imagined more worthy than this to be a Chris- 
 tian proverb: and it is worth while to observe 
 that it is made all the more proverbial to us by 
 being used liturgically in our Communion Ser- 
 vice. It reminds us of the similar proverbs 
 uttered by Our Lord Himself: “ They that be 
 whole need not a physician, but they that are 
 sick,” and “I came not to call the righteous, but 
 sinners to repentance.” Moreover, it is quite in 
 St. Paul’s manner to employ proverbial lan- 
 guage ; as, for instance, when he asks, “ Who art 
 thou that judgest another man’s servant 2” or 
 when he quotes a saying of Christ that would 
 otherwise have been unknown, “J¢ is more 
 blessed to give than to receive.”’ But the point 
 of interest here is that the sentence in question 
 is not merely fit and worthy to become a Chris- 
 tian proverb, but that by adding the words “ it 
 is a faithful saying ” the Apostle implies that it 
 was already become such. We have not simply 
 here to do with a maxim of life, expressed with 
 an epigrammatic force which tends to give it 
 general acceptance and currency. ‘The pre- 
 amble, “it is a faithful saying,” gives at once 
 to the proverb with which it is connected the 
 character of a quotation. The sentence comes 
 
 1 Rom. xiv. 4. Acts xx. 35. 
 
THE ‘ FAITHFUL SAYINGS.” 467 
 
 before us as the approved utterance of an or- 
 ganized community, conscious of the religious 
 life with which it is pervaded. Every society 
 has its proverbs. Why not the Christian Church? 
 But some time must elapse before the principles 
 of an organized community become incorporated 
 in current maxims. All this is in harmony, 
 and quite naturally in harmony, with that view 
 of the Pastoral Epistles which has been stated 
 above. The Church is now more mature than 
 it was when the earlier Epistles were written ; 
 and the Apostle himself writes with the senten- 
 tiousness of an old man who accepts and enforces 
 what has stood the test of experience. 
 
 The remarks made concerning the proverbial 
 quotations of these letters are equally true 
 ,egarding those which I have termed liturgical. 
 Creeds and Hymns and other forms of this nature 
 grew up side by side with the progress of Church 
 life. They would hardly be coincident, at least 
 in any mature shape, with the first preaching 
 of the Gospel; but would come into existence 
 gradually in the settled Christian communities, 
 would spread from one such community to 
 another, and become bonds of union among 
 them. It is not worth while, in this place, to 
 draw any distinctions between Hymns and 
 Creeds. They practically run into one another. 
 
 Hh 2 
 
468 APPENDIX IX. 
 
 Every good hymn is a creed; and those creeds 
 are the most likely to instruct and strengthen 
 the Christian people which are best adapted to 
 be sung as hymns. It can hardly be doubted 
 that other parts of the New Testament contain 
 indications of the existence of such liturgical 
 elements, though it may be in a very rudimen- 
 tary form. And here again it may be observed 
 that St. Paul elsewhere makes use of such litur- 
 gical elements, and thus manifests his consis- 
 tency with himself. There is an instance in the 
 first Epistle to the Corinthians, and another in 
 the Epistle to the Ephesians. In the former St. 
 Paul introduces by the phrase, “ as it 1s written,” 
 the following words: “ Hye hath not seen, nor ear 
 heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, 
 the things which God hath prepared for them that 
 love Him.” * Now a difficulty has always been 
 felt as to where these words are “ written” in 
 the Old Testament; but they are found in one 
 of the Early Liturgies; and also in two of the 
 earliest Fathers they occur asa quotation. It 
 seems natural to conclude that even when St. 
 ‘Paul wrote to the Corinthians, they were more 
 or less current in some form of prayer or praise. 
 In reading the Epistle to the Ephesians, again, we 
 
 2 1 Cor. ii. 9, 10. 
 
THE “ FAITHFUL SAYINGS.” 469 
 
 cannot fail to be struck by the rhythmical charac- 
 ter of certain words used by the Apostle (v. 14) 
 concerning the “children of light,” and intro- 
 duced by the phrase, “wherefore it saith: ” ° 
 “ Awake, thou that steepest, and arise from the 
 dead, and Christ shall give thee light: ” and the 
 hymnical nature of the passage strikes us as the 
 more observable, because in this Epistle St. Paul 
 speaks of sacred music and poetry in such a 
 manner as to prove the existence of “ hymns”’ 
 _ as well as “ psalms” in the Church, and the high 
 value set upon both.* This prepares us to find 
 in the Pastoral Epistles some quotation of the 
 same nature, with the probability that it will 
 indicate something still more definite and ma- 
 ture; and in the last “ faithful saying ” we dis- 
 cover an example which fulfils these conditions : 
 “ Tf we be dead with Him—we shall also live with 
 flim: if we suffer—we shall also reign with Him : 
 if we deny Him—He also will deny us: if we 
 believe not—yet He abideth faithful”? The 
 mere aspect of these words on the page justifies 
 the strong opinion that we have before us a 
 
 3 This seems more likély to be accurate than the trans- 
 lation “wherefore he saith” in the Authorized Version. 
 
 * See Appenpix VII., on the comparison of Colossians 
 and Ephesians. 
 
 5 2 Tim. ii. 11—13. 
 
4.70 APPENDIX IX. 
 
 fragment of a Christian Hymn, and a Hymn 
 uttered in that antiphonal manner which was 
 customary to the Jewish Church; while the 
 words, “it is a faithful saying,’ may be de- 
 scribed as the “‘ Amen,” which gives to all these 
 five quotations their liturgical or confessional 
 character. 
 
 The evidence derived from this source con- 
 verges with all other evidence to this one point 
 in regard to the Pastoral Epistles—that they 
 were written late in St. Paul’s life, and written . 
 about the same time. And especially it must be 
 observed that, on this theory, all the notices of 
 places in these Epistles cease to present any 
 difficulty. To assign these writings to certain 
 parts of St. Paul’s life, as recorded in the Acts, 
 has often been attempted, but never with suc- 
 cess. On the other hand, on the supposition of 
 a second imprisonment, it is very easy so to 
 arrange the journeys indicated in these Epistles, 
 as, In Paley’s words, to exhibit “their consis- 
 tency and agreement with one another.” 
 
 THE END. 
 
 : Sed 
 GILBERT AND RIVINGTON, PRINTERS, ST. JOHN’S SQUARE, LONDON. 
 
Society for Bromoting Christian Raotwledge. 
 
 PUBLICATIONS 
 ON THE CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES. 
 
 —a_= 
 
 7 BOOKS. Price 
 a, d. 
 THEISM OR AGNOSTICISM. 
 An Essay on the grounds of Belief in God. By the Rev. 
 Brownlow Maitland, M.A., author of ‘‘ The Argument from 
 Bropbecr ines. Post Svar iii desi dtister cet) A Cloth boards 1 6 
 ARGUMENT FROM PropHecy (The). 
 By the Rev. Brownlow Maitland, M.A., Author of “ Scepti- 
 cism and Faith,” &c. Post 8v0. .....sccessssseees Cloth boards 1 6 
 
 ScEPTICISM AND F'arrH. 
 By the Rev. Brownlow Maitland. Post 8vo. Cloth boards 1 6 
 
 Moprrn UNBELIEF: ITS PRINCIPLES AND CHARAG- 
 TERISTICS. By the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Gloucester 
 Rimristols) Post Sv0,) .cccccccescecccduacossdbecdbes Cloth boards 1 6 
 
 Some Moprrn Rericious Dirricuttiss. 
 Six Sermons, preached, by the request of the Christian 
 Evidence Society, at St. James’s, Piccadilly, on Sunday 
 Afternoons, after Easter, 1876 ; witha Preface by his Grace 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury. Post 8vo....... Cloth boards 1 6 
 
 Some WITNESSES FoR THE Farru. 
 Six Sermons, preached, by the request of the Christian 
 Evidence Society, at St. Stephen’s Church, South Kensing- 
 ton, on Sunday Afternoons, after Easter, 1877. Post 8vo. 
 Cloth boards 1 4 
 
 1-4-78.] [Sm. Post 8yo. 
 
bo 
 
 THe ANALOGY oF RELIGION. 
 Dialogues founded upon Butler’s ‘‘ Analogy of Religion.” 
 By Rev. H. R. Huckin, D.D., Head Master of Repton 
 
 School. ‘Post Bvo.s Soli icowets has. eee . Cloth boards 
 ‘ MIRACLES.”? 
 
 By the Rev. E. A. Litton, M.A., Examining Chaplain of 
 
 the Bishop of Durham. Crown 8vo. ............ Cloth boards 
 
 Morat DIFFICULTIES CONNECTED WITH THE BIBLE. 
 
 Being the Boyle Lectures for 1871, preached in Her 
 Majesty’s Chapel at Whitehall. By the Ven. Archdeacon 
 Hessey, D.C.L., Preacher to the Hon. Society of Gray’s 
 Inn, &c. First SERIES, Post 8vo............04+- Cloth boards 
 
 Morat DIirFicULTIES CONNECTED WITH THE BIBLE. 
 Being the Boyle Lectures for 1872, preached in Her 
 Majesty’s Chapel at Whitehall. By the Ven. Archdeacon 
 Hessey, D.C.L., SECOND SEntzs. Post 8vo...... Cloth boards 
 
 PRAYER AND RECENT DIFFICULTIES ABOUT IT. 
 The Boyle Lectures for 1873, being the THIRD SERIES 
 of ‘‘Moral Difficulties connected with the Bible.” 
 Preached in Her Majesty’s Chapel at Whitehall. By the 
 Ven. Archdeacon Hessey,D.C.L. Post 8vo...... Cloth boards 
 The above Three Series in a volume ............ Cloth boards 
 
 Historicat InLustratTions or Ton Op Tusta- 
 MENT. By the Rev. G. Rawlinson, M.A., Camden Pro- 
 fessor of Ancient History, Oxford. Post 8vo ...Cloth boards 
 
 Can we Bewieve tn Mrracues ? 
 
 By G. Warington, B.A., of Caius College, Cambridge. 
 Poab Sve, dela... deeiseansin. eR, Cloth boards 
 
 Tar Morat TracHinc or THE New TEstaMent 
 
 VIEWED AS EVIDENTIAL TO ITS HistoRicaAL TRuTH. By the 
 Rev. C. A. Row, M.A. Post 8v0...........csseeees ...Cloth boards 
 
 ScriptuRE Doctrine OF CREATION. 
 
 By the Rev. T. R. Birks, M.A., Professor of Moral Philosophy 
 at Cambridge: Post 8V0............ cc csceeece ees Cloth boards 
 
 THovuGHTS ON THE I['irst PRINCIPLES OF THE 
 POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY CONSIDERED IN RELATION TO THE 
 Human Minp. By the late Benjamin Shaw, M.A., late 
 Fellow of Trinity College, Camb. Post 8vo....... Limp cloth 
 
 THOUGHTS ON THE BIBLE. 
 By the Rev. W. Gresley, M.A., Prebendary of Lichfield. 
 PORN Re eA «cans cac cn soe vera to Sees .od cae Cloth boards 
 
Tr REASONABLENESS OF PRAYER. 
 
 By the Rev. P. Onslow, M.A. Post 8vo, ...:..... Lemp cloth 
 Locks on tHE Existence or Gop. 
 
 ROE MOVO ce e0 chs se Bie kc cknn spn hon pOREs isch pik oAG0 KS 0 ase Paper cover 
 
 Patry’s EvipENCES oF CHRISTIANITY. 
 A New Edition, with Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By 
 the Rev. E. A. Litton, M.A. Post 8vo............. Cloth boards 
 
 Patny’s Naturat THHonoey. 
 Revised to harmonize -with Modern Science. By Mr. F. le 
 Gros Clark, F.R.S., President of the Royal College of 
 Surgeons of England, &c. Post 8vo. ............ Cloth boards 
 
 Patry’s Hore Pavtine. 
 A new Edition, with Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By 
 J.S. Howson, D.D., Dean of Chester. Post 8vo. Cloth boards 
 
 Tur Story of CREATION, AS TOLD BY THEOLOGY 
 
 AND SCIENCE. By the Rev. T. 8. Ackland, M.A. Post 8vo. 
 Cloth boards 
 
 Man’s ACCOUNTABLENESS FOR HIS RELIGIOUS 
 Brier. A Lecture delivered at the Hall of Science, on 
 Tuesday, April 2nd, 1872. By the Rev. Daniel Moore, 
 M.A., Holy Trinity, Paddington. Post 8vo...... Paper cover 
 
 Tue Turory or PRAYER: WITH SPECIAL REFER- 
 
 ENCE TO MoprerRN THouGHT. By the Rev. W. H. 
 Karslake, M.A., Assistant Preacher at Lincoln’s Inn, 
 Vicar of Westcott, Dorking, late Fellow and Tutor at 
 Merton College, Oxford, Post 8V0............:000 Liiinp cloth 
 
 WHEN WAS THE PENTATEUCH WRITTEN ? 
 
 By George Warington, B.A., author of ‘‘Can we Believe 
 in Miracles?” &c. Post 8vo....... ies Sed eetiate Picwdes Cloth boards 
 
 Tur CREDIBILITY OF MysTERIEs. 
 A Lecture delivered at St. George’s Hall, Langham Place. 
 By the Rev. Daniel Moore, M.A. Post 8vo......Paper cover 
 
 ANALOGY oF Retiaion, NATURAL AND REVEALED, 
 TO THE CONSTITUTION AND COURSE OF NATURE: to which 
 are added, Two Brief Dissertations. By Bishop Butler. 
 New Epition. Post 8vo.......... PIURTADA ca seacense Cloth boards 
 
 CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES: 
 
 intended chiefly for the young, by the Most Reverend 
 Richard Whately, D.D. 12m0...........s0cceseeees Paper cover 
 
 os) 
 
 co 
 
 ©o 
 
Tur Erricacy or PRAYER. 
 
 By the Rey. W. H. Karslake, M.A., Assistant Preacher 
 at Lincoln’s-Inn, &c. &c, Post 8V0. ....secceeeeeee Limp cloth 0 & 
 
 ScIENCE AND THE Bipiu: a Lecture by the Right 
 Rev. Bishop Perry, D.D. 18mo. Paper cover4d.,orLimpcloth 0 6 
 
 Tur Breve: Its Hvidences, Characteristics, 
 
 A Sermon on THE Erricacy oF PRAYER. 
 By the Right Reverend Harvey Goodwin, D.D., Bishop of 
 Oarlisle. "LOMO"... .15.2+525 cede senagehe ss -caans anne Paper cover 0 2 
 
 Tor Testimony oF THE Primitive Fatuers 
 to the Truth of the Gospel History. By T. G. Bonney, M.A., 
 Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge, 18mo.Paper cover 0 2 
 
 Tne Trout or tHE GosreL History confirmed 
 by the Eariiest Witnesses after Apostolic Times, <A Lec- 
 ture delivered at Potsdam, by the late Dr. F. W. 
 Krummacher. 15m0, 1.0.2. ..+sscncnsdaneswesdecdeaaes Paper cover 0 2. 
 
 A Lecture on THE Bisie, by the Very Rev. 
 E. M, Goulburn, D.D., Dean of Norwich. 18mo, Paper cover 0 2 
 
 *.* For List of TRACTS on the Christian Evidences, see the Society's 
 Catalogue B, 
 
 DEPOSITORIES : 
 77, GREAT QUEEN STREET, Lincotn’s-Inn Freips, W.C. ; 
 4, Roya Excuananr, H.C. ; 48, PicoaDILLy, W.; 
 LONDON. 
 
Lil 
 —_ 
 QO 
 a 
 <{ 
 QO 
 
 293 
 
 Demco, Inc. 38 
 
ono toan ad ee) 9 ETM 
 Mole y, Gai bi am 
 
 MOVAC AeaAuWUL Nae 
 
 BUSWELL MEMORIAL LIBRARY 
 WHEATON COLLEGE 
 WHEATON, &% 60187 
 
 WHEATON COLLEGE 
 
 3 
 
 3124 00412 6768 
 
 i. V4 Am PRO 
 
Wn 
 
 2 121367764