that of unimmediate evidence:-evidence once removed; having, for its most probable and least untrustworthy source, that same immediate evidence. Paul's evidenceis, at the same time, not only more circumstantiated, but supported by the reasons which he has com bined with it. Not till three years after his alledged miraculous conversion, did he go near to any of the Apostles. Why?-Because, though, at that time, for reasons which he has left us to guess, he had regarded himself as having considerable need of them,-till that time he did not regard himself as having any need of them. And, why was it, that, for so great a length of time, he did not regard himself as having any need of them? The answer he himself gives us, Gal. i. 10: ...." do I seek to please men?-11. I certify to you, "brethren, that the Gospel which was preached of me, "is not after man.-12. For I received it not of man, "nor was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus "Christ.-15. When it pleased God, who called me "by his grace,-16. To reveal his Son in me, that "I might preach him among the heathen, immediately "I conferred not with flesh and blood:-17. Neither "went I up to Jerusalem to them which were Apostles "before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.-18. Then after three years "I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with "him fifteen days.-19. But other of the Apostles "saw I none, save James, the Lord's brother."

Thus far Paul himself. Let us now see, what is said in regard to the time, by his subsequent attendant and historiographer. Acts ix....." as he (Saul) journey"ed, he came near Damascus, and suddenly there "shined round him a light," &c.—ver. 8. "And Saul "arose from the earth; and.... they led him by the "hand, and brought him into Damascus.-9. And he "was three days without sight, and neither did eat "nor drink.-10. And there was a certain disciple at

Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the "Lord in a vision....-11.....go into the street "called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas "for one called Saul of Tarsus....-17. And Ana"nias....entered into the house, and.... said, Bro"ther Saul, the Lord....hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight....-18. And....he "received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. "-19. And when he had received meat, he was "strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the "disciples which were at Damascus.--20. And straight"way he preached Christ in the synagogues,

. . .

"22. .... and confounded the Jews which dwelt at "Damascus,....-23. And after that many days "were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him."24.....and they watched the gates day and night "to kill him.-25. Then the disciples took him by "night, and let him down by the wall in a basket.— "26. And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were "all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a "disciple.-27. But Barnabas took him, and brought "him to the Apostles, and declared unto them how "he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had "spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at "Damascus in the name of Jesus."

With what the historiographer says in his own person, agrees, as to the particular point now in question, what, in the studied oration, he puts into Paul's mouth. In that account likewise, immediately after the mention of what Paul did at Damascus,-follows, the mention of what he did at Jerusalem: and, as to every thing done by him among the Gentiles, not only does the mention of it come after the mention of what was done by him at Jerusalem, but, between the two, comes the mention, of whatever was done by him, in any of the coasts of Judea. Acts xxvi. 19. "Whereupon,

"O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:-20. 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."

Here then, according to Paul's own account, after his visit to Damascus from Jerusalem, he visited Arabia, and moreover Damascus a second time, before he made his visit to Jerusalem to see Peter: before this visit did he make both those other visits; and, in making them, pass three years, with or without the addition, of the time, occupied by his first visit to Damascus, and the time, occupied by his abode in Arabia. According to Paul's own account then, between his second departure from, and his arrival at, Jerusalem from thence, there was an interval either of three years, or of so much more than three years. On the contrary, according to both the accounts given of the matter by his historiographer in the Acts, there was not between the two events in question, any interval other than such as the journey from the one to the other-about 130 British miles as the crow flies, say about 160, allowance made for turnings and windings, would require.

Now, as between Jews and Gentiles, alias heathens :-to which of these two descriptions of persons, were his preachings addressed in the first instance?

According to his Epistle to his Galatians, preaching to the heathen being his peculiar destination, this accordingly is the vocation upon which he proceeded in the first place: and we have seen how probable it is, not to say certain, that, in this particular, what he asserted was true. His appointment being to "the hea

then," he conferred not with flesh and blood: i. e. with the Apostles, their immediate disciples, or other flesh and blood of the Christian persuasion: for, of any such conference of any assistance or support from any

such quarter, he has, in this same Epistle, been declaring and protesting-most vehemently protesting-that he had no need. Neither then for the purpose of conference with "those who were Apostles (as he says) be"fore him," nor for any other purpose, went he up to Jerusalem: no, not till either three years after his conversion, or three years, with the addition of another term of unmeasurable length.

Now then, how stands this matter according to the Acts-according to the speech put into Paul's mouth by the author of the Acts? Instead of the Gentiles being the description of persons, to whom, in the first instance, he applies his labours,—it is the Jews. What he shows is "shown," in the first place, to those "of Damascus ;" then " at Jerusalem;" then "throughout all the coasts of Judea;" and, not till then-to the Gentiles of his abode in Arabia-of any visit of his to Arabia-not any the slightest mention, or so much as allusion to it. But, all this while, for any thing that appears to the contrary, Arabia was completely open to him: whereas, after the offence he had committed against the authority of the ruling powers at Judea, it was not, morally speaking, in the nature of things that he could have continued in any place coming within that description-have continued, long enough to make any sensible impression : and, in Jerusalem in particular, in this same Epistle to the Galatians, from which the above particulars are taken,-it was, as he himself declares, only in secrecy, that, even fourteen years after this, he ventured to disseminate those doctrines, whatever they were, that were peculiar to himself*. "Then, fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, "and took Titus with me. 2. And I went up by re"velation, and communicated unto them that Gospel "which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to

"them which were of reputation, lest by any means I "should run, or had run, in vain."

Thus stands the contrariety:-the contrariety, between Paul's own account of his own proceedings, and the account, which, by the author of the Acts, he is represented as giving of them, on another occasion. Says Paul himself, in his own Epistle to his Galatians-After my conversion, it was to the Gentiles that I applied myself first: to the Jews, not till afterwards; nor then, to any considerable extent. Says the author of the Acts, in a speech, which he puts into the mouth of Paul-It was to the Jews that he applied himself first, and that to a great extent: to the Gentiles, not till afterwards.

Thus stands the contrariety, taken in itself. As to the cause, it will neither be far to seek, nor dubious. In the differences of situations, occasions, and purposes in view-in the differences, that had place in respect of all those particulars-it will be found.

On the occasion, on which Paul himself speaks, what was the persuasion which it was his endeavour to produce? It was-that, for a number of years, commencing from the moment of his conversion,with no persons, who, to this purpose, could be called Jews, had he, to any such purpose as this, had any intercourse for, this being admitted, it followed, of course, that, if, on the subject of the religion of Jesus, he had really received the information he declared himself to have received, it was not from the Apostles, that he had had it, or any part of it. "On them

66

(says he) I am perfectly independent: to them I "am even superior. With Jesus they had no com"munication but in a natural way; with the same "Jesus I have had communication in a supernatural "way-in the way of revelation.' My communi"cation with him is, moreover, of a date posterior to "theirs to any that they can pretend to: in so far "as there is any contrariety between what I teach and