that John had botn these classes of heretics in view, and | that he wrote to confute their respective tenets. Yet, though he composed his Gospel principally with this design, he did not wholly confine himself to it; but took occasion to impart correct views of the nature and offices of Jesus Christ both to the Jews and Gentiles. Should this opinion be acceded to, it will reconcile the various opinions of learned men concerning the real scope of John's Gospel.

VI. It is obvious to every attentive reader of this Gospel, that John studiously omits to notice those passages in our Lord's history and teaching, which had been related at length by the other evangelists, or if he mentions them at he gives his testimony that their narratives are faithful and all, it is in a very cursory manner. By pursuing this method true, and at the same time leaves himself room to enlarge the Gospel history. This confirms the unanimous declarations of ancient writers, that the first three Gospels were written and published before John composed his evangelical history. In the account of our Saviour's passion, death, and resurrection, all the four Gospels coincide in many particulars; though here John has several things peculiar to himself. In his Gospel, many things recorded by the other evangelists are omitted. He has given no account of our Saviour's nativity, nor of his baptism by John. He takes no notice of our Saviour's temptation in the wilderness; nor of the call or names of the twelve apostles; nor of their mission during the ministry of Christ; nor of his parabies, or other discourses recorded by the first three evan gelists; nor of his journeys; nor of any of his predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, which are related by them; nor has John repeated any of Christ's miracles recorded by them, except that of feeding five thousand people, which was probably repeated for the sake of the discourse to which it gave birth. But, on the other hand, John mentions several incidents, which the other evangelists have not noticed. Thus, he gives an account of our Lord's cleansing the temple at the first passover, when he went to Jerusalem; but all the other evangelists give a similar account of his cleansing the temple at his last passover. These two acts, however, are widely different. Ile relates the acts of Christ before the imprisonment of John the Baptist; the wedding at Cana; the cure of the man who had been blind from his birth; the resurrection of Lazarus; the indignation of Judas against the woman who anointed our Lord with ointment; the visit of the Greeks to Jesus; his washing the feet of his disciples; and his consolatory discourse to them previously to his passion. John's Gospel also contains more plain and frequent assurances than those occurring in the other Gospels, that Jesus is not only a prophet and inessenger of God, but also that he is the Messiah, the Son of God: and asserts his pre-existence and Deity in the clearest and

most distinct terms.'

contents of this book -VII. Observations on ils style.VIII. On the importance of this book, as an evidence for the truth of Christianity.

1. THE book of the ACTS OF THE APOSTLES forms the fifth

and last of the historical books of the New Testament, and
connects the Gospel with the Epistles; being a useful post-
script to the former, and a proper introduction to the latter.
Gospels, though (as Michaelis has remarked) in several an-
On this account it has been generally placed after the four
cient manuscripts and versions it is very frequently placed
after the Epistles of Saint Paul, because it is necessary to
noticed in the critical editions of the New Testament. Thus,
the right understanding of them.
Various TITLES have been given to this book which are
in the Codex Beza, or Cambridge manuscript, it is called
ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ ΤΩΝ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΩΝ, Μe acts or Transactions of the
Apostles. In the Codex Alexandrinus, and many other manu-
scripts, it is entitled ПPAZE Z TON ATION AHOZTOAON, the
of the Greek and Latin fathers. The first of these various
Acts of the Holy Apostles, which title is also adopted by most
titles is that which is adopted in the printed editions, and in
all modern versions; but by whom it was prefixed, it is now
impossible to ascertain. In the Syriac version, according to
Book of the Acts, that is, of the History of the Blessed
the edition in Bishop Walton's Polyglott, the title is: "The
Apostles, composed by my holy lord Luke the Evangelist:"
of the Acts of the [holy] Apostles;"-and in the Ethiopic
in the Arabic version it is, "The beginning of the Book
version, "The Acts of the Apostles, the transactions of the
ministers, that is, the History of the holy Apostles." This
Peter and Saint Paul, and of the history of the Christian
book contains great part of the lives and transactions of Saint
church; commencing at the ascension of our Saviour, and
being continued down to Saint Paul's arrival at Rome, after
his appeal to Cæsar, comprising a period of about thirty
years.

confinement.

II. That Saint Luke was the author of the Acts of the posiles, as well as of the Gospel which bears his name, is evident both from the introduction, and from the unanimous testimonies of the early Christians. Both are inscribed to Theophilus; and in the very first verse of the Acts there is a reference made to his Gospel, which he calls the former Treatise. On this account, Dr. Benson and some othe critics have conjectured that Saint Luke wrote the Gospels the frequent use of the first person plural, it is clear that he and Acts in one book, and divided it into two parts. From He ap was present at most of the transactions he relates. pears to have accompanied Saint Paul from Treas to 1 ilippi; he also attended him to Jerusalem, and afterwards to Rome, where he remained two years, during that apostle's first Accordingly we find Saint Luke particularly VII. Salmasius, Grotius, Bolten, and other critics have mentioned in two of the epistles written by Saint Paul, from imagined that John did not write his Gospel originally in Rome, during that confinement. As the book of Acts is Greek, but in the Syriac language. This hypothesis, how-continued to the end of the second year of Saint Paul's imever, is contradicted by the unanimous consent of Christian prisonment, it could not have been written before the year 63; antiquity, which affirms that he wrote it in Greek. In addi- and, as the death of that apostle is not mentioned, it is protion to the observations already offered, respecting the original is supposed to have happened A. D. 65. For these reasons, bable that the book was composed before that event, which language of the New Testament, we may remark, that the Hebraisms occurring in this Gospel clearly prove that it was Tomline, and the generality of critics, assign the date of this Michaelis, Dr. Lardner, Dr. Benson, Rosenm ller, Bishop originally written by a Jew. His style is pronounced by book to the year 63. Michaelis to be better and more fluent than that of the other evangelists; and he ascribes this excellence to the facility and taste in the Greek language, which the apostle seems to have acquired from his long residence at Ephesus. His narrative is characterized by singular perspicuity, and by the most unaffected simplicity and benevolence. There are few passages in Holy Writ more deeply affecting than this evan-lian, in the second century, both ascribed the Acts of the gelist's narrative of the resurrection of Lazarus.1

SECTION VI.

ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.

III. To the genuineness and authenticity of this book, the early Christian fathers bear unanimous testimony. Not to mention the attestations of the apostolic fathers, in the first century, which have been collected by Mr. Jones, Drs. Benson and Lardner, we may remark that Irenæus and Tertul

Apostles to Saint Luke. And their evidence is corroborated by that of Origen, Jerome, Augustine, Eusebius, and all subsequent ecclesiastical writers. Further, Chrysostom and other fathers inform us, that this book was annually read in the churches, every day between the festivals of Easter and Pentecost or Whitsuntide. The Valentinians, indeed, as

I. Title.-II. Author and date.-III. Genuineness and authen-well as the Marcionites, Severians, and some Manicheans, ticity.-IV. Scope.-V. Chronology.-VI. Analysis of the

Col. iv. 14. Philem. 21.

6 Jones on the Canon, vol. iii. pp. 129-136. Dr. Benson's Hist. of the First Planting of Christianity, vol. ii. pp. 325-330. 2d edit. Dr. Lardner's Works, Index, voce Acts of the Apostes. Lardner, svo. vol. ii. pp. 162, 164, 4to. vol. i. p. 368. Benson, vol. i Lardner, 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 261, 262.; 4to. vol. i. p. 452. Benson, vol. ii p. 331 Benson, vol. ii. pp. 321-321. Lardner, Svo. vol. vi. pp. 115-117; 4to iii. pp. 206, 207.

p.

330.

vol.

p. 605.

10 Benson, vol. ii. p. 332. Lardner, 8vo. vol. v. pp 133, 131.; 412. vol i

the book.

to death the apostle St. James; and about that time Saint Paul 2. "Second epoch. Herod Agrippa dies soon after he had put and Saint Barnabas return from Jerusalem to Antioch. (ch. xii. 21-25.). This is still in the year 44.

3. "Third epoch. (ch. xviii. 2.) Shortly after the banishment of the Jews from Italy by Claudius Cæsar, Saint Paul arrives at Corinth. Commentators affix the date of 54 to this event; but it is uncertain, for Suetonius, the only historian who has noticed this banishment of the Jews, mentions it without date. 4. "Fourth epoch. Saint Paul comes to Jerusalem, where he is imprisoned by the Jews, not long after the disturbances which were excited by the Egyptian. (ch. xxi. 37-39.) This imprisonment of Saint Paul happened in the year 60, for it was two years before Felix quitted his government of Judæa. (ch. xxiii. 26. xxiv. 27.)

rejected the Acts of the Apostles, not from historical reasons, | V. The Acts of the Apostles, Michaelis observed, were but because they militated against their opinions; for the evidently written with a tolerably strict attention to chronoGnostics (of which sect the Valentinians and Marcionites logical order; though Saint Luke has not affixed a date to any wore a branch) affirmed that the God of the Old Testament one of the facts recorded by him. There are, however, sevewas different from the God of the New Testament: and that [ral parts of this book, in which ecclesiastical history is com another Christ, different from our Saviour, was promised. bined with political facts, the dates of which are known: The Severians and Encratites strenuously insisted upon ab-and these Michaelis has endeavoured to determine, because stinence from certain articles of food; whereas, in the book the chronology will not only contribute to illustrate the Acts of Acts, the promiscuous use of food is allowed. Lastly, of the Apostles, but also will assist us in fixing the year when Mares wished himself to be taken for "the Comforter," who many of Saint Paul's Epistles were written. Taking for had been promised by Christ to his apostles; but in the Acts granted, therefore, that this book commences with the year it is related that the Comforter that had been so promised 33, of the Christian æra (in which calculation he follows was the Holy Spirit, who had been sent. The reasons, Archbishop Usher), he has given us the following series therefore, why the book was rejected by the above-mentioned of dates :sects, were not historical, but doctrinal; because the narrative 1. "The First epoch, after the commencement of the book, is of the sacred historian contradicted their dogmas; and as at ch. xi. 29, 30.; for what happened between the first Pentecost their errors were detected and refuted by contemporary wri- after Christ's ascension and this period is without any marks of ters, the unqualified and unsupported assertions of these chronology. But at ch. xi. 29, 30. we have a date; for the heretics are so far from impugning the veracity and genu-famine which took place in the time of Claudius Cæsar, and ineness of the Acts of the Apostles, that on the contrary, which induced the disciples at Antioch to send relief to their they afford a decisive and collateral testimony in favour of brethren in Judæa, happened in the fourth year of Claudius's IV. Saint Luke does not appear to have intended to write reign, that is, in the year 44 of the Christian æra. a complete ecclesiastical history of the Christian church, during the first thirty years after our Saviour's ascension, nor even of Saint Paul's life during that period; for he has almost wholly omitted what passed among the Jews after the conversion of that apostle, and is totally silent concerning the spread of Christianity in the East and in Egypt, as well as the foundation of the church of Christ at Rome, Saint Paul's journey into Arabia, and many other topics, though the labours and sufferings of the other apostles could not but have afforded the most interesting materials, had it fallen within his design to have composed an entire history of the church. If we carefully examine the Acts of the Apostles, we shall perceive that Saint Luke had two objects in view-1. To relate in what manner the gifts of the Holy Spirit were communicated on the day of Pentecost, and the subsequent miracles performed by the apostles, by which the truth of Christianity was confirmed. An authentic account of this matter was absolutely necessary, because Christ had often assured his disciples that they should receive the Holy Spirit. Unbelievers, therefore, whether Jews or Heathens, might have made objections to our religion if it had not been shown that Christ's declarations were really fulfilled.-2. To deliver such accounts as proved the claim of the Gentiles to admission into the Church of Christ,-a claim disputed by the Jews, especially at the time when Saint Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles. And it was this very circumstance which excited the hatred of the Jews against Saint Paul, and occaIt is difficult to determine the date of the events that hapsioned his imprisonment in Rome, with which Saint Luke closes his history. Hence we see the reason why he relates pened between the epochs 33 and 34, and between 44 and 60, the story of Cornelius, whom Saint Peter (to whose authority these transactions A. D. 35, others in 38. But, though we (ch. viii.) the conversion of the Samaritans, and (ch. x. xi.) especially the time of Saint Paul's conversion and of the council at Jerusalem: Archbishop Usher places the first of the adversaries of Saint Paul had appealed in favour of circumcision2) baptized, though he was not of the circumcision. cannot attain to absolute certainty, a probable conjecture may Hence also Saint Luke relates the determination of the first suffered martyrdom before Pilate was recalled from the gobe formed. Thus, Michaelis remarks, Saint Stephen hardly same reason he is more diffuse in his account of Saint Paul's vernment of Judæa; because, under that procurator, the Jews conversion, and Saint Paul's preaching the Gospel to the had not the power of inflicting capital punishments. Now, Gentiles, than on any other subject. It is true that the whole according to Usher, the year in which Pilate was recalled, was the thirty-sixth of the Christian æra: Saint Stephen's marrelation, which Saint Luke has given (ch. xii.), has no connection with the conversion of the Gentiles: but during the tyrdom, therefore, probably happened after 36.-If this be period to which that chapter relates, Saint Paul himself was after 36, and therefore 35 is too early a date. But how long true, Saint Paul's conversion must have happened likewise present at Jerusalem (see Acts xi. 30. xii. 25.), and it is pro-after 36, whether in 38, cannot be determined. bable, for that reason, that Saint Luke has introduced it. But there is, 3. A third opinion which Michaelis thinks not devoid of probability, viz. that Saint Luke might design to record only those facts, which he had either seen himself or had heard from eye-witnesses.3

council in Jerusalem relative to the Levitical law: and for the

Irenæus adversus Hæreses, lib. iii. c. 12. Theodoret, Hist. Eccl. lib. i. c. 21. Augustine epist. 251. et contra Faustum, lib. xix. c. 31. 2 See Galat. ii. 6--21.

Michaelis, vol. iii. past i. pp. 327-331. Dr. Benson, however, is of opinion that Saint Luke designed his book to be only a concise specimen of the doctrines preached by the apostles, and that he was chiefly desirous of describing the manner in which the Jews, proselytes of the gate, or devout Gentiles, and the idolatrous Gentiles, were respectively converted. Hense this learned author divides the book into three parts or books, viz. 1. The first part contains an account of the propagation of the Gospel among the Jews only, from A. D. 33. to A. D. 41. including chapter ii. to x. 2. The second comprises an account of the spreading of Christianity among the devout Gentiles, together with its farther progress among the Jews, A. D. 41. to A. D 14. (Acts x-xiii.) 3. And the third part comprehends the diffusion of Christianity among the idolatrous Gentiles, together with its further progress among the two preceding classes of persons, A. D. 44. to . D. 63. (Asta xiii.-xxviii.) Benson's Hist. of the First Planting of Chris janity, vol. i. pp. 22-24.

5. "Fifth epoch. Two years after the commencement of Saint Paul's imprisonment, Festus is appointed governer of Judæa, A. n. 62. (ch. xxiv. 27. xxv. 1.)

"From this period the chronology of the Acts of the Apostles is clear. Saint Paul is sent prisoner to Rome in the autumn of the same year in which Festus arrived in Judæa: he suffers shipwreck, passes the winter in Malta, and arrives in Rome in the following year, that is, in 63. (ch. xxvi. xxvii. xxviii.)

"The Acts of the Apostles close with the end of the second year of Saint Paul's imprisonment in Rome: consequently in the year 65. (ch. xxviii. 30.)"

ranged between 33 and 36, Michaelis cannot determine: for In what manner the chapters iii. iv. v. vi. are to be arwhat chronologers have said is mere conjecture, and not calculation. The same uncertainty prevails in respect to ch. viii. and x.: for we can aflirm nothing more, than that the one must be placed before the other after 36. We are likewise in the dark with respect to ch. xiii. xiv. and several other chapters. Of ch. xvi. we may assert, that it belongs to a period at least six years prior to the fourth epoch, or the year 60: for a year and a half at Corinth, three years at Ephesus, and the time spent on several journeys, can hardly be pressed into a smaller compass than that of six years. To ch. Xvi., therefore, the latest date which can be assigned is 54: and it is not improbable that it should be dated still earlier.4

• Michaelis, vol. iii. part. i. pp. 336-335. The chronology of the Acts of the Apostles is discussed at considerable length in Hug's Introduction to New Test. vol. ii. pp. 312-334, and (so far as concerns the ragels and writings of Saint Paul) by the reviewer of that work in the British Citie for April 1828, pp. 261-317.

VI. The Acts of the Apostles, as they appear in our co- other books of the New Testament, particularly in the pies, may be divided into three principal parts; viz.

presenting some circumstances, or using some phrase or expression not then in use. The plea of forgery, therefore, in later ages, cannot be allowed; and if Saint Luke had published such a history at so early a period, when some of the apostles, or many other persons concerned in the transactions which he has recorded, were alive, and his account had not been true, he would only have exposed himself to an easy confutation, and to certain infamy.

perfect unison with the history, and tend to confirm it; for the doctrines and principles are every where the same. The Gospels close with references to the facts recorded in the Acts, particularly the promise of the Holy Spirit, which we know from the Acts was poured out by Christ upon his disciples after his ascension; and the Epistles, generally, plainly suppose that those facts had actually occurred, which the history relates. So that the history of the Acts is one of the most important parts of sacred history; for, without Since, therefore, the Acts of the Apostles are in themneither the Gospels nor the Epistles could have been so selves consistent and uniform; the incidental relations agreeclearly understood; but by the aid of this book the whole able to the best ancient historians that have come down to us; scheme of the Christian revelation is set before us in a clear and the main facts supported and confirmed by the other and easy view. Lastly, the incidental circumstances, men- books of the New Testament, as well as by the unanimous tioned by Saint Luke, correspond so exactly, and without testimony of so many of the ancient fathers, we are justly any previous view to such a correspondence (in cases, too, authorized to conclude, that, if any history of former times where it could not possibly have been premeditated and pre- deserves credit, the Acts of the Apostles ought to be received contrived) with the accounts that occur in the Epistles, and and credited; and if the history of the Acts of the Apostles with those of the best ancient historians, both Jews and is true, Christianity cannot be false; for a doctrine so good Heathens, that no person who had forged such a history, in in itself, so admirably adapted to the fallen state of man, later ages, could have had the same external confirmation; and attended with so many miraculous and divine testimo but he must have betrayed himself, by alluding to some cus-nies, has all the possible marks of a true revelation 2 toms or opinions which have since sprung up, or by misre

CHAPTER III.

ON THE EPISTOLARY OR DOCTRINAL WRITINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, PARTICULARLY THOSE OF SAINT PAUL.

SECTION I.

ACCOUNT OF THE APOSTLE PAUL.

I. The Birth and Education of Paul.-His Persecution of the Disciples of Christ, and his Conversion.—Observations upon it.-II. His subsequent Travels and Labours, to his second Visit to Jerusalem.-III. His third Visit to Jerusalem, and subsequent Labours, to his fourth Visit to Jerusalem.—IV. His Journeys and Labours, to his fifth Visit to Jerusalem.-V. To his first Imprisonment at Rome.-VI. His subsequent Journeys, second Imprisonment, and Martyrdom.-VII, Character of Paul.-VIII. Observations on the Style of his Writings.

1. SAUL, also called PAUL (by which name this illustri- | from his quotations of several Greek poets. 10 From Tarsus, ous apostle was generally known after his preaching among the Gentiles, especially among the Greeks and Romans), was a Hebrew of the Hebrews, a descendant of the patriarch Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin,3 and a native of Tarsus, then the chief city of Cilicia. By birth he was a citizen of Rome, a distinguished honour and privilege, which had been conferred on some of his ancestors for services rendered to the commonwealth during the wars. His father was a Pharisee, and he himself was educated in the most rigid principles of that sect. His sister's son and some others of his relations were Christians, and had embraced the Gospel before his conversion. That he was early educated in Greek literature at Tarsus, may be inferred from that place being celebrated for polite learnings and eloquence, and also The subject of these coincidences has already been noticed in Vol. I. pp. 49-51. supra. Dr. Paley's Hora Paulina amplifies the argument above suggested, and is indispensably necessary to a critical study of the Epistles.

2 Dr. Benson's Hist. of Christianity, vol. ii. pp. 333-311.
a Phil. iii. 5. 2 Cor. xi. 22. Acts xvi. 37, 38.
4 Acts xxi. 25. 29. xxiii. 27.

8vo. vol. i. pp. 227-229.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 124, 125. Such also is the opinion
Dr. Lardner has shown that this is the most probable opinion. Works,
of John Arntzenius, who has written an elegant dissertation on Saint Paul's
citizenship. (See his Dissertationes Binæ, p. 195. Utrecht, 1725.) It is not
an improbable conjecture that the cloak and parchinents, which St. Paul
charged Timothy to bring to him (2 Tim. iv. 13.), were the Roman toga and
the certificates of his citizenship, which might be of service to him in his
approaching trial before the emperor. Shuttleworth's Paraphrastic Trans-
lation of the Apostolical Epistles, p. 369.

Acts xxiii. 6. xxvi. 5. Phil. iii. 5.

Acts xxiii. 16-22. Rom. xvi. 7. 11. 21.

Strabo the geographer, who lived in the same age as St. Paul, characterizes the inhabitants of Tarsus, as cherishing such a passion for philosophy and all the branches of polite literature, that they greatly excelled even Athens and Alexandria, and every other place where there were schools and academies for philosophy and literature. He adds, that the natives of Tarsus were in the practice of going abroad to other cities to perfect themselves. (Lib. xiv. vol. ii. pp. 960, 961. edit. Oxon.) This circumstance accounts for Saint Paul's going to Jerusalem, to finish his stu dies under Gamaliel.

Saul removed to Jerusalem, where he made considerable proficiency in the study of the law, and the Jewish traditions, under Gamaliel, a celebrated teacher of that day." He ap pears to have been a person of great natural abilities, of quick apprehension, strong passions, and firm resolution; and was thus qualified for signal service, as a teacher of whatever principles he might embrace. He was also blameless in his life, and strictly faithful to the dictates of his conscience, according to the knowledge which he possessed: this is evident from his appeals to the Jews, and from the undissembled satisfaction he expresses on a serious comparison and recollection of his former and later conduct. (Acts xxiii. 1. xxvi. 4, 5. Phil. iii. 6. 1 Tim. i. 13. 2 Tim. i. 3.) His parents completed his education by having him taught the art of tent-making,12 in conformity with the practice of the Jews, with whom it was customary to teach youth of the highest birth some mechanical employment, by which, in cases of necessity, they might maintain themselves without being burthensome to others: and his occupation appears For some time after the appearance of Christianity in the subsequently to have had some influence upon his style. world, he was a bitter enemy and a furious opposer of all Who professed that faith; and when the protomartyr Stephen quence was employed in sudden and unpremeditated harangues; and Saint Paul, long accustomed to compositions of this sort, transferred the style and manner from speaking to writing. (Dr. Powell's Discourses, p. 250.) This circumstance will account for the abruptness and other peculiarities in the apostle's letters which are more fully considered in the close of this section.

10 Thus, in Acts xvii. 28. he cites a verse from Aratus; in 1 Cor. xv. 33. he quotes another from Menander; and in Tit. i. 12. a verse from Epimenides. See an illustration of this last passage, supra, Vol. I. p. 81. 11 Acts xxii. 3. xxvi. 5. Gal. i. 14.

12 Michaelis makes St. Paul to have been a maker of mechanical instruments (vol. iv. pp. 183-1986.); but all commentators are of opinion that he was a manufacturer of tents, for which, in the East, there was always a considerable demand.

To a inan employed in making tents, the ideas of camps, arms, armour, warfare, military pay, would be familiar; and St. Paul introduces these and their concomitants so frequently, that his language seems to have been such as might rather have been expected from a soldier, than from one who lived in quiet times, and was a preacher of the gospel of peace. Pow

In every ancient seat of learning eloquence held a principal rank; and each species of it was denominated from the place where it was most practised, or in the greatest perfection. Thus we read of the chaste Attic eloquence, and of the florid Asiatic; and Tarsus also gave name to its peculiar mode, which, however, is least known, because, from the very nature of it, its productions were not like to remain. The Tarsic elo-ell's Discourses, p. 254. VOL. II. 28

was stoned, Saul was not only consenting to his death, but actually took care of the clothes of the witnesses who had

stoned him.

any mark of a libertine disposition. As among the Jews, sc among the Christians, his conversation and manners were blameless.-It has been sometimes objected to the other apos A. D. 34. After this event, Saul took an active part in the tles, by those who were resolved not to credit their testimony, persecution of the Christians, not only at Jerusalem, but also that having been deeply engaged with Jesus during his life, throughout Judæa (Acts viii. 3. xxii. 4. xxvi. 10, 11.); and they were obliged, for the support of their own credit, and procured letters of commission from the high-priest and from having gone too far to return, to continue the same pro elders, or sanhedrin, to the synagogue of the Jews at Da-fessions after his death; but this can by no means be said of mascus, empowering him to bring to Jerusalem any Chris-Saint Paul. On the contrary, whatever force there may be tians, whether men or women, whom he might find there. in such a mode of reasoning, it all tends to convince us, that He also obtained letters to the governor of Damascus, we may presume, to permit them to be removed from his jurisdiction. (Acts ix. 2. xxii. 5. xxvi. 12.) While Sauf was on his journey thither for this purpose, his miraculous conversion took place, A. D. 35, in the manner recorded in the ninth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, and to which Saint Paul himself has numerous references in his Epistles. The conversion of such a man, at such a time and by such means, furnishes one of the most complete proofs that have ever been given of the divine origin of Christianity. That Saul, who possessed such distinguished talents and acquirements, from being a zealous persecutor of the disciples of Christ, became all at once a disciple himself, is a fact, which cannot be controverted without overturning the credit of all history. He must, therefore, have been converted in the miraculous manner in which he himself declares that he was converted, and of course the Christian revelation must be from God; or he must have been either an impostor, an enthusiast, or a dupe to the fraud of others. There is no other alternative possible.

Saint Paul must naturally have continued a Jew, and an enemy to Christ Jesus. If they were engaged on one side, he was as strongly engaged on the other. If shame withheld them from changing sides, much more ought it to have stopped him; who, from his superior education, must have been vastly more sensible to that kind of shame, than the mean and illiterate fishermen of Galilee. The only other difference was, that they, by quitting their master after his death, might have preserved themselves; whereas he, by quitting the Jews, and taking up the cross of Christ, certainly brought on his own destruction.

2. As St. Paul was not an impostor, so it is manifest that he was not an enthusiast. Heat of temper, melancholy, ignorance, and vanity, are the ingredients of which enthu siasm is composed; but from all these, except the first, the apostle appears to have been wholly free. That he had great fervour of zeal, both when a Jew and when a Christian, in maintaining what he thought to be right, cannot be denied ; but he was at all times so much master of his temper, as, in matters of indifference, to "become all things to all 1. If he was an impostor, he must have declared what he men," with the most pliant condescension, bending his noknew to be false, and he must have been influenced to such a tions and manners to theirs, as far as his duty to God would conduct by some motive or other. But the only conceivable permit; a conduct compatible neither with the stiffness of a motives for religious imposture are the hopes of advancing bigot, nor with the violent impulses of fanatical delusion. one's temporal interest, credit, or power; or the prospect of That he was not melancholy, is evident from his conduct in gratifying some passion or appetite under the authority of the embracing every method which prudence could suggest to new religion. Now, that none of these motives could influence escape danger and shun persecution; when he could do it Saint Paul to profess the faith of Christ crucified, is manifest without betraying the duty of his office or the honour of his from the state of Judaism and Christianity, at the period God. A melancholy enthusiast courts persecution; and when he renounced the former, and einbraced the latter faith. when he cannot obtain it, afflicts himself with absurd pen Those whom he left were the disposers of wealth, of dignity, ances; but the holiness of Saint Paul consisted only in the and of power, in Judæa; those to whom he went were indi- simplicity of a godly life, and in the unwearied performance gent men, oppressed, and kept from all means of improving of his apostolical duties. That he was ignorant, no man their fortunes. The certain consequence, therefore, of his will allege who is not grossly ignorant himself; for he aptaking the part of Christianity was the loss not only of all pears to have been master not only of the Jewish learning, but that he possessed, but of all hopes of acquiring more: also of the Greek philosophy, and to have been very conversant whereas, by continuing to persecute the Christians, he had even with the Greek poets. That he was not credulous, is hopes, rising almost to a certainty, of making his fortune by clear from his having resisted the evidence of all the mirathe favour of those who were at the head of the Jewish state, cles performed on earth by Christ, as well as those that were to whom nothing could so much recommend him as the zeal afterwards wrought by the apostles; to the fame of which, which he had shown in that persecution. As to credit, or as he lived at Jerusalem, he could not possibly have been a reputation, could the scholar of Gamaliel hope to gain stranger. And that he was as free froin vanity as any man either by becoming a teacher in a college of fishermen! that ever lived, may be gathered from all that we see in his Could he flatter himself that the doctrines which he taught writings, or know of his life. He represents himself as the would, either in or out of Judæa, do him honour, when he least of the apostles, and not meet to be called an apostle. knew that they were to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to He says that he is the chief of sinners; and he prefers, in the the Greeks foolishness!" Was it then the love of power strongest terms, universal benevolence to faith, prophecy, that induced him to make this great change? Power! over miracles, and all the gifts and graces with which he could whom? Over a flock of sheep whom he himself had assisted be endowed. Is this the language of vanity or enthusiasm ? to destroy, and whose very Shepherd had lately been mur- Did ever fanatic prefer virtue to his own religious opinions, dered! Perhaps it was with the view of gratifying some to illuminations of the spirit, and even to the merit of marlicentious passion, under the authority of the new religion, tyrdom? It is therefore in vain for the enemies of Christithat he commenced a teacher of that religion! This cannot anity to attempt to resolve this miraculous conversion of be alleged; for his writings breathe nothing but the strictest Saint Paul into the effects of enthusiasm. The power of morality, obedience to magistrates, order, and government, imagination in enthusiastical minds is, unquestionably, very with the utmost abhorrence of all licentiousness, idleness, or strong; but it always acts in conformity to the opinions imloose behaviour, under the cloak of religion. We nowhere printed upon it at the time of its working, and can no more find in his works, that saints are above moral ordinances; act against them than a rapid river can carry a vessel against that dominion is founded in grace; that monarchy is despot- the current of its own stream. Now, nothing can be more cerism which ought to be abolished; that the fortunes of the rich tain than that, when Saul departed from Jerusalem for Damas ought to be divided among the poor; that there is no differ-cus, armed with authority from the chief priests to bring the ence in moral actions; that any impulses of the mind are to Christians, who were there, bound to Jerusalem, whether they direct us against the light of our reason, and the laws of na- were men or women (Acts ix. 2.), an authority solicited by ture; or any of those wicked tenets by which the peace of himself and granted to him at his own express desire,-his society has been often disturbed, and the rules of morality mind was most strongly possessed with an opinion against often broken, by men pretending to act under the sanction of Christ and his followers. To give those opinions a more divire revelation. He makes no distinctions, like the impos-active force, his passions at that time concurred, being intor of Arabia, in favour of himself: nor does any part of his flamed in the highest degree by the irritating consciousness life, either before or after his conversion to Christianity, bear of his past conduct towards them, the pride of supporting a See particularly 1 Cor. xv. 9. Gal. i. 13. 1 Tim. i. 12, 13. Various opi- part in which he had voluntary engaged, and the credit nions have been entertained by learned men respecting the date of St. Which he found it procured him among the chief priests and Paul's conversion. The date assigned in the text is that adopted by Bp. rulers, whose commission he bore. If, in such a state and Pearson. Dr. Lardner fixes that event to the end of 36, or early in 37. temper of mind, an enthusiastical man had imagined that he Works, Svo. vol. vi. pp. 236-239.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 252, 253.