HORE PAULINE. things are consistent. The Epistle to the Ro- Greece. Again, as St. Paul, in his epistle to mans is posterior even to the Second Epistle the church of Corinth, 1 Cor. xvi. 3. speaks to the Corinthians; because it speaks of a con- of a collection going on in that city, and of his tribution in Achaia being completed, which the desire that it might be ready against he came Second Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. viii. thither; and as in this epistle he speaks of that is only soliciting. It is sufficiently therefore collection being ready, it follows that the episposterior to the First Epistle to the Corinth- tle was written either whilst he was at Coians, to allow time in the interval for Aquila rinth, or after he had been there. Thirdly, since and Priscilla's return from Ephesus to Rome. | St. Paul speaks in this epistle of his journey Before we dismiss these two persons, we to Jerusalem, as about instantly to take place; may take notice of the terms of commendation and as we learn, Acts xx. 3. that his design in which St. Paul describes them, and of the and attempt was to sail upon that journey imagreement of that encomium with the history.mediately from Greece, properly so called, i. e. "My helpers in Christ Jesus, who have for as distinguished from Macedonia; it is probamy life laid down their necks; unto whom not ble that he was in this country when he wrote only I give thanks, but also all the churches the epistle, in which he speaks of himself as of the Gentiles." In the eighteenth chapter upon the eve of setting out. of the Acts, we are informed that Aquila and was most likely at Corinth; for the two EpisIf in Greece, he Priscilla were Jews; that St. Paul first mettles to the Corinthians show that the princiwith them at Corinth; that for some time he pal end of his coming into Greece, was to viabode in the same house with them; that St.sit that city, where he had founded a church. Paul's contention at Corinth was with the un-Certainly we know no place in Greece in which believing Jews, who at first "opposed and blas-his presence was so probable; at least, the plaphemed, and afterwards with one accord raised cing of him at Corinth satisfies an insurrection against him ;" that Aquila and stance. Priscilla adhered, we may conclude, to St. Paul of Corinth, or had some connection with CocircumNow that Erastus was an inhabitant every throughout this whole contest; for, when he rinth, is rendered a fair subject of presumption, left the city, they went with him, Acts xviii. by that which is accidentally said of him in 18. Under these circumstances, it is highly the Second Epistle to Timothy, chap. iii. 20. probable that they should be involved in the" Erastus abode at Corinth." St. Paul com 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. Farther, as they, though Jews, were assisting 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 been entitled to "thanks from "the churches of the Gentiles." They were Jews taking part with Gentiles. Yet is all this so indirectly intimated, 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. plains of his solitude, and is telling Timothy what was become of his companions: "Erastus abode at Corinth; but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick." Erastus was one of those who had 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 staid 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 innumerable 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 disThe two congruities last adduced, depend-been thought of: nor could the author of the play of the coincidence, if any such display had ed upon the time, the two following regard the place, of the epistle. Epistle to Timothy leave Erastus at Corinth, 1. Chap. xvi. 23. "Erastus, the chamberlain of the city, saluteth you"-of what city? We have seen, that is, we have inferred from circumstances found in the epistle, compared with circumstances found in the Acts of you Phoebe, our sister, which is a servant of 2. Chap. xvi. 1-3. "I commend unto the Apostles, and in the two epistles to the the church which is at Cenchrea, that ye reCorinthians, that our epistle was written dur-ceive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and ing St. Paul's second visit to the peninsula of that ye assist her in whatsoever business she 1 bath need of you; for she hath been a suc-attributed to St. Paul the same purpose, espe courer of many, and of myself also." Cen- cially a purpose so specific and particular as chrea adjoined to Corinth; St. Paul there- this, which was not merely a general design of fore, at the time of writing the letter, was in visiting Rome after he had passed through the neighbourhood of the woman whom he Macedonia and Achaia, and after he had perthus recommends. But, farther, that St. Paul formed a voyage from these countries to Jerhad before this been at Cenchrea itself, appears usalem. The conformity between the history from the eighteenth chapter of the Acts; and and the epistle is perfect. In the first quotaappears by a circumstance as incidental, and tion from the epistle, we find that a design of as unlike design, as any that can be imagined. visiting Rome had long dwelt in the apostle's "Paul after this tarried there, (viz. at Cor-mind in the quotation from the Acts, we inth,) yet a good while, and then took his leave of his brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila, having shorn his head in Cenchrea, for he had a vow. xviii. 18. The shaving of the head denoted the expiration of 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 "Phœbe, 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 "ghorn his head" in that place? No. III. find that design expressed a considerable time before the epistle 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 plan, as to have passed through Macedonia 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 thitherward by you; but now I go up to Je rusalem 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."-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. Chap. i. 13. "Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, but was let hitherto, that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles." Again, xv. 23, 24. If the passage in the epistle was taken from "But now having no more place in these parts, that in the Acts, why was Spain put in? If and having a great desire these many years the passage in the Acts was taken from that (Todd, oftentimes,) to come unto you, when-in the epistle, why was Spain left out? If 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: 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, (viz. at Ephesus,) 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." 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 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 meeting 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 it as a confirmation of the whole history of St. Paul's travels. Chap. xv. 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 II No. V. 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 be lieve, in Judaa."—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 immediately before St. Paul set forwards upon this journey from Achaia; that the words in the Acts were uttered by him when he had proceeded 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 an other, represent the state of St. Paul's mind, with 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, yricum. or preached the Gospel in that pro- tle. It was natural that the apostle should vince; but rather that he had come to the con- refer to a journey which was fresh in his fines of Illyricum (μixes T8 1ââvgies,) and that thoughts. 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 extended. The form of Chap. xv. 30. "Now I beseech you, brethexpression in the original conveys this idea-ren, for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, and for από Ιερεσαλημ και κυκλω μέχρι τα Ιλλυρικο. 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 no where occurs in the Acts of the Apostles; no suspicion, therefore, can be received that the mention of it was borrowed from thence. Yet I think it appears, from 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 consistency with the account there delivered. Illyricum adjoins upon Macedonia; measuring from Jerusalem towards Rome, it lies close behind it. If, therefore, St. Paul 'raversed the whole country of Macedonia, the route would necessarily bring him to the confines of Illyricum, 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 departed 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 ac-he entreats the Roman Christians, "for the count allows, or rather leads us to suppose, Lord Jesus Christ's sake, and for the love of that St. Paul, in going over Macedonia (daw the Spirit, to strive together with him in their ra μign sure,) had passed so far to the west, prayers to God for him, that he might be deas to come into those parts of the country livered from them which do not believe, in Juwhich were contiguous to Illyricum, if he did dæa," he sufficiently confesses his fears. In not enter into Illyricum itself. The history, the Acts of the Apostles we see in him the therefore, and the epistle so far agree, and the same apprehensions, and the same uncertainty: agreement is much strengthened by a coinci-" I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not dence of time. At the time the epistle was knowing the things that shall befall me there.' written, St. Paul might say, in conformity with The only difference is, that in the history his the history, that he had come into Illyri- thoughts are more inclined to despondency than cum;" much before that time, he could not in the epistle. In the epistle he retains his have said so; for, upon his former journey to hope" that he should come unto them with Macedonia, his route is laid down from the joy by the will of God:" in the history, his time of his landing at Philippi to his sailing mind yields to the reflection," that the Holy from Corinth. We trace him from Philippi Ghost witnesseth in every city that bonds and to Amphipolis and Apollonia; from thence to afflictions awaited him." Now that his fears Thessalonica; from Thessalonica to Berea; should be greater, and his hopes less, in this stage from Berea to Athens; and from Athens to Co- of his journey than when he wrote his epistle, rinth which tract confines him to the eastern that is, when he first set out upon it, is no other side of the peninsula, and therefore keeps him alteration than might well be expected; since all the while at a considerable distance from those prophetic intimations to which he refers, Illyricum. Upon his second visit to Macedo- when he says, "the Holy Ghost witnesseth in nia, the history, we have seen, leaves him at every city," had probably been received by him liberty. It must have been, therefore, upon in the course of his journey, and were proba that second visit, if at all, that he approached bly similar to what we know he received in the Illyricum; and this visit, we know, almost remaining part of it at Tyre, xxi. 4; and after. unmediately preceded the writing of the epis-wards from Agabus at Cæsarea, xxi. 11. that it became therefore necessary to appoint No. VI. another medium or condition of justification, There is another strong remark arising from in which new medium the Jewish peculiarity the same passage in the epistle; to make which was merged and lost; that Abraham's own jus understood, it will be necessary to state the pas-tification was anterior to the law, and inde sage over again, and somewhat more at length. pendent of it: that the Jewish converts were to "I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Je- consider the law as now dead, and themselves as sus Christ's sake, and for the love of the Spi-married to another; that what the law in truth rit, 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 Judæa-that I may come unto you with joy by the will of God, and may with you be refreshed." 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 be lievers in Christ, collected indifferently from I desire the reader to call to mind that part Jews and Gentiles. Soon after the writing of of St. Paul's history which took place after his this epistle, St. Paul, agreeably to the intention arrival at Jerusalem, and which employs the intimated in the epistle itself, took his jour seven last chapters of the Acts; and I build ney to Jerusalem. The day after he arrived upon it this observation—that supposing the there, he was introduced to the church. What Epistle to the Romans to have been a forgery, passed at this interview is thus related, Acts, and the author of the forgery to have had the xxi. 19: "When he had saluted them, he Acts of the Apostles before him, and to have declared particularly what things God had there seen that St. Paul, in fact, "was not de- wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry: livered from the unbelieving Jews," but on the and, when they heard it, they glorified the contrary, that he was taken into custody at Je-Lord : and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, rusalem, 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 Apostles; and that whatever coincidences have been or can be pointed out between them, are unsophisticated, and are the result of truth and reality. 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 teach. est 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 It also convinces me that the epistle was writ-matter is accounted for. Concerning the acten not only in St. Paul's life-time, 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. cusation 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 convert, 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 retaonstrance therefore of the church of Jerusalem, and the I now proceed to state the conformity which report which occasioned it, were founded in no exists between the argument of this epistle very violent misconstruction of the apostle's and the history of its reputed author. It is doctrine. His reception at Jerusalem was exenough for this purpose to observe, that the actly what I should have expected the author object of the epistle, that is, of the argumen- of this epistle to have met with. I am entit tative part of it, was to place the Gentile con-led therefore to argue, that a separate narra. vert upon a parity of situation with the Jew-tive of effects experienced by St. Paul, similar ish, in respect of his religious condition, and to what a person might be expected to experihis rank in the divine favour. The epistle ence who held the doctrines advanced in this 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 thein; 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 circumstances 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. any thing derogatory from the Jewish institu tion, he constantly follows it by a softening clause. Having (ii. 28, 29.) pronounced, not much perhaps to the satisfaction of the native Jews, "that he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither that circumcision which is out ward in the flesh:" he adds immediately, "What advantage then hath the Jew, or what profit is there in circumcision? Much every way." Having, in the third chapter, ver. 28. 1. The Epistle to the Galatians relates to brought his argument to this formal conclu the same general question as the Epistle to the sion," that a man is justified by faith without Romans. St. Paul had founded the church of the deeds of the law," he presently subjoins, Galatia; at Rome, he had never been. Observe ver. 31. "Do we then make void the law now a difference in his manner of treating of through faith? God forbid! Yea, we establish the same subject, corresponding with this dif- the law." In the seventh chapter, when in ference in his situation. In the Epistle to the the sixth verse he had advanced the bold asGalatians he puts the point in a great measure sertion, "that now we are delivered from the upon authority: "I marvel that ye are so soon law, that being dead wherein we were held ;" removed from him that called you into the in the very next verse he comes in with this grace of Christ, unto another Gospel." Gal. healing question, “What shall we say, then? i. 6. "I certify you, brethren, that the gos- Is the law sin? God forbid! Nay, I had not pel which was preached of me, is not after known sin but by the law. Having in the folman; for I neither received it of man, neither lowing words insinuated, or rather more than was I taught it but by the revelation of Je-insinuated, the inefficacy of the Jewish law, sus Christ." Ch. i. 11, 12. “I am afraid, viii. 3. "for what the law could not do, in that lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain." it was weak through the flesh, God sending his iv. 11, 12. I desire to be present with you own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for for I stand in doubt of you." iv. 20. sin, condemned sin in the flesh :" after a di"Behold, I, Paul, say unto you, that if ye begression indeed, but that sort of a digression circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing." which he could never resist, a rapturous con v. 2. "This persuasion cometh not of him that templation of his Christian hope, and which called you." v. 8. This is the style in which occupies the latter part of this chapter; we he accosts the Galatians. In the epistle to find him in the next, as if sensible that he had the converts of Rome, where his authority was said something which would give offence, re. not established, nor his person known, he puts turning to his Jewish brethren in terms of the the same points entirely upon argument. The warmest affection and respect : "I say the perusal of the epistle will prove this to the sa- truth in Christ Jesus; I lie not; my conscitisfaction of every reader: and, as the observa- ence also bearing me witness in the Holy tion relates to the whole contents of the epistle, Ghost, that I have great heaviness and conti. I forbear adducing separate extracts. I re-nual sorry in my heart; for I could wish that peat therefore, that we have pointed out a myself were accursed from Christ, for my bredistinction in the two epistles, suited to the thren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who relation in which the author stood to his different correspondents. now, Another adaptation, and somewhat of the same kind, is the following: are Israelites, to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the pro mises; whose are the fathers; and of whom, as 2. The Jews, we know, were very numer- concerning the flesh, Christ came." When, in ous at Rome, and probably formed a principal the thirty-first and thirty-second verses of this part amongst the new converts; so much so, ninth chapter, he represented to the Jews the that the Christians seem to have been known error of even the best of their nation, by tellat Rome rather as a denomination of Jews, ing them that "Israel, which followed after than as any thing else. In an epistle conse- the law of righteousness, had not attained to quently to the Roman believers, the point to be the law of righteousness, because they sought endeavoured after by St. Paul was to recon- it not by faith, but as it were by the works of cile the Jewish converts to the opinion, that the the law, for they stumbled at that stumbling Gentiles were admitted by God to a parity of stone," he takes care to annex to this declarareligious situation with themselves, and that tion these conciliating expressions: "Brethwithout their being bound by the law of Mo-ren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Isses. The Gentile converts would probably ac-rael is, that they might be saved; for I bear cede to this opinion very readily. In this epis- them record that they have a zeal of God, but tle, therefore, though directed to the Roman not according to knowledge." Lastly, having church in general, it is in truth a few writing ch. x. 20, 21. by the application of a passage in to Jews. Accordingly you will 'ake notice, Isaiah, insinuated the most ungrateful of all that as often as his argument leads him to say propositions to a Jewish ear, the rejection of |