No. VI.

Chap. i. 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. chap. v. 8: "We are confident and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."

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 The sameness of sentiment in these two quota-pathos, or which more truly represents the worktions is obvious. I rely however not so much ings of a warm and affectionate mind, than what upon that, as upon the similitude in the train of is exhibited in the quotation before us. The thought which in each epistle leads up to this sen- apostle reminds his Philippians of their being timent, and upon the suitableness of that train of joined with himself in the endurance of persecuthought to the circumstances under which the tion for the sake of Christ. He conjures them by epistles purport to have been written. This, I the ties of their common profession and their comconceive, bespeaks the production of the same mon sufferings, "to fulfil his joy;" to complete, by mind, and of a mind operating upon real circum- the unity of their faith, and by their mutual love, stances. The sentiment is in both places preced- that joy with which the instances he had received ed by the contemplation of imminent personal dan- of their zeal and attachment had inspired his breast. ger. To the Philippians he writes, in the twentieth Now if this was the real effusion of St. Paul's mind, verse of this chapter, "According to my earnest of which it bears the strongest internal character, expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall then we have in the words "the same conflict be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, which ye saw in me," an authentic confirmation so now also, Christ shall be magnified in my body, of so much of the apostle's history in the Acts, as whether it be by life or by death." To the Co- relates to his transactions at Philippi; and, through rinthians, "Troubled on every side, yet not dis- that, of the intelligence and general fidelity of the tressed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, historian. but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus." 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 recall to the author's mind the precarious condition of his life, and the perils which constantly awaited him. When the Epistle to the Philippians 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 himself over for lost. The epistle opens with a recollection of this subject, and the impression accompanied the writer's thoughts throughout.

CHAPTER VIII.

The Epistle to the Colossians,

No. I.

THERE is a circumstance of conformity between St. Paul's history and his letters, especially those which were written during his first imprisonment 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

I know that nothing is easier than to transplant epistles attributes his imprisonment not to his into a forged epistle a sentiment or expression preaching of Christianity, but to his asserting the which is found in a true one; or, supposing both right of the Gentiles to be admitted into it withepistles to be forged by the same hand, to insert out conforming themselves to the Jewish law. the same sentiment or expression in both. But This was the doctrine to which he considered the difficulty is to introduce it in just and close himself as a martyr. Thus, in the epistle before connexion with a train of thought going before, us, chap. i. 24: (I Paul) "who now rejoice in my and with a train of thought apparently generated sufferings for you"-"for you," i. e. for those by the circumstances under which the epistle is whom he had never seen; for a few verses afterwritten. In two epistles, purporting to be writ-wards he adds, "I would that ye knew what great ten on different occasions, and in different periods of the author's history, this propriety would not easily be managed.

No. VII.

Chap. i. 29, 30; ii. 1, 2. "For unto you is given, r 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 If there be, therefore, any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies; fulfil ye my jow that ye be like minded, having the same love, eg of one accord, of one mind.”

in me.

With this compare Acts, xvi. 22: "And the raultitude (at Philippi) rose up against them (Paul and Silas;) and the magistrates rent off their 2 D

conflict I have for you and for them in Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh." His suffering therefore for them was, in their general capacity of Gentile Christians, agreeably to what he explicitly declares in his Epistle to the Ephesians, iv. 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 mys tery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds." What that "mystery of Christ" was, the Epistle to the Ephesians distinctly informs us: "Whereby

* The original is very spirited: Ει τις ουν παράκλησις MOTOS, STEVE ANY INTIMO, #λnpwonτi nou εν Χριστώ, εἴ τι παραμυθίον αγαπης, ει τις κοινωνία Πνευ XAPAN.

18*

when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge | 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. For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill me." The seizing, therefore, of St. Paul's person, from which he was never discharged till his final liberation at Rome; and of which, therefore, his imprisonment at Rome was the 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 any thing that appears, remained at that time unmolested;) but it was distinctly and specifically 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, purporting to be written during this imprisonment, agree with this account of its cause and origin, we have already seen.

No. II.

Chap. iv. 10. "Aristarchus my fellow-prisoner saluteth you, and Marcus, sister's son to Barnabas, (touching whom ye received commandments: If he come unto you, receive him;) and Jesus, which is called Justus, who are of the circumcision."

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 promise in Christ by the Gospel." This, therefore, 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 history. 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 every where against the people, and the law, and this place; and farther 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 admission of the Gentiles, under the new dispensation, to an indiscriminate participation of God's favour with the Jews. But what follows makes the matter clear. When, by the interference 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 conversion; and is proceeding in this narrative, We find Aristarchus as a companion of our until he comes to describe a vision which was apostle in the nineteenth chapter of the Acts, and presented to him, as he was praying in the tem- the twenty-ninth verse: "And the whole city of ple; and which bid him depart out of Jerusalem, Ephesus was filled with confusion; and having "for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles," caught Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Acts, xxii. 21. "They gave him audience," says Paul's companions in travel, they rushed with the historian, "unto this word; and then lift up one accord into the theatre." And we find him their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow upon his journey with St. Paul to Rome, in the from the earth!" Nothing can show more strongly twenty-seventh chapter, and the second verse: than this account does, what was the offence" And when it was determined that we should 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 intolerable part of the apostle's crime. But although the real motive of the prosecution appears to have been the apostle's conduct towards the Gentiles; yet, when his accusers came before a Roman magistrate, a charge was to be framed of a more legal form. The profanation of the temple was the article they chose to rely upon. This, therefore, became the immediate subject of Tertullus's oration before Felix, and of Paul's defence. But that he all along considered his ministry amongst the Gentiles as the actual 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: "I have 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

sail into Italy, they delivered Paul and certain other prisoners unto one named Julius, a centurion of Augustus's band: and, entering into a ship of Adramyttium, we launched, meaning to sail by the coast of Asia; one Aristarchus, a Macedo nian of Thessalonica, being with us." But might not the author of the epistle have consulted the history; and, observing that the historian had brought Aristarchus along with Paul to Rome, might he not for that reason, and without any other foundation, have put down his name amongst the salutations of an epistle purporting to be written by the apostle from that place? allow so much of possibility to this objection, that I should not have proposed this in the number of coincidences clearly undesigned, had Aristarchus stood alone. The observation that strikes me in reading the passage is, that together with Aristarchus, 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 epistle, 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's name in the epistle, seems to be unaccountable.

"Marcus, sister's son to Barnabas." Does not concerning Jews. The reader will judge of the this hint account for Barnabas's adherence to Mark probability of this conclusion, and we urge the in the contest that arose with our apostle concern-coincidence no farther than that probability exing him! And some days after, Paul said unto tends. The coincidence, if it be one, is so remote Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren from all possibility of design, that nothing need be in every city where we have preached the word of added to satisfy the reader upon that part of the the Lord, and see how they do; and Barnabas argument. determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark; but Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work; and the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark and sailed unto Cyprus." The history which records the dispute has not preserved the circumstance of Mark's relationship to Barnabas. It is no where noticed but in the text before us. As far, therefore, as it applies, the application is certainly undesigned.

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," chap. iv. 15, 16, 17; ch. v. 4.

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 deduce 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 erroneous? 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 interpreted 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 forgeries were executed in the life-time of the person whose name they bear; nor was the primitive situation of the church likely to give birth to such an attempt.

No. II.

No. III.

Between our epistle and the history the accordancy in many points is 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 departed from thence, and, when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, came to Thessalonica, where Paul opened and alleged that Jesus was the Christ, Acts, xvi. 23, &c. 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, (vide 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," ii. 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, xvii. 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," iii. 4.

The history brings Paul and Silas and Timothy together at Corinth, soon after the preaching Our epistle concludes with a direction that it of the Gospel at Thessalonica:-"And when should be publicly read in the church to which it Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, was addressed: "I charge you by the Lord, that (to Corinth,) Paul was pressed in spirit," Acts, this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren." xviii. 5. The epistle is written in the name of The existence of this clause in the body of the these three persons, who consequently must have epistle is an evidence of its authenticity; because been together at the time, and speaks throughout to produce a letter purporting to have been publicly of their ministry at Thessalonica as a recent transread in the church of Thessalonica, when no such action: "We, brethren, being taken from you letter in truth had been read or heard of in that for a short time, in presence, not in heart, endeachurch, would be to produce an imposture destruc-voured the more abundantly to see your face, with tive of itself. At least, it seems unlikely that the great desire," ii. 17. 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.

The harmony is indubitable; 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 If we connect this article with the preceding, during the time of his residing at Corinth:we shall perceive that they combine into one" Wherefore we would have come unto you (even strong proof of the genuineness of the epistle. I Paul) once and again; but Satan hindered us," The preceding article carries up the date of theii. 18. "Night and day praying exceedingly that epistle to the time of St. Paul; the present article fixes the publication of it to the church of Thessalonica. Either therefore the church of Thessalonica was imposed upon by a false epistle, which in St. Paul's life-time they received and read publicly as his, carrying on a communication with him all the while, and the epistle referring to the continuance of that communication; or other Christian churches, in the same life-time of the apostle, received an epistle 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.

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," iii. 10, 11. Concerning a design which was not executed, although the person himself, who was conscious 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 circumstance, which is amongst the most