Lives of the apostles of Jesus Christ

by David Francis Bacon

II. THE HELLENIST APOSTLES.

SAUL,
AFTERWARDS NAMED PAUL.

HIS COUNTRY.

On the farthest north-eastern part of the Mediterranean sea, where its waters are bounded by the great angle made by the meeting of the Syrian coast with the Asian, there is a peculiarity in the course of the mountain ranges, which deserves notice in a view of the countries of that region, modifying as it does, all their most prominent characteristics. The great chain of Taurus, which can be traced far eastward in the branching ranges of Singara, Masius and Niphates, running connectedly also into the distant peaks of mighty Ararat, here sends off a spur to the shore of the Mediterranean, which under the name of Mount Amanus meets its waters, just at their great north-eastern angle in the ancient gulf of Issus, now called the gulf of Scanderoon. Besides this connection with the mountain chains of Mesopotamia and Armenia on the northeast, from the south the great Syrian Lebanon, running very nearly parallel with the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, at the Issic angle, joins this common center of convergence, so insensibly losing its individual character in the Asian ridge, that by many writers, Mount Amanus itself is considered only a regular continuation of Lebanon. These, however, are as distinct as any of the chains here uniting, and the true Libanic mountains cease just at this grand natural division of Syria from the northern coast of the Mediterranean. A characteristic of the Syrian mountains is nevertheless prominent in the northern chain. They all take a general course parallel with the coast and very near it, occasionally sending out lateral ridges which mark the projections of the shore with high promontories. Of these, however, there are much fewer on the southern coast of Asia Minor; and the western ridge of Taurus, after parting from the grand angle of convergence, runs exactly parallel to the margin of the sea, in most parts about seven miles distant. The country thus fenced off by Taurus, along the southern coast of Asia Minor, is very distinctly characterized by these circumstances connected with its orography, and is in a very peculiar manner bounded and inclosed from the rest of the continent, by these natural features. The great mountain barrier of Taurus, as above described, stretches along the north, forming a mighty wall, which is at each end met at right angles by a lateral ridge, of which the eastern is Amanus, descending within a few rods of the water, while the western is the true termination of Taurus in that direction,——the mountains here making a grand curve from west to south, and stretching out into the sea, in a bold promontory, which definitely marks the farthest western limit of the long, narrow section, thus remarkably enclosed. This simple natural division, in the apostolic age, contained two principal artificial sub-divisions. On the west, was the province of Pamphylia, occupying about one fourth of the coast;——and on the east, the rest of the territory constituted the province of Cilicia, far-famed as the land of the birth of that great apostle of the Gentiles, whose life is the theme of these pages.

Cilicia,——opening on the west into Pamphylia,——is elsewhere inclosed in mountain barriers, impenetrable and impassable, except in two or three points, which are the only places in which it is accessible by land, though widely exposed, on the sea, by its long open coast. Of these two adits, the most important, and the one through which the vast proportion of its commercial intercourse with the world, by land, has always been carried on, is the eastern, which is just at the oft-mentioned great angle of the Mediterranean, where the mountains descend almost to the waters of the gulf of Issus. Mount Amanus, coming from the north-east, and stretching along the eastern boundary of Cilicia an impassable barrier, here advances to the shore; but just before its base reaches the water, it abruptly terminates, leaving between the high rocks and the sea a narrow space, which is capable of being completely commanded and defended from the mountains which thus guard it; and forming the only land passage out of Cilicia to the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, it was thence anciently called “the gates of Syria.” Through these “gates,” has always passed all the traveling by land between Asia Minor and Palestine; and it is therefore an important point in the most celebrated route in apostolic history. The other main opening in the mountain walls of this region, is the passage through the Taurus, made by the course of the Sarus, the largest river of the province, which breaks through the northern ridge, in a defile that is called “the gates of Cilicia.”

The boundaries of Cilicia are then,——on the north, mountainous Cappadocia, perfectly cut off by the impenetrable chain of Taurus, except the narrow pass through “the gates of Cilicia;”——on the east, equally well guarded by Mount Amanus, Northern Syria, the only land passages being through the famed “Syrian gates,” and another defile north of the coast, toward the Euphrates;——on the south, stretches the long margin of the sea, which in the western two-thirds of the coast takes the name of “the Cilician strait,” because it here flows between the mainland and the great island of Cyprus, which lies off the shore, always in sight, being less than thirty miles distant, the eastern third of the coast being bounded by the waters of the gulf of Issus;——and on the west Cilicia ends in the rough highlands of Pamphylia. The territory itself is distinguished by natural features, into two divisions,——Rocky Cilicia and “Level Cilicia,”——the former occupying the western third, and the latter the eastern part,——each district being abundantly well described by the term applied to it. Within the latter, lay the opening scenes of the apostle’s life.

Thus peculiarly guarded, and shut off from the world, it might be expected that this remarkable region would nourish, on the narrow plains of its fertile shores, and the vast rough mountains of its gigantic barriers, a race strongly marked in mental, as in physical characteristics. In all parts of the world, the philosophical observer may notice a relation borne by man to the soil on which he lives, and to the air which he breathes,——hardly less striking than the dependence of the inferior orders of created things, on the material objects which surround them. Man is an animal, and his natural history displays as many curious correspondences between his varying peculiarities and the locality which he inhabits, as can be observed between the physical constitution of inferior creatures, and the similar circumstances which affect them. The inhabitants of a wild, broken region, which rises into mighty inland mountains, or sends its cliffs and vallies into a vast sea, are, in all ages and climes, characterized by a peculiar energy and quickness of mind, which often marks them in history as the prominent actors in events of the highest importance to mankind in all the world. Even the dwellers of the cities of such regions, share in that peculiar vivacity of their countrymen, which is especially imbibed in the air of the mountains; and carry through all the world, till new local influences have again subjected them, the original characteristics of the land of their birth. The restless activity and dauntless spirit of Saul, present a striking instance of this relation of scenery to character. The ever-rolling waters of the tideless sea on one side presenting a boundless view, and on the other the blue mountains rearing a mighty barrier to the vision,——the thousand streams thence rolling to the former,——the white sands of the long plains, gemmed with the green of shaded fountains, as well as the active movements of a busy population, all living under these same inspiring influences,——would each have their effect on the soul of the young Cilician as he grew up in the midst of these modifying circumstances.

Along these shores, from the earliest period of Hellenic colonization, Grecian enterprise had planted its busy centers of civilization. On each favorable site, where agriculture or commerce could thrive, cities grew up in the midst of prosperous colonies, in which wealth and power in their rapid advance brought in the lights of science, art, literature, and all the refinements and elegances which Grecian colonization made the invariable accompaniments of its march,——adorning its solid triumphs with the graceful polish of all that could exalt the enjoyment of prosperity. Issus, Mopsuestia, Anchialus, Selinus and others, were among the early seats of Grecian refinement; and the more modern efforts of the Syro-Macedonian sway, had blessed Cilicia with the fruits of royal munificence, in such cities as Cragic Antioch, Seleucia the Rocky, and Arsinoe; and in still later times, the ever-active and wide-spreading beneficence of Roman dominion, had still farther multiplied the peaceful triumphs and trophies of civilization, by here raising or renewing cities, of which Baiae, Germanicia and Pompeiopolis are only a specimen. But of all these monuments of ancient or later refinement, there was none of higher antiquity or fame than Tarsus, the city where was born this illustrious apostle, whose life was so greatly instrumental in the triumphs of Christianity.

Tarsus stands north of the point of a wide indentation of the coast of Cilicia, forming a very open bay, into which, a few miles south, flow the waters of the classic Cydnus, a narrow stream which runs a brief course from the barrier of Taurus, directly southward to the sea. The river’s mouth forms a spacious and convenient harbor, to which the light vessels of ancient commerce all easily found safe and ready access, though most of the floating piles in which the productions of the world are now transported, might find such a harbor altogether inaccessible to their heavier burden.

Ammianus Marcellinus, the elegant historian of the decline of the Roman empire, speaks in high descriptive terms, both of the province, and the city which makes it eminent in Christian history. In narrating important events here performed during the times whose history he records, he alludes to the character of the region in a preliminary description. “After surmounting the peaks of Taurus, which towards the east rise into higher elevation, Cilicia spreads out before the observer, in far stretching areas,——a land, rich in all good things. To its right (that is the west, as the observer looks south from the summits of Taurus) is joined Isauria,——in equal degree verdant with palms and many fruits, and intersected by the navigable river Calycadnus. This, besides many towns, has two cities,——Seleucia, the work of Seleucus Nicator of Syria, and Claudiopolis, a colony founded by Claudius Caesar. Isauria however, once exceedingly powerful, has formerly been desolated for a destructive rebellion, and therefore shows but very few traces of its ancient splendor. But Cilicia, which rejoices in the river Cydnus, is ennobled by Tarsus, a splendid city,——by Anazarbus, and by Mopsuestia, the dwelling-place of that Mopsus, who accompanied the Argonauts. These two provinces (Isauria or ‘Cilicia the Rocky,’ and Cilicia proper or ‘level’) being formerly connected with hordes of plunderers in a piratical war, were subjugated by the proconsul Servilius, and made tributary. And these regions, placed, as it were, on a long tongue of land, are separated from the eastern world by Mount Amanus.”

This account by Ammianus Marcellinus is found in book XIV. of his history, (p. 19, edited by Vales.)

The native land of Saul was classic ground. Within the limits of Cilicia, were laid the scenes of some of the most splendid passages in early Grecian fable; and here too, were acted some of the grandest events in authentic history, both Greek and Roman. The very city of his birth, Tarsus, is said to have been founded by Perseus, the son of Jupiter and Danae, famed for his exploit at another place on the shore of this part of the Mediterranean. More authentic history however, refers its earliest foundation to Sardanapalus, king of Assyria, who built Tarsus and Anchialus in Cilicia, nine hundred years before Christ. Its origin is by others ascribed to Triptolemus with an Argive colony, who is represented on some medals as the founder. These two stories may be made consistent with each other, on the supposition that the same place was successively the scene of the civilizing influence of each of these attributed founders. So too, may be taken, the legend which Ammianus Marcellinus records and approves,——that it was founded by Sandan, a wealthy and eminent person from Ethiopia, who at some early period not specified, is said to have built Tarsus. It was however, at the earliest period that is definitely mentioned, subject to the Assyrian empire; and afterwards fell under the dominion of each of the sovranties which succeeded it, passing into the hands of the Persian and of Alexander, as each in turn assumed the lordship of the eastern world. While under the Persian sway, it is commemorated by Xenophon as having been honored by the presence of the younger Cyrus, when on his march through Asia to wrest the empire from his brother. On this occasion, he entered this region through the northern “gates of Cilicia,” and passed out through the “gates of Syria,” a passage which is, in connection with this event, very minutely described by the elegant historian of that famous expedition.

Sardanapalus.——The fact of the foundation both of Tarsus and Anchialus by this splendid but unfortunately extravagant monarch, the last of his line, is commemorated by Arrian, who refers to the high authority of an inscription which records the event.

“Anchialus is said to have been founded by the king of Assyria, Sardanapalus. The fortifications, in their magnitude and extent, still, in Arrian’s time, bore the character of greatness, which the Assyrians appear singularly to have affected in works of the kind. A monument, representing Sardanapalus, was found there, warranted by an inscription in Assyrian characters, of course in the old Assyrian language, which the Greeks, whether well or ill, interpreted thus: ‘Sardanapalus, son of Anacyndaraxes, in one day founded Anchialus and Tarsus. Eat, drink, play: all other human joys are not worth a fillip.’ Supposing this version nearly exact, (for Arrian says it was not quite so,) whether the purpose has not been to invite to civil order a people disposed to turbulence, rather than to recommend immoderate luxury, may perhaps reasonably be questioned. What, indeed, could be the object of a king of Assyria in founding such towns in a country so distant from his capital, and so divided from it by an immense extent of sandy desert and lofty mountains, and, still more, how the inhabitants could be at once in circumstances to abandon themselves to the intemperate joys which their prince has been supposed to have recommended, is not obvious; but it may deserve observation that, in that line of coast, the southern of Lesser Asia, ruins of cities, evidently of an age after Alexander, yet barely named in history, at this day astonish the adventurous traveler by their magnificence and elegance.” (Mitford’s Greece, Vol. IX. pp. 311, 312.)

Over the same route passed the conquering armies of the great Alexander. At Issus, within the boundaries of Cilicia, he met, in their mightiest array, the vast hosts of Darius, whom here vanquishing, he thus decided the destiny of the world. Before this great battle, halting to repose at Tarsus, he almost met his death, by imprudently bathing in the classic Cydnus, whose waters were famed for their extreme coldness. By a remarkable coincidence, the next conqueror of the world, Julius Caesar, also rested at Tarsus for some days before his great triumphs in Asia Minor. Cilicia had in the interval between these two visits passed from the Macedonian to the Roman dominion, being made a Roman province by Pompey, about sixty years before Christ, at the time when all the kingdoms of Asia and Syria were subjugated. After this it was visited by Cicero, at the time of his triumphs over the cities of eastern Cilicia; and its classic stream is still farther celebrated in immortal verse and prose, as the scene where Marcus Antony met Cleopatra for the first time. It was the Cydnus, down which she sailed in her splendid galley, to meet the conqueror, who for her afterwards lost the empire of the world. During all the civil wars which desolated the Roman empire through a long course of years in that age, Tarsus steadily adhered to the house of Caesar, first to the great Julius and afterwards to Augustus. So remarkable was its attachment and devotion to the cause of Julius, that when the assassin Cassius marched through Asia into Syria to secure the dominion of the eastern world, he laid siege to Tarsus, and having taken it, laid it waste with the most destructive vengeance for its adherence to the fortunes of his murdered lord; and such were its sufferings under these and subsequent calamities in the same cause, that when Augustus was at last established in the undivided empire of the world, he felt himself bound in honor and gratitude, to bestow on the faithful citizens of Tarsus the most remarkable favors. The city, having at the request of its inhabitants received the new name of Juliopolis, as a testimony of their devotion to the memory of their murdered patron, was lavishly honored with almost every privilege which the imperial Augustus could bestow on these most faithful adherents of his family. From the terms in which his acts of generosity to them are recorded, it has been inferred,——though not therein positively stated,——that he conferred on it the rank and title of a Roman colony, or free city, which must have given all its inhabitants the exalted privileges of Roman citizens. This assertion has been disputed however, and forms one of the most interesting topics in the life of the great apostle, involving the inquiry as to the mode in which he obtained that inviolable privilege, which, on more than one occasion, snatched him from the clutches of tyrannical persecutors. Whether he held this privilege in common with all the citizens of Tarsus, or inherited it as a peculiar honor of his own family, is a question yet to be decided. But whatever may have been the precise extent of the municipal favors enjoyed by Tarsus, it is certain that it was an object of peculiar favor to the imperial Caesars during a long succession of years, not only before but after the apostle’s time, being crowned with repeated acts of munificence by Augustus, Adrian, Caracalla and Heliogabalus, so that through many centuries it was the most favored city in the eastern division of the Roman empire.

The history of Cilicia since the apostolic age, is briefly this: It remained attached to the eastern division of the Roman empire, until about A. D. 800, when it first fell under the Muhammedan sway, being made part of the dominion of the Califs by Haroun Al Rashid. In the thirteenth century it reverted to a Christian government, constituting a province of the Armenian kingdom of Leo. About A. D. 1400, it fell under the sway of Bajazet II., Sultan of the Ottoman empire, and is at present included in that empire,——most of it in a single Turkish pashalic, under the name of Adana.

Roman citizens.——Witsius very fully discusses this point, as follows. (Witsius on the Life of Paul § 1. ¶ V.)

“It is remarkable that though he was of Tarsus, he should say that he was a Roman citizen, and that too by the right of birth: Acts xxii. 28. There has been some discussion whether he enjoyed that privilege in common with all the Tarsans, or whether it was peculiar to his family. Most interpreters firmly hold the former opinion. Beza remarks, ‘that he calls himself a Roman, not by country, but by right of citizenship; since Tarsus had the privileges of a Roman colony.’ He adds, ‘Mark Antony, the triumvir, presented the Tarsans with the rights of citizens of Rome.’ Others, without number, bear the same testimony. Baronius goes still farther,——contending that ‘Tarsus obtained from the Romans, the municipal right,’ that is, the privileges of free-born citizens of Rome; understanding Paul’s expression in Acts xxi. 39, to mean that he was a municeps of Tarsus, or a Tarsan with the freedom of the city of Rome. Now the municipal towns, or free cities, had rights superior to those of mere colonies; for the free-citizens were not only called Roman citizens as the colonists were, but also, as Ulpian records, could share in all the honors and offices of Rome. Moreover, the colonies had to live under the laws of the Romans, while the municipal towns were allowed to act according their own ancient laws, and country usages. To account for the distinction enjoyed by Tarsus, in being called a ‘municipium of Romans,’ the citizens are said to have merited that honor, for having in the civil wars attached themselves first to Julius Caesar, and afterwards to Octavius, in whose cause they suffered much. For so attached was this city to the side of Caesar, that, as Dion Cassius records, their asked to have their name changed from Tarsus to Juliopolis, in memory of Julius and in token of good will to Augustus; and for that reason they were presented with the rights of a colony or a municipium, and this general opinion is strengthened by the high testimony of Pliny and Appian. On the other hand Heinsius and Grotius strongly urge that these things have been too hastily asserted by the learned; for scarcely a passage can be found in the ancient writers, where Tarsus is called a colony, or even a municipium. ‘And how could it be a colony,’ asks Heinsius, ‘when writers on Roman law acknowledge but two in Cilicia? Ulpian (Liber I. De censibus) says of the Roman colonies in Asia Minor, “there is in Bithynia the colony of Apamea,——in Pontus, Sinope,——in Cilicia there are Selinus and Trajanopolis.” But why does he pass over Tarsus or Juliopolis, if that had place among them?’ Baronius proves it to have been a municipium, only from the Latin version of Acts, where that word is used; though the term in the original Greek (πολιτης) means nothing more than the common word, citizen, (as it is rendered in the English version.) Pliny also calls Tarsus not a colony, nor a municipium, but a free city. ([a]libera urbs.]) Book V. chap xxvii. Appian in the first book of the civil wars, says that Antony granted to the Tarsans freedom, but says nothing of the rights of a municipium, or colony. Wherefore Grotius thinks that the only point established is, that some one of the ancestors of Paul, in the civil wars between Augustus Caesar, and Brutus and Cassius, and perhaps those between this Caesar and Antony, received the grant of the privileges of a Roman citizen. Whence he concludes that Paul must have been of an opulent family. These opinions of Grotius have received the approval of other eminent commentators. These notions however, must be rejected as unsatisfactory; because, though some writers have but slightly alluded to Tarsus as a free city, yet Dio Chrysostom, (in Tarsica posteriore,) has enlarged upon it in a tone of high declamation. ‘Yours, men of Tarsus, was the fortune to be first in this nation,——not only because you dwell in the greatest city of Cilicia, and one which was a metropolis from the beginning,——but also because the second Caesar was remarkably well-disposed and gracious towards you. For, the misfortunes which befell the city in his cause, deservedly secured to you his kind regard, and led him to make his benefits to you as conspicuous as the calamities brought upon you for his sake. Therefore did Augustus confer on you everything that a man could on friends and companions, with a view to outdo those who had shown him so great good-will,——your land, laws, honors, the right of the river and of the neighboring sea.’ On which words Heinsius observes in comment, that by land is doubtless meant that he secured to them their own territory, free and undisturbed. By laws are meant such as relate to the liberty usually granted to free towns. Honor plainly refers to the right of citizenship, as the most exalted he could offer. The point then seems to be established, if this interpretation holds good, and it is evidently a rational one. For when he had made up his mind to grant high favors to a city, in return for such great merits, why, when it was in his power, should Augustus fail to grant it the rights of Roman citizenship, which certainly had been often granted to other cities on much slighter grounds? It would be strange indeed, if among the exalted honors which Dio proclaims, that should not have been included. This appears to be the drift, not only of Dio’s remarks, but also of Paul’s, who offers no other proof of his being a Roman citizen, than that he was a Tarsan, and says nothing of it as a special immunity of his own family, although some such explanation would otherwise have been necessary to gain credit to his assertion. Whence it is concluded that it would be rash to pretend, contrary to all historical testimony, any peculiar merits of the ancestors of Paul, towards the Romans, which caused so great an honor to be conferred on a Jewish family.”

But from all these ample and grandiloquent statements of Dio Chrysostom, it by no means follows that Tarsus had the privilege of Roman citizenship; and the conclusion of the learned Witsius seems highly illogical. The very fact, that while Dio was panegyrizing Tarsus in these high terms, and recounting all the favors which imperial beneficence had showered upon it, he yet did not mention among these minutiae, the privilege of citizenship, is quite conclusive against this view; for he would not, when thus seeking for all the particulars of its eminence, have omitted the greatest honor and advantage which could be conferred on any city by a Roman emperor, nor have left it vaguely to be inferred. Besides, there are passages in the Acts of the Apostles which seem to be opposed to the view, that Tarsus was thus privileged. In Acts xxi. 39, Paul is represented as distinctly stating to the tribune, that he was “a citizen of Tarsus;” yet in xxii. 24, 25, it is said, that the tribune was about proceeding, without scruple, to punish Paul with stripes, and was very much surprised indeed, to learn that he was a Roman citizen, and evidently had no idea that a citizen of Tarsus was, as a matter of course, endowed with Roman citizenship;——a fact, however, with which a high Roman officer must have been acquainted, for there were few cities thus privileged, and Tarsus was a very eminent city in a province adjoining Palestine, and not far from the capital of Judea. And the subsequent passages of chap. xxii. represent him as very slow indeed to believe it, after Paul’s distinct assertion.

Hemsen is very clear and satisfactory on this point, and presents the argument in a fair light. See his note in his “Apostel Paulus” on pp. 1, 2. He refers also to a work not otherwise known here;——John Ortwin Westenberg’s “Dissert. de jurisp. Paul. Apost.” Kuinoel in Act. Apost. xvi. 37. discusses the question of citizenship.

“It ought not to seem very strange, that the ancestors of Paul should have settled in Cilicia, rather than in the land of Israel. For although Cyrus gave the whole people of God an opportunity of returning to their own country, yet many from each tribe preferred the new country, in which they had been born and bred, to the old one, of which they had lost the remembrance. Hence an immense multitude of Jews might be found in almost all the dominions of the Persians, Greeks, Romans and Parthians; as alluded to in Acts ii. 9, 10. But there were also other occasions and causes for the dispersion of the Jews. Ptolemy, the Macedonian king of Egypt, having taken Jerusalem from the Syro-Macedonians, led away many from the hill-country of Judea, from Samaria and Mount Gerizim, into Egypt, where he made them settle; and after he had given them at Alexandria the rights of citizens in equal privilege with the Macedonians, not a few of the rest, of their own accord, moved into Egypt, allured partly by the richness of the land, and partly by the good will that Ptolemy had shown towards their nation. Afterwards, Antiochus the Great, the Macedonian king of Syria, about the thirtieth year of his reign, two hundred years before the Christian era, brought out two thousand Jewish families from Babylonia, whom he sent into Phrygia and Lydia with the most ample privileges, that they might hold to their duty the minds of the Greeks, who were then inclining to revolt from his sway. These were from Asia Minor, spread abroad over the surrounding countries, between the Mediterranean sea, the Euphrates and Mount Amanus, on the frontiers of Cilicia. Besides, others afterwards, to escape the cruelty of Antiochus Epiphanes, betook themselves to foreign lands, where, finding themselves well settled, they and their descendants remained. Moreover, many, as Philo testifies, for the sake of trade, or other advantages, of their own accord left the land of Israel for foreign countries: whence almost the whole world was filled with colonies of Jews, as we see in the directions of some of the general epistles, (James i. 1: 1 Peter i. 1.) Thus also Tarsus had its share of Jewish inhabitants, among whom were the family of Paul.” (Witsius in Vita Pauli, § 1. ¶ v.)

Nor were the solid honors of this great Asian city, limited to the mere favors of imperial patronage. Founded, or early enlarged by the colonial enterprise of the most refined people of ancient times, Tarsus, from its first beginning, shared in the glories of Helleno-Asian civilization, under which philosophy, art, taste, commerce, and warlike power attained in these colonies a highth before unequalled, while Greece, the mother country, was still far back in the march of improvement. In the Asian colonies arose the first schools of philosophy, and there is hardly a city on the eastern coast of the Aegean, but is consecrated by some glorious association with the name of some Father of Grecian science. Thales, Anaxagoras, Anaximander, and many others of the earliest philosophers, all flourished in these Asian colonies; and on the Mediterranean coast, within Cilicia itself, were the home and schools of Aratus and the stoic Chrysippus. The city of Tarsus is commemorated by Strabo as having in very early times attained great eminence in philosophy and in all sorts of learning, so that “in science and art it surpassed the fame even of Athens and Alexandria; and the citizens of Tarsus themselves were distinguished for individual excellence in these elevated pursuits. So great was the zeal of the men of that place for philosophy, and for the rest of the circle of sciences, that they excelled both Athens and Alexandria, and every other place which can be mentioned, where there are schools and lectures of philosophers.” Not borrowing the philosophic glory of their city merely from the numbers of strangers who resorted thither to enjoy the advantages of instruction there afforded, as is almost universally the case in all the great seats of modern learning; but entering themselves with zeal and enjoyment into their schools of science, they made the name of Tarsus famous throughout the civilized world, for the cultivation of knowledge and taste. Even to this day the stranger pauses with admiration among the still splendid ruins of this ancient city, and finds in her arches, columns and walls, and in her chance-buried medals, the solid testimonies of her early glories in art, taste and wealth. Well then might the great apostle recur with patriotic pride to the glories of the city where he was born and educated, challenging the regard of his military hearers for his native place, by the sententious allusion to it, as “NO MEAN CITY.”

“It appears on the testimony of Paul, (Acts xxi. 39,) that Tarsus was a city of no little note, and it is described by other writers as the most illustrious city of all Cilicia; so much so indeed, that the Tarsans traced their origin to Ionians and Argives, and a rank superior even to these;——referring their antiquity of origin not merely to heroes, but even to demi-gods. It was truly exalted, not only by its antiquity, situation, population and thriving trade, but by the nobler pursuits of science and literature, which so flourished there, that according to Strabo it was worthy to be ranked with Athens and Alexandria; and we know that Rome itself owed its most celebrated professors to Tarsus.” (Witsius. § 1, ¶ iv.)

The testimony of Strabo is found in his Geography, book XIV. Cellarius (Geog. Ant.) is very full on the geography of Cilicia, and may be advantageously consulted. Conder’s Modern Traveler (Syria and Asia Minor 2.) gives a very full account of its ancient history, its present condition, and its topography.

The present appearance of this ancient city must be a matter of great interest to the reader of apostolic history; and it can not be more clearly given than in the simple narrative of the enterprising Burckhardt, who wrote his journal on the very spot which he describes. (Life of Burckhardt, prefixed to his travels in Nubia, pp. xv. xvi.)

“The road from our anchoring place to Tarsus crosses the above-mentioned plain in an easterly direction: we passed several small rivulets which empty themselves into the sea, and which, to judge from the size of their beds, swell in the rainy season to considerable torrents. We had rode about an hour, when I saw at half an hour’s distance to the north of our route, the ruins of a large castle, upon a hill of a regular shape in the plain; half an hour further towards Tarsus, at an equal distance from our road, upon a second tumulus, were ruins resembling the former; a third insulated hillock, close to which we passed midway of our route, was over-grown with grass, without any ruins or traces of them. I did not see in the whole plain any other elevations of ground but the three just mentioned. Not far from the first ruins, stands in the plain an insulated column. Large groups of trees show from afar the site of Tarsus. We passed a small river before we entered the town, larger than those we had met on the road. The western outer gate of the town, through which we entered, is of ancient structure; it is a fine arch, the interior vault of which is in perfect preservation: on the outside are some remains of a sculptured frieze. I did not see any inscriptions. To the right and left of this gateway are seen the ancient ruined walls of the city, which extended in this direction farther than the town at present does. From the outer gateway, it is about four hundred paces to the modern entrance of the city; the intermediate ground is filled up by a burying ground on one side of the road, and several gardens with some miserable huts on the other. * * * * The little I saw of Tarsus did not allow me to estimate its extent; the streets through which I passed were all built of wood, and badly; some well furnished bazars, and a large and handsome mosque in the vicinity of the Khan, make up the whole register of curiosities which I am able to relate of Tarsus. Upon several maps Tarsus is marked as a sea town: this is incorrect; the sea is above three miles distant from it. On our return home, we started in a south-west direction, and passed, after two hours and a half’s march, Casal, a large village, half a mile distant from the sea-shore, called the Port of Tarsus, because vessels freighted for Tarsus usually come to anchor in its neighborhood. From thence turning towards the west, we arrived at our ship at the end of two hours. The merchants of Tarsus trade principally with the Syrian coast and Cyprus: imperial ships arrive there from time to time, to load grain. The land trade is of very little consequence, as the caravans from Smyrna arrive very seldom. There is no land communication at all between Tarsus and Aleppo, which is at ten journeys (caravan traveling) distant from it. The road has been rendered unsafe, especially in later times, by the depredations of Kutshuk Ali, a savage rebel, who has established himself in the mountains to the north of Alexandretta. Tarsus is governed by an Aga, who I have reason to believe is almost independent. The French have an agent there, who is a rich Greek merchant.”

A fine instance of the value of the testimony of the Fathers on points where knowledge of the Scriptures is involved, is found in the story by Jerome, who says that “Paul was born at Gischali, a city of Judea,” (in Galilee,) “and that while he was a child, his parents, in the time of the laying waste of their country by the Romans, removed to Tarsus, in Cilicia.” And yet this most learned of the Fathers, the translator of the whole Bible into Latin, did not know, it seems, that Paul himself most distinctly states in his speech to the Jewish mob, (Acts xxii. 3,) that he was “born in Cilicia,” as the common translation has it;——in Greek, γεγενημενος εν Κιλικια,——words which so far from allowing any such assertion as Jerome makes, even imply that Paul, with Tristram Shandy-like particularity, would specify that he was “begotten in Cilicia.” Jerome’s ridiculous blunder, Witsius, after exposing its inconsistency with Jewish history, indignantly condemns, as “a most shameful falsehood,” ([a]putidissima fabula,]) which is as hard a name as has been applied to anything in this book.

But if this blunder is so shameful in Jerome, what shall be said of the learned Fabricius, who (Bibliotheca Graeca, IV. p. 795,) copies this story from Jerome as authentic history, without a note of comment, and without being aware that it most positively contradicts the direct assertion of Paul? And this blunder too is passed over by all the great critical commentators of Fabricius, in Harles’s great edition. Keil, Kuinoel, Harles, Gurlitt, and others equally great, who revised all this, are involved in the discredit of the blunder. “Non omnes omnia.”

HIS GRECIAN LEARNING.

In this splendid seat of knowledge, Saul was born of purely Jewish parents. “A Hebrew of the Hebrews,” he enjoyed from his earliest infancy that minute religious instruction, which every Israelite was in conscience bound to give his children; and with a minuteness and attention so much the more careful, as a residence in a foreign land, far away from the consecrated soil of Palestine and the Holy city of his faith, might increase the liabilities of his children to forget or neglect a religion of which they saw so few visible tokens around them, to keep alive their devotion. Yet, though thus strictly educated in the religion of his fathers, Saul was by no means cut off by this circumstance from the enjoyment of many of the advantages in profaner knowledge, afforded in such an eminent degree by Tarsus; but must, almost without an effort, have daily imbibed into his ready and ever active mind, much of the refining influence of Grecian philosophy. There is no proof, indeed, that he ever formally entered the schools of heathen science; such a supposition, is, perhaps, inconsistent with the idea of his principles of rigid Judaism, and is rendered rather improbable by the great want of Grecian elegance and accuracy in his writings; which are so decidedly characterized by an unrhetorical style, and by irregular logic, that they never could have been the production of a scholar, in the most eminent philosophical institutions of Asia. But a mere birth and residence in such a city, and the incidental but constant familiarity with those so absorbed in these pursuits, as very many of his fellow-citizens were, would have the unavoidable effect of familiarizing him also with the great subjects of conversation, and the grand objects of pursuit, so as ever after to prove an advantage to him in his intercourse with the refined and educated among the Greeks and Romans. The knowledge thus acquired, too, is ever found to be of the most readily available kind, always suggesting itself upon occasions when needed, according to the simple principle of association, and thus more easily applied to ordinary use than that which is more regularly attained, and is arranged in the mind only according to formal systems. Thus was it, with most evident wisdom, ordained by God, that in this great seat of heathen learning, that apostle should be born, who was to be the first messenger of grace to the Grecian world, and whose words of warning, even Rome should one day hear and believe.

HIS FAMILY AND BIRTH.

The parents of Saul were Jews, and his father at least, was of the tribe of Benjamin. In some of those numerous emigrations from Judea which took place either by compulsion or by the voluntary enterprise of the people, at various times after the Assyrian conquest, the ancestors of Saul had left their father-land, for the fertile plains of Cilicia, where, under the patronizing government of some of the Syro-Macedonian kings, they found a much more profitable home than in the comparatively uncommercial land of Israel. On some one of these occasions, probably during the emigration under Antiochus the Great, the ancestors of Saul had settled in Tarsus, and during the period intervening between this emigration and the birth of Saul, the family seems to have maintained or acquired a very respectable rank, and some property. From the distinct information which we have that Saul was a free-born Roman citizen, it is manifest that his parents must also have possessed that right; for it has already been abundantly shown that it was not common to the citizens of Tarsus, but must have been a peculiar privilege of his family. After the subjugation of Cilicia, (sixty-two years before Christ,) when the province passed from the Syrian to the Roman sway, the family were in some way brought under the favorable notice of the new lords of the eastern world, and were honored with the high privilege of Roman citizenship, an honor which could not have been imparted to any one low either in birth or wealth. The precise nature of the service performed by them, that produced such a magnificent reward, it is impossible to determine; but that this must have been the reason, it is very natural to suppose. But whatever may have been the extent of the favors enjoyed by the parents of Saul, from the kindness of their heathen rulers, they were not thereby led to neglect the institutions of their fathers,——but even in a strange land, observed the Mosaic law with peculiar strictness; for Saul himself plainly asserts that his father was a Pharisee, and therefore he must have been bound by the rigid observances of that sect, to a blameless deportment, as far as the Mosaic law required. Born of such parents, the destined apostle at his birth was made the subject of the minute Mosaic rituals. “Circumcised the eighth day,” he then received the name of Saul, a name connected with some glorious and some mournful associations in the ancient Jewish history, and probably suggested to the parents on this occasion, by a reference to its signification, for Hebrew names were often thus applied, expressing some circumstance connected with the child; and in this name more particularly, some such meaning might be expected, since, historically, it must have been a word of rather evil omen. The original Hebrew means “desired,” “asked for,” and hence it has been rather fancifully, but not unreasonably conjectured that he was an oldest son, and particularly desired by his expecting parents, who were, like the whole Jewish race, very earnest to have a son to perpetuate their name,——a wish however, by no means peculiar to the Israelites.

The name Saul is in Hebrew, שאול the regular noun from the passive Kal participle of שאל (sha-al and sha-el) “ask for,” “beg,” “request;” and the name therefore means “asked for,” or “requested,” which affords ground for Neander’s curious conjecture, above given.

Of the time of his birth nothing is definitely known, though it is stated by some ancient authority of very doubtful character, that he was born in the second year after Christ. All that can be said with any probability, is, that he was born several years after Christ; for at the time of the stoning of Stephen, (A. D. 34,) Saul was a “young man.”

HIS TRADE.

There was an ancient Jewish proverb,——often quoted with great respect in the Rabbinical writings,——“He that does not teach his son a trade, trains him to steal.” In conformity with this respectable adage, every Jewish boy, high or low, was invariably taught some mechanical trade, as an essential part of his education, without any regard to the wealth of his family, or to his prospect of an easy life, without the necessity of labor. The consequence of this was, that even the dignified teachers of the law generally conjoined the practice of some mechanical business, with the refined studies to which they devoted the most of their time, and the surnames of some of the most eminent of the Rabbins are derived from the trades which they thus followed in the intervals of study, for a livelihood or for mental relaxation. The advantages of such a variation from intense mental labor to active and steady bodily exercise, are too obvious, both as concerns the benefit of the body and the mind, to need any elucidation; but it is a happy coincidence, worth noticing, that, the better principles of what is now called “Manual Labor Instruction,” are herein fully carried out, and sanctioned by the authority and example of some of the most illustrious of those ancient Hebrew scholars, whose mighty labors in sacred lore, are still a monument of the wisdom of a plan of education, which combines bodily activity and exertion with the full development of the powers of thought. The labors of such men still remain the wonder of later days, and form in themselves, subjects for the excursive and penetrating range of some of the greatest minds of modern times, throwing more light on the minute signification and local application of scripture, than all that has been done in any other field of illustrative research.

“In the education of their son, the parents of Saul thought it their duty according to the fashion of their nation, not only to train his mind in the higher pursuits of a liberal education, but also to accustom his hands to some useful trade. As we learn from Acts xviii. 3, ‘he was by trade a tent-maker,’ occupying the intervals of his study-hours with that kind of work. For it is well established that this was the usual habit of the most eminent Jewish scholars, who adopted it as much for the sake of avoiding sloth and idleness, as with a view to provide for their own support. The Jews used to sum up the duties of parents in a sort of proverb, that ‘they should circumcise their son, redeem him, (Leviticus chapter xxvii.) teach him the law and a trade, and look out a wife for him.’ And indeed the importance of some business of this kind was so much felt, that a saying is recorded of one of the most eminent of their Rabbins, that ‘he who neglects to teach his son a trade, does the same as to bring him up to be a thief.’ Hence it is that the wisest Hebrews held it an honor to take their surnames from their trades; as Rabbins Nahum and Meir, the scriveners or book writers,” (a business corresponding to that of printers in these times,) “Rabbi Johanan the shoemaker, Rabbi Juda the baker, and Rabbi Jose the currier or tanner. How trifling then is the sneer of some scoffers who have said that Paul was nothing but a stitcher of skins, and thence conclude that he was a man of the lowest class of the populace.” (Witsius § I. ¶ 12.)

The trade which the parents of Saul selected for their son, is described in the sacred apostolic history as that of a “tent-maker.” A reference to the local history of his native province throws great light on this account. In the wild mountains of Cilicia, which everywhere begin to rise from the plains, at a distance of seven or eight miles from the coast, anciently ranged a peculiar species of long-haired goats, so well known by name throughout the Grecian world, for their rough and shaggy aspect, that the name of “Cilician goat” became a proverbial expression, to signify a rough, ill-bred fellow, and occurs in this sense in the classic writers. From the hair of these, the Cilicians manufactured a thick, coarse cloth,——somewhat resembling the similar product of the camel’s hair,——which, from the country where the cloth was made, and where the raw material was produced, was called cilicium or cilicia, and under this name it is very often mentioned, both by Grecian and Roman authors. The peculiar strength and incorruptibility of this cloth was so well known, that it was considered as one of the most desirable articles for several very important purposes, both in war and navigation, being the best material for the sails of vessels, as well as for military tents. But it was principally used by the Nomadic Arabs of the neighboring deserts of Syria, who, ranging from Amanus and the sea, to the Euphrates, and beyond, found the tents manufactured from this stout cloth, so durable and convenient, that they depended on the Cilicians to furnish them with the material of their moveable homes; and over all the east, the cilicium was in great demand, for shepherd’s tents. A passage from Pliny forms a splendid illustration of this interesting little point. “The wandering tribes, (Nomades,) and the tribes who plunder the Chaldeans, are bordered by Scenites, (tent-dwellers,) who are themselves also wanderers, but take their name from their tents, which they raise of Cilician cloth, wherever inclination leads them.” This was therefore an article of national industry among the Cilicians, and afforded in its manufacture, profitable employment to a great number of workmen, who were occupied, not in large establishments like the great manufactories of modern European nations, but, according to the invariable mode in eastern countries, each one by himself, or at most with one or two companions. Saul, however, seems to have been occupied only with the concluding part of the manufacture, which was the making up of the cloth into the articles for which it was so well fitted by its strength, closeness and durability. He was a maker of tents of Cilician camlet, or goat’s-hair cloth,——a business which, in its character and implements, more resembled that of a sail-maker than any other common trade in this country. The details of the work must have consisted in cutting the camlet of the shape required for each part of the tent, and sewing it together into the large pieces, which were then ready to be transported, and to form, when hung on tent-poles, the habitations of the desert-wanderers.

This illustration of Saul’s trade is from Hug’s Introduction, Vol. II. note on § 85, pp. 328, 329, original, § 80, pp. 335, 336, translation. On the manufacture of this cloth, see Gloss. Basil, sub voc. Κιλικιος τραγος, &c. “Cilician goat,——a rough fellow;——for there are such goats in Cilicia; whence also, things made of their hair are called cilicia.” He quotes also Hesychius, Suidas, and Salmasius in Solinum, p. 347. As to the use of the cloths in war and navigation, he refers to Vegetius, De re milit. IV. 6, and Servius in Georgica III. 312.——The passage in Pliny, showing their use by the Nomadic tribes of Syria and Mesopotamia for shepherd’s tents, is in his Natural History, VI. 28. “[a]Nomadas infestatoresque Chaldaeorum, Scenitae claudunt, et ipsi vagi, sed a tabernaculis cognominati quae ciliciis metantur, ubi libuit.]” The reading of this passage which I have adopted is from the Leyden Hackian edition of Pliny, which differs slightly from that followed by Hug, as the critical will perceive. Hemsen quotes this note almost verbatim from Hug. (Hemsen’s “Apostel Paulus,” page 4.)

The particular species or variety of goat, which is thus described as anciently inhabiting the mountains of Cilicia, can not now be distinctly ascertained, because no scientific traveler has ever made observations on the animals of that region, owing to the many difficulties in the way of any exploration of Asia Minor, under the barbarous Ottoman sway. Neither Griffith’s Cuvier nor Turton’s Linnaeus contains any reference to Cilicia, as inhabited by any species or variety of the genus Capra. The nearest approach to certainty, that can be made with so few data, is the reasonable conjecture that the Cilician goat was a variety of the species Capra Aegagrus, to which the common domestic goat belongs, and which includes several remarkable varieties,——at least six being well ascertained. There are few of my readers, probably, who are not familiar with the descriptions and pictures of the famous Angora goat, which is one of these varieties, and is well-known for its long, soft, silky hair, which is to this day used in the manufacture of a sort of camlet, in the place where it is found, which is Angora and the region around it, from the Halys to the Sangarius. This tract of country is in Asia Minor, only three or four hundred miles north of Cilicia, and therefore at once suggests the probability of the Cilician goat being something very much like the Angora goat. (See Modern Traveler, III. p. 339.) On the other side of Cilicia also, in Syria, there is an equally remarkable variety of the goat, with similar long, silky hair, used for the same manufacture. Now Cilicia, being directly on the shortest route from Angora to Syria, and half-way between both, might very naturally be supposed to have another variety of the Capra Aegagrus, between the Angoran and the Syrian variety, and resembling both in the common characteristic of long shaggy or silky hair; and there can be no reasonable doubt that future scientific observation will show that the Cilician goat forms another well-marked variety of this widely diffused species, which, wherever it inhabits the mountains of the warm regions of Asia, always furnishes this beautiful product, of which we have another splendid and familiar specimen in the Tibet and Cashmere goats, whose fleeces are worth more than their weight in gold. The hair of the Syrian and Cilician goats, however, is of a much coarser character, producing a much coarser and stouter fibre for the cloth.

On the subject of Paul’s trade, the learned and usually accurate Michaelis was led into a very great error, by taking up too hastily a conjecture founded on a misapprehension of the meaning given by Julius Pollux, in his Onomasticon, on the word σκηνοποιος (skenopoios,) which is the word used in Acts xiii. 3, to designate the trade of Saul and Aquilas. Pollux mentions that in the language of the old Grecian comedy, σκηνοποιος was equivalent to μηχανοποιος, (mechanopoios,) which Michaelis very erroneously takes in the sense of “a maker of mechanical instruments,” and this he therefore maintains to have been the trade of Saul and Aquilas. But it is capable of the most satisfactory proof, that Julius Pollux used the words here merely in the technical sense of theatrical preparation,——the first meaning simply “a scene-maker,” and the second “a constructor of theatrical machinery,”——both terms, of course, naturally applied to the same artist. (Michaelis, Introduction, IV. xxiii. 2. pp. 183–186. Marsh’s translation.——Hug, II. § 85, original; § 80, translation.)

The Fathers also made similar blunders about the nature of Saul’s trade. They call him σκυτοτομος, (skutotomos,) “a skin-cutter,” as well as σκηνορραφος, “a tent-maker.” This was because they were entirely ignorant of the material used for the manufacture of tents; for, living themselves in the civilized regions of Greece, Italy, &c. they knew nothing of the habitations of the Nomadic tent-dwellers. Chrysostom in particular, calls him “one who worked in skins.”

Fabricius gives some valuable illustrations of this point. (Bibliotheca Graeca, IV. p. 795, bb.) He quotes Cotelerius, (ad. Apost. Const. II. 63,) Erasmus, &c. (ad Acts xviii. 3,) and Schurzfleisch, (in diss. de Paulo, &c.) who brings sundry passages from Dio Chrysostom and Libanius, to prove that there were many in Cilicia who worked in leather, as he says; in support of which he quotes Martial, (epigraph xiv. 114,) alluding to “udones cilicii,” or “cilician cloaks,” (used to keep off rain, as water-proof,)——not knowing that this word, cilicium, was the name of a very close and stout cloth, from the goat’s hair, equally valuable as a covering for a single person, and for the habitation of a whole family. In short, Martial’s passage shows that the Cilician camlet was used like the modern camlet,——for cloaks. Fabricius himself seems to make no account of this leather notion of Schurzfleisch; for immediately after, he states (what I can not find on any other authority) that “even at this day, as late books of travels testify, variegated cloths are exported from Cilicia.” This is certainly true of Angora in Asia Minor, north-west of Cilicia, (Modern Traveler, III. p. 339,) and may be true of Cilicia itself. Fabricius notices 2 Corinthians v. 1: and xii. 9, as containing figures drawn from Saul’s trade.

HIS EDUCATION.

But this was not destined to be the most important occupation of Saul’s life. Even his parents had nobler objects in view for him, and evidently devoted him to this handicraft, only in conformity with those ancient Jewish usages which had the force of law on every true Israelite, whether rich or poor; and accordingly he was sent, while yet in his youth, away from his home in Tarsus, to Jerusalem, the fountain of religious and legal knowledge to all the race of Judah and Benjamin, throughout the world. To what extent his general education had been carried in Tarsus, is little known; but he had acquired that fluency in the Greek, which is displayed in his writings, though contaminated with many of the provincialisms of Cilicia, and more especially with the barbarisms of Hebrew usage. Living in daily intercourse, both in the way of business and friendship, with the active Grecians of that thriving city, and led, no doubt, by his own intellectual character and tastes, to the occasional cultivation of those classics which were the delight of his Gentile acquaintances, he acquired a readiness and power in the use of the Greek language, and a familiarity with the favorite writers of the Asian Hellenes, that in the providence of God most eminently fitted him for the sphere to which he was afterwards devoted, and was the true ground of his wonderful acceptability to the highly literary people among whom his greatest and most successful labors were performed, and to whom all of his epistles, but two, were written. All these writings show proofs of such an acquaintance with Greek, as is here inferred from his opportunities in education. His well-known quotations also from Menander and Epimenides, and more especially his happy impromptu reference in his discourse at Athens, to the line from his own fellow-Cilician, Aratus, are instances of a very great familiarity with the classics, and are thrown out in such an unstudied, off-hand way, as to imply a ready knowledge of these writers. But all these were, no doubt, learned in the mere occasional manner already alluded to in connection with the reputation and literary character of Tarsus. He was devoted by all the considerations of ancestral pride and religious zeal to the study of “a classic, the best the world has ever seen,——the noblest that has ever honored and dignified the language of mortals.”

HIS REMOVAL TO JERUSALEM.

Strabo, in speaking of the remarkable literary and philosophical zeal of the refined inhabitants of Tarsus, says that “after having well laid the foundations of literature and science in their own schools at home, it was usual for them to resort to those in other places, in order to zealously pursue the cultivation of their minds still further,” by the varied modes and opportunities presented in different schools throughout the Hellenic world,——a noble spirit of literary enterprise, accordant with the practice of the most ancient philosophers, and like the course also pursued by the modern German scholars, many of whom go from one university to another, to enjoy the peculiar advantages afforded by each in some particular department. It was therefore, only in a noble emulation of the example of his heathen fellow-townsmen, in the pursuit of profane knowledge, that Saul left the city of his birth and his father’s house, to seek a deeper knowledge of the sacred sources of Hebrew learning, in the capital of the faith. This removal to so great a distance, for such a purpose, evidently implies the possession of considerable wealth in the family of Saul; for a literary sojourn of that kind, in a great city, could not but be attended with very considerable expense as well as trouble.

HIS TEACHER.

Saul having been thus endowed with a liberal education at home, and with the principles of the Jewish faith, as far as his age would allow,——went up to Jerusalem to enjoy the instruction of Gamaliel. There is every reason to believe that this was Gamaliel the elder, grandson of Hillel, and son of Simeon, (probably the same, who, in his old age, took the child Jesus in his arms,) and father of another Simeon, in whose time the temple was destroyed; for the Rabbinical writings give a minute account of him, as connected with all these persons. This Gamaliel succeeded his ancestors in the rank which was then esteemed the highest; this was the office of “head of the college,” otherwise called “Prince of the Jewish senate.” Out of respect to this most eminent Father of Hebrew learning, as it is recorded, Onkelos, the renowned Chaldee paraphrast, burned at his funeral, seventy pounds of incense, in honor to the high rank and learning of the deceased. This eminent teacher was at first not ill-disposed towards the apostles, who, he thought, ought to be left to their own fate; being led to this moderate and reasonable course, perhaps, by the circumstance that the Sadducees, whom he hated, were most active in their persecution. The sound sense and humane wisdom that mark his sagely eloquent opinion, so wonderful in that bloody time, have justly secured him the admiration and respect of all Christian readers of the record; and not without regret would they learn, that the after doings of his life, unrecorded by the sacred historian, yet on the testimony of others, bear witness against him as having changed from this wise principle of action. If there is any ground for the story which Maimonides tells, it would seem, that when Gamaliel saw the new heretical sect multiplying in his own days, and drawing away the Israelites from the Mosaic forms, he, together with the Senate, whose President he was, gave his utmost endeavors to crush the followers of Christ, and composed a form of prayer, by which God was besought to exterminate these heretics; which was to be connected to the usual forms of prayer in the Jewish liturgy. This story of Maimonides, if it is adopted as true, on so slight grounds, may be reconciled with the account given by Luke, in two ways. First, Gamaliel may have thought that the apostles and their successors, although heretics, were not to be put down by human force, or by the contrivances of human ingenuity, but that the whole matter should be left to the hidden providence of God, and that their extermination should be obtained from God by prayers. Or, second,——to make a more simple and rational supposition,——he may have been so struck by the boldness of the apostles, and by the evidence of the miracle performed by them, as to express a milder opinion on them at that particular moment; but afterwards may have formed a harsher judgment, when, contrary to all expectation, he saw the wonderful growth of Christianity, and heard with wrath and uncontrollable indignation, the stern rebuke of Stephen. But these loose relics of tradition, offered on such very suspicious authority as that of a Jew of the ages when Christianity had become so odious to Judaism by its triumphs, may without hesitation be rejected as wholly inconsistent with the noble spirit of Gamaliel, as expressed in the clear, impartial account of Luke; and both of the suppositions here offered by others, to reconcile sacred truth with mere falsehood, are thus rendered entirely unnecessary.

At the feet of this Gamaliel, then, was Saul brought up. (Acts xxii. 3.) It has been observed on this passage, by learned commentators, that this expression refers to the fashion followed by students, of sitting and lying down on the ground or on mats, at the feet of their teacher, who sat by himself on a higher place. And indeed so many are the traces of this fashion among the recorded labors of the Hebrews, that it does not seem possible to call it in question. The labors of Scaliger in his “Elenchus Trihaeresii,” have brought to light many illustrations of the point; besides which another is offered in a well-known passage from פרקי אבות Pirke Aboth, or “Fragments of the Fathers.” Speaking of the wise, it is said, “Make thyself dusty in the dust of their feet,”——הוי מתאבק בעפר רגליהם——meaning that the young student is to be a diligent hearer at the feet of the wise;——thus raising a truly “learned dust,” if the figure may be so minutely carried out. The same thing is farther illustrated by a passage which Buxtorf has given in his Lexicon of the Talmud, in the portion entitled ברכית (Berachoth,) מנעו בניכם מן ההגיון והושיבום בין ברכי תלמידי חכמים “Take away your sons from the study of the Bible, and make them sit between the knees of the disciples of the wise;” which is equivalent to a recommendation of oral, as superior to written instruction. The same principle, of varying the mode in which the mind receives knowledge, is recognized in modern systems of education, with a view to avoid the self-conceit and intolerant pride which solitary study is apt to engender, as well as because, from the living voice of the teacher, the young scholar learns in that practical, simple mode which is most valuable and efficient, as it is that, in which alone all his knowledge of the living and speaking world must be obtained. It should be observed, however, that Buxtorf seems to have understood this passage rather differently from Witsius, whose construction is followed in the translation given above. Buxtorf, following the ordinary meaning of הגיבן (HEG-YON,) seems to prefer the sense of “meditation.” He rejects the common translation——“study of the Bible,” as altogether irreligious. “[a]In hoc sensu, praeceptum impium est.]” He says that other Glosses of the passage give it the meaning of “boyish talk,” (garritu puerorum.) But this is a sense perfectly contradictory to all usage of the word, and was evidently invented only to avoid the seemingly irreligious character of the literal version. But why may not all difficulties be removed by a reference to the primary signification, which is “solitary meditation,” in opposition to “instruction by others?”

We have in the gospel history itself, also, the instance of Mary. (Luke x. 39.) The passage in Mark iii. 32, “The multitude sat down around him,” farther illustrates this usage. There is an old Hebrew tradition, mentioned with great reverence by Maimonides, to this effect. “From the days of Moses down to Rabban Gamaliel, they always studied the law, standing; but after Rabban Gamaliel was dead, weakness descended on the world, and they studied the law, sitting.” (Witsius.)

HIS JEWISH OPINIONS.

Jerusalem was the seat of what may be called the great Jewish University. The Rabbins or teachers, united in themselves, not merely the sources of Biblical and theological learning, but also the whole system of instruction in that civil law, by which their nation were still allowed to be governed, with only some slight exceptions as to the right of punishment. There was no distinction, in short, between the professions of divinity and law, the Rabbins being teachers of the whole Mosaic system, and those who entered on a course of study under them, aiming at the knowledge of both those departments of learning, which, throughout the western nations, are now kept, for the most part, entirely distinct. Saul was therefore a student both of theology and law, and entered himself as a hearer of the lectures of one, who may, in modern phrase, be styled the most eminent professor in the great Hebrew university of Jerusalem. From him he learned the law and the Jewish traditional doctrines, as illustrated and perfected by the Fathers of the [♦]Pharisaic order. His steady energy and resolute activity were here all made available to the very complete attainment of the mysteries of knowledge; and the success with which he prosecuted his studies may be best appreciated by a minute examination of his writings, which everywhere exhibit indubitable marks of a deep and critical knowledge of all the details of Jewish theology and law. He shows himself to have been deeply versed in all the standard modes of explaining the Scriptures among the Hebrews,——by allegory,——typology, accommodation and tradition. Yet though thus ardently drinking the streams of Biblical knowledge from this great fountain-head, he seems to have been very far from imbibing the mild and merciful spirit of his great teacher, as it had been so eminently displayed in his sage decision on the trial of the apostles. The acquisition of knowledge, even under such an instructor, was, in Saul, attended with the somewhat common evils to which a young mind rapidly advanced in dogmatical learning, is naturally liable,——a bitter, denunciatory intolerance of any opinions contrary to his own,——a spiteful feeling towards all doctrinal opponents, and a disposition to punish speculative errors as actual crimes. All these common faults were very remarkably developed in Saul, by that uncommon harshness and fierceness by which he was so strongly characterized; and his worst feelings broke out with all their fury against the rising heretics, who, without any regular education, were assuming the office of religious teachers, and were understood to be seducing the people from their allegiance and due respect to the qualified scholars of the law. The occasion on which these dark religious passions first exhibited themselves in decided action against the Christians, was the murder of Stephen, of which the details have already been fully given in that part of the Life of Peter which is connected with it. Of those who engaged in the previous disputes with the proto-martyr, the members of the Cilician synagogue are mentioned among others; and with these Saul would very naturally be numbered; for, residing at a great distance from his native province, he would with pleasure seek the company of those residents in Jerusalem who were from Cilicia, and join with them in the study of the law and the weekly worship of God. What part he took in these animated and angry discussions, is not known; but his well-known power in argument affords good reason for believing, that the eloquence and logical acuteness which he afterwards displayed in the cause of Christ, were now made use of, against the ablest defenders of that same cause. His fierce spirit, no doubt, rose with the rest in that burst of indignation against the martyr, who fearlessly stood up before the council, pouring out a flood of invective against the unjust destroyers of the holy prophets of God; and when they all rushed upon the preacher of righteousness, and dragged him away from the tribunal to the place of execution, Saul also was consenting to his death; and when the blood of the martyr was shed, he stood by, approving the deed, and kept the clothes of them who slew him.

[♦] “Pharasaic” replaced with “Pharisaic”

HIS PERSECUTING CHARACTER.

The very active share which Saul took in this and the subsequent cruelties of a similar nature, is in itself a decided though terrible proof of that remarkable independence of character, which was so distinctly displayed in the greatest events of his apostolic career. Saul was no slave to the opinions of others; nor did he take up his active persecuting course on the mere dictation of higher authority. On the contrary, his whole behavior towards the followers of Jesus was directly opposed to the policy so distinctly urged and so efficiently maintained, in at least one instance, by his great teacher, Gamaliel, whose precepts and example on this subject must have influenced his bold young disciple, if any authority could have had such an effect on him. From Gamaliel and his disciples, Saul must have received his earliest impressions of the character of Christ and his doctrines; for it is altogether probable that he did not reach Jerusalem until some time after the ascension of Christ, and there is therefore no reason to suppose that he himself had ever heard or seen him. Nevertheless, brought up in the school of the greatest of the Pharisees, he would receive from all his teachers and associates, an impression decidedly unfavorable, of the Christian sect; though the uniform mildness of the Pharisees, as to vindictive measures, would temper the principles of action recommended in regard to the course of conduct to be adopted towards them. The rapid advance of the new sect, however, soon brought them more and more under the invidious notice of the Pharisees, who in the life-time of Jesus had been the most determined opposers of him and his doctrines; and the attention of Saul would therefore be constantly directed to the preparation for contest with them.

Stephen’s murder seems to have unlocked all the persecuting spirit of Saul. He immediately laid his hand to the work of persecuting the friends of Jesus, with a fury that could not be allayed by a single act. Nor was he satisfied with merely keeping a watchful eye on everything that was openly done by them; but under authority from the Sanhedrim, breaking into the retirement of their homes, to hunt them out for destruction, he had them thrown into prison, and scourged in the synagogues, and threatened even with death; by all which cruelties he so overcame the spirit of many of them, that they were forced to renounce the faith which they had adopted, and blaspheme the name of Christ in public recantations. This furious persecution soon drove them from Jerusalem in great numbers, to other cities. Samaria, as well as the distant parts of Judea, are mentioned as their places of refuge, and not a few fled beyond the bounds of Palestine into the cities of Syria. But even these distant exiles were not, by their flight into far countries, removed from the effects of the burning zeal of their persecutor. Longing for an opportunity to give a still wider range to his cruelties, he went to the great council, and begged of them such a commission as would authorize him to pursue his vindictive measures wherever the sanction of their name could support such actions. Among the probable inducements to this selection of a foreign field for his unrighteous work, may be reasonably placed, the circumstance that Damascus was at this time under the government of Aretas, an Arabian prince, into whose hands it fell for a short time, during which the equitable principles of Roman tolerance no longer operated as a check on the murderous spite of the Jews; for the new ruler, anxious to secure his dominion by ingratiating himself with the subjects of it, would not be disposed to neglect any opportunity for pleasing so powerful and influential a portion of the population of Damascus as the Jews were,——who lived there in such numbers, that in some disturbances which arose a few years after, between them and the other inhabitants, ten thousand Jews were slain unarmed, while in the public baths, enjoying themselves after the fatigues of the day, without any expectation of violence. So large a Jewish population would be secure of the support of Aretas in any favorite measure. Saul, well knowing these circumstances, must have been greatly influenced by this motive, to seek a commission to labor in a field where the firm tolerance of Roman sway was displaced by the baser rule of a petty prince, whose weakness rendered him subservient to the tyrannical wishes of his subjects. In Jerusalem the Roman government would not suffer anything like a systematic destruction of its subjects, nor authorize the taking of life by any religious tribunal, though it might pass over, unpunished, a solitary act of mob violence, like the murder of Stephen. It is perfectly incontestable therefore, that the persecution in Jerusalem could not have extended to the repeated destruction of life, and that passage in Paul’s discourse to Agrippa; which has been supposed to prove a plurality of capital punishments, has accordingly been construed in a more limited sense, by the ablest modern commentators.

Kuinoel on Acts xxv. 1, 10, maintains this fully, and quotes other authorities.

“It seems to some a strange business, that Paul should have had the Christians whipped through the synagogues. Why, in a house consecrated to prayer and religion, were sentences of a criminal court passed, and the punishment executed on the criminal? This difficulty seemed so great, even to the learned and judicious Beza, that in the face of the testimony of all manuscripts, he would have us suspect the genuineness of the passage in Matthew x. 17, where Christ uses the same expression. Such a liberty as he would thus take with the sacred text, is of course against all modern rules of sacred criticism. For what should we do then with Matthew xxiii. 34, where the same passage occurs again? Grotius, to explain the difficulty, would have the word synagogues understood, not in the sense of houses of prayer, but of civil courts of justice; since such a meaning may be drawn from the etymology of the Greek word thus translated. (συναγωγη, a gathering together, or assembling for any purpose.) But that too is a forced construction, for no instance can be brought out of the New Testament, where the word is used in that sense, or any other than the common one. What then? We cannot be allowed to set up the speculations which we have contrived to agree with our own notions, against accounts given in so full and clear a manner. Suppose, for a moment, that we could find no traces of the custom of scourging in the synagogues, in other writers; ought that to be considered doubtful, which is thus stated by Christ and Paul, in the plainest terms, as a fact commonly and perfectly well known in their time? Nor is there any reason why scourging in the synagogues should seem so unaccountable to us, since it was a grade of discipline less than excommunication, and less disgraceful. For it is made to appear that some of the most eminent of the wise, when they broke the law, were thus punished,——not even excepting the head of the Senate, nor the high priest himself.” (Witsius, § 1, ¶ xix.–xxi.) Witsius illustrates it still farther, by the stories which follow.

“But there are instances of flagellation in synagogues found in other accounts. Grotius himself quotes from Epiphanius, that a certain Jew who wished to revolt to Christianity, was whipped in the synagogue. The story is to the following purport. ‘A man, named Joseph, a messenger of the Jewish patriarch, went into Cilicia by order of the patriarch, to collect the tithes and first-fruits from the Jews of that province; and while on his tour of duty, lodged in a house near a Christian church. Having, by means of this, become acquainted with the pastor, he privately begs the loan of the book of the gospels, and reads it. But the Jews, getting wind of this, were so enraged against him, that on a sudden they made an assault on the house, and caught Joseph in the very act of reading the gospels. Snatching the book out of his hands, they knocked him down, and crying out against him with all sorts of abuse, they led him away to the synagogue, where they whipped him with rods.’

“Very much like this is the more modern story which Uriel Acosta tells of himself, in a little book, entitled ‘the Pattern of Human Life.’ The thing took place in Amsterdam, about the year 1630. It seems this Uriel Acosta was a Jew by birth, but being a sort of Epicurean philosopher, had some rather heretical notions about most of the articles of the Jewish creed; and on this charge, being called to account by the rulers of the synagogue, stood on his trial. In the end of it, a paper was read to him, in which it was specified that he must come into the synagogue, clothed in a mourning garment, holding a black wax-light in his hand, and should utter openly before the congregation a certain form of words prescribed by them, in which the offenses he had committed were magnified beyond measure. After this, that he should be flogged with a cowskin or strap, publicly, in the synagogue, and then should lay himself down flat on the threshhold of the synagogue, that all might walk over him. How thoroughly this sentence was executed, is best learned from his own amusing and candid story, which are given in the very words, as literally as they can be translated. ‘I entered the synagogue, which was full of men and women, (for they had crammed in together to see the show,) and when it was time, I mounted the wooden platform, which was placed in the midst of the synagogue for convenience in preaching, and with a loud voice read the writing drawn up by them, in which was a confession that I really deserved to die a thousand times for what I had done; namely, for my breaches of the sabbath, and for my abandonment of the faith, which I had broken so far as even by my words to hinder others from embracing Judaism, &c. After I had got through with the reading, I came down from the platform, and the right reverend ruler of the synagogue drew near to me, and whispered in my ear that I must turn aside to a certain corner of the synagogue. Accordingly, I went to the corner, and the porter told me to strip. I then stripped my body as low as my waist,——bound a handkerchief about my head,——took off my shoes, and raised my arms, holding fast with my hands to a sort of post. The porter of the synagogue, or sexton, then came up, and with a bandage tied up my hands to the post. When things had been thus arranged, the clerk drew near, and taking the cowskin, struck my sides with thirty-nine blows, according to the tradition; while in the mean time a psalm was chanted. After this was over, the preacher approached, and absolved me from excommunication; and thus was the gate of heaven opened to me, which before was shut against me with the strongest bars, keeping me entirely out. I next put on my clothes, went to the threshhold of the synagogue and laid myself down on it, while the porter held up my head. Then all who came down, stepped over me, boys as well as old men, lifting up one foot and stepping over the lower part of my legs. When the last had passed out, I got up, and being covered with dust by him who helped me, went home.’ This story, though rather tediously minute in its disgusting particulars, it was yet thought worth while to copy, because this comparatively modern scene seemed to give, to the life, the old fashion of ‘scourging in the synagogues.’”

HIS JOURNEY TO DAMASCUS.

Thus equipped with the high commission and letters of the supreme court of the Jewish nation, Saul, breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went on his way to Damascus, where the sanction of his superiors would have the force of despotic law, against the destined victims of his cruelty. The distance from Jerusalem to this great Syrian city, can not be less than 250 or 300 miles, and the journey must therefore have occupied as many as ten or twelve days, according to the usual rate of traveling in those countries. On this long journey therefore, Saul had much season for reflection. There were indeed several persons in his company, but probably they were only persons of an inferior order, and merely the attendants necessary for his safety and speed in traveling. Among these therefore, he would not be likely to find any person with whom he could maintain any sympathy which could enable them to hold much conversation together, and he must therefore have been left through most of the time to the solitary enjoyment of his own thoughts. In the midst of the peculiar fatigues of an eastern journey, he must have had many seasons of bodily exhaustion and consequent mental depression, when the fire of his unholy and exterminating zeal would grow languid, and the painful doubts which always come in at such dark seasons, to chill the hopes of every great mind,——no matter what may be the character of the enterprise,——must have had the occasional effect of exciting repentant feelings in him. Why had he left the high and sacred pursuits of a literary and religious life, in the refined capital of Judaism, to endure the fatigues of a long journey over rugged mountains and sandy deserts, through rivers and under a burning sun, to a distant city, in a strange land, among those who were perfect strangers to him? It was for the sole object of carrying misery and anguish among those whose only crime was the belief of a doctrine which he hated, because it warred against that solemn system of forms and traditions to which he so zealously clung, with all the energy that early and inbred prejudice could inspire. But in these seasons of weariness and depression, would now occasionally arise some chilling doubt about the certain rectitude of the stern course which he had been pursuing, in a heat that seldom allowed him time for reflection on its possible character and tendency. Might not that faith against which he was warring with such devotedness, be true?——that faith which, amid blood and dying agonies, the martyr Stephen had witnessed with his very last breath? At these times of doubt and despondency would perhaps arise the remembrance of that horrible scene, when he had set by, a calm spectator, drinking in with delight the agonies of the martyr, and learning from the ferocity of the murderers, new lessons of cruelty. to be put in practice against others who should thus adhere to the faith of Christ. No doubt too, an occasional shudder of gloom and remorse for such acts would creep over him in the chill of evening, or in the heats of noon-day, and darken all his schemes of active vengeance against the brethren. But still he journeyed northward, and each hour brought him nearer the scene of long-planned cruelty. On the last day of his wearisome journey, he at length drew near the city, just at noon; and from the terms in which his situation is described, it is not unreasonable to conclude that he was just coming in sight of Damascus, when the event happened which revolutionized his purposes, hopes, character, soul, and his whole existence through eternity,——an event connected with the salvation of millions that no man can yet number.

DAMASCUS.

Descending from the north-eastern slope of Hermon, over whose mighty range his last day’s journey had conducted him, Saul came along the course of the Abana, to the last hill which overlooks the distant city. Here Damascus bursts upon the traveler’s view, in the midst of a mighty plain, embosomed in gardens, and orchards, and groves, which, with the long-known and still bright streams of Abana and Pharphar, and the golden flood of the Chrysorrhoas, give the spot the name of “one of the four paradises.” So lovely and charming is the sight which this fair city has in all ages presented to the traveler’s view, that the Turks relate that their prophet, coming near Damascus, took his station on the mountain Salehiyeh, on the west of the hill-girt plain in which the city stands; and as he thence viewed the glorious and beautiful spot, encompassed with gardens for thirty miles, and thickly set with domes and steeples, over which the eye glances as far as it can reach,——considering the ravishing beauty of the place, he would not tempt his frailty by entering into it, but instantly turned away with this reflection: that there was but one paradise designed for man, and for his part, he was resolved not to take his, in this world. And though there is not the slightest foundation for such a story, because the prophet never came near to Damascus, nor had an opportunity of entering into it, yet the conspiring testimony of modern travelers justifies the fable, in the impression it conveys of the surpassing loveliness of the view from this very spot,——called the Arch of Victory, from an unfinished mass of stonework which here crowns the mountain’s top. This spot has been marked by a worthless tradition, as the scene of Saul’s conversion; and the locality is made barely probable, by the much better authority of the circumstance, that it accords with the sacred narrative, in being on the road from Jerusalem, and “nigh unto the city.”

“Damascus is a very ancient city, which the oldest records and traditions show by their accordant testimony to have been founded by Uz, the son of Aram, and grandson of Shem. It was the capital or mother city of that Syria which is distinguished by the name of Aram Dammesek or Damascene Syria, lying between Libanus and Anti-Libanus. The city stands at the base of Mount Hermon, from which descend the famous streams of Abana and Pharphar; the latter washing the walls of the city, while the former cuts it through the middle. It was a very populous, delightful, and wealthy place; but as in the course of its existence it had suffered a variety of fortune, so it had often changed masters. To pass over its earlier history, we will only observe, that before the Christian era, on the defeat of Tigranes, the Armenian monarch, it was yielded to the Romans, being taken by the armies of Pompey. In the time of Paul, as we are told in [♦]2 Corinthians xi. 32, it was held under the (temporary) sway of Aretas, a king of the Arabians, father-in-law of Herod the tetrarch. It had then a large Jewish population, as we may gather from the fact, that in the reign of Nero, 10,000 of that nation were slaughtered, unarmed, and in the public baths by the Damascenes, as Josephus records in his history of the Jewish War, II. Book, chapter 25. Among the Jews of Damascus, also, were a considerable number of Christians, and it was raging for the destruction of these, that Saul, furnished with the letters and commission of the Jewish high priest, now flew like a hawk upon the doves.” (Witsius, § 2, ¶ 1.)

[♦] “2” omitted in the original text.

The sacred narrative gives no particulars of the other circumstances connected with this remarkable event, in either of the three statements presented in different parts of the book of Acts. All that is commemorated, is that at mid-day, as Saul with his company drew near to Damascus, he saw a light exceeding the sun in brightness, which flashed upon them from heaven, and struck them all to the earth. And while they were all fallen to the ground, Saul alone heard a voice speaking to him in the Hebrew tongue, and saying, “Saul! Saul! Why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee to kick against thorns.” To this, Saul asked in reply, “Who art thou, Lord?” The answer was, “I am Jesus the Nazarene, whom thou persecutest.” Saul, trembling and astonished, replied, “Lord, what wilt thou that I should do?” And the voice said, “Rise and stand upon thy feet, and go into the city; there thou shalt be told what to do, since for this purpose I have appeared to thee, to make use of thee as a minister and a witness, both of what thou hast seen and of what I will cause thee to see,——choosing thee out of the people, and of the heathen nations to whom I now SEND thee,——to open their eyes,——to turn them from darkness to light, and from the dominion of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins, and an inheritance among them that are sanctified, by faith in me.”

These words are given thus fully only in Saul’s own account of his conversion, in his address to king Agrippa. (Acts xxvi. 14–18.) The original Greek of verse 17, is most remarkably and expressively significant, containing, beyond all doubt, the formal commission of Saul as the “Apostle of the Gentiles.” The first word in that verse is translated in the common English version, “delivering;” whereas, the original, Εξαιρουμενος, means also “taking out,” “choosing;” and is clearly shown by Bretschneider, sub voc. in numerous references to the usages of the LXX., and by Kuinoel, in loc., to bear this latter meaning here. Rosenmueller and others however, have been led, by the circumstance that Hesychius gives the meaning of “rescue,” to prefer that. Rosenmueller’s remark, that the context demands this meaning, is however certainly unauthorized; for, on this same ground, Kuinoel bases the firmest support of the meaning of “choice.” The meaning of “rescue” was indeed the only one formerly received, but the lights of modern exegesis have added new distinctness and aptness to the passage, by the meaning adopted above. Beza, Piscator, Pagninus, Arias Montanus, Castalio, &c., as well as the oriental versions, are all quoted by Poole in defense of the common rendering, nor does he seem to know of the sense now received. But Saul was truly chosen, both “out of the people” of Israel, (because he was a Jew by birth and religion,) “and out of the heathen,” (because he was born and brought up among the Grecians, and therefore was taken out from among them, as a minister of grace to them,) and the whole passage is thus shown to be most beautifully just to the circumstances which so eminently fitted him for his Gentile apostleship. The Greek verb used in the conclusion of the passage, is the consecrating word, αποστελλω, (apostello,) and makes up the formula of his apostolic commission, which is there given in language worthy of the vast and eternal scope of the sense,——words fit to be spoken from heaven, in thunder, amid the flash of lightnings, that called the bloody-minded, bitter, maddened persecutor, to the peaceful, devoted, unshrinking testimony of the cause, against the friends of which he before breathed only threatenings and slaughter.

Εξαιρουμενος σε εκ τοῦ λαοῦ και τῶν ἐθνῶν, εις οὑς νῦν σε ΑΠΟΣΤΕΛΛΩ.

All this took place while the whole company of travelers were lying prostrate on the ground, stunned and almost senseless. Of all those present, however, Saul only heard these solemn words of warning, command, and prophecy, thus sent from heaven in thunder; for he himself afterwards, in narrating these awful events before the Jewish multitude, expressly declares “the men that were with me, saw the light, indeed, and were afraid; but they heard NOT the voice of him who spoke to me.” And though in the previous statement given by Luke, in the regular course of the narrative, it is said that “the men who journeyed with Saul were speechless,——hearing a voice, but seeing no man;” yet the two statements are clearly reconciled by the consideration of the different meanings of the word translated “voice” in both passages, but which the accompanying expressions sufficiently limit in the latter case only to the articulate sounds of a human voice, while in the former it is left in such terms as to mean merely a “sound,” as of thunder, or any thing else which can be supposed to agree best with the other circumstances. To them, therefore, it seemed only surprising, not miraculous; for they are not mentioned as being impressed, otherwise than by fear and amazement, while Saul, who alone heard the words, was moved thereby to a complete conversion. The whole circumstances, therefore, allow and require, in accordance with other similar passages, that the material phenomena which were made the instruments of this miraculous conversion, were, as they are described, first a flash of lightning, which struck the company to the earth, giving all a severe shock, but affecting Saul most of all, and, second, a peal of thunder, heard by all as such, except Saul, who distinguished in those awful, repeated sounds, the words of a heavenly voice, with which he held distinct converse, while his wondering companions thought him only muttering incoherently to himself, between the peals of thunder;——just as in the passage related by John, when Jesus called to God, “Father! glorify thy name;” and then there came a voice from heaven, saying, “I both have glorified it and will glorify it;” yet the people who then stood by, said, “It thundered,”——having no idea of the expressive utterance which was so distinctly heard by Jesus and his disciples. There is no account, indeed, in either case, of any thunder storm accompanying the events; but there is nothing in the incidents to forbid it; and the nature of the effects upon the company who heard and saw, can be reconciled only with the supposition of a burst of actual thunder and lightning, which God made the organ of his awful voice, speaking to Saul in words that called him from a course of sin and cruelty, to be a minister of grace, mercy and peace, to all whose destroying persecutor he had before been. The sequel of the effects, too, are such as would naturally follow these material agencies. The men who were least stunned, rose to their feet soon after the first shock; and when the awful scene was over, they bestirred themselves to lift up Saul, who was now found, not only speechless, but blind,——the eyes being so dazzled by such excess of light, that the nerve loses all its power, generally, forever. Saul being now raised from the ground, was led, helpless and thunder-struck, by his distressed attendants, into the city, which he had hoped to make the scene of his cruel persecutions, but which he now entered, more surely bound, than could have been the most wretched of his destined captives.

Kuinoel and Bloomfield will furnish the inquiring reader with the amusing details of the hypotheses, by which some of the moderns have attempted to explain away the whole of Saul’s conversion, into a mere remarkable succession of natural occurrences, without any miracle at all.

HIS STAY IN DAMASCUS.

Thus did the commissioned persecutor enter the ancient capital of Aram. But as they led him along the flowery ways into this Syrian paradise, how vain were its splendors, its beauties and its historic glories, to the eyes which had so long strained over the far horizon, to catch the first gleam of its white towers and rosy gardens, beyond the mountain-walls. In vain did Damascus invite the admiring gaze of the passing traveler, to those damask roses embowering and hedging his path, which take their name in modern times, from the gardens where they first bloomed under the hand of man. In vain did their fragrance woo his nobler sense to perceive their beauty of form and hue; in vain did the long line of palaces and towers and temples, still bright in the venerable splendor of the ancient Aramaic kings, rise in majesty before him. The eyes that had so often dwelt on these historical monuments, in the distant and brilliant fancies of studious youth, were now closed to the not less brilliant splendors of the reality; and through the ancient arches of those mighty gates, and along the crowded streets, amid the noise of bustling thousands, the commissioned minister of wrath now moved distressed, darkened, speechless and horror-struck,——marked, like the first murderer, (of whose crime that spot was the fabled scene,) by the hand of God. The hand of God was indeed on him, not in wrath, but in mercy, sealing his abused bodily vision for a short space, until his mental eyes, purified from the scales of prejudice and unholy zeal, should have become fitted for the perception of objects, whose beauty and glory should be the theme of his thoughts and words, through all his later days, and of his discourse to millions for whom his heart now felt no love, but for whose salvation he was destined to freely spend and offer up his life. Passing along the crowded ways of the great city, under the guidance of his attendants, he was at last led into the street, which for its regularity was called the “Straight Way,” and there was lodged in the house of a person named Judas,——remaining for three days in utter darkness, without the presence of a single friend, and without the glimmer of a hope that he should ever again see the light of day. Disconsolate and desolate, he passed the whole of this period in fasting, without one earthly object or call, to distract his attention from the solemn themes of his heavenly vision. He had all this long interval for reflection on the strange reversion of destiny pointed out by this indisputable decree, which summoned him from works of cruelty and destruction, to deeds of charity, kindness and devotion to those whose ruin he had lately sought with his whole heart. At the close of this season of lonely but blessed meditation, a new revelation of the commanding presence of the Deity was made to a humble and devout Christian of Damascus, named Ananias, known even among the Jews as a man of blameless character. To him, in a vision, the Lord appeared, and calling him by name, directed him most minutely to the house where Saul was lodging, and gave him the miraculous commission of restoring to sight that same Saul, now deprived of this sense by the visitation of God, but expecting its restoration by the hands of Ananias himself, who though yet unknown to him in the body, had been distinctly seen in a vision by the blind sufferer, as his healer, in the name of that Jesus who had met him in the way and smote him with this blindness, dazzling him with the excess of his unveiled heavenly glories. Ananias, yet appalled by the startling view of the bright messenger, and doubting the nature of the vision which summoned him to a duty so strangely inconsistent with the dreadful fame and character of the person named as the subject of his miraculous ministrations, hesitated to promise obedience, and parleyed with his summoner. “Lord! I have heard by many, of this man, how much evil he has done to thy saints at Jerusalem; and here, he has commission from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.” The merciful Lord, not resenting the rational doubts of his devout but alarmed servant, replied in words of considerate explanation, renewing his charge, with assurances of the safe and hopeful accomplishment of his appointed task. “Go thy way: for he is a chosen instrument of mercy for me, to bear my name before nations and kings, and the children of Israel: for I will show him how great things he must suffer for the sake of my name.” Ananias, no longer doubting, now went his way as directed, and finding Saul, clearly addressed him in terms of confidence and even of affection, recognizing him, on the testimony of the vision, as already a friend of those companions of Jesus, whom he had lately persecuted. He put his hands on him, in the usual form of invoking a blessing on any one, and said, “Brother Saul! the Lord Jesus, who appeared to thee in the way, as thou camest, has sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with a holy spirit.” And immediately there fell from the eyes of the blinded persecutor, something like scales, and he saw now, in bodily, real presence, him who had already been in form revealed to his spirit, in a vision. At the same moment, fell from his inward sense, the obscuring film of prejudice and bigotry. Renewed in mental vision, he saw with the clear eye of confiding faith and eternal hope, that Jesus, who in the full revelation of his vindictive majesty having dazzled and blinded him in his murderous career, now appeared to his purified sense, in the tempered rays and mild effulgence of redeeming grace. Changed too, in the whole frame of his mind, he felt no more the promptings of that dark spirit of cruelty, but, filled with a holy spirit, before unknown to him, he began a new existence, replete with the energies of a divine influence. No longer fasting in token of distress, he now ate, by way of thanksgiving for his joyful restoration, and was strengthened thereby for the great task which he had undertaken. He was now admitted to the fellowship of the disciples of Jesus, and remained many days among them as a brother, mingling in the most friendly intercourse with those very persons, against whom he came to wage exterminating ruin. Nor did he confine his actions in his new character to the privacies of Christian intercourse. Going immediately into the synagogues, he there publicly proclaimed his belief in Jesus Christ, and boldly maintained him to be the Son of God. Great was the amazement of all who heard him. The fame of Saul of Tarsus, as a ferocious and determined persecutor of all who professed the faith of Jesus, had already pervaded Palestine, and spread into Syria; and what did this strange display now mean? They saw him, whom they had thus known by his dreadful reputation as a hater and exterminator of the Nazarene doctrine, now preaching it in the schools of the Jewish law and the houses of worship for the adherents of Mosaic forms, and with great power persuading others to a similar renunciation of all opposition to the name of Jesus; and they said, “Is not this he who destroyed them that called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither, with the very purpose of taking them bound, to the Sanhedrim, for punishment?” But Saul, each day advancing in the knowledge and faith of the Christian doctrine, soon grew too strong in argument for the most skilful of the defenders of the Jewish faith; and utterly confounded them with his proofs that Jesus was the very Messiah. This triumphant course he followed for a long time; until, at last, the stubborn Jews, provoked to the highest degree by the defeats which they had suffered from this powerful disputant, lately their most zealous defender, took counsel to put him to death, as a renegade from the faith, of which he had been the trusted professor, as well as the commissioned minister of its vengeance on the heretics whose cause he had now espoused, and was defending, to the great injury and discredit of the Judaical order. In contriving the means of executing this scheme, they received the support and assistance of the government of the city,——Damascus being then held, not by the Romans, but by Aretas, a petty king of northern Arabia. The governor appointed by Aretas did not scruple to aid the Jews in their murderous project; but even himself, with a detachment of the city garrison, kept watch at the gates, to kill Saul at his first outgoing. But all their wicked plots were set at nought by a very simple contrivance. The Christian friends of Saul, hearing of the danger, determined to remove him from it at once; and accordingly, one night, put the destined apostle of the Gentiles in a basket; and through the window of some one of their houses, which adjoined the barriers of the city, they let him down outside of the wall, while the spiteful Jews, with the complaisant governor and his detachment of the city guard, were to no purpose watching the gates with unceasing resolution, to wreak their vengeance on this dangerous convert.

Michaelis alludes to the difficulties which have arisen about the possession of Damascus by Aretas, and concludes as follows:

“The force of these objections has been considerably weakened, in a dissertation published in 1755, ‘[a]De ethnarcha Aretae Arabum regis Paulo insidiante,]’ by J. G. Heyne, who has shown it to be highly probable, first, that Aretas, against whom the Romans, not long before the death of Tiberius, made a declaration of war, which they neglected to put in execution, took the opportunity of seizing Damascus, which had once belonged to his ancestors; an event omitted in Josephus, as forming no part of the Jewish history, and by the Roman historians as being a matter not flattering in itself, and belonging only to a distant province. Secondly, that Aretas was by religion a Jew,——a circumstance the more credible, when we reflect that Judaism had been widely propagated in that country, and that even kings in Arabia Felix had recognized the law of Moses. * * * And hence we may explain the reason why the Jews were permitted to exercise, in Damascus, persecutions still severer than those in Jerusalem, where the violence of their zeal was awed by the moderation of the Roman policy. Of this we find an example in the ninth chapter of the Acts, where Paul is sent by the high priest to Damascus, to exercise against the Christians, cruelties which the return of the Roman governor had checked in Judea. These accounts agree likewise with what is related in Josephus, that the number of Jews in Damascus amounted to ten thousand, and that almost all the women, even those whose husbands were heathens, were of the Jewish religion.” (Michaelis, Introduction, Vol. IV. Part I. c. ii. § 12.)

HIS RESIDENCE IN ARABIA.

On his escape from this murderous plot, Saul, having now received from God, who called him by his grace, the revelation of his Son, that he might preach him among the heathen, immediately resolved not to confer with any mortal, on the subject of his task, and therefore refrained from going up to Jerusalem, to visit those who were apostles before him. Turning his course southeastward, he found refuge from the rage of the Damascan Jews, in the solitudes of the eastern deserts, where, free alike from the persecutions and the corruptions of the city, he sought in meditation and lonely study, that diligent preparation which was necessary for the high ministry to which God had so remarkably called him. A long time was spent by him in this wise and profitable seclusion; but the exact period cannot be ascertained. It is only probable that more than a year was thus occupied; during which he was not a mere hermit, indeed, but at any rate, was a resident in a region destitute of most objects which would be apt to draw off his attention from study. That part of Arabia in which he took refuge, was not a mere desert, nor a wilderness, yet had very few towns, and those only of a small size, with hardly any inhabitants of such a character as to be attractive companions to Saul. After some time, changes having taken place in the government of Damascus, he was enabled to return thither with safety, the Jews being now checked in their persecuting cruelty by the re-establishment of the Roman dominion over that part of Syria. He did not remain there long; but having again displayed himself as a bold assertor of the faith of Jesus, he next set his face towards Jerusalem, on his return, to make known in the halls of those who had sent him forth to deeds of blood, that their commission had been reversed by the Father of all spirits, who had now not only summoned, but fully equipped, their destined minister of wrath, to be “a chosen instrument of mercy” to nations who had never yet heard of Israel’s God.

The different accounts given of these events, in Acts ix. 19–25, and in Galatians i. 15–24, as well as 2 Corinthians xi. 32–33, have been united in very opposite ways by different commentators, and form the most perplexing passages in the life of Saul. The journey into Arabia, of which he speaks in Galatians i. 17, is supposed by most writers, to have been made during the time when Luke mentions him as occupied in and about Damascus; and it is said that he went thence into Arabia immediately after his conversion, before he had preached anywhere; and such writers maintain that the word “straightway,” or “immediately,” in Acts ix. 20, (ευθεως,) really means, that it was not until a long time after his conversion that he preached in the synagogues!! Into this remarkable opinion they have been led by the fact, that Saul himself says, (Galatians i. 16,) that when he was called by God to the apostleship, “immediately he conferred not with flesh and blood, nor went up to Jerusalem, but went into Arabia.” All this however, is evidently specified by him only in reference to the point that he did not derive his title to the apostleship from “those that were apostles before him,” nor from any human authority; and full justice is therefore done to his words, by applying them only to the fact, that he went to Arabia before he went to Jerusalem, without supposing them to mean that he left Damascus immediately after his baptism by Ananias. All the historical writers however, seem to take this latter view. Witsius, Cappel, Pearson, Lardner, Murdock, Hemsen, &c. place his journey to Arabia between his baptism and the time of his escape, and suppose that when he fled from Damascus, he went directly to Jerusalem. In the different arrangement which I make of these events, however, I find myself supported by most of the great exegetical writers, as Wolf, Kuinoel, and Bloomfield; and I can not better support this view than in the words of the latter.

Acts ix. 19. “ἐγένετο δὲ ὁ Σαῦλος. Paul (Galatians [♦]i. 17,) relates that he, after his conversion, did not proceed to Jerusalem, but repaired to Arabia, and from thence returned to Damascus. Hence, according to the opinion of Pearson, in his Annales Paulini, p. 2. the words ἐγένετο δὲ ὁ Σαῦλος are to be separated from the preceding passage, and constitute a new story, in which is related what happened at Damascus after Saul’s return from Arabia. But the words ἱκαναὶ ἡμέραι may and ought to be referred to the whole time of Paul’s abode at Damascus, before he went into Arabia; and thus with the ἱκαναὶ ἡμέραι be numbered the ἡμέραι τινὲς mentioned at verse 19: for the sense of the words is this: ‘Saul, when he spent some days with the Damascene Christians, immediately taught in the synagogues. Now Luke entirely passes by Paul’s journey into Arabia. (Kuinoel.) Doddridge imagines that his going into Arabia, (to which, as he observes, Damascus now belonged,) was only making excursions from that city into the neighboring parts of the country, and perhaps taking a large circuit about it, which might be his employment between the time in which he began to preach in Damascus, and his quitting it after having been conquered by the Romans under Pompey.’ But in view of this subject I cannot agree with him. The country in the neighborhood of Damascus is not properly Arabia.”

[♦] “1, 17” replaced with “i. 17”

22–24. “ὡς δὲ ἐπληροῦντο——ἀνελεῖν αὐτόν. In 2 Corinthians xi. 32, we read that the Ethnarch of Aretas, king of Arabia, had placed a guard at the gates of Damascus, to seize Paul. Now it appears that Syria Damascene was, at the end of the Mithridatic war, reduced by Pompey to the Roman yoke. It has therefore been inquired how it could happen that Aretas should then have the government, and appoint an Ethnarch. That Aretas had, on account of the repudiation of his daughter by Herod Antipas, commenced hostilities against that monarch, and in the last year of Tiberius (A. D. 37,) had completely defeated his army, we learn from Josephus Antiquities, 18, 5, 1. seqq. Herod had, we find, signified this by letter to Tiberius, who, indignant at this audacity, (Josephus L. c.) gave orders to Vitellius, prefect of Syria, to declare war against Aretas, and take him alive, or send him his head. Vitellius made preparations for the war, but on receiving a message acquainting him with the death of Tiberius, he dismissed his troops into winter quarters. And thus Aretas was delivered from the danger. At the time, however, that Vitellius drew off his forces, Aretas invaded Syria, seized Damascus, and continued to occupy it, in spite of Tiberius’s stupid successor, Caligula. This is the opinion of most commentators, and among others, Wolf, Michaelis, and Eichhorn. But I have already shewn in the Prolegomena § de chronologia lib. 2, 3, that Aretas did not finally subdue Damascus until Vitellius had already departed from the province.” (Kuinoel.) (Bloomfield’s Annotations, Vol. IV. pp. 322–324.)

HIS RETURN TO JERUSALEM.

Arriving in the city, whence only three years before he had set out, in a frame of mind so different from that in which he returned, and with a purpose so opposite to his present views and plans,——he immediately, with all the confidence of Christian faith, and ardent love for those to whom his religious sympathies now so closely fastened him, assayed to mingle in a familiar and friendly manner with the apostolic company, and offered himself to their Christian fellowship as a devout believer in Jesus. But they, already having too well known him in his previous character as the persecutor of their brethren, the aider and abettor in the murder of the heroic and innocent Stephen, and the greatest enemy of the faithful,——very decidedly repulsed his advances, as only a new trick to involve them in difficulties, that would make them liable to punishment which their prudence had before enabled them to escape. They therefore altogether refused to receive Saul; for “they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.” In this disagreeable condition,——cast out as a hypocrite, by the apostles of that faith, for which he had sacrificed all earthly prospects,——he was fortunately found by Barnabas, who being, like Saul, a Hellenist Jew, naturally felt some especial sympathy with one whose country was within a few miles of his own; and by this circumstance, being induced to notice the professed convert, soon recognized in him, the indubitable signs of a regenerated and sanctified spirit, and therefore brought him to the chief apostles, Peter, and James, the Lord’s brother; for with these alone did Saul commune, at this visit, as he himself distinctly testifies. Still avoiding the company of the great mass of the apostles and disciples, he confined himself almost wholly to the acquaintance of Peter, with whom he abode in close familiarity for fifteen days. In order to reconcile the narrative of Luke in the Acts, with the account given by Saul himself, in the first chapter of the epistle to the Galatians, it must be understood that the “apostles” spoken of by the former are only the two above-mentioned, and it was with these only that he “went in and out at Jerusalem,”——the other apostles being probably absent on some missionary duties among the new churches throughout Judea and Palestine. Imitating the spirit of the proto-martyr, whose death he had himself been instrumental in effecting, “he spoke boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Hellenists,” doubtless the very same persons among whom he himself had formerly been enrolled as an unshrinking opposer of that faith which he was now advocating. By them he was received with all that vindictive hate which might have been expected; and he was at once denounced as a vile renegade from the cause which in his best days he had maintained as the only right one. To show most satisfactorily that, though he might change, they had not done so, they directly resolved to punish the bold disowner of the faith of his fathers, and would soon have crowned him with the fate of Stephen, had not the disciples heard of the danger which threatened the life of their new brother, and provided for his escape by means not less efficient than those before used in his behalf, at Damascus. Before the plans for his destruction could be completed, they privately withdrew him from Jerusalem, and had him safely conducted down to Caesarea, on the coast, whence, with little delay, he was shipped for some of the northern parts of Syria, from which he found his way to Tarsus,——whether by land or sea, is unknown.

HIS VISIT TO TARSUS.

This return to his native city was probably the first visit which he had made to it, since the day when he departed from his father’s house, to go to Jerusalem as a student of Jewish theology. It must therefore have been the occasion of many interesting reflections and reminiscences. What changes had the events of that interval wrought in him,——in his faith, his hopes, his views, his purposes for life and for death! The objects which were then to him as idols,——the aims and ends of his being,——had now no place in his reverence or his affection; but in their stead was now placed a name and a theme, of which he could hardly have heard before he first left Tarsus,——and a cause whose triumph would be the overthrow of all those traditions of the Fathers, of which he had been taught to be so exceeding zealous. To this new cause he now devoted himself, and probably at this time labored “in the regions of Cilicia,” until a new apostolic summons called him to a distant field. He was yet “personally unknown to the churches of Judea, which were in Christ; and they had only heard, that he who persecuted them in times past, now preached the faith which once he destroyed; they therefore glorified God on his account.” The very beginnings of his apostolic duties were therefore in a foreign field, and not within the original premises of the lost sheep of the house of Israel, where indeed he was not even known but by fame, except to a few in Jerusalem. In this he showed the great scope and direction of his future labors,——among the Gentiles, not among the Jews; leaving the latter to the sole care of the original apostles, while he turned to a vast field for which they were in no way fitted, by nature, or by apostolic education, nor were destined in the great scheme of salvation.

HIS APOSTOLIC LABORS IN ANTIOCH.

During this retirement of Saul to his native home, the first great call of the Gentiles had been made through the summons of Simon Peter to Cornelius. There was manifest wisdom in this arrangement of events. Though the original apostles were plainly never intended, by providence, to labor to any great extent in the Gentile field, yet it was most manifestly proper that the first opening of this new field should be made by those directly and personally commissioned by Jesus himself, and who, from having enjoyed his bodily presence for so long a time, would be considered best qualified to judge of the propriety of a movement so novel and unprecedented in its character. The great apostolic chief was therefore made the first minister of grace to the Gentiles; and the violent opposition with which this innovation on Judaical sanctity was received by the more bigoted, could of course be much more efficiently met, and disarmed, by the apostle specially commissioned as the keeper of the keys of the heavenly kingdom, than by one who had been but lately a persecutor of the faithful, and who, by his birth and partial education in a Grecian city, had acquired such a familiarity with Gentile usages, as to be reasonably liable to suspicion, in regard to an innovation which so remarkably favored them. This great movement having been thus made by the highest Christian authority on earth,——and the controversy immediately resulting having been thus decided,——the way was now fully open for the complete extension of the gospel to the heathen, and Saul was therefore immediately called, in providence, from his retirement, to take up the work of evangelizing Syria, which had already been partially begun at Antioch, by some of the Hellenistic refugees from the persecution at the time of Stephen’s martyrdom. The apostles at Jerusalem, hearing of the success which attended these incidental efforts, dispatched their trusty brother Barnabas, to confirm the good work, under the direct commission of apostolic authority. He, having come to Antioch, rejoiced his heart with the sight of the success which had crowned the work of those who, in the midst of the personal distress of a malignant persecution, that had driven them from Jerusalem, had there sown a seed that was already bringing forth glorious fruits. Perceiving the immense importance of the field there opened, he immediately felt the want of some person of different qualifications from the original apostles, and one whose education and habits would fit him not only to labor among the professors of the Jewish faith, but also to communicate the doctrines of Christ to the Grecians. In this crisis he bethought himself of the wonderful young convert with whom he had become acquainted, under such remarkable circumstances, a few years before, in Jerusalem,——whose daring zeal and masterly learning had been so signally manifested among the Hellenists, with whom he had formerly been associated as an equally active persecutor. Inspired both by considerations of personal regard, and by wise convictions of the peculiar fitness of this zealous disciple for the field now opened in Syria, Barnabas immediately left his apostolic charge at Antioch, and went over to Tarsus, to invite Saul to this great labor. The journey was but a short one, the distance by water being not more than one hundred miles, and by land, around through the “Syrian gates,” about one hundred and fifty. He therefore soon arrived at Saul’s home, and found him ready and willing to undertake the proposed apostolic duty. They immediately returned together to Antioch, and earnestly devoted themselves to their interesting labors.

“Antioch, the metropolis of Syria, was built, according to some authors, by Antiochus Epiphanes; others affirm, by Seleucus Nicanor, the first king of Syria after Alexander the Great, in memory of his father Antiochus, and was the ‘royal seat of the kings of Syria.’ For power and dignity, Strabo, (lib. xvi. p. 517,) says it was not much inferior to Seleucia, or Alexandria. Josephus, (lib. iii. cap. 3,) says, it was the third great city of all that belonged to the Roman provinces. It was frequently called Antiochia Epidaphne, from its neighborhood to Daphne, a village where the temple of Daphne stood, to distinguish it from other fourteen of the same name mentioned by Stephanus de Urbibus, and by Eustathius in Dionysius p. 170; or as Appianus (in Syriacis,) and others, sixteen cities in Syria, and elsewhere, which bore that name. It was celebrated among the Jews for ‘[a]Jus civitatis],’ which Seleucus Nicanor had given them in that city with the Grecians and Macedonians, and which, says Josephus, they still retain, Antiquities, lib. xii. cap. 13; and for the wars of the Maccabeans with those kings. Among Christians, for being the place where they first received that name, and where Saul and Barnabas began their apostolic labors together. In the flourishing times of the Roman empire, it was the ordinary residence of the prefect or governor of the eastern provinces, and also honored with the residence of many of the Roman emperors, especially of Verus and Valens, who spent here the greatest part of their time. It lay on both sides of the river Orontes, about twelve miles from the Mediterranean sea.” (Wells’s Geography New Testament——Whitby’s Table.) (J. M. Williams’s Notes on Pearson’s Annales Paulinae.)

Having arrived at Antioch, Saul gave himself, with Barnabas, zealously to the work for which he had been summoned, and labored among the people to good purpose, assembling the church and imparting to all that would hear, the knowledge of the Christian doctrine. Under these active exertions the professors of the faith of Jesus became so numerous and so generally known in Antioch, that the heathen inhabitants found it convenient to designate them by a distinct appellation, which they derived from the great founder and object of their religion,——calling them Christians, because the heathen inhabitants of Syria were not acquainted with the terms, “Nazarene” and “Galilean,” which had been applied to the followers of Christ by the Jews, partly from the places where they first appeared, and partly in opprobium for their low provincial origin.

The name now first created by the Syrians to distinguish the sect, is remarkable, because being derived from a Greek word, Christos, it has a Latin adjective termination, Christianus, and is therefore incontestably shown to have been applied by the Roman inhabitants of Antioch; for no Grecian would ever have been guilty of such a barbarism, in the derivation of one word from another in his own language. The proper Greek form of the derivation would have been Christicos, or Christenos, and the substantive would have been, not Christianity, but Christicism, or Christenism,——a word so awkward in sound, however, that it is very well for all Christendom, that the Roman barbarism took the place of the pure Greek termination. And since the Latin form of the first derivative has prevailed, and Christian thus been made the name of “a believer in Christ,” it is evident to any classical scholar, that Christianity is the only proper form of the substantive secondarily derived. For though the appending of a Latin termination upon a Greek word, as in the case of Christianus, was unquestionably a blunder and a barbarism in the first place, it yet can not compare, for absurdity, with the notion of deriving from this Latin form, the substantive Christianismus, with a Greek termination foolishly pinned to a Latin one,——a folly of which the French are nevertheless guilty. The error, of course, can not now be corrected in that language; but those who stupidly copy the barbarism from them, and try to introduce the monstrous word, ChristianISM, into English, deserve the reprobation of every man of taste.

“Before this they were called ‘disciples,’ as in this place——‘believers,’ Acts v. 14——‘men of the church,’ Acts xii. 1——‘men of the way,’ Acts ix. 2——‘the saints,’ Acts ix. 13——‘those that called on the name of Christ,’ verse 14——and by their enemies, Nazarenes and Galileans, and ‘men of the sect;’——but now, by the conversion of so many heathens, both in Caesarea and Antioch, the believing Jews and Gentiles being made all one church, this new name was given them, as more expressive of their common relation to their Master, Christ. Whitby slightly alludes to the prophecy, Isaiah lxv.” (J. M. Williams’s Notes on Pearson.)

While Saul was thus effectually laboring in Antioch, there came down to that city, from Jerusalem, certain persons, indued with the spirit of prophecy, among whom was one, named Agabus, who, under the influence of inspiration, made known that there would be a great famine throughout the world;——a prediction which was verified by the actual occurrence of this calamity in the days of Claudius Caesar, during whose reign,——as appears on the impartial testimony of the historians of those times, both Roman and Jewish,——the Roman empire suffered at different periods in all its parts, from the capital to Jerusalem,——and at this latter city, more especially, in the sixth year of Claudius, (A. D. 46,) as is testified by Josephus, who narrates very particularly some circumstances connected with the prevalence of this famine in Jerusalem. The disciples at Antioch, availing themselves of this information, determined to send relief to their brethren in Judea, before the famine should come on; and having contributed, each one according to his ability, they made Barnabas and Saul the messengers of their charity, who were accordingly dispatched to Jerusalem, on this noble errand. They remained in Jerusalem through the period of Agrippa’s attack upon the apostles by murdering James, and imprisoning Peter; but they do not seem to have been any way immediately concerned in these events; and when Peter had escaped, they returned to Antioch. How long they remained here, is not recorded; but the date of subsequent events seems to imply that it was a space of some years, during which they labored at Antioch in company with several other eminent prophets and teachers, of whom are mentioned Simeon, who had the Roman surname of Niger, Lucius, the Cyrenian, and Manaen, a foster-brother of Herod the tetrarch. During their common ministrations, at a season of fasting, they received a direction from the spirit of truth which guided them, to set apart Saul and Barnabas for the special work to which the Lord had called them. This work was of course understood to be that for which Saul in particular, had, at his conversion, been so remarkably commissioned,——“to open the eyes of the Gentiles,——to turn them from darkness to light, and from the dominion of Satan to God.” His brethren in the ministry therefore, understanding at once the nature and object of the summons, now specially consecrated both him and Barnabas for their missionary work; and after fasting and praying, they invoked on them the blessing of God, in the usual oriental form of laying their hands on them, and then bade them farewell.

“That this famine was felt chiefly in Judea may be conjectured with great reason from the nature of the context, for we find that the disciples are resolving to send relief to the elders in Judea; consequently they must have understood that those in Judea would suffer more than themselves. Josephus declared that this famine raged so much there, πολλῶν ὑπό ἐνδείας ἀναλωμάτων φθειρομένων, ‘so that many perished for want of victuals.’”

“‘Throughout the whole world,’ πᾶσαν τὴν οἰκουμένην, is first to be understood, [a]orbis terrarum habitabilis: Demosthenes in Corona, Æschines contra Ctesiphon Scapula]. Then the Roman and other empires were styled οικουμένη, ‘the world.’ Thus Isaiah xiv. 17, 26, the counsel of God against the empire of Babylon, is called his counsel, ἐπὶ τὴν ὅλην οἰκουμένην, ‘against all the earth.’——(Elsley, Whitby.) Accordingly Eusebius says of this famine, that it oppressed almost the whole empire. And as for the truth of the prophecy, this dearth is recorded by historians most averse to our religion, viz., by Suetonius in the life of Claudius, chapter 18, who informs us that it happened ‘[a]ob assiduas sterilitates];’ and Dion Cassius History lib. lx. p. 146, that it was λιμὸς ἰσχυρὸς, ‘a very great famine.’ Whitby’s Annotations, Doddridge enumerates nine famines in various years, and parts of the empire, in the reign of Claudius; but the first was the most severe, and affected particularly Judea, and is that here meant.” (J. M. Williams’s notes on Pearson.)

HIS FIRST APOSTOLIC MISSION.

Going from Antioch directly eastward to the sea, they came to Seleucia, the nearest port, only twelve miles from Antioch, and there embarked for the island of Cyprus, the eastern end of which is not more than eighty miles from the coast of Syria. The circumstance that more particularly directed them first to this island, was probably that it was the native home of Barnabas, and with this region therefore he would feel so much acquainted as to know its peculiar wants, and the facilities which it afforded for the advancement of the Christian cause; and he would also know where he might look for the most favorable reception. Landing at Salamis, on the south-eastern part of the island, they first preached in the synagogues of the Jews, who were very numerous in Cyprus, and constituted so large a part of the population of the island, that some years afterwards they attempted to get complete possession of it, and were put down only by the massacre of many thousands. Directing their efforts first to these wandering sheep of the house of Israel, the apostles everywhere preached the gospel in the synagogues, never forsaking the Jews for the Gentiles, until they had been driven away by insult and injury, that thus the ruin of their nation might lie, not upon the apostles, but upon them only, for their rejection of the repeated offers of salvation. Here, it would seem, they were joined by John Mark, the nephew of Barnabas, who was probably staying upon the island at that time, and who now accompanied them as an assistant in their apostolic ministry. Traversing the whole island from east to west, they came to Paphos, a splendid city near the western end, famed for the magnificent temple and lascivious worship of the Paphian Venus, a deity to whom all Cyprus was consecrated; and from it she derived one of her numerous appellatives, Cypris being a name under which she was frequently worshipped; and the females of the island generally, were so completely devoted to her service, not merely in temple-worship, but in life and manners, that throughout the world, the name Cyprian woman, even to this day, is but a polite expression for one abandoned to wantonness and pleasure. The worship of this lascivious goddess, the apostles now came to exterminate, and to plant in its stead the dominion of a faith, whose essence is purity of heart and action. At this place, preaching the gospel with openness, they soon attracted such general notice, that the report of their remarkable character soon reached the ears of the proconsul of Cyprus, then resident in Paphos. This great Roman governor, by name Sergius Paulus, was a man of intelligence and probity, and hearing of the apostles, soon summoned them to his presence, that he might have the satisfaction of hearing from them, in his own hall, a full exposition of the doctrine which they called the word of God. This they did with such energy and efficiency, that they won his attention and regard; and he was about to profess his faith in Jesus, when a new obstacle to the success of the gospel was presented in the conduct of one of those present at the discourse. This was an impostor, called Elymas,——a name which seems to be a Greek form of the Oriental “Alim” meaning “a magician,”——who had, by his tricks, gained a great renown throughout that region, and was received into high favor by the proconsul himself, with whom he was then staying. The rogue, apprehending the nature of the doctrines taught by the apostles to be no way agreeable to the schemes of self-advancement which he was so successfully pursuing, was not a little alarmed when he saw that they were taking hold of the mind of the proconsul, and therefore undertook to resist the preaching of the apostles; and attempted to argue the noble convert into a contempt of these new teachers. At this, Saul, (now first called Paul,) fixing his eyes on the miserable impostor, in a burst of inspired indignation, denounced on him an awful punishment for his resistance of the truth. “O, full of all guile and all tricks! son of the devil! enemy of all honesty! wilt thou not stop perverting the ways of the Lord? And now, lo! the hand of the Lord is on thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a time.” And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and turning around, he sought some persons to lead him by the hand. At the sight of this manifest and appalling miracle, thus following the denunciation of the apostle, the proconsul was so struck, that he no longer delayed for a moment his profession of faith in the religion whose power was thus attested, but believed in the doctrine of Jesus, as communicated by his apostles.

“Seleucia was a little north-west of Antioch, upon the Mediterranean sea, named from its founder, Seleucus.——Cyprus, so called from the flower of the Cypress-trees growing there.——Pliny, lib. xii. cap. 24.——Eustathius. In Dionysius p. 110. It was an island, having on the east the Syrian, on the west the Pamphylian, on the south the Phoenician, on the north the Cilician sea. It was celebrated among the heathens for its fertility as being sufficiently provided with all things within itself. Strabo, lib. xiv. 468, 469. It was very infamous for the worship of Venus, who had thence her name Κύπρις. It was memorable among the Jews as being an island in which they so much abounded; and among Christians for being the place where Joses, called Barnabas, had the land he sold, Acts iv. 36; and where Mnason, an old disciple, lived; Acts xxi. 16.——(Whitby’s Table.) Salamis was once a famous city of Cyprus, opposite to Seleucia, on the Syrian coast.——(Wells.) It was in the eastern part of Cyprus. It was famous among the Greek writers for the story of the Dragon killed by Chycreas, their king; and for the death of Anaxarchus, whom Nicocreon, the tyrant of that island, pounded to death with iron pestles.”——(Bochart, Canaan, lib. i. c. 2——Laert, lib. ix. p. 579.) Williams’s Pearson.

Proconsul.——The Greek title Ανθυπατος, was applied only to those governors of provinces who were invested with proconsular dignity. ‘And on the supposition that Cyprus was not a province of this description, it has been inferred that the title given to Sergius Paulus in this place, was a title that did not properly belong to him. A passage has indeed been quoted from Dion Cassius, (History of Rome, lib. liv. p. 523, edited by Hanoviae, 1690,) who, speaking of the governors of Cyprus and some other Roman provinces, applies to them the same title which is applied to Sergius Paulus. But, as Dion Cassius is speaking of several Roman provinces at the same time, one of which was certainly governed by a proconsul, it has been supposed, that for the sake of brevity, he used one term for all of them, whether it applied to all of them or not. That Cyprus, however, ought to be excluded, and that the title which he employed, as well as St. Luke, really did belong to the Roman governors of Cyprus, appears from the inscription on a coin belonging to Cyprus itself. It belonged to the people of that island as appears from the word ΚΥΠΡΙΩΝ on the reverse: and, though not struck while Sergius Paulus himself was governor, it was struck, as appears from the inscription on the reverse, in the time of Proclus, who was next to Sergius Paulus in the government of Cyprus. And, on this coin the same title ΑΝΘΥΠΑΤΟΣ, is given to Proclus, which St. Luke gives Sergius Paulus.’ (Bishop Marsh’s Lecture part v. pp. 85, 86.) That Cyprus was a proconsulate, is also evident [♦]from an ancient inscription of Caligula’s reign, in which Aquius Scaura is called the proconsul of Cyprus. (Gruteri Corpus Inscriptionem, tom. i. part ii. p, cccix. No. 3, edited by Graevii Amsterdam, 1707.) Horne’s Introd.

[♦] “lrom” replaced with “from”

HIS CHANGE OF NAME.

In connection with this first miracle of the apostle of Tarsus, it is mentioned by the historian of the Acts of the Apostles, that Saul thenceforth bore the name of Paul, and the reader is thence fairly led to suppose, that the name was taken from that of Sergius Paul, who is the most important personage concerned in the event; and being the first eminent man who is specified as having been converted by the apostle, seems therefore to deserve, in this case, the honor of conferring a new name on the wonder-working Saul. This coincidence between the name and the occasion, may be justly esteemed sufficient ground for assuming this as the true origin of the name by which the apostle was ever after designated,——which he applies to himself in his writings, and by which he is always mentioned throughout the Christian world, in all ages. With the name of “Saul of Tarsus,” there were too many evil associations already inseparably connected, in the minds of all the Jewish inhabitants of the east, and the troublesome character of those prevalent impressions having been perhaps particularly obvious to the apostle, during his first missionary tour, he seized this honorable occasion, to exchange it for one that had no such evil associations; and he was therefore afterwards known only by the name of PAUL.

Embarking at Paphos, the apostles, after doubling cape Acamas, the most western point of the island, sailed northwestward, towards the northern coast of Asia Minor,——and after a voyage of about two hundred miles, reached Perga, a city in Pamphylia. This place was not a sea-port, but stood on the west bank of the river Cestrus, about eight miles from the sea. It was there built by the Attalian kings of south-western Asia, and was by them made the most splendid city of Pamphylia. Near the town, and on a rising ground, was a very famous temple of Diana, to which every year resorted a grand religious assembly, to celebrate the worship of this great Asian goddess. In such a strong hold of heathenism, the apostles must have found much occasion for the preaching of the gospel; but the historian of their Acts gives no account of anything here said or done by them, and only mentions that at this place their companion, John Mark, gave up his ministration with them, and returned to Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas then went on without him, to the north, and proceeded, without any material delay, directly through Pamphylia, and over the ranges of Taurus, through Pisidia, into Phrygia Katakekaumene, where they made some stay at the city of Antioch, which was distinguished from the great capital of Syria bearing the same royal name, by being called “Antioch of Pisidia,” because, though really within the boundaries of Phrygia, it was often numbered among the cities of the province next south, near whose borders it stood, and was therefore associated with the towns of Pisidia by those who lived south and east of them. At this place the apostles probably arrived towards the last of the week, and reposing here on the sabbath, they went into the Jewish synagogue, along with the usual worshiping assembly, and took their seats quietly among the rest. After the regular service of the day (consisting of the reading of select portions of the law and the prophets) was over, the minister of the synagogue, according to custom, gave an invitation to the apostles to preach to the people, if they felt disposed to do so. It should be noticed, that in the Jewish synagogues, there was no regular person appointed to preach, the minister being only a sort of reader, who conducted the devotions of the meeting, and chanted the lessons from the Scriptures, as arranged for each sabbath. When these regular duties were over, the custom was to invite a discourse from any person disposed or qualified to address the people,——the whole being always thus conducted somewhat on the plan of a modern “conference meeting.” On this day, the minister, noticing two grave and intelligent-looking persons among the worshipers, joining devoutly in the service of God, and perceiving them to be of a higher order than most of the assembly, or perhaps having received a previous hint of the fact that they were well-qualified religious teachers, who had valuable doctrines to communicate to the people,——sent word to them, “Brethren! if you have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.” Paul then,——as usual, taking the precedence of Barnabas in speaking, on account of his own superior endowments as an orator,——addressed the meeting, beginning with the usual form of words, accompanied with a graceful gesticulation, beseeching their favor. “Men of Israel! and you that fear God! give your attention.” The two different classes of persons included in this formula, are evidently, first, those who were Jews by birth and education, and second, those devout Gentiles who reverenced the God of Israel and conformed to the law of Moses, worshiping with the Jews on the sabbath. Paul, in his sermon, which was of considerable length, began in the usual form of an apostolic discourse to the Jews, by recurring to the early Hebrew history, and running over the great leading events and persons mentioned in their sacred writings, that might be considered as preparing the way for the Messiah. Then, proceeding to the narration of the most important points in the history of the new dispensation, he applied all the quoted predictions of the inspired men of old, to the man Christ Jesus, whom they now preached. The substance of his discourse was, that in Jesus Christ were fully accomplished those splendid prophecies contained in the Psalms, concerning the future glories of the line of David; and more especially that by his attested resurrection he had fulfilled the words spoken by the Psalmist, of the triumphs of the “Holy One” over the grave and corruption. Paul thus concluded,——“Be it known to you therefore, brethren, that through this man is preached to you forgiveness of sins; and every one that believes in him is justified from all things, from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses. Beware therefore, lest that come upon you which is spoken by the prophets,——‘See! you despisers! and wonder and be amazed; for I will do a work in your days, which you shall not believe, even if one should tell it to you.’” These denunciatory concluding words are from the prophet Habakkuk, where he is foretelling to the Israelites of his day, the devastating invasion of the Chaldeans; and the apostle in quoting them, aimed to impress his hearers with the certainty of similar evils to fall upon their nation,——evils so tremendous, that they might naturally disbelieve the warning, if it should give them the awful particulars of the coming ruin, but whose solemn truth they would, nevertheless, too soon learn in its actual accomplishment. These words being directed in a rather bitter tone of warning to the Jews in particular, that portion of the audience do not appear to have been much pleased with his address; but while the most of them were retiring from the synagogue, the Gentiles declared their high satisfaction with the discourse, and expressed an earnest desire that it might be repeated to them on the next sabbath,——a request with which ministers in these modern times are very rarely complimented by their congregations. After the meeting broke up, many of the audience were so loth to part with preachers of this extraordinary character, that they followed the apostles to their lodgings. These were mostly the religious proselytes from the heathen who worshiped with the Jews in the synagogue, but some even of the Jews were so well satisfied with what they had heard, that they also accompanied the throng that followed the apostles. Paul and Barnabas did not suffer this occasion to pass unimproved; but as they went along, discoursed to the company, exhorting them to stand fast in the grace of God. They continued in the city through the week, and meanwhile the fame of their doctrines and their eloquence extended so fast and so far, that when on the next sabbath they went to the synagogue to preach according to promise, almost the whole city came pouring in, along with them, to hear the word of God. But when the Jews, who had already been considerably displeased by the manner in which they had been addressed the last sabbath, saw the multitudes which were thronging to hear these new interlopers, they were filled with envy, and when Paul renewed his discourse, they openly disputed him,——denied his conclusions, and abused him, and his doctrine. Paul and Barnabas, justly indignant at this exhibition of meanness, that thus set itself against the progress of the truth among the Gentiles, from whom the Jews, not content with rejecting the gospel themselves, would also exclude the light of the word,——boldly declared to them——“It was necessary that the word of God should be first spoken to you; but since you have cast it off, and thus evince yourselves unworthy of everlasting life,——behold, we turn to the heathen. For thus did God command us, ‘I have set thee for a light to the heathen, that thou mightest be for their salvation, even to the uttermost part of the earth.’” And the heathen hearing this, rejoiced, and glorified the word of the Lord, and many of them believed, to their everlasting salvation. And the word of God was spread throughout that whole country; but the opposition of the Jews increasing in proportion to the progress of the faith of Christ, a great disturbance was raised against the apostles among the aristocracy of the city, who favored the Jews, and more especially among the women of high family, who were proselytes; and the result of the commotion was, that the apostles were driven out of the city. Paul and Barnabas, in conformity to the original injunction of Jesus to the twelve, shook off the dust of their feet, as an expressive testimony against them,——and turning eastward, came to another city, named Iconium, in Lycaonia, the most eastern province of Phrygia.

Lycaonia is a province of Asia Minor, accounted the southern part of Cappadocia, having Isauria on the west, Armenia Minor on the east, and Cilicia on the south. Its chief cities are all mentioned in this chapter xiv. viz., Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. They spake in the Lycaonian tongue, verse 10, which is generally understood to have been a corrupt Greek, intermingled with many Syriac words.——Horne’s Introduction.

Iconium was the capital of Lycaonia, and is mentioned by the Grecian and Roman writers, before and after the apostolic times, as a place of some importance; but nothing definite is known of its size and character. It appears, at any rate, from the apostolic record, that this flourishing city was one of the numerous centers of the Jewish population, that filled so much of Asia Minor; and here, according to their custom, the apostles made their first communication of the gospel, in the Jewish synagogue. Entering this place of worship, they spoke with such effect, that a great number both of Greeks and Jews were thoroughly convinced of the truth of the Christian doctrine, and professed their faith in Jesus. But, as usual, there was in Iconium a great residue of bigoted adherents to the Mosaic faith, who could appreciate neither the true scope of the ancient dispensation, nor the perfection of gospel truth; and a set of these fellows undertook to make trouble for the apostles, in the same way that it had been done at the Pisidian Antioch. Not having power or influence enough among themselves to effect any great mischief, they were obliged to resort to the expedient of exciting the ill-will of the Gentile inhabitants and rulers of the city, against the objects of their mischievous designs,——and in this instance were successful, inasmuch as “they made their minds disaffected against the brethren.” But in spite of all this opposition, thus powerfully manifested, “long time they abode there, speaking boldly in the Lord,” who did not fail to give them the ever-promised support of his presence, but “gave testimony to the word of his grace, and caused signs and miracles to be done by their hands.” The immediate effect of this bold maintenance of the truth was, that they soon made a strong impression on the feelings of the mass of the people, and created among them a disposition to defend the preachers of the word of heavenly grace, against the malice of their haters. The consequence of course was, that the whole city was directly divided into two great parties, one for and the other against the apostles. On one hand the supporters of the Jewish faction were bent upon driving out the innovators from the city, and on the other, the numerous audiences, who had been interested in the preaching of Paul and Barnabas, were perfectly determined to stand by the apostles at all hazards, and the whole city seems to have been on the eve of a regular battle about this difference. But it did not suit the apostles’ scheme to make use of such means for their own advancement or defence; and hearing that a grand crisis in affairs was approaching, in the opposition of the Jewish faction, they took the resolution of evading the difficulty, by withdrawing themselves quietly from the scene of commotion, in which there was but very little prospect of being useful, just then. The whole gang of their opponents, both Gentiles and Jews, rulers and commonalty, having turned out for the express purpose of executing popular vengeance on these odious agitators, by abusing and pelting them, the apostles, on getting notice of the scheme, moved off, before the mob could lay hands on them, and soon got beyond their reach, in other cities.

These fugitives from popular vengeance, after having so narrowly escaped being sacrificed to public opinion, turned their course southward, and stopped next on their adventurous route at the city of Lystra, also within Lycaonia, where they preached the gospel, and not only in the city and its immediate vicinity, but also throughout the whole surrounding region, and in the neighboring towns. In the progress of their labors in Lystra, they one day were preaching in the presence of a man who had been lame from his birth, being in exactly the same predicament with the cripple who was the subject of the first miracle of Peter and John, in the temple. This unfortunate auditor of Paul and Barnabas believed the word of truth which they preached; and as he sat among the rest, being noticed by the former apostle, was recognized as a true believer. Looking earnestly on him, Paul, without questioning him at all as to his faith, said to him at once, in a loud voice, “Rise, and stand on thy feet.” Instantly the man sprang up, and walked. When the people saw this amazing and palpable miracle, they cried out, in their Lycaonian dialect, “The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.” Struck with this notion, they immediately sought to designate the individual deities who had thus honored the city of Lystra with their presence; and at once recognized in the stately form, and solemn, silent majesty of Barnabas, the awful front of Jupiter, the Father of all the gods; and as for the lively, mercurial person attending upon him, and acting, on all occasions, as the spokesman, with such vivid, burning eloquence,——who could he be but the attendant and agent of Jupiter, Hermes, the god of eloquence and of travelers? Full of this conceit, and anxious to testify their devout sense of this condescension, the citizens bustled about, and with no small parade brought out a solemn sacrificial procession, with oxen and garlands, headed by the priests of Jupiter, and were proceeding to offer a sacrifice in solemn form to the divine personages who had thus veiled their dignity in human shape, when the apostles, horror-struck at this degrading exhibition of the idolatrous spirit against which they were warring, and without a single sensation of pride or gratitude for this great compliment done them, ran in among the people, rending their clothes in the significant and fantastic gesture of true Orientals, and cried out with great earnestness, “Sirs! what do you mean? We also are men of like constitutions with yourselves, and we preach to you with the express intent that you should turn from these follies to the living God, who made heaven and earth and sea, and all that is in them.——He, indeed, in times past, left all nations to walk in their own ways. Yet he left himself not wholly without witness of his being and goodness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.” With these words of splendid eloquence and magnificent conception bursting from their lips in the inspiration of the moment,——the apostles, with no small ado, stopped the idolatrous folly of the Lystrans, who probably felt and looked very silly, when the mistake into which they had been drawn by a mere mob-cry, was shown to them. Indignant, not so much at themselves, who alone were truly blamable for the error, as against the persons who were the nobly innocent occasions of it,——they were in a state of feeling to overbalance this piece of extravagance by another,——much more wicked, because it was not mere nonsense, but downright cruelty. When, therefore, certain spiteful Jews came to Lystra from Antioch and Iconium, from which places they had been hunting, like hounds, on the track of the apostles, and told their abusive lies to the people about the character of these two strange travelers, the foolish Lystrans were easily persuaded to crown their absurdity by falling upon Paul, who seemed to be the person most active in the business. Having seized him, before he could slip out of their hands, as he usually did from his persecutors, they pelted him with such effect that he fell down as if dead; and they, with no small alacrity, dragged him out of the city as a mere carcase. But the mob had hardly dispersed, when he rose up, to the great wonder of the brethren who stood mourning about him, and went back with them into the city. The whole of this interesting series of events is a firm testimony to the honesty of the apostolic narrative, exhibiting, as it does, so fairly, the most natural, and at the same time, the most contemptible tendencies of the human character. Never was there given such a beautiful illustration of the value and moral force of public opinion! unless, perhaps, in the very similar case of Jesus, in Jerusalem:——“Hosanna,” to-day, and “Crucify him,” to-morrow. One moment, exalting the apostles to the name and honors of the highest of all the gods; the next, pelting them through the streets, and kicking them out of the city as a nuisance. The Bible is everywhere found to be just so bitterly true to human nature, and the whole world cannot furnish a story in which the character and moral value of popular movements are better exhibited than in the adventures of the apostles, as recorded by Luke.

Acts xiv. 12. “It has been inquired why the Lystrans suspected that Paul and Barnabas were Mercury and Jupiter? To this it may be answered, 1st. that the ancients supposed the gods especially visited those cities which were sacred to them. Now from verse 13, it appears that Jupiter was worshiped among these people; and that Mercury too was, there is no reason to doubt, considering how general his worship would be in so commercial a tract of Maritime Asia. (Gughling de Paulo Mercurio, p. 9, and Walch Spic. Antiquities, Lystra, p. 9.) How then was it that the priest of Mercury did not also appear? This would induce one rather to suppose that there was no temple to Mercury at Lystra. Probably the worship of that god was confined to the sea-coast; whereas Lystra was in the interior and mountainous country. 2. It appears from mythological history, that Jupiter was thought to generally descend on earth accompanied by Mercury. See Plautus, Amphitryon, 1, 1, 1. Ovid, Metamorphoses, 8, 626, and Fasti, 5, 495. 3. It was a very common story, and no doubt, familiar to the Lystrans, that Jupiter and Mercury formerly traversed Phrygia together, and were received by Philemon and Baucis. (See Ovid, Metamorphoses, 8, 611, Gelpke in Symbol. ad Interp. Acts xiv. 12.) Mr. Harrington has yet more appositely observed, (in his Works, p. 330,) that this persuasion might gain the more easily on the minds of the Lycaonians, on account of the well-known fable of Jupiter and Mercury, who were said to have descended from heaven in human shape, and to have been entertained by Lycaon, from whom the Lycaonians received their name.

“But it has been further inquired why they took Barnabas for Jupiter, and Paul for Mercury. Chrysostom observes, (and after him Mr. Fleming, Christology Vol. II. p. 226,) that the heathens represented Jupiter as an old but vigorous man, of a noble and majestic aspect, and a large robust make, which therefore he supposes might be the form of Barnabas; whereas Mercury appeared young, little, and nimble, as Paul might probably do, since he was yet in his youth. A more probable reason, however, and indeed the true one, (as given by Luke,) is, that Paul was so named, because he was the leading speaker. Now it was well known that Mercury was the god of eloquence. So Horace, Carmen Saeculare, 1, 10, 1. [a]Mercuri facunde nepos Atlantis Qui feros cultus hominum recentum Voce formasti cantus]. Ovid, Fasti, 5, 688. Macrobius, Saturnalia, 8, 8. Hence he is called by Jamblichus, de Mysteriis, θεὸς ὁ των λόγων ἡγεμὼν, a passage exactly the counterpart to the present one, which we may render, ‘for he had led the discourse.’” (Bloomfield’s Annotations, New Testament, Vol. IV. c. xiv. § 12.)

“They called Paul Mercury, because he was the chief speaker,” verse 12. Mercury was the god of eloquence. Justin Martyr says Paul is λόγος ἑρμηνευτικὸς καὶ πάντων διδάσκαλος, the word; that is, the interpreter and teacher of all men. Apology ii. p. 67. Philo informs us that Mercury is called Hermes, ὡς Ἑρμηνέα καὶ προφήτην τῶν θειων, as being the interpreter and prophet of divine things, apud Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica, Lib. iii. c. 2. He is called by Porphyry παραστατικὸς, the exhibitor or representor of reason and eloquence. Seneca says he was called Mercury, quia ratio penes illum est. De Beneficiis, Lib. iv. cap. 7.——Calmet, Whitby, Stackhouse.

All this pelting and outcry, however, made not the slightest impression on Paul and Barnabas, nor had the effect of deterring them from the work, which they had so unpropitiously carried on. Knowing, as they did, how popular violence always exhausts itself in its frenzy, they without hesitation immediately returned by the same route over which they had been just driven by such a succession of popular outrages. The day after Paul had been stoned and stunned by the people of Lystra, he left that city with Barnabas, and both directed their course eastward to Derbe, where they preached the gospel and taught many. Then turning directly back, they came again to Lystra, then to Iconium, and then to Antioch, in all of which cities they had just been so shamefully treated. In each of these places, they sought to strengthen the faith of the disciples, earnestly exhorting them to continue in the Christian course, and warning them that they must expect to attain the blessings of the heavenly kingdom, only through much trial and suffering. On this return journey they now formally constituted regular worshiping assemblies of Christians in all the places from which they had before been so tumultuously driven as to be prevented from perfecting their good work,——ordaining elders in every church thus constituted, and solemnly, with fasting and prayer, commending them to the Lord on whom they believed. Still keeping the same route on which they had come, they now turned southward into Pamphylia, and came again to Perga. From this place, they went down to Attalia, a great city south of Perga, on the coast of Pamphylia, founded by Attalus Philadelphus, king of Pergamus. At this port, they embarked for the coast of Syria, and soon arrived at Antioch, from which they had been commended to the favor of God, on this adventurous journey. On their arrival, the whole church was gathered to hear the story of their doings and sufferings, and to this eager assembly, the apostles then recounted all that happened to them in the providence of God, their labors, their trials, dangers, and hair-breadth escapes, and the crowning successes in which all these providences had resulted; and more especially did they set forth in what a signal manner, during this journey, the door of Christ’s kingdom had been opened to the Gentiles, after the rejection of the truth by the unbelieving Jews; and thus happily ended Paul’s first great apostolic mission.

Bishop Pearson here allots three years for these journeys of the apostles, viz. 45, 46, and 47, and something more. But Calmet, Tillemont, Dr. Lardner, Bishop Tomline, and Dr. Hales, allow two years for this purpose, viz. 45 and 46; which period corresponds with our Bible chronology. (Williams on Pearson.)

THE DISPUTES ON THE CIRCUMCISION.

The great apostle of the Gentiles now made Antioch his home, and resided there for many years, during which the church grew prosperously. But at last some persons came down from Jerusalem, to observe the progress which the new Gentile converts were making in the faith; and found, to their great horror, that all were going on their Christian course, in utter disregard of the ancient ordinances of the holy Mosaic covenant, neglecting altogether even that grand seal of salvation, which had been enjoined on Abraham and all the faithful who should share in the blessings of the promise made to him; they therefore took these backsliders and loose converts, to task, for their irregularities in this matter, and said to them, “Unless you be circumcised [♦]according to the Mosaic usage, you can not be saved.” This denunciation of eternal ruin on the Gentile non-conformists, of course made a great commotion among the Antiochians, who had been so hopefully progressing in the pure, spiritual faith of Christ,——and were not prepared by any of the instructions which they had received from their apostolic teachers, for any such stiff subjection to tedious rituals. Nor were Paul and Barnabas slow in resisting this vile imposition upon those who were just rejoicing in the glorious light and freedom of the gospel; and they at once therefore, resolutely opposed the attempts of the bigoted Judaizers to bring them under the servitude of the yoke which not even the Jews themselves were able to bear. After much wrangling on this knotty point, it was determined to make a united reference of the whole question to the apostles and elders at Jerusalem, and that Paul and Barnabas should be the messengers of the Antiochian church, in this consultation. They accordingly set out, escorted beyond the city by the church; and passing first directly southward, along the Phoenician coast, they next turned inland through Samaria, everywhere visiting the churches on the route, and making known to them the joyful story of the conversions among the Gentiles of Asia Minor, which was news to the Christians of Palestine, and caused great congratulations among them, at these unexpected triumphs of their common faith. Arriving at Jerusalem, they there, for the first time, gave to the twelve apostles, a detailed account of their long Asian mission; and then brought forward the grand question under debate. As soon as this point was presented, all the obstinate Jewish prejudices of that portion of the church who were of the order of the Pharisees, were instantly aroused,——and with great earnestness they insisted “that it was necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” This first meeting however, adjourned without coming to any conclusion; and the apostles and elders were called together again to consider upon the matter. As soon as they were assembled they all fell to disputing with great violence, and, of course, with no decisive or profitable result; but at last the great apostolic chief rising up, ended the debate with a very clear statement of the results of his own personal experience of the divine guidance in this matter, and with brief but decisive eloquence hushed their clamors, that they might give Barnabas and Paul a chance to declare in what manner God had sanctioned their similar course. The two apostles of the Gentiles then narrated what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the heathen by them. Such was the decisive effect of their exposition of these matters of fact, that all debate was checked at once; and James himself, the great leader of the Judaical order, rose to express his perfect acquiescence in the decision of the apostolic chief and the Hellenists. His opinion was, that only so much conformity to the Mosaic institutions should be required of the Gentile converts, as they might without inconvenience submit to, out of respect to the old covenant, and such observances as were necessary for the moral purity of a professing Christian of any nation. The whole assembly concurred; and it was resolved to dispatch two select persons out of their own company, to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, and thus by their special commission, enforce the decision of the apostolic and presbyterial council. The decision of the council was therefore committed to writing, in a letter which bore high testimony to the zeal and courage of Barnabas and Paul, as “men who had hazarded their lives for the sake of the gospel,”——and it was announced as the inspired decision of the apostles, elders and brethren, that the Gentile converts should not be troubled with any greater burden than these necessary things:——“That you abstain from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication;” and if they should only keep themselves from these, they would do well. Jude and Silas were the envoys commissioned with the charge of this epistle, and accordingly accompanied Paul and Barnabas back to Antioch.

[♦] “acccording” replaced with “according”

“Those who maintained this position were Jews, of the sect of the Pharisees, Acts, xv. 5, converted to Christianity, but still too zealous for the observance of the law; and their coming immediately from Judea might make it rather believed, that the necessity of circumcision, in order to salvation, was a tenet of the apostles. The Jews themselves indeed were of different opinions in this matter, even as to the admission of a man into their religion. For some of them would allow those of other nations who owned the true God, and practised moral duties, to live quietly among them, and even without circumcision, to be admitted into their religion; whilst others were decidedly opposed to any such thing. Thus Josephus tells us that when Izates, the son of Helen, queen of Adiabene, embraced the Jews’ religion, Ananias, who converted him, declared that he might do it without circumcision; but Eleazer, another eminent Jew, maintained, that it was a great impiety in such circumstances, to remain uncircumcised; and this difference of opinion continued among the Jewish Christian converts, some allowing Gentiles to become converts to Christianity, without submitting to circumcision and the Jewish law: whilst others contended that without circumcision, and the observance of the law, their profession of the Christian faith would not save them.” (Stackhouse from Whitby and Beausobre.)

“It is very evident, that this is the same journey to which the apostle alludes in Galatians ii. First, from the agreement of the history here and the apostle’s relation in the epistle, as that ‘he communicated to them the gospel, which he preached among the Gentiles,’ Galatians ii. 2. which he now did, Acts xv. 4. That circumcision was not then judged necessary to the Gentiles, verse 3, as we find, Acts xv. 24, ‘that, when they saw the gospel of uncircumcision was committed to him, they gave to him and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship,’ Galatians ii. 9, as they did here, sending their very decree with one consent to the Gentiles, ‘by the hands of Paul and Barnabas,’ Acts xv. 22, 25, who were received by the ‘whole church,’ verse 4. and styled beloved,’ verse 25.

“Secondly, it appears unlikely that the apostle, writing this epistle about nine years after this council, should make no mention of a thing so advantageous to a cause he is pleading here, and so proper to confute the pretenses of the adversaries he disputes against. And,

“Thirdly, James, Peter, and John, being all the apostles now present at the council, the mention of their consent to his doctrine and practice was all that was necessary to his purpose to be mentioned concerning that council, It is no objection to this opinion, that we find no mention, in Acts xv. of Titus’s being with him; for he is not mentioned in the whole of the Acts, during which interval the journey must have happened.” (Whitby.)

“The Council of Jerusalem was assembled in the fourteenth year after St. Paul’s conversion. For the apostle adverts to this same journey, and determinately specifies the time in Galatians ii. 1, 2. Grotius is of opinion that four years should be here written instead of fourteen; who, nevertheless, allows, that the one mentioned in Galatians, is this journey to the Council. But the reason is evident why the apostle should date these years from the epoch of his conversion, from the scope of the first and second chapters. He styles himself an apostle, not of men, neither by man, chap. i. 1: he declared that his gospel was not according to men, and that he neither received nor learned it from men, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ, verses 11, 12. And this he proves to the Galatians by his conversion, which was not unknown to them. He begins with his strict profession of the Jewish religion, according to the tenets of the Pharisees, which ended in a most violent persecution of the Christians. Then he goes on to show how God revealed his Son to him, and that immediately he conferred not with flesh and blood, he neither held communion with any man, neither did he go up to Jerusalem to them that were apostles before him, by whom he could have been taught more fully the mind of God, ‘but went into Arabia,’ where he received the gospel by revelation; and he returned to Damascus, and preached the word of God to the confounding of the Jews: ‘Then after three years he went up to Jerusalem to see Peter.’ From all this it appears evident, that the epoch of these three years should commence at the time of his conversion. The same is to be said of the other epoch of the fourteen years. ‘Then, after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem,’ chap. ii. 1, because the scope of both is the same,——and they both date from the same period of time. The word επειτα does not connect this sentence with that of the three years, as if the beginning of these should be dated from the close of those, because there is another επειτα which comes between these two texts, viz. in verse 21, of chap. i. where he begins to relate his travels in Syria and Cilicia, but does not specify the period of time he remained in those regions; therefore no chronological connexion can have been intended by him. The apostle still following up his design, says επειτα and παλιν, but neither does επειτα refer to his stay in Syria and Cilicia,——nor παλιν to his second coming to Jerusalem: for he had been with a second collection to Jerusalem, then suffering from famine, accompanied by Barnabas, but not by Titus; and because he then saw none of the apostles, he omitted mentioning that journey, considering it quite foreign to his present purpose.” (Pearson, Annales, 49.)

PAUL’S QUARREL WITH PETER.

The whole company of envoys, both Barnabas and Paul, the original messengers of the Syrian church, and Jude and Silas, the deputies of the apostolic college, presented the complete results of the Jerusalem consultation before a fall meeting of the whole congregation of believers at Antioch, and read the epistle of the council to them. The sage and happy exhortations which it contained were not only respectfully but joyfully received; and in addition to the comfort of these, the first written words of Christian inspiration, the two envoys, Jude and Silas, also discoursed to the church, commenting at more length on the apostolic message of which they were the bearers, and confirmed their hearers in the faith. After remaining there for some time, Jude bade them farewell, and returned to his apostolic associates; but Silas was so much pleased with the opportunities thus afforded him of doing good among the Gentiles, of whom he himself also was one, as his name shows,——that he stayed in Antioch after the departure of Jude, and labored along with Paul and Barnabas, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also. This is commonly understood to be the time of Paul’s dissension with Peter, as mentioned in the epistle to the Galatians. The circumstances of this disagreeable occurrence have already been narrated and commented on, in the Life of Peter,——nor need anything additional be presented here in relation to Paul, except the observation, that his dispute with the chief apostle, and his harsh censure of his conduct, are very much in accordance with the impressions of his character, given in other passages of his life. He was evidently a man of violent and hasty passions; and is uniformly represented, both by his historian and by himself, as exceedingly bitter and harsh in his denunciations of all who differed from him on practical or speculative points, both before and after his calling to the apostleship; and this trait is manifested on such a variety of occasions, as to be very justly considered an inseparable peculiarity of his natural disposition and temperament. Doubtless there are many to whom it seems very strange, that the Apostle Paul should ever be spoken of as having been actually and truly angry, or ever having made an error in his conduct after his conversion; but there are instances enough to show that it was not a mere modest injustice to himself for him to tell the Lystran idolaters that he was a man of like passions with them,——but a plain matter of fact, made evident not only by his own noble and frank confession, but by many unfortunate instances throughout his recorded life. Yet there are a great many Protestants, who have been in the habit of making such a kind of idol or demi-god out of Paul, that they are as little prepared as the Lystrans to appreciate the human imperfections of his character; and if Paul himself could at this moment be made fully sensible of the dumb idolatrous reverence with which many of his modern and enlightened adorers regard him, he would be very apt to burst out in the same earnest and grieved tone, in which he checked the similar folly of the Lystrans,——“Sirs! why do ye these things? I also am a man of like passions with yourselves.”——“The spirit of divine truth which actuated me, and guided me in the way of light, by which I led others to life eternal, still did not make me anything more than a man,——a man in moral as in bodily weakness, nor exempt from liabilities to the accidents of passion, any more than to the pains of mortal disease. The Spirit that guided my pen in the record of eternal truth, and my tongue in the preaching of the word of salvation, did not exalt me above the errors, the failings and distresses of mortality; and I was still all my lifetime subject to the bondage of sin, groaning under that body of death, and longing for the day when I should pass away from the frailties and distresses of earth, to that state of being which alone is wholly sinless and pure.”

“From the opposition to St. Peter, which they suppose to be before the Council at Jerusalem, some would have it, that this Epistle to the Galatians was written before that Council; as if what was done before the Council could not be mentioned in a letter written after the Council. They also contend, that this journey, mentioned here by St. Paul, was not that wherein he and Barnabas went up to that Council to Jerusalem, but that mentioned Acts xi. 30; but this with as little ground as the former. The strongest reason they bring, is, that if this journey had been to the Council, and this letter after that Council, St. Paul would not certainly have omitted to have mentioned to the Galatians that decree. To which it is answered, 1. The mention of it was superfluous; for they had it already, see Acts xvi. 4. 2. The mention of it was impertinent to the design of St. Paul’s narrative here. For it is plain, that his aim, in what he relates here of himself, and his past actions, is to shew, that having received the gospel from Christ by immediate revelation, he had all along preached that, and nothing but that, everywhere; so that he could not be supposed to have preached circumcision, or by his carriage, to have shewn any subjection to the law; all the whole narrative following being to make good what he says, [♦]chap. i. 11, ‘that the gospel which he preached was not accommodated to the humoring of men; nor did he seek to please the Jews (who were the men here meant) in what he taught.’ Taking this to be his aim, we shall find the whole account he gives of himself, from that verse 11 of chap. i., to the end of the second chapter, to be very [♠]clear and easy, and very proper to invalidate the report of his preaching circumcision.” (Locke’s Paraphrase.)

[♦] “ehap.” replaced with “chap.”

[♠] “ctear” replaced with “clear”

“I conceive that this happened at the time here stated, because Paul intimates in Galatians ii. 11, that he was in Antioch when Peter came there; and Peter had never been to Antioch before Paul was in that city after the Council of Jerusalem; and besides the dissension between Paul and Barnabas, who was the intimate friend of Peter, appears to have originated here.” Pearson’s Annales Paul. (A. D. 50.)

A fine exhibition of a quibbling, wire-drawn argument, may be found in Baronius, (Annales, 51,) who is here put to his wits’ end to reconcile the blunt, “round, unvarnished tale,” in Paul’s own account, (in Galatians ii. 11–14,) with the papistical absurdity of the moral infallibility of the apostles. He lays out an argument of five heavy folio pages to prove that, though Paul quarreled thus with Peter, yet neither of them was in the slightest degree to blame, &c. But the folly of explaining away the Scriptures in this manner, is not confined wholly to the bigoted, hireling historian of papal Rome; some of the boldest of protestants have, in the same manner, attempted to reconcile the statement of Paul with the vulgar notions of apostolic infallibility. Witsius (Vita Pauli, iv. 12,) expends a paragraph to show that neither of them was to blame; but following the usual course of anti-papist writers, he represents the great protestant idol, Paul, in altogether the most advantageous light, according to the perfectly proverbial peculiarity of the opponents of the church of Rome, who, in their apostolic distinctions, uniformly “rob Peter to pay Paul.”

PAUL’S QUARREL WITH BARNABAS.

The church of Antioch having thus made great advances under these very abundant and extraordinary instructions, the apostles began to turn their eyes again to a foreign field, and longed for a renewal of those adventurous labors from which they had now had so long a repose. Paul therefore proposed to Barnabas that they should go over their old ground again:——“Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city, where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.” To this frank and reasonable proposition, Barnabas readily agreed, and as it was desirable that they should have an assistant with them on this journey, he proposed that his nephew Mark should accompany them in this capacity as he had done on their former voyage. But Paul, remembering the manner in which he had forsaken them just as they were entering upon the arduous missionary fields of Asia Minor, refused to try again one who had once failed to do them the desired service, at a time when he was most needed. Yet Barnabas, being led, no doubt by his near relationship to the delinquent evangelist, to overlook this single deficiency, and perhaps, having good reason to think that he had now made up his mind to stick to them through thick and thin, through good and bad fortune, was disposed to give him another trial in the apostolic service, and therefore strongly urged Paul to accept of him as their common assistant in this new tour for which he was well fitted by his knowledge of the routes. Paul, however, no doubt irritated against Mark, for the wavering spirit already manifested by him at Perga, utterly refused to have anything to do with him after such a display of character, and wished to take some other person who had been tried in the good work with more satisfactory results as to his resolution and ability. Barnabas of course, was not at all pleased to have his sister’s son treated so slightingly, and refused to have any substitute whatever, insisting that Mark should go, while Paul was equally resolved that he should not. The conclusion of the whole matter was, that these two great apostles, the authorized messengers of God to the Gentiles, quarreled downright; and after a great deal of furious contention, they parted entirely from one another; and so bitter seems to have been the division between them that they are not known to have ever after been associated in apostolic labors, although they had been the most intimate friends and fellow-travelers for many years, standing by one another through evil and good report, through trials, perils, distresses and almost to death. A most lamentable exhibition of human [♦]weakness marring the harmonious progress of the great scheme of evangelization! Yet it must be esteemed one of the most valuable facts relating to the apostles, that are recorded in the honest, simple, clear, and truly impartial narrative of Luke; because it reminds the Christian reader of a circumstance, that he might otherwise forget, in an undue reverence for the character of the apostles,——and that is, the circumstance that these consecrated ministers of the word of truth were, really and practically, in spite of their holiness, “men of like passions with ourselves,” and even in the arrangement of their apostolic duties, were liable to be governed by the impulses of human passion, which on a few occasions like this, acting in opposite directions in different persons at the same time, brought them into open collisions and disputes,——which, if men of their pure martyr-spirit, mostly too, under the guidance of a divine influence, could not avoid, nor could satisfactorily settle, neither may the unconsecrated historian of a later age presume to decide. Who was right and who was wrong in this difficulty, it is impossible to say; and each reader may judge for himself. It may be remarked, however, that Paul was no more likely to be right than Barnabas; he was a younger man, as it would appear from the circumstance that he is named after him in the apostolic epistle;——he was no more an apostle than Barnabas was; for both are thus named by Luke in his account of their first journey, and both were expressly called by a distinct revelation from the Holy Spirit to undertake the apostleship of the Gentiles together. Paul also is known to have quarreled with other persons, and especially with Peter himself, and that too without very just cause; and although Barnabas may have been influenced to partiality by his relationship to Mark, yet much also may be justly chargeable to Paul’s natural violence and bitterness of temper, which often led him into hasty acts, of which he afterwards repented, as he certainly did in this very case, after some time; for he repeatedly mentions Mark in his epistles in terms of regard, and what is most in point, declares him to be “profitable to him in the ministry.”

[♦] “weaknes” replaced with “weakness”

Witsius remarks, (Vita Pauli, iv. 16,) that the ancient Christian writers ascribe the greatest part of the blame of this quarrel to Barnabas, whom they consider as having been unduly influenced by natural affection for his kindred according to the flesh. “But”, as Witsius rather too cautiously remarks, “it may well be doubted whether Paul’s natural violence of temper did not carry him somewhat beyond the bounds of right. The Greeks have not unwisely remarked——Ὁ Παυλος ἐζητει το δικαιον, ὁ Βαρναβας το Πιλανθροπον ‘Paul demanded what was just——Barnabas, what was charitable.’ It might have been well enough if Barnabas had yielded to the zeal of Paul; but it would not have been bad if Paul had persuaded himself to allow something to the feelings of that most mild and amiable man. Meanwhile, it deserves notice, that God so ordered this, that it turned out as much for the individual benefit of Mark, as for the general benefit of the church. For the kind partiality of Barnabas was of advantage to Mark, in preventing him from being utterly cast off from apostolic companionship, and forsaken as unworthy; while to the church, this separation was useful, since it was the means of confirming the faith of more of the churches in the same time.” (Witsius.)

“From hence we may learn, not only that these great lights in the Christian church were men of the like passions with us, but that God, upon this occasion, did most eminently illustrate the wisdom of his providence, by rendering the frailties of two such eminent servants instrumental to the benefit of his church, since both of them thenceforward employed their extraordinary industry and zeal singly and apart, which till then had been united, and confined to the same place.” (Stanhope on the Epistles and Gospels, vol. 4.)

HIS SECOND APOSTOLIC MISSION.

After this unhappy dispute, the two great apostles of the Gentiles separated; and while Barnabas, accompanied by his favorite nephew, pursued the former route to Cyprus, his native island, Paul took a different direction, by land, north and west. In selecting a companion for a journey which he had considered as urgently requiring such blameless rectitude and firmness of resolution, he had set his heart upon Silas, the efficient Hellenist deputy from Jerusalem, whose character had been fully tested and developed during his stay in Antioch, where he had been so active in the exercise of those talents, as a preacher, which had gained for him the title of “prophet” before his departure from Jerusalem. Paul, during his apostolic association with him, had laid the foundation of a very intimate friendship; and being thus attached to him by motives of affection and respect, he now selected him as the companion of his missionary toils. Bidding the church of Antioch farewell, and being commended by them to the favor of God, he departed,——not by water, but through the cities of Syria, by land,——whence turning westward, he passed through the Syrian gates into Cilicia; in all these places strengthening the churches already planted, by making large additions to them from the Gentiles around them. Journeying northwest from Cilicia, he came by the Cilician gates of Taurus, to his old scenes of labor and suffering, in Lycaonia, at Derbe and Lystra, where he proceeded in the task of renewing and completing the good work which he had himself begun on his former tour with Barnabas; with whom he might now doubtless have effected vastly more good, and whose absence must have been deeply regretted by those who owed their hopes of salvation to the united prayers and labors of him and Paul. Among those who had been converted here by the apostles on their first mission, was a half-bred Jew, by name Timotheus, his father having been a Greek who married Eunice, a Jewess, and had maintained a high character among his countrymen in that region, both in Lystra and Iconium. Under the early and careful instructions of his pious mother, who had herself received a superior religious education under her own mother Lois, Timothy had acquired a most uncommon familiarity with the Scriptures, which were able to make him wise unto salvation; and that he had learned them and appreciated their meaning in a much more spiritual and exalted sense than most Jews, appears from the fact, that notwithstanding his early regard for the law as well as the prophets, he had never complied with the Mosaic rite of circumcision,——perhaps because his father may have been prejudiced against the infliction of such a sign upon his child. Paul becoming acquainted with Timothy, and seeing in the young man the germ of those talents which were afterwards so eminent in the gospel cause, determined to train him to be an assistant and associate with him in the apostolic ministry,——and in order to make him so far conform to all the rites of the ancient covenant, as would fit him for an acceptable ministry among the Jews as well as the Gentiles, he had him circumcised; and he was induced still farther to this step of conformity, by the consideration of the effect it would have on the Jews in that immediate neighborhood, who were already very suspicious that Paul was in reality aiming at the utter overthrow and extinction of all the Mosaic usages, and was secretly doing all that he could to bring them into contempt and disuse. Having made this sacrifice to the prejudices of his countrymen, he now considered Timothy as completely fitted for usefulness in the apostolic ministry, and henceforth made him his constant companion for years.

HIS WESTWARD JOURNEY.

With this accession to his company, Paul proceeded through the cities of that region which he had before visited, and communicated to them the decrees passed by the apostles and elders at Jerusalem, for the regulation of the deportment of professing Christians, in regard to the observance of Mosaic usages. They all, moreover, labored for the extension of the churches already founded, and thus caused them to be built up, so that they received fresh additions daily. Nor did Paul limit his apostolic labors to the mere confirmation of the work begun on his tour with Barnabas; but after traversing all his old fields of exertion, he extended his journey far north of his former route, through all Phrygia, and Galatia, a province which had never before been blessed with the presence of a Christian missionary,——and after laboring in his high vocation there, he was disposed to move west, to the Ionian or true Asian shore of the Aegean, but was checked by a direction which he could not resist; and passing northward of the true Asian cities, he came out of Phrygia into Mysia, the province that occupies the northwestern corner of all Asia Minor, bounded north by the Propontis and Hellespont, and west by the northern part of the Aegean,——the true Asia lying south of it, within the geographical division commonly named Lydia. Having entered Mysia, they were expecting to turn northeast into Bithynia, when again their own preferences and counsels were overruled by the same mysterious impulse as before, and they therefore continued their westward journey to the shore of the Hellespont and Aegean, arriving within the classic region of the Troad, at the modern city of Alexandria Troas, some miles south of that most glorious of all the scenes of Grecian poetical antiquity, where, thirteen hundred years before, “Troy was.” Here they rested for a brief space, and while they were undecided as to the course which they ought next to pursue, Paul had a remarkable vision, which gave a summons too distinct to be mistaken or doubted, to a field in which the most noble triumphs of the cross were destined to be won under his own personal ministration, and where through thousands of years the name of Christ should consecrate and re-exalt the land, over all whose hills, mountains, streams, valleys, and seas, then as now, clustered the rich associations of the most splendid antiquity that is marked in the records of the past, with the beautiful and the excellent in poetry, art, taste, literature, philosophy and moral exaltation. In the night, as Paul was slumbering at his stopping-place, in the Troad, there appeared to him a vision of a Macedonian, who seemed to cry out beseechingly to him——“Come over into Macedonia, and help us!” This voice of earnest prayer for the help of Christ, rolling over the wide Aegean, was enough to move the ardent spirit of Paul, and on waking he therefore summoned his companions to attend him in his voyage to this new field. He had been joined here by a new companion, as appears from the fact, that the historian of the Acts of the apostles now begins to speak in the first person, of the apostolic company, and it thence appears that besides Silas and Timotheus, Paul was now attended by Luke. Setting sail from Troas, as soon as they could get ready for this unexpected extension of their travels, the whole four were wafted by a fresh south-eastern breeze from the Asian coast, first to the large island of Samothrace; and on the second day, they came to Neapolis, a town on the coast of Macedonia, which is the seaport of the great city of Philippi.

HIS MISSION IN MACEDONIA.

They without delay proceeded to Philippi, the chief city of that part of Macedonia, taking its name from that sage monarch who laid the foundation of the Macedonian dominion over the Grecian world, and gave this city its importance and splendor, re-building it, and granting it the honors of his peculiar favor. Under the Roman conquest it had lost no part of its ancient importance, but had been endowed by Julius Caesar, in a special decree, with the high privileges of a Roman colony, and was in the apostolic age one of the greatest cities in that part of Europe. Here Paul and his companions staid for several days; and seeking on the sabbath, for some place where they could, in that heathen land, observe the worship, and celebrate the praises of the God of their fathers, they wandered forth from the great pagan city, and sat down, away from the unholy din of mirth and business, in a retired place on the banks of the little stream which ran by the town, being made up of numerous springs that rise at the foot of the hills north of it,——which gave it the name of Crenides, or “the city of springs;”——the common name of the town before its conquest by Philip. In such places, by the side of streams and other waters, the Jews were always accustomed to construct their places for social worship; and here, in this quiet place, a few Jewish residents of the city resorted for prayer, remembering the God of their fathers, though so far from his sanctuary. Those who thus kept up the worship of God in this place, are mentioned as being women only; for it may always be observed that it is among the softer sex that religion takes its deepest root, and among them a regard to its observances is always found, long after the indifference generated by a change of circumstances, or by the engrossing cares of business, has turned away the devotions of men. So was it in Philippi; while the sons of Judah had grown indifferent to those observances of their religion, which were inconvenient, by interfering with the daily arrangements of business intercourse with their heathen fellow-citizens, the daughters of Zion came still regularly together, to the place where prayer was wont to be made. Here the apostolic company met them, and preached to them the new word of grace, now revealed for all the scattered race of Israel, far and near,——and not for them only, but also for the Gentiles. Among these gentle auditors of the word of grace, now first proclaimed in Greece, was a Jewess, named Lydia, who had emigrated from Thyatira, in Lydian Asia, and now carried on in Philippi, a trade in the purple dye, for which the region from which she came was so famous, even from the time of Homer. While listening to the words of Paul, her heart was opened to the comprehension of the truth of the gospel, and she professed her faith in Jesus. Having been baptized with all her household, she was so moved with regard for those who had thus taught her the way of salvation, that she earnestly invited them to make her house their home. Complying with her benevolent and hospitable invitation, Paul, Silas, Timothy and Luke, took up their abode in her house, and remained there throughout their whole stay in Philippi.

Such was the beginning of the propagation of the gospel in Greece,——such was the foundation of the first church ever planted east of the Hellespont; and thus did Europe first receive the doctrines of that faith, which now holds in all that mighty division of the world, a triumphant seat, and constitutes the universal religion of the nations that hold within themselves the sources of art, learning,——all the refinements of civilization,——and of the dominion of half the globe. Four pilgrims entered the city of Philippi, unknown, friendless, and scorned for their foreign, half-barbarian aspect. Strolling about from day to day, to find the means of executing their strange errand, they at last found a few Jewish women, sitting in a little retired place, on the banks of a nameless stream. To them they made known the message of salvation;——one of the women with her household believed the gospel, and professed the faith of Jesus;——and from this beginning did those glorious results advance, which in their progress have changed the face of Europe, revolutionized the course of empires, and modified the destiny of the world!

An incident soon occurred, however, which brought them into more public notice, though not in a very desirable manner. As they went out to the usual place of prayer on the bank of the stream, they at last were noticed by a poor bedeviled crazy girl, who, being deprived of reason, had been made a source of profit to a set of mercenary villains, who taking advantage of the common superstition of their countrymen about the supernatural endowments of such unfortunate persons, pretended that she was a Pythoness, indued by the Pythian Apollo with the spirit of prophecy; for not only at Delphi, on his famous tripod, but also throughout Greece, he was believed to inspire certain females to utter his oracles, concerning future events. The owners and managers of this poor girl therefore made a trade of her supposed soothsaying faculty, and found it a very profitable business, through the folly of the wise Greeks of Philippi. This poor girl had her crazy fancy struck by the appearance of the apostolic company, as they passed along the streets to their place of prayer, and following them, perceived, under the impulse of the strange influence that possessed her, the real character of Paul and his companions; and cried out after them, “These men are the servants of the most high God, who show us the way of salvation.” This she did daily for a long time, till at last, Paul, annoyed by this kind of proclamation thus made at his heels, turned about, and by a single command subdued the demoniac influence that possessed her, and restored her to the freedom of sense and thought. Of course she was now no longer the submissive instrument of the will of her mercenary managers, and it was with no small vexation that they found all chance of these easy gains was forever gone. In their rage against the authors of what they deemed their calamity, they caught Paul and Silas, as the foremost of the apostolic company, and dragging them into the forum or courthouse, where the magistrates were in session, they presented their prisoners as a downright nuisance: “These men, who are Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city; and teach customs which are not lawful for us to adopt nor observe, if we are to maintain the privileges of Roman citizens.” What the latter part of the accusation referred to, in particular, it is not easy to say, and probably there was no very definite specification made by the accusers; for the general prejudice against the Jews was such, that the mob raised a clamor against them at once; and the magistrates seeing in the apostles only some nameless foreign vagabonds, who having come into the city without any reasonable object in view were disturbing the peace of the inhabitants, had no hesitation whatever in ordering them to be punished in the most ignominious manner, and without any question or defense, conforming to the dictation of that universally divine and immaculate source of justice,——the voice of the people,——instantly had them stripped and flogged at the discretion of their persecutors. After having thus shamefully abused them, they did not dismiss them, but cast them into prison, and set their feet in the stocks.

“Philippi was a city of Macedonia, of moderate extent, and not far from the borders of Thrace. It was formerly called Crenides, from its [♦]numerous springs, from which arises a small stream, mentioned Acts xvi. 13, though it is commonly omitted in the maps. The name of Philippi it received from Philip, father of Alexander, who enlarged it, and fortified it as a barrier town against the Thracians. Julius Caesar sent hither a Roman colony, as appears from the following inscription on a medal of this city, COL. IUL. AUG. PHIL. quoted in Vaillant Num. æn. imp. T. I. p. 160, and from Spon Misc. p. 173. See also Pliny, L. IV. c. ii. and the authors in Wolfii Curae, πρωτη της μεριδος της Μακεδονιας πολις, ‘the first city of that district of Macedonia:’ but in what sense the word πρωτη, or ‘first,’ is here to be taken, admits of some doubt. Paulus Æmilius had divided Macedonia into four districts, and that in which Philippi was situated, was called πρωτη, or the first district. But of this district, Philippi does not appear to be entitled, in any sense, to the name of πρωτη πολις. For if πρωτη be taken in the sense of ‘first in respect to place,’ this title belonged rather to Neapolis, which was the frontier town of Macedonia, towards Thrace, as appears from Acts xvii. 1. And, if taken in the sense of ‘first in respect to rank,’ it belonged rather to Amphipolis, which was the capital of this district of Macedonia, as appears from the following passage Livii History Lib. XLV. 29. [a]Capita regionum, ubi concilia fierent, primae regionis Amphipolin, secundae Thessalonicen], &c. But the difficulty is not so great as it appears to be. For, though Amphipolis was made the capital of the first district of [♠]Macedonia in the time of Paulus Æmilius, and therefore entitled to the name of πρωτη, it is not impossible that in a subsequent age, the preference was given to Philippi. Or even if Amphipolis still continued to be the capital of the district, or the seat of the Roman provincial government, yet the title πρωτη may have been claimed by the city of Philippi, though it were not the very first in point of rank. We meet with many instances of this kind, on the medals of the Greek cities, on which we find that more than one city of the same province, assumed the title of πρωτη. St. Luke, therefore, who spent a long time at Philippi, and was well acquainted with the customs of the place, gave this city the title which it claimed, and which, according to the custom of the Greek cities, was inscribed probably on its coins. Hence it appears that the proposal made by Pierce to alter πρωτη της μεριδος to πρωτη μεριδος, is unnecessary.” (Michaelis’s Introduction, Vol. IV. pp. 152–154. Marsh’s translation.)

[♦] “numerons” replaced with “numerous”

[♠] “Macodonia” replaced with “Macedonia”

“‘Where prayer was wont to be made.’ xvi. 13. This proseuchae signifies an oratory, a place appointed for prayer; in heathen countries, they were erected in sequestered retreats, commonly on the banks of rivers (as here) or on the sea-shore. Josephus has preserved the decree of the city of Halicarnassus, permitting the Jews to erect oratories, part of which is in the following terms:——‘We ordain that the Jews, who are willing, both men and women, do observe the Sabbaths and perform sacred rites according to the Jewish law, and build proseuchae by the seaside, according to the custom of their country; and if any man, whether magistrate or private person, give them any hinderance or disturbance, he shall pay a fine to the city.’ (Josephus, Antiquities, lib. xiv, cap. 10.) (Al. 24.)

“Many commentators, viz. Grotius, Drs. Whitby, Doddridge, and Lardner, agree with Josephus, Philo, and Juvenal, that these places of worship were synonymous with synagogues. But Calmet, Prideaux, and Hammond, contend that they were nearly the same, yet there was a real difference between them; the synagogues were within the cities, while the proseuchae were without, in retired spots, particularly in heathen countries, by the river-side, with galleries or the shades of trees for their only shelter. Prideaux considers them to be of greater antiquity than the synagogues, and that they were formed by the Jews in open courts, that those who lived at a distance from Jerusalem might offer their private worship as in the open courts of the Temple or Tabernacle. In the synagogues, Prideaux observes, public worship was performed, and in the proseuchae private prayer was used to be made. It is highly probable that these proseuchae were the same which are called in the Old Testament ‘high places.’ (Hammond on Luke vi. 12, and Acts xvi. 13–16. Calmet’s Dictionary voce proseucha. Prideaux’s Connec, part i. book iv. sub anno 444. vol. I. pp. 387–390. edition 1720.) (Horne’s Introduction.)

“‘And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira.’ verse 14. It is a remarkable fact, that among the ruins of Thyatira, there is an inscription extant with the words ΟΙ ΒΑΦΕΙΣ, the dyers. Wheler’s Journey into Greece, vol. iii. p. 233. Spon, Miscellanea Eruditae Antiquitates, p. 113; from whence we learn that the art and trade of dyeing purple were carried on in that city.” (Horne’s Introduction.)

Here was fine business for the apostle and his companion! “Come over into Macedonia and help us!” Such were the words of deep agonizing entreaty, in which the beseeching Macedonian had, in the night-vision, summoned the great apostle of the Gentiles to this new field of evangelizing labor. Taking that summons for a divine command, he had obeyed it——had crossed the wide Aegean, and sought in this great city of Macedonia, the occasions and the means of “helping” the idolatrous citizens to a knowledge of the truth as it was in Jesus. Week after week they had been inoffensively toiling in the faithful effort to answer this Macedonian cry for help; and what was the result and the reward of all these exertions? For no crime whatever, and for no reason except that they had rescued a gentle and unfortunate spirit from a most degrading thraldom to demoniac agencies, and to men more vile and wicked than demons, they had been mobbed,——abused by a parcel of mercenary scoundrels,——stripped naked in the forum, and whipped there like thieves,——and at last thrown into the common jail among felons, with every additional injury that could be inflicted by their determined persecutors, being fettered so that they could not repose their sore and exhausted bodies. Was not here enough to try the patience of even an apostle? What man would not have burst out in furious vexation against the beguiling vision which had led them away into a foreign land, among those who were disposed to repay their assiduous “help,” by such treatment? Thus might Paul and Silas have expressed their vexation, if they had indeed been misled by a mere human enthusiasm; but they knew Him in whom they had trusted, and were well assured that He would not deceive them. So far from giving way to despondency and silence, they uplifted their voices in praise! Yes, praise to the God and Father of Jesus Christ, that he had accounted them worthy to suffer thus for the glory of his name. “At midnight Paul and Silas prayed and sang praises to God, and the prisoners heard them.” In the dreary darkness,——inclosed between massive walls, and bound in weighty fetters, their spirits rose in prayer,——doubtless for those persecutors whom they came over to “help,” and not for themselves,——since their souls were already so surely stayed on God. To him they raised their voices in praise, for their own peace and joy in believing. Not yielding like those inspired by the mere impulses of human ambition or wild enthusiasm,——they passed the dreary night, not

“In silence or in fear.——

They shook the depths of the prison gloom,

With their hymns of lofty cheer.——

Amid the storm they sang,”

for He whom they thus invoked did not leave them in their heroic endurance, without a most convincing testimony that their prayers and their songs had come up in remembrance before him. In the midst of their joyous celebration of this persecution, while their wondering fellow-prisoners, waked from their sleep by this very unparalleled noise, were listening in amazement to this manifestation of the manner of spirit with which their new companions were disposed to meet their distresses,——a mighty earthquake shook the city, and heaved the whole prison-walls on their foundations, so that all the firmly barred doors were burst open, and, what was more remarkable, all the chains fell from the prisoners. The jailer waking up amidst this horrible crash, and seeing all the prison-doors open, supposed that the prisoners had all escaped; and knowing how utterly certain would be his ruin if his charge should thus be broken,——in a fit of vexation and despair, he drew his sword, and would have instantly killed himself, had not Paul, seeing through the darkness the frenzied actions of the wretched man, called out to him in a loud voice, clear and distinct amid the dreadful din, “Do thyself no harm, for we are all here.”

Hearing these consolatory words, the jailer called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, saying,——“Sirs! What must I do to be saved?” They replied——“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, with all thy house.” The jailer of course spoke of being saved merely from present danger,——and appalled by the shock of the earthquake, concluded at once that it had some connection with the prayers and songs of the two Jewish prisoners, whom he knew to have been unjustly punished and imprisoned. He supposed therefore, that from those who were the occasion of the awful occurrence, he might best learn the means of escaping its destructive consequences. But his alarmed inquiries were made instrumental in teaching him the way of escape from a peril of far greater magnitude, threatening his spirit with the eternal ruin that would fall at last on all the sinful opposers of the truth. The two imprisoned preachers then proclaimed to him the word of the Lord, and not only to him, but to all that were in his house. No sooner had the jailer thus learned, by their eloquent words, the real character and objects of his prisoners, than he immediately determined to make them all the atonement in his power, for the shameful treatment which they had received from his fellow-citizens. He took them that same hour of the night, and washed their stripes, and was baptized with all his house. Of course he could no longer suffer those who were the authors of his hopes of salvation, to lie any longer among felons; and he immediately brought them out of the jail into his own house, and gave them food, making it a sort of festal [♦]occasion for himself and his whole family, who were all rejoicing with him in the knowledge of the gospel. When it was day the magistrates sent the officers of justice with a verbal order for the release of the two prisoners, of whose abominable usage they were now quite ashamed, after a night’s reflection, without the clamors of a mob to incite them; and perhaps also their repentance may have been promoted by the great earthquake during the night, for which the Greeks and Romans would, as usual, seek some moral occasion, looking on it of course, as a prodigy, expressive of the anger of the gods, who might be supposed perhaps, to be indignant at the flagrant injustice committed against these two friendless strangers. But however satisfactory this atonement might seem to the magistrates, Paul was by no means disposed to let them off so quietly, after using him and Silas in this outrageous manner, in absolute defiance of all forms of law and justice. To this permission thus given him to sneak off quietly, he therefore returned the indignant answer——“They have openly beaten us uncondemned, though we are Roman citizens, and they have cast us into prison; and now do they thrust us out so slily? No, indeed; but let them come themselves and fetch us out.” This was alarming news indeed, to the magistrates. Here they were found guilty of having violated “the sacred privilege of Roman citizenship!”——a privilege which always shielded its possessor from irregular tyranny, and required, throughout the Roman world, that he should never be subjected to punishment without the most open and formal investigation of the charge; a privilege too, whose violation would bring down on them the most remorseless vengeance of the imperial fountain of Roman power. So nothing would do, but they must submit to the uncomfortable necessity of bringing down their magisterial dignity, to the low business of visiting their poor, abused prisoners in the jail, and humbly apologizing for their own cruelty.

[♦] “accasion” replaced with “occasion”

The magistrates of the great city of Philippi therefore came to the prison, and brought out their abused victims, respectfully requesting them to depart out of the city. The two prisoners accordingly consented to retire quietly from the city, without making any more trouble for their persecutors. Going first to the house of their kind hostess, Lydia, they saw the brethren who had believed the gospel there, during their apostolic ministrations, and having exhorted them, bade them farewell, and in company with their two companions, Timothy and Luke, left the city.

Turning southwestwards towards Greece proper, and keeping near the coast, they came next to Amphipolis, a Macedonian city on the river Strymon, near where it flows into the Strymonic gulf; but making no stay that is mentioned, they continued their journey in the same direction to Apollonia, an inland town on the river Chabrius, in the peninsula of Chalcidice; whence turning northwest they came next to Thessalonica, a large city at the head of the great Thermaic gulf. In this place was a synagogue of the Jews,——the first that they had found in their European travels; for in this thriving commercial place the Jews were, and always have been, in such large numbers, that they were abundantly able to keep their own house of worship and religious instruction, and had independence enough, as well as regard for the institutions of their fathers, to attend in large numbers weekly at this sanctuary. So zealous and successful indeed had they been in their devotion to their religion, that they had drawn into a profession of the faith of the God of Israel, a vast number of Greeks who attended worship with them; for such was the superior purity of the religion of the Jews, which regarded the one only living God, who was to be worshiped not in the debasing forms of statues, but in spirit and truth, that almost every place throughout the regions of Grecian civilization, in which the Jews had planted their little commercial settlements, and reared the houses of religious instruction, showed abundance of such instances as this, in which the bright intellectual spirit of the Greek readily appreciated the exalted character and the holy truth of the faith owned by the sons of Israel, and felt at once how far more suited to the conceptions of Hellenic genius was such a religion, than the degrading polytheism which the philosophy and poetry of a thousand years had striven in vain to redeem from its inherent absurdities. Among these intelligent but mixed congregations, Paul and his companions entered, and taking advantage of the freedom of religious discourse allowed to all by the order of a Jewish synagogue, they on three successive sabbaths reasoned with them out of the scriptures, on that great and all-absorbing point in the original apostolic theology,——that the Christ, the Messiah, so generally understood to be distinctly foretold in the Hebrew scriptures, was always described as destined to undergo great sufferings during his earthly career, and after a death of shame, was to rise from the grave;——and at last concluded with the crowning doctrine——“This Jesus, whom I preach to you, is this Christ.”

This glorious annunciation of a new and spiritual dispensation, was at once well received by a vast majority of the hearers——but more especially by the Greeks, whose conceptions of the religion which they had espoused, were far more rational and exalted than even the notions of the original Israelites, whose common ideas of a Redeemer being connected and mixed up, as their whole faith was, so much with what was merely national and patriotic in their feelings, had led them to disregard the necessarily spiritual nature of the new revelation expected, and had caused them almost universally to image the Messiah as a mere Jewish conqueror, who was to aim mainly at the restoration of the ancient dominion of long-humbled Judah. Therefore, while the Greeks readily and joyfully accepted this glorious completion of the faith whose beginnings they had learned under the old covenant,——the Jews for the most part scornfully rejected the revelation which presented to them as their Messiah, “a man of sorrows,”——a Galilean,——a Nazarene,——one without pomp or power; the grand achievment of whose earthly career was that most ignominious death on the cross. No: this was not the Messiah for whom they looked and longed, as the glorious restorer of Israel, and the bloody conqueror of the Gentiles; and it was therefore with the greatest indignation that they saw the great majority of those converts from heathenism, whom they had made with so much pains, now wholly carried away with the humbling doctrines of these new teachers. Thus “moved with envy,” the unbelieving Jews resorted to their usual expedient of stirring up a mob; and accordingly, certain low fellows of the baser sort among them, gathered a gang, and set the whole city on an uproar,——an effect which might seem surprising, from a cause apparently so trifling and inadequate, did not every month’s observation on similar occurrences, among people that call themselves the most enlightened and free on the globe, suffice to show every reader, that to “set a whole city in an uproar,” is the easiest thing in the world, and one more often done by “certain lewd fellows of the baser sort,” about the merest trifle, than in any other way. And here then again, is another of those fac-simile exhibitions of true human nature, with which the honest and self-evident story of Luke abounds; and in this particular instance what makes him so beautifully graphical and natural in his description of this manifestation of public opinion, is the fact that he himself was a spectator of the whole proceedings at Thessalonica,——and therefore gives an eye-witness story. The mob being thus gathered, immediately made a desperate assault on the house of Jason, where Paul and Silas were known to lodge, and sought to drag them out to the people. (One would think that this was a mere prophetic account of perfectly similar occurrences, that pass every month under the noses of modern Europeans.) Paul and Silas, however, had been wise enough to make off at the first alarm, and had found some place of concealment, beyond the reach of the mob. Provoked at not obtaining the prime object of the attack, the rascals then seized Jason and other Christians whom they found there, and dragged them before the magistrates, crying——“These that have turned the world upside down, have come hither also,——whom Jason has entertained; and they all do contrary to the statutes of Caesar, saying that there is another king,——one Jesus.” This communication of the mode in which the great mundane inversion had been effected by these four travelers and their new converts, excited no small commotion among all the inhabitants; for it amounted to a distinct charge of a treasonable conspiracy against the Roman government, and could not fail to bring down the most disagreeable consequences on the city, if it was made known, even though it should amount to nothing. However, the whole proceedings against Jason and his friends were conducted with a moderation truly commendable, and far above any mob-action in these enlightened times; for without any personal injury, they simply satisfied themselves with taking security of Jason and his companions, that they should keep the peace, and attempt nothing treasonable, and then quietly let them go. Who would expect any modern European mob to release their victims in this moderate and reasonable way?

“Amphipolis is a city of Macedonia, on the confines of Thrace, called so, as Thucydides informs us, (lib. iv. p. 321,) because the rivers encompassed it. Suidas and others place it in Thracia, giving it the name of the Nine Ways. It had the name likewise of Chrysopolis.” (Wells, Whitby.)

“Apollonia, a city of Macedonia, lying between Amphipolis and Thessalonica. Geographers affirm that there were fourteen cities, and two islands of that name. Stephanus reckons twenty-five.” (Whitby.)

Thessalonica, a large and populous city and sea-port of Macedonia, the capital of the four districts into which the Romans divided that country, after its conquest by Paulus Æmilius. It was situated on the Thermian Bay, and was anciently called Thermae; but, being rebuilt by Philip, the father of Alexander, after his victory over the Thessalians, it then received the name of Thessalonica.

“At the time of writing the Epistle to the Thessalonians, Thessalonica was the residence of the Proconsul who governed the province of Macedonia, and of the Quaestor who had the charge of the imperial revenues. Besides being the seat of government, this port carried on an extensive commerce, which caused a great influx of strangers from all quarters; so that Thessalonica was remarkable for the number, wealth, and learning of its inhabitants. The Jews were extremely numerous here. The modern name of this place is Salonichi; it is the chief port of modern Greece, and has a population of sixty thousand persons, twelve thousand of whom are Jews. According to Dr. Clarke, this place is the same now as it was then; a set of turbulent Jews constituted a very considerable part of its population; and when St. Paul came here from Philippi to preach the gospel to the Thessalonians, the Jews were numerous enough to ‘set all the city in an uproar.’” (Williams.)

After this specimen of popular excitement, it was too manifest that nothing could be done just then at Thessalonica by the apostolic ministers of Christ, and that very night therefore the brethren sent off Paul and Silas in the darkness, to Beroea, a city also in Macedonia, about fifty miles from Thessalonica, exactly west, being on the same parallel of latitude, standing on the south bank of the river Astroeus. Arriving there, they went into the synagogue of the Jews, who were here for the most part of a much better character than the mean Jews of the great trading city of Thessalonica, and being more independent and spiritual in their religious notions, were also much better prepared to appreciate the spiritual doctrines preached by Paul and Silas. They listened respectfully to the new preachers, and when the usual references were made to the standard passages in the Old Testament, universally supposed to describe the Messiah, they diligently examined the passages for themselves, and studied out their correspondence with the events in the life of Jesus, which were mentioned by his preachers as perfectly parallel with these distinct prophecies. The natural result of this nobly candid and rational examination of this great question was, that many of these fair-minded and considerate Jews of Beroea professed their perfect conviction that Jesus was the Christ, and had by the actions of his life fully answered and completed the prophetic types of the Messiah. Here, too, as in Thessalonica, the Greek proselytes to Judaism readily and heartily accepted the doctrines of Jesus. But the gospel messengers were not long allowed the enjoyment of this fine field of apostolic enterprise; for their spiteful foes in Thessalonica, hearing how things were going on in Beroea, took the pains and trouble to journey all the way to that place, for the express purpose of hunting out the preachers of Jesus by a new mob: and in this they were so successful, that the brethren, according to the established rules of Christian expediency, immediately sent away Paul to the south, because he seemed to be the grand object of the persecution; but Silas and Timothy being less obnoxious, still remained in Beroea.

“Beroea was a city of Macedonia; a great and populous city. Lucian de Asino, p. 639. D.” (Whitby.) It was situated to the west of Thessalonica, and not “south,” as Wells absurdly says, “almost directly on the way to Athens.”

HIS VISIT TO ATHENS.

Paul, thus obeying the command given by Jesus in his first charge to the original twelve, went on under the guidance of his Beroean brethren, according to his own request, by sea, to Athens, where he parted from them, giving them charge to tell Silas and Timothy to come on after him, as soon as their commission in Macedonia would allow. He then went about Athens, occupying the interval while he waited for them, in observations upon that most glorious of all earthly seats of art and taste. As he wandered on, an unheeded stranger, among the still splendid and beautiful, though then half-decaying works, which the combined devotion, pride and patriotism of the ancient Athenians had raised to their gods, their country, and its heroes,——in the beautifully picturesque yet simple expression of the apostolic historian, “Paul saw the city wholly given to idolatry.” How many splendid associations does it call up before the mental eye of the classical scholar who reads it? As the apostle wandered along among these thousand works of art, still so hallowed in the fond regard of the scholar, the antiquarian, the man of taste, the poet, and the patriot, his spirit was moved within him, when he every where saw how the whole city was given to idolatry. Not a spot but had its altar; every grove was consecrated to its peculiar nymphs, its Dryads and its Fauns; every stream and fountain had the votive marble for its own bright Naiad;——along the plain rose the splendid colonnades of the yet mighty temples of Jupiter, and all the Olympian gods; and above all, on the high Acropolis, the noble Parthenon rose over the glorious city, proclaiming to the eye of the distant traveler, the honors of the virgin goddess of wisdom, of taste and philosophic virtue, whose name crowned the city, of which she, was throughout all the reign of Polytheism, the guardian deity.

These splendid but mournful testimonies of the misplaced energies of that inborn spirit of devotion, which, all over the world in all times, moves the heart of man to the worship of that Eternal power of whose existence he is ever conscious, touched the spirit of Paul with other emotions than those of delight and admiration. The eye of the citizen of classical and splendid Tarsus, was not indeed blind to the beauties of these works of art, whose fame was spread throughout the civilized world, and with whose historic and poetic glories his eye and ear had long been made familiar; but over them all was cast a moral and spiritual gloom which darkened all these high and rich remembrances, otherwise so bright. Under the impulse of such feelings, he immediately sought occasion to make an attack on this dominant spirit of idolatry. He accordingly, in his usual theater of exertion,——the Jewish synagogue,——freely made known the new revelation of the truth in Jesus, both to the Jews, and to those Gentiles who reverenced the God of Israel, and listened to religious instruction in the Jewish house of worship. With such effect did he proclaim the truth, and with such fervid, striking oratory, that the Athenians, always admirers and cultivators of eloquence, soon had their attention very generally drawn to the foreign teacher, who was publishing these very extraordinary doctrines, in a style of eloquence so peculiar and irregular. The consequence was, that his audiences were soon extended beyond the regular attendants on the Jewish synagogue worship, and many of the philosophic sages of the Athenian schools sat listening to the apostle of Jesus. They soon undertook to encounter him in argument; and Paul now resorting to that most classic ground, the Athenian forum, or Agora, was not slow to meet them. On the spot where Socrates once led the minds of his admiring hearers to the noble conceptions of moral truth, Paul now stood uttering to unaccustomed ears, the far more noble conceptions of a divine truth, that as far outwent the moral philosophy of “Athena’s wisest son,” as did the life, and death, and triumphs of the crucified Son of Man, the course and fate of the hemlock-drinker. Greatly surprised were his philosophical hearers, at these very remarkable doctrines, before unheard of in Greece, and various were the opinions and comments of the puzzled sages. Some of those of the Epicurean and Stoic schools, more particularly, had their pride and scorn quite moved at the seeming presumption of this fluent speaker, who without diffidence or doubt uttered his strange doctrines, though characterized by a style full of irregularities, and a dialect remarkably distinguished by barbarous provincialisms, and scornfully asked, “What does this rattling fellow mean?” Others, observing that he claimed such divine honors for Jesus, the founder of his faith, remarked, that “he seemed to be a preacher of foreign deities.” At last, determined to have their difficulties resolved by the very highest authority, they took him before the very ancient and venerable court of the Areopagus, which was the supreme council in all matters that concerned religion. Here they invited him to make a full communication of the distinctive articles of his new faith, because they felt an honest desire to have the particulars of a subject never before introduced to their notice; and a vast concourse stood by to hear that grand object of life to the news-hunting Athenians,——“A NEW THING.”

“With regard to the application of babbler, Eustathius gives two senses of the word σπερμολόγος. 1. The Attics called those σπερμολόγοι who conversed in the market, and places of merchandise. (In Odys. B. ad finem.) And Paul was disputing with those he met in the market-place. 2. It is used of those who, from some false opinions, boasted unreasonably of their learning. (Idem.) Œcumenius says, a little bird that gathered up the seeds scattered in the market-place, was called σπερμολόγος; in this etymology, Suidas, Phavorinus, the scholiast upon Aristophanes de Avibus, p. 569, and almost all grammarians agree. (Cave’s Lives of the Apostles.) (Whitby’s Annotations.)

“18. σπερμολόγος. This word is properly used of those little insignificant birds which support a precarious existence by picking up seeds scattered by the sower, or left above ground after the soil has been harrowed. See Maximus of Tyre, Dissertations, 13, p. 133., Harpocrates, Aristophanes Av. 232., and the Scholiast, and Plutarch, T. 5, 50, edited by Reiske. It was metaphorically applied also to paupers who prowled about the market place, and lived by picking up any thing which might be dropped by buyers and sellers; and likewise to persons who gleaned in the corn fields. See Eustathius on Homer’s Odyssey ε 241. Hence it was at length applied to all persons of mean condition, who, as we say, “live on their wits.” Thus it is explained by Harpocrates εὐτελὴς, mean and contemptible. And so Philo 1021 c. χρησάμενος——δούλῳ σπερμολόγῳ περιτρίμματι.” (Bloomfield’s Annotations, Acts xvii. 18.)

“The Areopagus was a place in Athens, where the senate usually assembled and took its name (as some think) from Ἄρης which is the same as Mars, the god of war, who was the first person tried here, for having killed Apollo’s son. Others think that, because ἄρης sometimes signifies fighting, murder, or violence of any kind, and that παγὸς is properly a rock, or rising hill, it therefore seems to denote a court situated upon an eminence, (as the Areopagus was,) where causes of murder, &c. were tried. This court at present is out of the city, but in former times it stood almost in the middle of it. Its foundations, which are still standing, are built with square stones of prodigious size, in the form of a semi-circle, and support a terrace or platform, of about a hundred and forty paces, which was the court where this senate was held. In the midst of it, there was a tribunal cut in a rock, and all about were seats also of stone, where the senate heard causes in the open air, without any covering, and (as some say) in the night time, that they might not be moved to compassion at the sight of any criminal that was brought before them. This judicature was held in such high esteem for its uprightness, that when the Roman proconsuls ruled there, it was a very common thing for them to refer difficult causes to the judgment of the Areopagites. After the loss of their liberty, however, the authority of the senate declined, so that in the apostles’ times, the Areopagus was not so much a court of judicature as a common rendezvous, where all curious and inquisitive persons, who spent their time in nothing else, but either in hearing or telling some new thing, were accustomed to meet, Acts xvii. 21. Notwithstanding, they appeared still to have retained the privilege of canonizing all gods that were allowed public worship; and therefore St. Paul was brought before them as an assertor and preacher of a Deity, whom they had not yet admitted among them. It does not appear that he was brought before them as a criminal, but merely as a man who had a new worship to propose to a people religious above all others, but who took care that no strange worship should be received on a footing of a tolerated religion, till it had the approbation of a court appointed to judge such matters. The address of the court to St. Paul, ‘May we know what this doctrine is whereof thou speakest?’ implies rather a request to a teacher, than an interrogatory to a criminal; and accordingly his reply has not the least air of an apology, suiting a person accused, but is one continued information of important truths, such as it became a teacher or benefactor, rather than a person arraigned for crime, to give. He was therefore neither acquitted nor condemned, and dismissed as a man coram non judice. We are indeed told, that when they heard of ‘the resurrection of the dead,’ some mocked, and others said, ‘We will hear thee again of this matter,’ putting off the audience to an indefinite time; so that nothing was left him but to depart.” (Calmet’s Commentary. Beausobre’s and Hammond’s Annotations, and Warburton’s Divine Legation.)

The Areopagus, or Mars Hill; with the Temple of Theseus, Athens.
Acts xvii. 22.

“That Athens was wholly enslaved to idolatry, has been abundantly proved by our philological illustrators, especially the indefatigable Wetstein, from Pausanias Attic. 1, 24: Strabo 10. p. 472, c: Lucian, t. 1. Prometheus p. 180: Livy 45, 27. So also Pausanias in Attic. c. 18, 24. (cited by Pearce and Doddridge,) who tells us, that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece; and Petronius Satyricon c. 17, who humorously says, ‘It was easier to find a god than a man there.’” (Bloomfield Annotations.)

“καὶ ἐν τῆ ἀγορᾶ. Of the market-places at Athens, of which there were many, the most celebrated were the Old and the New Forum. The former was in the Ceramicus, a very ample space, part within, and part without the city. See Meursius, [a]dissertatione de Ceramico Gemino], § 46. and Potter’s Archaeology 1, 8. p. 30. The latter was outside of the Ceramicus, in a place called Eretria. See Meursius, Ath. Attic. l. 1. c. 6. And this seems to be the one here meant. For no forum, except the Ceramicus and the Eretriacum, was called, absolutely, ἄγορα, but had a name to denote which was meant, as Areopagiticum, Hippodamium, Piraeum, &c. In process of time, and at the period when Paul was at Athens, the forum was transferred from the Ceramicus into the Eretria; a change which, indeed, had been introduced in the time of Augustus; and that this was the most frequented part of the city, we learn from Strabo 10. p. 447. Besides, the Eretriac forum was situated before the στοὰ, or portico, in which the Stoics, of whom mention is just after made, used to hold their public discourses. It was moreover called κύκλος, from its round form.”

“Ἄρειον πάγον, Mars’ Hill. Πάγος signifies properly a high situation. This was a hill opposite to that of the citadel on the west; as we learn from Herodias 8, 52. [See the passages produced supra, to which I add Livy 26, 44. [a]Tumulum quem Mercurii vocant.] Editor.] It was so called, either because it had been consecrated to Mars (as the Campus Martius at Rome,) or because (as [♦]Pausanias relates, Att. C. 28,) Mars, when he had slain Halyrrothius, son of Neptune, was the first who there pleaded a capital cause, which took place before the twelve gods. The judges used to sit by night, and sub dio; and whatever was done was kept very secret. [whence the proverb Ἀρεοπαγίτου σιωπηλότερος, to which may be compared ours, ‘as grave as a Judge.’ Editor.] They gave their judgment, not viva voce, but in writing. Nor were any admitted into the number of Areopagists but persons of noble birth, of unspotted morality, and eminent for justice and equity. See more in Meursius de Areopago.” (Kuinoel.) (Bloomfield Annotations.)

[♦] “Pausanius” replaced with “Pausanias”

Paul taking his stand there, in that splendid scene, uttered in a bold tone and in his noblest style, the great truths which he was divinely consecrated to reveal. Never yet had Athens, in her most glorious state, heard a discourse which, for solemn beauty and lofty eloquence, could equal this brief declaration of the providence of God in the religion of his creatures. Never did the world see an orator in a sublimer scene, or in one that could awaken higher emotions in those who heard, or him who spoke. He stood on the hill of Mars, with Athens beneath and around him, and the mighty Acropolis rising with its “tiara of proud towers,” walls and temples, on the west,——bounding and crowning the view in that direction;——to the north-east lay the forum, the late scene of his discussions, and beyond lay the philosophic Academia, around and through which rolled the flowery Cephisus. Before him sat the most august and ancient court in the Grecian world, waiting for the revelation of his solemn commission respecting the new deities which he was expected to propose as an addition to their polytheistic list;——around him were the sages of the Athenian schools, listening in grave but curious attention, for the new things which the eastern stranger had brought to their ears. The apostle raised his eyes to all the monuments of Athenian devotion which met the view on every side. Before him on the high Acropolis was the mighty temple of the Athenian Minerva; on the plain beyond was the splendid shrine of the Olympian Jove; on his right was the temple of Theseus, the deified ancient king of Attica, who laid the first foundation of her glories; and near were the new piles which the later Grecian adulation had consecrated to the worship of her foreign conquerors——to the deified Caesars. Beginning in that tone of dignified politeness, which always characterized his address towards the great ones of earth, he won their hearts and their attention by a courteously complimentary allusion to the devout though misguided zeal, whose solid tokens everywhere surrounded him. “Ye men of Athens! I see in all places that you are VERY RELIGIOUS. For passing along and gazing at the shrines of your devotion, I found an altar on which was written,——‘To the unknown God;’——Him therefore, whom, not knowing, you worship, I preach to you.” The rest of this splendid, though brief discourse, need not be repeated, because it is given with tolerable fidelity in the common English translation; but it deserves notice how readily and completely, on all occasions, Paul accommodated himself to the circumstances of his hearers. His style on this occasion is remarkably protracted and rounded in its periods, highly cumulative in structure, and harmonious in its almost rhythmical flow;——the whole bearing the character which was best suited to the fancy and fashion of the Athenians,——though still very decidedly marked by the peculiarities of his eastern origin. Here too, he gave them a favorable impression of his knowledge of the Grecian classics, by his apt and happy quotation from Aratus, the philosophical poet of his native province, Cilicia. “For we also are his offspring.”

Very religious.——This is unquestionably the just meaning of xvii. 22. See Bloomfield and all the standard commentators. “Too superstitions” is insulting.

“‘To the Unknown God.’ (xvii. 23.)——It is very evident from the testimony of Laertius, that the Athenians had altars in their public places, inscribed to unknown gods or demons. He informs us, that when Athens was visited with a great plague, the inhabitants invited Epimenides the philosopher, to lustrate their city. The method adopted by him was to carry several sheep to the Areopagus; whence they were left to wander as they pleased, under the observation of persons sent to attend them. As each sheep lay down, it was sacrificed on the spot to the propitious god; (In vita Epimenides lib. xi.) and as the Athenians were ignorant of what god was propitious, they erected an altar with this inscription, [♦]ΘΕΟΙΣ ΑΣΙΑΣ, ΚΑΙ ΕΥΡΩΠΗΣ, ΚΑΙ ΛΙΒΗΥΣ, ΘΕΩ ΑΓΝΩΣΤΩ ΚΑΙ ΞΕΝΩ:——To the gods of Asia, Europe, and Africa, to the strange and unknown god.

[♦] “AΙΒΗΥΣ” replaced with “ΛΙΒΗΥΣ” and
“KΛI” replaced with “ΚΑΙ”

“On the architrave of a Doric portico at Athens, which was standing when that city was visited about sixty years since, by Dr. Chandler and Mr. Stuart, is a Greek inscription to the following purport:——‘The people’ [of Athens have erected this fabric] ‘with the donations to Minerva Archegetia,’ [or the conductress,] ‘by the god Caius Julius Caesar and his son the god Augustus, when Nicias was Archon.’ Over the middle of the pediment was a statue of Lucius Caesar, with this inscription:——‘The people’ [honor] ‘Lucius Caesar, the son of the Emperor Augustus Caesar, the son of the god.’ There was also a statue to Julia, the daughter to Augustus, and the mother of Lucius, thus inscribed:——‘The Senate of the Areopagus, and the Senate of the Six Hundred’ [dedicate this statue to] ‘the goddess Julia, Augusta, Provident.’ These public memorials supply an additional proof of the correctness of Paul’s observations on the Athenians, that they were too much addicted to the adoption of objects for worship and devotion.” (Hammond’s Annotations of Cave’s Lives of the Apostles, Horne’s Introduction.)

As he concluded however, with the solemn declaration of the great foundation-truth of Christianity,——that God had raised Jesus from the dead,——there was a very general burst of contempt from the more scornful portion of his audience, at the idea of anything so utterly against all human probability. Of the immortality of the soul, the divinest of their own philosophers had reasoned,——and it was by most of the Athenian sects, considered on the whole, tolerably well established; but the notion of the actual revivification of the perished body,——the recall of the scattered dust and ashes, to the same breathing, moving, acting, thinking form, which for ages had ceased to be,——all amounted to a degree of improbable absurdity,——that not the wildest Grecian speculator had ever dreamed of. So the proud Epicureans and Stoics turned sneeringly away from the barbarian stranger who had come so far to try their credulity with such a tale; and thus they for ever lost the opportunity to learn from this new-opened fountain of truth, a wisdom that the long researches of all the Athenian schools had never reached and could never reach, without the light of this truly divine eastern source, which they now so thoughtlessly scorned. But there were some, more considerate, among the hearers of the apostle, who had learned that it is the most decided characteristic of a true philosopher, to reject nothing at first sight or hearing, though it may happen to be contrary to his own personal experience and learning; and these, weighing the matter with respectful doubt, told Paul——“We will hear thee again about this.” Without any further attempt to unfold the truth at that time, Paul departed from the Areopagus, and no more uplifted his voice on the high places of Athens, in testimony of that solemn revelation of the Son of Man from the dead,——the conviction of whose truth, in spite of all philosophic sneers, was destined to oversweep the whole of that world which they knew, and a new one beyond it, and to exalt the name of that despised wanderer to a fame compared with which that of Socrates should be small. Paul was however afterwards visited by several of those who heard him before the Areopagus; and after a free, conversational discussion of the whole subject, and a more familiar exhibition of the evidences of his remarkable assertions, professed their satisfaction with the arguments, and believed. Among these, even one of the judges of the august Areopagus owned himself a disciple of Jesus. Besides him is mentioned a woman named Damaris; and others not specified, are said to have believed.

“‘Dionysius the Areopagite.’ Acts xvii. 34.——Dionysius is said to have been bred at Athens in all the arts and sciences: at the age of twenty-five he went into Egypt to learn astronomy. At the time of our Savior’s death he was at Heliopolis, where, observing the darkness that attended the passion, he cried out thus:——‘That certainly, at that time, either God himself suffered, or was much concerned for somebody that did.’ Returning to Athens he became one of the senators of the Areopagus; he was converted by St. Paul, and by him appointed bishop of Athens. Having labored and suffered much for the holy cause, he became a martyr to the faith, being burnt to death at Athens, in the 93d year of Christ.” (Cave’s Lives of the Apostles. Stanhope on Epistles and Gospels. Calmet’s Dictionary.)

From the grave manner in which this story is told, the reader would naturally suppose that these great writers had some authority for these incidents; but in reality, everything that concerns Dionysius the Areopagite, is utterly unknown; and not one of these impudent inventions can be traced back further than the sixth century.

After this tolerably hopeful beginning of the gospel in Athens, Paul left that city, and went southwestward to Corinth, then the most splendid and flourishing city of all Greece, and the capital of the Roman province of Achaia. It was famous, beyond all the cities of the world, for its luxury and refinement,——and the name of “Corinthian” had, long before the time of Paul, gone forth as a proverbial expression for what was splendid in art, brilliant in invention, and elegant in vice.

Here first arose that sumptuous order of architecture that still perpetuates the proverbial elegance of the splendid city of its birth, and the gorgeously beautiful style of the rich Corinthian column, “waving its wanton wreath,”——may be taken as an aptly expressive emblem of the general moral and internal, as well as external characteristics of this last home of true Grecian art. Here longest tarried the taste, art and refinement, which so eminently marked the first glories of Greece, and when the triumphs of that ancient excellence were beginning to grow dim in its brighter early seats in Attica and in Ionian Asia, they flashed out with a most dazzling beauty in the splendid city of the Isthmus,——but alas!——in a splendor that was indeed only a passing flash,——a last brilliant gleam from this glorious spot, before the lamp of Hellenic glory in art, went out forever. In the day of the apostle’s visit however, it was in its most “high and palmy state,”——the queen of the Grecian world. It was glorious too, in the dearest recollections of the patriotic history of Greece; for here was the center of that last brilliant Achaian confederacy, which was cherished by the noble spirits of Aratus and Philopoemen; and here too was made the last stand against the all-crushing advance of the legions of Rome: and when it fell at last before that resistless conquering movement,——“great was the fall of it.” The burning of Corinth by Mummius, (B. C. 144, the year of the fall of Carthage,) is infamous above all the most barbarous acts of Roman conquest, for its melancholy destruction of the works of ancient art, with which it then abounded. But from the ashes of this mournful ruin, it rose soon after, under the splendid patronage of Roman dominion, to a new splendor, that equalled, or perhaps outwent the glories of its former perfection, which had been ripening from the day when, as recorded by old Homer, in the freshness of its early power, it sent forth its noble armaments to the siege of Troy, or set afloat the earliest warlike navy in the world, or was made, through a long course of centuries, the center of the most brilliant of Grecian festivals, in the celebration of the Isthmian games before its walls. The Roman conquerors, as if anxious to make to this ancient seat of Grecian splendor, a full atonement for the barbarous ruin with which they had overwhelmed it, now showered on it all the honors and favors in their power. It was rebuilt as a Roman colony,——endowed by the munificence of senates, consuls, and emperors, and made the capital of the Roman province of Achaia, until the dismemberment of the empire. Shining in its gaudy fetters, it became what it has been described to be in the apostolic age, and was then beyond all doubt the greatest Grecian city in Europe, if not in the world. Athens was then mouldering in more than incipient decay——“the ghost of its former self;” for even Cicero, long before this, describes it as presenting everywhere spectacles of the most lamentable ruin and decline; but Corinth was in the highth of its glory,——its luxury,——its vice,——its heathen wickedness,——and may therefore be justly esteemed the most important scene of labor into which apostolic enterprise had ever yet made its way, and to have been well worthy of the attention which it ever after received from him, to the very last of his life, being made the occasion and object of a larger and a more splendid portion of his epistolary labors, than all with which he ever favored any other place in the world; nor can this protracted notice of its condition and character be justly blamed for its intrusion on this hurried narrative.

“Corinth.——There is scarcely any one of the seats of ancient magnificence and luxury, that calls up more vivid and powerful associations, than are awakened by the name of this once opulent and powerful city. Corinth, ‘the prow and stern of Greece,’ the emporium of its commerce, the key and bulwark of the Peloponnesus, was proverbial for its wealth as early as the time of Homer. Its situation was so advantageous for the inexperienced navigation of early times, that it became of necessity the center of trade. The first naval battle on record was fought between Corinth and its colony Corcyra, about 657 B. C. ‘Syracuse, the ornament of Sicily, Corcyra, some time sovran of the seas, Ambracia in Epirus, and several other cities more or less flourishing, owe their origin to Corinth.’ (Travels of [♦]Anacharsis, vol. III. c. 37.) Thucydides states, that the Corinthian ship-builders first produced galleys with three benches of oars. The circumnavigation of the peninsula was tedious and uncertain to a proverb; while at the Isthmus, not only their cargoes, but, if requisite, the smaller vessels might be transported from sea to sea. By its port of Cenchreae, it received the rich merchandise of Asia, and by that of Lechaeum, it maintained intercourse with Italy and Sicily. The Isthmian Games, by the concourse of people which they attracted at their celebration, contributed not a little to its immense opulence; and the prodigality of its merchants rendered the place so expensive, that it became a saying, ‘It is not for every one to go to Corinth.’ Even after its barbarous destruction by the Romans, it must have been an extremely magnificent city. Pausanias mentions in and near the city, a theater, an odeum, a stadium, and sixteen temples. That of Venus possessed above a thousand female slaves. ‘The women of Corinth are distinguished by their beauty; the men by their love of gain and pleasure. They ruin their health by convivial debauches, and love with them is only licentious passion. Venus is their principal deity.... The Corinthians, who performed such illustrious acts of valor in the Persian war, becoming enervated by pleasure, sunk under the yoke of the Argives; were obliged alternately to solicit the protection of the Lacedaemonians, the Athenians, and the Thebans; and are at length reduced to be only the wealthiest, the most effeminate, and the weakest state in Greece.’” (Anacharsis.) (Modern Traveler, pp. 160, 161.)

[♦] “Anarchasis” replaced with “Anacharsis”

The Hebrew stranger, entering without despondency, this new scene of labor, passed on unnoticed, and looking about for those with whom he might be bold to communicate, on the score of national and religious sympathies, he found among those who like himself were strangers, a Jew, by name Aquilas, who with his wife Priscilla had lately arrived from Italy, whence they had just been driven by a vexatious decree of Claudius Caesar, which, on some groundless accusation, ordered all the Jews to depart from Rome. Aquilas, though lately a resident in Italy, was originally from Pontus in the northern part of Asia Minor, not very far from Paul’s native province; and this proximity of origin joined to another circumstance arising out of it, drew the strangers together, in this foreign city. In Pontus even at this day is carried on that same famous manufacture of camlet articles for which Cilicia was also distinguished and proverbial, and it is therefore perfectly reasonable to suppose that in that age also, this business was common in the same region, because the variety of goat which produces the material, has always been confined within those limits. Being of the same trade, then, and both of them friendless strangers, seeking employment and support, Paul and Aquilas fell into one another’s company and acquaintance, and getting work at the same time, they seem to have set up a kind of partnership in their trade, living together, and working in the same way, from day to day. This, of course, gave constant opportunity for the freest communication on all subjects of conversation; and Aquila would not be long in finding out the great object, which had led Paul away from his country and friends, to a place where his necessities drove him to the laborious exercise of an occupation, which a person of his rank and character could not originally have acquired with any intention of gaining his livelihood thereby. That this was the sole motive of his present application to his tedious business, is abundantly testified in the epistles, which he afterwards wrote to this same place; for he expressly says, that he “was chargeable to no man,” but “labored with his own hands.” Yet the diligent pursuit of this laborious avocation, did not prevent him from appearing on the sabbath, in the synagogue, as a teacher of divine things; nor would the noble principles of Jewish education permit any man to despise the stranger on account of his necessitous and apparently humble circumstances. His weekly ministry was therefore pursued without hindrance, and with success; for “he persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.” Among those who received the most eminent advantage from his apostolic labors, was his fellow-workman Aquilas, who with his wife Priscilla, here imbibed such a portion of Christian knowledge, as ever after made both him and her, highly useful as teachers of the new faith, to which they were at this time converted. It would seem, however, that Paul did not, during the first part of his ministrations, very openly and energetically proclaim the grand doctrine of the faith; for it was not till after the arrival of Silas and Timothy from Macedonia, that he “pressed on in the word, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah.” As had usually been the case, whenever he had proclaimed this solemn truth to his own countrymen, he was met by the Corinthian Jews, for the most part, with a most determined and scornful opposition; so that renouncing their fellowship in the expressive gesture of an Oriental,——shaking his raiment,——he declared——“Your blood be on your own heads:——I am clean. Henceforth, I will go to the Gentiles.” Leaving their company, he then went into the house of a religious friend, close to the synagogue, and there took up his abode. But not all the Jews were involved in the condemnation of this rejection. On the contrary, one of the most eminent men among them, Crispus, either then or formerly the ruling elder of the synagogue, professed the faith of Jesus, notwithstanding its unpopularity. Along with him his whole family were baptized, and many other Corinthians received the word in the same manner. In addition to these nobly encouraging results of his devoted labors, his ardor in the cause of Jesus received a new impulse from a remarkable dream, in which the Lord appeared to him, uttering these words of high consolation,——“Fear not, but speak, and hold not thy peace; for I am with thee, and no one shall hurt thee. I have many people in this city.” Under the combined influence of both natural and supernatural encouragements, he therefore remained zealously laboring in Corinth, and made that city his residence, as Luke very particularly records, for a year and six months.

“xviii. 5. συνείχετο τῳ λόγω, &c. The common reading is πνεύματι. Now since συννέχεσθαι, among other significations, denotes angi, maerore corripi, (see Luke [♦]xii. 50, and the note on Matthew ♦iv. 24,) many Commentators, as Hammond, Mill, and Wolf, explain, “[a]angebatur Paulus animo, dum docebat Judaeos, Jesum esse Messiam];” viz. “since he could produce no effect among them.” And they compare verse 6. But this interpretation is at variance with the context.

[♦] “12” replaced with “xii” and
“4” replaced with “iv” for consistency

“Now this verb also signifies to incite, urge; as in 2 Corinthians v. 14. Hence Beza, Pricaeus, and others, explain: ‘[a]intus et apud se aestuebat prae zeli ardore;]’ which interpretation I should admit, if there were not reason to suppose, from the authority of MSS. and Versions, that the true reading, (though the more difficult one,) is λύγῳ, of which the best interpretation, and that most suitable to the context, is the one found in the Vulgate ‘[a]instabat verbo].’ For συνέχεσθαι denotes also to be held, occupied by anything; as in Sappho 17, 20. Herodotus 1, 17, 22. Aelian, Varia Historia, 14, 22. This [♦]signification of the word being admitted, the sense will be: ‘When they had approached whom Paul (who knew that combined strength is most efficacious) had expected as his assistants in promulgating the Christian doctrine, and of whom, in so large and populous a city there was need, then he applied himself closely to the work of teaching.’ Kuinoel. (Bloomfield’s Annotations, p. 593.)

[♦] “significaiion” replaced with “signification”

HIS EPISTLES WRITTEN FROM CORINTH.

The period of his residence in this city is made highly interesting and important in the history of the sacred canon, by the circumstance that here he wrote some of the first of those epistles to his various missionary charges, which constitute the most controverted and the most doctrinal portion of the New Testament. In treating of these writings, in the course of the narrative of his life, the very contracted limits now left to his biographer, will make it necessary to be much more brief in his literary history, than in that of those other apostles, whose writings have claimed and received so full a statement, under their respective lives. Nor is there so much occasion for the labors of the apostolic historian on this part of the history of the apostolic works, as on those already so fully treated; for while the history of the writings of Peter, John, Matthew, James and Jude, has so seldom been presented to the eyes of common readers, the writings of Paul, which have always been the great storehouse of Protestant dogmatism, have been discussed and amplified in their history, scope, character, and style, more fully than all the rest of the Bible, for common readers; but in the great majority of instances, proving such a comment on the sadly prophetical words of Peter on these very writings, that the apostolic historian may well and wisely dread to immerse himself in such a sea of difficulties as presents itself to view; and he therefore cautiously avoids any intermeddling with discussions which will possibly involve him in the condemnation pronounced by the great apostolic chief, on those “unlearned and unstable,” who even in his time had begun to “wrest to their own destruction, the things hard to be understood in the epistles of his beloved brother Paul;” a sentence which seems to have been wholly overlooked by the great herd of dogmatizing commentators, who, very often, without either the “learning” or the “stability,” which Peter thought requisite for the safe interpretation of the Pauline epistles, have rushed on to the task of vulgarizing these noble and honest writings, to suit the base purposes of some popular system of mystical words and complex doctrines. If then, the “unlearned and unstable” have been thus distinctly warned by the highest apostolic authority, against meddling with these obscure and peculiar writings; and since the whole history of didactic theology is so full of melancholy comments on the undesignedly prophetical force of Peter’s denunciation,——it is no more than prudent to decline the slightest interference with a subject, which has been on such authority declared to require the possession of so high a degree of learning and stability, for its safe and just treatment. The few things which may be safely stated, will merely concern the place, time and immediate occasion of the writing of each of these epistles.

In the first place, as to the order in which these works of Paul are arranged in the common New Testament canon, it should be observed that it has reference neither to date, subject, nor anything whatever in their character or object, except the very arbitrary circumstance of the rank and importance of the places and persons that were the original objects of their composition. The epistle to the Romans is always placed first, because the imperial city to which it was directed was beyond all question the greatest in the world. The epistles to the Corinthians are next, because that city was the nearest in rank and importance to Rome, of all those which were the objects of Paul’s epistolary attentions. The epistle to the Galatians is next, because it was directed to a great province, inferior indeed in importance, to the two great cities before mentioned, but vastly above any of the other places to which Paul wrote. The epistle to the Ephesians comes next, because Ephesus ranked far above any of the cities which follow. Philippi was supposed, by those who arranged the canon, greater than Colosse and Thessalonica, because it was thought to have been a capital city. Thus all those epistles which are addressed to whole churches, are placed first; and those which are addressed to individuals in the same manner, form a class by themselves; that to Timothy being placed first of these, because he was the most eminent of all the apostle’s assistants,——Titus being inferior to him in dignity, and Philemon, a person of no account at all, except from the bare circumstance, that he was accidentally the subject of Paul’s notice. The epistle to the Hebrews is last of all, because it is altogether peculiar in its character, addressed neither to churches, nor to an individual, but to a whole nation, being published and circulated for their general benefit. The circumstance also that it was long denied a place in the canon, and considered as a spurious writing, improperly attributed to Paul, probably caused it to be put last of all his writings, when in the course of time, it was at length allowed a place in the canon.

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS.

That epistle which the great majority of all modern critics consider as the earliest of all those writings of Paul that are now preserved, is the first to the Thessalonians. It is directed to them from Paul, Silvanus, (or Silas,) and Timothy, which shows that it was written after Paul had been joined by these two brethren, which was not until some time after his arrival in Corinth. It appears by the second and third chapters, that the apostle, having been hindered by some evil agency of the wicked, from visiting Thessalonica, as he had earnestly desired to do, had been obliged to content himself with sending Timothy to the brethren there, to comfort them in their faith, and to inquire whether they yet stood fast in their first honorable profession; for he declares himself to have been anxious to know whether by some means the tempter might not have tempted them, and his labor have thus been in vain. But he now informs them how he has lately been greatly comforted by the good news brought from them by Timothy, who had assured the apostle of their faith and love, and that they had great remembrance of him always, desiring much to see him, as he them. Making known to them the great joy which these tidings had caused in him, he now affectionately re-assures them of his high and constant regard for them, and of his continued remembrance of them in his prayers. He then proceeds briefly to exhort them to a perseverance in the Christian course, in which they had made so fair an outset, urging upon them more especially, those virtues which were peculiarly rare among those with whom they were daily brought in contact,——purity of life, rigid honesty in business transactions, a charitable regard for the feelings of others, a quiet, peaceable, inoffensive deportment, and other minuter counsels, according to the peculiar circumstances of different persons among them. The greater portion of this brief letter, indeed, is taken up with these plain, practical matters, with no reference to any deep doctrinal subjects, the whole being thus evidently well-suited to the condition of believers who had but just begun the Christian course, and had been in no way prepared to appreciate any learned discussion of those obscure points which in later periods were the subject of so much controversy among some of Paul’s converts. Their dangers hitherto had also been mainly in the moral rather than in the doctrinal way, and the only error of mere belief, to which he makes reference, is one which has always been the occasion of a great deal of harmless folly among the ignorant and the weak minded in the Christian churches, from the apostolic age to this day. The evil however, was considered by the apostle of so much importance, that he thought it worth while to briefly expose its folly to the Thessalonians, and he accordingly discourses to them of the day of judgment, assuring them that those who might happen to be alive at the moment of Christ’s coming, would derive no peculiar advantage from that circumstance, because those who had died in Christ should rise first, and the survivors be then caught up to meet the Lord in the air. But as for “the times and the seasons,”——those endless themes for the discursive nonsense of the visionary, even to the present day and hour,——he assures them that there was no need at all that he should write to them, because they already well knew that the day of the Lord should come as a thief in the night, according to the words of Jesus himself. The only practical benefit which they could expect to derive then, from this part of their faith, was the conviction of the necessity of constantly bearing in mind the shortness and uncertainty of their earthly stay, and the importance of watchfulness and sobriety. After several sententious moral exhortations, he concludes with affectionate salutations, and with an earnest, solemn charge, that the letter should be read to all the brethren of the church.

It will be observed, that at the conclusion of the epistle is a statement that it was written from Athens,——an assertion perfectly absurd, and rendered evidently so by the statements contained in the epistle itself, as above shown. All the similar statements appended to his other epistles are equally unauthorized, and most of them equally false;——being written by some exceedingly foolish copyists, who were too stupid to understand the words which they transcribed. Yet these idle falsehoods are gravely given in all copies of the English translation, and are thus continually sent abroad to mislead common readers, many of whom, seeing them thus attached to the apostolic writings, suppose them to be also of inspired authority, and are deceived accordingly. And they probably will continue to be thus copied, in spite of their palpable and mischievous falsehood, until such a revolution in the moral sense of common people takes place, that they shall esteem a new negative truth more valuable and interesting, than an old, groundless blunder.

For some time after the writing of the first epistle to the Thessalonians, with these triumphs and other encouragements, Paul and his faithful helpers appear to have gone on steadily in their apostolic labors, with no special obstacle or difficulty, that is commemorated in the sacred record. But at last their old difficulties began to manifest themselves in the gradually awakened enmity of the Jews, who, though at his first distinct public ministrations they had expressed a decided and scornful opposition to the doctrine of a crucified Savior, yet suffered the new teachers to go on, without opposing them any farther than by scornful verbal hostility, blasphemy and abuse. But when they saw the despised heresy making such rapid advances, notwithstanding the contempt with which it was visited, they immediately determined to let it no longer take advantage of their inefficiency in resisting its progress. Of course, deprived themselves, of all political power, they had not the means of meeting the evil by physical violence, and they well knew that any attempt on their part to raise an illegal commotion against the strangers, would only bring down on the exciters of the disturbance, the whole vengeance of their Roman rulers, who were unsparing in their vengeance on those that undertook to defy the forms of their laws, for the sake of persecution, or any private ends; and least of all would a class of people so peculiar and so disliked as the Jews, be allowed to take any such treasonable steps, without insuring them a most dreadful punishment. These circumstances therefore compelled them to proceed, as usual, under the forms of law; and their first step against Paul therefore, was to apprehend him, and take him, as a violator of religious order, before the highest Roman tribunal,——that of the proconsul.

The proconsul of Achaia, holding his supreme seat of justice in Corinth, the capital of that Roman province, was Lucius Junius Gallio, a man well known to the readers of one of the classic Latin writers of that age,——Seneca,——as one of the most remarkable exemplifications of those noble virtues which were the great theme of this philosopher’s pen. Out of many beautiful illustrations which may be drawn from Roman and Jewish writers, to explain and amplify the honest and faithful apostolic history of Luke, there is none more striking and gratifying than the aid here drawn from this fine philosophical classic, on the character of the noble proconsul, who by his upright, wise, and clement decision, against the mean persecutors of Paul,——and by his indignant refusal to pervert and degrade his vice-regal power to the base ends of private abuse, has acquired the grateful regard and admiring respect of all Christian readers of apostolic history. The name of Lucius Junius Gallio, by which he is known to Roman writers as well as in apostolic history, was not his original family designation, and therefore gives the reader no idea of his interesting relationship to one of the finest moralists of the whole period of the Roman empire. His original family name was Marcus Annaeus Novatus Seneca,——which appellation he exchanged for his later one, on being adopted by Lucius Junius Gallio, a noble Roman, who being destitute of children, adopted, according to a very common custom of the imperial city, one of a family that had already given promise of a fine reward to those who should take its offspring as theirs. The famous philosopher before mentioned,——Lucius Annaeus Seneca,——was his own brother; both of them being the sons of Marcus Annaeus Seneca, a distinguished orator and rhetorician of the Augustan age. A strong and truly fraternal affection always continued to hold the two brothers together, even after they had been separated in name by the adoption of the older into the family of Gallio; and the philosopher often commemorates his noble brother, in terms of high respect; and dedicated to him one of the most perfect of those moral treatises which have immortalized the name of Seneca.

The philosopher Seneca, after having been for many years banished from Rome by Claudius, was at length recalled by that emperor in the ninth year of his reign, corresponding to A. D. 49. He was immediately made a senator, and was still further honored by being intrusted with the education of Domitius, the son of Agrippina, afterwards adopted by Claudius as heir to the throne, to which he succeeded on the emperor’s death, under the name of Nero, by which he has now become so infamous wherever the Roman name is known. Being thus elevated to authority and great influence with the emperor, Seneca made use of his power, to procure for his brother Gallio such official honors as his talents and character justly claimed. In the eleventh year of Claudius he was made consul, as is recorded in the Fasti Consulares; and was soon after sent into Greece, as proconsul of Achaia. Arriving at Corinth in the year 53, he was immediately addressed by the Jewish citizens of that place in behalf of their plot against Paul; for they naturally supposed that this would be the best time for the attempt to bend the new governor to their purposes, when he was just commencing his administration, and would be anxious to please the subjects of his power by his opening acts. But Gallio had no disposition to acquire popularity with any class of citizens, by any such abuse of power, and by his conduct on this occasion very fairly justifies the high character given him by his brother Seneca. When the Jews came dragging Paul before the proconsular tribunal, with the accusation——“This fellow persuades men to worship God in a manner contrary to the ritual,”——before Paul could open his mouth in reply, Gallio carelessly answered——“If it were a matter of crime or misdemeanor, ye Jews! it would be reasonable that I should bear with you; but if it be a question of words and names, and of your ritual, look ye to it; for I do not wish to be a judge of those things.” With this contemptuous reply, he cleared the court of them. The Jews thus found their fine scheme of abusing Paul under the sanction of the Roman tribunal, perfectly frustrated; nor was their calamity confined to this disappointment; for all the Greeks who were present at the trial,——indignant at the scandalous character of the proceeding,——took Sosthenes, the ruling elder of the synagogue, who had probably been most active in the persecution of Paul, as he was the regular legal chief of the Jews, and gave him a sound threshing in the court, before he could obey the orders of the Proconsul, and move off from the tribunal. Gallio was so far from being displeased at this very irregular and improper outbreak of public feeling, that he took no notice of the action whatever, though it was a shameful violation of the dignity of his tribunal; and it may therefore be reasonably concluded that he was very much provoked against the Jews, and was disposed to sympathize with Paul; otherwise he would have been apt to have punished the outrage of the Greeks upon Sosthenes.

“The name of this proconsul was Marcus Annaeus Novatus, but being adopted by Lucius Junius Gallio, he took the name of his adopted father; he was brother to the famous Seneca, tutor to Nero. That philosopher dedicated to Gallio his book, ‘De Vita Beata.’ The Roman historians concur in giving him the character of a sweet disposition, an enemy to all vice, and particularly a hater of flattery. He was twice made proconsul of Achaia, first by Claudius, and afterwards by Nero. As he was the sharer of his brother’s prosperity, so he was of his misfortunes, when he fell under Nero’s displeasure, and was at length put to death by the tyrant, as well as his brother.” (Calmet’s Commentary. Poole’s Annotations. Williams on Pearson.)

“In Acts xviii. 12–16, we find Paul is brought before Gallio by the Jews, but this proconsul refused to judge any such matters, as not coming within his jurisdiction. The character for justice, impartiality, prudence, and mildness of disposition, which this passage gives to Gallio, is confirmed by Seneca, his brother, in these words:——[a]Solebam tibi dicere, Gallionem fratrem meum (quem nemo non parum amat, etiam qui amare plus non potest,) alia vitia non nosse, hoc etiam, (i. e. adulationem,) odisse.——Nemo enim mortalium uni tam dulcis est, quam hic omnibus. Hoc quoque loco blanditiis tuis restitit, ut exclamares invenisse te inexpugnabilem virum adversus insidias, quas nemo non in sinum recipit.] (Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Natural Questions, lib. iv. in preface, op. tom. iv. p. 267, edited by Bipont.) In our translation Gallio is styled the deputy, but the real Greek word is Ανθυπατευοντος, proconsul. The accuracy of Luke in this instance is very remarkable. In the partition of the provinces of the Roman empire, Macedonia and Achaia were assigned to the people and Senate of Rome. In the reign of Tiberius they were, at their own request, made over to the emperor. In the reign of Claudius, (A. U. C. 797. A. D. 44,) they were again restored to the Senate, after which time proconsuls were sent into this country. Nero afterwards made the Achaians a free people. The Senate therefore lost this province again. However, that they might not be sufferers, the emperor gave them the island of Sardinia, in the room of it. Vespasian made Achaia a province again. There is likewise a peculiar propriety in the name of the province of which Gallio was proconsul. The country subject to him was all Greece; but the proper name of the province among the Romans was Achaia, as appears from various passages of the Roman historians, and especially from the testimony of Pausanias. Καλουσι δε ουχ’ Ἑλλαδος, αλλα’ [♦]Αχαιας ἡγεμονα οἱ Ῥωμαιοι διοτι εχειρωσαντο Ἑλληνας δε Αχαιων, τοτε του Ἑλληνικου προεστηκοτων. (Pausanias Description of Greece. lib. vii. p. 563. Lardner’s Works, 4to. vol. I. p. 19.)

[♦] “Ααχιων” replaced with “Αχαιων”

“The words Γαλλίωνος δε ἀνθυπατεύοντος ought to be rendered, with Heumann, Walch, Antiquities, Corinth, p. 35., and Reichard, (as indeed is required by the context,) ‘when Gallio had been made Proconsul,’ or ‘on Gallio’s entering on the Proconsulship.’ (Kuinoel.) In the same sense it was also taken by Beza and Piscator; and this appears to be the true one. The Jews, it seems, waited for the arrival of a new Proconsul to make their request, as thinking that they should then be less likely to meet with a refusal.” (Bloomfield’s Annotations, Vol. IV. p. 600.)

“‘Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogues.’ verse 17. In the 8th verse we read that Crispus was the chief ruler of the synagogue in Corinth. And from this we may suppose that there were more than one synagogue in that city, or that there might be more than one ruler in the same synagogue; or that Crispus, after his conversion to Christianity, might have been succeeded by Sosthenes; but then we are at a loss to know who the people are that thus beat and misused him; the Greek printed copies tell us that they were the Gentiles; and those that read the text imagine, that when they perceived the neglect and disregard wherewith the proconsul received the Jews, they, to insult them more, fell upon the ruler of their synagogue, whether out of hatred to them, or friendship to St. Paul, it makes no matter. But others think, that Sosthenes, however head of the synagogue, was nevertheless the friend of St. Paul, and that the other Jews, seeing themselves slighted by Gallio, might vent their malice upon him; for they suppose that this was the same Sosthenes, whose name St. Paul, in the beginning of his first Epistle to the Corinthians, written about three years after this time, joins with his own. This opinion, however, was not universally received, since, in the time of Eusebius, it was thought the Sosthenes mentioned in the epistle was one of the seventy disciples, and, consequently, could not be the chief of the synagogue at Corinth, twenty years after the death of Jesus Christ.” (Beausobre’s Annotations. Calmet’s Commentary and Dictionary.)

“‘xviii. 17. ἐπιλαβόμενοι δὲ πάντες οἱ Ἕλληνες There is here some variation of reading, and no little question raised as to the true one; which consequently leaves the interpretation unsettled. Two ancient MSS. and versions omit οἱ Ἕλληνες, and others read οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι. As to the latter reading, it cannot be tolerated; for why should the Jews have beaten him? Neither is it likely that they would have taken such a liberty before so solemn a tribunal. The words οἱ Ἕλληνες are thought by many critics, as Grotius, Mill, Pierce, Bengel, and Kuinoel, to be derived from the margin, like the last. Now those were Gentiles (say they) who beat Sosthenes; and hence some one wrote οἱ Ἕλληνες. As to the reason for the beating, it was to make the Jews go away the faster; and to this they were actuated partly by their hatred towards the Jews, and partly by a desire to please the Procurator.’ But this appears to be pressing too much on the word ἀπήλασεν, which has by no means any such meaning. Besides, it is strange that the words Ἕλληνες should have crept into nearly all the MSS; even into so many early ones. And, supposing Ἕλληνες to be removed, what sense is to be given to παντες? None (I think) satisfactory, or agreeable to the style of the New Testament. It must therefore be retained: and then the sense of πάντες will be as follows: ‘all the Greeks, both Gentiles and Christians:’ which is so evident, that I am surprised the commentators should not have seen it. Some explain it of the Gentiles, and others of the Gentile Christians. Both indeed had reason to take umbrage at the intolerance and bitter animosity of the Jews. It is not likely that any should have joined in the beating, merely to please the Proconsul, who was not a man to be gratified by such a procedure. So that the gnomes brought forward by Grotius on the base assentatio of courtiers, are not here applicable.

“By ἔτυπτον is merely to be understood beating, or thumping him with their fists, as he passed along. Anything more than that, we cannot suppose they would have ventured upon, or the Proconsul have tolerated.”

“By τούτων, (verse 17,) we may, I think, understand both the accusation brought forward, and the cuffs which followed; to neither of which the Proconsul paid much attention; and this from disgust at the litigious conduct of the Jews; as also from the custom, mentioned by Pricaeus, of the Roman governors, to pass by any conduct which did not directly tend to degrade the dignity of the Roman name, or weaken its influence, in order that the yoke might be as easy as possible to the provincials.” (Bloomfield’s Annotations, Vol. IV. pp. 603–605.)

CORINTH——CENCHREA.
Romans xvi. 1. Acts xviii. 18.

His character having been thus vindicated, and his safety thus assured him by the supreme civil authority, Paul resided for a long time in Corinth, steadily pursuing his apostolic work, without any direct hindrance or molestation from the Jews. There is no reason to suppose that he confined all his labor entirely to the city; on the contrary, it is quite certain, that the numerous smaller gospel fields throughout the adjacent country, must have attracted his attention, and it appears, from the commencement of his second epistle to the Corinthians, that many throughout all Achaia had received the gospel, and had been numbered among the saints. Corinth, however, remained the great center of his operations in Greece, and from this place he soon after directed another epistle to one of his apostolic charges in Macedonia,——the church of Thessalonica. Since his former epistle had been received by them, there had arisen a new occasion for his anxious attention to their spiritual condition, and in his second letter he alludes distinctly to the fact that there had been misrepresentations of his opinion, and seems to imply that a letter had been forged in his name, and presented to them, as containing a new and more complete account of the exact time of the expected coming of Christ, to which he had only vaguely alluded in the first. In the second chapter of his second epistle, he renews his warning against these delusions about the coming of Christ, alluding to the fact, that they had been deceived and disturbed by misstatements on this subject, and had been led into error, both by those who pretended to be inspired, and by those who attempted to show by prediction, that the coming of Christ was at hand, and also by the forged epistle pretending to contain Paul’s own more decisive opinions on the subject. He exhorts them to “let no man deceive them by any of these means.” He warns them moreover, against any that exalt themselves against the doctrines which he had taught them, and denounces all false and presumptuous teachers in very bitter terms. After various warnings against these and all disorderly persons among them, he refers to his own behavior while with them, as an example for them to follow, and reminds them how blamelessly and honestly he behaved himself. He did not presume on his apostolic office, to be an idler, or to eat any man’s bread for naught, but steadily worked with his own hands, lest he should be chargeable to any one of them; and this he did, not because his apostolic office did not empower him to live without manual labor, and to depend on those to whom he preached for his means of subsistence, but because he wished to make himself, and his fellow-laborers, Silas and Timothy, examples for their behavior after he was gone. Yet it seemed that, notwithstanding the pains he had taken to inculcate an honest and industrious course, several persons among them had assumed the office of teaching and reproving, and had considered themselves thereby excused from doing anything for their own support. In the conclusion, he refers them distinctly to his own signature and salutation, which authenticate every epistle which he writes, and without which, no letter was to be esteemed genuine. This he specifies, no doubt, for the sake of putting them on their guard against the repetition of any such deception as had been lately practised on them in his name.

HIS VOYAGE BACK TO THE EAST.

Soon after Paul had written his second epistle to the Thessalonians, he left Corinth, in the spring of A. D. 56, as it is commonly calculated, and after bidding the brethren farewell, journeyed back to Asia, from whose shores he had now been absent not less than three years. On his return journey, he was accompanied by his two acquaintances and fellow-laborers, Aquilas and Priscilla, who were now his most intimate friends, and henceforth were always esteemed among the important aids of the apostolic enterprise. Journeying eastward across the isthmus, they came to Cenchreae, the eastern port of Corinth, and at the head of the great Saronic gulf, about seven miles from the city itself. At this place Paul discharged himself of the obligation of a vow, which he had made some time before, in conformity with a common Jewish custom of thus giving force to their own sense of gratitude for the accomplishment of any desired object. He had vowed to let his hair grow until some unknown end was attained, and now, having seen the prayers which sanctioned that vow granted, he cut off his hair in token of the joyful completion of the enterprise on which he had thus solemnly and formally invoked the blessing of heaven. The actual purpose of this vow is not recorded,——but when the occasion on which he thus exonerated himself is considered, it seems most reasonable to suppose that now, embarking from the shores of Europe, after he had there passed so many years of very peculiar labor and trials, he was thus celebrating the prosperous and happy achievment of his first great western mission, and that this vow had been made for his safe return, when he first sailed from the eastern coast of the Aegean, at Alexandria Troas.

He sailed from Cenchreae to Ephesus, a great city of Ionic Asia, which had never been the scene of his apostolic labors, though he had traversed much of the country around it; for it will be remembered, that on his last journey through Asia Minor, when he had passed over Galatia and Phrygia, he was about to enter Asia Proper, but was hindered by a special impulse of the Spirit, which sent him in a different direction. But having thus achieved his great western enterprise, there was now no longer any more important commission to prevent him from gratifying his eyes with a sight of this very interesting region, and making here an experimental effort to diffuse the knowledge of the gospel through the numerous, wealthy, refined and populous cities of this, the most flourishing and civilized country in the world. He did not intend, however, to make anything more than a mere call at Ephesus; for the great object of his voyage from Europe was to return to Jerusalem and Syria, and give to his brethren, a full statement of all the interesting particulars of his long and remarkable mission in Macedonia and Greece. But he took occasion to vary this eastern route, so as to effect as much good as possible by the way; and therefore embarked first for Ephesus, where he landed with Aquilas and Priscilla, whom he left there, while he continued on his journey, southeastwards. He stopped with them however, a few days, with a view to open this new field of labor with them; and going into the synagogue, discoursed with the Jews. He was so well received by his hearers, that he was earnestly besought to prolong his stay among them; but he excused himself for his refusal of their kind invitation, by stating the great object which he had in view in leaving Europe at that particular time:——“I must by all means keep this coming feast at Jerusalem; but I will return to you,——God willing.” And bidding them farewell, he sailed away from Ephesus to Caesarea, on the coast of Palestine, where he landed. Thence he went up to Jerusalem, to salute the church. In this part of the history of Paul, Luke seems to be exceedingly brief; perhaps because he was not then with him, and had never received from him any account of this journey. There is therefore no way of ascertaining what was the particular motive or design of this visit. It would appear, however, from the very hurried manner in which the visit was noticed, that it was exceedingly brief, and his departure thence may, as Calvin conjectures, have been hastened by the circumstance, that possibly the business on which he went thither did not succeed according to his wishes. At any rate, there seems to have been something very mysterious about the whole matter, else there would not have been this very studied concealment of the motives and details of a journey, which he announced to the brethren of the church at Ephesus, as absolutely necessary for him to perform. This also may have been concealed for the same reason, which has been conjectured to have caused the visit to be so short, as would seem from the manner in which it is noticed. From Jerusalem he went down to Antioch, by what route is not specified,——but probably by way of Caesarea and the sea.

“xviii. 22. Caesarea. A town on the sea-coast. [See the note on p. [173].] Ἀναβὰς, ‘and having gone up.’ Whither? Some commentators, as Camerarius, De Dieu, Wolf, Calov., Heumann, Doddridge, Thaleman, Beck, and Kuinoel, refer it to Caesarea. But this requires the confirmation of examples. And we must take for granted that the city was built high above the port, (which is not likely,) or that the church was so situated; which would be extremely frigid. Neither is it certain that there was a church. Besides, how can the expression καταβαίνω be proper, as used of traveling from a seaport-town, like Caesarea, to Antioch? I therefore prefer the mode of interpretation adopted by some ancient and many modern commentators, as Beza, Grotius, Mor., Rosenmueller, Reichard, Schott, Heinrichs, and others, who supply εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα. This may indeed seem somewhat harsh; yet it must be remembered that not a few things are so in the New Testament; and ἀναβαίνω is there often used absolutely of going up to Jerusalem, and καταβαίνω of going from thence. Nor is this unexampled in the classical writers. Xenophon uses the word in the very same sense, of those going from Greece to the capital of Persia. See Anabasis 1, 1, 2. Hist. 2, 1. 9, 10. Anabasis 1, 4, 12. Hist. 4, 1, 2. 1, 5, 1. 1, 4, 2. and many other passages referred to by Sturz in his Lexicon Xenophon in voce. Besides, as the words εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα have just preceded, it is not very harsh to repeat them. Kuinoel, indeed, and some others, treat those words as not genuine; but their opinion rests on mere suspicion, unsupported by any proof.” (Bloomfield Annotations. Vol. IV. p. 607.)

From the very brief and general manner in which the incidents of this visit of Paul to the eastern continent are commemorated, the apostolic historian is left to gather nothing but the most naked circumstances, of the route pursued, and from the results, it is but fair to conclude that nothing of consequence happened to the apostle, as his duties consisted merely in a review and completion of the work he had gone over before. Luke evidently did not accompany Paul in this Asian journey, and he therefore only states the general direction of the apostle’s course, without a single particular. He says that Paul, after making [♦]some stay in Antioch,——where, no doubt he greatly comforted the hearts of the brethren, by the glad tidings of the triumphs of Christ in Europe,——went in regular order over the regions of Galatia, and Phrygia, everywhere confirming the disciples. Beyond this, no incident whatever is preserved; yet here great amplification of the sacred record might be made, from the amusing narrative of that venerable monkish story-teller, who assumes the name of Abdias Babylonius. But from the specimens of his narrative already given, in the lives of Andrew and John, the reader will easily apprehend that they contain nothing which deserves to be intruded into the midst of the honest, authentic statements, of the original and genuine apostolic history; and all these with many other similar inventions are wholly dismissed from the life of Paul, of whose actions such ample records have been left in the writings of himself and his companions, that it is altogether more necessary for the biographer to condense into a modernized form, with proper illustrations, the materials presented on the authority of inspiration, than to prolong the narrative with tedious inventions. In this part of the apostolic history, all that Luke records is, that Paul, after the before-mentioned survey of the inland countries of Asia Minor, came down to the western shore, and visited Ephesus, according to the promise which [♠]he had made them at his farewell, a few months before. Since that hasty visit made in passing, some events important to the gospel cause had happened among them. An Alexandrine Jew named Apollos, a man of great Biblical learning, (as many of the Jews of his native city were,) and indued also with eloquence,——came to Ephesus, and there soon distinguished himself as a religious teacher. Of the doctrines of Jesus Christ and his apostles, indeed, he had never heard; but he had somewhere been made acquainted with the peculiar reforming principles of his great forerunner, John the Baptist, and had been baptized, probably by some one of his disciples. With great fervor and power, he discoursed learnedly of the things of the Lord, in the synagogue at Ephesus, and of course, was brought under the notice of Aquilas and Priscilla, whom Paul had left to occupy that important field, while he was making his southeastern tour. They took pains to draw Apollos into their acquaintance, and found him, like every truly learned man, very ready to learn, even from those who were his inferiors in most departments of sacred knowledge. From them he heard with great interest and satisfaction, the peculiar and striking truths revealed in Jesus, and at once professing his faith in this new revelation, went forth again among the Jews, replenished with a higher learning and a diviner spirit. After teaching for some time in Ephesus, he was disposed to try his new powers in some other field; and proposing to journey into Achaia, his two Christian friends gave him letters of introduction and recommendation to the brethren of the church in Corinth. While he was there laboring with great efficiency in the gospel cause, Paul returning from his great apostolic survey of the inland and upper regions of Asia Minor, came to Ephesus. Entering on this work of perfecting and uniting the results of the various irregular efforts made by the different persons, who had before labored there, he found, among those who professed to hold the doctrines of a new revelation, about a dozen men, who knew very little of the great doctrines which Paul had been in the habit of preaching. One of his first questions to them, of course, was whether they had yet received that usual convincing sign of the Christian faith,——the Holy Spirit. To which they answered in some surprise, that they had not yet heard that there was any Holy Spirit;——thus evidently showing that they knew nothing about any such sign or its effects. Paul, in his turn considerably surprised, at this remarkable ignorance of a matter of such high importance, was naturally led to ask what kind of initiation they had received into the new dispensation; and learning from them, that they had only been baptized according to the baptism of John,——instantly assured them of the incompleteness of that revelation of the truth. “John truly baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people that they must believe on him that should come after him,——that is on Christ Jesus.” Hearing this, they consented to receive from the apostle of Jesus, the renewal of the sign of faith, which they had formerly known as the token of that partial revelation made by John; and they were therefore baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus,——a form of words which of course had never been pronounced over them before. Paul, then laying his hands on them, invoked the influence of the Holy Spirit, which was then immediately manifested, by the usual miraculous gifts which accompanied its effusion.

[♦] removed duplicate word “some”

[♠] removed duplicate word “he”

“xviii. 24. Apollos. A name contracted from Apollonius, (which is read in the Cod. Cant.) as Epaphras from Epaphroditus, and Artemas from Artemonius. Of this Apollonius, mention is also made in 1 Corinthians i. 12. iii. 5 seq. where Paul speaks of the labor he underwent in the instruction of the Corinthians. (1 Corinthians iv. 6. xvi. 12.) Γένει, by birth, i. e. country; as in 18, 2. The Jews of Alexandria were eminent for Biblical knowledge. That most celebrated city of Egypt abounded with men of learning, both Jews and Gentiles.” Kuinoel. (Bloomfield’s Annotations, Vol. IV. p. 608.)

“The Baptism of John is put, by synecdoche, for the whole of John’s ordinances. See the note on Matthew xxi. 25. (Kuinoel.) It is generally supposed that he had been baptized by John himself: but this must have been twenty years before; and it is not probable that during that time he should have acquired no knowledge of Christianity. It should rather seem that he had been baptized by one of John’s disciples; and perhaps not very long before the time here spoken of.” (Bloomfield’s Annotations, Vol. IV. p. 610.)

“With respect to the letters here mentioned, they were written for the purpose of encouraging Apollos, and recommending him to the brethren. This ancient ecclesiastical custom of writing letters of recommendation, (which seems to have originated in the necessary caution to be observed in times of persecution, and arose out of the interrupted and tardy intercourse which, owing to their great distance from each other, subsisted between the Christians,) has been well illustrated by a tract of Ferrarius de Epistolis Ecclesiasticis, referred to by Wolf.” (Bloomfield. Vol. IV. p. 611.)

“Ephesus was the metropolis of proconsular Asia. It was situated at the mouth of the river Cayster, on the shore of the Aegean sea, in that part anciently called Ionia, (but now Natolir,) and was particularly celebrated for the temple of Diana, which had been erected at the common expense of the inhabitants of Asia Proper, and was reputed one of the seven wonders of the world. In the time of Paul, this city abounded with orators and philosophers; and its inhabitants, in their gentile state, were celebrated for their idolatry and skill in magic, as well as for their luxury and lasciviousness. Ephesus is now under the dominion of the Turks, and is in a state of almost total ruin, being reduced to fifteen poor cottages, (not erected exactly on its original site,) and its once flourishing church is now diminished to three illiterate Greeks. (Revelation ii. 6.) In the time of the Romans, Ephesus was the metropolis of Asia. The temple of Diana is said to have been four hundred and twenty-five feet long, two hundred and twenty broad, and to have been supported by one hundred and twenty-seven pillars of marble, seventy feet high, whereof twenty-seven were most beautifully wrought, and all the rest polished. One Ctesiphon, a famous architect, planned it, and with so much art and curiosity, that it took two hundred years to finish it. It was set on fire seven times; once on the very same day that Socrates was poisoned, four hundred years before Christ.” (Horne’s Introduction. Whitby’s Table. Wells’s Geography. Williams on Pearson.)

After this successful effort to confirm and complete the conversions already effected, Paul went about his apostolic labors in the usual way,——going into the synagogue, and speaking boldly, disputing the antiquated sophistry of the Jews, and urging upon all, the doctrines of the new revelation. In this department of labor, he continued for the space of three months; but at the end of that time, he found that many obstacles were thrown in the way of the truth by the stubborn adherents of the established forms of old Judaism, who would not allow that the lowly Jesus was the Messiah for whom their nation had so long looked as the restorer of Israel. Leaving the hardened and obstinate Jews, he therefore, according to his old custom in such cases of the rejection of the gospel by them, withdrew from their society, and thenceforth went with those who had believed among the more candid Greeks, who, with a truly enlightened and philosophical spirit, held their minds open to the reception of new truths, even though they might not happen to accord with those which were sanctioned to them by the prejudices of education. After leaving the synagogue, his new place of preaching and religious instruction was the school of one Tyrannus,——doubtless one of those philosophical institutions with which every Grecian city abounded. This continued his field of exertion for two years, during which his fame became very widely established,——all the inhabitants of Ionic and Aeolic Asia, having heard of the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks. Among the causes and effects of this general notoriety, was the circumstance, that many miraculous cures were wrought by the hands of Paul; and many began even to attach a divine regard to his person;——handkerchiefs being brought to the sick from his body, which, on application to those afflicted, either with bodily or mental diseases, produced a perfect cure. This matter becoming generally known and talked of, throughout Ephesus, became the occasion of a ludicrous accident, which occurred to some persons who entertained the mistaken notion, that this faculty of curing diseases was transferable, and might be exercised by anybody that had enterprise enough to take the business in hand, and say over the form of words that seemed to be so efficacious in the mouth of Paul. A set of conjurers of Jewish origin, the seven sons of Sceva, who went about professedly following the trade of casting out devils, straightway caught up this new improvement on their old tricks, (for so they esteemed the divinely miraculous power of the apostle,) and soon found an opportunity to experiment with this, which they considered a valuable addition to their old stock of impositions. So, calling over the miserable possessed subject of their foolish experiment, they said——“We exorcise you by Jesus, whom Paul preaches.” But the devil was not slow to perceive the difference between this second-hand, plagiaristic mode of operation, and the commanding tone of divine authority with which the demoniacal possessions were treated by the apostle of Jesus. He therefore quite turned their borrowed mummery into a jest, and cried out through the mouth of the possessed man,——“Jesus I know, and Paul I know:——but who are ye?” Under the impulse of the frolicsome, mischievous spirit, the man upon whom they were playing their conjuring tricks, jumped up at once, and fell upon these rash doctors with all his might, and with all the energy of a truly crazy demoniac, beat the whole seven, tore their clothes off from them, and threshed them to such effect, that they were glad to stop their mummery, and make off as fast as possible, but did not escape till they were naked and wounded. The affair of course, was soon very generally talked of, and the story made an impression, on the whole, decidedly favorable to the true source of that miraculous agency, which, when foolishly tampered with, had produced such appalling results. Many, among both Jews and Greeks, were thereby led to repentance and faith, and more particularly those who had been in the way of practising these arts of imposition. A very general alarm prevailed among all the conjurers, and many came and confessed the mean tricks by which they had hitherto maintained their reputation as controllers of the powers of the invisible world. Many who had also, at great expense of time and money, acquired the arts of imposition, brought the costly books in which were contained all the mysterious details of their magical mummery, and burned them publicly, without regard to their immense estimated pecuniary value, which was not less than nine thousand dollars. In short, the results of this apparently trifling occurrence, followed up by the zealous preaching of Paul, effected a vast amount of good, so that the word of God mightily grew and prevailed.

EPHESUS.——Ruins of the Temple of Diana.
Ephesians i. 1. Revelation ii. 1, 7.

“In Acts xx. 31, the apostle says, that for the space of three years he preached at Ephesus. Grotius and Whitby hold that these three years are to be reckoned from his first coming to Ephesus, xviii. 19; that he does not specify his being in any other city; and that when it is said here, ‘So that all Asia heard the word,’ xix. 40, it arose from the concourse that, on a religious account, continually assembled in that city. The Jews also, from different parts of Asia, were induced by commerce, or obliged by the courts of judicature, to frequent it. Other commentators contend that, as only two years, with three months in the synagogue, are here mentioned, the remaining three-quarters of a year were partly engaged in a progress through the neighboring provinces. (Elsley, from Lightfoot and Doddridge.)

“While he was at Ephesus, ‘God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul; so that from his body were brought unto the sick, handkerchiefs or aprons,’ &c. &c. Acts [♦]xix. 11, 12. Σιμικίνθιον, aprons, is slightly changed from the Latin semicinctum, which workmen put before them when employed at their occupations, to keep their clothes from soiling. The difference which Theophylact and Oecumenius make between these and σουδάρια, is, that the latter are applied to the head, as a cap or veil, and the former to the hands as a handkerchief. ‘They carry them,’ says Oecumenius, ‘in their hands, to wipe off moisture from their face, as tears,’” &c. &c. (Calmet’s Commentary.)

[♦] removed spurious “v.”

“‘And they counted the price of them, [the books,] and found it to be fifty thousand pieces of silver,’ verse 19——αργυριον is used generally in the Old Testament, LXX. for the shekel, in value about 2s. 6d., or the total 6250l. as Numbers vii. 85. Deuteronomy xxii. 19. 2 Kings xv. 20. Grotius. If it means the drachma, as more frequently used by the Greeks at 9d. each, the sum will be 1875l.” [$9000.] Doddridge. Elsley’s Annotations. (Williams on Pearson, pp. 53–55.)

THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

There is hardly one of the writings of Paul, about the date of which there has been so much discussion, or so many opinions as this; but the results of all the elaborate investigations and argumentations of the learned, still leave this interesting chronological point in such doubt, that this must be pronounced about the most uncertain in date, of all the Pauline epistles. It may however, without any inconsistency with the historical narrative of the Acts, or with any passages in the other epistles, be safely referred to the period of this residence in Ephesus, probably to the later part of it. The epistle itself contains no reference whatever, direct or indirect, to the place in which he was occupied at the time of writing, and only bare probabilities can therefore be stated on it,——nor can any decisive objection be made to any one of six opinions which have been strongly urged. Some pronounce it very decidedly to have been the first of all the epistles written by Paul, and maintain that he wrote it soon after his first visit to them, at some time during the interval between Paul’s departure from Galatia, and his departure from Thessalonica. Others date it at the time of his imprisonment in Rome, according to the common subscription of the epistle. Against this last may, however, perhaps be urged his reproof to the Galatians, that they “were so soon removed from him that called them to the grace of Christ,”——an expression nevertheless, too vague to form any certain basis for a chronological conclusion. The great majority of critics refer it to the period of his stay in Ephesus,——a view which entirely accords with the idea, that it must have been written soon after Paul had preached to them; for on his last journey to Ephesus, he had passed through Galatia, as already narrated, confirming the churches. Some time had, no doubt, intervened since his preaching to them, sufficient at least to allow many heresies and difficulties to arise among them, and to pervert them from the purity of the truth, as taught to them by him. Certain false teachers had been among them since his departure, inculcating on all believers in Christ, the absolute necessity of a minute and rigid observance of Mosaic forms, for their salvation. They also directly attacked the apostolical character and authority of Paul,——declaring his opinion to be of no weight whatever, and to be opposed to that of the true original apostles of Jesus. These, Paul meets with great force in the very beginning of the epistle, entering at once into a particular account of the mode of his first entering the apostleship,——showing that it was not derived from the other apostles, but from the special commission of Christ himself, miraculously given. He also shows that he had, on this very question of Judaical rituals, conferred with the apostles at Jerusalem, and had received the sanction of their approbation in that course of open communion which he had before followed, on his own inspired authority, and had ever since maintained, in the face of what he deemed inconsistencies in the conduct of Peter. He then attacks the Galatians themselves, in very violent terms, for their perversion of that glorious freedom into which he had brought the Christian doctrine, and fills up the greater part of the epistle with reproofs of these errors.

His argument against the doctrines of the servile Judaizers is made up in his favorite mode of demonstration, by simile and metaphor, representing the Christian system under the form of the offspring of Abraham, and afterwards images the freedom of the true believers in Jesus, in the exalted privilege of the descendants of Sara, while those enslaved to forms are presented as analogous in their condition to the children of Hagar. He earnestly exhorts them, therefore, to stand fast in the freedom to which Christ has exalted them, and most emphatically condemns all observance of circumcision. Thus pointing out to them, the purely spiritual nature of that covenant, of which they were now the favored subjects, he urges them to a truly spiritual course of life, bidding them aim at the attainment of a perfect moral character, and makes the conclusion of the epistle eminently practical in its direction. He speaks of this epistle as being a testimony of the very particular interest which he feels in their spiritual prosperity, because, (what appears contrary to his practice,) he has written it with his own hand. To the very last, he is very bitter against those who are aiming to bring them back to the observance of circumcision, and denounces those as actuated only by a base desire to avoid that persecution which they might expect from the Jews, if they should reject the Mosaic ritual. Referring to the cross of Christ as his only glory, he movingly alludes to the marks of his conformity to that standard, bearing as he does in his own body, the scars of the wounds received from the scourges of his Philippian persecutors. He closes without any mention of personal salutations, and throughout the whole makes none of those specifications of names, with which most of his other epistles abound. In the opening salutation, he merely includes with himself those “brethren that are with him,” which seems to imply that they knew who those brethren were, in some other way,——perhaps, because he had but lately been among them with those same persons as his assistants in the ministry.

On this very doubtful point, I have taken the views adopted by Witsius, Louis Cappel, Pearson, Wall, Hug and Hemsen. The notion that it was written at Rome is supported by Theodoret, Lightfoot, and Paley,——of course making it a late epistle. On the contrary, Michaelis makes it the earliest of all, and dates it in the year 49, at some place on Paul’s route from Troas to Thessalonica. Marcion and Tertullian also supposed it to be one of the earliest epistles. Benson thinks it was written during Paul’s first residence in Corinth. Lenfant and Beausobre, followed by Lardner, conjecture it to have been written either at Corinth or at Ephesus, during his first visit, either in A. D. 52, or 53. Fabricius and Mill date it A. D. 58, at some place on Paul’s route to Jerusalem. Chrysostom and Theophylact, date it before the epistle to the Romans. Grotius thinks it was written about the same time. From all which, the reader will see the justice of my conclusion, that nothing at all is known with any certainty about the matter.

THE EPHESIAN MOB.

Paul having now been a resident in Ephesus for nearly three years, and having seen such glorious results of his labors, soon began to think of revisiting some of his former fields of missionary exertion, more especially those Grecian cities of Europe which had been such eventful scenes to him, but a few years previous. He designed to go over Macedonia and Achaia, and then to visit Jerusalem; and when communicating these plans to his friends at Ephesus, he remarked to them in conclusion——“And after that, I must also visit Rome.” He therefore sent before him into Macedonia, as the heralds of his approach, his former assistant, Timothy, and another helper not before mentioned, Erastus, who is afterwards mentioned as the treasurer of the city of Corinth. But Paul himself still waited in Asia for a short time, until some other preliminaries should be arranged for his removal. During this incidental delay arose the most terrible commotion that had ever yet been excited against him, and one which very nearly cost him his life.

It should be noticed that the conversion of so large a number of the heathen, through the preaching of Paul, had struck directly at the foundation of a very thriving business carried on in Ephesus, and connected with the continued prevalence and general popularity of that idolatrous worship, for which the city was so famous. Ephesus, as is well known, was the chief seat of the peculiar worship of that great Asian deity, who is now known, throughout all the world, where the apostolic history is read, by the name of “Diana of the Ephesians.” It is perfectly certain, however, that this deity had no real connection, either in character or in name, with that Roman goddess of the chase and of chastity, to whom the name Diana properly belongs. The true classic goddess Diana was a virgin, according to common stories, considered as the sister of Apollo, and was worshiped as the beautiful and youthful goddess of the chase, and of that virgin purity of which she was supposed to be an instance, though some stories present an exception to this part of her character. Upon her head, in most representations of her, was pictured a crescent, which was commonly supposed to show, that she was also the goddess of the moon; but a far more sagacious and rational supposition refers the first origin of this sign to a deeper meaning. But when the mythologies of different nations began to be compared and united, she was identified with the goddess of the moon, and with that Asian goddess who bore among the Greeks the name of Artemis, which is in fact the name given by Luke, as the title of the great goddess of the Ephesians. This Artemis, however, was a deity as diverse in form, character and attributes, from the classic Diana, as from any goddess in all the systems of ancient mythology; and they never need have been confounded, but for the perverse folly of those who were bent, in spite of all reason, to find in the divinities of the eastern polytheism, the perfect synonyms to the objects of western idolatry. The Asian and Ephesian goddess Artemis, had nothing whatever to do with hunting nor with chastity. She was not represented as young, nor beautiful, nor nimble, nor as the sister of Apollo, but as a vast gigantic monster, with a crown of towers, with lions crouching upon her shoulders, and a great array of pictured or sculptured eagles and tigers over her whole figure; and her figure was also strangely marked by a multitude of breasts in front. Under this monstrous figure, which evidently was no invention of the tasteful Greeks, but had originated in the debasing and grotesque idolatry of the orientals, Artemis of the Ephesians was worshiped as the goddess of the earth, of fertility, of cities, and as the universal principle of life and wealth. She was known among the Syrians by the name of Ashtaroth, and was among the early objects of Hebrew idolatry. When the Romans, in their all-absorbing tolerance of idolatry, began to introduce into Italy the worship of the eastern deities, this goddess was also added there, but not under the name of Diana. The classic scholar is familiar with the allusions to this deity, worshiped under the name of Cybele, Tellus and other such, and in all the later poets of Rome, she is a familiar object, as “the tower-crowned Cybele.” This was the goddess worshiped in many of the Grecian cities of Asia Minor, which, at their first colonization, had adopted this aboriginal goddess of those fertile regions, of whose fertility, civilization, agricultural and commercial wealth, she seemed the fit and appropriate personification. But in none of these Asian cities was she worshiped with such peculiar honors and glories as in Ephesus, the greatest city of Asia Minor. Here was worshiped a much cherished image of her, which was said to have fallen from heaven, called from that circumstance the Diopetos; which here was kept in that most splendid temple, which is even now proverbial as having been one of the wonders of the ancient world. Being thus the most famous seat of her worship, Ephesus also became the center of a great manufacture and trade in certain curious little images or shrines, representing this goddess, which were in great request, wherever her worship was regarded, being considered as the genuine and legitimate representatives, as well as representations of the Ephesian deity.

This explanation will account for the circumstances related by Luke, as ensuing in Ephesus, on the success of Paul’s labors among the heathen, to whose conversion his exertions had been wholly devoted during the two last years of his stay in Ephesus. In converting the Ephesians from heathenism, he was guilty of no ordinary crime. He directly attacked a great source of profit to a large number of artizans in the city, who derived their whole support from the manufacture of those little objects of idolatry, which, of course, became of no value to those who believed Paul’s doctrine,——that “those were no gods which were made with hands.” This new doctrine therefore, attracted very invidious notice from those who thus found their dearest interests very immediately and unfortunately affected, by the progress made by its preacher in turning away the hearts of Ephesians from their ancient reverence for the shrines of Artemis; and they therefore listened with great readiness to Demetrius, one of their number, when he proposed to remedy the difficulty. He showed them in a very clear, though brief address, that “the craft was in danger,”——that warning cry which so often bestirs the bigoted in defence of the object of their regard; and after hearing his artful address, they all, full of wrath, with one accord raised a great outcry, in the usual form of commendation of the established idolatry of their city,——“Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” This noise being heard by others, and of course attracting attention, every one who distinguished the words, by a sort of patriotic impulse, was driven to join in the cry, and presently the whole city was in an uproar;——a most desirable condition of things, of course, for those who wished to derive advantage from a popular commotion. All bawling this senseless cry, with about as much idea of the occasion of the disturbance as could be expected from such a mob, the huddling multitudes learning the general fact, that the grand object of the tumult was to do some mischief to the Christians, and looking about for some proper person to be made the subject of public opinion, fell upon Gaius and Aristarchus of Macedonia, two traveling companions of Paul, who happened to be in the way, and dragged them to the theater, whither the whole mob rushed at once, as to a desirable scene for any act of confusion and folly which they might choose to commit. Paul, with a lion-like spirit, caring naught for the mob, proposed to go in and make a speech to them, but his friends, with far more prudence and cool sense than he,——knowing that an assembly of the people, roaring some popular outcry, is no more a subject of reason than so many raging wild beasts,——prevented him from going into the theater, where he would no doubt have been torn to pieces, before he could have opened his mouth. Some of the great magistrates of Asia, too, who were friendly to him, hearing of his rash intentions, sent to him a very urgent request, that he would not venture himself among the mob. Meanwhile the outcry continued,——the theater being crowded full,——and the whole city constantly pouring out to see what was the matter, and every soul joining in the religious and patriotic shout, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” And so they went on, every one, of course, according to the universal and everlasting practice on such occasions, making all the noise he could, but not one, except the rascally silversmiths, knowing what upon earth they were all bawling there for. Still this ignorance of the object of the assembly kept nobody still; but all, with undiminished fervor, kept plying their lungs to swell the general roar. As it is described in the very graphic and picturesque language of Luke,——“Some cried one thing, and some, another; for the whole assembly was confused;——and the more knew not wherefore they were come together,”——which last circumstance is a very common difficulty in such assemblies, in all ages. At last, searching for some other persons as proper subjects to exercise their religious zeal upon, they looked about upon the Jews, who were always a suspected class among the heathen, and seized one Alexander, who seems to have been one of the Christian converts, for the Jews thrust him forward as a kind of scapegoat for themselves. Alexander made the usual signs soliciting their attention to his words; but as soon as the people understood that he was a Jew, they all drowned his voice with the general cry, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” and this they kept up steadily for two whole hours, as it were with one voice. Matters having come to this pass, the recorder of the city came forward, and having hushed the people,——who had some reverence for the lawful authorities, that fortunately were not responsible to them,——and made them a very sensible speech, reminding them that since no one doubted the reverence of the Ephesians for the goddess Artemis, and for the Diopetos, there surely was no occasion for all this disturbance to demonstrate a fact that every body knew. He told them that the men against whom they were raising this disturbance had neither robbed their temples nor blasphemed the goddess; so that if Demetrius and his fellow-craft had anything justly against these men, as having injured their business, they had their proper remedy at law. He hinted to them also that they were all liable to be called to account for this manifest breach of Roman law, and this defiance of the majesty of the Roman government;——a hint which brought most of them to their senses; for all who had anything to lose, dreaded the thought of giving occasion to the awfully remorseless government of the province, to fine them, as they certainly would be glad to do on any valid excuse. They all dispersed, therefore, with no more words.

“‘Silver shrines,’ verse 24. The heathens used to carry the images of their gods in procession from one city to another. This was done in a chariot which was solemnly consecrated for that employment, and by the Romans styled Thensa, that is, the chariot of their gods. But besides this, it was placed in a box or shrine, called Ferculum. Accordingly, when the Romans conferred divine honors on their great men, alive or dead, they had the Circen games, and in them the Thensa and Ferculum, the chariot and the shrine, bestowed on them; as it is related of Julius Caesar. This Ferculum among the Romans did not differ much from the Graecian Ναὸς, a little chapel, representing the form of a temple, with an image in it, which, being set upon an altar, or any other solemn place, having the doors opened, the image was seen by the spectators either in a standing or sitting posture. An old anonymous scholiast upon Aristotle’s Rhetoric, lib. i. c. 15, has these words: Ναοποιοὶ οἱ τοὺς ναοὺς ποιοῦσι, ἤτοι εἱκονοστάσια, τινα μικρὰ ξύλινα ἅ πωλοῦσι, observing the ναοι here to be εικονοστάσια, chaplets, with images in them, of wood, or metal, (as here of silver,) which they made and sold, as in verse 25, they are supposed to do. Athenaeus speaks of the καδισκος, ‘which,’ says he ‘is a vessel wherein they place their images of Jupiter.’ The learned Casaubon states, that ‘these images were put in cases, which were made like chapels. (Deipnos. lib. ii. p. 500.) So St. Chrysostom likens them to ‘little cases, or shrines.’ Dion says of the Roman ensign, that it was a little temple, and in it a golden eagle, (Ρωμαικ, lib. 40.) And in another place: ‘There was a little chapel of Juno, set upon a table.’ Ρωμαικ, lib. 39. This is the meaning of the tabernacle of Moloch, Acts vii. 43, where by the σκηνη, tabernacle, is meant the chaplet, a shrine of that false god. The same was also the סכות דנות the tabernacle of Benoth, or Venus.” Hammond’s Annotations. [Williams on Pearson, p. 55.]

Robbers of temples.——Think of the miserable absurdity of the common English translation in this passage, (Acts xix. 37,) where the original ἱεροσυλοι is expressed by “robbers of churches!” Now who ever thought of applying the English word “church,” to anything whatever but a “Christian assembly,” or “Christian place of assembly?” Why then is this phrase put in the mouth of a heathen officer addressing a heathen assembly about persons charged with violating the sanctity of heathen places of worship? Such a building as a church, (εκκλησια, ecclesia) devoted to the worship of the true God, was not known till more than a century after this time; and the Greek word ἱερον, (hieron,) which enters into the composition of the word in the sacred text, thus mistranslated, was never applied to a Christian place of worship.

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.

Paul’s residence in Ephesus is distinguished in his literary history, as the period in which he wrote that most eloquent and animated of his epistles,——“the first to the Corinthians.” It was written towards the close of his stay in Asia, about the time of the passover; according to established calculations, therefore, in the spring of the year of Christ 57. The more immediate occasion of his writing to the Corinthian Christians, was a letter which he had received from them, by the hands of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus. Paul had previously written to them an epistle, (now lost,) in which he gave them some directions about their deportment, which they did not fully understand, and of which they desired an explanation in their letter. Many of these questions, which this epistle of the Corinthians contained, are given by Paul, in connection with his own answers to them; and from this source it is learned that they concerned several points of expediency and propriety about matrimony. These are answered by Paul, very distinctly and fully; but much of his epistle is taken up with instructions and reproofs on many points not referred to in their inquiries. The Corinthian church was made up of two very opposite constituent parts, so unlike in their character, as to render exceedingly complicated the difficulties of bringing all under one system of faith and practice; and the apostolic founder was, at one time, obliged to combat heathen licentiousness, and at another, Jewish bigotry and formalism. The church also, having been too soon left without the presence of a fully competent head, had been very loosely filled up with a great variety of improper persons,——some hypocrites, and some profligates,——a difficulty not altogether peculiar to the Corinthian church, nor to those of the apostolic age. But there were certainly some very extraordinary irregularities in the conduct of their members, some of whom were in the habit of getting absolutely drunk at the sacramental table; and others were guilty of great sins in respect to general purity of life. Another peculiar difficulty, which had arisen in the church of Corinth, during Paul’s absence, was the formation of sects and parties, each claiming some one of the great Christian teachers as its head; some of them claiming Paul as their only apostolic authority; some again preferring the doctrines of Apollos, who had been laboring among them while Paul was in Ephesus; and others again, referred to Peter as the true apostolic chief, while they wholly denied to Paul any authority whatever, as an apostle. There had, indeed, arisen a separate party, strongly opposed to Paul, headed by a prominent person, who had done a great deal to pervert the truth, and to lessen the character of Paul in various ways, which are alluded to by Paul in many passages of his epistle, in a very indignant tone. Other difficulties are described by him, and various excesses are reproved, as a scandal to the Christian character; such as an incestuous marriage among their members,——lawsuits before heathen magistrates,——dissolute conformity to the licentious worship of the Corinthian goddess, whose temple was so infamous for its scandalous rites and thousand priestesses. Some of the Corinthian Christians had been in the habit of visiting this and other heathen temples, and of participating in the scenes of feasting, riot and debauchery, which were carried on there as a part of the regular forms of idolatrous worship.

The public worship of the Corinthian church had been disturbed also by various irregularities which Paul reprehends;——the abuse of the gift of tongues, and the affectation of an unusual dress in preaching, both by men and women. In the conclusion of his epistle he expatiates too, at great length, on the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, vehemently arguing against some Corinthian heretics, who had denied any but a spiritual existence beyond the grave. This argument may justly be pronounced the best specimen of Paul’s very peculiar style, reasoning as he does, with a kind of passion, and interrupting the regular series of logical demonstrations, by fiery bursts of enthusiasm, personal appeals, poetical quotations, illustrative similes, violent denunciations of error, and striking references to his own circumstances. All these nevertheless, point very directly and connectedly at the great object of the argument, and the whole train of reasoning swells and mounts, towards the conclusion, in a manner most remarkably effective, constituting one of the most sublime argumentative passages ever written. He then closes the epistle with some directions about the mode of collecting the contributions for the brethren in Jerusalem. He promises to visit them, and make a long stay among them, when he goes on his journey through Macedonia,——a route which, he assures them, he had now determined to take, as mentioned by Luke, in his account of the preliminary mission of Timothy and Erastus, before the time of the mob at Ephesus; but should not leave Ephesus until after Pentecost, because a great and effectual door was there opened to him, and there were many opposers. He speaks of Timothy as being then on the mission before mentioned, and exhorts them not to despise this young brother, if he should visit them, as they might expect. After several other personal references, he signs his [♦]own name with a general salutation; and from the terms, in which he expresses this particular mark already alluded to in the second epistle to the Thessalonians, it is very reasonable to conclude, that he was not his own penman in any of these epistles, but used an amanuensis, authenticating the whole by his signature, with his own hand, only at the end; and this opinion of his method of carrying on his correspondence, is now commonly, perhaps universally, adopted by the learned.

[♦] “ownn,ame” replaced with “own name”

“Chapter xvi. 10, 11. ‘Now, if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you without fear; for he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do: let no man therefore despise him, but conduct him forth in peace, that he may come unto me, for I look for him with the brethren.’

“From the passage considered in the preceding number, it appears that Timothy was sent to Corinth, either with the epistle, or before it: ‘for this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus.’ From the passage now quoted, we infer that Timothy was not sent with the epistle; for had he been the bearer of the letter, or accompanied it, would St. Paul in that letter have said, ‘if Timothy come?’ Nor is the sequel consistent with the supposition of his carrying the letter; for if Timothy was with the apostle when he wrote the letter, could he say, as he does, ‘I look for him with the brethren?’ I conclude, therefore, that Timothy had left St. Paul to proceed upon his journey before the letter was written. Further, the passage before us seems to imply, that Timothy was not expected by St. Paul to arrive at Corinth, till after they had received the letter. He gives them directions in the letter how to treat him when he should arrive: ‘if he come,’ act towards him so and so. Lastly, the whole form of expression is more naturally applicable to the supposition of Timothy’s coming to Corinth, not directly from St. Paul, but from some other quarter; and that his instructions had been, when he should reach Corinth, to return. Now, how stands this matter in the history? Turn to the nineteenth chapter and twenty-first verse of the Acts, and you will find that Timothy did not, when sent from Ephesus, where he left St. Paul, and where the present epistle was written, proceed by a straight course to Corinth, but that he went round through Macedonia. This clears up everything; for, although Timothy was sent forth upon his journey before the letter was written, yet he might not reach Corinth till after the letter arrived there; and he would come to Corinth, when he did come, not directly from St. Paul, at Ephesus, but from some part of Macedonia. Here therefore is a circumstantial and critical agreement, and unquestionably without design; for neither of the two passages in the epistle mentions Timothy’s journey into Macedonia at all, though nothing but a circuit of that kind can explain and reconcile the expressions which the writer uses.” (Paley’s Horae Paulinae, 1 Corinthians No. IV.)

“Chapter v. 7, 8. ‘For even Christ, our passover, is sacrificed for us; therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.’

“Dr. Benson tells us, that from this passage, compared with chapter xvi. 8, it has been conjectured that this epistle was written about the time of the Jewish passover; and to me the conjecture appears to be very well founded. The passage to which Dr. Benson refers us, is this: ‘I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.’ With this passage he ought to have joined another in the same context: ‘And it may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with you:’ for, from the two passages laid together, it follows that the epistle was written before Pentecost, yet after winter; which necessarily determines the date to the part of the year, within which the passover falls. It was written before Pentecost, because he says, ‘I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.’ It was written after winter, because he tells them, ‘It may be that I may abide, yea, and winter with you.’ The winter which the apostle purposed to pass at Corinth, was undoubtedly the winter next ensuing to the date of the epistle; yet it was a winter subsequent to the ensuing Pentecost, because he did not intend to set forwards upon his journey till after the feast. The words, ‘let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth,’ look very much like words suggested by the season; at least they have, upon that supposition, a force and significancy which do not belong to them upon any other; and it is not a little remarkable, that the hints casually dropped in the epistle, concerning particular parts of the year, should coincide with this supposition.” (Paley’s Horae Paulinae. 1 Corinthians. No. XII.)

SECOND VOYAGE TO EUROPE.

After the disturbances connected with the mob raised by Demetrius had wholly ceased, and public attention was no longer directed to the motions of the preachers of the Christian doctrine, Paul determined to execute the plan, which he had for some time contemplated, of going over his European fields of labor again, according to his universal and established custom of revisiting and confirming his work, within a moderately brief period after first opening the ground for evangelization. Assembling the disciples about him, he bade them farewell, and turning northward, came to Troas, whence, six or seven years before, he had set out on his first voyage to Macedonia. The plan of his journey, as he first arranged it, had been to sail from the shores of Asia Minor directly for Corinth. He had resolved however, not to go to that city, until the very disagreeable difficulties which had there arisen in the church, had been entirely removed, according to the directions given in the epistle which he had written to them from Ephesus; because he did not desire, after an absence of years, to visit them in such circumstances, when his Corinthian converts were divided among themselves, and against him,——and when his first duties would necessarily be those of a rigid censor. He therefore waited at Troas, with great impatience, for a message from them, announcing the settlement of all difficulties. This he expected to receive through Titus, a person now first mentioned in the apostle’s history. Waiting with great impatience for this beloved brother, he found no rest in his spirit, and though a door was evidently opened by the Lord for the preaching of the gospel in Troas, he had no spirit for the good work there; and desiring to be as near the great object of his anxieties as possible, he accordingly took leave of the brethren at Troas, and crossed the Aegean into Macedonia, by his former route. Here he remained in great distress of mind, until his soul was at last comforted by the long expected arrival of Titus. Luke only says, that he went over those parts and gave them much exhortation. But though his route is not given, his apostolic labors are known to have extended to the borders of Illyricum. At this time also, he made another important contribution to the list of the apostolic writings.

THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.

There is no part of the New Testament canon, about the date of which all authorities are so well agreed, as on the place and time, at which Paul wrote his second epistle to the Corinthians. All authorities, ancient and modern, decide that it was written during the second visit of Paul to Macedonia; although as to the exact year in which this took place, they are not entirely unanimous. The passages in the epistle itself, which refer to Macedonia as the region in which the apostle then was, are so numerous indeed, that there can be no evasion of their evidence. A great topic of interest with him, at the time of writing this epistle, was the collecting of the contributions proposed for the relief of the Christian brethren in Jerusalem; and upon this he enlarges much, informing the Corinthians of the great progress he was making in Macedonia in this benevolent undertaking, and what high hopes he had entertained and expressed to the Macedonians, of the zeal and ability of those in Achaia, about the contributions. This matter had been noticed and arranged by him, in his former epistle to them, as already noticed, and he now proposed to send forward Titus and another person, (who is commonly supposed to be Luke,) to take charge of these funds, thus collected. He speaks of coming also himself, after a little time, and makes some allusions to the difficulties which had constituted the subject of the great part of his former epistle. Of their amendment in the particulars then so severely censured, he had received a full account through Titus, when that beloved brother came on from Corinth, to join Paul in Macedonia. Paul assures the Corinthians of the very great joy caused in him, by the good news of their moral and spiritual improvement, and renews his ardent protestations of deep affection for them. The incestuous person, whom they had excommunicated, in conformity with the denunciatory directions given in the former epistle, he now forgives; and as the offender has since appeared to be truly penitent, he now urges his restoration to the consolations of Christian fellowship, lest he should be swallowed up with too much sorrow. He defends his apostolic character for prudence and decision, against those who considered his change of plans about coming directly from Ephesus to Corinth, as an exhibition of lightness and unsettled purpose. His real object in this delay and change of purpose, as he tells them, was, that they might have time to profit by the reproofs contained in his former epistle, so that by the removal of the evils of which he so bitterly complained, he might finally be enabled to come to them, not in sorrow, nor in heaviness for their sins, but in joy for their reformation. This fervent hope had been fulfilled by the coming of Titus to Macedonia, for whom he had waited in vain, with so much anxiety at Troas, as the expected messenger of these tidings of their spiritual condition; and he was now therefore prepared to pass on to them from Macedonia, to which region he tells them he had gone from Troas, instead of to Corinth, because he had been disappointed about meeting Titus on the eastern side of the Aegean. With the exception of these things, the epistle is taken up with a very ample and eloquent exhibition of his true powers and office as an apostle; and in the course of this argument, so necessary for the re-establishment of his authority among those who had lately been disposed to contemn it, he makes many very interesting allusions to his own personal history. The date of the epistle is commonly supposed, and with good reason, to be A. D. 58, the fifth of Nero’s reign, and one year after the preceding epistle.

MILETUS. Acts xx. 15–17.

“Chapter ii. 12, 13. ‘When I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother; but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia.’

“To establish a conformity between this passage and the history, nothing more is necessary to be presumed, than that St. Paul proceeded from Ephesus to Macedonia, upon the same course by which he came back from Macedonia to Ephesus, or rather to Miletus in the neighborhood of Ephesus; in other words, that, in his journey to the peninsula of Greece, he went and returned the same way. St. Paul is now in Macedonia, where he had lately arrived from Ephesus. Our quotation imports that in his journey he had stopped at Troas. Of this, the history says nothing, leaving us only the short account, ‘that Paul departed from Ephesus, for to go into Macedonia.’ But the history says, that in his return from Macedonia to Ephesus, ‘Paul sailed from Philippi to Troas; and that, when the disciples came together on the first day of the week, to break bread, Paul preached unto them all night; that from Troas he went by land to Assos; from Assos, taking ship and coasting along the front of Asia Minor, he came by Mitylene to Miletus.’ Which account proves, first, that Troas lay in the way by which St. Paul passed between Ephesus and Macedonia; secondly, that he had disciples there. In one journey between these two places, the epistle, and in another journey between the same places, the history makes him stop at this city. Of the first journey he is made to say, ‘that a door was in that city opened unto him of the Lord;’ in the second, we find disciples there collected around him, and the apostle exercising his ministry, with, what was even in him, more than ordinary zeal and labor. The epistle, therefore, is in this instance confirmed, if not by the terms, at least by the probability of the history; a species of confirmation by no means to be despised, because, as far as it reaches, it is evidently uncontrived.

“Grotius, I know, refers the arrival at Troas, to which the epistle alludes, to a different period, but I think very improbably; for nothing appears to me more certain, than that the meeting with Titus, which St. Paul expected at Troas, was the same meeting which took place in Macedonia, viz. upon Titus’s coming out of Greece. In the quotation before us, he tells the Corinthians, ‘When I came to Troas, I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus, my brother; but, taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia.’ Then in the seventh chapter he writes, ‘When we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled on every side; without were fightings, within were fears; nevertheless, God, that comforteth them that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus.’ These two passages plainly relate to the same journey of Titus, in meeting with whom St. Paul had been disappointed at Troas, and rejoiced in Macedonia. And amongst other reasons which fix the former passage to the coming of Titus out of Greece, is the consideration, that it was nothing to the Corinthians that St. Paul did not meet with Titus at Troas, were it not that he was to bring intelligence from Corinth. The mention of the disappointment in this place, upon any other supposition, is irrelative.” (Paley’s Horae Paulinae. 2 Corinthians No. VIII.)

SECOND JOURNEY TO CORINTH.

Among his companions in Macedonia, was Timothy, his ever zealous and affectionate assistant in the apostolic ministry, who had been sent thither before him to prepare the way, and had been laboring in that region ever since, as plainly appears from the fact, that he is joined with Paul in the opening address of the second epistle to the Corinthians,——a circumstance in itself sufficient to overthrow a very common supposition of the critics,——that Timothy returned to Asia; that Paul at that time “left him in Ephesus,” and at this time wrote his first epistle to Timothy from Macedonia. It is also most probable that Timothy was the personal companion of Paul, not only during the whole period of his second ministration in Macedonia, but also accompanied him from that province to Corinth; because Timothy is distinctly mentioned by Luke, among those who went with Paul from Macedonia to Asia, after his brief second residence in that city. No particulars whatever are given by Luke of the labors of Paul in Corinth. From his epistles, however, it is learned that he was at this time occupied in part, in receiving the contributions made throughout Achaia for the church of Jerusalem, to which city he was now preparing to go. The difficulties, of which so much mention had been made in his epistles, were now entirely removed, and his work there doubtless went on without any of that opposition which had arisen after his first departure. There is however, one very important fact in his literary history, which took place in Corinth, during his residence there.

THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

From the very earliest period of apostolic labor, after the ascension, there appear to have been in Rome, some Jews who professed the faith of Jesus. Among the visitors in Jerusalem at the Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit first descended, were some from Rome, who sharing in the gifts of that remarkable effusion, and returning to their home in the imperial city, would there in themselves constitute the rudiment of a Christian church. It is perfectly certain that they had never been blessed in their own city with the personal presence of an apostle and all their associated action as a Christian church, must therefore have been entirely the result of a voluntary organization, suggested by the natural desire to keep up and to spread the doctrines which they had first received in Jerusalem, under such remarkable circumstances. Yet the members of the church would not be merely those who were converted at the Pentecost; for there was a constant influx of Jews from all parts of the world to Rome, and among these there would naturally be some who had participated in the light of the gospel, now so widely diffused throughout the eastern section of the world. There is moreover distinct information of certain persons of high qualifications, as Christian teachers, who had at Rome labored in the cause of the gospel, and had no doubt been among the most efficient means of that advancement of the Roman church, which seems to be implied in the communication now first made to them by Paul. Aquilas and Priscilla, who had been the intimate friends of Paul at Corinth, and who had been already so active and distinguished as laborers in the gospel cause, both in that city and in Ephesus, had returned to Rome on the death of Claudius, when that emperor’s foolish decree of banishment, against the Jews, expired along with its author, in the year of Christ, 54. These, on re-establishing their residence in Rome, made their own house a place of assembly for a part of the Christians in the capital,——probably for such as resided in their own immediate neighborhood, while others sought different places, according as suited their convenience in this particular. Many other persons are mentioned by Paul at the close of this epistle, as having been active in the work of the gospel at Rome;——among whom Andronicus and Junias are particularly noticed with respect, as having highly distinguished themselves in apostolic labors. From all these evangelizing efforts, the church of Rome attained great importance, and was now in great need of the counsels and presence of an apostle, to confirm it, and impart to its members spiritual gifts. It had long been an object of attention and interest to Paul, and he had already expressed a determination to visit the imperial city, in the remarks which he made to the brethren at Ephesus, when he was making arrangements to go into Macedonia and Achaia. The way was afterwards opened for this visit, by a very peculiar providence, which he does not seem to have then anticipated; but while residing in Corinth, his attention being very particularly called to their spiritual condition, he could not wait till he should have an opportunity to see them personally, to counsel them; but wrote to them this very copious and elaborate epistle, which seems to have been the subject of more comment among dogmatic theologians, than almost any other portion of his writings, on account of its being supposed to furnish different polemic writers with the most important arguments for the peculiar dogmas of one or another, according to the fancy of each. It undoubtedly is the most doctrinal and didactic of all Paul’s epistles, alluding very little to local circumstances, which are the theme of so large a part of most of his writings, but attacking directly certain general errors entertained by the Jews, on the subject of justification, predestination, election, and many peculiar privileges which they attributed to themselves as the descendants of Abraham.

This epistle, like most of the rest, was written by an amanuensis, who is herein particularly named, as Tertius,——a word of Roman origin; but beyond this nothing else is known of him. It was carried to Rome by Phebe, an active female member of the church at Cenchreae, the port of Corinth, who happened to be journeying to Rome for some other purposes, and is earnestly recommended by Paul to the friendly regard of the church there.

RETURN TO ASIA.

After passing three months in Corinth, he took his departure from that city, on his pre-determined voyage to the east, the direction of which was somewhat changed by the information that the Jews of the place where he then was, were plotting some mischief against him, which he thought best to avoid by taking a different route from that before planned, which was a direct voyage to Syria. To escape the danger prepared for him by them, at his expected place of embarkation, he first turned northward by land, through Macedonia to Philippi, and thence sailed by the now familiar track over the Aegean to Troas. On this journey, he was accompanied by quite a retinue of apostolic assistants,——not only his faithful disciple and companion Timothy, but also Sosipater of Beroea, Aristarchus and Secundus of Thessalonica, Gaius, or Caius of Derbe, and Luke also, who now carries on the apostolic narrative in the first person, thus showing that he was himself a sharer in the adventures which he narrates. Besides these immediate companions, two brethren from Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus, took the direct route from Corinth to Troas, at which place they waited for the rest of the apostolic company, who took the circuitous route through Macedonia. The date of the departure of Paul is very exactly fixed by his companion Luke, who states that they left Philippi at the time of the passover, which was in the middle of March; and other circumstances have enabled modern critics to fix the occurrence in the year of Christ 59. After a five days’ voyage, arriving at Troas on Saturday, they made a stay of seven days in that place; and on the first day of the week, the Christians of that place having assembled for the communion usual on the Lord’s day, Paul preached to them: and as it was the last day of his stay, he grew very earnest in his discourse and protracted it very late, speaking two whole hours to the company, who were met in the great upper hall, where, in all Jewish houses, these festal entertainments and social meetings were always held. It was, of course, the evening, when the assembly met, for this was the usual time for a social party, and there were many lights in the room, which, with the number of people, must have made the air very warm, and had the not very surprising effect of causing drowsiness, in at least one of Paul’s hearers, a young man named [♦]Eutychus, whose interest in what was said, could not keep his attention alive against the pressure of drowsiness. He fell asleep; and the occurrence must appear so very natural, (more particularly to any one, who has ever been so unfortunate as to be sleepy at an evening meeting, and knows what a painful sensation it is, though the drowsiness is wholly beyond the control of the reason,) that it can hardly be thought worth while to take pains, as some venerable commentators do, to suppose that the devil was very specially concerned in producing the sleep of Eutychus, and that the consequences which ensued, were an exhibition of divine wrath against the sleepy youth, for slumbering under the preaching of Paul. If the supposition holds equally good in all similar cases, the devil must be very busy on warm Sunday afternoons; and many a comfortable nap would be disturbed by unpleasant dreams, if the dozer could be made to think that his drowsiness was the particular work of the great adversary of souls, or that he was liable to suffer any such accident as Eutychus did, who, falling into a deeper sleep, and losing all muscular control and consciousness, sunk down from his seat, and slipping over the side of the gallery, in the third loft, fell into the court below, where he was taken up lifeless. But Paul hearing of the accident, stopped his discourse, and going down to the young man, fell on him and embraced him, saying, “Trouble not yourselves, for the life is in him.” And his words were verified by the result; for they soon brought him up alive, and were not a little comforted. Paul, certain of his recovery, did not suffer the accident to mar the enjoyment of the social farewell meeting; but going up and breaking bread with them all, talked with them a long time, passing the whole night in this pleasant way, and did not leave them till day-break, when he started to go by land over to Assos, about twenty-four miles south-east of Troas, on the Adramyttian gulf, which sets up between the north side of the island of Lesbos and the mainland. His companions, coming around by water, through the mouth of the gulf, took Paul on board at Assos, according to his plan; and then instead of turning back, and sailing out into the open sea, around the outside of Lesbos, ran up the gulf to the eastern end of the north coast of the island, where there is an other outlet to the gulf between the eastern shore of Lesbos and the continent. Sailing southward through this passage, after a course of between thirty and forty miles, they came to Mitylene, on the southeastern side of the island. Thence passing out of the strait, they sailed southwestwards, coming between Chios and the main-land, and arrived the next day at Trogyllium, at the southwest corner of Samos. Then turning their course towards the continent, they came in one day to Miletus, near the mouth of the [♠]Meander, about forty miles south of Ephesus.

[♦] “Entychus” replaced with “Eutychus”

[♠] “Maeander” replaced with “Meander”

Landing here, and desiring much to see some of his Ephesian brethren before his departure to Jerusalem, he sent to the elders of the church in that city, and on their arrival poured out his whole soul to them in a parting address, which for pathetic earnestness and touching beauty, is certainly, beyond any doubt, the most splendid passage that all the records of ancient eloquence can furnish. No force can be added to it by a new version, nor can any recapitulation of its substance do justice to its beauty. At the close, took place a most affecting farewell. In the simple and forcible description of Luke, (who was himself present at the moving scene, seeing and hearing all he narrates,)——“When Paul had thus spoken, he kneeled down and prayed with them all.” The subjects of this prayer were the guardians of that little flock which he, amid perils and death, had gathered from the heathen waste of Ionic Asia, to the fold of Christ. When he left it last, the raging wolves of persecution and wrath,——the wild beasts of Ephesus,——were howling death and destruction to the devoted believers of Christ, and they were still environed with temptations and dangers, that threatened to overwhelm these feeble ones, left thus early without the fostering care of their apostolic shepherd. Passing on his way to the great scene of his coming trials, he could not venture among them to give them his parting counsels, and could now only intrust to their constituted guardians, this dear charge, with renewed exhortations to them to be faithful, as in the presence of their God, to those objects of his labors, his cares, his prayers, and his daily tears. Amid the sorrows of that long farewell, arose on the prophetic vision of the apostle some gloomy foreshadowings of future woes to fall on that Ephesian charge, and this deepened the melancholy feeling of his heart almost to agony. This no doubt was the burden of his last prayer, when with their elders, and for them, he kneeled down on the shore and sent up in earnest petition to God, that voice which they were doomed to hear no more forever.

Such passages as this in the life and words of Paul, constitute a noble addition to the reader’s idea of his character. They show how nobly were intermingled in the varied frame of his spirit, the affectionate, the soft, and the winning traits, with the high, the stern, and the bitter feelings that so often were called out by the unparalleled trials of his situation. They show [♦]that he truly felt and acted out, to the life, that divine principle of Christian love which inspired the most eloquent effort of his pen;——and that he trusted not to the wonder-working powers that moved his lips, as with the eloquence of men and angels,——not to the martyr-spirit, that, sacrificing all earthly substance, devoted itself to the raging flames of persecution, in the cause of God,——not to the genius whose discursive glance searched all the mysteries of human and divine knowledge,——but to that pure, exalted and exalting spirit of ardent love for those for whom he lived like his Savior, and for whom he was ready to die like him, also. This was the inspiration of his words, his writings, and his actions,——the motive and spirit of his devotion,——the energy of his being. Wherever he went and whatever he did,——in spite of the frequent passionate outbreaks of his rougher nature, this honest, fervent, animated spirit of charity,——glowing not to inflame, but to melt,——softened the austerities of his character, and kindled in all who truly knew him, a deep and lasting affection for him, like that which was so strikingly manifested on this occasion. Who can wonder that to a man thus constituted, the lingering Ephesians still clung with such enthusiastic attachment? In the fervid action of that oriental clime, they fell on his neck and kissed him, sorrowing most of all for the words which he said,——that they should see his face no more. Still loth to take their last look at one so loved, they accompanied him to the ship, which bore him away from them, to perils, sufferings and chains.

[♦] duplicate word “that” removed

“Assos was a sea-port town, situated on the south-west part of the province of Troas, and over against the island Lesbos. By land it is much nearer Troas than by sea, because of a promontory that runs a great way into the sea, and must be doubled to come to Assos, which was perhaps the reason that the apostle chose rather to walk it.” (Wells’s Geography and Calmet’s Commentary.)

MYTELENE. Acts xx. 14.

“Mitylene, (chapter xx. verse 14,) was one of the principal cities in the island of Lesbos, situated on a peninsula with a commodious haven on each side; the whole island was also called by that name, as well as Pentapolis, from the five cities in it, viz. Issa or Antissa, Pyrrhe, Eressos, Arisba, and Mitylene. It is at present called Metelin. The island is one of the largest in the Archipelago, and was renowned for the many eminent persons it produced; such as Sappho, the inventress of Sapphic verses,——Alcaeus, a famous lyric poet,——Pittacus, one of the seven wise men of Greece,——Theophrastus, the noble physician and philosopher,——and Arion, the celebrated musician. It is now in the possession of the Turks. As mentioned by St. Luke, it may be understood either the island or the city itself.” (Wells’s Geography and Whitby’s Table.)

“Chios, (verse 15,) was an island in the Archipelago, next to Lesbos, both as to situation and size. It lies over against Smyrna, and is not above four leagues distant from the Asiatic continent. Horace and Martial celebrate it for the wine and figs that it produced. It is now renowned for producing the best mastic in the world.

“Sir Paul Ricaut, in his ‘Present State of the Greek Church,’ tells us, that there is no place in the Turkish dominions where Christians enjoy more freedom in their religion and estates than in this island, to which they are entitled by an ancient capitulation made with Sultan Mahomet II.” (Wells’s Geography.)

“Samos, (verse 15,) was another island of the Archipelago, lying south-east of Chios, and about five miles from the Asiatic continent. It was famous among heathen writers for the worship of Juno; for one of the Sibyls called Sibylla Samiana; for Pherecydes, who foretold an earthquake that happened there, by drinking of the waters; and more especially for the birth of Pythagoras. It was formerly a free commonwealth; at present, the Turks have reduced it to a mean and depopulated condition; so that ever since the year 1676, no Turk has ventured to live on it on account of its being frequented by pirates, who carry all whom they take into captivity.” (Wells’s Geography and Whitby’s Table.)

“Trogyllium, (verse 15,) is a promontory at the foot of Mount Mycale, opposite to, and five miles from Samos: there was also a town there of the same name, mentioned by Pliny, Lib. v, c. 29. p. 295.” (Whitby’s Table.)

“Miletus, (verse 15,) a sea-port town on the continent of Asia Minor, and in the province of Caria, memorable for being the birth-place of Thales, one of the seven wise men of Greece, and father of the Ionic philosophy; of Anaximander, his scholar; Timotheus, the musician; and Anaximenes, the philosopher. It is called now, by the Turks, Melas; and not far distant from it is the true Meander.” (Whitby’s Table and Wells’s Geography.) [Williams on Pearson. pp. 66, 67.]

Tearing himself thus from the embraces of his Ephesian brethren, Paul sailed off to the southward, hurrying on to Jerusalem, in order to reach there if possible, before the Pentecost. After leaving Miletus, the apostolic company made a straight course to Coos, and then rounding the great northwestern angle of Asia Minor, turned eastwardly to Rhodes, and passing probably through the strait, between that island and the continent, landed at Patara, a town on the coast of Lycia, which was the destination of their first vessel. They therefore at this place engaged a passage in a vessel bound to Tyre, and holding on southeastward, came next in sight of Cyprus, which they passed, leaving it on the left, and then steering straight for the Syrian coast, landed at Tyre, where their vessel was to unlade; so that they were detained here for a whole week, which they passed in the company of some Christian brethren who constituted a church there. These Tyrian disciples hearing of Paul’s plan to visit Jerusalem, and knowing the dangers to which he would there be exposed by the deadly hate of the Jews, were very urgent with him against his journey; but he still resolutely held on his course, as soon as a passage could be procured, and bade them farewell, with prayer on the shore, to which the brethren accompanied him with their women and children. Standing off from the shore, they then sailed on south, to Ptolemais, where they spent a day with the Christians in that place, and then re-embarking, and passing round the promontory of Carmel, reached Caesarea, where their sea-voyage terminated. Here they passed several days in the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the seven deacons, who had four daughters that were prophetesses. While they were resting themselves in this truly religious family, from the fatigues of their long voyage, they were visited by Agabus, a prophet from Jerusalem,——the same who had formerly visited Antioch when Paul was there, and who had then foretold the coming famine, which threatened all the world. This remarkable man predicted to Paul the misfortunes which awaited him in Jerusalem. In the solemnly impressive dramatic action of the ancient prophets, he took Paul’s girdle, and binding his own hands with it, said——“Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘So shall the Jews at Jerusalem, bind the man that owns this girdle, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles.’” On hearing this melancholy announcement, all the companions of Paul and the Christians of Caesarea, united in beseeching Paul to give up his purpose of visiting Jerusalem. But he, resolute against all entreaty, declared himself ready not only to be bound, but to die in Jerusalem for the Lord Jesus. And when they found that he would not be persuaded, they all ceased to harass him with their supplications, and resigned him to Providence, saying,——“The will of the Lord be done.” They then all took carriages, and rode up to Jerusalem, accompanied by some brethren from Caesarea, and by Mnason, an old believer, formerly of Cyprus, but now of Jerusalem, who had engaged them as his guests in that city.

“Coos, (chapter xxi. verse 1,) an island in the Aegean or Icarian sea, near Mnydos and Cnidus, which had a city of the same name, from which Hippocrates, the celebrated physician, and Apelles, the famous painter, were called Coi. Here was a large temple of Aesculapius, and another of Juno. It abounded in rich wines, and is very often mentioned by the classic poets.” (Whitby’s Alphabetic Table.)

Witsius very absurdly defines the situation of this island by saying that it is “near Crete.”——“[a]Coos, quae maris Mediterranei insula est prope Cretam.]” It is in the Aegean sea properly, and not in the Mediterranean; and can not be less than one hundred and twenty miles from Crete, much farther off from it than is Rhodes,——the next island in Paul’s route, and there are many islands between Coos and Crete, so that the statement gives no just idea of the situation of the island. It would be as proper to say that Barbadoes is near Cuba, or the isle of Man near France.

“Rhodes, (verse 1,) an island, supposed to have taken its name απο των Ροδων from the many roses which were known to grow there. It lies south of the province of Caria, and it is accounted next to Cyprus and Lesbos, for its dignity among the Asiatic islands. It was remarkable among the ancients for the expertness of its inhabitants in navigation; for a college, in which the students were eminent for eloquence and mathematics; and for the clearness of its air, insomuch that there was not a day in which the sun did not shine upon it; and more especially celebrated for its prodigious statue of brass, consecrated especially to the sun, and called his Colossus. This statue was seventy cubits high, and every finger as large as an ordinary sized man, and as it stood astride over the mouth of the harbor, ships passed under its legs.” (Whitby’s Table and Wells’s Geography.) [Williams on Pearson, pp. 67, 68.]

LAST VISIT TO JERUSALEM.

Paul was now received in Jerusalem by the brethren with great joy, and going, on the day after his arrival, to see James, now the principal apostle resident in the Holy city, communicated to him and all the elders a full account of all his various labors. Having heard his very interesting communications, they were moved with gratitude to God for this triumph of his grace; but knowing as they did, with what rumors against Paul these events had been connected by common fame, they desired to arrange his introduction to the temple in such a manner, as would most effectually silence these prejudicial stories. The plan proposed by them was, that he should, in the company of four Jews of the Christian faith, who had a vow on them, go through with all the usual forms of purification prescribed under such circumstances for a Jew, on returning from the daily impurities to which he was exposed by a residence among the Gentiles, to a participation in the holy services of solemn worship in the temple. The apostles and elders, however, in recommending this course, declared to him, that they believed that the Gentiles ought not to be bound to the performance of the Jewish rituals, but should be exempt from all restrictions, except such as had formerly been decided on, by the council of Jerusalem. Paul, always devout and exact in the observance of the institutions of his national religion, followed their advice accordingly, and went on quietly and unpretendingly in the regular performance of the prescribed ceremonies, waiting for the termination of the seven days of purification, when the offering should be made for himself, and one for each of his companions, after which, they were all to be admitted of course, to the full honors of Mosaic purity, and the religious privileges of conforming Jews. But these ritual observances were not destined to save him from the calamities to which the hatred of his enemies had devoted him. Near the close of the seven days allotted by the Mosaic ritual for the purification of a regenerated Israelite, some of the Asian Jews, who had known Paul in his missionary journeys through their own country, and who had come to Jerusalem, to attend the festival, seeing their old enemy in the midst of the temple, against whose worship they had understood him to have been preaching to the Gentiles,——instantly raised a great outcry, and fell upon him, dragging him along, and shouting to the multitude around, “Men of Israel! help! This is the man, that every where teaches all men against the people, and the law, and this place; and he has furthermore, brought Greeks into the temple, and has polluted this holy place.” It seems they had seen Trophimus, one of his Gentile companions from Ephesus, with him in the city, and imagined also that Paul had brought him into the temple, within the sanctuary, whose entrance was expressly forbidden to all Gentiles, who were never allowed to pass beyond the outermost court. The sanctuary or court of the Jews could not be crossed by an uncircumcised Gentile, and the transgression of the holy limit was punished with death. Within this holy court, the scene now described took place; and as the whole sanctuary was then crowded with Jews, who had come from all parts of the world to attend the festival in Jerusalem, the outcry raised against Paul immediately drew thronging thousands around him. Hearing the complaint that he was a renegade Jew, who, in other countries, had used his utmost endeavors to throw contempt on his own nation, and to bring their holy worship into disrepute, and yet had now the impudence to show himself in the sanctuary, which he had thus blasphemed,——and had, moreover, even profaned it by introducing into the sacred precincts one of those Gentiles for whose company he had forsaken the fellowship of Israel,——they all joined in the rush upon him, and dragged him out of the temple, the gates of which were immediately shut by the Levites on duty, lest in the riot that was expected to ensue, the consecrated pavement should be polluted with the blood of the renegade. Not only those in the temple, but also all those in the city, were called out by the disturbance, and came running together to join in the mob against the profaner of the sanctuary, and Paul now seemed in a fair way to win the bloody crown of martyrdom.

The great noise made by the swarming multitudes who were gathering around Paul, soon reached the ears of the Roman garrison in castle Antonia, and the soldiers instantly hastened to tell the commanding officer, that “the whole city was in an uproar.” The tribune, Claudius Lysias, probably thinking of a rebellion against the Romans, instantly ordered a detachment of several companies under arms, and hurried down with them, in a few moments, to the scene of the riot. The mob meanwhile were [♦]diligently occupied in beating Paul; but as soon as the military force made their way among the crowd, the rioters left off beating him, and fell back. The tribune coming near, and seeing Paul alone in the midst, who seemed to be the object and occasion of all the disturbance, without hesitation seized him, and putting him in chains, took him out of the throng. He then demanded what all this riot meant. To his inquiry, the whole mob replied with various accounts; some cried one thing and some another; and the tribune finding it utterly impossible to learn from the rioters who he was or what he had done, ordered him to be taken up to the castle. Castle Antonia stood at the northwestern angle of the temple, close by one of the great entrances to it, near which the riot seems to have taken place. To this, Paul was now taken, and was borne by the surrounding soldiers, to keep off the multitude, who were raging for his blood, like hungry wolves after the prey snatched from their jaws,——and they all pressed after him, shouting, “kill him!” In this way Paul was carried up the stairs which led to the high entrance of the castle, which of course the soldiers would not allow the multitude to mount; and when he had reached the top of the stairs, he was therefore perfectly protected from their violence, though perfectly well situated for speaking to them so as to be distinctly seen and heard. As they were taking him up the stairs, he begged the attention of the tribune, saying, “May I speak to thee?” The tribune hearing this, in some surprise asked, “Canst thou speak Greek? Art thou not that Egyptian that raised a sedition some time ago, and led away into the wilderness a band of four thousand cut-throats?” This alarming revolt had been but lately put down with great trouble, and was therefore fresh in the mind of Lysias, who had been concerned in quelling it, along with the whole Roman force in Palestine,——and from some of the outcries of the mob, he now took up the notion that Paul was the very ringleader of that revolt, and had now just returned from his place of refuge to make new trouble, and had been detected by the multitude in the temple. Paul answered the foolish accusation of the tribune, by saying, “I am a Jewish citizen of Tarsus, in Cilicia, which is no mean city; and I beg of thee, to let me speak to the people.” The tribune, quite glad to have his unpleasant suspicions removed, as an atonement for the unjust accusation immediately granted the permission as requested, and Paul therefore turned to the raging multitude, waving his hand in the usual gesture for requesting silence. The people, curious to hear his account of himself, listened accordingly, and he therefore uplifted his voice in a respectful request for their attention to his plea in his own behalf. “Men! Brethren! and Fathers! Hear ye my defence which I make to you!”

[♦] “dilgently” replaced with “diligently”

Those words were spoken in the vernacular language of Palestine, the true Hebraistic dialect of Jerusalem, and the multitude were thereby immediately undeceived about his character, for they had been as much mistaken about him, as the tribune was, though their mistake was of a very opposite character; for they supposed him to be entirely Greek in his habits and language, if not in his origin; and the vast concourse was therefore hushed in profound silence, to hear his address made in the true Jewish language. Before this strange audience, Paul then stood up boldly, to declare his character, his views, and his apostolic commission. On the top of the lofty rampart of Castle Antonia,——with the dark iron forms of the Roman soldiery around him, guarding the staircase from top to bottom, against the raging mob,——and with the enormous mass of the congregated thousands of Jerusalem, and of the strangers who had come up to the festival, all straining their fierce eyes in wrath and hate upon him, as a convicted renegade,——one feeble, slender man, now stood, the object of the most painful attention to all,——yet, less moved with passion and anxiety than any one present. Thus stationed, he began, and gave to the curious multitude an interesting account of the incidents connected with that great change in his feelings and belief, which was the occasion of the present difficulty. After giving them a complete statement of these particulars, he was narrating the circumstance of a revelation made to him in the temple, while in a devotional trance there, on his first return to Jerusalem, after his conversion. In repeating the solemn commission there confirmed to him by the voice of God, he repeated the crowning sentence, with which the Lord removed his doubts about engaging in the work of preaching the gospel, when his hands were yet, as it were, red with the blood of the martyred faithful,——“And he said to me, ‘Go: for I will send thee far hence, unto the Gentiles.’” But when the listening multitude heard this clear declaration of his having considered himself authorized to communicate to the Gentiles those holy things which had been especially consigned by God to his peculiar people,——they took it as a clear confession of the charge of having desecrated and degraded his national religion, and all interrupted him with the ferocious cry, “Take him away from the earth! for such a fellow does not deserve to live.” The tribune, finding that this discussion was not likely to answer any good purpose, instantly put a stop to it, by dragging him into the castle, and gave directions that he should be examined by scourging, that they might make him confess truly who he was, and what he had done to make the people cry out so against him,——a very foolish way, it would seem, to find out the truth about an unknown and abused person, to flog him until he should tell a story that would please them. While the guard were binding him with thongs, before they laid on the scourge, Paul spoke to the centurion, who was superintending the operation, and said in a sententiously inquiring way, “Is it lawful for you to scourge a Roman citizen without legal condemnation?” This question put a stop to all proceedings at once. The centurion immediately dropped the thongs, and ran to the tribune, saying, “Take heed what thou doest, for this man is a Roman citizen.” The tribune then came to Paul, in much trepidation, and with great solemnity said——“Tell me truly, art thou a Roman citizen?” Paul distinctly declared, “Yes.”

Desirous to learn the mode in which the prisoner had obtained this most sacred and unimpeachable privilege, the tribune remarked of himself, that he had obtained this right by the payment of a large sum of money,——perhaps doubting whether a man of Paul’s poor aspect could have ever been able to buy it; to which Paul boldly replied——“But I was BORN free.” This clear declaration satisfied the tribune that he had involved himself in a very serious difficulty, by committing this illegal violence on a person thus entitled to all the privileges of a subject of law. All the subordinate agents also, were fully aware of the nature of the mistake, and all immediately let him alone. Lysias now kept Paul with great care in the castle, as a place of safety from his Jewish persecutors; and the next day, in order to have a full investigation of his character and the charges against him, he took him before the Sanhedrim, for examination. Paul there opened his defence in a very appropriate and self-vindicating style. “Men! Brethren! and Fathers! I have heretofore lived before God with a good conscience.” At these words, Ananias the high priest, provoked by Paul’s seeming assurance in thus vindicating himself, when under the accusation of the heads of the Jewish religion, commanded those that stood next to Paul to slap him on the mouth. Paul, indignant at the high-handed tyranny of this outrageous attack on him, answered in honest wrath——“God shall smite thee, thou whited wall! For dost thou command me to be smitten contrary to the law, when thou sittest as a judge over me?” The other by-standers, enraged at his boldness, asked him, “Revilest thou God’s high priest?” To which Paul, not having known the fact that Ananias then held that office, which he had so disgraced by his infamous conduct, replied——“I knew not, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.” Then, perceiving the mixed character of the council, he determined to avail himself of the mutual hatred of the two great sects, for his defense, by making his own persecution a kind of party question; and therefore called out to them——“I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. Of the hope of the resurrection of the dead, I am called in question.” These words had the expected effect. Instantly, all the violent party feeling between these two sects broke out in full force, and the whole council was divided and confused,——the scribes who belonged to the Pharisaic order, arising, and declaring, “We find no occasion of evil in this man. But if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God.” This last remark, of course, was throwing down the gauntlet at the opposite sect; for the Sadducees, denying absolutely the existence of either angel or spirit, could of course believe no part of Paul’s story about his vision and spiritual summons. They all therefore broke out against the Pharisees, who being thus involved, took Paul’s side very determinedly, and the party strife grew so hot that Paul was like to be torn in pieces between them. The tribune, seeing the pass to which matters had come, then ordered out the castle-guard, and took him by force, bringing him back to his former place of safety.

“The reason why St. Paul chose to speak in the Hebrew tongue, may be accounted for thus. There were at this time two sorts of Jews, some called by Chrysostom οἱ βαθεις Ἑβραιοι, profound Hebrews, who used no other language but the Hebrew, and would not admit the Greek Bible into their assemblies, but only the Hebrew, with the Jerusalem Targum and Paraphrase. The other sort spoke Greek, and used that translation of the scriptures; these were called Hellenists. This was a cause of great dissension among these two parties, even after they had embraced Christianity, (Acts vi. 1.) Of this latter sort was St. Paul, because he always made use of the Greek translation of the Bible in his writings, so that in this respect he might not be acceptable to the other party. Those of them who were converted to Christianity, were much prejudiced against him, (Acts xxi. 21,) which is given as a reason for his concealing his name in his Epistle to the Hebrews. And as for those who were not converted, they could not so much as endure him: and this is the reason which Chrysostom gives, why he preached to the Hellenists only. Acts ix. 28. Therefore, that he might avert the great displeasure which the Jews had conceived against him, he accosted them in their favorite language, and by his compliance in this respect, they were so far pacified as to give him audience.” (Hammond’s Annotations.) [Williams’s Pearson, p. 70.]

“Scourging was a method of examination used by Romans and other nations, to force such as were supposed guilty to confess what they had done, what were their motives, and who were accessory to the fact. Thus Tacitus tells us of Herennius Gallus, that he received several stripes, that it might be known for what price, and with what confederates, he had betrayed the Roman army. It is to be observed, however, that the Romans were punished in this wise, not by whips and scourges, but with rods only; and therefore it is that Cicero, in his oration pro Rabirio, speaking against Labienus, tells his audience that the Porcian law permitted a Roman to be whipped with rods, but he, like a good and merciful man, (speaking ironically,) had done it with scourges; and still further, neither by whips nor rods could a citizen of Rome be punished, until he were first adjudged to lose his privilege, to be uncitizened, and to be declared an enemy to the commonwealth, then he might be scourged or put to death. Cicero Oratio in Verres, says, ‘It is a foul fault for any praetor, &c. to bind a citizen of Rome; a piacular offense to scourge him; a kind of parricide to kill him: what shall I call the crucifying of such an one?’” (Williams’s notes on Pearson, pp. 70, 71.)

“Ananias, the son of Nebedaeus, was high priest at the time that Helena, queen of Adiabene, supplied the Jews with corn from Egypt, (Josephus Antiquities, lib. xx. c. 5. § 2,) during the famine which took place in the fourth year of Claudius, mentioned in the eleventh chapter of the Acts. St. Paul, therefore, who took a journey to Jerusalem at that period, (Acts xv.) could not have been ignorant of the elevation of Ananias to that dignity. Soon after the holding of the first council, as it is called, at Jerusalem, Ananias was dispossessed of his office, in consequence of certain acts of violence between the Samaritans and the Jews, and sent prisoner to Rome, (Josephus, Antiquities, lib. xx. c. 6. § 2,) whence he was afterwards released and returned to Jerusalem. Now from that period he could not be called high priest, in the proper sense of the word, though Josephus (Antiquities, lib. xx. c. 9. § 2, and Jewish War lib. ii. c. 17. § 9,) has sometimes given him the title of αρχιερευς, taken in the more extensive meaning of a priest, who had a seat and voice in the Sanhedrim; αρχιερεις in the plural number is frequently used in the New Testament, when allusion is made to the Sanhedrim;) and Jonathan, though we are not acquainted with the circumstances of his elevation, had been raised, in the mean time, to the supreme dignity in the Jewish church. Between the death of Jonathan, who was murdered (Josephus Antiquities of the Jews lib. xx. c. 8. § 5,) by order of Felix, and the high priesthood of Ismael, who was invested with that office by Agrippa, (Josephus Antiquities lib. xx. c. 8. § 3,) elapsed an interval in which this dignity continued vacant. Now it happened precisely in this interval, that St. Paul was apprehended at Jerusalem; and, the Sanhedrim being destitute of a president, he undertook of his own authority the discharge of that office, which he executed with the greatest tyranny. (Josephus Antiquities lib. xx. c. 9. § 2.) It is possible therefore that St. Paul, who had been only a few days at Jerusalem, might be ignorant that Ananias, who had been dispossessed of the priesthood, had taken upon himself a trust to which he was not entitled. He might therefore very naturally exclaim, ‘I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest!’ Admitting him on the other hand to have been acquainted with the fact, the expression must be considered as an indirect reproof, and a tacit refusal to recognize usurped authority.” (Michaelis, Vol. I. pp. 51, 56.)

“The prediction of St. Paul, verse 3, ‘God shall smite thee, thou whited wall,’ was, according to Josephus, fulfilled in a short time. For when, in the government of Florus, his son Eleazar set himself at the head of a party of mutineers, who, having made themselves masters of the temple, would permit no sacrifices to be offered for the emperor; and being joined by a company of assassins, compelled persons of the best quality to fly for their safety and hide themselves in sinks and vaults;——Ananias and his brother Hezekias, were both drawn out of one of these places, and murdered, (Josephus Jewish War lib. ii. c. 17, 18,) though Dr. Lightfoot will have it that he perished at the siege of Jerusalem!” (Whitby’s Annotations.) [Williams on Pearson.]

During that night, the soul of Paul was comforted by a heavenly vision, in which the Lord exhorted him to maintain the same high spirit,——assuring him that as he had testified of him in Jerusalem, even so he should bear witness in Rome. His dangers in Jerusalem, however, were not yet over. The furious Jews, now cut off from all possibility of doing any violence to Paul, under the sanction of legal forms, determined to set all moderation aside, and forty of the most desperate bound themselves by a solemn oath, neither to eat nor drink, till they had slain Paul. In the arrangement of the mode in which their abominable vow should be performed, it was settled between them and the high-priest, that a request should be sent to the tribune to bring down Paul before the council once more, as if for the sake of putting some additional inquiries to him for their final and perfect satisfaction; and then, that these desperadoes should station themselves, where they could make a rush upon Paul, just as he was entering the council-hall, and kill him before the guard could bestir themselves in his defense, or seize the murderers; and even if some of them should be caught and punished, it never need be known, that the high priest was accessory to the assassination. But while they were arranging this hopeful piece of wickedness, they did not manage it so snugly as was necessary for the success of the plot; for it somehow or other got to the ears of Paul’s nephew,——a young man no where else mentioned in the New Testament, and of whose character and situation, nothing whatever is known. He, hearing of the plot, came instantly to his uncle, who sent him to communicate the tidings to the tribune. Lysias, on receiving this account of the utterly desperate character of the opposition to Paul, determined not to risk his prisoner’s life any longer in Jerusalem, even when guarded by the powerful defenses of castle Antonia. He dismissed the young man with the strongest injunctions, to observe the most profound secrecy, as to the fact of his having made this communication to him; and immediately made preparations to send off Paul, that very night, to Caesarea, designing to have him left there with the governor of the province, as a prisoner of state, and thus to rid himself of all responsibility about this very difficult and perilous business. He ordered two centurions to draw out a detachment, of such very remarkable strength, as shows the excess of his fears for Paul. Two hundred heavy-armed soldiers, seventy horsemen, and two hundred lancers, were detached as a guard for Paul, and were all mounted for speed, to take him beyond the reach of the Jerusalem desperadoes, that very night. He gave to that portion of the detachment that was designed to go all the way to Caesarea, a letter to be delivered to Felix the governor, giving a fair and faithful account of all the circumstances connected with Paul’s imprisonment and perils in Jerusalem.

RETURN TO CAESAREA.

The strong mounted detachment, numbering four hundred and seventy full-armed Roman warriors, accordingly set out that night at nine o’clock, and moving silently off from the castle, which stood near one of the western gates of the city, passed out of Jerusalem unnoticed in the darkness, and galloped away to the north-west. After forty miles of hard riding, they reached Antipatris before day, and as all danger of pursuit from the Jerusalem assassins was out of the question there, the mounted infantry and the lancers returned to Jerusalem, leaving Paul however, the very respectable military attendance of the seventy horse-guards. With these, he journeyed to Caesarea, only about twenty-five miles off, where he was presented by the commander of the detachment to Felix, the Roman governor, who always resided in Caesarea, the capital of his province. The governor, on reading the letter and learning that Paul was of Cilicia, deferred giving his case a full hearing, until his accusers had also come; and committed him for safe keeping in the interval, to an apartment in the great palace, built by Herod the Great, the royal founder of Caesarea.

After a delay of five days, the high priest and the elders came down to Caesarea, to prosecute their charges against Paul before the governor. They brought with them, as their advocate, a speech-maker named Tertullus, whose name shows him to have been of Roman connections or education, and who, on account of his acquaintance with the Latin forms of oratory and law, was no doubt selected by Ananias and his coadjutors, as a person better qualified than themselves to maintain their cause with effect, before the governor. Tertullus accordingly opened the case, and when Paul had been confronted with his accusers, began with a very tedious string of formal compliments to Felix, and then set forth a complaint against Paul in very bitter and abusive terms, stating his offense to be, the attempt to profane the temple, for which the Jews would have convicted and punished him, if Lysias had not violently hindered, and put them to the trouble of bringing the whole business before the governor, though a matter exclusively concerning their religious law. To all his assertions the Jews testified.

This presentation of the accusation being made, Paul was then called on for his defense, which he thereupon delivered in a tone highly respectful to the governor, and maintained that he had been guilty of none of the troublesome and riotous conduct of which he was accused: but quietly, without any effort to make a commotion among the people anywhere, had come into the city on a visit, after many years absence, to bring alms and offerings; and that when he was seized by the Asian Jews in the temple, he was going blamelessly through the established ceremonies of purification. He complained also, that his original accusers, the Asian Jews, were not confronted with him, and challenged his present prosecutors to bring any evidence against him. Felix, after this hearing of the case, on the pretence of needing Lysias as a witness on the facts, deferred his decision, and left both accusers and accused to the enjoyment of the delays and “glorious uncertainties of the law.” Meanwhile he committed Paul to the charge of a centurion, with directions that he should be allowed all reasonable liberty, and should not be in any particular restricted from the freest intercourse with his friends. The imprisonment of Paul at Caesarea was merely nominal; and he must have passed his time both pleasantly and profitably, with the members of the church at Caesarea, with whom he had formerly been acquainted, especially with Philip and his family. Besides these, he was also favored with the company of several of his assistants, who had been the companions of his toils in Europe and Asia; and through them he could hold the freest correspondence with any of the numerous churches of his apostolic charge throughout the world. He resided here for two whole years at least, of Felix’s administration; and during that time, was more than once sent for by the governor, to hold conversations with him on the great objects of his life, in some of which he expressed himself so forcibly on righteousness, temperance and judgment to come, that the wicked governor,——at that moment sitting in the presence of the apostle with an adulterous paramour,——trembled at the view presented by Paul of the consequences of those sins for which Felix was so infamous. But his repentant tremors soon passed off, and he merely dismissed the apostle with the vague promise, that at some more convenient season he would send for him. He did indeed, often send for him after this; but the motive of these renewals of intercourse seems to have been of the basest order, for it is stated by the sacred historian, that his real object was to induce Paul to offer him a bribe, which he supposed could be easily raised by the contributions of his devoted friends. But the hope was vain. It was no part of Paul’s plan of action to hasten the decision of his movements by such means, and the consequence was, that Felix found so little occasion to befriend him, that when he went out of the office which he had uniformly disgraced by tyranny, rapine, and murder, he thought it, on the whole, worth while to gratify the late subjects of his hateful sway, by leaving Paul still a prisoner.

“This Drusilla was the youngest daughter of Herod Agrippa. (Josephus lib. xix. c. 9. in.) Josephus gives the following account of her marriage with Felix:——‘Agrippa, having received this present from Caesar, (viz. Claudius,) gave his sister Drusilla in marriage to the Azizus, king of the Emesenes, when he had consented to be circumcised. For Epiphanes, the son of king Antiochus, had broken the contract with her, by refusing to embrace the Jewish customs, although he had promised her father he would. But this marriage of Drusilla with Azizus was dissolved in a short time, after this manner. When Felix was procurator of Judaea, having had a sight of her, he was mightily taken with her; and indeed she was the most beautiful of her sex. He therefore sent to her Simon, a Jew of Cyprus, who was one of his friends, and pretended to magic, by whom he persuaded her to leave her husband, and marry him; promising to make her perfectly happy, if she did not disdain him. It was far from being a sufficient reason; but to avoid the envy of her sister Bernice, who was continually doing her ill offices, because of her beauty, she was induced to transgress the laws of her country, and marry Felix.’” (Lardner’s Credibility, 4to. Vol. I. p. 16, 17, edition, London, 1815.) [Williams on Pearson, p. 78.]

SYRACUSE. Acts xxviii. 12.

The successor of Felix in the government of Palestine, was Porcius Festus, a man whose administration is by no means characterized in the history of those times by a reputation for justice or prudence; yet in the case of Paul, his conduct seems to have been much more accordant with right and reason, than was that of the truly infamous Felix. Visiting the religious capital of the Jews soon after his first entrance into the province, he was there earnestly petitioned by the ever-spiteful foes of Paul, to cause this prisoner to be brought up to Jerusalem for trial, intending when Paul should enter the city, to execute their old plan of assassination, which had been formerly frustrated by the benevolent prudence and energy of Claudius Lysias. But Festus, perhaps having received some notification of this plot, from the friends of Paul, utterly refused to bring the prisoner to Jerusalem, but required the presence of the accusers in the proper seat of the supreme provincial administration of justice at Caesarea. After a ten days’ stay in Jerusalem, he returned to the civil capital, and with a commendable activity in his judicial proceedings, on the very next day after his arrival in Caesarea, summoned Paul and his accusers before him. The Jews of course, told their old story, and brought out against Paul many grievous complaints, which they could not prove. His only reply to all this accusation without testimony was——“Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended in any particular.” But Festus having been in some way influenced to favor the designs of the Jews, urged Paul to go up to Jerusalem, there to be tried by the supreme religious court of his own nation. Paul replied by a bold and distinct assertion of his rights, as a Roman citizen, before the tribunal of his liege lord and sovran: “I stand before Caesar’s judgment-seat, where I ought to be judged. To the Jews I have done no wrong, as thou very well knowest. If I am guilty of anything that deserves death, I refuse not to die; but if I have done none of these things of which they accuse me, no man can deliver me into their hands. I appeal to Caesar.” This solemn concluding formula put him at once far beyond the reach of all inferior tyranny; henceforth no governor in the world could direct the fate of the appellant Roman citizen, throwing before himself the adamantine aegis of Roman law. Festus himself, though evidently displeased at this turn of events, could not resist the course of law; but after a conference with this council, replied to Paul——“Dost thou appeal to Caesar? To Caesar shalt thou go.”

While Paul was still detained at Caesarea, after this final reference of his case to the highest judicial authority in the world, Festus was visited at Caesarea, by Herod Agrippa II. king of Iturea, Trachonitis, Abilene, and other northern regions of Palestine, the son of that Herod Agrippa whose character and actions were connected with the incidents of Peter’s life. He, passing through Judea with his sister Bernice, stopped at Caesarea, to pay their compliments to the new Roman governor. During their stay there, Festus, with a view to find rational entertainment for his royal guests, bethought himself of Paul’s case, as one that would be likely to interest them, connected as the prisoner’s fate seemed to be, with the religious and legal matters of that peculiar people to whom Agrippa himself belonged, and in the minutiae of whose law and theology he had been so well instructed, that his opinion on the case would be well worth having, to one as little acquainted with these matters as the heathen governor himself was. Festus therefore gave a very full account of the whole case to Agrippa, in terms that sufficiently well exhibited the perplexities in which he was involved, and in expressions which are strikingly and almost amusingly characteristic,——complaining as he does of the very abstruse and perplexing nature of the accusations brought by the Jews, as being “certain questions of their own religion, and of one Jesus, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.” Agrippa was so much interested in the case that he expressed a wish to hear the man in person; and Festus accordingly arranged that he should the next day be gratified with the hearing.

“‘King Agrippa and Bernice.’ Acts. xxv. 13. This Agrippa was the son of Herod Agrippa; St. Luke calls him king, which Josephus also does very often. (Antiquities lib. xx. c. viii. § 6, et passim.) But St. Luke does not suppose him to be king of Judaea, for all the judicial proceedings of that country relating to St. Paul, are transacted before Felix, and Festus his successor; besides, he says, that ‘Agrippa came to Caesarea to salute Festus,’ to compliment him on his arrival, &c. verse 1. When his father died, Claudius would have immediately put him in possession of his father’s dominions, but he was advised not to do so, on account of the son’s youth, then only seventeen; the emperor, therefore, ‘appointed Cuspius Fadus praefect of Judea and the whole kingdom, (Josephus Antiquities lib. xix. c. 9, ad fin.) who was succeeded by Tiberius, Alexander, Cumanus, Felix, and Festus, though these did not possess the province in the same extent that Fadus did.’ (Antiquities xx. Jewish War lib. ii.)

“Agrippa had, notwithstanding, at this time, considerable territories. ‘Herod, brother of king Agrippa the Great, died in the eighth year of the reign of Claudius. Claudius then gave his government to the young Agrippa.’ (Josephus Antiquities xx. p. 887.) This is the Agrippa mentioned in this twenty-fifth chapter. ‘The twelfth year of his reign being completed, Claudius gave to Agrippa the tetrarchy of Philip and Batanea, adding also Trachonitis with Abila. This had been the tetrarchy of Lysanias. But he took away from him Chalcis, after he had governed it four years.’ (Josephus Antiquities xx. p. 890, v. 25, &c.) ‘After this, he sent Felix, the brother of Pallas, to be procurator of Judea, Galilee, Samaria, and Peraea; and promoted Agrippa from Chalcis to a greater kingdom, giving him the tetrarchy which had been Philip’s. (This is Batanea, and Trachonitis, and Gaulonitis;) and he added, moreover, the kingdom of Lysanias, and the province that had been Varus’s.’ (Josephus War of the Jews lib. ii. c. 12. fin.) ‘Nero, in the first year of his reign, gave Agrippa a certain part of Galilee, ordering Tiberias and Tarichaea to be subject to him. He gave him also Julias, a city of Peraea, and fourteen towns in the neighborhood of it.’ (Antiquities xx. c. 7. § 4.) St. Luke is therefore fully justified in styling this Agrippa king at this time.” (Lardner’s Credibility, 4to. Vol. I. pp. 17, 18.) [Williams’s Pearson, p. 81, 82.]

On the next day, preparations were made for this audience, with a solemnity of display most honorable to the subject of it. The great hall of the palace was arrayed in grand order for the occasion, and, in due time, king Agrippa, with his royal sister, and the Roman governor, entered it with great pomp, followed by a train composed of all the great military and civil dignitaries of the vice-imperial court of Palestine. Before all this stately array, the apostolic prisoner was now set, and a solemn annunciation was made by Festus, of the circumstances of the prisoner’s previous accusation, trial, and appeal; all which were now summarily recapitulated in public, for the sake of form, although they had before been communicated in private, to Agrippa. The king, as the highest authority present, having graciously invited Paul to speak for himself, the apostle stretched forth his hand and began, in that respectful style of elaborately elegant compliment, which characterizes the exordiums of so many of his addresses to the great. After having, with most admirable skill, conciliated the attention and kind regard of the king, by expressing his happiness in being called to speak in his own defense before one so learned in Hebrew law, he went on; and in a speech which is well known for its noble eloquence, so resplendent, even through the disguise of a quaint translation, presented not merely his own case, but the claims of that revelation, for proclaiming which he was now a prisoner. So admirably did he conduct his whole plea, both for himself and the cause of Christ, that in spite of the sneer of Festus, Agrippa paid him the very highest compliment in his power, and pronounced him to be utterly guiltless of the charges. No part of this plea and its attendant discussions, needs to be recapitulated; but a single characteristic of Paul, which is most strikingly evinced, deserves especial notice. This is his profound regard for all the established forms of polite address. He is not satisfied with a mere respectful behavior towards his judges, but even distinguishes himself by a minute observance of all the customary phrases of politeness; nor does he suffer his courtly manner to be disturbed, even by the abrupt remark of Festus, accusing him of frenzy. In his reply, he styles his accuser “Most noble;” and yet every reader of Jewish history knows, and Paul knew, that this Festus, to whom he gave this honorable title, was one of the very wicked men of those wicked times. The instance shows then, that those who, from religious scruples, refuse to give the titles of established respect to those who are elevated in station, and reject all forms of genteel address, on the same ground, have certainly constructed their system of practical religion on a model wholly different from that by which the apostle’s demeanor was guided; and the whole impression made on a common reader, by Luke’s clear statement of Paul’s behavior before the most dignified and splendid audience that he ever addressed, must be, that he was complete in all the forms and observances of polite intercourse; and he must be considered, both according to the high standard of his refined and dignified hearers, and also by the universal standard of the refined of all ages,——not only a finished, eloquent orator, but a person of polished manners, delicate tact, ready compliment, and graceful, courtly address:——in short, A PERFECT GENTLEMAN.

VOYAGE TO ROME.

As Paul, however, had previously appealed to Caesar, his case was already removed from any inferior jurisdiction, and his hearing before Agrippa was intended only to gratify the king himself, and to cause the particulars of his complicated case to be more fully drawn out before his royal hearer, who was so accomplished in Hebrew law, that his opinion was very naturally desired by Festus; for, as the governor himself confessed, the technicalities and abstruse points involved in the charge, were altogether beyond the comprehension of a Roman judge, with a mere heathen education. The object, therefore, of obtaining a full statement of particulars, to be presented to his most august majesty, the emperor, being completely accomplished by this hearing of Paul before Agrippa,——there was now nothing to delay the reference of the case to Nero; and Paul was therefore consigned, along with other prisoners of state, to the care of a Roman officer, Julius, a centurion of the Augustan cohort. Taking passage at Caesarea, in an Adramyttian vessel, Julius sailed with his important charge from the shores of Palestine, late in the year 60. Following the usual cautious course of all ancient navigators,——along the shores, and from island to island, venturing across the open sea only with the fairest winds,——the vessel which bore the apostle on his first voyage to Italy, coasted along by Syria and Asia Minor. Of those Christian associates who accompanied Paul, none are known except Timothy, Luke, his graphically accurate historian, and Aristarchus of Thessalonica, the apostle’s long-known companion in travel. These, of course, were a source of great enjoyment to Paul on this tedious voyage, surrounded, as he was, otherwise, by strangers and heathen, by most of whom he must have been regarded in the light of a mere criminal, held in bonds for trial. He was, however, very fortunate in the character of the centurion to whose keeping he was entrusted, as is shown in more than one incident related by Luke. After one day’s sail, the vessel touching at Sidon, Julius here politely gave Paul permission to visit his Christian friends in that place,——thus conferring a great favor, both on the apostle and on the church of Sidon. Leaving this place, their course was next along the coast of Syria, and then eastwards, along the southern shore of Asia Minor, keeping in the Cilician strait between that province and the great island of Cyprus, on account of the violence of the southwesters. Coasting along by Pamphylia and Lycia, they next touched at Myra, a city in the latter province, where they were obliged to take passage in another vessel, bound from Alexandria to Italy. In this vessel, they also kept close to the coast, their course being still retarded by head winds, until they reached Cnidus, the farthest southeastern point of Asia Minor, and thence stretched across the Carpathian sea, to Crete, approaching it first at Cape Salmone, the most eastern point at the island, and then passing on to a place called “the Fair Haven,” near Lasea, probably one of the hundred cities of Crete, but mentioned in no other ancient writer. At this place, Paul, whose experience in former voyages was already considerable, having been twice ship-wrecked, had sagacity enough to see that any further navigation that season would be dangerous; for it was now the beginning of October, and the most dreadful tempests might be reasonably expected on the wintry sea, before they could reach the Italian coast. He warned the centurion accordingly, of the peril to which all their lives were exposed; but the owner and commander of the vessel, anxious to find a better place for wintering than this, persuaded Julius to risk the passage to the south side of the island, when they might find, in the port of Phoenix, a more convenient winter harbor. So, after the south wind had nearly died away, they attempted to take advantage of this apparent lull, and work their way, close to the shore along the south side of Crete; but presently they were caught by a tremendous Levanter, which carried them with great velocity away to the west, to the island of Clauda, which lies south of the west end of Crete. Here the danger of the ship’s breaking in pieces was so great, that having with much ado overhauled their boat, they undergirded the ship with cables, to keep it together,——a measure not unknown in modern navigation. Finding that they were in much danger of grounding among the quicksands on the coast of the island, they were glad to stand out to sea; and taking in all sail, scudded under bare poles for fourteen days, during a great part of which time, they saw neither sun, moon nor stars, the whole sky being constantly overcast with clouds, so that they knew nothing of their position. The wind of course carried them directly west, over what was then called the sea of Adria,——not what is now called the Adriatic gulf, but that part of the Mediterranean, which lies between Greece, Italy and Africa. In their desperation, the passengers threw over their own baggage, to lighten the ship; and they began to lose all hope of being saved from shipwreck. Paul, however, encouraged them by the narration of a dream, in which God had revealed to him that every one of them should escape; and they still kept their hopes alive to the fourteenth night, when the sailors, thinking that the long western course must have brought them near Sicily, or the main-land of Italy, which lay not far out of this direction, began to heave the lead, that they might avoid the shore; and at the first sounding, found but twenty fathoms, and at the next fifteen. Of course, the peril of grounding was imminent, and they therefore cast anchor, and waited for day. Knowing that they were now near some shore, the sailors determined to provide for their own safety, and accordingly undertook to let down the boat, to make their escape, and leave the passengers to provide for themselves. But Paul represented to the centurion the certainty of their destruction, if the ship should be left without any seamen to manage it; and the soldiers of the prisoners’ guard, determined not to be thus deserted, though they should all sink together, cut off the ropes by which the boat was held, and let it fell off. All being thus inevitably committed to one doom, Paul exhorted them to take food, and thus strengthen themselves for the effort to reach the shore. They did so accordingly, and then, as a last resort, flung out the wheat with which the ship was loaded, and at day-break, when land appeared, seeing a small creek, they made an effort to run the ship into it, weighing anchor and hoisting the mainsail; but knowing nothing of the ground, soon struck, and the overstrained ship was immediately broken by the waves, the bows being fast in the sandbank, while the stern was heaved by every surge. The soldiers, thinking first of their weighty charge, for whose escape they were to answer with their lives, advised to kill them all, lest they should swim ashore. But the more humane centurion forbade it, and gave directions that every man should provide for his own safety. They did so; and those that could not swim, clinging to the fragments of the wreck, the whole two hundred and seventy-six who were in the vessel, got safe to land.

“‘When sailing was now dangerous, because the fast was already past.’ verse 9. There is no question but that this is the great fast of expiation, Leviticus xvi. 29, the description of which we have in Isaiah lviii. under the name of a sabbath, verse 13. The precise time of this sabbatic fast is on the tenth day of the seventh month, Tizri, which falls on the same time very nearly with our September, the first day of Tizri on the seventh of that, and so the 10th of Tizri on the 16th of September, that is, thirteen days before our Michaelmas. This being premised, the apostle’s reasoning becomes clear; for it is precisely the same as though he should have said, because it was past the twentieth (the day Scaliger sets for the solemnization of the fast,) of September; it being observed by all sailors, that for some weeks before and after Michaelmas, there are on the sea sudden and frequent storms, (probably the equinoctial,) which have in modern times received the name of Michaelmas flaws, and must of course make sailing dangerous. Hesiod himself tells us, that at the going down of Pleiades, which was at the end of autumn, navigation was hazardous.” (Williams.)

“Undergirding the ship.’ verse 17. We learn from various passages in the Greek and Roman writers, that the ancients had recourse to this expedient, in order to save the ship from imminent danger; and this method has been used in modern times. The process of undergirding a ship is thus performed:——a stout cable is slipped under the vessel at the prow, which can be conducted to any part of the ship’s keel, and then fasten the two ends on the deck, to keep the planks from starting. An instance of this kind is mentioned in ‘Lord Anson’s Voyage round the World.’ Speaking of a Spanish man-of-war in a storm, the writer says, ‘They were obliged to throw overboard all their upper-deck guns, and take six turns of the cable round the ship, to prevent her opening.’ (p. 24, 4to. edition.) Bp. Pearce and Dr. Clarke, on Acts xxvii. 17. Two instances of undergirding the ship are noticed in the ‘Chevalier de Johnstone’s Memoirs of the Rebellion in 1745–6, London, 1822, 8vo. pp. 421, 454.” (Williams’s notes on Pearson, p. 85.)

They now found that they had struck on the island of Melita, (now Malta,) which lies just south of Sicily, in the direct track in which the eastern gale must have blown them. The uncivilized inhabitants of this desolate spot received the shipwrecked voyagers with the kindest attention, and very considerately kindled a fire, to warm and dry them, after their long soaking in cold water. The dripping apostle took hold with the rest to make the fire blaze up, and gathered a bundle of dry sticks, for the purpose; but with them he unconsciously gathered a viper, which was sheltering itself among them from the cold, and roused by the heat of the fire, now crept out upon his hand. He, of course, as any other man would, gave a jerk, and shook it off, as soon as he saw it,——a very natural occurrence; but the superstitious barbarians thought this a perfect miracle, as they had before foolishly considered it a token of divine wrath; and having looked on him as an object of horror, and a wicked criminal, they now, with equal sense, adored him as a God.

Another incident of more truly miraculous character, occurred to Paul soon after, in the part of the island on which they were wrecked, which had the effect of gaining him a much more solid fame. The father of Publius, the Roman officer who governed the island, as the deputy of the praetor of Sicily, was at that time very sick of the dysentery; and Paul, going to see him, laid his hands on him and prayed,——thus effecting a complete recovery. This being known, other diseased persons were presented as the subjects of Paul’s miraculous powers, and the same cures following his words, he with his associates soon became the objects of a far more rational reverence than had been excited by the deliverance from the viper. The reverence too, was extended beyond mere empty honor. The shipwrecked apostolic company having lost all their baggage and provisions, were abundantly provided with everything that they needed, by the grateful contributions of the islanders;——and when, after a stay of three months, Paul and his companions departed, they were loaded with things necessary for the voyage.

PUTEOLI. Acts xxviii. 13, 14.

Sailing, on the return of spring, in another Alexandrine vessel, of the same very common name borne by that in which they were shipwrecked, they came next to Syracuse, on the east side of the island of Sicily, and after a stay of three days, turned through the Sicilian strait to Rhegium, on the main-land directly opposite the island. There Paul first saw the soil of Italy, but did not leave the vessel for his land journey, till they came, with a fresh south wind, to Puteoli, a port in the bay of Naples. Here they found Christians, who invited them to rest among them for a week; after which they journeyed along the coast, on the noble road of Pozzuoli and Baiae, for about a hundred miles, to Appius’s Forum, a village about eighteen miles from Rome. At this place, they were met by a number of brethren from the church of Rome; and having journeyed along the Appian way, to the Three Taverns,——a little stopping place a few miles from the city,——they were received by still another deputation of Roman Christians, come out to greet the great apostle, whose name had long been known among them, and whose counsels and revelations they had already enjoyed by his writings. This noble testimony of the esteem in which they held him, was a most joyful assurance to Paul, that, even on this foreign shore, a stranger and a prisoner, he had many near and dear friends; and his noble spirit, before probably depressed and melancholy, in the dark prospect of his approach to the awful seat of that remorseless imperial power that was to decide his doom, now rose to feelings of exultation and gratitude. Entering the vast imperial city, the prisoners were remanded by the centurion to the custody of Burrhus, the noble and influential praefect of the praetorian guard, who was, ex-officio, the keeper of all prisoners of state, brought from the provinces to Rome. Burrhus however, was as kind and accommodating to Paul as Julius had been, and allowed him to live by himself in a private house, with only a soldier as an attendant guard.

After three days, Paul invited to his lodgings the chief men of the Jewish faith, in Rome, and made known to them the circumstances under which he had been sent thither, and his present relations to the heads of their religion in Jerusalem. In reply, they merely stated that they had received no formal communications respecting him, from Jerusalem, nor had those of their brethren who had arrived from Judea spoken ill of him. They expressed also a great desire to hear from him the peculiar doctrine, for entertaining which he had been thus denounced, of which they professed to know nothing, but that there was a universal prejudice against it. A day was accordingly appointed for a full conference on these very important subjects,——and at the set time, Paul, with no small willingness, discoursed at great length on his views of the accomplishment of all the ancient prophecies respecting the Messiah, in the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth. His hearers were very much divided in opinion about these points, after his discourse was over,——some believing and some disbelieving. Leaving them to meditate on what he had said, Paul dismissed them with a warning quotation from Isaiah, against their prejudices, and sternly reminded them, that though they did reject the truth, the waiting Gentiles were prepared to embrace it, and should receive the word of God immediately. They then left him, and made his words a subject of much discussion among themselves; but the results are unrecorded. Paul having hired a house in Rome, made that city the scene of his active labors for two whole years, receiving all that called to inquire into religious truth, and proclaiming the doctrines of Christianity with the most unhesitating boldness and freedom; and no man in Rome could molest him in making known his belief to as many as chose to hear him; for it was not till many years after, that the Christians were denounced and persecuted by Nero.

HIS EPISTLES WRITTEN FROM ROME.

With these facts the noble narrative of Luke ceases entirely, and henceforth no means are left of ascertaining the events of Paul’s life, except in those incidental allusions which his subsequent writings make to his circumstances. Those epistles which are certainly known and universally agreed to have been written from Rome during this imprisonment, are those to the Philippians, the Ephesians, the Colossians, and to Philemon. There are passages in all these which imply that he was then near the close of his imprisonment, for he speaks with great confidence of being able to visit them shortly, and very particularly requests preparation to be made for his accommodation on his arrival.

There is good reason to think that the epistles to the Ephesians, to the Colossians, and to Philemon, were written about the same time and were sent together. This appears from the fact, that Tychicus is spoken of in both the two former, as sent by the apostle, to make known to them all his circumstances more fully, and is also implied as the bearer of both, while Onesimus, the bearer of the latter, is also mentioned in the epistle to the Colossians as accompanying Tychicus.

THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.

The most important question which has been raised concerning this epistle, regards the point, whether it was truly directed and sent by Paul, to the church in Ephesus, as the common reading distinctly specifies. Many eminent modern critics have maintained that it was originally sent to the church in Laodicea, and that the word Ephesus, in the direction and in the first verse, is a change made in later times, by those who felt interested to claim for this city the honor of an apostolic epistle. Others incline to the opinion, that it was directed to no particular church, but was sent as a circular to several churches in Asia Minor, among which were those of Ephesus and Laodicea, and that several copies were sent at the same time, each copy being differently directed. They suppose that when the epistles of Paul were first collected, that copy which was sent to Ephesus was the one adopted for this, and that the original manuscript being soon lost, all written trace of its original general direction disappeared also.

The prominent reason for this remarkable supposition, unsupported as it is by the authority of any ancient manuscript, is that Paul writes apparently with no local reference whatever to the circumstances of the Ephesians, among whom he had lived for three years, although his other epistles to places which he had visited are so full of personal and local matters; and that he speaks on the contrary as though he knew little of them except by hearsay. A reference to the particular details of the reasoning by which this opinion is supported, would altogether transcend the proper limits of this work; since even a summary of them fills a great many pages of those critical and exegetical works, to which these discussions properly belong; and all which can be stated here is the general result, that a great weight of authority favors the view that this was probably a circular epistle; but the whole argument in favor of either notion, rests on so slight a foundation, that it is not worth while to disturb the common impression for it.

The epistle certainly does not seem to dwell on any local difficulties, but enlarges eloquently upon general topics, showing the holy watchfulness of the apostle over the faith of his readers. He appears, nevertheless, to emphasize with remarkable force, the doctrines that Christ alone was the source and means of salvation, “the chief corner-stone,” and that in him all are united, both Jews and Gentiles, in one holy temple. There is something in many such passages, with which the epistle abounds, that seems peculiarly well fitted to the circumstances of mixed communities, made up of Jews and Gentiles, and as if the apostle wished to prevent the former from creating any distinctions in the church, in their own favor. Many passages in this epistle also, are very pointedly opposed to those heresies, which about that period were beginning to rise up in those regions, and were afterwards famous under the name of the Gnosis,——the first distinct sect that is known to have perverted the purity of Christian truth. Paul here aims with remarkable energy, to prove that salvation was to be attributed to Christ alone, and not to the intervention of any other superior beings, by whatever names they are called, whether principalities, or powers, or might or dominion, both in this world and the world to come,——in heavenly places as well as earthly. The apostle also is very full in the moral and practical part,——urging with great particularity the observance of those virtues which are the essentials of the Christian character, and specifying to each particular age, sex, rank and condition, its own peculiar duties.

THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS.

In the first verse of the second chapter, the apostle expresses a peculiar anxiety for the spiritual safety of those Christians who have not seen his face in the flesh, among whom he appears to number the Colossians and Laodiceans. It seems quite evident that he had never been at Colosse; for though he traversed Phrygia, on two several occasions before this time, he is not said to have visited either Colosse or Laodicea;——but his route is so described, as to make it almost impossible for him to have taken either city directly in his way. This circumstance may account for the fact of his distinguishing in this manner a single city like Colosse, of no great size or importance; because as it appears from the general tenor of the epistle, certain peculiar errors had arisen among them, which were probably more dangerously rife, from the circumstance of their never having been blessed by the personal presence and labors of an apostle. The errors which he particularly attacks, seem to be those of the Judaizers, who were constantly insisting on the necessity of Mosaical observances, such as circumcision, sabbaths, abstinence from unclean meats, and other things of the same sort. He cautions them particularly against certain false doctrines, also referred to under the names of philosophy, vain deceit, the traditions of men, &c. which are commonly thought to refer to the errors of the Essenes, a Jewish sect characterised by Josephus in terms somewhat similar, and who are supposed to have introduced their ascetic and mystical doctrines into the Christian church, and to have formed one of the sources of the great system of Gnosticism, as afterwards perfected. The moral part of this epistle bears a very striking similarity, even in words, to the conclusion of that to the Ephesians,——a resemblance probably attributable in part, to the circumstance, that they were written about the same time. The circumstance that he has mentioned to the Colossians an epistle to be sent for by them from Laodicea, has given rise to a forged production, purporting to be this very epistle from Paul to the Laodiceans; but it is manifestly a mere brief rhapsody, collected from Paul’s other epistles, and has never for a moment imposed upon the critical. It has been supposed that the true epistle meant by Paul, is another, now lost, written by Paul to Laodicea; and the supposition is not unreasonable.

THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON.

This was merely a private letter from Paul to a person otherwise not known, but appearing, from the terms in which he is herein mentioned, to have been at some time or other associated with Paul in the gospel work; since he styles him “fellow-laborer.” He appears to have been a man of some property and generosity, because he had a house spacious enough to hold a worshiping assembly, who were freely accommodated by him; and he is likewise mentioned as hospitably entertaining traveling Christians. The possession of some wealth is also implied in the circumstance which is the occasion of this epistle. Like almost all Christians of that age who were able to do so, he owned at least one slave, by name Onesimus, who had run away from him to Rome, and there falling under the notice of Paul, was made the subject of his personal attentions, and was at last converted by him to the Christian faith. Paul now sends him back to his old master, with this letter, in which he narrates the circumstances connected with the flight and conversion of Onesimus, and then with great earnestness, yet with mildness, entreats Philemon to receive him now, not as a slave, but as a brother,——to forgive him his offenses, and restore him to favor. Paul himself offers to become personally responsible for all pecuniary loss experienced by Philemon in consequence of the absence of his servant in Rome, where he had been ministering to Paul; and the apostle gives [♦]his own note of hand for any reasonable amount which Philemon may choose to claim. Throughout the whole, he speaks in great confidence of the ready compliance of Philemon with these requests, and evidently considers him a most intimate friend, loving and beloved. He also speaks with great confidence of his own speedy release from his bonds, and begs Philemon to prepare him a lodging; for he trusts that through his prayers, he shall shortly be given to him.

[♦] duplicate word “his” removed

THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS.

That this was written after the others that were sent from Rome by Paul during this imprisonment, is proved by several circumstances. Luke was certainly with him when he wrote to the Colossians and to Philemon; but no mention whatever is made of him in the epistle to the Philippians, who would, nevertheless, feel as much interest in him as in Timothy or any companion of Paul; because he had resided in Philippi many years, and must have had many acquaintances there, who would expect some account of him, and some salutation from him. Paul, moreover, says, that he trusts to send Timothy shortly to them, because he has no man with him who is like minded, or who will care for their state;——a remark which, if Luke had been with him, he could not have made with any justice to that faithful and diligent associate, who was himself a personal acquaintance of the Philippians. There were some circumstances connected with the situation of Paul, as referred to in this epistle, which seem to imply a different date from those epistles just mentioned. His condition seems improved in many respects, although before not uncomfortable, and his expectations of release still more confident, though before so strong. He speaks also of a new and remarkable field in which his preaching had been successful, and that is, the palace of the imperial Caesar himself, among whose household attendants were many now numbered among the saints who sent salutations to Philippi. The terms in which he mentions his approaching release, are still more remarkable than those in the former epistles. He says——“Having this confidence, I know that I shall abide and continue with you all,” &c. “that your rejoicing may be more abundant, by my coming to you again.” “I trust in the Lord that I shall myself also come shortly.”

The immediate occasion of this epistle was the return of Epaphroditus, the apostle or messenger of the Philippian church, by whom Paul now wrote this, as a grateful acknowledgment of their generosity in contributing to his support that money, of which Epaphroditus was the bearer. In the epistle, he also took occasion, after giving them an account of his life in Rome, to warn them against the errors of the Judaizers, whose doctrines were the occasion of so much difficulty in the Christian churches.

THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.

The release which Paul so confidently anticipated, probably happened shortly after the writing of the last epistle, and at this time, just before leaving Italy for another field of labor, it is commonly believed that he wrote his epistle to the Hebrews. Of the particular place, the time, the immediate object, and the persons who were the receivers of this epistle, nothing is with any certainty known; and the whole range of statements in standard works of exegetical and critical theology, on this writing, is the most appalling mass of vague speculations, unfounded conclusions and contradictory assertions, that presents itself to the historian of the apostolic works in any direction; and in respect to all these points, referring the critical to any or all of the thousand and one views, given in the learned and elaborate introductions and commentaries, which alone can with any justice so much as open the subject, the author excuses himself entirely from any discussion of this endless question, in the words used on one of these points, by one of the most learned, acute, ingenious and cautious critics of modern times. “Any thing further on this subject I am unable to determine, and candidly confess my ignorance as to the place where the epistle to the Hebrews was written. Nor do I envy any man who pretends to know more on this subject, unless he has discovered sources of intelligence, which have hitherto remained unknown. It is better to leave a question in a state of uncertainty, than, without foundation, to adopt an opinion which may lead to material errors.”

VOYAGE TO THE EAST.

On leaving Italy after this release, he seems to have directed his course eastward; but nothing whatever is known of his motions, except that from the epistle of Titus it is learned that he journeyed to Miletus, to Ephesus, to Troas, to Macedonia, to Crete and to Epirus,——and last of all, probably, to Rome. His first movements on his release were, doubtless, in conformity with his previous designs, as expressed in his epistles. He probably went first to Asia, visiting Ephesus, Miletus, Colosse, &c. On this voyage he might have left Titus in Crete, (as specified in his letter to that minister,) and on embarking for Macedonia, left Timothy at Ephesus, (as mentioned in the first epistle to him.) After visiting Philippi and other places in Macedonia, where he wrote to Timothy, he seems to have crossed over the country to the shore of the Ionian sea, to Nicopolis, whence he wrote to Titus, to come from Crete, and join him there. These two epistles, being of a merely personal character, containing instructions for the exercise of the apostolic functions of ordination, &c. in the absence of Paul, can not need any particular historical notice, being so simple in their object that they sufficiently explain themselves. Respecting that to Timothy, however, it may be specified that some of its peculiar expressions seem to be aimed at the rising heresy of the Jewish and Oriental mystics, who were then infecting the eastern churches with the first beginnings of that heresy which, under the name of the Gnosis, or science, (falsely so called,) soon after corrupted with its dogmas, a vast number in Asia Minor, Greece and Syria. The style and tenor of both of the epistles are so different from all Paul’s other writings, as to make it very evident that they were written at a different time, and under very different circumstances from the rest.

RETURN TO ROME.

The only real evidence of this movement of Paul is found in the tenor of certain passages in the second epistle to Timothy, which seem to show that it was written during the author’s imprisonment in Rome, but which cannot be connected with his former confinement there. In the former epistles written from Rome, Timothy was with Paul;——but this of course implies that he was absent. In them, Demas is declared to be with Paul;——in this he is mentioned as having forsaken him, and gone to Thessalonica. In the first epistle to Timothy, Mark was also with Paul, and joined in saluting the Colossians; in this, Timothy is instructed to bring him to Paul, because he is profitable to him in the ministry. In the fourth chapter, Paul says that “Erastus abode at Corinth;”——an expression which implies that Erastus abode in Corinth when Paul left it. But Paul took no journey from Corinth before his first imprisonment; for when he left that place for the last time before his journey to Jerusalem,——when he was seized and sent to Rome,——he was accompanied by Timothy; and there could therefore be no need of informing him of that fact. In the same passage of this epistle he also says, that he had left Trophimus sick at Miletus; but when Paul passed through Miletus, on that journey to Jerusalem, Trophimus certainly was not left behind at Miletus, but accompanied him to Jerusalem; for he was seen there with him by the Asian Jews. These two passages therefore, refer to a journey taken subsequent to Paul’s first imprisonment,——and the epistle which refers to them, and purports in other passages to have been written during an imprisonment in Rome, shows that he returned thither after his first imprisonment.

The most striking passage in this epistle also refers with great distinctness to his expectation of being very speedily removed from apostolic labors to an eternal apostolic reward. “I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought the good fight; I have finished my course; I have kept the faith: henceforth, there is laid up for me a crown of life, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day.” All these expressions are utterly at variance with those hopes of release and of the speedy renewal of his labors in an eastern field; and show very plainly that all the tasks to which he once looked forward were now completed, and that he could hope for no deliverance, but that which should call him from chains and toils to an eternal crown.

HIS DEATH.

The circumstance of his being again in Rome a prisoner, after having been once set free by the mandate of the emperor himself, after a full hearing, must at once require a reference to a state of things, in which Paul’s religious profession and evangelizing labors, before esteemed so blameless that no man in Rome forbade him to preach the gospel there,——had now, by a mighty revolution in opinions, become a crime, since for these, he was now held in bondage, without the possibility of escape from the threatened death. Such a change actually did occur in the latter part of the reign of Nero, when, as already related in the history of Peter’s first epistle, the whole power of the imperial government was turned against the Christians, as a sect, and they were convicted on that accusation alone, as deserving of death. The date of this revolution in the condition of the Christians, is fixed by Roman history in the sixty-fourth year of Christ; and the time when Paul was cast into chains the second time, must therefore be referred to this year. His actual death evidently did not take place at once, but was deferred long enough to allow of his writing to Timothy, and for him to make some arrangements therein, for a short continuance of his labors. The date which is commonly fixed as the time of his execution, is in the year of Christ 65; but in truth, nothing whatever is known about it, nor can even a probability be confidently affirmed on the subject. Being a Roman citizen, he could not die by a mode so infamous as that of the cross, but was beheaded, as a more honorable exit; and with this view, the testimony of most of the early Fathers, who particularize his death, distinctly accords.

Of the various fictions which the monkish story-tellers have invented to gratify the curiosity which Christian readers feel about other particulars of the apostle’s character, the following is an amusing specimen. “Paul, if we may believe Nicephorus, was of a low and small stature, somewhat stooping; his complexion fair; his countenance grave; his head small; his eyes sparkling; his nose high and bending; and his hair thick and dark, but mixed with gray. His constitution was weak, and often subject to distempers; but his mind was strong, and endued with a solid judgment, quick invention, and prompt memory, which were all improved by art, and the advantages of a liberal education. Besides the epistles which are owned to be genuine, several other writings are falsely ascribed to him: as an epistle to the Laodiceans, a third to the Thessalonians, a third to the Corinthians, a second to the Ephesians, his letter to Seneca, his Acts, his Revelation, his voyage to Thecla, and his Sermons.” (Cave’s Lives of the Apostles.)

But the honors and saintship of Paul are recorded, not in the vague and misty traces of bloody martyr-death, but in the far more glorious achievements of a heroic life. In these, are contained the essence of his greatness; to these, all the Gentile world owes its salvation; and on these, the modern historian, following the model of the sacred writers, dwells with far more minuteness and particularity, than on a dull mass of uncertain tradition.

---