PART II. discusses various Particulars adapted to the State of the Corinthian Church, which may be commodiously arranged into two Sections. SECT 1. contains a reproof of the corruptions and abuses which disgraced the church. (i. 10. vi. 1—20.) $i. The apostle rebukes the sectaries among them, and defends himself against one or more Corinthian teachers, who had alienated most of the Corinthians from him; and adds many weighty arguments to reunite them in affection to himself, as having first planted the Gospel among them. (i. 10-31. ii.—iv.) ii. A reproof for not excommunicating an incestuous person, who had married his own step-mother. (v.) iii. A reproof of their covetous and litigious temper, which caused them to prosecute their Christian brethren before heathen courts of judicature. (vi. 1–9.) $iv. A dissuasive from fornication,-a sin to which they had been extremely addicted before they were converted, and which some of the Corinthians appeared to have considered an indifferent matter. The enormity of this sin is very strongly represented. (vi. 10—20.) SECT. 2. contains an answer to the questions which the Corinthian church had proposed to the apostle. (vii.-xv.) §i. Directions concerning matrimony (vii. 1-16.), the celibacy of virgins (25-38.) and widows (39-40.); in which Saint Paul takes occasion to show that Christianity makes no alteration in the civil conditions of men, but leaves them under the same obligations that they were before $ ii. Concerning the lawfulness of eating things sacrificed to idols, show. their conversion. (17--24.) ing when they may, and when they may not, be lawfully eaten. (viii. -xi. 1.) iii. Saint Paul answers a third query concerning the manner in which women should deliver any thing in public, when called to it by a divine impulse. He particularly censures the unusual dress of both sexes in prophesying, which exposed them to the contempt of the Greeks, among whom the men usually went uncovered, while the women $iv. A reproof of their irregularities, when celebrating the Lord's Sup were veiled. (xi. 2-17.) per, with directions for receiving it worthily. (xi. 17-31.) S v. Instructions concerning the desiring and exercising of spiritual gifts. (xii.-xiv.) vi. The certainty of the resurrection of the dead defended against the false teacher or teachers. (xv.) if there be no resurrection. (19.) vii. Those, who were baptized in the faith that Christ died for them, and rose again, are deceived. (29.) viii. The apostles and Christians in general, who suffer persecution, on the ground that, after they had suffered awhile here, they shall have a glorious resurrection, are acting a foolish and unprofitable part. (30-35.) II. He shows what will be the nature of the resurrection-bodies, and in what manner this great work will be performed. (35-49.) III. He shows what will become of those who will be found alive at the day of judgment. (50-57.) This important and animating discussion is followed by The use which we should make of this doctrine. (58.)2 PART III. contains the Conclusion, comprising Directions relative to the Contributions for the Saints at Jerusalem,3 promises that the Apostle would shortly visit them, and Salutations to various Members of the Church at Corinth. (xvi.) ure from Corinth, went into Asia, and visited Ephesus, Jerusalem, and Antioch, after which, passing through Galatia and Phrygia, he returned to Ephesus, where he remained three years. (Acts xviii. 18-23. xix. 1. xx. 31.) At the close of his residence at Ephesus, Saint Paul wrote this Epistle, as appears from 1 Cor. xvi. 8. where he says, I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost; and that it was written at the preceding passover, is further evident from 1 Cor. v. 7. where the apostle uses this expression, ye are unleavened,—— that is, ye are now celebrating the feast of unleavened bread. Now, as Saint Paul's departure from Ephesus, after residing there three years, took place about the year of Christ 56, it follows that the first Epistle to the Corinthians was written about that time.5 The genuineness of Saint Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians was never doubted. It was cited or alluded to repeatedly by Clement of Rome, Ignatius,' and Polycarp, in the first century. In the following century it was cited by TaIn the third century, this Epistle was acknowledged to be tian, Irenæus, Athenagoras, and Clement of Alexandria.12 Saint Paul's by Tertullian, Caius," and Origen.15 The testimonies of later writers are too numerous and explicit to render any detail of them necessary. V. An important question has been much agitated, thians besides those we now have. In 1 Cor. v. 9. the folWhether Saint Paul wrote any other Epistle to the Corinlowing words occur-Ezpata iua în eriscan, which in our version is rendered-I have written to you in an epistle. From this text it has been inferred, that Saint Paul had already written to the Corinthians an Epistle which is no longer extant, and to which he alludes; while others contend, that by This, he means only the Epistle which he is writing. The former opinion is advocated by Calvin, Beza, Grotius, Cappel, Witsius, Le Clerc, Heinsius, Mill, Wetstein, Beausobre, Bishop Pearce, Dr. Doddridge, Mr. Scott, Michaelis, Storr, Rosenmiller, Hug, and Schleusner: and the latter opinion, after Chrysostom, Theodoret, and other fathers, is defended by Fabricius, Glassius, Calmet, Dr. Whitby, Stosch, Jer. Jones, Drs. Edwards, Lardner, and Macknight, Purver, Archbishop Newcome, Bishop Tomline (whose words are adopted by Bishop Mant and Dr. D'Oyly), and Bishop Middleton. A third opinion is that of Dr. Benson, which is acceded to by Dr. Clarke, viz. that Saint Paul refers to an Epistle which he had written, or begun to write, but had not sent; for, on receiving further information from Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, he suppressed that, and wrote this, in which he considers the subject more at large. The weight of evidence, however, is most decidedly in favour of the opinion, that the apostle wrote only the two epistles now extant, which bear his name.16 On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr, Paley's Hora Paulinæ, Chap. III.17 SECTION V. ON THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. I. Date and where written.-II. Occasion of this Epistle. III. Scope.-IV. Synopsis.-V. Observations on this Epis tle.-VI. A supposed chronological difficulty elucidated. IV. Although the subscription to this Epistle purports that it was written at Philippi, yet, as this directly contradicts I. THE preceding Epistle, we have seen, was written Saint Paul's own declaration in xvi. 8., we must look to the from Ephesus about the year 57, before Saint Paul's deEpistle itself for notes of time, that may enable us to ascer-parture from that city. On quitting Ephesus he went to tain its date. We have seen that Saint Paul, on his depart- Troas, which place was situated on the shore of the Ægean 1 On the subject of the spiritual gifts discussed in chap. xii. the reader is referred to Dr. Bloomfield's Recensio Synoptica, vol. vi. pp. 552-570. Dr. A. Clarke on 1 Cor. xv. The Jews, who lived out of Palestine, were chiefly engaged in trade, and were generally in more affluent circumstances than those who resided in Judæa, to whom they usually sent an annual relief. (Vitringa de Syn. Vet. lib. iii. p. i. c. 13.) Now, as the Gentile Christians became brethren to the Jews, and partook of their spiritual riches, Saint Paul thought it equitable that the Greek Christians should contribute to the support of their poorer brethren in Judæa. (Rom. xv. 26, 27.) When he was at Jeru salem, he had promised Peter and James that he would collect alms for this purpose (Gal. ii. 10.); and accordingly we find (1 Cor. xvi. 1-4.) that he made a collection among the Christians at Corinth. Michaelis, vol. iv. p. 61. See p. 324. supra. Michaelis is of opinion that the mistake in the sub. scription arose from misunderstanding poμ (xvi. 5.) to mean I am now travelling through, instead of "my route is through Macedonia," which it evidently means, Vol. iv. p. 43. Michaelis, vol. iv. p. 42. Paley's Hore Paulinæ, p. 96. Mill, Whitby, Michaelis, Benson, and almost all modern commentators and critics, agree in the above date. • Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 36.; 4to. vol. i. p. 297. Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. pp. 74, 75.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 318, 319. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 91. 94.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 327. 329. 9 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 140.; 4to. vol. i. p. 355. 10 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 163. ; 4to. vol. i. p. 868. 11 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 185.; 4to. vol. i. p. 380. 14 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 374, 375.: 4to. vol. i. pp. 482, 483. 17 Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 314, 315.; 4to. vol. iii. p. 291., Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 42-62. 68, 69.; Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 368385.; Rosenmüller, Scholia, tom. iv. pp. 1-7. Whitby's and Macknight's Prefaces; Bloch, Chronotaxis, Scriptorum Pauli, pp. 160-172. Calmet, Preface sur la premiere Epitre de Saint Paul aux Corinthiens. sea, in expectation of meeting Titus, and receiving an account of the success with which (he hoped) his former Epistle had been attended, and of the present state of the Corinthian church. (2 Cor. ii. 12.) But not meeting him there (13.), Paul proceeded to Macedonia, where he obtained the desired interview, and received satisfactory information concerning the promising state of affairs at Corinth. (vii. 5,6.) From this country, and probably from Philippi (as the subscription imports), the apostle wrote the second letter (2 Cor. viii. 1-14. ix. 1-5.); which he sent by Titus and his associates, who were commissioned to hasten and finish the contribution among the Christians at Corinth, for the use of their poor brethren in Judæa. (ix. 2-4.) From these historical circumstances, it is generally agreed that this Epistle was written within a year after the former, that is, early in A. D. 58., and according to Dr. Bloch, at Beroea. The genuineness of this Epistle was never doubted; and as it is cited or referred to by nearly the same ancient writers, whose testimonies to the first Epistle we have given in the preceding section, it is not necessary to repeat them in this place. II. The first Epistle to the Corinthians produced very different effects among them. Many amended their conduct, most of them showed strong marks of repentance, and evinced such respect for the apostle, that they excommunicated the incestuous person (2 Cor. ii. 5-11. vii. 11.); requested the apostle's return with tears (vii. 7.); and became zealous for him, that is, they vindicated the apostle and his office against the false teacher and his adherents. (vii. 7-11.) Others, however, of the Corinthians, adhered to the false teacher, expressly denied his apostolical ministry, and even furnished themselves with arguments which they pretended to draw from his first Epistle. He had formerly intimated his intention of taking a journey from Ephesus to Corinth, thence to visit the Macedonian churches, and from them to return to Corinth (2 Cor. i. 15, 16.); but the unhappy state of the Corinthian church led him to alter his intention, since he found he must have treated them with severity, had he visited them. (23.) Hence his adversaries charged him, 1. With levity and irresolution of conduct (2 Cor. i. 18.), and, therefore, he could not be a prophet; 2. With pride and tyrannical severity on account of his treatment of the incestuous person; 3. With arrogance and vain-glory in his ministry, therein lessening the authority of the law; and, 4. With being personally contemptible, intimating, that however weighty he might be in his letters, yet in person he was base and despicable. (2 Cor. x. 10.) Such were the principal circumstances that gave occasion to this second Epistle to the Corinthians, to which we may add their forwardness in the contribution for the poor saints in Judæa, and their kind and benevolent reception of Titus. tion of his apostolic office and power, and his extraordinary PART II. The Apologetic Discourse of St. Paul, in which, SECT. 2. He exhorts them to a liberal contribution for their poor brethren in Judæa. (viii. ix.) SECT. 3. He resumes his apology; justifying himself from the charges and insinuations of the false teacher and his followers; in order to detach the Corinthians from them, and to re-establish himself and his authority. (x.-xiii. 10.) PART III. The Conclusion. (xiii. 11—14.) V. "The most remarkable circumstance in this Epistle is, the confidence of the apostle in the goodness of his cause, he then was by a powerful and sagacious party, whose auand in the power of God to bear him out in it. Opposed as thority, reputation, and interest were deeply concerned, and who were ready to seize on every thing that could discredit him, it is wonderful to hear him so firmly insist upon his apostolical authority, and so unreservedly appeal to the miraculous powers which he had exercised and conferred at Corinth. So far from shrinking from the contest, as afraid of some discovery being made, unfavourable to himself or to the common cause, he, with great modesty and meekness indeed, but with equal boldness and decision, expressly declares that his opposers and despisers were the ministers of Satan, and menaces them with miraculous judgments, when as many of their deluded hearers had been brought to could in a reasonable time effect. It is inconceivable that a repentance, and re-established in the faith, as proper means stronger internal testimony, not only of integrity, but of divine inspiration, can exist. Had there been any thing of imposture among the Christians, it was next to impossible, but such a conduct must have occasioned a disclosure of it." Of the effects produced by this second Epistle, we have no circumstantial account; for Saint Luke has only briefly noticed (in Acts xx. 2, 3.) Saint Paul's second journey to Corinth, after he had written this Epistle. We know, however, that he was there, and that the contributions were brought to him in that city for the poor brethren at JeruIII. Agreeably to these circumstances the SCOPE of this he sent salutations from some of the principal members of salem (Rom. xv. 26.); and that, staying there several months, Epistle is chiefly, 1. To account for his not having come to that church to the Romans. (xvi. 22, 23.) "From this time them so soon as he had promised, viz. not out of levity, but we hear no more of the false teacher and his party; and partly in consequence of his sufferings in Asia, which pre- when Clement of Rome wrote his Epistle to the Corinthians, vented him (2 Cor. i. 8. 11.), and partly that he might give Saint Paul was considered by them as a divine apostle, to them more time to set their church in better order, so that whose authority he might appeal without fear of contradiche might come to them with greater comfort. (ii. 3, 4.) 2. tion. The false teacher, therefore, must either have been To declare that his sentence against the incestuous person silenced by Saint Paul, in virtue of his apostolical powers, was neither rigid nor tyrannical (ii. 5-11.), but necessary and by an act of severity which he had threatened (2 Cor. and pious; and now, as excommunication had produced so xiii. 2, 3.); or this adversary of the apostle must have good an effect upon that offender, the apostle, commending the obedience of the Corinthians, exhorts them to absolve quitted the place. Whichever was the cause, the effect prohim from that sentence and to restore him to communion duced must operate as a confirmation of our faith, and as a ing the Gospel, which he does, not for his own glory, but for xii. 14. and xiii. 1, 2., in which passages the apostle mentions VI. A considerable chronological difficulty occurs in 2 Cor with the church. 3. To intimate his great success in preach-proof of Saint Paul's divine mission."3 the glory of the Gospel, which had peculiar efficacy upon his design of visiting Corinth a third time; whereas only one the Corinthians above others (2 Cor. iii.), and far surpassed visit before the date of this Epistle is noticed in the Acts the ministry of Moses (iv.), and was under a veil only to (xviii. 1.), about A. D. 51, and the next time that he visited those who were perishing. In preaching which Gospel he Greece (xx. 2.), about A. D. 57, no mention is made of his used all diligence and faithfulness, notwithstanding all his going to Corinth. And, indeed, for the reasons already afflictions for the Gospel; which afflictions, far from re-stated, he purposely avoided that city. It has been conflecting disgrace upon the Gospel, or its ministers, prepared for him a far greater glory in heaven (v.), to which he aspired, inviting others to do the same, by accepting the grace of reconciliation tendered in the Gospel. 4. To stir them up to lead a holy life, and particularly to avoid communion with idolaters. 5. To excite them to finish their contributions for their poor brethren in Judæa. (viii. ix.) 6. Lastly, to apologize for himself against the personal contemptibleness imputed to him by the false teacher and his adherents. (x.-xiii.) In the course of this apology, he reproves their vain-glory, and enters upon a high commenda. lectured by Grotius, and Drs. Hammond and Paley, that his that it is so represented by the apostle in a corresponding first Epistle virtually supplied the place of his presence, and ble, it is, however, far-fetched, and is not satisfactory as a passage. (1 Cor. v. 3.) Admitting this solution to be proba Roberts's Clavis Bibliorum, p. 754. The various emotions, which evi dently agitated the mind of St. Paul when writing this epistle, and also his Michaelis, vol. iv. p. 74. matter of fact. Michaelis has produced another, more simple and natural, viz. that Paul, on his return from Crete, visited Corinth a second time before he went to winter at Nicopolis. This second visit is unnoticed in the Acts, because the voyage itself is unnoticed. The third visit promised in 2 Cor. xii. 14. and xiii. 1, 2. was actually paid on the apostle's second return to Rome, when he took Corinth in his way. (2 Tim. iv. 20.) "Thus critically does the book of the Acts harmonize, even in its omissions, with the Epistles and these with each other, in the minute inidental circumstance of the third visit." On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Horæ Paulina, Chap. IV.3 SECTION VI. ON THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. I. Notice of the Christian church in Galatia.-II. Date.-III. Genuineness and authenticity of this Epistle.-IV. Its occasion and scope.-V. Synopsis of its contents.-VI. Observations on this Epistle. I. CHRISTIANITY was very early planted in Galatia by Paul himself, and it appears from the Acts of the Apostles that he visited the churches in this country more than once. Two distinct visits are clearly marked, viz. the first about the year 50 (Acts xvi. 6.), and the second about the year 51 or 55. (xviii. 23.) II. There is great diversity of opinion among learned men concerning the date of the Epistle to the Galatians. Weingart supposes it to have been written so early as the year 48; Michaelis, in 49; Cappel, in 51; Bishop Pearson, in 57; Mill, Fabricius, Moldenhawer, and others, in 58; Van Til and Dr. Doddridge, in 53; Hottinger, in 54; Lord Barrington, Drs. Benson and Lardner, in 53; Beausobre, Rosenm ller, and Dr. A. Clarke, in 52 or 53; Bishop Tomline, in 52. Theodoret, who is followed by Dr. Lightfoot and some others, imagine that it was one of those Epistles which Saint Paul wrote from Rome during his first confinement; but this opinion is contradicted by the apostle's silence concerning his bonds, which he has often mentioned in the letters that are known to have been written at that time. It is evident that the Epistle to the Galatians was written early, because he complains in it of their speedy apostasy from his doctrine, (Gal. i. 6.), and warns them in the strongest and most forcible terms against the judaizing teachers, who disturbed the peace of the churches in Syria and Asia Minor. (i. 7-9. iii. 1.) The warmth of the apostle's expressions led Tertullian to conclude that Saint Paul was himself a neophyte or novice in the Christian faith at the time of writing this Epistle. And as no intimation is given through the whole of it that he had been with them more than once, we are authorized to conclude, that he wrote this letter from Corinth about the end of 52, or early in the year 53. The subscription, indeed, states it to have been written from Rome: but this is evidently spurious, for Saint Paul's first journey to Rome did not take place until at least ten years after the conversion of the Galatians. III. The genuineness of this Epistle was never doubted. It is cited by the apostolic fathers, Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp ;9 and is declared to be authentic by Irenæus,10 Clement of Alexandria," Tertullian,12 Caius,13 Origen, and by all subsequent writers. It is worthy of 1 Michaelis, vol. iv. p. 37. 2 Dr. Hales's Chronology, vol. ii. book ii. p. 1123. Calinet, Preface sur la seconde Epitre aux Corinthiens. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 324, 325.; 4to. vol. iii. p. 296. Rosenmüller, Scholia in N. T. tom. iv. pp. 251, 252.; Bloch, Chronotaxis Scriptorum Pauli, pp. 192-203.; Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 385-392. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 13-75. Whitby's and Macknight's Prefaces to 2 Corinthians. Compare Gal. i. 8. 11. ii. i. et seq. Cont. Marcion, lib. i. c. 20. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 37. ; 4to. vol. i. p. 298. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 57.; 4to. vol. i. p. 309. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 76. ; 4to. vol. i. p. 319. Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. p. 95.; 4to. vol. i. p. 330. 10 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 163, 161.; 4to. vol. i. p. 368. 11 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 223.; 4to. vol. i. p. 401. 1 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 261.; 4to. vol. i. p. 423. 13 Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. p. 374.; 4to. vol. i. p. 482. 2 U 14 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 471.; 4to. vol. i. p. 535. VOL. II. It was remark, that this Epistle was acknowledged to be genuine by the heretic Marcion, who reckoned it the earliest written of all Saint Paul's Letters, and accordingly placed it first in his Apostolicon, or Collection of Apostolical Writings.15 IV. The Churches in Galatia, as in most other countries, were composed partly of converted Jews and partly of Gentile converts, but the latter seem to have been most numerous. It appears from the contents of this Epistle, that, not long after the Galatians had embraced Christianity, a certain judaizing teacher or false apostle had either crept in or risen up among them, who, to advance his own doctrine, questioned Saint Paul's apostolical authority, insinuating that Peter and the apostles of the circumcision were superior to him, and consequently much more to be regarded. further insinuated that they never preached against the circumcision of Gentile converts: but that it was a doctrine peculiar to Paul, who was only an apostle of men, and had not such extraordinary powers and illumination as had been conferred on the other apostles. The false teacher seems even to have intimated, that Saint Paul did himself secretly, and at some times, preach the necessity of circumcision to the insisted on the contrary. In short, the false apostle was deGentile converts; though generally, and at other times, he sirous that all Gentile Christians should submit themselves to circumcision, and consequently oblige themselves to observe the whole law of Moses, as if the Gospel of Jesus Christ alone were insufficient to justify and save them. And so successful was this teacher in propagating this error, that some of the Galatians actually submitted to be circumcised. (Gal. v. 2-12.) From the expression of Saint Paul in Gal. v. 9-10., it is probable that this disturbance in the Galatian churches was made by one judaizing teacher only, and not by several zealots, as some commentators have supposed; and, from what is said in vi. 12, 13., it appears that he was a man of immoral character, who acted not from any religious views or motives, but from vain-glory and fear; that he might conciliate the favour of the Jews by increasing the number of proselytes, and so escape the persecutions raised by the unbelieving Jews against Saint Paul, and those who adhered to his doctrines. Such were the circumstances that occasioned Saint Paul to write this Epistle with his own hand (Gal. vi. 11.), contrary to his usual practice of dictating his letters. Accordingly, its ScOPE is, to assert his apostolical character and authority, and the doctrine which he taught, and to confirm the Galatian churches in the faith of Christ, especially with to expose the errors which had been disseminated among respect to the important point of justification by faith alone; them, by demonstrating to them the true nature and use of the moral and ceremonial law; and to revive those principles of Christianity which he had taught when he first preached the Gospel to them. three parts, viz. V. The Epistle to the Galatians, therefore, consists of PART I. The Introduction. (i. 1—5.) PART II. The Discussion of the Subjects which had occasioned this Epistle: in which SECT. 1. is a vindication of Saint Paul's apostolical doctrine and authority, and shows that he was neither a missionary from the church at Jerusalem, nor a disciple of the apostles, but an immediate apostle of Christ himself, by divine revelation; consequently that he was in no respect inferior to Saint Peter himself. (i. 6-24. ii.) SECT. 2. The apostle disputes against the advocates for circumcision and the observance of the law of Moses, and shows, §i. That justification is by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Mosaic law. (iii. 1—18.) ii. That the design of God in giving the law was, not to justify but to convince of sin, as well as to restrain from the commission of it; and that being intended only for a temporary institution, instead of vacating the promise, it was designed to be subservient to it, by showing the necessity of a better righteousness than that of the law, and so to lead convinced souls to Christ; that, being justified by faith in him, they might obtain the benefit of the promise. (iii. 19-21.) Such being the end and design of the law, the apostle infers from it, that now, under the Gospel, we are freed from the law (25-29.); and illustrates his inference by God's treatment of the Jewish church, which he put under the law, as a father puts a minor under a guardian. (iv. 1-7.) SECT. 3. shows the great weakness and folly of the Galatians in going about to subject themselves to the law, and that 1 Epiphanius, Hæres. 42. by submitting to circumcision they became subject to the whole law, and would forfeit the benefits of the covenant of grace. (iv. 8-21. v. 1—9.) SECT. 4. contains various instructions and exhortations for Christian behaviour, and particularly concerning a right use of their Christain freedom. (v. 10—16. vi. 1—10.) PART III. The Conclusion, which is a Summary of the Topics d'scussed in this Epistle, terminates with an Apostolical Benediction. (vi. 11—18.) VI. Although the subject discussed in the Epistle to the Galatians is the same that is treated in the Epistle to the Romans, viz. the doctrine of justification by faith alone, yet the two Epistles differ materially in this respect. The Epistle to the Galatians (which was first written) was designed to prove against the Jews, that men are justified by faith without the works of the law of Moses, which required perfect obedience to all its precepts, moral and ceremonial, under the penalty of the curse, from which the atonements and purifications prescribed by Moses had no power to deliver the sinner. On the contrary, in his Epistle to the Romans, Saint Paul treats of justification on a more enlarged plan; his design being to prove against both Jews and Gentiles, that neither the one nor the other can be justified meritoriously by performing works of law, that is, the works enjoined by the law of God, which is written on men's hearts; but that all must be justified gratuitously by faith through the obedience of Christ. The two Epistles, therefore, taken together, form a complete proof, that justification is not to be obtained meritoriously, either by works of morality, or by rites and ceremonies, though of divine appointment; but that it is a free gift, proceeding entirely from the mercy of God, to those who are qualified by faith to receive it.2 In This Epistle is written with great energy and force of language, and at the same time affords a fine instance of Saint Paul's skill in managing an argument. The chief objection, which the advocate or advocates for the Mosaic law had urged against him, was, that he preached circumcision. the beginning of the Epistle he overturns this slander by a statement of facts, without taking any express notice of it; but at the end he fully refutes it, that he might leave a strong and lasting impression upon their minds. SECTION VII. ON THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. I. Account of the church at Ephesus.—II. Genuineness and I. CHRISTIANITY was first planted in this city by Saint Paul, about A. D. 54, when he reasoned with the Jews in their sy nagogues for the space of three months; he did not, however, continue long there at that time, but hastened to keep the feast at Jerusalem, promising to return again to his hearers. (Acts xviii. 19-21.) Accordingly he came to Ephesus early the following year (Acts xix. 1. et seq.), and preached the word with such success, and performed such extraordinary miracles among them, that a numerous church was formed there, chiefly composed of Gentile converts; whose piety and zeal were so remarkable, that many of them, in abhorrence of the curious arts which they had used, burnt their magical books, to a great value. (xix. 19.) And such was the apostle's concern for their spiritual welfare, that he did not leave them until A. D. 56, when he had been about three years among them. (xx. 31.) After this he spent some time in Macedonia and Achaia; and on his return to Jerusalem (A. D. 57) he sent for the elders of the Ephesian church to meet him at Miletus. There he took an affectionate leave of them, as one that should see them no more; appealing to them with what fidelity he had discharged his ministry among them, and exhorting them to "take heed unto themselves, and unto the flock" committed to their care, lest they should be corrupted by seducing teachers who would rise among them, and artfully endeavour to pervert them. (xx. 17-38.) Though the erroneous doctrines of the judaizing teacher and his followers, as well as the calumnies which they spread for the purpose of discrediting him as an apostle, doubtless occasioned great uneasiness of mind to him and to the faith-first verse of this Epistle, which is an evident proof that the ful in that age, and did considerable injury among the Galatians, at least for some time: yet, ultimately, these evils have proved of no small service to the church in general. For, by obliging the apostle to produce the evidences of his apostleship, and to relate the history of his life, especially after his conversion, we have obtained the fullest assurance that he really was an apostle, called to be an apostle by Jesus Christ himself, and acknowledged to be such by those who were apostles before him; consequently, we are assured that our faith in the doctrines of the Gospel as taught by him (and it is he who has taught the peculiar doctrines of the Gospel most fully) is not built on the credit of men, but on the authority of the Spirit of God, by whom Saint Paul was inspired in the whole of the doctrine which he has delivered to the world. As this letter was directed to the churches of Galatia, Dr. Macknight is of opinion, that it was to be read publicly in them all. He thinks, that it was in the first instance sent by Titus to the brethren in Ancyra, the chief city of Galatia, with an order to them to communicate it to the other churches, in the same manner as the first Epistle to the Thessalonians was appointed to be read to all the brethren in that city, and in the province of Macedonia. On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Hora Paulina, Chap. V. In critically studying this Epistle, much assistance will be obtained from Dr. Bloomfield's Recensio Synoptica, vol. vii. pp. 311-509. 1 Compare, among other passages, Gal. iii. 2, 3. 5. iv. 21. v. 1-4. Dr. Macknight's Preface to the Epistle to the Galatians, sect. 3. 3 Ibid. Calmet, Preface sur l'Epitre aux Galates. Rosenmüller, Scholia in N. T. tom. iv. pp. 394-396.; Bloch, Chronotaxis Scriptorum Pauli, pp. 131159.; Lardner's Works, Svo. vol. vi. pp. 305-314.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 287291.; Whitby's Preface; Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 361-367.; Michae lis, vol. iv pp 8-22 II. The apostle Paul is universally admitted to be the author Lardner, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 70.; 4to. vol. i. p. 316. * Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 95.; 4to. vol. i. p. 330. • Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. p. 163.; 4to. vol. i. p. 368. 10 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 263, 264.; 4to. vol. i. p. 423. 14 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 472.; 4to. vol. i. p. 535. 12 Ibid. Svo, vol. ii. pp. 263, 261.; 4to. vol. i. p. 423. 13 See the original passage in Lardner, 8vo. vol. iv. p. 401.; 4to. vol. ii. p. 466.; or in Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 142-146. expressly cites the Epistle to the Ephesians' without any hesitation, it is evident that in his time (the latter part of the fourth century) this Epistle was not considered as being addressed to the Laodiceans. III. The subscription to this Epistle states, that it was written from Rome, and sent to the Ephesians by Tychicus, who was also the bearer of the Epistle to the Colossians, the similarity of which in style and subject shows that it was Thirdly, it is contended that there are no allusions in this written at the same time. That this Epistle was written Epistle to St. Paul's having resided among the persons to during Saint Paul's first imprisonment at Rome, is evident whom it is addressed; and that the expressions in Eph. i. 15. from its allusions to his confinement (iii. 1. iv. 1. vi. 20.); iii. 2. and iv. 21. appear to be more suitable to persons whom and as he does not express in it any hopes of a speedy rehe had never seen (which was the case of the Christians at lease (which he does in his other Epistles sent from that Laodicea), than to the Ephesians, among whom he had re-city), we conclude with Dr. Lardner, Bishop Tomline, and sided about three years. (Acts xx. 31.) But these passages others, that it was written during the early part of Saint admit of easy and satisfactory interpretations, which directly Paul's imprisonment, and probably in the year 61, soon after refute this hypothesis. It will be recollected that four or five he arrived at Rome. years had elapsed since Saint Paul had quitted Ephesus: he IV. As Saint Paul was, in a peculiar manner, the apostle might, therefore, with great propriety, express (in i. 15.) his of the Gentiles, and was now a prisoner at Rome in concomplacency on hearing that they continued steadfast in the sequence of his having provoked the Jews, by asserting that faith, notwithstanding the various temptations to which they the observance of the Mosaic law was not necessary to obtain were exposed. Again, the expression in iii. 2. ( curate the favour of God, he was apprehensive lest advantage should THY Ccro) which many translate and understand to mean, be taken of his confinement to unsettle the minds of his if ye have heard of the dispensation, more correctly means, Ephesian converts, who were almost wholly Gentiles. Hearsince ye have heard the dispensation of the grace of God, which ing, however, that they stood firm in the faith of Christ, he had been made known to them by Saint Paul himself. Con- wrote this Epistle in order to establish them in that faith, and sequently this verse affords no countenance to the hypothesis to give them more exalted views of the love of God, and above mentioned. The same remark applies to iv. 21., where of the excellency and dignity of Christ; and at the same a similar construction occurs, which ought in like manner to time to fortify their minds against the scandal of the cross. be rendered, since indeed ye have heard him, &c. But most With this view, he shows them that they were saved by stress has been laid upon the direction given by Saint Paul grace; and that, however wretched they once were, now they in Col. iv. 16.—that the Colossians should "cause the Epis-had equal privileges with the Jews. He then proceeds to tle which he wrote to them to be read also in the church of encourage them to persevere in their Christian calling, by the Laodiceans, and that they should likewise read the declaring with what steadfastness he suffered for the truth, Epistle from Laodicea;"-which (it is contended) affords a and with what earnestness he prayed for their establishment plain proof that the Epistle, in our copies inscribed to the and continuance in it; and urges them to walk in a manner Ephesians, must. be that which is intended in Col. iv. 16., becoming their profession, in the faithful discharge both of and consequently was originally written to the Laodiceans. the general and common duties of religion, and of the special But this conclusion does not necessarily follow: for it is duties of particular relations. most probable, that by "the Epistle from Laodicea," Saint Paul meant the Epistle to the Ephesians, a copy of which was sent by the apostle's directions to the Laodiceans, whose city lay between Ephesus and Colosse; and, as it was within the circuit of the Ephesian church (which was the metropolitan of all Asia, as Ephesus was the chief city of proconsular Asia), the Epistle to the Ephesians, as already remarked,2 may refer to the whole province. Michaelis, Haenlein, Hug, and Cellérier, after Archbishop Usher and Bengel, get rid of all the difficulties attending this question, by supposing the Epistle to have been encyclical or circular, and addressed to the Ephesians, Laodiceans, and some other churches in Asia Minor. But it could hardly be eircular in the sense in which Michaelis understands that term: for he supposes that the different copies transmitted by Saint Paul had Ep, at Ephesus, & Naudinux, at Lavdicea, &c. as occasion required, and that the reason why all our manuscripts read Eger is, that when the books of the New Testament were first collected, the copy used was obtained from Ephesus; but this, Bishop Middleton observes, seems to imply what cannot be proved-that the canon was established by authority, and that all copies of this Epistle, not agreeing with the approved edition, were suppressed. V. In this Epistle we may observe the following particulars, besides the inscription (i. 1, 2.); viz. PART I. The Doctrine pathetically explained, which contains, SECT. 1. Praise to God for the whole Gospel-blessing (i. 3— SECT. 2. A more particular admonition concerning their once SECT. 1. General, to walk worthy of their calling, agreeable to SECT. 2. Particular. (1.) To avoid lying, anger, theft, and other sins (iv. 25–31. v. 1–21.), with a commendation of the opposite virtues. (2.) To a faithful discharge of the relative duties of wives and husbands (v. 22—23.), of children and parents (vi. 1-1.), and of masters and servants. (vi. 5-9.) SECT. 3. Final.-To war the spiritual warfare. (vi. 10-20.) PART III. The Conclusion. (vi. 21—24.) Dr. Macknight is of opinion, that Saint Paul sent the Ephesians word by Tychicus, who carried their letter, to send a copy of it to the Laodiceans, with an order to them to communicate it to the Colossians. This hypothesis will account, as well as that of Michaelis, for the want of those VI. The style of this Epistle is exceedingly animated, marks of personal acquaintance which the apostle's former and corresponds with the state of the apostle's mind at the residence might lead us to expect, and on which so much time of writing. Overjoyed with the account which their stress has been laid: for every thing local would be pur-messenger had brought him of their faith and holiness (i. 15.), posely omitted in an Epistle which had a further destination. and transported with the consideration of the unsearchable The reader will adopt which of these hypotheses he may wisdom of God, displayed in the work of man's redemption, deem the best supported: we think the solution last stated, and of his astonishing love towards the Gentiles in making the most natural and probable; and that, when the united them partakers, through faith, of all the benefits of Christ's testimonies of manuscripts, and all the fathers, with the ex- death, he soars high in his sentiments on these grand subception of Basil, are taken into consideration, we are fully jus- jects, and gives his thoughts utterance in sublime and copious tified in regarding this Epistle as written to the Ephesians.3 expressions. Many of them contain happy allusions to the 1 Lardner, Svo. vol. iv. p. 401. ; 4to. vol. ii. p. 467. temple and statue of Diana at Ephesus. "No real Chris2 See Vol. I. p. 58. tian," says Dr. Macknight, "can read the doctrinal part of the Epistle to the Ephesians, without being impressed and roused by it, as by the sound of a trumpet." Stosch, de Epistolis Apostolorum non deperditis, p. 101. et seq. Calmet, Preface sur l'Epitre aux Ephesiens; Rosenmüller and Koppe in their re spective Prolegomena to this epistle. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 12-116. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 416-456.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 312-362. Macknight on Col. iv. 16. Cellerier, Introd. au Nouv. Test. p. 423. Hug's Introd. vol. ii. pp. 425-433. Bishop Middleton on the Greek Article, pp. 508-513. (first edit.), who observes, that if ever there were an epistle from Saint Paul to the Laodiceans, it is lost; for that which is extant in Fabricius and in Mr. Jones's work on the canon (and of which we have given a translation in Appendix I to Vol. I. Sect. II.) is universally admitted to be a forgery; yet the loss of a canonical writing is of all suppositions the most improbable. On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's flore Paulinæ, Chap. VI. For a table of the corresponding passages in this Epistle, and in that of the Colossians, see page 31. infra. • Preface to Ephesians, sect. 6. |