various DOCTRINAL PROPOSITIONS in this Epistle, which are found in the other acknowledged Epistles of Paul. Professor Stuart and M. De Groot have discussed this subject at length, especially the former: our limits will only permit a very few examples to be given, showing the superiority of the Gospel over the Mosaic dispensation :— 1. As to the superior degree of RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE imparted by the Gospel. "In his acknowledged Epistles, Paul calls Judaism Ta σTOIXTH TOU Xoo(Gal. iv. 3.), the elements or rudiments of the world, that is, the elements or principles of a religion accommodated to the ignorant and imbecile men of the present age or world; and again, т σ #TWXX σTIXX (Gal. iv. 9.), weak and beggarly elements, to denote its imperfection. He represents it as adapted to children, (Gal. iv. 3.), who are in a state of nonage and pupilage, or in the condition of servants rather than that of heirs. (Gal. iv. 1.) On the other hand, Christians attain to a higher know. ledge of God (Gal. iv. 9.): they are no more as servants, but become sons, and obtain the privileges of adoption. (Gal. iv. 5, 6.) They are represented as TEANG (1 Cor. xiv. 20.); as being furnished with instruction adequate to make them pes TEXIOUS. (Eph. iv. 11-13.) Christianity leads them to see the glorious displays of himself which God has made, with an unveiled face, that is, clearly (2 Cor. iii. 18.); while Judaism threw a veil over these things. (2 Cor. ii. 13.) Christianity is engraven on the hearts of its votaries, JINXOVIN TOU VIUμATOS (2 Cor. iii. 8.), while Judaism was engraven on tablets of stone, iPTSTUEN EN TOTS 2015. (2 Cor. iii. 7.)" Let us now compare the preceding sketch of the apostle's views on this point, as contained in his acknowledged Epistles, with those which are developed in the Epistle to the Hebrews. "This Epistle commences with the declaration, that God, who in times past spake to the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken to us by his Son. (Heb. i. 1. ii. 1.) Judaisin was revealed only by the mediation of angels (ii. 2.), while Christianity was revealed by the Son of God, and abundantly confirmed by miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. (ii. 3, 4.) The ancient covenant was imperfect with respect to the means which it furnished for the diffusion of knowledge; but the new covenant provides that all shall know the Lord from the least to the greatest. (viii. 9-11.) The law was only a sketch or imperfect representation of religious blessings; while the Gospel proffers the blessings themselves. (x. 1.) The worthies of ancient times had only imperfect views of spiritual blessings, while Christians enjoy them in full measure. (xi. 39, 40.)" 2. As to the views which the Gospel displays concerning God the Father, in the bestowment of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. No one has spoken so frequently as Saint Paul concerning the Holy Spirit, nor has any one of the inspired writers adduced the gifts of the Holy Spirit as an argument for the truth of the Gospel, besides Saint Paul and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. (See 1 Cor. xiv. 22, &c.) The apostle expressly uses the word up, to distribute, with regard to these gifts in Rom. xii. 3. and 2 Cor. vii. 17.; and in Heb. ii. 4. he says, that the mission of the apostles was confirmed by God with divers miracles, and IITOS Ayou μepimus, distributions or gifts of the Holy Spirit. These gifts, Saint Paul exclusively affirms, are variously imparted according to the will of God (Rom. xii. 3-6. Eph. iv. 7. and especially 1 Cor. xii. 4. 7-11. 28.); and in the Epistle to the Hebrews these gifts are conferred **T* THE AUTO Sλ, according to his will. 3. Concerning the person and mediatorial office of the LORD JESUS CHRIST, He is the Creator of all things (Col. i. 16. Eph. iii. 9. 1 Cor. viii. 6.), and by Him all things subsist. (Col i. 17.) He is the image or likeness of God, FIX TOU BOU (2 Cor. iv. 4.); the image of the invisible God, sixey TOU B100 TOU HOPETOV. (Col. i. 15.) He being in the form of God, in μopen -that is, in the condition of God-humbled himself, assumed an inferior or humble station,-taking the condition of a servant, being made after the similitude of men, and being found in fashion as a man, he exhibited his humility by obedience, even to the death of the cross, wherefore God highly exalted him to supreme dignity; and he must reign till he hath put all things under his feet. (Phil. ii, 6-9. 1 Cor. xv. 25-27.) Correspondent to these representations are the declarations in the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Son of God is affirmed to be the reflected splendour of the glory of God, that is, one in whom the divine majesty is conspicuous, the xxpxrap TOOTHING TOU IIтpes, the exact image, rep resentation, or counterpart of the Father (i. 3.), by whom God made all things (i. 2.), and upholds the universe by his word. Yet he was in a state of humiliation, being made a little loicer than the angels (ii. 9.); he assumed flesh and blood, "in order that he might by his own death render null and void the destructive power of the devil. (ii. 14.) On account of the suffering of death he is exalted to a state of glory and honour. (ii. 9.) He endured the suffering of the cross, making no account of its disgrace, but having a regard to the reward set before him, which was a seat at the right hand of God. (xii. 2.) All things are put under his feet (ii. 8. x. 13.), where the very same passage from the Old Testament is quoted, which Paul quotes in 1 Cor. xv. 25-28., and it is applied in the same manner."'s But chiefly does Saint Paul expatiate in his acknowledged Epistles on the death of Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice for sin, and the reconciliation of sinners to God by means of this sacrifice. He is there said to have come into the world to save sinners (1 Tim. i. 15.); to have died for us and for our sins (Tit. ii. 14. 1 Cor. xv. 3.), and to be a propitiation for our sins. (Rom. iii. 25.) In him we have redemption through his blood. (Eph. 1. 7.) This salvation it was impossible to obtain by the law; it could only be effected by Jesus Christ, who accomplished what the law could not do. (Rom. iii. 20-28. viii. 3. Gal. ii. 16. 21.) Finally, Jesus is our constant Mediator and Intercessor with God. (1 Tim. ii. 5. Rom. viii. 34.) In the Epistle to the Hebrews, we find the same sentiments urged with the same ardour, particularly in chapters vii.-x. To adduce a few instances: Stuart's Commentary, vol. i. pp. 143, 144. (174, 175. of the London edition.) in pp. 144-148. (175-178. of the London edition) he admirably illustrates the superiority of the motives to piety contained in the Gospel, as well as its superior efficacy in insuring the happiness of mankind, and the perpetuity of the Christian dispensation. De Groot, de Epist. ad Hebræos, pp. 240, 241. Stuart's Commentary, vol. i. p. 149. (or p. 182. of the London edition.) Christ was offered to bear the sins of many. (Heb. ix. 28.) He tasted death for every man. (Heb. ii. 9.) He put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (Heb. ix. 26.) The Jewish offerings being altogether insufficient to make expiation, Christ has by his own blood once for all made expiation for sin. (ix. 9-15. x. 10-12. 14. 19.) He is the Mediator of a new covenant to the throne of the universe (ii. 6-10.), he appears in the presence of God (ix. 15. xii. 24.), which is better than the ancient one. (vii. 22. viii.) Exalted for us (ix. 24.); he ever lives to make intercession for all that come unto 16.) Many of the doctrines explained in this Epistle, particularly those God by him (vii. 25.); and he is ever able and ready to assist us. (iv. 14concerning the mediation and intercession of Jesus Christ, are not men tioned by any of the inspired writers, except Paul. of quotation, and style of phraseology of this Epistle, and [iv.] Fourthly, There is such a similarity between the modes those which occur in the apostle's acknowledged Epistles, as clearly shows that the Epistle to the Hebrews is his undoubted production. De Groot, and above all Professor Stuart, have adduced numerous Braunius, Carpzov, Langius, Schmidt, Lardner, Macknight, instances at considerable length, from which the following have been abridged : (1.) Modes of quotation and interpretations of some pas sages of the Hebrew Scriptures which are peculiarly Pauline, because they are to be found only in the writings of Saint Paul. out of the Old Testament in this than his other epistles, is nothing more That the apostle should more abound with testimonies and quotations necessarily required. Thus, Psal. ii. 7. "Thou art my Son: to day I have than the subject of which he treats, and the persons to whom he wrote, his discourse to the Jews in the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia, cited and begotten thee;" is quoted and applied to Jesus (Heb. i. 5.) just as Paul, in applied the same passage of Scripture to him. (Acts xiii. 33.) In like manner, the quotation and explanation of Psal. viii. 4. and of Psal. cx. l., given by Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 25. 27. are found in Heb. ii. 7, 8. So also the explanation of the covenant with Abraham (Heb. vi. 14. 18.) is nowhere found but in Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. (iii. 8. 9. 14. 18.) (2.) Instances of agreement in the style and phraseology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in the acknowledged Epistles of Paul. i. PARTICULAR WORDS, PECULIAR TO PAUL, OR WHICH ARE MOST FREQUENT IN HIS WRITINGS. forty-eight others; De Groot has considerably enlarged the list, which he Wetstein enumerates eleven instances, to which Schmidt has added upwards of sixty examples. Our limits will allow a few only to be subrefers to certain classes; as also does Professor Stuart, who has given joined. The word of God, in Panl, is a sword, μxspa. (Eph. vi. 17. Heb. iv. 12.) uninformed, are termed vin 1 Cor. iii. 1. Eph. iv. 14. Rom. ii. 20. Gal. Children in religion, that is, those who are comparatively ignorant and iv. 3. and Heb. v. 13.; and instruction for such persons is termed milk, and for strong persons (TX), or those who are well taught, it is p, meat, and space тpion, or strong meat, in 1 Cor. iii. 2. and Heb. v. 14.; and their advanced or mature state of Christian knowledge is called TEXELOTHS. MITS or Mediator, to denote Jesus Christ, is exclusively Pauline. (Gal. iii. 19, 20. 1 Tim. ii. 5. Heb. viii. 6.) imputation of sin, to render God propitious, occurs in Eph. v. 26. Heb. ii. 'Aya, to cleanse from sin, that is, to expiate, to liberate from the 11. x. 10. and xiii. 12. to the perfect image, or delineation. (Col. ii. 17. Heb. viii. 5. x. 1.) Heb. iii. 1. iv. 14. x. 23.) 'Oixos Osov, the house of God, that is, the church. (1 Tim. iii. 15. Heb. iii. 6.) Karaрys, to annul, abolish, or abrogate. (Rom. iii. 3. 31. vi. 6. 1 Cor. i. 28. Gal. v. 11. Heb. ii. 14.) ΣπspμX TOU ABpaan, the seed of Abraham, or Christians, occurs in Gal. iii. 29. and Heb. ii. 6. ii. AGONISTIC EXPRESSIONS OR ALLUSIONS TO THE GAMES AND EXERCISES WHICH WERE THEN IN GREAT REPUTE, AND WERE FREQUENTLY SOLEMNIZED IN GREECE AND OTHER PARTS OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, AND PARTICULARLY AT JERUSALEM AND CESAREA BY HEROD. (1 Cor. ix. 24. Phil. iii. 12-14. 2 Tim. ii. 5. iv. 6-8. compared with Heb. vi. 18. and xii. 1-2, 4. 12.) (3.) Coincidences between the exhortations in this Epistle and those in Paul's other letters." See Heb. xii. 3. compared with Gal. vi. 9. 2 Thess. iii. 13. and Eph. iii. 13.; xiii. 16. with Phil. iv. 18. See also Rom. xv. 26. 2 Cor. viii. 24. and ix. 13. Heb. xii. 14. with Rom. xii. 18.; Heb. xiii. 1. 3. 4. with Eph. v. 2-4.; Heb. (4.) Coincidences between the conclusion of this Epistle and the conclusions of Paul's Epistles, in several respects. Compare Heb. xii. 18. with Rom. xv. 30. Eph. vi. 18, 19. Col. iv. 3. Eph. vi. 19-23. 1 Thess. v. 23. and 2 Thess. iii. 16.; Heb. xiii. 24. with 1 Thess. v. 25. and 2 Thess. iii. 1.; Heb. xiii. 20, 21. with Rom. xv. 30-33. Rom. xvi. 21-23. 1 Cor. xvi. 19-21. 2 Cor. xiii. 13. Phil. iv. 21, 22.; Heb. xiii. 25. with 2 Thess. iii. 18. Col. iv. 18. Eph. vi. 24. 1 Tim. vi. 21. 2 Tim. iv. 22. and Tit. iii. 15. [v.] Lastly, There are several circumstances towards the * Macknight's Pref. to Ep. to the Hebrews. Sect. I. §iii. De Groot gives De Groot, pp. 247-250. Stuart, vol. i. pp. 160-168., or pp. 196-204. of the close of this Epistle, which evidently prove that it was written | should lead to the conclusion that it was not written by Paul." by Paul. Thus, (1.) Heb. xiii. 23. The departure of Timothy is mentioned; and we know from the commencement of the Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to Philemon, that he was with Paul during his imprisonment at Rome. (2.) Heb. xiii. 24. They of Italy salute you: the writer, therefore, was then in Italy, whither Paul was sent a prisoner, and where he resided two years (Acts xxviii. 30.); where also he wrote several Epistles which are (3.) Heb. x. 34. The apostle makes mention of his bonds, and of the compassion which the Hebrew Christians showed him in his sufferings, and during his imprisonment. Now it is scarcely credible, that any other person in Italy, where Paul still extant. then was, should write to the Hebrew Christians, and therein make mention of his own bonds, and of Timothy being with him, who was a man unknown to them except through Paul, and not once intimate any thing concerning his condition. Besides, the constant sign and token of Paul's Epistles, which himself had publicly signified to be so (2 Thess. iii. 17, 18.), is subjoined to this:-Grace be with you all. (Heb. xiii. 25.) That this was originally written with his own hand, there is no ground to question; but rather appears to be so because it was written: for he affirms, that it was his custom to subjoin that salutation with his own hand. Now this was an evidence to the persons to whom the original of the Epistle first came, but not to those who had only transcribed copies of it. The salutation itself was their token, being peculiar to Paul; and all these circumstances will yet receive some additional force from the consideration of the time when this Epistle was written. (See par. iv. in the next column.) Is it possible that all these coincidences (which are comparatively a small selection) can be the effect of mere accident? The arrangement and method of treatment, the topics discussed, and the peculiarity of sentiments, words, and phrases, are all so exclusively Pauline, that no other person could have been its author, except the great apostle of the Gentiles. Yet, notwithstanding this strong chain of proof for the authenticity of this Epistle, doubts have still been entertained, whether it is a genuine production of Saint Paul. These doubts rest principally on the omission of the writer's name, and the superior elegance of the style in which it is written. 1. It is indeed certain that all the acknowledged Epistles of Paul begin with a salutation in his own name, and that most of them were directed from some particular place, and sent by some special messengers; whereas the Epistle to the Hebrews is anonymous, and is not directed from any place, nor is the name of the messenger introduced by whom it was sent to Judæa. These omissions, however, can scarcely be considered as conclusive against the positive testimony already adduced. And they are satisfactorily accounted for by Clement of Alexandria, and by Jerome, who intimate, that as Jesus Christ himself was the peculiar apostle to the Hebrews (as acknowledged in this epistle, iii. 1.), Paul declined, through humility, to assume the title of an apostle. To which Theodoret adds, that Paul being peculiarly the apostle of the uncircumcision, as the rest were of the circumcision (Gal. ii. 9. Rom. xi. 13.), he scrupled to assume any public character when writing to the people of their charge. He did not mention his name, messenger, or the particular persons to whom it was sent, because (as Dr. Lardner judiciously remarks) such a long letter might give umbrage to the ruling powers at this crisis, when the Jews were most turbulent, and might endanger himself, the messenger, and those to whom it was directed. But they might easily know the author by the style, and also from the messenger, without any formal notice or superscription. But the absence of the apostle's name is no proof that the Epistle to the Hebrews was not written by Paul, or, that it is a treatise or homily, as some critics have imagined; for, in our canon of the New Testament, there are Epistles universally acknowledged to be the production of an inspired apostle, notwithstanding his name is nowhere inserted in them. The three Epistles of John are here intended, in all of which, that apostle has omitted his name, for some reasons not now known. The first Epistle begins in the same manner as the Epistle to the Hebrews; and in the other two, he calls himself simply the elder or presbyter. That Paul, however, did not mean to conceal himself, we learn from the Epistle itself:-"Know ye," says he, "that our brother Timothy has been sent abroad, with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you." (Heb. xiii. 23.) The objection, therefore, from the omission of the apostle's name, necessarily falls to the ground. 2. With regard to the objection, that this Epistle is superior in point of style to Paul's other writings, and therefore is not the production of that apostle, it is to be observed, that "there does not appear to be such a superiority in the style of this Epistle as Schmidii Hist. Canonis, p. 665. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 402, 403.; 4to. vol. iii. p. 335. Owen on the Hebrews, part i. exercitation 2. The hypothesis of Berger, that the Epistle to the Hebrews was originally an homily, is examined and refuted by Prof. Stuart. Commentary, vol. i. pp. 4-7., or pp. 4-9. of the London edition. Michaelis thinks it highly improbable that Paul would visit Jerusalem again, and expose his life to zealots there. But surely, Dr. Hales remarks, he might revisit Judæa without incurring that danger. Analysis of Chronology vol. ii book ii p. 1130. Those who have thought differently have mentioned Barnabas, Luke, and Clement, as authors or translators of this Epistle. The opinion of Jerome was, that "the sentiments are the apostle's, but the language and composition of some one else, who committed to writing the apostle's sense, and, as it were, reduced into commentaries the things spoken by his master." Dr. Lardner conjectures that Paul dictated the Epistle in Hebrew, and that another, who was a great master of the Greek language, immediately wrote down the apostle's sentiments in his own elegant Greek; but who this assistant of the apostle was, is altogether unknown. But surely the writings of Paul, like those of other authors, may not all have the same precise degree of merit; and if, upon a careful perusal and comparison, it should be thought that the Epistle to the Hebrews is written with greater elegance than the acknowledged compositions of this apostle, it should also be remembered that the apparent design and contents of this Epistle suggest the idea of more studied composition, and yet that there is nothing in it which amounts to a marked difference of style." Besides the sublime subject of this Epistle, the grand ideas which the apostle developes with equal method and warmth, did not permit him to employ the negligent style of a familiar the same construction of sentences, and the same style of exOn the other hand, as we have already seen, there are pression, in this Epistle, which occur in no part of the Scriptures except in Saint Paul's Epistles.6 letter. Upon the whole, we conclude with Braunius, Langius, Carpzov, Pritius, Whitby, Lardner, Macknight, Hales, Rosenmuller, Bengel, Bishop Tomline, Janssens, De Groot, Professor Stuart, and almost every other modern commentator and biblical critic, that the weight of evidence, both external and internal, preponderates so greatly in favour of Paul, that we cannot but consider the Epistle to the Hebrews as written by that apostle; and that, instead of containing "far-fetched analogies and inaccurate reasonings" (as the opponents of our Saviour's divinity and atonement affirm), its finished, than any of Paul's other Epistles, and that it affords composition is more highly wrought, and its language more a finished model of didactic writing. IV. With regard to the time when this Epistle was written, critics and commentators are not agreed, some referring it to A. D. 58, but the greater part placing it between A. D. 61 and 64. If (as we believe) Paul was its author, the time when it was written may easily be determined; for the salutations from the saints in Italy (Heb. xiii. 24.), together with the apostle's promise to see the Hebrews shortly (23.), plainly intimates that his imprisonment was then either terminated, or on the point of being so. It was therefore written from Italy, perhaps from Rome, soon after the Epistles to the Colossians, Ephesians, and Philemon, and not long before Paul left Italy, viz. at the end of A. D. 62, or early in 63. It is evident from several passages, as Lardner and Macknight have observed, that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, and probably, Professor Stuart thinks, but a short time before that event; for in Heb. viii. 4. ix. 25. x. 11. and xiii. 10. the temple is mentioned as then standing, and the Levitical sacrifices are noticed as being then offered. To which we may add, that in x. 32-37. the apostle comforts the believing Hebrews under the persecution which their unbelieving brethren were carrying on against them, by the prospect of Christ's speedy advent to destroy Jerusalem and the whole Mosaic economy. V. The occasion of writing this Epistle will be sufficiently apparent from an attentive review of its contents. The Jews did every thing in their power to withdraw their brethren, who had been converted, from the Christian faith. To persecutions and threats, they added arguments derived from the infer, that the law of Moses was given by the ministration excellency of the Jewish religion. They observed, we may of angels; that Moses was far superior to Jesus of Nazareth, who suffered an ignominous death; that the public worship of God, instituted by their great legislator and prophet, was truly splendid and worthy of Jehovah while the Christians, on the contrary, had no established priesthood, no temple, no altars, no victims, &c. In opposition to such arguments, the at Jerusalem strongly denied; viz. that Jesus of Nazareth, apostle shows, what the learned doctors, scribes, and elders whom they had lately put to death, was the Messiah, the Bishop Tomline's Elements of Christian Theology, vol. i. pp. 455, 456. See pp. 354, 355. supra. The objections of Bertholdt and others, taken from the style of the Epistle to the Hebrews, are examined in detail, and refuted by Professor Stuart, vol. i. p. 180. et seq. Son of God, and far superior to the angels, to Moses, to the high-priest of the Old Testament, and to all other priests: that from his sufferings and death, which he endured for us, much greater and more lasting benefits have resulted to the whole human race, than the Jews ever derived from their temple service, and from the numerous rites and ordinances of the Levitical laws, which were absolutely inefficacious to procure the pardon of sin. The reality of the sacrifice of himself, which Christ offered for sin, is clearly demonstrated. From these and other arguments, the apostle proves that the religion of Jesus is much more excellent and perfect than that of Moses, and exhorts the Christian converts to constancy in the faith, and to the unwearied pursuit of all god. liness and virtue. The great object of the apostle, therefore, in this Epistle, Is to show the deity of Jesus Christ, and the excellency of his Gospel, when compared with the institutions of Moses; to prevent the Hebrews or Jewish converts from relapsing into those rites and ceremonies which were now abolished; and to point out their total insufficiency, as means of reconciliation and atonement. The reasonings are interspersed with numerous solemn and affectionate warnings and exhortations, addressed to different descriptions of persons. At length Saint Paul shows the nature, efficacy, and triumph of faith, by which all the saints in former ages had been accepted by God, and enabled to obey, suffer, and perform exploits, in defence of their holy religion; from which he takes occasion to exhort them to steadfastness and perseverance in the true faith. The Epistle to the Hebrews consists of three parts; viz. PART I. demonstrates the Deity of Christ by the explicit Declarations of Scripture. (ch. i.-x. 18.) The proposition is, that Christ is the true God. (i. 1—3.) SECT. I. His superiority to angels, by whom he is worshipped The superiority of Christ over angels asserted, notwithstand- believing ancestors who perished in the wilderness. (iii. 7— 19. iv. 1-13.) SECT. 3. His superiority to Aaron and all the other high-priests demonstrated. Christ is the true high-priest, adumbrated by Melchizedek and Aaron. (iv. 14-16. v.-viii.) In ch. v. 1—14. and ch. vi. the apostle inserts a parenthetical digression, in which he reproves the Hebrew Christians for their ignorance of the Scriptures. Proofs, (x. 19-39.—xiii. 1—19.) in which the Hebrews are SECT. 1. To faith, prayer, and constancy in the Gospel. (x. SECT. 3. To peace and holiness, and to a jealous watchfulness SECT. 4. To an obedient reception of the Gospel, and a reverential worship of God, from the superior excellency of the Christian dispensation, and the proportionably greater guilt and danger of neglecting it. (xii. 18-29.) SECT. 5. To brotherly love, hospitality, and compassion; to charity, contentment, and the love of God. (xiii. 1-3.) SECT. 6. To recollect the faith and examples of their deceased pastors. (xiii. 4-8.) SECT. 7. To watchfulness against false doctrines in regard to the sacrifice of Christ. (xiii. 9-12.) SECT. 8. To willingness to bear reproach for him, and thanks. giving to God. (xiii. 13-15.) SECT. 9. To subjection to their pastors, and prayer for the apostle. (xiii. 16—19.) PART III. The Conclusion, containing a Prayer for the Hebrews, and Apostolical Salutations. (xiii. 20-25.) The Epistle to the Hebrews, Dr. Hales observes, is a masterly supplement to the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, and also a luminous commentary on them; showing that all the legal dispensation was originally designed to be superseded by the new and better covenant of the Christian dispensation, in a connected chain of argument, evincing the of this Epistle, as connecting the Old Testament and the profoundest knowledge of both. The internal excellence New in the most convincing and instructive manner, and elucidating both more fully than any other Epistle, or perhaps than all of them, places its divine inspiration beyond all doubt. We here find the great doctrines, which are set forth applied to practical purposes, in the most impressive manner.' in other parts of the New Testament, stated, proved, and 1 Heidegger, Enchiridion. Biblicum, pp. 600-611. Dr. Owen's Exercitations on the Epistle to the Hebrews, pp. 1-44. fol. edit. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 381-415.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 324-341. Macknight's Preface to the Hebrews, vol. iii. pp. 321-341. 4to. edit. or vol. v. pp. 1-27. 8vo. edit. Braunii Comment. in Epist. ad Hebræos, pp. 1-36. Carpzovii Exercitationes in Epist. ad Hebræos, pp. lxii.-cvi. Schmidii Hist. et Vindicatio Canonis, pp. 655-673. Langii Commentatio de Vita et Epistolis Apostoli Pauli, pp. 153-160. J. A. Ernesti Lectiones Academicæ in Epist. ad Hebræos, pp. 1-8. 1173-1185. 8vo. Lipsie, 1815. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 192 -269. Dr Hales's Analysis of Chronology, vol. ii. pp. 1128-1137. Pritii SECT. 4. The typical nature of the tabernacle and its furniture, and of the ordinances there observed. (ix. 1-10.) SECT. 5. The sacrifice of Christ is that true and only sacrifice by which all the Levitical sacrifices are abolished. (ix. 11-cos Vet. et Nov. Test. pp. 332-340. Alber, Institutiones Hermeneutica 28. x. 1-18.) Introd. ad Lectionem Nov. Test. pp. 38-61. 312-318. Rosenmüller, Scholia in Nov. Test. vol. v. pp. 142-148. Moldenhawer, Introd. ad Libros Canoni PART II. The Application of the preceding Arguments Nov. Test. toin. i. pp. 244-250. Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 488-533. Janssens, Hermeneutique Sacrée, tom. ii. pp. 61-68. Whitby's and Scott's and Commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews. CHAPTER IV. ON THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. SECTION I. ON THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE CATHOLIC EPistles. I. Origin of the Appellation Catholic Epistles.-II. Its Antiquity.-Observations on their Authenticity.-III. On the Order in which they are usually placed. 1. THE Epistles of Paul are followed in the canon of the New Testament by seven Epistles, bearing the names of the apostles James, Peter, Jude, and John. For many centuries, these Epistles have been generally termed Catholic Epistles, an appellation for which several conjectures have been assigned. 1. Salmeron and others have imagined that they were denominated Catholic or general Epistles, because they were designed to be transcribed and circulated among the Christian churches, that they might be perused by all; for they contain that one catholic or general doctrine, which was delivered to the churches by the apostles of our Saviour, and which might be read with advantage by the universal church of Christ. In like manner they might be called canonical, as containing canons or general rules and precepts which concern all Christians. Unquestionably, the doctrines they contain are truly catholic and excellent; and they also contain general rules and directions that concern all Christians, as well as precepts that are binding upon all, so far as their situations and circumstances are similar. But these remarks are equally applicable to the other books of the New Testament, and Paul's Epistles may, for the same reasons, with equal propriety, be termed catholic or canonical Epistles; for the doctrines there delivered are as catholic and excellent as those comprised in the seven Epistles now under consideration. They likewise contain many general precepts that are obligatory upon all Christians; and the particular precepts are binding so far as the circumstances of Christians in later ages are similar to those referred to by the great apostle of the Gentiles. II. The denomination of Catholic Epistles is of very considerable antiquity, for Eusebius uses it as a common appellation in the fourth century, and it is probably earlier; for John's first Epistle is repeatedly called a catholic Epistle by Origen, and by Dionysius bishop of Alexandria. Of these Epistles, two only, víz. the first Epistle of Peter and the first Epistle of John, were universally received in the time of Eusebius; though the rest were then well known. Athanasius, Epiphanius, and later Greek writers, received seven Epistles which they called catholic. The same appellation was also given to them by Jerome. Although the authenticity of the Epistle of James, the second of Peter, the Epistle of Jude, and the second and third Epistle of John, was questioned by some ancient fathers, as well as by some modern writers, yet we have every reason to believe that they are the genuine and authentic productions of the inspired writers whose names they bear. The claims to authenticity of these disputed Epistles are discussed in the following sections. We may, however, here remark, that the primitive Christians were extremely cautious in admitting any books into their canon, the genuineness and authenticity of which they had any reason to suspect. They rejected all the writings forged by heretics in the names of the apostles; and, therefore, most assuredly, would not have received any, without previously subjecting them to a severe scrutiny. Now, though these five Epistles were not immediately acknowledged as the writings of the apostles, this only shows that the persons, who doubted, had not received complete and incontestable evidence of their authenticity. But, as they were afterwards universally received, we have every reason to conclude, that, upon a strict examination, they were found to be the genuine productions of the apostles. Indeed, the ancient Christians had such good opportunities for examining this subject, they were so careful to guard against imposition, and so well founded was their judgment concerning the books of the New Testament, that, as Dr. Lardner has remarked, no writing which they pronounced genuine has yet been proved spurious; nor have we at this day the least reason to believe any book to be genuine which they rejected. 2. Others are of opinion that they received the appellation of catholic or general Epistles, because they were not written to one person, city, or church, like the Epistles of Paul, but to the catholic church, Christians in general, or to Christians of several countries, or at least to all the Jewish Christians wherever they were dispersed over the face of the earth. Ecumenius, Leontius, Whitby, and others, have adopted this opinion, which, however, does not appear to be well founded. The Epistle of James was, indeed, written to the Christians of the twelve tribes of Israel in their several dispersions; but it was not inscribed to the Christians in Judæa, III. The order in which these Epistles are placed, varies nor to Gentile Christians in any country whatever. The two in ancient authors; but it is not very material in what manEpistles of Peter were written to Christians in general, but ner they are arranged. Could we fix with certainty the date particularly those who had been converted from Judaism. of each Epistle, the most natural order would be according The first Epistle of John and the Epistle of Jude were pro-to the time when they were written. Some have placed the bably written to Jewish Christians; and the second and third Epistles of John were unquestionably written to particular persons. three Epistles of John first, probably because he was the beloved disciple of our Lord. Others have given the priority to the two Epistles of Peter, because they considered him as the prince of the apostles. Some have placed the Epistle of James last, possibly because it was later received into the canon by the Christian church in general. By others, this Epistle has been placed first, either because it was conjectured to have been the first written of the seven Epistles, or because Saint James was supposed to have been the first bishop of Jerusalem, the most ancient and venerable, and the first of all the Christian churches; or because the Epistle was written to the Christians of the twelve tribes of Israel, who were the first believers. In the following sections the usual order has been retained.1 3. A third opinion is that of Dr. Hammond, adopted by Dr. Macknight and others, which we think is the most proDable. It is this:-The first Epistle of Peter and the first Epistle of John, having from the beginning been received as authentic, obtained the name of catholic or universally acknowledged (and therefore canonical) Epistles, in order to distinguish them from the Epistle of James, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, and the Epistle of Jude, concerning which doubts were at first entertained, and they were considered by many as not being a rule of faith. But their authenticity being at length acknowledged by the generality of the churches, they also obtained the name of catholic or universally received Epistles, and were esteemed of equal authority with the rest. These Epistles were also termed canonical by Cassiodorus in the middle of the sixth century, and by the writer of the prologue to these Epistles, which is erroneously ascribed to Jerome. The propriety of I. this latter appellation is not satisfactorily ascertained. Du Pin says that some Latin writers have called these Epistles canonical, either confounding the name with catholic, or to denote that they are a part of the canon of the books of the New Testament. SECTION II. ON THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES. Account of the author of this Epistle.-II. Its genuineness and authenticity.-III. To whom addressed.-IV. Its scope. 1 Benson's Preface to the Catholic Epistles. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 269– 271. Pritii Introd. ad Nov. Test. pp. 62-65. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 465-468.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 366, 367. Rosenmüller, Scholia, vol. v. pp. 317, 318. V. Synopsis of its contents.-VI. Observations on this Epistle. 1. CONSIDERABLE doubts have existed respecting the author of this Epistle. Two apostles of the name of James are mentioned in the New Testament. The first was the son of Zebedee, a fisherman upon the lake of Galilee, and the brother of the evangelist John; and as he is uniformly mentioned by the evangelists before John (except in Luke ix. 28.), he is supposed to have been the elder of the two. As he was put to death by Herod Agrippa, A. D. 44 (Acts xii.), it is evident that he was not the author of the Epistle which bears the name of James, because it contains passages which refer to a later period, viz. v. 1-8., which intimates the then immediately approaching destruction of Jerusalem, and the subversion of the Jewish polity. The other James was the son of Alpheus or Cleopas; he is called the brother or near relation of our Lord (Gal. i. 18, 19.), and is also generally termed "the Less," partly to distinguish him from the other James, and probably, also, because he was lower in stature. That he was an apostle, is evident from various passages in the New Testament, though it does not appear when his designation to this office took place. He was honoured by Jesus Christ with a separate interview soon after his resurrection. (1 Cor. xv. 7.) He was distinguished as one of the apostles of the circumcision (Acts i. 13.); and soon after the death of Stephen, A. D. 34, he seems to have been appointed president or bishop of the Christian church at Jerusalem, to have dwelt in that city, and to have presided at the council of the apostles, which was convened there A. D. 49. On account of his distinguished piety and sanctity, he was surnamed "the Just." But, notwithstanding the high opinion that was generally entertained of his character, his life was prematurely terminated by martyrdom, according to the account of Hegesippus, an ecclesiastical historian, who flourished towards the close of the second century. Having made a public declaration of his faith in Christ, the Scribes and Pharisees excited a tumult among the Jews, which began at the temple: or at least they availed themselves of a general disturbance, however it might have originated, and demanded of James an explicit and public declaration of his sentiments concerning the character of Christ. The apostle, standing on an eminence or battlement of the temple, whence he could be heard by the assembled multitude, avowed his faith, and maintained his opinion, that Jesus was the Messiah. The Jews were exasperated, and precipitated him from the battlement where he was standing; and as he was not killed by the fall, they began to cast stones at him. The holy apostle, kneeling down, prayed to God to forgive his murderers, one of whom at length struck him with a long pole, which terminated his life. According to Hegesippus, this event took place about the time of the passover A. D. 62. At this time the procurator Festus is supposed to have been dead, and his successor Albinus had not arrived; so that the province was left without a governor. Such a season left the Jews at liberty to gratify their licentious and turbulent passions; and from their known character and sentiments about this time, they were very likely to embrace the opportunity. We may therefore date the apostle's death about the time assigned by Hegesippus, viz. A. D. 62, in which year it is placed by most learned men,' who are agreed in dating the Epistle of James in the year 61.2 II. A considerable diversity of opinion has prevailed respecting the canonical authority of this Epistle; but though Michaelis and some other modern critics are undecided on this subject, we apprehend that there is sufficient evidence to prove that it was written in the apostolic age. Clement of Rome has alluded to it twice. Hermas has not 1 Hegesippus, cited by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c. 23. Eusebius also quotes a passage from Josephus, that is no longer extant in his works, in which the Jewish historian considers the miseries which shortly after overwhelmed his countrymen as a judgment for their murder of James, whom he calls a most righteous person. The genuineness of Josephus's testimony has been questioned, so that no reliance can be placed upon it. Origen and Jerome cite it as authentic, and they are followed by Bishop Pearson, who has defended its genuineness. Dr. Doddridge considers the testimony of Josephus as unworthy of credit; and Dr. Benson thinks that both the accounts of Josephus and Hegesippus are extremely dubious. Dr. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 468-502.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 368384. Dr. Benson's History of Saint James, prefixed to his Paraphrase, pp. It is well known that the venerable Martin Luther, in the earlier part of the Reformation, spoke rather in a slighting manner of this Epistle, which he called straminea epistola, a strawy epistle, and excluded it at first from the sacred canon on account of its supposed contradiction of Saint Paul concerning the doctrine of justification by faith; but more mature experience and deeper research induced hiin subsequently to retract his opinion. 1-13. 2d edit. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 273-292. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 44.; 4to. vol. i. p. 301. fewer than seven allusions to it,5 which Dr. Lardner thinks sufficient to prove the antiquity of this Epistle. It is classed whose authenticity the ancients were not unanimous, though by Eusebius among the Arras, or writings concerning the majority was in favour of them. This Epistle was quoted as genuine by Origen, Jerome, Athanasius, and most of the subsequent ecclesiastical writers: and it is found in all the catalogues of the canonical books of Scripture, which were published by the general and provincial councils. But the most decisive proof of its canonical authority is, that the Epistle of James is inserted in the Syriac version of the New Testament, executed at the close of the first or early in the second century, in which the second Epistle of Peter, the second and third of John, the Epistle of Jude, and the book of Revelation are omitted. This, Dr. Macknight truly Jewish believers, to whom that Epistle was addressed and remarks, is an argument of great weight; for certainly the delivered, were much better judges of its authenticity than the converted Gentiles to whom it was not sent, and who had perhaps no opportunity of being acquainted with it until long after it was written. III. Commentators and critics are by no means agreed concerning the persons to whom this Epistle was addressed. Beza, Cave, Scott, Fabricius, Bishop Tomline, and others, are of opinion that it was addressed to the believing Jews who were dispersed all over the world. Grotius and Dr. Wall think that it was written to all the people of Israel living out of Judæa. Michaelis considers it certain that James wrote to persons already converted from Judaism to Christianity; but at the same time he believes, as the apostle was highly respected by the Jews in general, that he wished and designed that it should also be read by the unbelieving Jews, and that this design and intention had some influence on the choice of his materials. Dr. Benson is of opinion that this Epistle was addressed to the converted Jews out of Palestine; but Whitby, Lardner, and after them Macknight, think it was written to the whole Jewish nation, both within and without Judæa, whether believers or not. This opinion is grounded on some expressions in the first ten verses of the fourth chapter, and in the first five verses of the fifth chapter, which they suppose to be applicable to unbelievers only. It is true that in the fifth chapter the apostle alludes to the then impending destruction of Jerusalem, and the miseries which soon after befell the unbelieving Jews; but we think, with Bishop Tomline, that in these passages the apostle alludes merely to the great corruptions into which the Hebrew Christians had fallen at that time. It does not appear probable that James would write part of his Epistle to believers, and part to unbelievers, without any mention or notice of that distinction. It should also be remembered, that this Epistle contains no general arguments for the truth of Christianity, nor any reproof of those who refused to embrace the Gospel; and, therefore, though Bishop Tomline admits that the inscription "to the twelve tribes that are scattered abroad" might comprehend both unbelieving and believing Jews, yet he is of opinion that it was intended for the believing Jews only, and that Saint James did not expressly make the discrimination, because neither he nor any other apostle ever thought of writing to any but Christian converts. "The object of the apostolical Epistles," he further observes, "was to confirm, and not to convert; to correct what was amiss in those who did believe, and not in those who did not believe. The sense of the above inscription seems to be limited to the believing Jews by what follows almost immediately, 'The trial of your faith worketh patience.' (i. 3.) And again, My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.' (ii. 1.) These passages could not be addressed to unbelievers." IV. The design of the apostle James, in writing this Epistle, we may collect, from a consideration of its contents, to be as follows: First, to prevent the Jewish Christians from falling into the vices which abounded among the Jews; such as pride in prosperity, impatience under poverty, or any other afflic tion; unworthy thoughts of God, and more particularly the looking upon him as the author of moral evil; a valuing without a virtuous practice; a very criminal partiality for themselves on their faith, knowledge, or right opinion, the rich, and a contempt for the poor; an affectation of being doctors or teachers; indulging passion and rash anger, envy and uncharitableness, strife and contention; abusing the Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 58-60.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 309, 310. Bishop Tomline's Eleinents of Christian Theology, p. 472. |