Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

came with a straight course to Samothracia.* It may be proper in this place to mention, that St. Luke, according to the constant tradition of the early Church, was a native or inhabitant of Antioch: that he was an inhabitant of that city, when the Gospel was first preached there, may be inferred, with some degree of probability, from the minuteness with which several particulars concerning it are related in the eleventh chapter. We are told that they, which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen, travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word. But we are not informed of any of their proceedings in Phenice, or Cyprus; whereas a detailed account is given of all that was done at Antioch. The only reason which has been urged against the probability of this tradition is this, that his name is not a Syriac, but a Greek name; which is not strictly true; for it is, properly speaking, more of a Latin than a Greek name; and even if it were true, it would be no objection; for in the sixth chapter of the Acts we find Nicolas, an undoubted Greek name, mentioned as that of a proselyte of Antioch. It seems a probable supposition that Luke himself was a proselyte. It is also, I think, far from

* Acts xvi. 11.

improbable, that Luke was the same person as the Lucius of Cyrene, who is mentioned in the first verse of the thirteenth chapter, as one of the prophets and teachers who were at Antioch, and of whom St. Paul speaks in the sixteenth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans; Timotheus my work-fellow, and Lucius, and Jason, and Sosipater my kinsmen, salute you. The objections which have been made to this supposition cannot now be considered in detail. They are not such as, in my opinion, to destroy, or greatly to weaken, its probability. I will only remark upon the argument, which is grounded upon the difference of names, that in writing to the Christians at Rome, St. Paul would naturally use the Roman form of Lucius, in preference to that of Lucas.

But from this comparatively unimportant question let us return to the history itself. Timotheus, whom Paul selected for his confidential companion, was the son of a Jewess who had embraced the Christian faith; but his father was a Greek.* His mother's name, Eunice, shews that she was of a family of Asiatic Jews, who spoke the Greek language. He was well reported of, says the historian, by the brethren who were at Lystra and Iconium. The topics

*Acts xvi. 1.

of their commendation may be inferred, from the praise which St. Paul himself bestows upon him in the second Epistle* addressed to this favourite disciple. In the first place his unfeigned faith; a faith unmixed with any worldly motive; not assumed, or professed, for the purpose of obtaining the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit; or of procuring to himself credit with men, as a distinguished teacher, and leader of a sect; but wholly without the leaven of hypocrisy.t For the purity and stedfastness of his faith he was indebted to the care, which had been taken by his mother, to instil religious principles into his youthful mind; for the same faith, St. Paul observes, dwelt first in his grandmother Lois, and his mother Eunice. If we inquire what the instruction was, which laid so sure a foundation for his Christian faith, we learn that it was instruction in the Scriptures of the Old Testament; for Timothy from a child had known the Holy Scriptures, which were able to make him wise unto salvation, through faith which was in Christ Jesus. The Scriptures, both of the law and the prophets, had been so explained to him, as to convince him of their fulfilment in the person of Jesus Christ. Lois and Eunice, who † ἀνυπόκριτος.

* 2 Tim. i. 5.

[ocr errors]

had been converted to the true faith, had no doubt reasoned with Timothy, as our Lord had reasoned with the disciples on the way to Emmaus, and as St. Paul reasoned with the Thessalonians, out of the Scriptures; opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead, and that Jesus whom he preached unto them, was Christ.* It was St. Paul himself, however, who more perfectly instructed this youthful believer in the way of God, delivering to him the form of sound words, and afterwards ordaining him to the ministry by the laying on of his hands, and qualifying him to receive the special gifts of the Holy Ghost. He therefore addresses him as his dearly beloved son, his own son in the faith.§

This youthful, but well instructed and trustworthy Christian, St. Paul would have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him, because of the Jews which were in those quarters; for they all knew that his father was a Greek.|| This transaction at first sight appears to be inconsistent with the principle which had been laid down by the Apostolic council, that circumcision was not to be required of the Gentiles: but it is

* Acts xvii. 2. § 2 Tim. 1. 2.

† 2 Tim. i. 13.

1 Tim. i. 2.

2 Tim. i. 6.

|| Acts xvi. 3.

inconsistent only in appearance. The principle asserted by the Apostles was this, that circumcision was not to be required of any man, as necessary to salvation. They did not prohibit the use of circumcision to the Jewish Christians, provided that it was not regarded as a saving, or justifying ordinance. Timothy was not, properly speaking, a Gentile convert, for his mother was a Jewess, and he had been brought up either in the Jewish or the Christian religion: but he was not, like St. Paul, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, and would naturally be considered as following the parentage of his father, rather than of his mother. Now the very circumstance of St. Paul's being specially commissioned to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, rendered it particularly desirable, that he should give no unnecessary offence to the Jews. Although he was not to compromise the Gospel, by sanctioning those prejudices, which were derogatory to its spiritual efficacy, neither was he to indispose the minds of his countrymen for its reception, by a harsh and intolerant condemnation of those prejudices, where they did not interfere with Christian principles. Although St. Paul was a special ambassador of Christ to the Gentiles, yet he continued, even after he had solemnly opened his commission at Antioch in

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »