« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
Jerusalem, and a distant hint of the possibility of the journey ; but nothing concerning a contribution in Macedonia. In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians he would have found a contribution in Macedonia accompanying that in Achaia ; but no intimation for whom either was intended, and not a word about the journey. It was only by a close and attentive collation of the three writings, that he could have picked out the circumstances which he has united in his epistle ; and by a still more nice examination, that he could have determined them to belong to the same period. In the third place I remark, what diminishes very much the suspicion of fraud, how aptly and connectedly the mention of the circumstances in question, viz. the journey to Jerusalem, and of the occasion of that journey, arises from the context, “ Whensoever I take my journey into Spain, I will come to you; for I trust to see you in my journey, and to be brought' on my way thitherward by you, if first I be somewhat filled with your company But now I go unto Jerusalem, to minister unto the saints ; for it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem. It hath pleased them verily, and their debtors they are ; for, if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things. When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed them to this fruit, I will come by you into Spain.” Is the passage in Itulics like a passage foisted in for an extraneous purpose ? Does it not arise from what goes before, by a junction as easy as any example of writing upon real business can furnish? Could any thing be more natural than that St. Paul, in writing to the Romans, should speak of the time when he hoped to visit them; should mention the business which then detained him ; and that he purposed to set forwards upon his journey to them, when that business was completed ?
No. II. By means of the quotation which formed the subject of the preceding number, we collect, that the Epistle to the Romans was written at the conclusion of St. Paul's second visit to the peninsula of Greece ; but this we collect, not from the epistle itself, nor from any thing declared concerning the time and place in any part of the epistle, but from a comparison of circumstances referred to in the epistle, with the order of events recorded in the Acts, and with references to the same circumstances, though for quite different purposes, in the two Epistles to the Corinthians. Now would the author of a forgery, who sought to gain credit to a spurious letter by congruities, depending upon the time and place in which the letter was supposed to be written, have left that time and place to be made out, in a manner so obscure and indirect as this is ? If therefore coincidences of circumstances can be pointed out in this epistle, depending upon its date, or the place where it was written, whilst that date and place are only ascertained by other circumstances, such coincidences may fairly be stated as undesigned. Under this head I adduce
Chap. xvi. 21--23. “ Timotheus, my work-fellow, and Lucius, and Jason, and Sosipater, my kinsmen, salute you. · I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord. Gaius, mine host, and of the whole church, saluteth you ; and Quartus, a brother.” With this passage I compare, Acts XX. 4. “ And there accompaniod him into Asia, Sopater of Berea ; and, of the Thessa
lonians, Aristarchus and Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timotheus; and, of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus.”. The Epistle to the Romans, we have seen, was written just before St. Paul's departure from Greece, after his second visit to that peninsula: the persons mentioned in the quotation from the Acts are those who accompanied him in that departure. Of seven whose names are joined in the salutation of the church of Rome, three, viz. Sosipater, Gaius, and Timothy, are proved, by this passage in the Acts, to have been with St. Paul at the time. And this is perhaps as much coincidence as could be expected from reality, though less, I am apt to think, than would have been produced by design. Four are mentioned in the Acts who are not joined in the salutation; and it is in the nature of the case probable that there should be many attending St. Paul in Greece who knew nothing of the converts at Rome, nor were known by them. In like manner, several are joined in the salutation who are not mentioned in the passage referred to in the Acts. This also was to be expected. The occasion of mentioning them in the Acts was their proceeding with St. Paul upon his journey. But we may be sure
that there were many eminent Christians with St. Paul in Greece, besides those who accompanied him into Asia*. i
But if any one shall still contend that a forger of the epistle, with the Acts of the Apostles before him, and having settled this scheme of writing a letter as from St. Paul upon jhis second visit into Greece, would easily think of the expedient of putting in the names of those persons who appeared to be
* Of these Jason is one, whose presence upon this occasion is very naturally accounted for. Jason was an inhabitant of Thessalonica in Macedonia, and entertained St. Paul in his house upon his first visit to that country. Acts, xvii. 7.-St. Paul; upon this his second visit, passed through Macedonia on his way to Greece, and, from the situation of Thessalonica, most likely through that city. It appears, from various instances in the Acts, to have been the practice of many converts to attend St. Paul, from place to place. It is therefore highly probable, I mcan that it is highly consistent with the account in the history, that Jason, according to that account a zealous disciple, the inhabitant of a city at no great distance from Greece, and through which,' as it should seem, St. Paul had lately passed, should have accompanied St, Paul into Greece, and have been with him there at this time. Lucius is another name in the epistle. A very slight alteration would convert Aourios into Aouxas, Lucius into Luke, which would produce an additional coincidence; for; if Luke was the author of the history, he was with St. Paul at the time; inasmuch as, describing the voyage which took place soon after the writing of this epistle; the historian uses the first person-.“ Je sailed away from Philippi.” Acts, xx. 6.