to warn them beforehand of their fault, 'lest when he came he should have sorrow of them of whom he ought to rejoice;' (chap. ii. 3.) that he had the farther view, though perhaps unperceived by them, of making an experiment of their fidelity, 'to know the proof of them, whether they were obedient in all things.' (chap. ii. 9.) This full discovery of his motive came very naturally from the apostle, after he had seen the success of his measures, but would not have been a seasonable communication before. The whole composes a train of sentiment and of conduct resulting from real situation, and from real circumstance, and as remote as possible from fiction or imposture.

No. VI.

Chap. xi. 9. When I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man; for that which was lacking to me, the brethren which come from Macedonia supplied.' The principal fact set forth in this passage, the arrival at Corinth of brethren from Macedonia during St Paul's first residence in that city, is explicitly recorded, Acts, chap. xviii. 1, 5. 'After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth. And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.'

6

No. VII.

The above quotation from the Acts proves that Silas and Timotheus were assisting to St Paul in preaching the gospel at Corinth. With which corresponds the words of the epistle chap. i. 19.): For the son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.' I do admit that the correspondency, considered by itself, is too direct and obvious; and that an impostor with the history before him might, and probably would, produce agreements of the same kind. But let it be remembered, that this reference is found in a writing, which from many discrepancies, and especially from those noted No. II. we may conclude, was not composed by any one who had consulted, and who pursued the history. Some observation also arises upon the variation of the name.

We read Silas in the Acts, Silvanus in the epis

tle. The similitude of these two names, if they were the names of different persons, is greater than could easily have proceeded from accident; I mean that it is not probable, that two persons placed in situations so much alike, should bear names so nearly resembling each other.* On the other hand, the difference of the name in the two passages negatives the supposition of the passages, or the account contained in them, being transcribed either from the other.

No. VIII.

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

To establish a conformity between this passage and the history, nothing more is necessary to be presumed, than that St. Paul proceeded from Ephesus to Macedonia, upon the same course by which he came back from Macedonia to Ephesus, or rather to Miletus in the neighbourhood of Ephesus; in other words, that, in his journey to the peninsula of Greece, he went and returned the same way. St Paul is now in Macedonia, where he had lately arrived from Ephesus. Our quotation imports that in his journey he had stopped at Troas. Of this, the history says nothing, leaving us only the short account, that 'Paul departed from Ephesus for to go into Macedonia.' But the history says, that in his return from Macedonia to Ephesus, Paul sailed from Philippi to Troas; and that, when the disciples came together on the first day of the week to break bread, Paul preached unto them all night; that from Troas he went by land to Assos; from Assos, taking ship and coasting along the front of Asia Minor, he came by Mitylene to Miletus.' Which account proves, first, that Troas lay in the way by which St Paul passed between Ephesus and Macedonia; secondly, that he had disciples there. In one journey between these two places, the epistle, and in another journey between the same places, the history, makes him stop at this city. Of the first journey he is made to say, that a

* That they were the same person is further confirmed by 1 Thess. chap. i. 1, compared with Acts, chap. xvii. 10.

door was in that city opened unto him of the Lord;' in the second we find disciples there collected around him, and the apostle exercising his ministry, with, what was even in him, more than ordinary zeal and labour. The epistle, therefore, is in this instance confirmed, if not by the terms, at least by the probability of the history; a species of confirmation by no means to be despised, because, as far as it reaches, it is evidently uncontrived.

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

No. IX.

Chap. xi. 24, 25. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one; thrice was I beaten with rods; once was I stoned; thrice I suffered shipwreck; a night and a day I have been in the deep.'

These particulars cannot be extracted out of the Acts of the Apostles; which proves, as hath been already observed, that the epistle was not framed from the history; yet they are con sistent with it, which, considering how numerically circum

stantial the account is, is more than could happen to arbitrary and independent fictions. When I say that these particulars are consistent with the history, I mean, first, that there is no article in the enumeration which is contradicted by the history; secondly, that the history, though silent with respect to many of the facts here enumerated, has left space for the existence of these facts, consistent with the fidelity of its own narration.

er.

First, no contradiction is discoverable between the epistle and the history. When St Paul says, thrice was I beaten with rods, although the history records only one beating with rods, viz. at Philippi, Acts xvi. 22, yet is there no contradiction. It is only the omission in one book of what is related in anothBut had the history contained accounts of four beatings with rods, at the time of writing this epistle, in which St Paul says that he had only suffered three, there would have been a contradiction properly so called. The same observation applies generally to the other parts of the enumeration, concerning which the history is silent: but there is one clause in the quotation particularly deserving of remark; because, when confronted with the history, it furnishes the nearest approach to a contradiction, without a contradiction being actually incurred, of any I remember to have met with. 'Once,' saith St Paul, 'was I stoned.' Does the history relate that St Paul, prior to the writing of this epistle, had been stoned more than once? The history mentions distinctly one occasion upon which St Paul was stoned, viz. at Lystra in Lycaonia. Then came thither certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded the people; and, having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead.' (chap. xiv. 19.) And it mentions also another occasion in which an assault was made both of the Gentiles, and also of the Jews with their rulers, to use them despitefully, and to stone them; but they were aware of it,' the history proceeds to tell us, ' and fled into Lystra and Derbe.' This happened at Iconium, prior to the date of the epistle. Now had the assault been completed; had the history related that a stone was thrown, as it relates that preparations were made both by Jews and Gentiles to stone Paul and his companions; or even had the account of this transaction stopped, without going on to inform us that Paul and his companions were aware of their danger and fled,' a contradiction between the history and the epistle would have ensued. Truth is necessarily consistent: but it is scarce

ly possible that independent accounts, not having truth to guide them, should thus advance to the very brink of contradiction without falling into it.

Secondly, I say, that if the Acts of the Apostles be silent concerning many of the instances enumerated in the epistle, this silence may be accounted for, from the plan and fabric of the history. The date of the epistle synchronises with the beginning of the twentieth chapter of the Acts. The part, therefore, of the history, which precedes the twentieth chapter, is the only part in which can be found any notice of the persecutions to which St Paul refers. Now it does not appear that the author of the history was with St Paul until his departure from Troas, on his way to Macedonia, as related chap. xvi. 10; or rather indeed the contrary appears. It is in this point of the history that the language changes. In the seventh and eighth verses of this chapter the third person is used. 'After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bythinia, but the Spirit suffered them not; and they passing by Mysia came to Troas:' and the third person is in like manner constantly used throughout the foregoing part of the history. In the tenth verse of this chapter, the first person comes in. 'After Paul had seen the vision, immediately we endeavoured to go into Macedonia; assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us to preach the gospel unto them.' Now, from this time to the writing of the epistle, the history occupies four chapters; yet it is in these, if in any, that a regular or continued account of the apostle's life is to be expected; for how succinctly his history is delivered in the preceding part of the book, that is to say, from the time of his conversion to the time when the historian joined him at Troas, except the particulars of his conversion itself, which are related circumstantially, may be understood from the following observations:

The history of a period of sixteen years is comprised in less than three chapters; and of these, a material part is taken up with discourses. After his conversion, he continued in the neighbourhood of Damascus, according to the history, for a certain considerable, though indefinite, length of time, according to his own words (Gal. i. 18.) for three years; of which no other account is given than this short one, that 'straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God; that all that heard him where amazed, and said, Is not this he that destroyed them which called on his name in Jerusalem?