PR INCETON. N. J. Part of the a ♦ ADDI60N ALEXANDER LIIU'.MIY. which was presented hy ME.SUS. R.L. AND A. Stcakt. |\ Case. Shrffr, Section^.. Book. No r:. .4. K54- y^o-J. Li i-C^d J{f-fi^' i((e x^^M r/e.^ WHO WAS ST. TITUS? THE SCltlPTURE KOTICES ON THE SUBJECT COMPARED ^VITH RECEIVED OPINIONS. R. KING, A.B, Ex-Scholar of ^nnity College, Dublin, i'c. \\ lu) iuui wlicnce he was, is not known but hy uncertain probabilitii-s." Dii. Cavk. DUBLIN: HODGES AND SMITH, G RAFTON-STREET, BOOKSELLEnS TO THE UNIVERSITY. 1853. Dublin: Printed by James Charles, 61, Middle Abbey-street. PREFACE. The Supposition put forward in the following pages as to the identity of SS. Timothy and Titus will naturally be regarded by most readers as a very strange and paradoxical one. The writer, however, has not ventured to place it before the public, without having previously submitted the argument in its favour to the consideration of many of those friends, on whose information, judgment, and candour, he could place most reliance; but the manner in which it has been received by them generally has been such as to encom-age a very strong hope, that however slow religious and sensible Christians may be to accept the novel Hypothesis now suggested to them, they will yet be disposed to regard the publication of this Essay with favour, and find it both interesting and instructive. Neither has it been committed to the press without earnest prayer tliat the great Head of the Church may accompany it with His blessing, as a means of increasing among His people the knowledge and understanding of His own Word, and may prevent it from furnishing occasion of injury or offence to the least of the members of Christ oiu' Lord. Of the Plan and Contents of the work, the following prelimi- nary account may not be unacceptable to the I'eader. Chap. I. contains the Argument for the above Hypothesis, de- rived from a comparison of the several passages in the two Epis- tles to the Corinthians witli one another, and with the history of St. Paul and liis companions, as given in the Acts of the Apostles. iv Preface. Chap. 11. consists of an Examination into the nature and amount of the several Difficulties which stand in the way of the Hypothesis. In the Appendix, Article I., -will be found a full and critical Examination into the Interpretation of the passage concerning the Circumcision of Titus, in Galat. ii. 3—5 ; with copious illustrations of the Comments furnished on these Verses by Annotators in all ages. . Art 2, consists of Extracts from Bilroth's Commentary on the two Epistles to the Corinthians, comprising all the matter to be found in that work of any great interest or importance in connec- tion with the subject of this Essay. In Art. 3, is contained Neander's Elucidation of the Difficulties involved in the Missions of Timothy and Titus to Corinth, as understood according to the common view, (i. e. that Timothy and Titus were the names of different individuals.) In Art. 4, are given some Extracts from the recently published Work of the Rev. Messrs. Conybeare and Howson on the Life and Epistles of St. Paul. With this very beautiful and valuable pub- lication the Avriter of the present Essay became acquainted only after the latter had been all written. Otherwise much assistance might haAC been derived from it, had it been available at an ear- lier period of his inquiiies on the subject. As it is, he has only had opportunity, as yet, to study a few portions of it, bearing on those parts of the Apostle's history and writings which were more immediately concerned in the present Essay. But the introduc- tion of the extracts given in this article will, no doubt, prove inte- resting and acceptable to the reader, as exhibiting to him the views adopted in connection with such passages, in the most recent and able work which has appeared on this part of the Aj^ostolic History. Art 5, comprises Three Letters on the Character of A polios, by the late I'ev. Cliarlcs Boyton, D.D., Ex-Fellow of Tjinity College, Dublin. They have been inserted in the Appendix, not more in consequence of their being so far connected, as they are, with much that has been dwelt \ipon in the preceding pages, than witli a view to giving increased circulation to papers in themselves of such intrinsic interest, and bringing tbem befbic the notice of some as yet unacquainted with them, t<> wlimu they will probu- Preface. v bly appear as striking and worthy of attention, as they did to so many inteUigcnt and judicious persons on their first publication. Although composed in a less perfect style in some places, than might have been expected from their able Author, this may easily be accounted for by the circumstance of their having been prepared amid a pressure of other important occupations, for the pages of the Periodical in which they originally appeared. The present writer in republishing these Letters, does not, of course, mean to express his agreement in every opinion incidentally expressed in them ; although, so far as the main argument of them is con- cerned, he does not hesitate to say that they appear to him forci- ble and convincing. From a desire to adapt the matter of the Essay to others, as well as those who have enjoyed the benefits of a learned or clas- sical education, the translations of words were at first added in some places, which would have been, of course, needless for clas- sical students. But it having been afterwards found convenient to extend much further than was at first intended, the quantity of critical matter and references to the Greek text, &c., comprised in the work, the practice referred to was discontinued. The re- sult has been some little imevenness of style, which it becomes needful, accordingly, thus to explain. The writer has also to apologise for a few typographical errata, Avhich escaped atten- tion while the sheets were going through press, but which the reader who may observe them will find, it is hoped, no difficulty in correcting, without any more special notice of them here. CONTENTS. Chap. I. — Concerning the Missions despatched by St. Paul to Corinth joreviousli/ to lohat is commonly regarded as his oioi Second Visit to that City. Part I — Of the Mission of Timothy to Corinth in 1 Cor., &c. Acts xix. 21, 22. After these things were ended, Paul purposed Sfc., Notes on the circumstances connected with those two verses, 1 Cor. iv. 17-19. For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus SfC, Notes by Paley on this passage, with additional observations. Unwillingness of A polios to be directed by St. Paul, 1 Cor. xvi 11, 12. Now if Timotheus come, see that he maybe with you Notes by Paley, with additional comments, .... // does not necessarily imply doubt as to whether Timothy might come, Notes from Green's N. T. Grammar, &c., on the use of the Aorist here. Dr. A. Clarke on the words, ' I look for him with the brethren,' St. Chrysostom's Commentary on this place in the Corinthians, 1 Cor. xvi. 5-9. Now I will come to you when I shall pass SfC, Notes on the arrangements here contemplated by St. Paul, Harmony of this place with Acts xix., .... 2 Cor. i. 15, &c. And in this confidence I ivas minded to come §'c., Notes on the explanation here given of St. Paul's arrangements, Meaning of 'n second benefit,' according to Clarke, Paley, &c., Burkitt's note on the word, and St. Chrysostom's explanation, Different meanings assigned in Pool's Synopsis, Whitby on the words, ' And to pass by you into Macedonia,' Dr. Doddridge's Comments on this passage. Notes of Rev. T. Scott on the arrangements in question, 1 Cor. written just before St. Paul's departure from Ephesus, Page. 2 ib. 6 ib. ifc. 8 C, 9 ib. Ssc. 10 11 12 ib. 14 ib.SiC. IC 17 ib. Sjc. 18 19 ib. 20 ib. SfC. 22, &C. 23 Pa^t II Of the Missions of Titus to Corinth, mentioned in 2 Cor. St. Paul's departure from Ephesus hastened by the riot of Demetrius, Ac, Occasion of his visit to Troas at this time, &c., .... Anxiety of the Apostle for tidings from Corinth while there, 2 Cor. i. 1. Paul an Apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God SfC, Note on the mention of Timothy in this verse, .... Occasion of writing the Second Epistle, from Pool's Synopsis, . St. Chrysostora on the mention of Timothy in the Salutation, . 2 Cor. i. 17. The Son of God who was preached among you by us, Sfc, Timothy a fellow-labourer with St. Paul at Corinth 2 Cor. ii. 12, 13. Furthermore when I came to Troas to preach. Sfc, Abruptness of the mention of TiTcs in this passage, (fee. Comments from St. Chrysostom, from Bloomficld's liecensio, Ac, 2 Cor. vii. 5-8. For when we were come into Macedonia, Sfc„ Comments of St Chrj'Sostom on these verses, .... 2 Cor. vii. 13-16. Therefore we were comforted in your comfort, Sfc, Comments of St. Chrysostom, ...... 2.i •26 27 28 ib. 4-c. 29 ib. 30 ib. 30 31 32 33 ib. 34 ib. 4v. Contents. Uow came St. Paul to ' boast ' of tlie Corinthians to Titus V Tlie probable identity of Timothy and Titus suggested, Apparent necessity for such a conclusion from what precedes, Ito bearing on the connection of the two Epistles, Difficulties involved in any other hypothesis. The silence of the Acts concerning Titus thus easily explained. Notes of Ileinrichs, Clarke, Scott, and Cave, on the obscurity of Titus' 2 Cor. viii, 6. Insomuch that we desired Titus, that as he had SfC, Bearing of this text on our present subject. Notes of St. Chrysostom on the same verse, 2 Cor. ix. 4, 5 Lest haply if they of Macedonia, SfC, . 2 Cor. viii. 16-24. But thanks be to God, which put the same Sfc, Commentary of St Chrysostom on these verses, Titus the principal of the second Mission to Corinth, Conjectures concerning his companions on the same. Notes of Dr. A. Clarke on this point, St. Luke probably one of those companions, Connection of this with the silence of the Acts about Titus, Silas not likely to have been the third on this mission, . Reasons for a similar conclusion concerning Barnabas, . ApoUos not one of the party, .... The third person may have been St. Mark, or Aristarchus, ifcc. The identity of Timothy and Titus rendered more probable from'this Note on the words '>«j/ partner and fellow-helper concerning you,' Do on the Salutations occurring in Rom. xvi., . 42 ib. 43 44 ib. 45-48 AH ib. 49 50 51 52 53 54 ib. 55 ib. 5G 57 57 ib. 68 59 fJO (il ib. G2 G3 ib. (i4 ib. Chap. II. — Difficulties in the way of the hypothesis of the pre- ceding Chapter, examined. Objections enumerated, ........ C5 I. Timothy apparently circumcised, Titus micircumcised, ... m Such an opinion founded on a wrong interpretation of Galat. ii. 3-5, . , ib. II. The testimony of Antiquity apparently decisive on the other side, . 66 Scantiness of the evidence furnished from this source, .... ib. Illustration of the subject from St. Chrysostom's Notes on Titus, . . 67 Another illustration, from Cartwright's Primitire Hebrew Church, . . 68 In what way a mistake as to the persons might have originated, ... 09 Obscurity of some parts of St. Paul's own personal history, ... 70 Observations of the American Bibliotheca Sacra on this head, . . . ib. Dr. Cave's remarks concerning the obscurity of Titus's history, . . 71 The received accounts of Timothy and Titus stated, from Calmet, . . 72-74 Some additional particulars, noted by Mr. Greswell, .... 75 Nothing told for certain of either, except in the Holy Scriptures, . . 76 III. The question why two names should be given to one person, examined, ib. Such a practice very common in both Old and New Testaments, . . 77 Contenf!< IX Note from IMr. Cartwrijjht on tlie confusion of names in some cases, Various instances of double names for single persons in the New Testament, What sort of principle regulated tlie use of sucli variations, How the names Timothy and Titus might be distinguished in use, Mr. Greswell's remark on such variation of names. The different liiscriptiuns of tite KjiistU's to Thnutliy and '/"/ifa, considered, IV. The similarity ol' the Epistle to Titus to the First to Timothy, noticed, statement of the argument on this head, from I'alcy, A similar fact exists in connection with ttie two Epistles to Timothy, . Dr. A. Clarke's notice of this agreement in the latter instance, . Such agreement easily accounted for, ..... Some Notes as to tlie Dales of the three Pastoral F.pistlrs, The different views of that of the FiVjt joot, Ajipondix, No. \'. 4 Of the Mission of St. Timotliy to Corinth in 1 Cor. him on this occasion, nor by the messengers who brought it, Avas he informed at all of the most serious of the existing evils. Tlie divisions and contentions among them, which he treats of so ear- nestly, as the first matter to which he addresses liimself, and in connection with which he employs such force of exhortation and reproof, throughout the hrst fenir chapters of the First Epistle, he had heard of only in a private way. It had been mentioned to him by some of Chloe's household. The next matter which fur- nishes occasion for his just and severe condemnation, the case of the incestuous person, had reached his ears by common report. And it was not until after he had sufficiently rebidvcd them for these and other such evils, that at length, at the commencement of the seventh chapter, he sets himself to reply to the questions they had proposed to him, beginning this part of his address to them in those words — A^ow concerninc/ the things xchereof ye wrote unto me., t*cc. St. Paid would naturally, we may suppose, have desired, under such circumstances, to visit a place where his personal exertions Avould haA^e been so needful for setting matters to right, and heahng the Avoimds of the Church. Two motives, at least, however, Avhich are on record in the sacred volume, prevented him from under- taking immediately a journey for this purpose. The firsts that he was iniAvilling to go to a people with A\'hom his former inter- course had been so happy, at a time Avhen his dcahngs Avith them should of necessity be of so dilferent, of such a painful character, A\-hen he shoidd feel obliged to occupy himself chiefly in correcting, in rebuking — and it might needs be sharplj^ — and in using the rod. To spare them, therefore, as Avcll as, perhaps, himself", a trial such as this, he Avould not yet come to Corinth. Tire second, that the important and critical state of matters around him, connected Avith the interests of Chiistianity in Ephesus, demanded his continued presence in the latter city for some time longer. For there Avas on the one hand a mighty Avork to be prosecuted, and that Avith most encouraging tokens of success. ' A great door and effectual was opened' in that place to the Apostle. And on the other hand, the opposition excited against his Christian labours was poAverful also, and promoted by a strong confederation. ' There Avere many ad- versaries.' St. Paul therefore determined, for tlic present, to abide State of the Coriittlilan C/iinrli at the tune. 5 still at Epliesus, and to arrange for the more speedy correction of abuses at Corintli, partly, in the letter which was to be sent thither in reply to that he had received, and partly, by means of agents to be commissioned to visit the place with authority from himself, whose personal influence might effectively promote the same desirable end. Besides the disorders to be corrected at Corinth, and the im- portance of the crisis at P]phesus, there was a third object which plainly occupied mucli of St. Paurs thoughts at this time; whicli Avas, the collection to be made, particidarly in Macedonia and Achaia, for the relief of the temporal wants of the poor and per- secuted Hebrew Christians connected with the Church at Jerusa- lem. How anxiously the Ajiostle sought to promote this object is sufficiently evident from all that he says concerning it in chap- ters viii. and ix. of the Second Epistle. It was in furtherance of it also, no doubt, that he now purposed to make a visitation of Mace- donia and Achaia, before coming, according to his purpose and the exigency of the case, to the capital of the latter province. And it is likewise plain, from the use of the word so, in the 22nd verse of Acts xix., that the mission of Timotheus and Erastus was im- mediately connected with his own intended visit to those places to which they were sent before him. He ' purposed to go through Macedonia and Achaia, &c., so he sent into ]\Iacedonia two of them that ministered unto him,' f the Mission of St. y^iitiothf/ to Coriiitli in 1 Cor. In connection with tlie last cited observations of PalevV (on 1 Cor. xvi. 10, 11), it may be as well to subjoin bis additional note on the same place, oiven a little fiirtbor on in tlic same part of tbe Hora3 Panlina? : — ' Now if Timothens come, let no man despise him.' Why despise him ? This charge is not given concerning any other messenger whom St. Paul sent : and in the different Epistles many such messengers are mentioned. Turn to 1st Timothy, ch. iv. ]2, and you will find that Timothy was a young man, younger probably than those who were usually employed in the Christian mission ; and that St. I'aul, apprehending lest he should on that account be exposed to con- tempt, urges upon him the caution which is there inserted : Let no man despise thy youth. On tlie words, /or / look fo?' him with the brethren, in verse 11, (r/.ds'/o,aai yuo durhv {Lira t(Lv ddsA(pouv), Dr. A. Clarke observes, tliat ' This clause slionld not be understood as if Paul was expecting certain hrethren with Timothy; but it was the brethren that were tfith Pan! tliat were looking for him ; /, icith the brethren, am looking for him.' Certainly the Corinthians are spoken of as being to send forth him only, in the preceding clause of the verse. And the brethren intended may have been Gains and Aiistarchus, ' Paul's companions in travel,' as they are called, who were "with him in EjDliesus at this time, (Acts, xix. 29,) and possibly others also. The remarks of St. Chrysostom (in his Homily on 1 Cor. x\'i. 10, jVow if Timotheus, &c.) on the mission of Timothy, contain much that is judicious and worth citing here. The principal pas- sages concerned we accordingly subjoin: — That he may be with you without fear, i. e. that none of those desperate characters should rise against him. For he would have occasion possibly to rebuke them in connection with the matters whereof Paul also wrote unto them : seeing that he promised to send him for this very end. For saith he, I have sent vnto you Timotliy, who shall bring you into i emembrance of my ways tvhich he in ChriH, as I teach every where in every Church. In order, then, that none might, on the strength of high rank, and wealth, and popular support, and the wisdom without, presume to treat him with haughtiness and contempt, or be led to form intrigues against him from vexation at the reproofs which he might administer, or take occa- sion to wreak on him their vengeance for the censures conveyed by his master, therefore it is that he saith, That he may be with you without fear. Refer it not, I pray you, to those without, the (Jreeks and unbelievers. I am asking that which you can yourselves contribute, you for whose behalf the whole Epistle has l)een composed (to whose fears lie had aoth higlily educated, and also more advanced in years than Timothy. Lest therefore they should say, ' "Why now sent he not the man, but instead of him, the youth ?' observe liovv he softens away this objection, both in calling the one his brother, and saying in reference to the other, that he had repeatedly urged liim. For it was lest he might seem to have honoured Timothy above him, and to have refrained on such grounds from sending him, and lest he should thus kindle up more serious odium, that he added, 1 repeatedly urged him to go. What then ? Did he not assent, nor comply, but meet the proposal with resistance and opposition? He doth not say this, but speaks in such a way as not to attach culpability to him, and yet to apologise for his own conduct L3ut his will was not at all that he should vow come. Then, that they might not say, that this is all pretence and shufHing, he adds. But he will come unto you, when he shall have a convenient season. In this he both advances the apology for him, and encourages those who were anxious for his coming with the hope of a visit from him. Then, indicating that they must cherish their hopes of salvation, not in their teachers, but in themselves, he subjoins. Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, &c. There are some other particulars noticed in the last chapter of the Fiist Epistle to the Corinthians, relative to St. Paul's arrange- ments and circninstances at the time now under consideration, to wliich it will 1)0 proper to pay some attention here, before passing on to the studv of what concerns our present incniiry In the Second 14 Of the Mission of St. Timothy to Corinth in 1 Cor. Epistle. The same particulars, indeed, are fiu*tlier noticed (at least, some of them) in the first Chapter of the latter, so that we shall find it needful to compare both places together, in order to arrive at a correct imderstanding of those intended an-angcments to which they relate. First then, as the writer of the Acts had informed us that St. Paul's purpose at this time was to xmdertake, shortly after, a \'isita- tion of ]\Iacedonia and Achaia, including of coxu'se, Corinth, so the Apostle liimself repeatedly intimates as much to the Corinthians ; as in iv. l9, 'I will come to you shortly, if the Lord "vvill ;' and again in xvi. 2, 3, &c., ' that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality imto Jeru- salem. And if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me.' In these latter words we perceive a further point of agreement with the narrative of the Acts, viz., in St. Paul's expressing his in- tention of proceeding on from Corinth to Jerusalem, after the journey through Macedonia, &c., Of the order, &c., of his in- tended proceedings, he gives a fuller explanation in the verses which next follow : — 5. Now I will come unto you when I shall pass [more literally and correctly, shall have passed] through Macedonia : for I do pass [t. e. am fully intending to pass] through Macedonia. 6. And it may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with you, that ye may bring me on my journey, whithersoever I go. 7. For I will not see you now by the way; [du fsXu ya^ u/xag a^ri sv -rao- oduj ibiTr For I do not wish to see you now in passing ;] but I trust to tarry a while with you, if the Lord permit. 8. But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost. 9. For a great door and effectual is opened unto me, and there are many ad- versaries. From verse 5, it is plain, that St. Paul, when he wrote this, was intending to make his visitation of Macedonia before coming to Corinth, from which latter port he covild then very conveniently obtain passage by sea into Syria, on his way to Jerusalem, Avith the collection that had been made in the journey preceding. But it does not quite so obviously appear what route he intended to pursue in going to Macedonia, as he might either have taken his course northward by Troas, and across thence to Philippi, and so on towards Corinth, by land, s<^uthwards ; or he might have sailed across Plans of St. Paul, as described in 1 Cor. xvi. 15 directly to Corintli, and proceeded immediately from its port north- wards to Macedonia, deferring his visit to the Corinthian disciples until his return on the way to Jerusalem. That the latter was his actual intention appears, I think, tolerably certain, from different considerations, and, particularly, as far as the passage immediately before us is concerned, from the introduction of those words, ' I do not A\asli to see you now («n transitu) in passing ;' which ap- pear evidently intended to guard them against a disappointment, where they would naturally expect a visit from him. • Not intend- ing so to visit them, he apologises by expressing his unwillingness to see them in such a short, passing way, when he should have occa- sion immediately to leave them for Macedonia, where the prelimi- nary visit of Timotheus and Erastus would cause his coming to be expected, and make it needful for him to proceed thither with all speed. His affectionate regard for the Corinthians would feel more satisfaction in his coming to them at a time when he coidd ' tarry a while' with them. His plans, however, appear, from verse 6, to have been, at this time, rather unsettled and indeterminate, so far as ulterior inten- tions, after he should leave Ephesus, were concerned. And this is exceedingly natm-al. For as he pm-posed continuing in the latter city for some time longer, it was impossible for him to tell what might occur meanwhile, there, or in IMacedonia, or Corinth itself, to influence his movements, or interfere Avith his design of spend- ing a season among those to whom he was writing ; especially as the projects which he had in contemplation appear to have ex- tended over a considerable space of time, including more than a year, by the time that his intended visit to Jerusalem, with the collection for the poor saints, should have been accomplished. ' He purposed' (says Dr. A. Clarke, on 1 Cor. xvi. 6,) ' to stay till Pentecost at Ephesus ; after that to go to Macedonia, and pro- bably to spend the summer there ; and come in the autumn to Corinth, and there spend the ivinter.^ For, as Paley observes, on V. 7, 8, of the First Epistle, " ' the winter which the Apostle purposed to pass at Corinth was undoubtedly the winter next ensuing to the date of the Ej)istle ; yet it Avas a winter sub- sequent to the ensuing Pentecost, because he did not intend to set forwards iipon his journey imtil after that feast. The words, ' Let 16 Of the Misaioii of >it. Tunoilnj to Coflnth in 1 Cor. us keep the teust, not with ukl leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth,'" look very like words suggested by the. season ; [as written, according to what is here said, about the time of the Jew- ish Passover, or perhaps a little before it ;] at least, they have, upon that siipposition, a force and significancy Avhich do not be- long to them upon any other. According to all this, the actual time when St. Paul did arrive in Jerusalem, viz., the second Pen- tecost after the First Epistle to the Corinthians was written (Acts, XX. 2, 3, 6, 16,) was tolerably near the time wliich he had in view so long before, if not the very exact time so contemplated. Wliitby rightly remarks on the words g'coc rri; rrBvrBxoarrii, in 1 Cor. xvi. 8, that ' It was, therefore, the following Pentecost that he has- tened to be at Jerusalem, Acts, xx. 16 ;' i. e. the Pentecost follow- ing this one which he intended waiting for in Ejjliesus. It is almost superfluous to remark how exactly the state of affairs at Ephesus, described in the 9th verse, agrees with the nar- rative in the Acts, at the point where this Epistle fits into it; where is mentioned how mightily had grown the word of God and prevailed, not only in Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, when Demetrius and his fellow-craftsmen were just on the eve of making a violent attempt to crush the spreading truth of the Gos|Xjl by their outrageous rioting and insurrection. To proceed, however, with oiu- accomit of St. Paul's plans and intended movements at this period, although in the verses above cited he informs the Corinthians that it was liis design to make a toiu" through ]\Iacedonia before visiting them, and that he did not mean to see them on his way thither, such, it seems, had not been his original intention. He had, on the contrary, it would appear, given them to understand that he would pay them his visit on his way up to JVlacedonia. And it was possibly a postponement of this promised visit, (as Paley supposes,) that gave occasion for the ill-natured misrepresentations of some, who, before the writing of the First Epistle, were ' puffed up,' as though he would not lidlil his intention of coming to them at all. \\^hat is more certain is, that for his alteration of plan, as intimated in the First Epistle (' I will not see you now in passing,') he was charged by some Avith ' lio-htness' and \uisteadiness of purpose, a charge A\hlch he Jfccoiiiig o/"" a second hoiejW in 2 (\>r. i. lo. 17 meets in 2 Cor. i. 15, iNcc., by explaining luUy the motives on wliich lie had acted, and accounting satisfactorily for the changes which had incurred their censure. 15. And in tins confidence I was minded to ci mo unto you before, [_'~f'>? '^IJM.^ ik&iiv rrooTSociv, i^iva osvrs^av yaoiv lyj^n) y.ai hi -o'Jjmv dnXl)siv %. r. X.] that ye might have a second benefit ; [/o come to i/oii first {i. e. before Macedonia,) so s t/iat yon wii/ht have a second favour, i. e. the favour of a donble visit, once, when I siiould be go'.ng, once, coming back.] 10. And to pa s by you into Macedonia, and to come again aut of Macedonia unto you, and of you to be brought on my way toward Judica. 17- When I tiierefore was thus minded, did I use lightness? &c 23. Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul, that disorders in their Church, reaching him, whether ironi those of Chloe's household, or by public rumour, or in communications with Apollos, (or, in ftict, in any of the ways for which the con- stant intercourse between two such important and neighbouring maritime cities as Corinth and Ephesus afforded every facility,) had, ])robablv, the effect of inclining St. Paul to defer the first visit, after it had been actually promised, and ultimately, on liis coming to hear all, with pain and sorrow of heart, to relinquish the idea of it altogether. This resolution, communicated to them in the First Epistle, was adopted with a view to spare them, that he might not come to them in heaviness, where his task woidd be the distressing one of correcting, with severity and sharpness, those who had been the occasion of scandal and grief in the Christian body among them. ' He was willing, therelorc,' says Paley, 'to I) 18 Of the MUaion of St. Tiiiiothi/ to Corinth in 1 Cor. try, betbrc he came in person, what a letter of authoritati^•e objur- gation "would do p,mongst them, and to leave time for the opera- tion of the experiment.' — (On 2 Cor. j\o. 5.) \'\niat is here said in explanation of St. Paul's original inten- tions relative to visiting Corinth tAvice, and his afterwards giving up the idea of the first visit on the way to Macedonia, fui'nishes an additional confirmation of the mode of understanding 1 Cor. xvi. 7, recommended at page 15, su]?., according to which the Apostle, still adhering tq his plan of going to Macedonia, via. the port of Corinth, would be de"vaating fi-om his arrangements, as originally marked out, only in omitting a sojourn at Corinth on the way. According to the interpretation above given of the diVTSPav, connected with %a^/!/ there, it will have no reference whatever to St. Paul's first residence in Corinth, mentioned in Acts, xviii., but simply to the two visits which he had been designing to pay them, as described in these two verses, 15 and 16. Tliis is so obviously what was intended by the Sacred AVriter, that it seems astonisliing how generally commentators ha^'e failed to apprehend his mean- ing. Dr. A. Clarke's note on the place, however, is this : — A second benefit.'] He had been with them once, and they had received an especial blessing in having the seed of lii'e sown among them by the preaching of the gospel; and he had purposed to visit them again that they might have a second blessing, in having that seed watered. Paley also adopts the same view, in his remarks on 2 Cor. xiii. 1 , (Hor. Paul. 2 Cor. JVo. 11,) 'This is the third time I am coming to you,' T^irov TovTo sgp^o,aa/. Explaining these words, (after Gro- tius,) to mean the same thing with t^Itov 'ctoi/mu; 'iy^u sXii^Tv tpci? i//xa? in ch. xii. v. 14, (viz., so as to imply, ' Once I visited you; a second time I promised, but disappointed you ; behold, a third time / aw in 7'eadiiiess to come to you,') he mentions, with other more satisfactory proofs of the Apostle's having visited them but once already, this place, where, " in the fifteenth verse of the first chapter, he tells them, ' In this confidence I was minded to come vmto you before, that ye might have a second benefit.' AVliy a second, and not a third benefit? Why hurs^av and not roirriv, yagiv, if the T^irov s§^o/jt,ai, in the thirteenth chapter, meant a third visit ?"' In like manner, ^\^'iitbv remarks on the same word : ' Hence BiirkUt, c*)V., on St. J'did's j>lniis In 2 I'or. i. I'), 1(5. li) it appears that tlic ^Vpostle had been only once with them when he writ this.' And so the Rev. Thomas Scott also, ' This shews he he had been only once at Corintli at this time.' A'lucli to the same purpose, Henry : ' That they might receive a second benefit, some fmiher advantage by his ministry.' Burkitt, (' late Vicar and Lecturer of Diu-ham in Essex,') in liis Explanatory Notes on the A^ew Testament, (Tegg, Lond. 1838,) adopts the same view, but enlarges on it a little more extensively, and so as to shew, very instructively, how mucli of pious sentiment may be connected with a Scripture text, in such a way as to throw more darkness than liglit on its real signification. After this manner descants he on the doubtfid expression : — Tlie first benefit was their conversion ; the second benefit was their confir- mation, confirmation in the faith, and reformation both in life and manners. It is not enough that by our ministry we plant a church, and gather a people out of the world, by external and visible profession ; but there is farther need of daily industry and continual care to water what we have planted, to cultivate and dress that corner of our Lord's vineyard which is under our particular inspection and care. O that our people had hearts to cry out, and say. Lord ! not the first time only, but the second, yea all my life, make me partaker of tiiis benefit — (On 2 Cor., i. 15.) The comment of St. Chrysostom, (who is followed here by Erasmtis and others of note,) is not much nearer to what the Apostle had in view, in using the word dsvrs^av. It runs thus: " That you might have a second benefit. Wliat meaneth a second one ? It is, ' that you might have a double benefit,' both that con- Icrred in the letter, and that of a visit in person." — (St. Chrys. in 2 Ep. ad Cor. Cap. 1, Horn. III., torn. 5, p. 527. Par. 1636.) This interpretation is so far correct, as that it excludes any refer- ence to St. Paul's first residence in tlieir cltv ; but, beyond this, it is as faulty as the former. The various different meanings which liave been assigned by various authors to the same plirasc are tlius briefly enumerated in Pool's Synopsis {in loc.) : — That i/oti mifj/it have a aecond favour, i.e. a twofold, or a repeated benefit, viz., the former in the Epi.>-;tlo, the latter in my own personal presence: or, the former in my first coming to you, the otiier in my second : or, tiie former in the first preaching of the Gospel and your conversion, the siibse(|uent one in the watering, or confirmation, of you in the faitii you had received ; or, advancement r^O (ff the Mission of St. TiuiotJii/ to Corinth in 1 Cor. in your faith and other Cliristian virtues. Compare Rom., i. 12; 1. Cor., iii. 6. For there were many defects observable iu the Corinthians in matters of faith and morals, which called for the personal exertions of a master among them — • So as that you might receive of me this additional benefit.' On tlie next words, (a'cisc Ki,) Whitby's comment is to tliis effect :— And to pasH hy you into Macedonia.'^ Interj)reters ancient and modern, are mirch troubled how to reconcile those words with what the Apostlo hath said in his former Epistle, / xvill come unto you when I have passed ihrouyh Macedonia, 1 Cor., xvi. 5, for there he expressly declares, his purpose was first to go into iVIaccdonia, and then to come to Corinth from thence. Here, say they, he declares he purposed first to come to Corinth, and then to Macedonia, and return again from Macedonia to Corinth: but the Apostle seems to say no more here than he did there. There he declares that he would go first to Macedonia ; but he adds also, that he would go from Ephesus, passing by them into Macedonia ; saying also that he would not then see them sv cra»o5w in his passage by them, verse 7, and here he only saith he purposeth diiXdsTv to pass by them into Mace- donia ; but saith not that he would call upon them in that passage, but only when he came again from ^Macedonia and intended to go to Syria; which he did not, partly by reason of Titus's absence, who was not yet returned to him to give an account of their affairs, but went again from Troas to Macedonia (2 Cor., ii. 12,) where he met Titus, and partly by reason of the Jews, who waylaid him in his passage to Syria, (Acts, xx. 3:) and for this delay and non-performance of his purpose, that he came not from IMacedonia the first time he went thither, to w inter with them, ho makes this apology. Had this Avritcr s attention been directed to a right understand- ing of the two visits to Corinth, spoken of in the first chapter of the Second Epistle to the Chiu'ch there, he would, probably, have been able to produce a someAvhat more lucid and satisfactory ac- count of the matters referred to than what is communicated to his reader.^ in this (in tlic latter part, at least,) obscure and confused note. J)r. Doddridge, in his Famili/ E.rpositor, (on this place,) agrees with Whitby in regarding the second benefit simply as a second visit firom the Apostle, with its natural results ; and as to any general explanation of the plans for journe} i)ig, &c., which St. I'aiil sets himself to describe here and in I Cor. xvi., he is un- able to make any better hand of them than Whitby has done. Heiv, for example, is his paraphrase of 2 Cor. i. 15, Ki : — And in this confidence I n-as long before desirous ofcominy lo i/' u and enjoying another intervitew with friends who have long lain so near inv heart : that the DoddrUhje^ c^yV., on St. Fanfti phots lit 1 Co)-, xvi. aitd 2 Cof.'i. 21 expected transports of that blessed day, [the great day of the Lord Jesus] might in some degree be anticipated, both on my part and on yours ; and accordingly would have come to you mu>5h sooner, not only on my own account, but likewise that ye wii/ht have had a second benefit ; as I doubted not but it would have been much to jour advantage, as well as have given you a great deal of joy, to have seen and conversed with your father in Christ, who had once been so dear and so Avelconie to you. And indeed my scheme was to pass by you into Macedonia and make you a short visit^ in my way thither ; and then having despatched my business in the churches there, to come to you ayain from Macedonia, and make a longer stay ; that so I might be brought forward by you in my journey toward Judea, when 1 shall go thither to deliver the money raised by the contribution of the Gentile Christians for their Jewish brethren, when they shall meet at Jerusalem on occasion of some of their great feasts. See Acts, xx. 16. The note, (a little more to the purpose,) given by Doddridge in the same place, is as follows : — b Make you a short visit] A/ 'jimuv SiBXhiv s/j Ma7Cs8ovtav some have un- derstood of going into Macedonia without calling on them in his way. But as he went from Ephesus to Jtacedonia, it was not his direct way to go by Corinth ; especially considering the road we know he did take by Troas : and if he were now in Macedonia, as I think there is great reason to believe he was, there would on that interpretation have been no such appearance of change in his purpose as should have needed any apology. I therefore conclude that his first scheme was to make them two visits, the one in his way to Macedonia, (perhaps sailing from Ephesus to Corinth,) and then another and longer in his return. This the word waXiv, ayain, seems to intimate ; and if this were his purpose, it was now plain, in fact, that he had changed it. The grand objection to this is 1 Cor., xvi 7, which can only be reconciled by a supposition, that he had altered his purpose between the date of that Epistle and his quitting Ephesus ; and had given them, perhaps by some verbal message, some intimation of it. That he did so alter his plan is, from a comparison of the two Epistles with the history in the Acts, evident enough ; the First Epistle clearly implying his intention of going into IMacedonia by Corinth, and the Second indicating that he did not go that way, but via Troas. On first considering this circumstance, it occurred to me that, as Paid found it necessary to leave Ephesus hastily after the uproar, he might have been compelled to change his plan, from not being able to find a ship crossing the sea from that port on the day when he was leaving, or from some other cause. His own statement, however, in '2 Cor. i. 23, makes it evident that he acted on a different motive. 'To spare you,' saith he, ' I came not as yet unto Corinth;' in whirh it is plaiidy implied, that, frtun 22 Of the Mission of St. Timot/u/ to Corinth in 1 Cor. uneasiness about their condition, and in conseqvience of Timothy's not ha^dng arrived before his departure, to give intelligence of their amendment, he could not . find it in his heart to undertake the accomplishment of his resolution in regard to visiting them at that time. But whether the Corinthians received any intimation concerning this alteration of his purpose, before the arrival of the messengers who came with the Second Epistle, appears not so cer- tain. The remainder of the above note is judicious enough; more so, certainly, than what had been advanced by the same expositor on 1 Cor. XYi. 5, thus : — I am just upon my Journey through Macedonia.] Thus I think we may justly render Maxsdoviav yap dnoyn/jbocr Macedonia was not the direct way from Ephesus to Corinth. It seems by his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, written a few months after this, that he was either in ISIacedonia or on his way thither, (compare 2 Cor. i. 16) from whence it appears that he had a secret purpose of seeing Corinth in his way to as well as from Macedonia ; but he does not express this purpose here, so that we know not how it was signified to them, as from the text last mentioned it seems that it was. St. Paul expresses plainly enough, in the same chapter, (verse 7,) that he did not intend seeing them on his way to Macedonia ; and to suppose that he then entertained ' a secret purpose' of doing so would be to attribute to him the penning of a deliberate false- hood. Yet such, (as far as I can understand it,) would seem to be the evident purport of the note here cited. The explanation of the Apostle's intended arrangements, &c., given by the Eev. Thomas Scott, in his Notes on 1 Cor. xvi. 5-9, and 2 Cor. i. 15, 1(5, is as follows : — (I Cor., xvi. 5-9.) The Apostle was meditating to make a progress through Macedonia, when he wrote this Epistle : and he seems to have given some intimations, that he would go to Corinth in his way to Macedonia, as well as on his return, though it is not here mentioned. (Note, 2 Cor., i. l.'j, 16.) He had however formed his determination of coming ; and he assured his brethren at Corinth, that he would make some stay among them, ' if the Lord would give him leave :' for he did not think it sufficient, merely to call on them, as a tra- veller in his journey, when so many things, and of so great importance, required his presence among them. It was therefore his design to continue at Ephesus till the feast of Pentecost : the rest of the summer he meant to employ in his progress through Macedonia ; and then perhaps to spend the winter at Corinth ; expecting that tiie Corinthians would afterwards help him forward in his journey, ' whithersoever he should go.' Perhaps he intended to sail from Ephesus to Corinth tir.st ; (hen after a short stav to go into Macedonia, and afterwards return Kcplidiatlon of St. Paura Plans in 1 Cor. xvi. and '2 Car. i. 23 to winter there. But lie thought it Incumbent on him to stay some time longer at Ephesus ; as great opportunities of service were afforded him ; great success attended his labours ; and ' many adversaries' were excited to oppose him, to terrify or dissuade men from embracing tlie Gospel, or to discourage and mislead the new converts. His presence therefore was peculiarly necessary ; though his dangers and hardships were proportionably increased. ... It is probable that the tumult made at Ephesus by Demetrius, hastened the Apostle's depar- ture, &c. (2 Cor. i. 15, 16 ) He had intended to pass by Corinth in his way to IMace- donia, and to call as he went, and then afterwards to return, and make a longer abode with them. This must have been his plan, for Corinth was out of his way into Macedonia : nor could it be supposed that he would (;ome near that city, except in order to visit the Christians there. (Note, 1 Cor. xvi. 5-9 ) Probably he had given some other intimation of his purpose to the Corinthians, than that which is contained in the former Epistle. He however saw reason to alter his plan, and to go into Macedonia by Troas. To sum up hiieflj what appears to have been the true state of matters, accordmg to the conchisions ah'eady set forth. St. Paul, during the course of his labours at Ephesus, seeing occasion to make a visitation of JMacedonia and Achaia, resolved on going through the former fiist, calling at Corinth on his way, and making some little stay with the Christian brethren in that city, intend- ing also to return again to the same place for a longer sojourn, after the visitation of Macedonia had been completed, and pre- viously to his embarking for Syria ; so as that Coi'inth should thus enjoy a second benefit, in the double visit intended for them there. Of svicli intentions the Corinthians were, probably, made aware by tidings from Ephesus, conveyed either by report or letter, some time before the writing of St. Paul's First Epistle to them. Afterwards, on being informed more fully concerning the dis- ordered state of spiritual matters among them, the Apostle, feeling how distressing to both parties must prove a visit from him imder such circumstances, (having at first, perhaps, deferred it only ibr a time,) was led to resolve upon omitting the visit on his icarj to Ma- cedonia. And yet, seeing what urgent need there appeared to exist for the active personal efforts of some entirely trustworthy agent, in whom his fullest confidence might be reposed, to bring about such reforms as the condition of religion at Corinth rciiuircd, he appointed his beloved and faithful disciple, Timothy, to under- take a mission for this end. The delay of St. Paul's visit, and, possiblv also, the arrival of intelligence concerning tliis intended 24 Of the Mission of St. Timothij to Corinth in 1 Cor. mission of St. Timotliy, may have been the occasion which letl some to be puffed up, and confident in their evil ways, as reckon- in,o- that St. Paul himself would not come to them ut all. The i^roimdlessness of such a hope he, therefore, takes care to point out to them, in the First Epistle, written some httle time after Timothy had started on his mission, and before the Apostle had re- ceived word of his arrival at Corinth. In the same Epistle St. Paul further informs them of his having come to the resolution of not calling to see them on his way to Macedonia, his intention being to defer any visit to them until after the return of Timothy, which he was looking for at this time, and further, also, luitil he should have completed his projected tour through Macedonia. For such alterations of his plans he was, by some of the ill-minded at Corinth, accused of exhibiting lightness and unsteadiness of purpose, 'Bnd framing his plans in a worldly and carnal spirit ; which ill-natured calmnny having been reported to him, probably by his faithful agent, on his return to him from Corinth, gave oc- casion for his freeing himself from this charge, as he fully does in the beginning of the Second Epistle. It is to be observed, in fine, that the First Epistle must have been written immediately before St. Paul's departure from Ephe- siis. For when we are told in the Acts (xix. 22) that he sent into Macedonia Timotheus and Erastus, staying himself in Asia for a season, the next following words are, ' And the same time {xuto. Tov TLaighv sy.smv) there arose no small stir about that Avay;' Deme- trius, the silversmith, gets up his riot ; ' And after the uproar teas ceased., Paul called unto him the disciples, and embraced them, and departed for to go into Macedonia,' (ch. xx. i.) He could not, therefore, have had time, after the tumult, for penning the p]pistle, nor could he then say, ' I wall tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.' So, as the disorder in question was just coming on at the time of Timothy's departure, at least, then pretty near at hand, the Epis- tle, written, as we have seen, some little time after Timothy had left, and yet before Paul had any anticipation of such a sudden ex- pulsion from the place, must, of necessity, have been penned very shortly before the uproar, and his removal from Ephesus. 25 Ch. I., Part II. — Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth, mentioned in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. From the manner in which the Sacred Writer makes mention, in the one sentence, (Acts, xx. 1,) of the termination of tlie uproar at Ephesus, and St. Paul's immediately subsequent removal from the scene of his deeply interesting labours there, it appears almost cer- tainly to have been his design to mark a close connection between the two circumstances, and to indicate to his reader that the one was the consequence and residt of the other ; that the Apostle's departure was hastened and made compulsory by the violence and wickedness of his adversaries. Thus suddenly torn from so many ties and associations of dearest aftcction, such as his ministry, com- menced among them some three years before, could not fail to give occasion to, and not knowiiig what might now be the coming destiny of the Lord's flock in the place which he was leaving, over whom had abeady burst a beginning, at least, of the angry storm and tempest of persecution, it must have greatly added to the weight of sorrow and anxiety which he bore away with him from the place, to remember the unhappy condition of the Church at Corinth, concerning which no tidings had yet reached him in reply to his First Epistle or the commission entrusted by him to Timothy. Had any intelligence reached him from that quarter of a cheering character, it is natural to suppose that he would, in consequence, have been led to direct his course thither, (as he had been purposing,) and in Christian intercoiu'se with the brethren there, and experience of the steadfastness of their faith in Christ, to find no small consolation under existing discouragements. But no such word having been received before his hurried removal from Ephesus, it appears that he still acted on the feeling which, ' to spare them,' inclined him to come not as yet unto Corinth. Accordingly, setting out for his Macedonian jo\n-ney, he took the course which brought him round by Troas on his way ; and here finding an opening for making known the Gospel of Christ, he appears to have arranged for continuing some little time in that place. Possibly, his quitting Ephesus considerably before tlie time he had proposed to himself for departure, may lune brouglit 26 Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cor. him forwai'cl on his journey towards ]\[acedonia ninch earlier thaii the disciples there would have been forewarned by Tiniotheus and Erastus to prepare for his coming ; and this may have given him leisure to occupy himself in any other Christian labour for which facilities might offer, in the mean time. Nor is it unlikely that, while at Ephesus, he may have been informed by some who came from Troas to that metropolis, of circumstances favourable to the planting oi" a branch of Christ's Church in their part of the coun- try, such as a disposition on the part of some residing there to re- ceive the Word of God, and aid in propagating it among others, or some like encouragement to his opening a mission there. Something of this kind appears to be intimated in what the Apos- tle says in 2 Cor. ii. 12, ' I came to Troas to preach Christ's Gos- pel,^ CeX8u\i di hg rriv T^udda, si? to suayysAiov rou Xo/ffToD,) in which it aj)pears to be implied that his ^•isit was not merely casual, on account of that place being on his way to IMacedonia, but that he went there for the pin-pose of preaching the Gospel of Christ. As to the additional time on St. Paul's hands, by reason of his earlier than intended quitting of Ephesus, it might amount to some weeks. He had purposed leaving after Pentecost, whereas he did start, as it seems, just after the writing of his First Epistle in the Spring season, about Passover tide ; which woidd occasion a dif- ference of some seven weeks between his projected and actual ar- rangements. Perhaps it may have been some observances of tlie Jews at Ephesiis, connected with the Passover, which led to tlie riot happening at that particular time. Had they, at that season, assembled in greater numbers than usual, whether to observe any such ordinances in Ej)hesus, or to embark from that port for Jeru- salem, as the Sacred Festival drew nigh, it might have afforded the Christian teachers at Ephesus opportunity oi' addressing larger as- semblies than at other times, and effecting proportionably more for the spread of the Gospel. And tlie heathen people, seeing the multitudes, and conibunding all, Jews and Christians, together, as the common enemies of their idolatry, would naturally be filled with envy, and ready to engage in any such scenes of excitement and violence as that of which Demetrius was the leader. P)ut although St. Paul had come to Troas for the purpose of preaching the Gospel, and found circumstances tlicre sufficiently Vkit of St. Paul to Troas. 27 favourable and encouraging for tlic undertaking, a door of viseful- ness having been opened unto him among the inhabitants of that locality, his mind was still disturbed and uneasy from recol- lections concerning the state of the Lord's work elsewhere, — at Corinth in particular, — and concerning the dear friend and child in Christ Jesus to whom, in much anxiety, although in the full confidence of aftectionate attachment, he had entrusted the recent important and responsible mission to that city. Wliat could be detaining him in Macedonia all this while ? Or had any evil be- fallen him at Corinth? where the Apostle had known a lawless mob to take and beat a chief ruler of the synagogue, even before the judgment seat of the civil governor, and escape altogether un- reproved? Or had he changed his plan, and encountered the dangers of the longer sea voyage, and met with shi^jwreck on his way to E2:)hesus ? Or might he have arrived there, and furnished an acceptable sacrifice to the fury of those wicked men, out oi' whose hands the Apostle himself had so recent, and so narrow an escape? Or what perils of robbers might be thought of, to account for his protracted absence? It seems not wonderful therefore to find the statement of St. Paul himself informing us, that he had no rest in his spirit ; and that notwithstanding all the interest and attractions which the opening scene of successful exer- tion at Troas presented to his mind, all the prospect of usefulness to the people of that place which invited liim to tarry there a sea- son, and help them, yet he could not abide the anguish of luicer- tainty and suspense which vexed his soid, and so, taking his leave of them he departed into ]\Iacedonia, if haply there he might once more see face to face his best-loved fellow-labourer, or hear tell how prospered the "Word of the Lord in the city of Corinth. Aniving in ]\Iacedonia, still in trouble and affliction, ' trouble on every side, fightings without' on the part of heathen persecu- tors, ' fears within' as to what might now be going on at Corinth, or what be come of the brother who had been sent thither, it was not long until St. Paul was fully relieved of all his anxiety and sorrow on these latter heads, by the return from Corinth of him whose presence he had been so longingly desiring, and not by his return only, but also by the happy and comforting news he brought with him of the penitence and reformation of the Corinthians, and 28 Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cor. tlie earnest attachment entertained among them for the Apostle of the Lord, who had been the first to make known to them the tidings of salvation. In the warmth of overflo'sving gladness which now filled his bosom, St. Paul was led to pen liis Second Epistle to the Corinthians, addressed to them fi'om some place in IMace- donia, and probably, as is commonly supposed, from the city of Philippi. Its proper place in the apostolic history, as recorded in the Acts, is at Ch. xx. v. 1, where St. Paul, after the uproar at Ephesus, ' called unto him the disciples, and embraced them, and departed for to go into Macedonia ;' on his way to which he paid the visit to Troas, of which we have been just speaking. The very first verse of this Epistle indicates that Timothy was once again present with St. Paul at the time when it was written, his nan.e being joined with that of the Apostle in the opening salutation, after this manner : — Paul an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the Church of God which is at Corinth with all the saints which are in all Achaia. "The Apostle," says the Rev. T. Scott, "joined his beloved Timothy ivith himself in this ' Second Epistle to the Corinthians,' that he might establish his reputation and influence among them. Hence we learn that Timothy was come to him from Ephesus, [rather, I think, from Corinth, via ]\Iacedonia,] before he wrote it." With this agrees what we find in Pool's Synopsis, in the Pro- legomena to this Second Epistle, and the notes on the first verse of it, to this effect : — Prolegomena.] This Epistle to the Corinthians Paul wrote neither imme- diately after the first, nor yet very long subsequently to its despatch. For there intervened a sufficient interval for Timothy to go, as Paul had commissioned him, to Corinth, communicate Paul's commands, and labour to secure that they should be obeyed, and return again to Paul. His labours at Corinth had succeeded well with the Christians there generally ; whence this Epistle is of a milder tone than the former. There Mere still however some who entertained ill-feeling towards Paul, whose injurious representations he meets in this Epistle through- out. The occasion of writing this Epistle was threefold. 1 . To apologise for the delay of his visit, promised 1 Cor. iv. 19, and xv. 16, {rather .\vi. 3.] 2. To express his commendation of their improvement consequent on the former Epistle, and their obedience to its injunctions. 3. To maintain his authority and rebuke his maligners. Occasion of toritimj this Second Epistle. 29 Cap. i. 1, and Timothij'] whom, as delegate from himself, he Lad sent to Corinth : from which place, on his return to Paul, he had brought word of their condition and improvement, as well as concerning the false Apostles. His name he associates with his own here, and in the Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, Thessalonians, chap. [Epp. ?] i, & ii., not that he assisted Paul incom- posing the Epistle, but, 1, as a mark of honour : 2, to signify that his sentiments agreed with his own. He calls him brother, not so much i'or their communion in the faith, as for his ministerial dignity ; (/. d. co-apostle. Besides the tlirce motives here suggested for the writing of a Second Epistle to the Corinthians, we have two othei's mentioned by St. Chrysostom in his first Homily on it, viz., that St. Paul was desirous to thank them lor their kind reception of his messenger Titus ; and also to express liis acknowledgments for their alacrity in attending to the collection for the saints ; or rather, (he might, perhaps, have said,) to urge them to maintain the spirit of alacrity once manifested by them in this matter. Another purpose whicli the Apostle had in view seems to have been to encourage the Co- rinthians to pardon, upon his repentance, the individual whom, in the former Epistle, he had enjoined them to pmaish for his crime by excommunication. — (See Ch. ii. vv. 6-8.) As to the union of Timothy's name with his ownx in the opening salutation, the com- ments of St. Chrysostom rvm as follows. In the first place, he observes, ' we must inqmre how it is that he associates Timothy Avitli himself in these words, for — Paul, saith he, an Apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothij our brother. For in the former Epistle also he had made mention of him, promising to send him, and had given them injunction concerning him, saying. Now if Timothy be come, see that he be with you without fear. How then is it that here in the opening address he associates him with himself? Having arrived among them, according to the promise of his master (for saith he, I have sent unto you Timothy, ivho shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ,') and having set all to rights, he returned back again : as, even when sending him, he had made use of the language, Conduct him forth in peace that he may come unto me, for I am awaiting him with the brethren. Seeing then that he had rejoined his master, and, after having settled matters aright with him in Asia, (for saith he, / will tan y at Ephesus until Pentecost,) had again passed over into Macedonia, he naturally associates him with himself afterwards, as being present with him. For his former communication had been sent from Asia, whereas he now writes from Macedonia. And he associated him thus, both with a view to add to the weight of his character in this way, and also to evince his own deep Immility. For he was his inferior, certainly : but love draws all together. Tiierefore also is it that he every where makes him his equal, now indeed saying. As a son with 30 Of the Missions of Sf. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cur. a father hath he served with me, and now, For he worheth the work of the Lord as I also do. And in the place before us also, he calls him brother, using every means of commending him to the respectful feelings of the Corinthians. For he had also been there, as I remarked, among them, and given them proofs of his worth. That Timothy, with Sihis, had been St. Paul's assistant in his original preaching of the Gospel at Corinth dnring his first resi- dence there, is intimated by St. Luke in his record of the history of that period in the Acts (xviii. 5 :) and to the same circimi- stance the Apostle himself alludes in the 17th verse of the first Chapter of the Epistle, with which we are now more immediately concerned, thus, The Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by u?, even by me and Silvanus, and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea. Sec. It was no wonder that he who had been so labouring among the Coiinthians at the first, should be the one afterwards chosen to undertake the important mission entrusted to him by St. Paul in connection with their sj)iritual interests. Bvit it may perhaps at first appear a little less natm'al that we should find the Apostle taking such apparent pains to make them favoiu'ably ac- quainted with the character and labours of one, whom they might already have had so many opportunities of knowing personally, as a pastor of the Church in their city. Wlien however we bear in mind the length of time, exceeding two years, during which St. Paul had now been absent from Corinth, and the numbers who had probably meanwhile joined themselves to the Church there, many of whom perhaps had never known, or even seen Timothy, wliich very ones would most probably most require his pastoral corrections, it seems nothing strange that he should be sent among them with such credentials, testifying to his continued worth, and the continued confidence reposed in him, and authority entrasted to him, by the Apostle. The next place in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians in which any statement occurs bearing on the subject of St. Paul's having recently sent a mission to that city, and including the name of an individual employed in it, is the following very re- markable one, which is found in Chap. ii. vi\ 12, 13. Furthermore when I came to Troas to preach Christ's gospel, and a door Abruptness of the notice of T'dns in Cli. ii. 12. 31 was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit because I found not Titus my brother, but taking leave of them, I wont from thence into Macedonia. On this extraordinary and abrupt introduction of the name of Titus, for the first time, in these Epistles, where every thing that had gone before, in them and in the Acts, would liave led us to expect mention of the name of St. Timothy, no Commentator that I have met with has the slightest observation expressive either of difficulty or surprise; a silence which is the more unaccountable, the more we pay attention to the circumstances of the case. For not only is it that Timothy who had been repeatedly named before in these Epistles, here thus suddenly gives place to Titus, but moreover, the name of Timothy is never afterwards again men- tioned in any single instance, to the Corinthians, while that of Titus, introduced now for the first time, is over and over again mentioned in what follows ; and always, as having done work, which wc should have supposed, from what precedes, that Timothy had done, or appointed to do new work, which we migt have anticipated as likely to be assigned to Timothy, or holding a position in connection with St. Paul, which wc should have supposed to have belonged peculiarly to Timothy, or cherishing sentiments, and exhibiting traits of character, such as we should have with reason attributed to Timothy, or in fine receiving from the Apostle those earnest expressions of affection and recommendation to the people of Corinth, with Avhich thus far Timothy had been so largely favoured. To establish the truths of these observations, it will only be needful to continue our examination, through the remainder of this Epistle, of the class of texts which we have been studying ; i.e. now, those in wliich the name of Titus occurs, that of Timo- thy being, as we have said, no more to be found in this letter. If the verses last cited appear to leave it somewhat uncertain, why St. Paul felt so much distress at the continued absence of rittis, the obscurity is sufficiently removed in the place Avhere lie next resumes the same topic, (Ch. vii. v. 5, seqq.) in which he in- dicates plainly that the occasion of his anxiety was the delay of the tidings from Corinth, expected by Titus, and the luicer- taintv which he consequently felt as to the state of matters among those to wliom he was now writing. Before proceccUng, 32 Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cor. however, to that part of the Epistle, it will be proper to in- troduce a specimen or two of the observations of Commentators on our present passage ; on which St. Chrysostom, for example speaks thus ; — ITere again he teaches them that he had another affliction to undergo. How and in what way .? In not finding Titus. For it is a serious matter, and enough to cast down the soul, to have to endure trials at all. But when there is none to speak a word of comfort near, none who may share the burden with one, then it is that the violence of the tempest is aggravated. Titus here named is the same individual of whom he mentions further on, that he had come from them to him, and on whom be bestows many and great encomiums, whom also he mentions having sent to them. From a desire therefore to shew that he had borne this trouble for their sakes, he spake as above He doth not aaj that the absence of Titus formed an impediment to the salvation of those who were prepared to join him, nor yet that he slighted on account of it such as had believed, but that he had no rest, i.e. was afflicted, pained at his brother's absence, indicating how heavy a thing a brother's absence is. And he there- fore departed thence. In Dr. Bloomfield's Recensio Si/noptica, vol. vii. p. 45, we find on the same passage, the Ibllowing annotations ; (in which, how- ever, where the author quotes the Greek of Theodoi'ct and Thco- phylact, we substitute here the English, as more siutable to the plan of the present work, and the class of readers for whom it is in a great measure intended ;) — huy. 'ieyjt%a aneiv ruj Ti/s-j/jjari /mjv. ' I had no rest to my spirit.' This Eosenm. interprets of impatience till he saw Timothy and Titus, and knew how both his Epistles would be received. And so Doddr. & Mackn. But that seems too much lowering the sense. Other modern commentators give but a vague and unsatisfactory account of this point. The ancicntf seem to have had a far clearer perception of the sense. The feeling of the apostle was, doubtless, regret at the absence of Titus not affording him the means of making the most of that door, or opportunity which was offered, of spreading the Gospel. So Theodoret : ' Deeply was I grieved at heart, seeing numbers coming to the preaching of the the word, and having no fellow-labourer to aid me in the care of them. For Titus, whom, to provide for your interests, I had sent away unto you, had not yet returned back to us. For which reason, as having no partner in my labours, I took leave of them and came away, and so Theophyl. :' ' I was afflicted, I was pained, on account of his absence. The work was impoded by his being away.' It is observed by Theodoret, that the Apostle not without reason makes this mention of Titus, since such a way of speaking would be the strongest recom- mendation of him to the Corinthians. The next observations made by St. Patd concerning the mis- St. Paid comforted by the return of Titus. 33 sion of Titus, arc those which wc find in the seventh Chapter oi' tliis Epistle, in vv. 5 — 8, Avhcre he writes on that subject in these terms : — 5. For when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh liad no rest, but we were troubled on every side; witiiout were fightings, within were fears. 6. Neverthele'^s God, tliat comforteth those tliat are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus ; 7. And not by his coming only, but by the consolation wlierewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mour;ning, your fer- vent mind toward me ; so that I rejoiced the more. 8. For though I made you sorry with a lettei-, I do not repent, though I did repent, &c. Returning to the HoniiUes of St. Chrysostom, we find his com- ments on the verses now cited to run as follows : — For when we came into Macedonia, ourflesli had no rest. Having made use of the word affliction, he remarks how great was that affliction, and magnifies it in |k description, in order to exhibit the full extent of the joy and consolation he had received from them, seeing that it had banished such afflicting pain. Sut we were troubled on every side. How on every side? without ivere fi.. SI? TO ■ra^a'/.aX^aai ri/J^a? Tirov, ha -/.adu? ■-posi'^g^aro, outu y.ai h~i- In Avhich Verse (r. G) it is plainly implied, that the tone of feel- ing which he saAV to be prevalent among the ]\Iacedonian Chris- tians, had the effect of making him vn.s\\ to see a Hke spirit pro- moted among the Corinthians also. Now, tlie one who had been sent into Macedonia with Erastus, in anticipation of Paul's own visit, was Timotheus, and to his labours would appear to have been attributable, in a great measure, tlie present healthy condi- tion of Christian liberality among the Macedonians. This Axry Timotheus Avas noAV again with St. Paul Avhen he Avrote the Second Epistle ; and Avho more likely to be sent from him to prepare his Avay at Corinth on the present occasion, than lie Avhose laboui-s Avere telling so effectually, at the moment, in jMaccdonia ? No Avord however is said, according to the usually received vicAV of the subject, of sending him. Titus is again chosen for the honour- able office of delegate for the Apostle to the Corinthians ; and tlie (h'l'ii.'^ion of the StohiI Mit\y fellow-labourer, but, in matters connected with your interests, in advancing your welfare, in promoting your improvement, in affectionate regard for you, in exertions on your behalf: a testimony which might well commend him in the strongest way to their kindly feelings. Or as reyards our brethren. Or if you desire, he means, to hear anythiny of the others, they too are possessed of most worthy grounds of recommendation to you. For they also, saith he, are our brethren, and Apostles from the Churches. That is, sent by the Churches. Then for the highest claim of all. T]te ylory of Christ. For to Ilim is to be referred, whatever treatment shall be shown toward them. Whether therefore ye be disposed to receive them as brethren, or as Apostles of the Churches, or as occupying yourselves in what is for the ylory of Christ, you have many considerations to excite your benevolent emotions in their favour. For as reyards Titus, I am able to state that he is both my partner, and your loving friend, and as regards these others, we have in them to deal with brethren, with Apostles of the Churches, with the glory of Christ. Observe you, that it plainly follows from what is here said also, that they were some whom they were unacquainted with ? Or else he would surely have conferred on them the same honours as on Titus. I mean with regard to love towards them. But seeing that they were not as yet known to them, 'Receive them,' saith he, 'as brethren, as Apostles of the Churches, as occupying yourselves iu a work for the glory of Christ.' Whereupon he addeth. Shew ye therefore to them, and before the Churches, the proof of your love, and of our boastiny on your behalf. Shew now, he means, how much you love us, and how far from any rash and unfounded boasting is that we are making on your behalf. And this you \\\\\ shew, if you exhibit a spirit of love in your treatment of them. Then rising in solemnity of stylo, he adds, in the face ef the Churches : meaning, for the glory, the honour, of the Churche.-. For in honouring these men, ye shall give honour to the 48 Of tlie Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cor. Churches which have sent them. For the lionour will be reflected, not on them only, but on those likewise who have sent them, who have given them their suf- frages ; and beyond tlicra, even to redound to the glory of God, seeing that the honour we bestow on those who are His ministering servants is to be regarded as a tribute of homage to Himself. Here again tlie reader mg-y easily observe tliese comments of St. Clirysostom to be cliaractcrised by more of difFuseness than of critical accuracy ; although this very diffuseness is of use to our present purpose, in occupying the mind so much with the text and statements of Scripture itself, and acquainting us thus largely with all that so ancient and famous an Expositor was able to set forth in illustration of this portion of the Sacred Word. A careful study of the place, however, in connection with what we know otherwise of the circumstances to which it refers, may enable lis to add some useful observations to those of the venerable Com- mentator from whom we have been making such copious extracts for the reader's benefit. St. Clirysostom appears to be imdoubtedly light, and to express no more than St. Paul imj^lies in this Chapter, in representing Titus as the principal or head of this mission, consisting of three altogether, which was despatched to Corinth along with, or at least at the same time as, the Second Epistle. He was, it appears from Ver. 17, much more forward, or ready, to go to them at this time than on the former occasion. Then, as we have seen, (p. 36) his unwillingness to undertake a mission to them had given occa- sion to St. Paul to dwell strongly on the encouraging points of character for Avhich he gave them credit, with a ^'iew to over- coming his disciple's reluctance. Now., he needed no such pres- sure, his inward affection had become more abundant to them, and being more forward, of his own accord he went unto them, he readily accepted the proposal, which was quite in harmony witli the impulse of his own feelings, to visit them again. But who the other two may have been, that were to accompany him in tlois second visit to Corinth, it seems much less easy to determine. St. Clirysostom names, as the one most commonly supposed to have been the first of them, St. Luke ; or, as he states to have been thought by others, Barnabas, whom also he appears himself to think tlic one intended l)y the Apostle. As to the tliird indi- His companions on the Second, n-ho? 49 viJual, the silence of Clxrysostoin as to any name by wliicli lie was to be known, appears to indicate sufficiently that no tradition had reached him as to who it was most likely to have been. He col- lects however from St. Paul's way of speaking of the two latter, that they were both personally unknown to the Coi-inthians, or else that the Apostle would have spoken more j)articularly of them byname, &c., as well as of Titus. Dr. Adam Clarke arrives at a rather different conclusion in his Notes upon the passage, which, so lixr as they re'ler to the in- dividuals hinted at, are these : — Verse 18. The brother, whose praise is in the Gospel. ] Who this brother was we cannot tell ; some suppose it was St. Luke, who wrote a gospel, and who was the companion of St. Paul in several of his travels ; others think it was Silas ; others, Barnabas ; others, Mark ; and others, Apollos. Neither ancients nor moderns agree in either ; but Luke, John and Mark, seem to have the most probable opinions in their favour. Whoever the person was, he was sufficiently known to the Corinthiiins, as we learn by what the Apostle says of him in this place. A'"erse 19. Chosen of the Churches to travel with us.] XsiPOTOvrithi;' Ap- pointed by a show (if hands ; from vs/s the hand, and rsit^u) to extend. This appointment, by the suftVage of the Churches, seems to refer more to St. Luke tlian any one else; unless we suppose he refers to the transaction. Acts xv. 40, 41, and then it would appear that Silas is the person intended. Verse 22, We have sent with them} Titus and, probably Luke, our brother, probably Apollos. Now much more diligent.] Finding that I have the fullest confidence in your complete reformation and love to me, he engages in this business with alacrity, and exceeds even his former diligence. Verse 23. Whether any do enquire of Titus.] Should it be asked. Who is this Titus? I answer, he is my companion, and my fellow-labourer in reference to you; Chap. ii. 13, vii. 6,7. Should any enquire, Who are these brethren, Luke and Apollos ? I answer, The;/ are A'rrogro/.oi, apostles of the Churches, and intensely bent on promoting the glory of Christ. In such a case, where the Bible has not expressly mentioned names, we must, of course, content ourselves with probabilities as to the persons intended. Yet it is interesting to investigate, as far as we may be able, a point concerning which so many hints are given to encourage inquiry. That St. Luke is, moreover, the one intended in the 18th Verse, is w^hat Ave have very strong grounds for accepting as highly probable ; such being the opinion which has most support in the testimony of antiquity, and which II 50 Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Co?'. also seems to accord best with the Sacred Nan'ative itself. In adopting this view, however, we are not to understand the words ' whose praise is in the Gospel throughout all the Chvirches,' as if they meant, one ' who has already icrltten a Gospel, which is held in universal estimation among Christians,' because the ' Gospel' of St. Luke was not, it seems, published until some years later ; not xmtil after St. Paul's death, according to the testimony of St. Ire- naeus in the second centviry, (Euseb. Ecc. Hist.., V. 8.) The ex- pression appears rather to signify, ' who is commended for his preaching of the Gospel,' (according to the use of the word in 2 Cor. X. 14, and elsewhere ;) althoiigh such commendation, so generally bestowed, sufficiently indicated the high quahfications possessed by the one who received them, for composing, as he afterwards did, a written account of the Gospel History. In connection with this supposed mission of St. Luke to Achaia, we are to remember that it is generally believed, not without apparent reason, that it was for the special use of the people of that province he composed his Gospel, according to the well-known distich of St. Gregory Nazianzen, (a.D. 350 ;) — MarSaTo? fih syoa-^sv 'Ej3^aioi?: dav,'J,ara XgiaroxJ- ' Matthew wrote for the Hebrews the miracles of Christ, Mark for Italy, Luke for Achaia.' — (St. Greg. Naz. Opp.., Bened., Par., 1842, torn. ii. Carmina, p. 200, //. 31, 32. Vid. q. p. 274 ih., Carm., 22, 1. 1.) Elsew^hcre also the same writer mentions that as St. John, to pj-each the Gospel, went to sojourn (^i--ihrtij.r,si) at Ephesus, St. Thomas in India, &c., in like mannci" St. Luke took up his position in Achaia ; though this may appear to assign him perhaps, in part at least, a post more properly belonging to his senior, St. Paul. Turning now to tlie Holy Scriptures, we find St. Liike, when first mentioned in the Acts, (Ch. xvi. 8, 10,) apparently staying at Troas ; from whence he went with St. Paul to Philippi on the Apostle's first visit to that city, and remained there when St. Paul departed after his imprisonment, {vv. 12, 17, 40.) The next place where Ave find St. Luke and St. Paul together is again at Philippi, (in Acts XX. 5, (),) and proceeding thence to Troas, after the time of the St. Luke, prohublii, H-ith hint on the Second. 51 transactions now more immediately before us. It would appear probable from this, that St. Luke lived at Fhilippi, (or, at least, that he may have been much there,) during the intervening period. From Philippi, during that same period, this Second Epistle to the Corinthians was written, as is generally, and most probably cor- rectly, supposed : and what, then, more likely than that St. Luke, whose name has become so associated with that of Acliaia, should be the first selected, on the present occasion, to accompany St. Titus to that province ? With this agrees also the tenor of the 19th verse, in which St. Paul states that the person spoken of in it was one who was * chosen of the Churches to travel with us with this grace which is administered by us.' For as the ' grace' intended must certainly include, if it does not refer exclusively to, the contributions of the Churches, entrusted to St. Paul and his companions for trans- mission to Jerusalem, so we know that when this Apostle went lip thither with those alms, he was accompanied in his journey by St. Luke, as appears from the language of the latter in the Acts, (xx. 5, &G.,) in relating the particulars of this journey. (See also Kom. XV. 25-31, where the same journey is mentioned.) Suj)posing, however, this to have been the case, what, on the other hand, more extraordinary and unUkely, than that one who had actually been thus associated with St. Titus in such a labour of Christian love, should afterwards, when writing the Acts, alto- gether suppress the slightest mention of his distinguished compa- nion, as he is usxially conceived to have done ? That silence, Avhich has justly been considered in itself remarkable enough, would certainly appear the more so from its connection with the flict now stated, on the testimony of antl(|uity, and with the con- firmation, so far as it throws any light on the matter, of the Word of God. As to the third individual who accompanied Titus on his second mission to Corinth, as mentioned in Averse 22, we may next inquire which he is most likely to have been, of those different individuals who have been referred to by Connnentators as liaviiig possibly been of the party, whether Silas, or Barnalxis, or iVpollos, .) Epaphroditus, (Philip, ii. 25.) ]\Iark, Luke, Demas, Aristarchus, (Philem. v. 24,) and others. But the whole exj)ression, ' mg [oivn'\ j^xirtner and felloiv- lahourer for yon,' is very striking and worthy of note, as assigning to St. Titus a position relatively to the "WTiter using it, and the persons addressed, wdiich would imdoubtedly seem in the Acts and First Epistle to the Corinthians, and even at the connnence- ment of this Second Epistle, to have belonged to St. Timotliy ex- clusively. The Epistle to the Romans was written almost immediately after this Second one to Corinth, i. e. from Corinth itself, as is generally supposed, when the Apostle had arrived there after the penning of this Second Epistle, (Acts, xx. 2, 3; 2 Cor., ix. 4; xii. 14, 20, &c.) Now it is Avorth obser^ang, that while at the close many salutations are addressed from the Apostle's com- panions to the brethren at Rome, of the eight whose names are mentioned, as being then with St. Paid at Corinth, only one is entitled his fellow-labourer, that same one being also placed first ol" the number, thus: — Timotlieus my work-fellow \_6 guvs^yog /xou, the same word which is {runiAnXcd feUoiv-helper in 2 Cor. viii. 2, 3, Notice of the first Mission in Ch. xii. 57 and elscwlicre felloiv-labourer,~\ and Lucius, and Jason, and Sosi- pater, my kinsmen, salute you.^ It may bo remarked furtlicr, that among tlie salutations there inserted, the name of Titus does not occiir, although he had been sent on to Corinth before the Apostle, m order to have matters ready there for his arrival, and might therefore naturally be supposed to be in his company when he came. AVliat is perhaps more deserving of remark, in con- nection with the same subject, is, that in none of the Epistles do we find St. Paul unite the name of Titus with his own in the opening salutation, altliough that of Timothy is repeatedly so honoured, and occasionally those of others also ; as for instance, those of Sosthenes, (1 Cor. i.) and Silas, (1 Thes. i. 1., &c.) Yet from the way in which St. Titus is spoken of, (especially in 2 Cor. viii. 23,) and from the relations generally believed to have existed between liim and St. Paid, we might naturally have ex- pected his name to have been inserted in some such instance at least, where that of Timothy is thus introduced so often. Only one other place is to be found in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, where mention is made of St. Titus. In Chap, xii. vv. 17, 18, St. Paul alludes in this manner to his first mission to Corinth: — 17. Did I make a gain of you by any of them whom I sent unto you ? 18. I desired Titus, and with him I sent a brothei*. Did Titus make a gain of you ? Walked we not in the same spirit ? Walked we not in the same steps ? These remarks of the Apostle harmonise acctu'ately enough with the history contained in the Acts, if Titus be but another name for Timothy. But otherwise, it is very difficidt to see how both authorities can be brought to agree with one another. In the Acts, we are told that St. Paul sent before him into ]\Iace- donia tioo of his coadjutors, and that their names were Timotheus and JErastus. In the same record, it is hinted that they were to proceed on from IVIacedonia to Achaia ; and with this agrees the testimony of St. Paul in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, informing them that Timothy was to visit their city for him, it being also the home of his associate on tlie journey, with whom he would probably lodge while there. Now in tlic Second E2)istle, in the place just quoted, alluding to tliose wliom lu; liad I 58 Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cor. sent as his agents among tliem, he specifies as the one that might most naturally be thought of, as the principal and foremost among them, his friend Titus, whom he had already sent to them with one brother accompanying him. Are not these two then, pro- bably, the Timotheus and Erastus of the Acts? That he had sent others is indeed possible, if not probable from the use of the expression,' ' any of them whom I sent.' But whether or no, the-re were but two whom St. Luke, but two whom St. Paul him- self, thovaght to require any special notice in that instance. And what more natural, than for the same tAvo to be mentioned by both? But why doth St. Paul specify Titvis here by name, and not make like sj)ecial mention of the other ? If that other were Erastus, the reply is easy and obvious ; inasmuch as it were superfluous to dwell on the possibiUty of the Coi-inthians having been cheated or made a gain of by their fellow-citizen, who filled among them the honoiu-able post of treasurer of the city (p. 6. sup.) while it was natiu-al enough to propose the question, (al- though with fullest confidence as to the only answer which any of them could give it,) concerning St. Paul's own favoimte dis- ciple and intimate friend. On the place in which he makes this last allusion to liim. Dr. A. Clarke has these notes : — Verse 17. Did Imake a gain of you. '\ Did any person I ever sent to preach the gospel to you, or help you in your Christian course, ever get any thing from you for me ? Produce the proof if you can. Verse 18. I desired Tilus.] I never sent any to you but Titus, and another brother, Chap. viii. 6, 18. And did Titus make a gain of you ? Did he get any thing from you, either for himself or for me ? You know he did not. lie was actuated by the same spirit, and he walked in the same steps. Vere 19. Think ye that ice excuse ourselves.] A'ro/.oyoufj.sOa ; That we make an apology for our conduct ; or, that I have sent Titus and that bro- ther to you because I was ashamed or afraid to come myself. Dr. Clarke appears in his note on the 18th Verse to suggest a wrong connection between it and the Aaiith Chapter, which, according to what has been already stated, refers not to the same, but the second mission of Titus. Had he referi'ed to the first in the passage before us, he should have said not 'a brother,' but 'brethren,' seeing that there were two of them. The remarks of St. Chrvsostom on this place need not be cited here, as they contain nothing of peculiar interest to our present purpose, but SS. Tiinoth)/ and Titus of exaetlij similar parentage. 59 only dwell on the strict integrity and sliunning of covetousness manifested in the Apostle's dealings with the Corintliians, and his care, not only to take nothing from them himself, but also to send to them, as his commissioned agents, persons on whom he could entirely depend for acting in a like spirit. Had we but the two Epistles to the Corinthians to guide us concerning the history of SS. Timothy and Titus, we might have supposed that in the first mission to Corinth, one was original/// appointed to go, and the other substituted afterwards. But the History of the Acts, written at least some five years after these transactions, has placed it beyond a doubt that the one actually sent was Timotheus, and that after his mission and the writing of the First Epistle, there would not have been time, in the way in which circumstances turned out, for making the supposed sub- stitution in time to have expected Titus back at Troas, when the Apostle came thither from Ephesus. The readers attention is elsewhere* drawn to the coincidence observable between the parentage of St. Timothy, and that which, from the iind of Galatians, must be assigned to St. Titus, "vdz., a father of the Greek, and a mother of the Jewish race. In age also, as far as we have any hints given us, an agreement is obser- vable, if we compare together the First Ejiistle to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus ; in the former of which it is said to the one, ' Let no man despise thy youth ; but be thou an example of the believers, &c.,' (Ch. iv. 12.) while in the latter, supposed by many to have been penned in the same year, St. Paul uses language in- timating that Titus was of like standing as to age, and should ex- hibit like caution in counterbalancing the deficiency by exemplary conduct ; — ' In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works, &c. . . . Let no man despise thee,' Tit., ii. 7, 15. St. Paul also applies to each in these Epistles the expression, ' mine own son,' (yvrjffluj rr/.vw,) which seems to intimate that he had himself been the instrument of converting to the faith of Christ, and bringing to His baptism, the person so addressed. (Compare Philem. 10.) In official connection with St. Paul too, the position occupied in each case was the same, as illustrated not only in the mission to * Sec Apoonili.v, No. 1. 60 Of the Missions of St. l^ltiis to Corinth in 2 Cor. Corintli, assigned now to the one name, now to tlie other, but also in tlie more solemn and responsible charge of selecting and or- daining pastors for the Chnrches, and setting in order other mat^ ters concerning their discipHne and faith, which we see afterwards devolving on the bearers, or bearer, of these different appellations. Finally, the natural disposition described as belonging in each case to the person concerned, in readiness, independently of any ui'ging from others, to be anxious and exertive to promote the welfare of his fello'WTnen, is strikingly identical. For as it was said of Titus, when sent on his second mission to Corinth, from Phihppi, that God had put an earnest care into liis heart for the Coiintliians, so that he not only accepted the invitation, ' but being more forward, of his 0"wn accord ' went unto them ; so does the same Apostle, writing to the people of the same Philippi, some years after, speak in a very similar manner of Timothy, thus, ' I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly tmto you, that I also may be of good comfort, when I know your state. For I have no man likeminded, ivho ivill naturally care for your state.' A hasty perusal of the beginning of the x^dth of Acts might indeed lead us, (as it has led many,) to suppose, that in that place commenced St. Paul's intimacy with Timothy, wliile Titus must, (from the iind of Galatians) have accompanied the Apostle in the joiu'ney described at the commencement of the preceding Chapter (the xvth) of the Acts. A very little consideration will however furnish grounds from the Holy Scriptures themselves for judging differently of this matter. For first of all, it is stated in this very place, where the name of St. Timothy first occurs, that he was then already a Christian, 'a disciple,' (Acts, xvi. 1.) It is not said, ' And there was a certain yomig man there, named Timo- theus, who hearing Paul preach, believed and was baptized :' but ' a certain disciple was there,' when Paul came on this visit. How came he then to be a disciple of Christ at this time ? On looking back to the xivth Chapter, we learn there that St. Paul, after liis first preaching of the Gospel at Antioch (in Pisidia,) and then at Iconium, had next visited, for the same purpose, the cities of Lys- tra and Dcrbe in Lycaonia ; and that when he had been stoned, well nigh to death, at Lystra, and had subsequently departed thence to Derbc, having preached the Gospel in the latter place, Note on the circumstmices referred to in 2 Tun. iii. 10, 11. Gl and made many disciples, (Acts xiv. 21, marg^ lie had retui'ncd again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch. From tliis it seems liigWy probable that it was during tlie period of these jour- neys, and on some occasion connected with them, that Timothy had been introduced into the fold of Christ : nor can we say but that he may have been one of the ' many disciples' made at Derbe as stated in the passage just referred to. That he was intimately, and most probably, personally, acquainted with St. Paul's proceed- ings and sufferings at this period of his history, seems to be im- plied in those words of the 2nd Epistle to Timothy, (Ch. iii. vv. 10, 11.) in which the Apostle makes allusion to the subject. ' Thou,' says he, ' hast fully known my doctrine, manner of Ufe, purpose, faith, long-suffering, charity, patience, persecutions, afflictions, wliich came to me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra ; what persecutions I endured, but out of them all the Lord delivered me.' Heinrichs, however, in commenting on these Verses, (in Koppe's Greek Testament,) \iews them somewhat differently ; thus ; — All the perils here mentioned, if you refer to the Acts of the Apostles, you ■will find to have befallen Paul before the year 53 of the vulgar sera, in which Timothy is [first] mentioned as accompanying him. Notwithstanding which he makes the statement, that Timothy Tap/izoXovDrjZivai [had had an accurate knowledge of] him in these diuy,'j,oi; [persecutions.] But it does not thence fol- low that Timothy had been an acquaintance of Paul's, and his companion and partner in those persecutions. For if we be disposed to take the ■Trapay.a/.oulJsiv in its proper sense, we may consider this enumeration of instances to have been added by Paul in the flow of his language, in such a manner as will by no means admit of our insisting on its literal signification : or if -TrapazoXouhiv mean, to love any object, to prefer, and therefore pursue [o/co;c£/^] it, in which sense it is un- doubtedly to be taken in verse 10, the sense will be: you have made choice of per- secutions, i.e., you have preferred presenting yourself as a mark for persecution from the adversaries of Christianity, to descending to their corrupt arts; and you have thus home in other places (in what particular ones we cannot tell,) ro/a TaOTi'MaTa dia. [xoi &c., persecutions of similar character to those, &c., [which bofel me at An- tioch, &c.] Thus will all run smoothly. There are, however, those who from this very passage suppose that Timothy had from his childhood been a follower of Paul's, having been given up to him by his mother and grandmother, in order to learn to conform to the pattern of his life : an opinion which Grotius ear- nestly contends to maintain, following however in this, Chrysostom, fficumenius, and Theophylact. And he also cites a few places from Demosthenes, in which rrapyiy.o'Ao-jdriKivai -zpay/Mari rivt is said of those who were actually present at a particular occurrence. But he will find few, I believe, prepared to adopt his opinion. (Koppe's N. Test. Gr. not. in II. Tim.m. 11.) Q2 Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cor. The meaning here condemned appears however to me the most natural and accordant with the original, the verb in which, being the same as that used also in St. Luke i. 3, seems to have sim- ply the same force as in that passage, expressing the having come to a full or accurate knowledge of the particulars of any matter, such as might most readily be acquired by personal observation ; though it might be attained by other means also, as in the case to which St. Luke refers in that Verse. According to the significa- tion thus approved of, St. Paul's meaning in the Epistle to Timothy will be, that the latter had been with him in the transactions no- ticed in ^Vcts xiv., and had thus known, from his own experience, the natiu'e of the sufferings to which he refers. Further, the language used by St. Paul in his Second Epistle to Timothy, (i. 5,) would seem to imply that he had been long acquainted with the older members of his family. ' I call to re- membrance,' he says, ' the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice ; and I am persuaded that in thee also.' And again, the statement of the Apostle in Ch. iii. 15, of the same Epistle, is Hke that of one who had been familiar with Timothy in early youth, ' from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures.' Such acquaintance be- tween the two might more easily arise, considering that St. Paul was a native of Cilicia, the next province north of Lycaonia, to which Timothy belonged, and that he would naturally pass through the latter province in going up to Jerusalem, where we know that he received his education, (Acts xxii. 3.) The case may have been thus : Timothy, the child of a Jew- ish mother, was by her, and perhaps, his grandmother, carefully instructed in the Jewish Scriptures, although not made a member of the Jewish communion, in consequence of his father being a Greek, or Gentile. St. Paul having been acquainted with him while so circumstanced, was the means of enlightening him in the truth of the Gospel, and converting him to the faith of our Lord Jesus, during the period refeiTcd to in Acts xiv, or, at least, be- fore the transactions recorded in the fifteenth Cliapter. Then, when St. Paul was going up to the Council at Jerusalem, (Acts XV. 2,) Timothy was probably his companion, having either been with him at Antioch, when he was sent on this mission, or else Date of I'imothys first acquaintance icifh St. Paul. G3 having been summoned from Lycaonia for the occasion. After the meeting in Jerusalem, and the circvmastances aUuded to in Gal. ii. 1-10, Paul having returned to Antioch, (Acts xv. 30,) Timothy may have betaken himself home to his own country, so as to be found there by St. Paul on his arrival, (Acts xvi. 1,) after the missionary tour through Syria and Cilicia (Acts xv. 41,) accomplished by him at this time. From a cursory study of the language used in Acts xvi. 1, it might indeed be inferred, as we have suggested above, that it was intended to describe the com- mencement of St. Paul's acquaintance with Timothy, he being spoken of not as one already familiarly known to the Apostle, but only as ' a certain disciple, the son of a certain xootnan, which was a Jewess, and believed ;' but when we bear in mind that the probability of his having already known St. Paul, involved in the fact of his being then a disciple, is confirmed by the concurrent strong pro- bability (from 1 Tim. i. 2,) that it was no other than St. Paul him- self who had persuaded him to become one, it will appear more natural that we should refer to St. Luke himself, than to the Apos- tle whose actions he is recording, any ignorance of the previous history of Timothy which appears to be implied in Acts xvi. 1 . As it was in that part of the history that we first observe any in- dications of St. Luke's being in company with St. Paul, (at v. 10,) so it is not at all improbable that it was then that the acquaintance wliich subsisted between the former and his fellow-labourer fu'st originated. Supposing however that St. Paul may have been intimate with Eimice and Lois, and fully aware, from personal observation, of the care with which Timothy had been instructed by them from early youth in the Word of God, and further also, that he had had considerable opportunities of studying his character on the journey to Jervisalem (in Acts xv.,) and at other times, yet all this would be very far from rendering altogether needless or unimportant the testimony which might be borne to his conduct and estimation in the world by others also : especially when we consider that among the qualifications which St. Paul enumerated as needftd to be Ibund in a Christian prelate, there is mention of that one, that even of them that are without he should have a good report. It is nothing surprising therefore tliat St. Luke, in 64 Of the Missions of St. Titus to Corinth in 2 Cor. introducing Timotliy to our notice, tells of him that he ' was well reported of by the bretliren that were at Lystra and Iconiiun.' They were acquainted mth his . manner of life at home among themselves, and able to testify concerning the correctness of those parts of it which came less imder the stranger's eye ; and this, to the time of St. Pavd's present visit to their country, and so as to include the period which had elapsed since he and Timothy had last parted, when the Apostle midertook the joiu-ney abovemen- tioned from Antioch through Syria and CiHcia. Some such arrangement of these particulars mvist be adopted, if we be disposed to receive the conclusion relative to the identity of SS. Timothy and Titus, in support of which it is believed that a rather strong case has been made ovit in the preceding pages. That the objections, however, to such an opinion, are neither very few, nor unimportant, we cannot, of course, attempt to dis- semble. To state them in their full force, and examine how far they may be met and explained, is what it shall be om' en- deavour to accomplish in the next following portion of this Essay. G5 CHAPTER II. DIFFICULTIES IN THE WAY OF THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE PRECEDING CHAPTER CONSIDERED. The principal difficulties wliicli lie in the way of our accepting as tr\ie the liypotliesis relative to tlie identity of SS. Timothy and Titus, which has been suggested in the foregoing Chapter, would seem to be these following : — I. Tlie Holy Scriptures appear to state very distinctly that Titus never submitted to the Rite of Circumcision, which Rite was however, we know, performed, in Timothy's case, by St. Paul himself, evidently shewing, as it would seem, that Timothy and Titus must have been the names of two distinct persons among the companions of the Apostle. II. The testimony of Universal Antiquity is apparently on the other side. HI. If only one person be intended by the two different desig- nations, how account for such a change of names in speaking of him, and for the distinct titles ever given to the Epistles to Timo- thy and to Titus respectively? r\^. And how account, in the same case, for the similarity of the directions given in the First Epistle to Timothy, and in that to Titus? or, V. For the fact of Timothy's name being included in the su- perscription to the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, supposing him (as must be supposed, if he be the same with Tltii?,) to have been the bearer of it. YI. The mention of Titus in 2 Tim. iv. 10, is contrary to such an hypothesis. Vn. Wliat, it may be suggested, is the use of such a conclusion, even if true, whereas, on the other hand, it may possibly exercise K 66 Difficulties examined- an iuj virions efiect in unsettling tlie ideas of some as to the_ founda- tion of Episcopacy, or even as to tlie authority of the Canon of the Holy Scriptures? I. It remains to be seen how far each of these difficulties may, in its turn, be met, either wholly or in part. And, First, as to that connected with the supposed non-circmncision of Titus, it appears to be foimded wholly on a mistaken interpretation of the passage Gal. ii. 3-5, wliich bears upon this subject. For a full examination of those Verses, the reader is referred to the Ajj- 2?endix to the present Essay, No. 1. Here it may suffice to say, that there seems to be every reason for beheving that Titus, though he was under no actual obhgation, and so could not have been compelled by the partizans of circumcision, &c., to receive that Rite, yet was really circumcised, not adopting the or- dinance as in the least necessary to acceptance with God for him- self, but as what was calculated to avoid scandal with others, and to conciliate the good feelings of those to whom it was liis desire to preach the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. n. Secondly, as to the objection derived from the testimony of antiquity, it would of course be idle as well as improper to repre- sent it as of tri\dal magnitude. Its cogency may however easily be overrated, and it will perhaps on examination be found of somewhat less force than one might natm-ally be disposed, in the first instance, to conceive. If the Records of Ecclesiastical Antiquity had indeed preserved to VIS any authentic traditions conveying information relative to the history of St. Timothy or St. Titus, which was not to be found in the Sacred Volmne, such traditions, in so far as they bore on the question proposed, might, it is conceivable, fm'nish strong grovmds for condemning at once the theory proposed in these pages. But, in fact. Ecclesiastical Antiquity has hardly uttered an independent voice at all on this topic. Her information is de- rived from the Bible itself, which we also arc privileged to con- sult, and compare with her judgment of the matter in hand ; and she has added not a syllable of trustworthy intelligence to what we have already recorded in that AVord of infallible truth in con- nection with it. This will be seen more clearly by a reference to the observa- Value of the testimony of Tradition 67 tions of St. Clirysostom in liis Commentary on the Epistle to Titus, at the commencement of which wc find him discoiu'sing thus : — This individual was an esteemed associate of Paul. For had he not been so esteemed, he would not have given him the entire island in charge, nor appointed him to complete the arrangements left unfinished. For saith he, thai thou miyhtcst set in order the things that arc wanling. Nor would he have entrusted to him the power of judgment over so many bishops, if he had not been a person in whom he reposed exceeding great confidence. They say, too, that he was of youthful age, on account of the Apostle styling him his son. This however is not altogether certain from that expression. I am of opinion that there is men- tion made of iSlm in the Acts also ; and possibly he was a Corinthian, unless that were some other individual of the same name. And [here] he summons Zenas indeed to come to him, and expresses a wish that Apollos might be sent also, but includes not the individual addressed ; testifying to their being likely to exhibit a larger amount of courage and fortitude before the emperor. It appears to me that some lapse of time intervenes, and that Paul is in the enjoyment of liberty when he writes this ; for he makes [in it] no allusion to his trials. . . . He con- fines himself in the present case to a short epistle, not without cause, it being a proof of the worth of Titus, that he needed not many words, but merely some- what in the way of a refreshment of his memory. This moreover appears to me to have been penned before the [Second] Epistle to Timothy, seeing that he wrote that at the close of his career, when in bonds, while he writes this free and at liberty. For the phrase, / have determined to winter in Nicopolis, is an evi- dence of his not yet being in prison, whereas in that other lie constantly makes mention of himself as a prisoner, &c. — St. Chrys. Opp., Tom. x.p.729. Paris, 1734. The Note of the Benedictine Editor, appended to this passage, is to the following effect : — In the Vulgate Version of Ch. xviii. v. 7, of the Acts, mention is made of a certain Titus, surnamed Justus, who worshipped God, and had a house at Corinth, whereinto Paul entered. But in the Greek copies the name of Titus is not found, and this individual is called merely Justus. H/.^'ev si? or/.iav riva? ovcxar/ Io-jOtoxj : And Chi-ysostom therefore adds, that he was possibly a Corin- thian, unless that one who had the house at Corinth were some other of the same name. From which it is plain that it was this place of the Acts that Chrysostom had in view, and that although his copy had not the name of Titus in it, yet was he aware that in other copies this name of Titus was to be found, and entertained a doubt as to whether it was to this Titus, or to some other of the same name, the circumstances now referred to were to be applied. From this passage it appears, that when we go back to the age of St. Chrysostom and his cotemporaries, we gain absolutely nothing in the way of additional information relative to the par- ticulars of the life or history oi' Titus. The only soiu'cc of intelli- gence on the subject referred to by the eloquent Archbishop of 68 Dijficidties examined. Constantinople is that Bible to wliicli we also can refer ; and liis inferences from tliis autliority, and guesses concerning it, are only sucli as might C(iiially suggest themselves to a reflecting mind at the present time. Thus far the question as to the value of the tes- timony of Antiquity in this particular case becomes considerably narrowed. Fifteen hundred years of its duration being removed, nothing is lost or gained : had we lived at the commencement of them, and conversed with St. Chrysostom, we should have no word from his lips concerning any evidences not now available in favour of the received opinions now called in qi;estion. ]\Ir. Cartwright, in liis history of the Primitive Hebrew Chris- tian Church of Jerusalem, (p. 151,) has, in connection with ano- ther question involved in the Apostolic history, some remarks which, as equally applicable to the present one, are worth citing here. Referring to the statement of Dr. Cave, (after Eusebius, Epiphanivis, &e.) that Jerome is wrong about the parentage of James the Less, and that he was the brother of the Lord, as being the son of Joseph by a former wife, Mr. C. proceeds thus : — Of course the obvious objection to this, if we conclude that James, the bro- ther of our Lord, was an Apostle, is, that James the Apostle is called the son of Alpheus, and that his mother was alive at the time of the Crucifixion. After all, it seems clear that on this particular point the opinion of a'hcient writers, (for we have nothing that can be called testimony,') affords us little assis- tance bejond the assurance (no unimportant one,) that no decided tradition ex- isted on the subject ; and we are therefore thrown back upon the text of Scrip- ture. In this as well as in numberless other instances, both in questions of fact and of doctrine, the easic^st and most satisfactory course seems to be to compare Scripture with Scripture. Nor can we dismiss this enquiry as unimportant and uninteresting. We have seen in how many instances the Word of God has dis- tinctly marked the relationship subsisting between the different persons connec- ted with the present enquiry ; in that blessed book there is nothing written with- out a design, nothing that is unprofitable, nothing that will not repay a serious and patient investigation. It may be easily admitted, I suppose, on all hands, that if a mistake relative to the identity of Timothy and Titus had become generally prevalent among the Christians of St. Chrysostom's time, it might very readily continue afterwards uncorrected in the tradi- tions of all Christendom. It remains for us to inquire, could such an error have originated between the apostolic age, and the close of the Fourth Century ? Value of the testimony of Tradition, 69 That it might have so happened seems to me, under the cir- cumstances, not at all impossible. It appears obvious that the Church of the Fourth Century knew not anything- for certain, or very probable, of Timothy or Titus, beyond Avhat she gathered from Holy Writ ; and that in this matter of historic fact her opinion was to be regarded as infallible, not many, I suppose, will contend. Had the question indeed been one of a doctrinal cha- racter, or at all connected with any of the controversies of the early Christians, it Avere, I admit, inconceivable that any such error as that here imagined covdd have arisen about it. But in a matter concerning chiefly the personal history of two individuals, or one, as the case may be, it was otherwise. The texts relating to them were not submitted on the one hand to the Gflarino- liabt of controversial examination, nor were they on the other hand much studied in their mutual connection with the scrutinising criticism of a Paley ; and so, lying in the less noticed region of theological inquiry, they may have become the more easily in- volved in obscurity, and subjected to mistaken interpretation ; especially at a time when violent persecution of the followers of Christ must have exercised a natural influence to check the pro- gress of learning, and even the communication of regular and sys- tematic instruction among the children of the Church. Now, supposing the same person who laboured for Christ at Ephesus, and was known there by the name of Timothy, to have lived and laboured in Crete also, and to have been more generally known to the islanders by the name of Titus, the latter people, it seems, in the course of time, preserved no authentic traditions relative to the history of this individual, beyond what the Bible conveyed to them. The descendants of those whom he taught and ruled with spiritual authority would therefore soon be ig- norant of that part especially of his life which was spent in other places, at Ephesus, &c. And in like manner the people of Ephesus, losing soon, as they did, all the particulars of the life and liistory of Timothy, which were not on record in the Holy Scriptures, or not plain to their perception therein, might, and Avould, natm-ally lose, with the rest, the remembrance of the labours of the same teacher in such extraneous places on the island of Crete, &c. And in the course of time, when men found 70 Uijicultles e.vamined. tradition fail in enlightning tliem on the subject, and were tlirown, as we sec in the case of St. Chrysostom, on the written AVord, as the only tnistworthy source of the information they sought for, a mistake such as we have supposed may have been adopted, and transmitted, with the sanction of names justly had in reverence, to succeeding generations. Similar to the remarks here made are some that we find in connection with another point in the apostolic History, viz., the second impiisoimient of St. Paul at Rome, in a learned ar- ticle on the Pastoral Epistles ( /. e. those to Timothy and Titus) contained in a recent number of the American Bihliotheca Sacra, from the pen of Professor B. B. Edwards, of Andover; which are so applicable to our present purpose, as to be worth citing in this place. The}'- are as follows : — The notice in the Acts cannot be made to hold good against the historical probability of a liberation and subsequent imprisonment, since the martyr death of the Apostle at the close of the imprisonment mentioned by Luke, is not less an hypothesis than the liberation. We must resort to the statements of the ancient church fathers. Still, it is not to be overlooked, that they give only a few notices respecting the Apostles. Not so much an historical, as a parcene- tical or doctrinal interest lies at the basis of their writings. They looked at existing needs, and only occasionally at past facts. Hence, we cannot wonder if they communicate only a few facts in regard to Paul, and those few only in the form of hints. Tlie first clear and definite notice that Paul was liberated from the impri- sonment mentioned by Luke is found in Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. ii. 22, and is as follows : — ' Then [namely after the lapse of the two years, mentioned Acts xxviii. 30,] after pleading his cause, the Apostle is reported to have gone again on the ministry of preaching, and that having come a second time to the same city, he finished his course by martyrdom under him [Nero.] While he was in bonds, he wrote his Second Epistle to Timothy, signifying at the same time his first defence, and his impending death.' Still the testimony of Eusebius has not remained unassailed. The attempt has been made to invalidate it, 1st,, because Eusebius himself does not rely on competent vouchers, but only on the report, /.dyoc ; and 2nd, because his conviction of the correctness of this report rests only on the Second Epistle to Timothy itself, and particularly on his interpre- tation of 2 Tim. iv. 16, 17. But on the other hand, it is to be remarked, that Eusebius, by the phrase Xoyog syn, never denotes an uncertain and doubtful report or myth, appearing only occasionally, but rather the general prevalent conviction as such ; so that it appears from his testimony, if nothing more, that at his time the view generally prevailed that Paul was set at liberty from that imprisonment. Since now Eusebius met with this account, so the condition [contents ?] of the Second Epistle was a proof to him that it was written in the second imprisonment at Rome, indicated by the tradition. On the other hand. Value of the Testimony of Tradition. 71 the assertion that Eusebius inferred the liberation and subsequent imprisonment only from the Second Epistle to Timothy is without foundation, and is in oppo- sition to the words of Eusebius. The circumstance that Eusebius adduces no testimony from an older church writer for the truth of that tradition, may be taken as a proof that there was no witness ; so on the other hand it cannot be denied that no opposing testimony was known to him. In favour of the truth of the tradition there appear, if not direct, yet indirect proofs, and that, too, of an earlier time. [As for instance, the statement in the First Epistle of Clemens Eomanus to the Corinthians, c. v., that St. Paul before his removal from this world, had taught every where in it, the way of righteousness, for this purpose ' visiting even the boundary of the West,' supposed to be Spain, &c.] See the Bibliotheca Sacra and American Biblical Repository. Combined Series. No. II. pi>. 312, 313. Wliere so very important a passage in the history of the Apostle Paul himself is the subject of doubt, and the tradition of the earliest antiquity gives concerning it such very uncertain evidence, it \A\\. be the less extraordinary, if, in the case of his companions and followers, historical mistakes of still more striking character may have been generally, or even universally, coun- tenanced and adopted in later times. How httle of satisfactory information is to be found concerning Titus in any early records, is plain from the statement of Dr. Cave, relative to liis personal history, which has already been quoted in part in a preceding page, (Life of St. Titus, Apostolici, p. 56.) The ancient writers of the Church make little mention of this holy man ; who and whence he was is not known, but by uncertain probabilities. St. Chry- sostom conjectures him to have been born at Corinth, for no other reason but be- cause in some ancient copies (as still in several MSS. at this day) mention is made of St. Paul's going at Corinth into the house of one [Titus] named Justus, one that worshipped. The writers of later ages generally make him to be born in Crete, better known by the modern name of Candia, &c. But the opinion of those late authors who represent him not only as having been a Cretan, but also a descendant of Minos and Rhadamanthus, &c., is of little relevancy to our present inquiry. IMucli more worthy of our observation is it, that Tertullian, who lived in the Second Century, appears actually to have regarded these two names, Timothy and Titus, as belonging to one and the same individual. For he applies to one a remarkable expression, whicli in the Scriptures is as distinctly applied to the other ; viz., in that statement of his (cited in tho Append i.r, No. 1, Part 2, inf.) 72 Dijicidties examined. where lie speaks of St. Paul as ' circumcisincj TiMOTHY on account of the false brethren that had been unawares brought in,' whereas Paul himself applies tliis remark, not to Timothy by that name, but to Titus : nor covild it according to the common view be so properly applied to Timothy, his circumcision having been per- formed, as this view supposes, not on account of brethren of any kind, or persons who had come in to the Church, but on accovmt of the Jews without. In his longer Note on Gal. ii. 3-5, (given in the same part of the Appendix,) TertulHan seems to wiite on the same supposition, that Timothy was identical Avith Titus ; for after having interpreted that passsage as a defence made by St, Paul of his conduct in yielding to have Titus circumcised, he sums up his comments on it in these words, ' of necessity therefore he gave place for a time. And thus it appears that there was a consistency in his conduct in circumcising Timotfiy, and intro- ducing the tonsured folk into the temple, &c.' Seeing now that so little is to be gleaned on this topic from the testimony of Ecclesiastical Antiquity, compared with what mio-ht have been conceived and expected, and that the Scriptures alone contain whatsoever of certain or important information is to be attained to concerning the matter, it Avill help us to a better understanding of it to have set before us the accounts of Timothy and Titus that are usually gathered from their pages : and these we fmd given in the following form, in the popular Enghsh abridge- ment of Calmefs Dictionary of the Bible. Timothy, a disciple of Paul. He was of Derbe or Lystra, both cities of Lycaonia. Acts, xvi. 1 ; xiv. 6. His father was a Gentile, but his mother a Jewess, 2 Tim. i. 5; iii. 15. When Paul came to Derbe and Lystra, about A.D. 51, or 32, the brethren spoke highly of the merit and good disposition of Timo- thy ; and the Apostle determined to take him along with him, for which purpose he circumcised him at Lystra, Acts xvi. 3. Timothy applied himself to labour in the Gospel, and did Paul very important services, through the whole course of his preaching. It is not known when he was made bishop ; but it is believed that he received very early the imposition of the Apostle's hands, and this in consequence of a particular revelation, or intimation from the Holy Spirit, 1 Tim. iv. 14 ; 2 Tim. i. 6. Paul calls him not only his dearly beloved sou, but also his brother, the companion of his labours, and a man of God ; observing that none was more united with him in heart and mind than Timothy. He accompanied Paul to Macedonia, to Philippi, to Thessalonica, and to Berea ; where he left him and Silas to confirm the converts, Acts xvii. 14, &c. When at Athens, he directed Timothy to come to him (A.D. 52) and thence sent Lives of Timothy and I'itas, r^.s xsna/l)/ received. 73 him back to Thessalonica, from whence he afterwards returned with Silas, to Paul at Corinth, (Acts xviii. 5,) where he continued with the Apostle, and is named with Silas at the beginning of the two Epistles to the Thessalonians. About A.U. 50 Paul sent Timothy with Erastus into Macedonia (Acts xix. 21, 22) and directed him to call at Corinth to refresh the minds of the Corin- thians in the truth. Some time after, writing to this Church (1 Cor. iv. 17) he recommends to them the care of Timothy, and directs them to send him back in peace. Timothy returned to Paul in Asia, who there stayed for him, whence they went together into Macedonia ; and the Apostle joins Timothy's name with his own, in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, which he wrote from this province about the middle of A.D. 57- He also sends his commendations to the Romans, in the letter which he wrote to them from Corinth, the same year, [or A.D. 58,] Kom. xvi. 21. Though it does not appear by the Acts, that Timothy was with Paul the two years in which he was prisoner at Osesarea, nor during his voyage to Rome; yet he had accompanied him in his journey to Jerusalem, Acts xx. 4, and it is certain he was in Rome when the Apostle wrote to the Philippians, to the Colossians, and to Philemon, because he is named in the titles of these Epistles, which were written A.D. 60, 61, 62. The year following, when Paul wrot^ to the Hebrews, (Heb. xiii. 23, A.D. 64) he tells them that Timothy was come out of prison ; but he mentions no circumstances either of his imprisonment or delivery. When the Apostle retin-ned from Rome, A.D. 64, he left Timothy at Ephe- sus, (1 Tim. i. 3, 4 ; ii. 1, 8, 9 ; iii. 1,8; v. 7, 20) as the overseer of that Church. The first of the two letters addressed to him was written from Macedonia about A.D. 64 or 65, 1 Tim. v. 23. The Apostle recommends him to be more modei-ate in his austerities, and to drink a little wine, because of the weakness of his sto- mach, and his frequent infirmities. After Paul came to Rome (A.D. 65) he wrote to him his second letter, which is full of kindness and tenderness for this his dear disciple, and which is justly considered as the last will of the Apostle. He desires him to come to Rome to him before winter, and to bring with him several things that had been left at Troas, 2 Tim. iv. 10-13. If Timothy went to Rome, as is probable, he must have been a witness there of the martyrdom of Paul, A.D. 60. Calmet and some other Commentators incline to think that Timothy must be the angel of the Church of Ephesus, to whom John writes, (Rev. ii.) though they are of opinion tliat the reproaches contained in the ad- dress do not so much concern Timothy, personally, as some members of his Church, %vhose zeal had become cool. We have nothing that can bo depended on concerning the latter part of his life. I. Titus surnamed Justus, a native of Corinth, and the host of Paul in that city. We read in Acts xviii. 7, that Paul quitted the house of Aquila, where he had lodged, and entered that of Titus Justus, who feared G( d, and whose house adjoined the synagogue. Chrysostom and Grotius wore of opinion that this Titus was the bishop of Crete, to whom Paul addressed an epistle. But the contrary opinion, which distinguishes these t«o persons, has generally prevailed. II. Titus, a Gentile, (Gal. ii. 3,) converted by the Apostle Paul, who calls L 74 Difficulties e,camined. him his son, Tit. i. 4. Paul took him ^vith him to Jerusalem (a.d. 51. Gal. ii. 1,) about the time of the question, whether the converted (J entiles should become subject to the ceremonies of the law? Some would then have obliged him to circumcise Titus ; but neither he nor Titus would consent. Titus was. afterwards sent by the Apostle to Corinth, (2 Cor. xii. 18,) on occasion of some disputes in that Church. lie was well received by the Corinthians, and much satisfied by their ready compliance, but would receive nothing from them ; thereby imitat- ing the disinterestedness of his master. From Corinth he went to Paul in IVIacedonia, and gave him an account of the state of the Corinthian Church, 2 Cor. vii. 6, 15. A short while afterwards, the Apostle desired him to return to Corinth to regulate things against his own arrival there. Titus readily un- dertook this journey, and departed immediately (2 Cor. viii. 5, 16, 17,) carryinj^ with him Paul's second letter to the Corinthians. Titus was made bishop of Crete about a.d. 63, when Paul was obliged to leave that island to take care of other Churches, Tit. i. 5. The following year he wrote to him, to desire that as soon as he should have sent Tychicus or Arteraas to supply his place in Crete, Titus would come to him to Nicopolis in Macedonia, (or to Nicopolis in Epirus, on the gulf of Anibracia,) where the Apostle intended to pass the winter. Titus was deputed to preach the Gospel in Daluiatia ; and he was there A.D. Go, when the Apostle wrote his Second Epistle to Timothy, 2 Tim. iv. 10. He afterwards returned to Crete, whence it is said he propogated the Gospel in the neighbouring islands, and died aged 94. The subject of the Epistle to Titus, is to represent the qualities that should characterise Church officers. As a principal function of Titus in the isle of Crete, was to ordain bishops and deacons, it was highly incumbent on him to make a discreet choice. The Apostle also suggests the advice and instructions he should give to all sorts of persons ; to the aged, both men and women ; to young people of either sex ; to slaves and servants. He exhorts him to exercise a strict authority over the Cretans, and to reprove them with severity, on account of their lying, idleness and gluttony. And as there were many converted Jews in Crete, he exhorts him to oppose their vain traditions and fables ; also, to decline the observation of the legal cere- monies, as no longer necessary ; to show that the distinction of meats is abolished, and that every thing is pure and clean to those who are pure. He puts him in mind of exhorting the faithful to be obedient to temporal powers, to avoid dispute.=;, quarrels and slander; to engage in honest callings; and to shun the company of heretics, after the first and second admonition. Mr. Taylor thinks from the similarity of their contents, that tlie Epistle to Titus, and the First to Timothy, were written at no great interval of time. (See Calmet's Dictionary of the IJuly Bible, by the late Mr. Charles Taylor, with the fragments incorporated, the whole condensed and arranged in alpliabetical order, with numerous additions. Illustrated ivith maps, SfC, 1th Edition. Samuel IJoldsworth, Amen Corner, Paternoster-row, London, 1838. Articles Timothy and Titus.) To tliis wc may append the following additional observations concerning St. Titus, made by Mr. Greswell, in his Dissertation on the Chronology of the Acts, Vol. iv., pp. 171), 180. TJie receloed accounts of Thaothy and Titus. 75 When St. Paul was present in Jerusalem at the Passover, u.c. 805, [or a.d. 52,] Titus was with him (Gal. ii. 1); and therefore as we may suppose, would afterwards accompany him both to Antioch, and to G.alatia : yet either he did not return with him to Ephesus, u.c. 80G, or if he did, he had been sent some- whither from Ephesus again, before St. Paul ivrote the First to the Corinthians, u.c. 807. For he was not with St. Paul when he wrote that Epistle; yet before St. Paul wrote the Second, he had come from some quarter to Ephesus, accompanied by another of the brethren (who is currently believed to be St. Luke,) and that a brother charged (y;;poTOvril)sic) by common appointment, with the contribu- tions of some Christian Societies, distinct from those of Macedonia and Acliaia ; which must consequently have been the Christian Societies of Asia : he had been sent from Ephesus to Corinth ; be had been expected to meet St. Paul (on his way back into Asia) at Troas ; he did not meet him until St. Paul was come into Macedonia : he had departed again to Corinth from Macedonia, accompanied also by the brother supposed to be St. Luke, out of obedience to a personal wish of St. Paul's ; and with a view to expedite and get ready the contributions of Achaia, before St. Paul himself, accompanied by the brethren from Macedonia, might bo expected to arrive at Corinth : and all this before the Second to the Corinthians was written.* We may conclude therefore that Titus and St, Luke were the persons by whose means St. Paul, though himself at Ephesus, had communicated on the sub- ject of this conti'ibution with the Churches in Asia^ and with that of Galatia among the rest ; that this communication was made early in u.c. 807 ; and that the contributions so raised, were brought to Ephesus by the same parties, be- tween the Passover and the Pentecost of u c. 808, &c. The Note above referred to is as follows : — *2 Cor. vii. 8, G, 13-16; viii. 6-16-24; ii. 12, 13; ix. 3-5; xii 17, 18. Some of these texts, (as viii. 23; ix. 3-5) would imply that others besides St. Luke accompanied Titus on this second occasion; and others (xii. 17, 18,) that some brother (whether the same as in the second instance or not) accompa- nied Titus on his former mission to Corinth — that mission on his return from which Paul expected to have met him at Troas (2 Cor. ii. 12, 13.) but did not meet him until he come to Macedonia. (Ibid. vii. 5, 6.) So far as the matter of the j)rececling accounts of Timothy and Titus is based on the sure foundation of Holy Scripture, (for they include after all a little of the ' uncertain probabilities' of tradition,) there is in them nothing, as I conceive, which may not, by a careful arrangement of the circumstances, be apphed wholly to one and the same individual. And therefore, setting aside, for tlic present, the argument for the common view which may be raised from the different Inscriptions of tlie ' Ej)istles to Timothy and Titus,' and which will be noticed in the next Section, tlie testimony of Anti«[uity comes, in rdercnce to tlic 7(i ])ijjiL-alt'iL't< tKcamined. pie^ent question, to this merely ; — that, while we have no life of either 'Timothy,' or 'Titus,' by any writer of the first three Centmies, nor even, in any such writer, the statement of any one «ngle fact relative to cither of them, independent of those re- corded in the Holy Scriptures, the writer who refers to either of them during that period, in a manner bearing the most pointedly on this question, viz., TcrtuUian, (A.D. 190,) who is indeed al- most' the only writer of that time that refers to them in any way, (save by cjiioting the Ejoistles to Timothy and Titus,) has given eA'idence fa^-om-able, so far as it goes, to the imusual view of the subject set forth in these pages. What was lost, in the way of any fuller information concerning the companion of St. Paul, in the first three ages, was not recovered in the fourth, arriving at which, we find ourselves conversing with men confessedly in the same position as oui-selves, with regard to knowledge of the par- ticvdar part of the apostolic history now considered — confessedly deriving their information concerning it fi'om the written Word, and professing to jDossess no infallible guidance to secure them from such a mistake, as it is here supposed possible that they may have adopted. Is it presumptuous to suppose, that by the blessing of Almighty God on the careful studv of His Word, even we, in this later age, may yet have power to detect, in the light of that Word, an error, on the authority of their worthy and venerable names, too readily adopted into the number of received opinions, ])y their successors, further i-cmovcd as they were from the sources of authentic and orio-inal knowledo-e of the matter? o o III. That the same individual should, in different places of the Bible, be called by different names, will not appear any thing Acry strange or imcommon to a tolerably well informed reader of the Holy Scriptures ; inasmuch as both Old and New Testaments abound with such alterations of names, as may be seen in instances without number ; some of the most remarkable of Avhich we may here notice. In the Old Testament, all will of couise remember the chan- ging of the names of Abram and Sarai to Abraham and Sarah, in Gen. xvii. 5, le5. The name of Benoni was that which Rachel at his birth gave to him who was afterwards, byhis father's choice, called Beniamin. Jaclun. son of Simeon, Gen. xlvi. 1(\ h called Two names for one person in the II. S. not iiutisiuil. 77 in 1 Clir. iv. 24, Jarib. In the same way Pliuvah and Job, sons of Issachar, Verse 13 of'tlie former Chapter, are named in 1 Chron. vii. 1, and in Nmnb. xxvi. 23, 24, Piiah, or Pua, and Jashub. The Ezbon of Gen. xlvi. 16, is the Ozni of Nmiib. xxvi. 16. And so of other names in the same catalogue in Gen. xlvi. The father-in-law of Moses, named Keucl in Exod. ii. 18, is called Jethro elsewhere in the same book, ch. iii. 1, iv. 18, &c. Azariah, son of Amaziah, king of Judah, 2 IGngs xiv. 21, xv. 1-7, 23, is called likewise by the name of Uzziah, 2 Engs xv. 13, 32, 34, and 2 Chron. xxvi. 1, &c. The Jehoahaz, son of Josiah, of 2 Kings xxiii. 31, is called also Shalhim, in 1 Chr. iii. 15, Jer. xxii. 11. Ehakim, substituted in his place by Pharaoh Nechoh, had his name changed by that sovereign to Jehoiakim, 2 Ivings xxiii. 34. In like manner, when the king of Babylon replaced Jehoiachin, son of Jehoiakim, by his imcle Mattaniah, he took the liberty of changing his name to Zedekiah, 2 IGngs xxiv. 17. Jehoiachin himself, 2 Kings xxiv. 8, is called also Jeconiah, 1 Chr. iii. 16, Jer. xxiv, 1, and Coniah, Jer. xxii. 24, 28. Ahaziah, grandson of Jehoshaphat, 1 Chr. iii. 11, is called Azariah in 2 Chron. xxii. 6, and also Jehoahaz, in 2 Chron. xxi. 17. The musician Ethan, son of Eslii, (the companion of David's friends Heman and Asaph,) 1 Chron. vi. 44, is called also Jeduthnn in various places, 1 Chron. XXV 1, &c. and his father, Kushaiah, in 1 Chron. xv. 17. The Nachon of 2 Sam. vi. 6, is in 1 Chron. xiii. 9, called Chidon. The Xahash of 2 Sam. xvii. 25, is supposed, from a comjiarison of that place with 1 Clii-on. ii. 13, 16, 17, to have been identical Avith Jesse the father of David. The Adoniram Avho is mentioned in 1 Kings, iv. 6, v. 14, as officer under Solo- mon for the collection of tribute &c., is called Adoram in the same book, Ch. xii. 18, and Hadoram also, in 2 Chron. x. 18. Finally, Daniel's name was changed at Babylon to Bclteshazzar, and liis three fiiends, A\dth whom we are so familiar by their names of Shadrach, IMeshach and Abcdnego, were called originally, as we know, by those of Hananiah, ]\Iishacl, and Azariah. Dan. i. 7. A similar practice we meet Avith not less frequently (in pro- portion to its bulk) in the Ncav Testament. Commencing with our Blessed Lord's original Disciples, he Avhom avc commonly name 78 Dijficulties examined. St. ]\Iattliew, was at first called Levi, S. ISIatt. ix. U, S. :\Iaik ii. 14. S. Luke V. 27. He wlio originally went by the name of Simon, son of Jonas, on following our Lord, was by liim named Cephas, or Peter, in which appellation his former name is now com- monly lost sight of Simon the Canaanitc, again, some will have to be the same with Symeon, the successor of St. James in the bishopric of Jerusalem, in connection with which supposition these observations of Mr. Cartwright (Heh. Chu7'ch,-p^. 17(5, 177,) are not irrelevant to om- present purpose : — It is only necessary to remark, that whilst all antiquity asserts that Symeon the son of Cleophas, was the second bishop of Jerusalem, much confusion has ai-isen with reference to the earlier period of ecclesiastical history, from the identity or similitude of names. Cave justly observes that we have an instance of this with reference to the person whose history is now under consideration, ' whom,' as he writes, ' some will have to be the same with St. Simon the Canaanite, one of the twelve Apos- tles ; others confound him with Simon, one of the four brethren of our Lord, whilst a third sort make all three to be but one and the same person ; the sound and similitude of names giving birth to the several mistakes.' But whilst it may be readily conceded that Simon the Apostle, called by St. Matthew, Simon the Canaanite, and by St. Luke, Simon Zelotes, was a different person, it is not so clear that Symeon the second bishop of Jerusalem, was not the same Simon who is mentioned as one of the Lord's brethren. In fact, it seems, that however much we are indebted to the Church of the Second Century for its faithfulness in maintaining the doctrine of the Gospel, and the Canon of the Holy Scripture, under all difficulties, we are but little beholden to that age for any accvu'acy in preserving to its a knowledge of the less material his- torical circtuustances relating to the lives of the Apostles and their companions and fellow-labourers. How much the Church in after ages would have esteemed and cherished such records, ap- pears sufficiently from the diligent but imsuccessful cffi^rts made, in those ages, by tradition, to supply the irrecoverable omissions of more early history. Continuing our notice of the alterations of names to be met with in the New Testament, we find (as is generally imderstood,) St. Mark the Evangelist to have been originally called John, Acts xii. 12, 25; xiii. 5; although, probably for the sake of distinc- tion from others of that name, he came afterwards to be known commonly by what was at first but his epithet, or surname, Col. One person often called hy two names in tJie JV. T. 71) iv. 10; 2 Tim. iv. 11, . 304.) That it w^as penned after the Apostle's release from his im- prisonment in Kome, described in the last Verses of tlie Acts, has been the oj^inion of Pearson, Le Clerc, Usslier, Cave, Fabricius, Whitby, Mill, JNIacknight, L'Enfant, Rossenmiiller, Paley, Gres- well, and Adam Clarke. And this opinion, independently of any peculiar views already set forth here, the writer of this Essay is decidedly inclined to adopt, as far the most in harmony with any thing to be found in Holy Scripture bearing on this point. Nothing, in fact, can well be more decisive, than the evidence Date of the First Epistle to Timothj. 89 deduciblc fi-om the Acts to prove that it could not have been in connection with his leaving Ephesns after the uproar, that St. Paul wrote this First EjDistle to Timothy. For when did that uproar occur ? ' At the time' says the writer of the Acts (Ch. xix. 22, 23,) ' when Paul, having sent away Timotheus and Erastus into Macedonia, and intending himself to follow thither soon after, was remaining in Asia for a season.' He could not therefore at that time have besought Timothy, at his own departure for INIacedonia, ' to abide still at Ephesus,' as he had done a little before writing the Ej)istle. Nor is there any sufficient ground in the Scripture for supposing that lie saw Timothy after sending him to JMacedo- nia and Corinth, until he met him in Macedonia, just before the writing of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Neither is there, according to what we have already seen, any ground in the Bible for supposing that Timothy failed to execute the mission on which St. Paul sent him to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17; xvi. 10, 11): nor can it be sujjposed that, if he had executed it, and returned to Ephesus before St. Paul's departure, the Apostle would have ar- rived at Troas, and afterwards in j\Iacedonia, so ignorant, as he was, of the state of affairs at Corinth, until he was comforted con- cerning it by the coming of Titus, &c. Some indeed, as Bcrtholdt and Matthies, have endeavoured to connect the First Epistle to Timothy with Acts xx. 3-5, by sup- posing that when Paul was returning from Corinth through Alace- donia, Timothy may have gone to Ephesus, and soon afterwards received this Epistle. But this appears quite contrary to the men- tion of Timothy's having tarried with certain others, for Paul, at Troas, on that occasion, and it is altogether a view of the case little entitled to attention. Fmihermore, when this Epistle was written, Paul was ' hoping to come soon' to Timothy at Ephesus, which does not from the history appear likely to have been the case with him at any time following shortly after his expulsion from that city. (See Dr. A. Clarke, Pref. to 1 Tim^ Moreover, the erroi'S, and upholders of them, condemned in the First Epistle to Timothy, appear certainly not to have origi- nated in the Ephesian Clmrch at the early period of its history described in the xxth of the Acts. The ' fables and endless gene- N 90 Difficulties considered. al ogles' against Avliich Timotliy Avas to warn the Ephesian teachers, tlie ' vahi janglhig' of self-sufficient expounders of the law, the 'pro- fane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called, some of the professors of which had erred from the faith,' (1 Tim. i. 4, 0; vi. 3, 20, 21,) although denoimced in that First Epistle, are not alluded to as having any existence when St. Paul delivered ]iis charo-e, at ]\Iiletus, to the elders of Ephesus, (Acts xx. 17-35.) He rather speaks then of such evils as yet to come. ' I know tliis, til at after my departure shall grievoiis wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to di'aw away disciples after them.' It is inconceivable that tliis future form only should have been made use of, if the teachers of error denounced in the First Epistle aforesaid had already been disseminating their pernicious tenets. The Epistle therefore, we conclude, was written at a later time, and consequently beyond the period included in the Acts, during which Paul visited Ephesus no more. The main arguments depended on as laA^orable to the early date of the Epistle under consideration are comprised in the fol- lowing statement of the Eev. T. Scott. {Pref. to 1 Tim?) Timothy, after the conclusion of St. Paul's first imprisonment at Rome, must on any computation have been above thirty years of age; and though at that time of life, the exhortation to fiee youthful lusts might not be unseasonable ; (2 Tim. ii. 22;) yet the caution, 'Let no nian despise thy youth,' (iv. 12,) seems not so consistent liut the grand difficulty arises from the words of the Apostle to the Ephesian elders at Miletus : ' And now behold I knoiv that ye all, among whom I have yone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my /ace no more.' It is evident that the persons present understood this, not as a conjecture, or as 'a desponding inference,' but as a prediction. When the Apostle perceived the overwhelming sorrow, which it had excited in them, he neither retracted nor qualified it : and it seems unquestionable that the historian records it as a prophecy .... The words 'yea//,' &c. confine the interpretation to the persons present: the prediction therefore would be exactly fulfilled, though the Apostle visited many places in that neighbourhood; nay though he pui-posed, (which is not lilicly,) to visit Jlphesus, provided he did not actually go thither, or meet any of the ciders to whom he gave the charge at Miletus It can hardly be supposed that after an absence of perhaps rather more than ten years, the Apostle revisiting Ephesus, found, that all the elders whom he had addressed at Miletus were dead. But except on this very improbable sui)position, or on that of the words before adduced being a mere conjecture, in which the event proved the Apostle to have been mistaken ; we mu* adhere to the old opinion that this Epistle was written immediately after tjie Apostle had left Date of tlie First Epistle to 'funot/ii/. \)l Ephesus to go into Macedonia : because it is, on every other supposition, almost, if not absolutely certain, that he never after left Ephesus to go into Macedonia, To the first objection here stated it might be enough to reply with Dr. A. Clarke, that ' supposing Timothy to have been 18 years old, A.D. 50, when he became St. Paul's companion, he would be no more than 32, A.D. 64, two years after the Apostle's release, when it is supposed [according to Dr. A. Clarke's system of Chro- nology] this Epistle was written,' an age at which if he did not conduct himself with exemplary propriety, he might be more likely to be treated contemptuously than a person whose riper years would of themselves have a natm-al tendency to command res23ect. But however, from the departure to IMacedonia in Acts XX. 1, to a year after St. Paul's captivity (in Acts xxviii.) ended, would be only about six years in any case ; so that if he were at the one time 25, and at the other 31, there would be between the two no such striking difference, as to make the expression in 1 Tim. iv. 12, much more plainly suitable in the one case than in the other. In fact, so long as his time of life made it expedient for him to receive a caution to ' flee youthful lusts,' a caution ad- dressed to him in the Second Epistle, which seems undoubtedly (notwithstanding the opinions of several eminent authorities to the contrary,) to have been permed just before the close of St. Paul's life, so long might it also have been equally proper to have cau- tioned him concerning the necessity of compensating by the gra- vity of his demeanotu' for the want of more advanced maturity of years. As to the second objection above mentioned by Scott, in con- nection with the words expressing the Apostle's assurance that the Ephesian elders should see his face no more, Paley's remarks in reply, although apparently not much valued by this respectable Commentator, appear very satisfactory. They are as follows. Having observed that there was no occasion for displaying such anxiety to save the infallibility of a supposed prediction in tlie xxvth Verse, he proceeds : — In the 2-2nd and 23rd Verses of the same Chapter, i. e. two Verses before, the Apostle makes this declaration. 'And now behold I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not kno^^ing the things that shall befall me there : save that 1)2 Di^mlties considered. the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me.' This ' witnessing of the Holy Ghost' was undoubtedly prophetic and supernatural. But it went no farther than to foretell that bonds and afflictions awaited hira. And I can very well conceive, that this might be all which was communicated to the Apostle by extraordinary revelation, and that the rest was the conclusion of his own mind, the desponding inference which he drew from strong and repeated intimations of approaching danger. And the expression * I know,' which St. Paul here uses, does not, perhaps, when applied to future events affecting himself, convey an assertion so positive and absolute as we may at first sight apprehend. In the First Chapter of the Epistle to the Philippians, and the i25th Verse, ' I know,' says he, ' that I shall abide and continue with you all, for your furtherance and joy of faith.' Notwithstanding this strong de- claration, in the 2nd Chapter and 23rd Verse of the same Epistle, and speaking also of the very same event, he is content to use a language of some doubt and uncertainty : ' Ilim therefore I hope to send presently, so soon as I shall see how it will go with me.' 'But / tPust in the Lord, that I also myself shall come shortly.' And a few verses preceding these, he not only seems to doubt of his safety, but almost to despair ; to contemplate the possibility at least of his condemnation and martyrdom. ' Yea and if I be offered upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy and rejoice with you all.' No. I. But can we shew that St. Paul visited Ephesus after his liberation at Rome ? Or rather can we collect any hints from his other letters which make it probable that he did? If we can, then we have a coincidence. If we cannot, we have only an unauthorised supposition, to which the exigency of the case compels us to resort. Now for this purpose let us examine the Epistle to the Philippians and the Epistle to Philemon. These two Epistles purport to be written whilst bt. Paul was yet a prisoner at Rome. To the Philippians he writes as follows : ' I trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly.' To Philemon, who was a Colossian, he gives this direction : ' But withal prepare me also a lodging, for I trust that through your prayers I shall be given unto you.' An inspection of the map will shew us that Colosse was a city of the Lesser Asia, lying eastward, and at no great distance from Ephesus. Philippi was on the other, i. e. the western side of the JEgean sea. If the Apostle executed his purpose; if in pursuance of the intention expressed in his letter to Philemon he came to Colosse soon after he was set at liberty at Rome, it is very improbable that he would omit to visit Ephesus, which lay so near to it, and where he had spent three years of his ministry. As he was also under a promise to the Church of Philippi to see them 'shortly;' if he passed from Colosse to Philippi, or from Philippi to Colosse, he could hardly avoid taking Ephesus in his way. {Hor. Paul, on 1 Tim.) In short, as wc know from the Second Epistle to Timothy, which was undoubtedly written after St. Paul had been brought (whe- ther for the first or second time,) a prisoner to Rome, that the Apostle had, a little before lie wrote it, vi.sited both Troas and IMiletum (2 Tim. iv. 13, 20) between wliicl), and near the lattei", Date of the EjAtstle to Titus. 93 lay Eplicsiis, it seems not at all improbable that he may at this time have visited Ephesus itself also, as well as the place where he had formerly addi-essed its elders, attending him at his summons, viz., Miletus, or Miletmn : and if so, his once having despaired of seeing those elders and their people again can furnish no sufficient argument against what seems to be so necessarily implied in the Scripture account of these matters, as the circumstance that Paul did, at some time subsequent to the history contained in tlie Acts, visit Ephesus again, and leave Timothy there after him : or that he did at least, on some occasion wlicn he was going into Macedo- nia, request Timothy, who must have been of himself inclined to leave Ephesus, (or why beseech him?) to abide there still. St. Paul however might have made this request without being him- self at Ephesus at the time, commimicating it either by letter to Timothy at Ephesus, or orally to him at some other place, to which Timothy might have come from Ephesus, for the purpose of meeting him, and conferring with him about the affairs and in- terests of the Ephesian Church. Doddridge, on St. Paul's remark to the Ephesian elders, observes — ' I conclude that the Apostle had received some particular revelation, that if he should ever re- turn to these parts of Asia again, (as from Philem. 22 I think it probable he might,) yet that he should not have an opportunity of calling at Ephesus, or of seeing the ministers whom he now ad- dressed.' But in any case, and however this matter be imder- stood, without attempting to assign the precise year, (which may be safely left for more learned examiners,) we cannot help adopt- ing, for the reasons already assigned, the opinion of those who pronounce the First Epistle to Timothy to have been written at some period subsequent to the two years of imprisonment suffered by St. Paid at Rome, of Avhich an account is given in the end of the Acts. ' There are few of St. Paul's Epistles the date of which has been so much contested as that to Titus. We will mention the different opinions which have been held upon this subject in the order of time. 1 . Michaelis supposed it to have been written during tlio eighteen months which St. Paul is said to have passed at Corinth, Acts xviii. 11 ; in which he is folioMcd hy Hales and Townsend. 94 Di^culties examined. 2. Hug thinks that it was written from Ephesus, when St. Paul stopped there on his way from Corinth, Acts xviii. 19. 3. Heinriehs conjectured it to have been written after St. Taul had left Corinth, and while he was at Troas, Actsxx. 6. 4. Lardner fixes the date at some time between St. Paul leaving Ephesus, Acts XX. 1, and arriving at Jerusalem, xxi. 15, in which opinion Barrington agrees with him. 5 Grotius supposed it to be written from Rome, or some other place in Italy, between St. Paul's first and second imprisonment there ; and Pearson, Whitby, Paley, and Bertholdt, agree with Grotius as to the time. [As does, we may add, Mr. Gres well also.] (See Burton's Essay on the ChronoloQ. Without attributing any imdue credit to this ancient preface, its testimony is useful as indicating that the supposition of St. Paul's having been so long engaged in missionary toils after his first imprisonment, as we have supposed, although necessary to a certain extent, in connection with the peculiar opinions advocated in this Essay, is by no means novel, or contrary to the impressions of those who have been occupied with the study of the Sacred Text in other days. {See Burton, lit sup.} Genuineness of the Pastoral Epistles. 105 The following Summary exliibits a view of the dates adopted by Mr. Greswell, in connection with the chief particulars in the life of St. Paid with Avhich we are here concerned. (See liis Dissertations^ Vol. iv. Part 2. ;ip. 748, 751.) The Epistle to Titus written Macedonia, a.d. 64. The First to Timothy, .... Nicopolis, "Winter, a.d. 65. The Second to Tiinothij, . . . Rome, Spring Qr. a.d. 66. St. Paul's 1st arrival at Rome, Marcji, A.D. 39. His liberation, and visit to Spain, a.d. 61. His return from Spain, and liberation of Timothy, a.d. 63. Circuit of Crete, .... Spring or Summer Qr. a.d. 64. Beginning of Nero's persecution, July, a.d. 64. Apprehension of St. Paul, in Asia, . . Winter Qr. a.d. 66. His second arrival at Rome, Spring, a.d. 66. Death, same summer. To conclude this topic. It will at once be seen that we have refrained from setting up in detail any pecidiar system of Chrono- logy suitable to the special object of this Essay; contenting om-- selves with having shown, that in the schemes which have been proposed and maintained by others, there is a sufficient open left for the adoption of such an arrangement as may harmonise with any consequences appearing to result from the supposition of the identity of SS. Timothy and Titvis. Should this latter supposition, however, come to be regarded with favour by any of those whose learning and opportimities qualify them better for such investiga- tions, it may have the effect (as has been abeady suggested,) of assisting them to come to some more certain and definite conclu- sions relative to the arrangement of the dates and circumstances connected with the closing period of the hfe and labours of the great Apostle of the Gentiles. Although it would be altogether foreign to the purpose of the present inquiry to enter into any discussion of the question which some have raised concerning the genuineness of the ' Pastoral Epistles,' yet the subject is so closely connected with wliat precedes, tliat it may probably be satisfactory to the reader that we sliould insert here at least a brief notice of the state of the case connected with them. The subjoined account ol'the matter is accordingly given from the Nimaber of the Bihliotheca Sacra &c. already referred to, ;). 317. Having indicated, from the testimonies of IrenKus, Ter- P 106 DiJHculties examined. tuUian, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, &c., liow very decisive is tliu external e^adence in favour of the genuineness of these three Epistles, the writer of the Article in question proceeds thus : — But with the Gnostic heretics these Epistles shared a different fate. That they are not found .in Marcion's Canon, does not prove that he was ignorant of their existence. Jerome, in the Introduction to his Commentary on Titus, charge's him and the other heretics with having arbitrarily rejected them. It is well known how capriciously Marcion treated some of the New Testament writ- ings admitted by him as genuine. It is in entire harmony with this, when he ex- cludes from the Canon, Epistles that so decidedly war against the Gnostic errors. The reason why Tatian receives the Epistle to Titus as genuine, while he rejects those to Timothy, may be owing to the fact that the heretical teachers are more definitely named as Jewish in Titus than in Timothy. Since the time of Tatian, the genuineness of these Epistles was not doubted till the beginning of this century. J. E. C. Schmidt suggested doubts in regard to the First Epistle to Timothy ; Schleiermacher, 1807, decidedly rejected it, but received the other two. The First Epistle was defended by Planck, Wegschei- der, and Beckhaus. Eichhorn then attacked the genuineness of all three, in ■which he was followed, though with some wavering, by De Wette, in his Intro- duction to the New Testament, 1826. While De Wette's criticism was rather of a negative kinrl, Eichhorn sought to prove that the Epistles were written by a disciple of Paul. Schott, 1830, very arbitrarily describes Luke as the author. The Epistles have been defended with more or less ability, partly in special trea- tises, partly in works of a more general kind, by Hug, Bertholdt, Feilmoser, Guerike, Biihl, Curtius, Kling, Heidenreich, Mack, and others. Baur, Tubingen, J 835, supposes that they originated at the time of the Marcion heretics, from an author, who without being able to rid himself of Gnostic notions, was in the in- terest of the Pauline party, and put his attacks on the Gnostic errors into the mouth of Paul. Baumgarten, Bbttger, Matthies, and others, have refuted Baur. Even De Wette does not accord with him, but in his Commentary, 1844, thinks that the Epistles were written near the end of the First Century. No more striking specimen can be needed, of the spirit in which German writers approach the examination of subjects of this kind, than the notion of Baur, here mentioned, that the author of the Epistles under consideration was infected with Gnosticism. Irenoeus and Tertiillian, those most decided antagonists of Marcion, were never led, in their controversy/ against his errors, to discover the manifestations of them in these Epistles : but left this remark- able fact unnoticed until brought to light by the observation of a Tubingen professor some IGOO years after their time ! A not less melancholy illustration of the same spirit of pre- sumptuous scepticism is furnished in tlic following remarks on Neanders View of the 1st Epistle to Timotliij. 107 the same Epistles, from the pen of one of the most eminent and esteemed of recent German wi-iters, the famous Dr. Augustus Ne- ander ; — (See his History of the Planting and Training of the Cliristian Church, Bohn, London, 1851, Vol. I. p. 388, Note.) The genuineness of the First Epistle to Timothy being presupposed, the view I have here taken of the relations and circumstances under which it was written, appears to be the only tenable one. [ i. e. the view, according to which the First Epistle to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus are to be referred to the later Apostolic age, subsequently to the History of the Acts and the first im- prisonment of St. Paul at Rome.] But I confess that I am not convinced of the genuineness of the First Epistle to Timothy, with the same certainty as of the Paulino origin of all the other Pauline Epistles, and of the two other Pastoral Letters, and the Epistles to the Ephesians aud the Colossians. What is said in this Epistle of the false teachers excites no suspicion in my mind ; and I can find nowhere the allusions to the later Gnostic doctrines, which Bauer would find in this as well as in the [other ?] Pastoral Letters. The germ of such Judaizing Gnosticism, or of a Judaizing theosophic ascetic tendency, as it shews itself in the two Epistles to Timothy, I would presuppose a priori to be existing at this time, since the appearances of the Second Century point back to such a tendency gradually evolving itself out of Judaism. In this respect, the absence of the marks of a later date is to me a proof of its high antiquity. To the declara- tion of Hegesippus in Eusebius iii. 22, that the falsifications of doctrine first be- gan after the death of the Apostle, or rather then ventured to make their public appearance, I can attach no such weight as historical evidence, as to cast a doubt on these undeniable facts. As there is an unhistorical tendency pro- duced by a dogmatic bias, which transposes the originators of all heresies to the Apostolic age, and makes the Apostles to be the first impugners of them; so also there is a more unhistorical tendency, and equally proceeding from a dog- matic bias ( as is the case with all the depositions of Hegesippus ), which would maintain, that up to a certain date, the Church was wholly pure, and that all heresies broke out first after the decease of the Apostles. A common but one- sided truth lies at the bottom of both opinions. I can find nothing surprising in the fact, that, in the two Epistles to Timothy, such an aspect of the present as an omen and germ of what would be developed in the future, is to be seen. The attentive observer, capable of deeper insight, must here behold the future in the present. But I cannot deny that, w hen I come from reading other Pauline Epis- tles, and especially the two other Pastoral Letters, to this Epistle, I feel myself struck by (he impression of something rot Pauline. More particularly, the mode of transition appears to me not in the Pauline style, — as in ii. 7 ; iii. 1 ; iii- 15 ; v. 17, 18 ; and the relation of this Epistle to the two other Pastoral Letters is also suspi' cious. I can indeed find reasons for allaying these doubts, but none which, taken nil together, can satisfy the unprejudiced lover of truth. It is not so much to be wondered at that such doubts shoukl have been entertained, on the subject of the genuineness of the First Epistle to Timothy, by Dr. Neander, when wc consider that 108 Dijficulties examined. his master Schleiermaclier, by the perusal of one of wliose works {Reden iiher die Religion, i.e. 'Discourses on Religion,') lie had been converted from a state of infidel Judaism to the profession which he afterwards maintained with such earnestness, held like views on the same subject. Under Schleiermaclier he studied the- ology at the University of Halle in 1806, and no professor in that place attracted so much of his affections, or gained so large an in- fluence over his mind. In 1813 they were again associated in the newly founded University of BerHn, Neander having been in that year aj)poiiited Professor Ordinariiis in that Institution. V. The mention of Timothy's name in 2 Cor. i. 1, has been suggested as an objection to the hypothesis that it and Titus be- longed to the same individual : for if he were to go to Corintli with the Epistle, wliy should he be represented as writing to the people there, among whom he would appear along with the letter? Tliis, it must be confessed, is a reasonable objection, as it does appear a little unaccountable that the bearer of a letter should be mentioned as joining in the writing of it. At least, it apjDcars a little unnatvu'al, imlike what we should expect. And yet this does not amount to any proof that it was not even so. It seems by no means impossible that the name of the actual bearer of the letter may have been thus inserted, to imply his concurrence in the sentiments expressed in it. We cannot of course suppose that the person whose name was introduced in this way had any share in the writing or composition of the Epistle concerned. We do not attribute to Sosthenes (1 Cor. i. 1,) any authority or in- spiration which would lia-\-e qualified him for Avriting, in part, the First Epistle to the Corinthians. The prece^Dts and sentiments it conveys we believe to have been penned by St. Paul, as he, the sole agent for the purpose, was moved by the Holy Ghost. The name of Sosthenes appears to be added to express the consent of the brethren to what was written, and the desire of one that was known and respected at Corinth, to second, and commend to the good feelings of liis fellow-townsmen, the words of Instruction and reproof which were commimicated by the Apostle of the Lord. Such an addition might serve also to remove in part from the Apostle, the onus of writing what was vmpleasant, by bringing in another as a sharer in the sentiments expressed: and it might The inention of 2vnothij in 2 Cor. i. 1. 109 likewise have the efiect of causing him to appear, not so much as ruling the Church by his own individual authority, as exercising a trust and commission from on high, in which others had an equal interest, and in which some of them might be called, in part at least, to share his labours. So again, when he says, (in Galat. i. 2,) ^And all the brefhreii lohich are ivith me, unto the Churches of G alalia,' we do not suppose that those brethren wrote, or even suggested, any part of that Epistle, but merely that they fully sympathised with all its contents, and willingly set their seal to the truth and importance of the doctrines it was written to uphold. In the opening Salutation of the Epistle to the Philippians also, the name of Timothy is associated with that of St. Paul, and yet it is plainly not intended to convey to the reader, that in that Epistle the subject matter throughout w^as to be regarded as pro- ceeding from the joint authorship of the two persons thus men- tioned. Else the name of Timothy would not have been again introduced in the manner in which we find it occurring in Ch. ii. vv. 19-24; — '/trust in the Lord Jesus to send Imiotheus shortly unto you .... for I have no man hke-minded, who will natvirally care for your state. For all seek their own, not the tilings which are Jesus Christ's. But ye know the proof of him, that as a son with the father, he hath served with me in the Gospel,' &c. A similar observation appUes to the First Epistle to the Thcs- salonians. In the first Verse of it also, we find St. Paul imiting the name of Timothy with his own : and yet that, so far as human authorship was concerned, the contents of tliis Epistle were to be regarded as the composition of St. Paul exclusively, is evident from the observations concerning both Timothy and himself, which are to be found in Ch. iii. 1-6 ; — ' Wlien we could no longer forbear, we [i. e. I, Paul,] tJiought it good to he left at Athens alone, and sent Timotlmis, ovu' brother, and minister of God, and our fellow-labourer in the Gospel of Christ, to establish you and to comfort you concerning your faith,' &c. As, then, the insertion of Timothy's name in the beginning of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians does not appear to imply that he had any hand in the actual writing or composition of this 110 Difficulties examined. Epistle, but merely that lie was with St. Paul when he wrote it, that he felt the value of its contents, and earnestly recommended them to the study of the Corintliian people, it may be quite pos- sible that he became himself the bearer of this letter to them. His recent kind reception among them, (2 Cor. vii. 13-15,) sup- posing him to have been the same with Titus, would make him a peculiarly suitable person for being joined with St. Paul in the opening Salutation referred to. St. Paul himself was coming to Corinth, when he wrote this Second Epistle to the Christians there ; and even had he been there himself with Timothy, on his arrival with the Epistle, there would have been nothing unsuitable or unprofitable, in circulating among the inhabitants of that large place, copies of a docmnent so full of important and practical in- straction. The mention of Timothys name therefore, although furnishing, as has been admitted, a reasonable ground of objec- tion, does not appear, upon examination, to present any insuj)erable, or very serious obstacle, to our adopting the hypothesis put forth in tliis Essay. VI. A more striking, if not a more important difficiilty, in the way of our theory, is that which we meet with in 2 Tim. iv. 10, in the words, ' Titus unto Dalmatia' If the Titus here intended be the same person who is mentioned in the Epistle to the Galatians and the Second to the Corinthians, since he is here spohen of in ivriting to Timotlty, this notice of him appears, independently of any other argmuent, sufficient of itself to disprove the identity we have been supposing to have existed. It is not however certain that the Titus here spoken of was the same with the chief and most eminent person among the compa- nions of St. Paul, who bore that name. Tlie appellation was a very common one ; and the person here designated by it may have been, not the distinguished individual whom the Apostle set over the Cretan Church, but some one of inferior note, and more of the same class with Demas and Crescens, who are mentioned before him in this Verse. We have seen already, that Calmet notices, as mentioned in the New Testament, (Acts xviii. 7,) a second Titus, on the authority of some of the ancient Copies and Versions of the Scnptures, including the Syriac, Sahidic, and Vulgate Versions, the latter of which is followed, of course, in this particular, as else- llie mention of Titus in 2 Tim. iv. 10. Ill where, by the Ehemisli Translators. Nor was it only the name Titus, but that of Timothy also, which was common to more than a single individual among the companions and followers of St. Paul. The second Timothy here alluded to is mentioned in a short but interesting letter of the first Pius, bishop of Rome, addi'essed, about A.D. 161, to Justus, bishop of Vienna, in the following man- ner. ' Those presbyters who were brought up under the training of the Apostles, and who survived to our own days, with whom we have shared the Word of Life, have been called hence by the Lord, to repose in the eternal mansions. Saint Tmiothy and IVlark have passed away from us in tlie good fight. Be careful, brother, to imitate their example, and to avoid being entangled in bondage to the world.' Ejj. 1, Pii 1. in Bihl. Vet. Pat. Gallandii, Tom. i. 2). 672. For this Timothy's claim to have been the converter of the British king Lucius, See Ussher's Brit. Ecc. Ant. Cap. iii. p. 49 seqq. especially p. 50, of his Works, by Elrington. Vol. V. I reside at present in the house with a very intimate clerical friend, whose Christian name is John. Almost equally intimate with us both is another clerical friend of the same name in the West of Ireland. Now, if it were to happen that I should visit, as I have ere this done, the latter friend, and write from his house to the former, I tliink it not at all impossible, or very imHkely, that I, or any other person similarly circumstanced, should, in writing from that place in the West, make mention of the friend who was near me, to his namesake, by his Christian name. I might for instance say, ' John is at present getting on very well here,' or, ' John has left ns to ovu'selves to-day, having had occasion to visit town.' And there would be no possible ambiguity in such use of the name, although belonging ccpially to another friend, or per- haps to many; because the only one naturally expected to be mentioned would be that individual who was nearest to me at the time, or otherwise most readily associated with the subject on which I was writing. VII. The last objection to the hypothesis which supposes the identity of Titus and Timothy is that which is founded on the supposed tendency of such a aIcw ; and which has been suggested in the form of the questions, ' Wiat is the Use of it ? And may not its tendency be rather iujurious to the Authority of tlie Canon 112 Dijjiculties examined. of Holy Scripture ? or, if not to so serious a matter as that, at least to some of the usual arguments for the divine autliority or apos- tolicity of Diocesan Episcopacy ? To these queries we shall endeavour to give, in their order, the best replies of wliich they appear capable. The Use of the present Inquiry is to promote the right under- standing of Holy Scriptiu'e ; and where there appears some reason for doubting Avhether a mistake may not have occurred, to endea- vour, by an examination of the Sacred Records themselves, with the aid of such light as can be thrown on the matter from other som'ces, to ascertain the truth. The harmony and mutual rela- tion to each other of the historical passages concerned must be rendered more clear and interesting by understanding them aright, and, on the other hand, be proportionably marred and ob- scured by any misconceptions adopted in connection with them ; and no one who loves the Word of God with inteUigent and wor- thy love, can regard that as lost labour, which will help to the more correct interpretation of any portion of its contents. No doctrine of the faith, but only historical particulars are here made the subject of question : and the question concerns not the truth of any part of Revelation, but only the manner in Avhich it has been usually understood among Christians. Should the theory here suggested be judged most in accordance with the testimony of Holy Scripture, such a residt would prove that the error (in that case) commonly adopted has had much influence in taking away from the interest naturally existing in the connection be- tween the part of Timothy's liistory brought before us in the Acts, and that comprehended in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, &c., and substituting for such interesting connection a difficulty, adapted to render the New Testament (in so far as this subject is concerned,) more obsure to the ignorant and careless reader, and even to the thoughtful and intelligent, not very easy of explana- tion. Further, the doubt as to the truth of the .opinions commonly received about St. Titus, which has led to the writing of this -Essay, has been suggested from no other source, originally, than the reading of the English New Testament. So that if such doubt should eventually be judged well-foiuidcd, and the received llie Case of Episcopacy, hoic far concerned. 113 opinion condemned by competent autliority as erroneous, so far from the contents of the Bible being likely to suffer by such a restdt, with any honest or unprejudiced, or perhaps, even preju- diced, minds, the very contrary must rather be the case : and honour and credit will rather accrue more largely to the Word of God, for that internal consistency, truth, and harmony of all its parts, by which it is able to right itself, after so many ages, from the erroneous glosses that had been adheiing to its Text, imder the pressure of the unanimous consent of Chl-istians, almost from the very infancy of the Church. As to the authority of the Canon of Scripture, and of the New Testament in particular, it is in no way whatsoever affected by any views propounded in this Essay, not even to the alteration of a single word. The only part which might seem in danger of being imsettled by the adoption of the new view would be the Titles of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, concerning which it is quite unnecessary to add here anything to what has been already said Sit pp. 83, 84, sup. With some of the argiunents often adduced in favoiir of Epis- copacy, and some of the views very commonly prevalent as to its original, our theory does indeed more or less interfere ; but not, I believe, with any views or argvuuents on the subject to which much weight need be attached by a judicious and well-in- formed Episcopalian. The notion that Timothy settled down- into a diocesan bishop or metropolitan of Ephesus, and that Titus became permanently resident in a similar capacity in a sec-house in Crete, has no doubt been held by many, and been regarded also by some (and that not always by the rash and ignorant only,) as a main part of the foundation of Episcopacy. Wiser men have refi'ained however, from allowing a principle of so great impor- tance to rest much on so frail a foundation : and while discoverinor in the New Testament in general, and in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus in particular, abundant authority for the institution of Episcopacy, and sufficiently plain condemnation of any system which rejects it, they have not, at the same time, failed to observe the weakness of the reasoning, which would, in this argument, lay any great stress on these supposed models of Diocesan Episcopacy, Q 114 Dijiculties examined. to be found, according to the opinion of so many, in the persons of SS. Timothy and Titus. The following observations of the Rev. Thomas Scott, in his Preface to the Epistle to Titus, are to our purpose in comaection with such a view of the subject now under consideration : — Tradition and ecclesiastical records have made Titus bishop of Crete : and because so large an island renowned for a hundred cities, was an extensive charge, some have conferred on him the title of archbishop. But I am by no means convinced that even this title would not have been a derogation from his real dignity, as an evangelist -' If by saying Timothy and Titus were bishops, the one of J-'phesus, the other of Crete, we understand that they took upon them these churches or dioceses, as their fixed and particular charge, in which they were to preside for the term of hfe, I believe that Timothy and Titus were not thus bishops : For both Timothy and Titus were Evangelists Now the work of an Evangelist, says Eusebius, was this, to lay the foundation of churches in barbarous nations, to constitute them pastors ; and having committed to them the cultivating of those new plantations, they passed on to other countries. — As to Titus, he was only left in Crete to ordain elders in every city, and to set in order the things that were wanting. Having therefore done that work, he had done all that was assigned him in that station, and therefore St. Paul sends for him the very next year to Nicopolis.' Whitby. It is however recorded that he after- wards returned to Crete, and died there when 94 years of age. Dr. Whitby never doubted, nor does the author of these notes at all doubt, that diocesan episcopacy was generally introduced into the Churches, even during the lives of some of the Apostles. But the office of an Evangelist of old, and that of a true missionary at present, should be considered as perfectly distinct from that of a bishop, and in some respects (especially as [implying] a general commission to preach the Gospel to the nations,) superior to it. As for the authorities for styling Titus bishop of Crete, they may be seen in the passage of Dr. Cave's Life of St. Titus, (c. iii. p. 58,) which we subjoin. The learned author himself covm- tenances, it will be observed, the view in support of which these authorities are cited ; but he would have done more to recommend it to the favour of a judicious reader of his work, had he been able to quote in support of it, instead of Eusebius or S. Chry- sostom, some decided testimony of the second or third century. The account which lie gives of the matter is thus : — The affair about which they were sent being despatched in the synod, he [St. Titus] returned, no doubt, with St. Paul to Antioch, and thence accom- panied him in his travels, till having gone over the Churches of Syria and Cilicia, they set sail for Crete, . . . where St. Paul industriously set himself to preach and propiigate thij Christian faith. . . . But because the care of other Churches Tlw Serlptural arrjument for Episcopacy. 115 called upon him, and would not permit him to stay long enough here to sec Christianity brought to a due maturity and perfection, he constituted Titus bishop of that island, that ho might nourish that infant Church, superintend its growth and prosperity, and manage the government and administration of it. This the ancients with one mouth declare. Heivas the first bishop, says Eusebius, of the Churches in Crete, (II. Ec. 1. iii. c. 4,) the Apostle consecrated him bishop of it, so St. Ambrose, {Prcef. in Tit.) so Dorothcus, {Si/nops. p. 148,) and Sophro- nius, (Ap. Hier. de Script, in Tit.) he was, says Chrysostom, an approved person, (^Homil. 1 in Tit.) to whom jj i/^co? oXokXyjoc-:, the whole island, was entirely com- viilted, that he might exercise power and jurisdiction over so mam/ bishops ; he urns by St. Paul ordained bishop of Crete, though a very large island, ihxit he might or- dain bishops under him, says Theodoret, {Argitm. Ep. ad. Tit.) expressly. To which might be added the testimonies of Theophylact, Q^^cumenius, and others, and the subscription at the end of the Epistle to Titus, (which though not die- tated by the same hand, is ancient however,) where he is said to have been or- dained the first bishop of the Cliurch of the Cretians : and S. Clirysostom gives this as the reason why of all his disciples and followers S. Paul wrote Epistles to Titus and Timothy, and not to Silas or Luke, because he had committed to them the care and government of the Churches, while he reserved the others as attendants and mhiisters to go along with himself. (^Arg. in 1 ad Tim. p. 1519.) Supposing tlie names Timotliy and Titus to have belonged to the same individual, it will he of course impossible to retain the opinion according to which the owner of the former was appointed by St. Paul permanent bishop of the See of Ephesus, and the bearer of the other, in like manner, of Crete. But seeing how slender is, in any case, the evidence in support of such an opinion, we need feel the less imeasy at the possibility of a system proving true, which is certainly qmte adverse to the supposition of the ex- istence of those instructive models of diocesan bishops which Timotliy and Titus might, according to the more usual hypO' thesis, have supplied. As to the Scriptural argument for episcopal discipline in the Church of Christ, it may suffice us to know, that when the Apos- tles delegated, in any instance mentioned in the Scriptures, the selection, ordination, or location, of ministers, to any other par- ties, it was to individuals, and not to committees, synods, or pres- byteries, they entrusted such a charge ; and while we no where find, in the several Epistles addressed to the Churches, any direc- tions to the members of them at large, as to what sort of pastors they should nominate or cause to be ordained for themselves, but only that they should obey, &c., those who were duly appointed ll*^' Difficulties e^vamined. to watch for their souls, we do find, on the contrary, very full in- structions in the First Epistle to Timothy, and the Epistle to Titus, as to the selection, judging, and general governing, of mi- nisters, by the individual constituted, in each of these cases, the Apostle's delegate. The pastors for the cities in Crete were not to be selected by the congregations in those cities, but by Titus. To Titus, and hot to any presbytery, or other assembly, of clergy andpcople, St. Paul, guided by the Spirit of God, thought proper to entrust, on his own departure, the power of ordination and in- stitution of ministers for the various flocks in that island, as well as the general ordering of matters pertaining to religion there ; a sufficient indication, as it seems, of what that Wisdom which directed his way, judged to be the fittest and most suitable form of discipline for the general government of the fold of Christ, when its planters and first pastors were to be called away to their everlasting rest. Seeing, however, that the indications observable in the New Testament of some kind of permanent connection of Timothy with Ejjhcsus are a little more substantial and worthy of conside- ration, than any which can be adduced in support of a like per- manent connection of Titus with Crete, (where, so far as the evi- dence of Holy Scripture goes, he was only left for a time, in order to ordain clergy for the diiFercnt cities there, in which Christianity had gained a footing, and regulate other matters which needed to be set in order, and then after a little, to leave that place, and repair to join St. Paul at Nicopolis^) it may be possible, supposing the tw^o names to have belonged to one per- son, that the owner of them, at some period subsequently to his laboiirs in Crete, did settle in Ephesus, act as a kind of diocesan bishop in that metropolis, and in the same place continue to spend his latter days, till his earthly warfare was accomplished. \ APPENDIX. APPENDIX. No. I. EXAMINATION OF THE QUESTION, WHETHER ST. TITUS WAS CIRCUMCISED, OR NOT? Part I. — The common Opinion, that he u-as not, illustrated hy Extracts from various Commentators, P^ROM the passage in wliicli mention is made of Titus in Ch. ii. of the Epistle to the Galatians, it has commonly been inferred, as a matter of certainty, that he was never circumcised. That place however is one, concerning the sense of which there ap- pear to be strong grounds for believing that a good deal of mis- imdcrstanding has existed, and one which, when fully examined into, seems to supply no sufficient foundation for such an infe- rence as that here stated. On this account, and also because these Verses of the Epistle to the Galatians bring . before oiu- no- tice, in an interesting way, some of the earliest circumstances on record relating to the history of St. Titus, (his parentage, original freedom from the law of circumcision, &c.,) we propose now to make them the subject of a careful investigation, citing at large what has been "svritten upon them by a considerable number of the most famous Commentators in various ages ; and in this, (be- sides illustrating the point Immediately concerned,) setting forth an interesting specimen of the multitude and variety of comments to which a single passage of Holy Scripture has given occasion. These comments on the place in question we shall set before the reader in such an order, as will indicate, in the first in- 118 Exposition of Galat. ii. 3-5. [ Appendix, Stance, what appears to be the most commonly received exposition of its meaning, and afterwards assist in endeavouring to deter- mine, how far such exposition is borne out and confirmed by the original text of the verses in question, or by any other con- siderations. The Interpretation, then, of these Verses, which appears to be received with general favoiu' and acceptance among the most in- telligent and well-informed Christians in our day, agrees in the main with that of the great St. Augustine in his Exposition of the Epistle, wliich is to the following effect : — But neither Titus ivho was with me, [saith ho,] being a Greek, iras compelled to be circumcised. Albeit that Titus was a Greek, and no rule of custom or kin connected with his parents required that he should be circumcised, as Timothy, yet would the Apostle readily have allowed him also to be circumcised. For he never taught men that salvation would be forfeited by such circumcision ; — but if reliance were placed on it for the hope of salvation, this, he shewed them, would interfere with their salvation. The practice therefore, as a superfluous one, he was prepared to tolerate without objection, according to the sentiment which he has elsewhere expressed, that circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is no- thing, but the keeping of the commandments of God. But because of false bre- thren unaivares hrouyht in, Titus was not compelled to be circumcised : that is, it was found impossible to extort, in his case, a compliance with circumcision, inas- much as those who came in privily, as he saith, to spy out their liberty, were anx- iously watching and longing to have Titus circumcised, that they might there- upon preach the necessity of circumcision in order to salvation, even upon the shewing, and with the full sanction, of Paul himself, and thus bring them, as he says, into bondage, that is, reduce them again to their former servitude under the burdens of the law. To ivhom, he says that he gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour, that is, not even for a time, that the truth of the Gospel might continue with the Gentile?. — {Sti. Augustini Opera, Ed. Bened. Venet., 1729, '30. Tom. iii. pars 2da, col. 947.) With the view here given agree in substance the Notes on these Verses in Mant and D'Oyly's Bible, which are these : — 3. But neither Titus, §-c.] Hereby it appeared that the other Apostles as- sented to St. Paul's doctrine, that Gentile Christians were not bound to the Jew- ish observances. — Dr. Hammond. 4. And that because of false brethren, ^r] The Apostle says that he kept Titus uncircumcised, and carried him so to the other Apostles, on purpose to shew that his sentiments were quite opposite to those of the false Jewish zealots, who came to Antioch, Acts xv., and insinuated themselves into the assemblies there, with a design to catch at and oppose St. Paul's doctrine, and to bring all No. I. Pt. 1.] Notes of St. Augustine, Mant and UOijlij, .X' (tud's T/Vo?, &c., TSj/r/xjitljji/a/. I agree with Borger and Jaspis that these words are parenthetical. Their true scope has been best seen by the ancient Commentators, as CEcumenius: ovx T^vayzaffOrj, &c , [i.e. {in English,) ' He was not compelled by the Apostles to receive circumcision, which was a proof that not even Peter and his associates preached circumcision, but that they conceded the use of circumcision as a condescension to those of Israel who be- lieved.'] See also Theophylact. Note, ib. Jaspis (partly from Borger) ably annotates thus : ' Scite Paulus Titi mentionem faclt,' &c. ; [or, in English, thus, ' Paul judiciously makes men- tion of Titus not having been circumcised; for thus was made to appear on the one hand the vanity of circumcision, on the other the agreement of Paul's doc- trine with that of the other Apostles. Timothy is rashly read here by some in place of Titus. Him Paul did order to be circumcised, on account of the Jews, Acts xvi. 3: but did not thereby contradict himself ; for in circumcising Timo- thy he acted so as to indulge the Jews, accommodating himself to their weak- ness, as Timothy was to become a teacher of the Christian religion, in which ca- pacity he would if uncircumcised have been rejected by the Jews. Besides Paul did tiiis of his own will, no one demanding circumcision in this instance as a right. But in our present passage, he had to do with those who were demand- 120 Exposition of Galat. ii. 3-5. [Appendix, ing the enforcement of circumcision as a matter of right. To this he could not give place a nail's breadth. In ritual matters of the kind Paul prudently acted with a view to the circumstances of the case. Compare Acts xxi. 22, seqq- ; 1 Cor. ix. 20.'] Dr. Adam Clarke, in his Commentary, has on the same three Verses these Notes : — Verse 3. But neither Titus who was with me.] The Apostle proceeds to state that his account was so satisfactory to the Apostles, that they not only did not require him to insist on the necessity of circumcision among the Gentiles, but did not even require him to have Titus, who was a Greek, circumcised : though that might have appeared expedient, especially at Jerusalem, to have prevented false brethren from making a handle of his uncircumcision and turning it to the preju- dice of the Gospel in Judea. To spy out our liberty.] The Judaizing brethren got introduced into the as- sembly of the Apostles, in order to find out what was implied in the liberty of the Gospel, that they might know the better how to oppose St. Paul and his fellows in their preaching Christ to the Gentiles, and admitting them into the Church without obliging them to observe circumcision and keep the law. The Apostle saw that while such men were in the assembly it was better not to mention his mission among the Gentiles, lest by means of those false brethren, occasion should be given to altercations and disputes ; therefore he took the opportunity, by private coiiferences, to set the whole matter, relative to his work among the Gentiles, before the chief of the Apostles. Verse 3. To whom we gave place by subjection.^ So fully satisfied was he with his divine call, and that he had in preaching among the Gentiles acted in strict conformity to it, that he did not submit in the least to the opinion of those Judaizing teachers ; and therefore he continued to insist on the exemption of the Gentiles from the necessity of submitting to Jewish rites ; that the truth of the Gospel — this grand doctrine, that the Gentiles are admitted by the Gospel of Christ to be fellow-heirs with the Jews, miyht continue ; and thus the same doc- trine is continued with you Gentiles. Of the time when the visit to Jerusalem, here alluded to, was paid, Dr. Clarke observes that some ' contend that the journey of which the Apostle speaks is that mentioned. Acts xi. 27, &c., when Barnabas and Saul were sent by the Chiu"ch of Antioch with relief to the poor Christians in Judea,' an opinion with which he seems to agree, although admitting at the same time, that ' the Apostle is however generally supposed to refer to the journey he took to Jerusalem, about the question of circumcision, mentioned in Acts XV. 4, &c.' And this latter view, which has been adopted by most Commentators, ancient and modern, appears certainly to be the most just and well-founded, as agreeing best with the en- No. 1, Pt. 1.] Date of ilie visit to Jerusalem in Galat. ii. 1. 121 tire tenor of the narrative.* ' The occasion of this journey,' says Pool, ' we have in Acts xv. 1,2. It was to advise with the Apostles and Elders, about the necessity of circumcision ; some that came from Judea having taught the disciples at Antioch, that except they were circumcised, they could not be saved. With Barnabas^ * We find, however, in Koppe's Greek Testament, the following Note, added by Tychsen in the Third Edition of the Galatians, &c., {Gottiti^fp, 1823,) in the Tenth Excursus appended to that Epistle, p. 149, (published after Koppe's death ;) — Ch. ii. I, 2, 5. That the journey to Jeru- salem which the Apostle has in view in this passage is not the one noticed in Acts xv — but an earlier one, viz., the second, Acts, xi. 27, seqq. has been argued with learning and inge- nuity by Keil, in his Dissertation concerning tile Settlement of the time of the journey of Paul to Jerusalem, spoken of in Gal. ii. 1, 2, inserted in his Opuscula Academica. Lips. 1821, p. 160, seqq. This epistle should then have been written at an earlier date, before the Council of the Apostles was held in Jerusalem, which the same learned individual proves in his Dissertation On the fixing of the date at which Paul's Epistle to the Galatians is to be supposed to haiie been written, ibid. p. 351-3G8. If you accept these conclusions, as I acknowledge ray- self to do, the reading oig ovhs, v. 5, (the ge- nuineness of which is defended by Schmidt m Biblioth. f. Krit. tend Exegese des N. T. Vol. ii. p. 449,) will appear the more probable, and the interpretation to be preferred, that given by Koppe in the first instance. [ For which, see Part 2 of this Article, inf.] As to the date of the Epistle, Koppe places it somewhere between Acts xvi. 6, and Acts xviii. 23, the rh -Tr^ors^ov, (^^ my former visit' ^\\\ Gal. iv. 13, inti- mating that he had been with them twice before it was written, as the hxjriji raysktg, in Gal. i. 6, does, that it was not long after a visit to them. He thinks the visit to Galatia in Acts xvi. 6, could not have been the first, as it was to con- firm the disciples, (Acts xv. 36; xvi. 5,) and as Barnabas was then away from Paul, whereas he was known to the Galatians, as it would seem from Gal. ii. 13. St. Pauls first visit to Galatia may probably, he thinks, have occurred, with Barnabas as his companion, at Acts xiv. 6, Galatia bordering on Lycaonia. He conceives that subsequently to this journey, St. Paul visited Jerusalem (Acts XV, after, in his journey again joined by Barnabas, (1 Cor. ix. 6,) and so may have had him with him when he wrote this Epistle. Keil's works I have not been able to meet with. (They are not in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin.) But the following statement and refutation of his aro-uments in support of the opinion above noticed, is to be found in Schott's Prolegomena to liis learned Commentary on the Galatians ( § 4. ^);j. 303, stqq. Lips. 1834.) conceives tnat suDsequentiy to tins journey, ot. xaui visiieu .Jerusalem (^iiccs 2; Gal. ii. 1,) from Antiooli, and returning to the latter city, had tliere soon jr, possibly, the disagreement with St. Peter noticed in Gal. ii. 21 : and that lis journey to Macedonia and Greece, Acts xvi. xvii. xviii. he was somewhere Let us consider briefly the arguments which have induced many [i.e. Keil, Eichhorn, Bengel, osition of Gcdat. ii. 3-5. [Appendix, contained in ordinances. But privately to them ivhich were of reputation; but he saith that ho did it privately, and to men of reputation ; by which he meaneth the Apostles, or some other Christians of greatest eminency. Lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain; lest he should have prejudiced himself, as to the course of the Gospel, which he metaphorically compareth to a race. See 1 Cor. ix. 26. Object. If any ask how this influenced Paul, so as to make him privately to communicate the doctrine which he had amongst the Gentiles preached pub- tie to the Church of Antioch, by authority whereof it might be duly and openly declared, that they who had turned from Paganism to Christ, were not to be bound to observe either circumcision, or the other precepts generally of the ceremonial law, v. 22 seqq. In Gal. ii. 4, mention is made of persons, who adopting but outwardly the character of Christians, and not imbued with true piety or Christian wisdom, ( as being more zealous for Judaism,) had come pri- vily into the Church, to undermine the liberty of the Gospel. Compare Acts xv. 1. Hal Tl\iis [ •'tc., in English thus,] ^nd certain men ichic/i came dou-}i from Judaa taught the bre- thren, and said, Except ye he circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. Com- pare i). 5. It is also observable, that Paul, in Gal. ii. 11, after having spoken of the circumstances which had occurred at Jerusalem, treats next of the controversy that arose between himself and Peter at Antioch. Comp. Acts xv. 30. Paul and Barnabas, upon their dismissal from Jeru- salem, are said to have repaired to Antioch. Finally, when Paul was discharging at Jerusa- lem the office of relieving the wants of the poor in that season of calamity, by the alms collected in the Church of Antioch, he had then Barna- bas for leader and patron, he being the one that had a little before, when the Apostle had been recently converted, both recommended him to tlie Christians of Jerusalem, in such a way as that they might persuade themselves of his having really with all his heart come over to the Christian faith, (Acts ix. 26, seiji/.,) and also introduced him to the Church at Antioch, (Acts xi. 25.) Comp. Acts xi. 30, where the name of Barnabas is placed first, that of Saul last. On the other hand, in the statements put forth by Paul in Gal. ii. concerning his journey to Jeru- salem, and the circumstances which occurred in connection with it, the authority of Paul is re- presented as predominant. As Hemscn has well observed in the place referred to, p. 08. On these grounds I licsitate not to rank my- self witli those who maintain that Paul in Gal. ii. 1, had chiefly in view the third journey to Jerusalem, (Acts xv.) and so, that this Epistle was not written unul after the assembly in Je- rusalem. But if those interpreters, who find most difficulty in the circumstance of the Ajios- tle being thought to have passed over in silence, in the Epistle to the Galatians, the second jour- ney to Jerusalem, (Acts xi. 30.) be not wholly satisfied with the grounds above suggested as the probable cause of fuch omission, there is another easy mode of getting rid of the difficulty. Unless I be altogether mistaken, the words of Paul in Gai.ii. 1, sTS/ra hta dsxarsssdo- UV STOOV, (fee, may be understood at once of those two journeys of the Apostle to Jerusalem, the 'former of which CActs xi. 30,) he made in company with Barnabas, (Gal. ii. I, (JjITOL Ba^vdSa^) the latter, (Acts x-v. 2,) in com- pany with the same individual and others, among whom, on that occasion, Titus is with sufficient probability supposed to have been, (Gal. ii. I. suiM-xa^aXajSc/iv xai T/Vov,) provided that you prefer translating hid OiXarifid. BruiV, 'within 11 years," im f'erlaufe von 14 Jahren. (Comp. forth'suse of theprepn. did, Acts i. 3; v. 19; xxiii. 31 ; Hebr. ii. 15;) and observe of the word TaX/i/, that it is not unfrequently re- ferred to a circumstance of such a kind as is conceived to be again and again, done, or, to be done, Matt. xx. 5; John iv. 13; sii. 28. The sense to be : Then during the course of 14 years, I visited Jerusalem a second time with Barna- bas, and having Titus also with mcon the latter occasion. In the very concise language which he uses, he throws in a passing notice of that second journey which he made with Barnabas only, (whether it was that he no longer remem- bered the year of that second journey, or that he judged any more accurate specification of the time to be needless in this place, assuming his readers to be already acquainted, from some other source, with the distinction between the two journeys,) hastening on, as we have inti- mated above, to what he had to say concerning the third journey.- (Schott, p. 309.) No. 1, Pt. 1.] Annotations from Pool, cjr. 125 licly ? It is easily answered. 1. That the consent of those who were Apostles before him to the doctrine which he preached, was of great moment to persuade all Christians to embrace it ; and by this means he obviated the scandal of being singular in the doctrine which he preached. 2. Besides that Paul was now at Jerusalem, which was the chief place of the Jews' residence, to whom God in- dulged a greater liberty for the ceremonial usages, than to the Churches of the Gentiles, who had not been educated in that religion. And had Paul openly On the date of the Epistle to the Galatians and other points of Chronology involved more or less in the preceding enquiry, Scliott has given some learned and able observations in the same Prolegomena, for which however we must refer the reader to the work itself, merely introducing here a very short notice of some of the conclusions there by him adopted. Agreeing justly with Koppe, that it may be certainly inferred from the rh T^onoov in Ch. iv. 13, that the Apostle had visited the Galatians twice altoge- ther, before writing his Epistle to them, he, apparently with equal justice, dis- sents from the idea that the word ra^sug in Ch. i. 6, necessarily i-efers to the time of their conversion, or of a recent visit of the Apostle to them, as it may im- ply nothing more than suddenly, hastily, rashly, (as in St. John xi. 31 ; 1 Tim. V. 22,) or even if it refer to their conversion which had occurred only a few years before, the expression rayioog might be justly applied to their degeneracy, as compared with other Churches that abode more steadfastly in the faith From the manner in which the Apostle speaks of their kindness to him on the occasion of his first visit (Gal. iv. 13-16.) without any allusion to similar manifestations on the second occasion, Scholt reasonably infers (/). 316,) that the work of cor- ruption had commenced among them before he made the second visit. It is very improbable, (as Schott has sufficiently shewn, pp. 291 -'G,) that Galatia could have been included mentally by St. Luke, in Acts xiv. 6, as in the rrsgly^M^og of Lystra and Derbe : and if not, the conversion of the Galatians must rather be understood to have taken place when St. Paul journeyed through their country in Acts xvi. 6 ; at which time not only were the Churches con- firmed and established in the faith, where they had already been planted, (Acts XV. 36, 41 ; xvi. 5,) but they also ' increased in number daily.' As to the idea that Barnabas must (from Gal. ii. 1, &c.) have been personally known to the Galatians, it appears altogether unfounded ; as it would sufficiently account for St. Paul's mention of him, to bear in mind, that he was most probably known to them, at all events, by name and character. As it is however admitted on all hands, that the Epistle to the Galatians was one of the earliest which St. Paul wrote, (several placing it so far back as A. D. 46 or 47, immediately, or very soon after, the supposed visit to Galatia in Acts xiv. 6, See Srhott, p. 291;) and yet, as we have seen, it could not have been written before the Apostle's second visit to their country. Acts xviii. 23, Schott concludes, j\'ith considerable appearance of probability, (accordiiig to his system of Chronology,) that it was sent from Ephesus, between the commence- ment of summer, a.d. 34, and the Pentecost of A. D. 56. The other dates in the history of St. Paul, which bear in any degree on our present inquiry, are thus arranged by Schott. The vision in 2 Cor. xii. 1_4, he supposes to agree with that in Acts xxii. 17, seqq., in which St. Paul, three years after his conversion, (Gal. i. 17, 18,) was directed to leave Jerusalem, (See Acts ix. 29, 30,) and engage in the work of preaching to the Gentiles : and thus it naturally enough succeeds to the account of his escape from Damascus, (2 Cor. xi. 32, 33; Acts ix. 22-25,) which occurred immediately before. The Epistles to tiie Corinthians being supposed to have been penned in a. d. 56, the ' fourteen years ago,' in 2 Cor. xii. 2, will bring the vision spoken of to a. d. 41 or 42, ac- cording as the year 56 itself is included in the 14 years, or the 14 supposed to 126 Eivposition of Galat. ii. 3-5. [Appendix, there declared the liberty of Christians from circumcision, and the ceremonial usages, he had both enraged those who as yet continued in the Jewish religion, and possibly given no small offence to those who had been educated in that reli- gion, though they were converted to the faith of the Gospel, they not fully yet understanding the liberty of Christians from that yoke. By one or both of which ways, had Paul openly at Jerusalem published the doctrine which he had pub- licly preached in Damascus and Arabia, and other places of the Gentiles, his la- bours might have been rendered useless, and he might also have been less suc- cessful in his further course of preaching it. 3. But neither Titus who was xvith me being a Greek, was compelled to he cir- cumcised. The Apostle brings this as an instance of the Apostles at Jerusalem agree- ing with him in his doctrine, as to the non-necessity of circumcision ; for though Titus was with him, who was a native Gentile, being a Greek, and a minister of the Gospel, (and possibly Paul carried him with him for an instance,) yet the Apostles at Jerusalem did not think fit to impose on him circumcision ; no, not upon a solemn debate of that question. If any shall object, that Paul himself cir- cumcised Timothy, who was a Greek, Acts, xvi. 1, 3; the answer is easy, the same text letting us know that his mother was a Jewess, and that he did it he- cause of the Jews in those quarters. As to the Jews, it was matter of liberty at this time, they might or might not be circumcised. Now in matters of this nature, where men have a liberty, they ought to have regard to circumstances, and to do that which they, from a view of circumstances, judge will be most for the glory of God, the good of others, and give least offence. 1 Cor. x. 28-31. 4. And that because oy false brethren unaivares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage. He gives the reason why circumcision was not urged upon Titus, viz., be- cause there were some got into that meeting, where Paul debated these things with the Apostles that were at Jerusalem, who though they had embraced the Christian religion, ( and upon that account were brethren,) yet were soured with the Jewish leaven, and were very zealous for all Christians to observe the Jewish rites of circumcision, &c. ; upon which account it is that he calleth them false brethren. These ( he saith ) came in privily to spy out that liberty which all Chris- tians had, and Paul had preached and used, as to all those Jewish ceremonies ; who could they have obtained to have had Titus circumcised, they had had a great advantage to have defamed Paul, as teaching one thing to the Gentile Churches, and practising the contrary when he came to Jerusalem to the Apos- havc expired before its commencement ; and the conversion of Paul, three years earlier, must be then assigned to a. d. 38, or 39, or possibly even to 37, if the 14 years be mentioned in a popular and conversational way. Herod Agrippa, (mentioned in Acts xii., &c.,) who died a little before the Passover of a. d. 44, appears to have been alive when Paul and Barnabas came to Jerusalem on the scconil journey, (Acts xi. .30,) which accordingly took place, most probably, in the beginning of that year. The third journey (Acts x v.) occurring 14 years after the conversion of St. Paul, (Gal. ii. 1,) which conversion may be assigned, as above stated, to a. d. 37, was made, it would seem, in a. d. 30; according to the mode of calculation adopted by Schott in the work referred to, pp. 309-315. No. 1, Pt. ].] Annotations from Pool, tjc. 127 ties, and amongst the Jews. And this being a liberty -which ho and all Chris- tians had, in and from Jesus Christ, he would not part with it, for they aimed at nothing but the bringing of Christians again under the bondage of the eeremonial law. Some may say. It being a thing wherein Christians had a liberty, why did not St. Paul yield, to avoid their offence ; becoming all things to all men to gain some? Answ. In the use of our liberty, all circumstances are to be considered, as well as that of scandal and offence. The valuable opposite circumstance in this case, seemeth to be the validity and success of the Apostle's ministry, the efficacy of which would have been much weakened, if his enemies had from hence gained an advantage to represent him, as doing one thing in one place, and the quite contrary in another. Besides, though at this time the 'use or not use of the ceremonial rites by the Jews, was a matter of liberty, by reason of God's in- dulgence to them for the prejudices of their education, yet whether they were at all so to the Gentile converts, may be doubted : See Chap. v. 2, 3. Further yet these brethren urged the observation of these rites as necessary to salvation, (as appears from Acts xv. 1,) for they were of the Sect of the Pharisees, Ver. 5. And to use them under that notion was no matter of liberty. 5. To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour, that the truth of the Gospel might continue with you. To these Judaizing Christians the Apostle did not think fit to yield one jot, not for the least time, nor in so much as one precedent ; having a desire that these Gentile Churches might not be perverted. Or, ( as others think,) to which men of reputation we yielded not in the least. It is very probable that Peter and James, upon their first arguing the case, to avoid the scandal and offence of the Jews, would have had Titus circumcised : St. Paul would not yield to it, that he might preserve the doctrine of the Gospel, which he had planted among the Ga- latians and other Gentiles, pure, and not encumber those Churches with the Mo- saical rites. But the most and best interpreters rather judge the persons here mentioned, to whom Paul would not yield, to be some Judaizing Christians, rather than the persons of reputation mentioned Ver. 2. Such are the Annotations of Pool himself on this place. It may however be satisfactory to the reader, that we shovild give here the fuller exposition of the words of it, collected from various authorities, by this writer, in his very learned Synopsis. On accomit of the impossibility of expressing each single term occurring in this Exposition by an exactly corresponding English word, it will be as well to set forth in parallel columns the Latin original also, as follows : — 3. Sed (supple, non in vanum cu- 3. But (supply, / ran not in vain ; curri; id quod Titi example ostendit'. which he shows by the example of 'AXXcc vim habet occupatoriam. Expo- Titus. ' AXXa has an anticipatory force, suisti eis Evangelium, forte tacuisti do You explained to them the Gospel, pos- circumcisione. De hac, inquit, actum sibly as to circumcision you observed est, et mihi prorsus assenserunt".) silence. It was treated of, saith he, 128 Exposition of Galat. ii. 3-5. [Appendix, yPi. «rPar. b Hi. in Er. c Er. ex Aug. Sim. Camer. E. T. rfE. * Vor. t Be. /Pi. gVi. llatn. «. 2. h Pi. i Pi. Ham k Ham. /PL utique ? R. K.] neque Titus — cum (vel, quamvis. Pi.) essei Gentilis (vel, Graats, Er. E. P. Be.