did not work; and that many thousands joined with him in believing the contrary of what they faw. Is this poffible? 3. What enthufiaft, or fanatic, ever ventured upon morals, without being mifled by his imagination to invent an extravagant fyftem? Whereas in the morality taught by St. Paul we meet with nothing, but what is rational, and confiftent with philofophical ethics. 4. When a man of frantic and difordered brain fuffers the heat of his imagination to carry him fo far, as to feal his error by his death, his refolution is generally accompanied with a wild irrational vehemence and defpair. The joyfulness of the martyrs in the fecond and third centuries, and the eagerness, with which they plunged into fufferings, frequently bordered on this kind of phrenfy. But, when St. Paul faw death approaching, his temper of mind was calm and rational. He went with fortitude, to meet death, but he did not feek it: on the contrary he defended himself, as well as he was able, and felt the ufual and natural apprehenfions of a man, who expects to forfeit his life. Laftly, fome have contended that St. Paul was not an enthusiast, but a cool and deliberate free-thinker, whose object was to deliver, by a well-intended fraud, both the world in general, and the Jews in particular, from the yoke of fuperftition. But to this objection I fhall not reply at prefent, because it belongs rather to deistical controverfy, than to an Introduction to the New Tefta ment. : SECT. SECT. II. Of St. Paul's profeffion, or trade. Σ T. PAUL frequently fays in his Epiftles, that he Sreceived no pay from the Chriftian communities, except from that of Philippi, and that he earned his bread by the labour of his own hands: though at the fame time he declares, that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and that the teacher deferves to be recompenfed by those who are taught. He even ordained, that other teachers fhould be paid by the churches, and excluded only himself from a participation of the pay. He fays in express terms to the elders of the church at Ephefus, where he had refided three years, I have coveted no man's filver, or gold, or apparel; yea, ye yourfelves know, that these hands have miniftered unto my neceffities, and to them, that were with me". Now St. Paul had generally feveral affiftants with him: and, when he was at Ephefus, he by no means lived in a narrow or fparing manner. For he hired a public auditory, where he daily taught the doctrines of Chriftianity, and where every one was permitted to enter withou fee or reward. And among his Ephefian friends he reckoned feveral Afiarchs, who were opulent annual magiftrates, and who were certainly not Chriftians, as it was their office, especially of one of their body, to prefide over the religious games, of which the prefident defrayed the greateft part of the expence Nor does St. Paul appear to have been in narrow circumstances during his two years imprisonment at Cæfarea: for *. ་།། the See 1 Cor. ix. 2 Cor. xi. 7—11. Gal. vi, 6-10. Phil. iv. 10-16, 1 Tim. v. 17. 18. " Acts xx. 33. 34. * Acts xix. 9. * See Boze's Effay on this fubject, in the 17th volume of the Memoires de l' Academie des Infcriptions et Belles Lettres. the Roman governor, Felix, frequently fent for him and converfed with him, expecting that money would be offered for his release. That among the Jews, even men of learning, (as St. Paul certainly was, who had been educated under Gamaliel), gained their livelihood by the labour of their own hands, is a matter which is well known. But the queftion is, by what kind of labour was St. Paul, who devoted fo much time to the exercife of his Apoftolical office, enabled to provide fo plentifully both for himself and his companions. The Greek term used by St. Luke, Acts xviii. 3. where he fays that St. Paul and 3.0 Aquilas exercifed the fame art, is exлvorosos. This word, which does not occur in other Greek authors, is fuppofed to be equivalent to oxnvogga Pos, and is taken by fome commentators to denote a worker in leather, either a faddler, or a maker of leather chairs which were ftrapped on the back of a camel. But no man can exercise the trade of a faddler, who leads fuch a wandering life, as St. Paul did; for a faddler has fo many materials neceffary for his business, that they cannot conveniently be tranfported from town to town. Whoever therefore reads with attention the fixteenth and feventeenth chapters of the Acts of the Apoftles, and obferves how fhort a ftay St. Paul made in each place, and how frequentlhe was forced to depart fuddenly, muft perceive that the notion of St. Paul's being a travelling faddler is wholly abfurd. Befides, the very employment of a faddler is by no means calculated for a travelling trade; for fince fadlers in every town have generally their fixed cuftomers, a man of this trade, who came a ftranger to any place, might wait there a twelvemonth, before he found employment. And even if this objection were removed, it is ftill difficult to comprehend, how any man who devoted the greatest part of his time to fpiritual purposes, and had only a few hours leifure every day for the labour of his hands, y See my edition of Caftelli Lexicon Syriacum, p. 454. under the article and I. Helfrich's Short account of a journey to Jerufalem in 1581, under the date, 11 October. hands, could earn enough as a faddler to fupply, in an ample manner, the neceffities both of himself, and of his friends. If we explain σxnvorosos as denoting a maker of leather chairs to be ftrapped on the backs of camels,' the difficulty will be ftill increafed; for St. Paul was very frequently in places, where there were no camels, and confequently where no fuch chairs were wanted. Other commentators take oxяvorosos in the sense of a ⚫tent maker;' but the fame objections, which I have made to the other applications of the word, may be made likewise to this. And if Aquilas, who was of the fame trade with St. Paul, was a tent-maker, it must feem extraordinary, that a man, who was a native of Pontus, in the neighbourhood of which country there were nations who lived in tents, fhould come to Corinth and Ephefus, where tents were not wanted. σκηνοποιος But the preceding difficulties are entirely removed by the following paffage in Julius Pollux, from which it appears that onvoоos has properly a very different meaning from either of thofe already mentioned. This learned writer fays in his Onomafticon, Lib. VII. § 189. that σunvorosos in the language of the old comedy was equivalent to μηχανοποιος”. Now μηχανοποιος fignifies a maker of mechanical inftruments.' Confequently St. Paul and Aquilas were neither faddlers, nor tent-makers, but mechanical inftrument makers. And this profeffion fuited extremely well their mode of life: for, whoever poffeffes ability in the art can earn, in a few hours every day, as much as is neceffary for his fupport, and can eafily travel from place to place, because the apparatus is eafily transported. It is therefore extraordinary that no commentator has hitherto taken unvoroios, Acts xviii 3. in this fenfe and ftill more extraordinary that Julius Pollux has been actually quoted for a very different purpose, - Τις δε μηχανοποιες και σκηνοποιος ή παλαια κωμωδια ονομάζει Though Julius Pollux fays that exnoroos was thus ufed in the old comedy, and does not quote any living authors, yet it must be observed that the words used in comedy are the words of common conversation, though not always used by authors. purpose, namely, to caution the reader against afcribing tō cunvorraias, Acts xviii. g. the fenfe, which is given it in the Onomafticon of Julius Pollux. Such commentators muft furely have never reflected on the advantages, which attend this fenfe, and the difficulties, which attend the others. General remarks: and Statement of the questions to be amined in this chapter. *, HAVE deferred to this place the examination of I the Epiftle to, the Hebrews, because it is a matter of difpute, which perhaps will never be finally determined, whether it was written by St. Paul, or not. In the preceding editions of this Introduction I wholly neglected to treat of this Epiftle, and contented myself with referring the reader to other authors: though, when I published the third edition I had already written a particular Expofition of this Epiftle, which I quoted as well as Lardner's Supplement to the Credibility of the Gofpel Hiftory. But, fince an Introduction to the New Teftament ought to contain a differtation on every part of it, I think it neceffary to fupply, in the prefent, the deficiency of the preceding editions. And I am the more ftrongly urged to the undertaking, firft, as I have lately made feveral obfervations on this fubject, which had formerly escaped my notice, as well as the notice a Vol. II. Ch. 12. af |