Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

dulges his contempt of Baronius's judgment, Capellus himself falls into an error of the fame kind, and more grofs and palpable than that which he reproves. For he begins the chapter by ftating the fecond epiftle to the Corinthians and the first epistle to Timothy to be nearly cotemporary; to have been both written during the apostle's fecond vifit into Macedonia; and that a doubt fubfifted concerning the immediate priority of their dates; "Posterior ad eofdem "Corinthios epiftola, et prior ad Timo"theum certant de prioritate, et fub judice lis eft; utraque autem fcripta eft paulo

[ocr errors]

poftquam Paulus Ephefo difceffiffet, adeoque dum Macedoniam peragraret, fed "utra tempore præcedat, non liquet." Now, in the first place, it is highly improbable that the two epiftles should have been written either nearly together, or during the fame journey through Macedonia; for in the epiftle to the Corinthians, Timothy appears to have been with St. Paul; in the epiftle addreffed to him, to have been left behind at Ephesus, and not only left behind, but directed to continued there, till St. Paul

fhould

66

should return to that city. In the second place it is inconceivable, that a question fhould be propofed concerning the priority of date of the two epiftles; for, when St. Paul, in his epistle to Timothy, opens his address to him by faying, " as I befought "thee to abide ftill at Ephesus when I went "into Macedonia," no reader can doubt but that he here refers to the laft interview which had paffed between them; that he had not feen him fince; whereas if the epistle be posterior to that to the Corinthians, yet written upon the fame vifit into Macedonia, this could not be true; for as Timothy was along with St. Paul when he wrote to the Corinthians, he must, upon this fuppofition, have paffed over to St. Paul in Macedonia after he had been left by him at Ephefus, and muft have returned to Ephefus again before the epiftle was written. What mifled Ludovicus Capellus was fimply this, that he had entirely overlooked Timothy's name in the superscription of the second epistle to the Corinthians. Which overfight appears not only in the quotation which we have given,

but

but from his telling us, as he does, that Timothy came from Ephefus to St. Paul at Corinth, whereas the fuperfcription proves that Timothy was already with St. Paul when he wrote to the Corinthians from Macedonia.

[blocks in formation]

CHAP. XVI.

THE CONCLUSION.

N the outset of this enquiry, the reader

IN

was directed to confider the Acts of the Apoftles and the thirteen epiftles of St. Paul as certain ancient manuscripts lately discovered in the closet of fome celebrated library. We have adhered to this view of the fubject. External evidence of every kind has been removed out of fight; and our endeavours have been employed to collect the indications of truth and authenticity, which appeared to exist in the writings themselves, and to result from a comparison of their different parts. It is not however neceffary to continue this fuppofition longer. The tef timony which other remains of cotemporary, or the monuments of adjoining ages afford to the reception, notoriety, and public estimation of a book, form no doubt the first proof of its genuinenefs. And in no books whatever is this proof more complete, than

[ocr errors]

in thofe at prefent under our confideration. The enquiries of learned men, and, above all, of the excellent Lardner, who never overstates a point of evidence, and whose fidelity in citing his authorities has in no one inftance been impeached, have established, concerning thefe writings, the following propofitions:

I. That in the age immediately posterior to that in which St. Paul lived, his letters were publicly read and acknowledged.

Some of them are quoted or alluded to by almost every Chriftian writer that followed, by Clement of Rome, by Hermas, by Ignatius, by Polycarp, difciples or cotemporaries of the apoftles; by Juftin Martyr, by the churches of Gaul, by Irenæus, by Athenagoras, by Theophilus, by Clement of Alexandria, by Hermias, by Tertullian, who occupied the fucceeding age. Now when we find a book quoted or referred to by an ancient author, we are entitled to conclude, that it was read and received in the age and country in which that author lived. And this conclufion does not,

in any degree, rest

upon

the judgment or

Cc 2

cha

« НазадПродовжити »