evident from his own declaration in ii. 1. where he says that neither the Colossians nor the Laodiceans had then "seen his face in the flesh." But though Paul had never been in Colossæ when he wrote this Epistle, yet Christianity had evidently been taught, and a church planted there. Rosenmiller is of opinion, that the Gospel was introduced into that city by Epaphras. It is not improbable that Epaphras, who is mentioned in i. 7. iv. 12, 13., was one of the earliest eachers; but it does not necessarily follow that he was the person who first planted Christianity there. Indeed, it is not likely that the Colossians would send away the founder of their church while it was yet in an infant state. As it appears from Acts xix. 10. that, during Paul's residence at Ephesus, many persons, both Jews and Greeks, came from various parts of Asia to hear the Gospel, Michaelis supposes that several Colossians, particularly Philemon, were of this number. He also thinks that Timothy might have taught them the Christian faith; as Paul subjoins his name to his own (i. 1.), and throughout the first chapter speaks in their joint names, except where the subject relates to his own Imprisonment, and where Timothy of course could not be included. II. But though it is impossible now to ascertain the founder of the church at Colossæ, the Epistle itself furnishes us with a guide to its date. In Col. iv. 3. the apostle alludes to his imprisonment, from which circumstance, as well as from its close affinity to the Epistle addressed to the Ephesians, it is evident that it was written nearly at the same time. Accordingly most commentators and critics refer it to the year 62. Its genuineness was never disputed. III. At the time of writing this Epistle, Paul was "an ambassador in bonds," for maintaining the freedom of the Gentile converts from all subjection to the law of Moses. Its immediate OCCASION was, some difficulties that had arisen among the Colossians, in consequence of which they sent Epaphras to Rome, to acquaint the apostle with the state of their affairs; to which we may add the letter (Col. iv. 16.) sent to him by the Laodiceans, who seem to have written to him concerning the errors of the false teachers, and to have asked his advice. Paul, therefore, replies in the present Epistle, which he sent to the Colossians as being the larger church, and also because the false teachers had probably caused greater disturbances among the Colossians; but desired that they would send the same Epistle to the Laodiceans, and ask them for a copy of their letter to Paul, in order that they might the better understand his answer. principalities or powers.-that he alone was the head of the church, and had reconciled men to the Father. (15-20.) The inference from this description is evident, that Jesus was superior to angels; that they were created beings, and ought not to be worshipped. In verse 21. Paul returns from this digression to the sentiments with which he had introduced it in the thirteenth and fourteenth verses; and again expresses his joy, that the Colossians remained faithful to the Gospel, which was to be preached to the Gentiles, without the restraints of the ceremonial law. From this view of the excellency of Christ's person, and the riches of his grace, the apostle takes occasion to express the cheerfulness with which he suffered in the cause of the Gospel, and his earnest solicitude to fulfil his ministry among them in the most successful manner; assuring them of his concern for them and for the other Christians in the neighbourhood, that they might be established in their adherence to the Christian faith. (i. 21-29. ii. 1—7.) II. Having given these general exhortations, he proceeds directly to caution them against the vain and deceitful philosophy of the new teachers, and their superstitious adherence to the law; shows the superiority of Christ to angels, and warns Christians against worshipping them. He censures the observations of Jewish sabbaths and festivals, and cautions the Colossians against those corrupt additions which some were attempting to introduce, especially by rigours and superstitions of their own devising. (ii. 8-23.) To these doctrinal instructions succeed precepts concerning the practical duties of life, especially the relative duties of husbands and wives, parents and children, servants and masters. (iii. iv. 1-6.) The Epistle concludes with matters chiefly of a private nature, except the directions for reading it in the church of Laodicea, as well as in that of Colossæ. (iv. 7-18.) For an illustration of iv. 16. see Vol. I. p. 58. Whoever, says Michaelis, would understand the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, must read them together. The one is in most places a commentary on the other; the meaning of single passages in one Epistle, which, if considered alone, might be variously interpreted, being determined by the parallel passages in the other Epistle. Yet, though there is a great similarity, the Epistle to the Colossians contains many things which are not to be found in that to the Ephesians; especially in regard to the worship of angels, and many single points, which appear to be Essene, and might prevail at Colossa.! The following Table exhibits the corresponding passages of the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians. EPHESIANS. COLOSSIANS. i. 6, 7. i. 15, 16. i. 17-21. i. 22. iii. 10, 11. ii. 13-16. iii. 3, &c. i. 13. i. 19, 20. i. 3, 4. i. 9-15. i. 16-18. ii. 12, 13. EPHESIANS. COLOSSIANS. i. 20. ii. 14. i. 24, 25. i. 26-29. ii. 12-15. i. 21. Who the false teachers were, is a point not satisfactorily determined. Michaelis is of opinion that this Epistle was directed against the tenets and practices of the Essenes, of CHAP. i. 1, 2. CHAP. i. 1, 2. which sect an account has been given in the early part of this volume. But it is more probable that they were partly superstitious judaizing teachers, who diligently inculcated not only the Mosaic law, but also the absurd notions of the rabbins, and partial converts from Gentilism who blended Platonic notions with the doctrines of the Gospel. It is well known that the Platonists entertained singular ideas concerning demons, whom they represented as carrying men's prayers to God, from whom they brought back the blessings supplicated; and the doctrines of the Jews concerning angels were nearly the same as that of the Platonics concerning demons. It appears from Col. ii. 16-23. that the false teachers inculcated the worship of angels, abstinence from animal food, the observance of the Jewish festivals, new moons and Sabbaths, the mortification of the body by long-continued fastings, and, in short, the observance of the Mosaic ritual law, as absolutely necessary to salvation. IV. The SCOPE of the Epistle to the Colossians is, to show that all hope of man's redemption is founded on Christ our Redeemer, in whom alone all complete fulness, perfections, and sufficiency, are centered: to caution the Colossians against the insinuations of judaizing teachers, and also against philosophical speculations and deceits, and human traditions, as inconsistent with Christ and his fulness for our salvation; and to excite the Colossians, by the most persuasive arguments, to a temper and conduct worthy of their sacred character. The Epistle, therefore, consists of two principal parts besides the introduction and conclusion. I. After a short inscription or introduction (i. 1, 2.) Paul begins with expressing great joy for the favourable character which he had heard of them, and assures them that he daily prayed for their further improvement. (3-14.) He then makes a short digression in order to describe the dignity of Jesus Christ, who, he declares, created all things, whether thrones or dominions, iv. 2-4. On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Hora Paulinæ, Chap. VIII. · SECTION X. ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. I. Account of the Christian church there.-II. Genuineness of this Epistle.-III. Its occasion and scope-Synopsis of its contents. I. CHRISTIANITY was first planted at Thessalonica by Saint Paul, a. D. 50, who formed a church, composed both of Jews and Gentiles, but the latter were most numerous. (Acts xvii. 2-4.) The unbelieving Jews, however, having stirred up a persecution against him and his company, they were forced to flee to Beræa, and thence to Athens (xvii. 5 -15.), from which city he proceeded to Corinth. Being thus prevented from visiting the Thessalonians again as he 'Epitre à les Colossiens; Michaelis's Introd. vol. iv. pp. 116-124.; Hug's 1 Boehmer, Isagoge in Epistolam ad Colossenses; Calmet, Preface sur Introd. vol. ii. pp 433-435.; Macknight's Preface; Rosenmuller, Scholia, tom. iv. pp. 131-136. In instituting a collation of these two epistles the student will find a very valuable help in M. Van Bemmelen's Dissertatio Exegetico-Critica, de epistolas Pauli ad Ephesios et Colossenses inter se collatis. 8vo. Lugd. Bat. 1903. had intended (1 Thess. ii. 17, 18.), he sent Silas and Timo- | of them as thought the advent of Christ and the end of the thy to visit them in his stead (iii. 6.), and, on their return to him from Macedonia (Acts xvii. 14, 15. xviii. 5.), he wrote the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, A. D. 52, from Corinth, and not from Athens, as the spurious subscription to this Epistle imports.' II. The first Epistle to the Thessalonians is generally admitted to have been one of the earliest written, if indeed it be not the very first, of all Saint Paul's letters, and we find that he was anxious that it should be read to all the Christian churches in Macedonia. In chap. v. 27. he gives the following command:-I adjure you by the Lord that this Epistle be read unto all the holy brethren. This direction is very properly inserted in his first Epistle. Its genuineness has never been disputed. Polycarp has probably referred to it, and it is certainly quoted and recognised as Saint Paul's production (together with the second Epistle) by Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Caius, Origen, and all subsequent ecclesiastical writers. III. The immediate occasion of Paul's writing this Epistle was, the favourable report which Timothy had brought him of the steadfastness of the Thessalonians in the faith of the Gospel. He therefore wrote to confirm them in that faith, lest they should be turned aside from it by the persecutions of the unbelieving Jews, and also to excite them to a holy conversation, becoming the dignity of their high and holy calling. This epistle consists of five parts, viz. PART I. The Inscription. (i. 1.) PART II. celebrates the grace of God towards the Thessalonians, and reminds them of the manner in which the Gospel was preached to them. (i. 2—10. ii. 1—16. PART III. The Apostle declares his desire to see them, together with his affectionate solicitude for them, and his prayer for them. (ii. 17-20. iii.) In PART IV. he exhorts them to grow in holiness (iv. 1—8.) and in brotherly love, with industry. (9—12.) PART V. contains exhortations against immoderate sorrow for their brethren, who had departed in the faith; together with admonitions concerning the coming of Christ to judgment. (iv. 13—18. v. 1—11.) The Epistle concludes with various practical advices and instructions. (v. 12—28.) On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Hora Paulinæ, Chap. IX.9 SECTION XI. ON THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. world to be at hand, were neglecting their secular affairs, as being inconsistent with a due preparation for that important and awful event. As soon, therefore, as the state of the Thessalonians was made known to Paul, he wrote this second Epistle, to correct their misapprehension, to rescue them from an error which (appearing to rest on apostolical authority) must ultimately be injurious to the spread of the Gospel, and to recommend several Christian duties. II. After a short introduction, the apostle begins with commending the faith and charity of the Thessalonians, of which he had heard a favourable report. He expresses his joy on account of the patience with which they endured persecution; which, he observes, was a proof of a righteous judg ment to come, where their persecutors would meet with then proper recompense, and the righteous be delivered out of all their afflictions. And all this (he assures them) will take place, when Jesus Christ returns with pomp and majesty as universal judge. He further assures them of his constant prayers for their further improvement, in order that they may attain the felicity promised. (ch. i.) He then proceeds to rectify the mistake of the Thessalonians, who, from misunderstanding a passage in his former letter, believed that the day of judgment was at hand. “The day of the Lord," he informs them, will not come until a great apostasy has overspread the Christian world, the nature of which he describes. Symptoms of this mystery of iniqui ty had then appeared: but the apostle expresses his thankfulness to God, that the Thessalonians had escaped this corruption; and he exhorts them to steadfastness, praying that God would comfort and strengthen them. (ii.) He next requests their prayers for himself, and for Silvanus and Timothy, his two assistants; at the same time expressing his confidence that they would pay a due regard to the instructions he had given them. And he proceeds to correct some irregularities that had crept into their church. Many of the Thessalonians seem to have led an idle and disorderly life: these he severely reproves, and commands the faithful to shun their company, if they still remained incorrigible. The apostle concludes with his apostolical benediction; and inwas a token of the genuineness of all the Epistles which he forms them that his writing the salutation with his own hand wrote. that it consists of five parts, viz. From the preceding view of this Epistle, it will be seen 1. The Inscription. (i. 1, 2.) 2. Saint Paul's Thanksgiving and Prayer for them. (i. 312.) 3. The Rectification of their Mistake concerning the day of judgment and the doctrine concerning the man of sin. (ii.) 4. Various advices relative to Christian virtues, particularly i. To prayer, with a prayer for the Thessalonians. (iii. 1—5.) ii. To correct the disorderly. (ui. 5—16.) I. Date, occasion, and scope of this Epistle.-II. Analysis of 5. The Conclusion. (iii. 17, 18.) its contents.-III. Observations on this Epistle. I. THE second Epistle to the Thessalonians was evidently written soon after the first (A. D. 52), and from the same place; for Silvanus or Silas, and Timothy, are joined together with the apostle in the inscription of this Epistle as well as that of the former. The Epistle was occasioned by the information communicated to Paul by the person who had conveyed his first letter to the Thessalonians, respecting the state of their church. Among other things he was informed, from some expressions in it,10 that many of them expected that the day of judgment would happen in that age; and that such rical evidence. 1 Grotius has contended that the first Epistle to the Thessalonians is in reality the second, but he has not supported that conjecture by any histoCalmet, Bloch, Dr. Macknight, and many other modern critics, after Chrysostom and Theodoret, are decidedly of opinion that this is the ear liest written of all St. Paul's Epistles. Lardner, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 96.; 4to. vol. i. p. 330. Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. p. 264. ; 4to. vol. i. p. 423. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 374.; 4to. vol. i. p. 482. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 528. 530.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 566, 567. Calmet, Preface sur la première Epitre aux Thessaloniens; Rosenmüller, Scholia, toin. iv. pp. 681, 682.; Bloch, Chronotaxis Scriptorum Pauli, pp 99-109.; Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 23-29.; Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 349-352. But the fullest view of all the circumstances of this epistle is given in Burgerhoudt's Specimen Academicum Inaugurale de Coetus Christianoruin Thessalonicensis Ortu Fatisque, et prioris Pauli iis scriptæ Epistolæ Consilio et Argumento. Lugd. Bat. 1825. 8vo. 10 See 1 Thess. iv. 15. 17. v. 4. 6. III. Although the second Epistle to the Thessalonians is the shortest of all Saint Paul's letters to the churches, it is not inferior to any of them in the sublimity of the sentiments, and in that excellent spirit by which all the writings of this apostle are so eminently distinguished. Besides those marks of genuineness and authority which it has in common with the rest of the apostolical Epistles, it has one peculiar to itself, in the exact representation it contains of the papal power, under the characters of the "Man of Sin," and the Mystery of Iniquity." For, considering how directly opposite the principles here described were to the genius of Christianity, it must have appeared, at the time when this Epistle was written, highly improbable to all human apprehension that they should ever have prevailed in the Christian church; and consequently a prediction like this, which answers so exactly in every particular to the event, must be allowed to carry its own evidence along with it, and to prove that its author wrote under divine influence." On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Hora Paulinæ, Chap. X. 11 Dr. Doddridge's Introd. to 2 Thess. Bloch, Chronotaxis Scriptorum Pauli, pp. 109-115. Calmet's Preface sur la seconde Epitre aux Thessa loniens; Hug's Introd. vol. ii. pp. 353, 354. For a full illustration of the prophecy above mentioned, see Bishop Newton's Dissertations, vol. ii. Diss. 22. Dr. Benson's Dissertation on the Man of Sin (Paraphrase on 1 and 2 Thess. pp. 173–197. 2d edit.); or Drs. Macknight and A. Clarke on 2 Thess. ii. SECTION XII. ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. I. Account of Timothy.-II. Date of this Epistle.-III. Genuineness and authenticity of the two Epistles to Timothy.-IV. Scope and synopsis of the first Epistle.-V. Observations on the use which the church is to make in every age of Paul's Epistles to Timothy and Titus. On the contrary, in behalf of the LATER DATE, which supposes this Epistle to have been written after Saint Paul's first imprisonment at Rome, A. D. 64 or 65, it is insisted, 1. That it appears from Saint Paul's Epistles to Philemon (22.) and to the Philippians (ii. 24.), that he evidently designed, when he had a prospect of being released, to go both to Colossa and into Macedonia. Now it is admitted, that these two Epistles were written towards the close of Saint Paul's first imprisonment at Rome; and, if he executed his intention of going to Colossæ immediately after his release, it is very probable that he would visit Ephesus, which was in the vicinity of Colossæ, and proceed thence to Philippi. I.. TIMOTHY, to whom this Epistle was addressed, was a native of Lystra, a city of Lycaonia, in Asia Minor. His father was a Greek, but his mother was a Jewess (Acts xvi. 1.), and, as well as his grandmother Los, a person of excellent character. (2 Tim. i. 5.) The pious care they took of 2. We further learn from the first Epistle to Timothy, that his education soon appeared to have the desired success; for he was left at Ephesus to oppose the following errors: 1. Fables we are assured by Saint Paul, that from his childhood, Timo- invented by the Jewish doctors to recommend the observance of thy was well acquainted with the Holy Scriptures. (2 Tim. the law of Moses as necessary to salvation;-2. Uncertain iii. 15.) It is generally supposed that he was converted to genealogies, by which individuals endeavoured to trace their dethe Christian faith during the first visit made by Paul and scent from Abraham, in the persuasion that they would be saved, Barnabas to Lystra. (Acts xiv.) From the time of his con- merely because they had Abraham to their father;-3. Intricate version, Timothy made such proficiency in the knowledge of questions and strifes about some words in the law ;--4. Perverse the Gospel, and was so remarkable for the sanctity of his disputings of men of corrupt minds, who reckoned that which manners, as well as for his zeal in the cause of Christ, that produced most gain to be the best of godliness; and oppositions he attracted the esteem of all the brethren in those parts. of knowledge falsely so named. But these errors had not taken Accordingly, when the apostle came from Antioch in Syria place in the Ephesian church before the apostle's departure; for, to Lystra the second time, they commended Timothy so in his charge to the Ephesian elders at Miletus, he foretold that highly to him, that Paul selected him to be the companion false teachers would enter among them after his departing, Acts of his travels, having previously circumcised him (Acts xvi. xx. 29., I know that after my departing, shall grievous wolves 2, 3.) and ordained him in a solemn manner by imposition enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30. Also of your of hands (1 Tim. iv. 14.; 2 Tim. i. 6.), though at that time own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw he probably was not more than twenty years of age. (1 Tim. away disciples after them. The same thing appears from the iv. 12.) From this period, frequent mention is made of Ti- two Epistles which the apostle wrote to the Corinthians; the mothy, as the attendant of Paul in his various journeyings, one from Ephesus before the riot of Demetrius, the other from assisting him in preaching the Gospel, and in conveying his Macedonia after that event; and from the Epistle which he wrote instructions to the churches. When the apostle was driven to the Ephesians themselves from Rome, during his confinement from Thessalonica and Berea by persecution, he left Silas there. For in none of these letters is there any notice taken of and Timothy there to strengthen the churches in the faith. the above mentioned errors as subsisting among the Ephesians (Acts xvii. 13, 14.) Thence they went to Paul at Corinth (xviii. 5.), and from Ephesus he again sent Timothy to Thes- at the time they were written, which cannot be accounted for salonica (Acts xix. 22.; 1 Thess. iii. 2, 3.) to comfort the the apostle went into Macedonia after the riot. We conclude, on the supposition that they were prevalent in Ephesus, 'when believers under their tribulations and persecutions. Timothy returning to the apostle, next accompanied him into Asia therefore, with Dr. Macknight, that the first Epistle to Timothy, (Acts xx. 4.), and was left at Ephesus (1 Tim. i. 3, 4.) to in which the apostle desired him to abide at Ephesus for the.* instruct the church in that city, the care of which was con- purpose of opposing the judaizers and their errors, could not be fided to Timothy. How long he governed the Ephesian written, either from Troas, or from Macedonia, after the riot, as church is not known; and we are equally uncertain as to the those who contend for the early date of that Epistle suppose : but time of his death. An ecclesiastical tradition relates that he it must have been written some time after the apostle's release suffered martyrdom, being slain with stones and clubs, A. D. from his confinement in Rome, when, no doubt, he visited the 97, while he was preaching against idolatry in the vicinity church at Ephesus, and found the judaizing teachers there busily of the temple of Diana at Ephesus. His supposed relics employed in spreading their pernicious errors. were translated to Constantinople, with great pomp, a. d. 356, in the reign of Constantius. II. The date of this Epistle has been much disputed. Dr. Lardner refers it to the year 56; Dr. Benson, Michaelis, and Hug (after Cappel, Grotius, Lightfoot, and several other critics), date it in A. D. 58; Bishop Pearson, Le Clerc, Dr. Mill, and Rosenmuller, in A. D. 65; Drs. Whitby, Macknight, and Paley, and Bishop Tomline, in 64. In favour of the EARLY DATE it is argued, 3. In the first Epistle to Timothy, the same persons, doctrines, and practices are reprobated, which are condemned in the second. Compare 1 Tim. iv. 1-6. with 2 Tim. iii. 1-5., and 1 Tim. vi. 20. with 2 Tim. i. 14., and 1 Tim. iv. 7. and vi. 20. with 2 Tim. ii. 16. The same commands, instructions, and encouragements are given to Timothy in the first Epistle as in the second. Compare I Tim. vi. 13, 14. with 2 Tim. iv. 1-5. The same remedies for the corruptions, which had taken place among the Ephesians, are prescribed in the first Epistle as in the second. 1. That it appears from the third chapter of this Epistle, that Compare 1 Tim. iv. 14. with 2 Tim. i. 6, 7. And as in the no bishops had been then appointed at Ephesus. Saint Paul second Epistle, so in the first, every thing is addressed to Timothy, instructs Timothy in the choice, as of an appointment to a new as superintendent both of the teachers and of the laity in the office, and "hopes to return to him shortly." church at Ephesus: all which, Dr. Macknight justly thinks, imAnd it is not probable the apostle would suffer a community to be long without plies that the state of things among the Ephesians was the same governors. Now he departed from Ephesus when he travelled when the two Epistles were written. Consequently, the first into Macedonia (Acts xx. 1.), and we see from v. 17. 28. that Epistle was written only a few months before the second, and not on his return bishops had been appointed. Consequently this long before the apostle's death. Epistle must have been written at the beginning of his journey; for Timothy soon left Ephesus, and was at Corinth with Paul. (Acts xviii. 5.) He even joined him in Macedonia, for the second Epistle to the Corinthians, written in Macedonia, was in the joint names of Paul and Timothy. This Epistle, therefore, was written a short time before the second to the Corinthians. 2. It is further contended, that Timothy, at the time this Epistle was written, was in danger of being "despised for his youth." (1 Tim. iv. 12.) As he became an associate of Paul at Lystra (Acts xvi. 1.) so early as A. D. 50, he must then have been, as an assistant in the Gospel, at least twenty years of age. If this Epistle was written A. D. 65, he must have been of the age of thirty-five years, and could not have been less than fifteen years a preacher of the Gospel. He could not in that case have been depised for his youth; though he might, before he had reached his twenty-seventh year. To the late date of this first Epistle, however, there are three plausible objections which admit of easy solutions. 1. It is thought, that if the first Epistle to Timothy was written after the apostle's release, he could not, with any propriety, have said to Timothy, iv. 12. Let no man despise thy youth.— But it is replied, that Servius Tullius, in classing the Roman people, as Aulus Gellius relates,' divided their age into three periods. Childhood, he limited to the age of seventeen: youth, from that to forty-six; and old age, from forty-six to the end of life. Now, supposing Timothy to have been twenty years old, A. D. 50, when he became Paul's assistant, he would be no more than 34, A. D. 64, two years after the apostle's release, when it is supposed this Epistle was written. Since, therefore, Timothy was then in that period of life, which, by the Greeks as well as Noctes Atticæ, lib. x. c. 28. the Romans, was considered as youth, the apostle, with propriety, might say to him, Let no man despise thy youth. 2. When the apostle touched at Miletus, in his voyage to Jerusalem, with the collections, the church at Ephesus had a number of elders, that is, of bishops and deacons, who came to him at Miletus, Acts xx. 17. It is therefore asked, What occasion was there, in an Epistle written after the apostle's release, to give Timothy directions concerning the ordination of bishops and deacons, in a church where there were so many elders already? The answer is, the elders who came to the apostle at Miletus, in the year 58, might have been too few for the church at Ephesus, in her increased state, in the year 65. Besides false teachers had then entered, to oppose whom, more bishops and deacons might be needed than were necessary in the year 58. Not to mention, that some of the first elders having died, others were wanted to supply their places. 3. Because the apostle wrote to Timothy, that he hoped to come to him soon, 1 Tim. iii. 14., it is argued, that the letter, in which this is said, must have been written before the apostle said to the Ephesian elders, Acts xx. 25., I know that all ye, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more. But if, by this, the first Epistle to Timo thy is proved to have been written before the apostle's interview with the elders at Miletus, his Epistles to the Philippians, to the Hebrews, and to Philemon, in which he promised to visit them, must likewise have been written before the interview: for his declaration respected the Philippians, the Hebrews, and Philemon, as well as the Ephesians: for they certainly were persons among whom the apostle had gone preaching the kingdom of God: yet no commentator ever thought the Epistles above mentioned were written to them before the apostle's interview with the Ephesian elders. On the contrary, it is universally acknowledged, that these Epistles were written four years after the interview; namely, during the apostle's first imprisonment at Rome. When, therefore, he told the Ephesian elders, that they and his other converts, among whom he had gone preaching the kingdom of God, should see his face no more, as it was no point either of faith or practice which he spake, he may well be supposed to have declared nothing but his own opinion resulting from his fears. He had lately escaped the rage of the Jews who laid wait for him in Cenchrea to kill him. (Acts xx. 3.) This, with their fury on former occasions, filled him with such anxiety, that, in writing to the Romans from Corinth, he requested them to strive together with him in their prayers, that he might be delivered from the unbelieving in Judæa. (Rom. xv. 30, 31.)Further, that in his speech to the Ephesian elders, the apostle only declared his own persuasion, dictated by his fears, and not any suggestion of the Spirit, Dr. Macknight thinks, is plain from what he had said immediately before, verse 22. Behold I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things which shall befall me there: 23. Save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me. Wherefore, although his fears were happily disappointed, and he actually visited the Ephesians after his release, his character as an inspired apostle is not hurt in the least; if in saying, he knew they should see his face no more, he declared his own persuasion only, and no dictate of the Holy Spirit.' We conclude, therefore, that Saint Paul wrote his first Epistle to Timothy about the end of the year 64. III. But whatever uncertainty may have prevailed concerning the date of this Epistle, it has always been acknowledged to be the undisputed production of the apostle Paul. Both the first and second Epistles to Timothy are cited or alluded to by the apostolical fathers, Clement of Rome,2 and Polycarp; and the first Epistle by Ignatius; and in the following centuries by Irenæus; Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Caius, Origen, and by all subsequent ecclesiastical writers without exception. Decisive as these testimonies confessedly are, the authenticity of this Epistle has been denied by Dr. Schleier 1 Dr. Benson's Preface to 1 Tim. (pp. 220-222) Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 75-78. Rosenmüller, Scholia in N. T. tom. v. pp. 1-4.; Hug's Introd. vol. ii. pp. 393-102. Lardner's Works, Svo. vol. vi. pp. 316-320.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 292-294. Doddridge and Whitby's Prefaces to 1 Tim. Macknight's Preface to 1 Tim. sect. ii. Dr. Paley has advocated the late date of this Epistle by arguments similar to those above stated. Horæ Paulinæ, pp. 286-294. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 38, 39.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 298, 299. 4 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 78, 79.; 4to. vol. i. p. 321. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 164.; 4to. vol. i. P. 368. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 224.; 4to. vol. i. p. 401. Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 374.; 4to. vol. i. p. 483. Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. p. 471.; 4to. vol. i. p. 535. macher, Professor Eickhorn, and others, and vindicated by Professor Hug; the following is an abstract of the objections and their refutation: 1. The language of the Epistle cannot be that of Saint Paul, because (it is alleged) expressions occur which are either not to be found in his other Epistles, or at least not with the same signification. But this is more or less the case in other Epistles; and some of the words alluded to are found in the New Testament, "while the composition of others betrays the apostle, who, unshackled by the laws of grammatical authority, either compounds his own words and forcible expressions, or derives them in a manner in which tragic authors would scarcely have indulged themselves." If, however, "independently of this peculiarity, we examine the whole of the diction, we shall find it assuredly Paul's. The accumulation of words of allied significations, or false synonymes, the enumerations, the short instantaneous bursts, the parentheses, particularly the long parenthesis in i. 5-18., an imitation in the use of certain words, in which any one then the animation which pervades the whole;-all is not might easily succeed, but the fac-simile of his peculiar mode of communication."10 Besides the difference of style in this Epistle, as compared with that of the preceding Epistles, is the times when the several Epistles were written, and also by accounted for by new adversaries arising, by the difference of the diversity of the subjects discussed, all which circumstances would necessarily produce a diversity of expression." 2. The great doubts which have been raised against this Epistle, because the apostle (i. 26.) has so very briefly mentioned Hymenæus and Alexander, are of no moment. He mentions them incidentally, as well-known examples of erring self-conceit, and for no other purpose besides, as he has also done in other passages, at this period of his life, viz. 2 Tim. i. 15., and ii. 17., where he also points out wellknown examples of error, as a warning to others, and this he also does incidentally.12 3. It has been asserted, that there is a contradiction between 1 Tim. i. 20. where Alexander is mentioned as a heretic, and 2 Tim. iv. 14. where he is an enemy of St. Paul. But the apostle carefully distinguishes the individual in the second Epistle from him who is noticed in the first, by the epithet of xxxus, the worker in metals, or the smith. Beza and Bolton have conjectured that he was the person who appeared at the Roman tribunal among the accusers of Paul. This, however, is of little moment, as from this name being very common, there must have been hundreds of persons who bore the name of Alexander.12 In short, whoever carefully and impartially examines the style of this Epistle, will find that the language and genius of the apostle of the Gentiles pervades it throughout; and that the animating, urgent, and affecting motives which it presents, are such as proceeded from the heart, and such as no impostor could imitate.13 affairs of the church in that city, Saint Paul wrote this EpisIV. Timothy, having been left at Ephesus, to regulate the the church, as well as in the exercise of a regular ministry. tle chiefly to instruct him in the choice of proper officers in Another and very important part of the apostle's design was to caution this young evangelist against the influence of those false teachers (Michaelis thinks they were Essenes), who, by their subtle distinctions and endless controversies, had corrupted the purity and simplicity of the Gospel; to press upon him, in all his preaching, a constant regard to the interests of practical religion; and to animate him to the greatest diligence, fidelity, and zeal, in the discharge of his office. The Epistle, therefore, consists of three parts; viz. PART I. The Introduction. (i. 1, 2.) PART II. Instructions to Timothy how to behave in the Administration of the Church at Ephesus; in which, SECT. 1. After reminding Timothy of the charge which had been committed to him, viz. To preserve the purity of the Gospel against the pernicious doctrines of the false teachers (enumerated above) whose opinions led to frivolous controversies, and not to a holy life, Saint Paul shows the use of the law of Moses, of which these teachers were ignorant. This account of the law, he assures Timothy, was agreeable to the representation of it in the Gospel, with the preaching of which he was intrusted. (i. 3-11.) Having mentioned the Gospel, the apostle, in the fulness of his heart, makes a digression to express his gratitude to God in calling him, 10 Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 403, 404. 11 Cellerier, Introd. an Nouv. Test. p. 432. 13 Cellérier, Introd. au Nouv. Test. p. 432. 12 Ilug, vol. ii. p. 405. 1. See p. 343. supra. who had been a persecutor, to the Christian faith and minis- | for the learned; and if his secret views and expectations had terial office; and observes, that his favour was extended to him, though so unworthy, as an encouragement to all that should believe in every future age. (12-20.) SECT. 2. Paul then proceeds to give Timothy particular instructions, $i. Concerning the manner in which divine worship was to be performed in the Ephesian church. (ii.) $ ii. Concerning the qualifications of the persons whom he was to ordain bishops and deacons of that church. (iii.) $ iii. After foretelling the great corruptions which were to prevail in the church in future times (iv. 1-5.), the apostle instructs Timothy, 1. How to support the sacred character. (6-16.) 2. How to adinonish aged men and women (v. 1, 2.), and in what manner he should treat widows (3-16.), elders (17-19), and offenders. (20, 21.) Annexed are some instructions to Timothy himself. (22-24.) 3. Concerning the duties of slaves. (vi. 1, 2.) SECT. 3. condemns trifling controversies and pernicious disputes, censures the excessive love of money, and charges the rich to be rich in good works. (vi. 3—19.) PART III. The Conclusion. (20, 21.) V. Although the errors of the judaizing teachers at Ephesus, which gave rise to Saint Paul's Epistles to Timothy, have long disappeared, yet "the Epistles themselves are still of great use, as they serve to show the impiety of the principles from which these errors proceeded. For the same principles are apt in every age to produce errors and vices, which, though different in name from those which prevailed in Ephesus in the apostle's days, are precisely of the same kind, and equally pernicious. These Epistles are likewise of great use in the church, as they exhibit to Christian bishops and deacons, in every age, the most perfect idea of the duties of their function; teach the manner in which these duties should be performed; describe the qualifications necessary in those who aspire to such holy and honourable offices, and explain the ends for which these offices were originally instituted, and are still continued in the church. The very same things, indeed, the apostle, about the same time, wrote to Titus in Crete; but more briefly, because he was an older and more experienced minister than Timothy. Nevertheless the repetition of these precepts and charges, is not without its use to the church still, as it maketh us more deeply sensible of their great importance: not to mention, that in the Epistle to Titus, there are things peculiar to itself, which enhance its value. In short, the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, taken together, containing a full account of the qualifications and duties of the ministers of the Gospel, may be considered as a complete body of divinely-inspired ecclesiastical canons, to be observed by the Christian clergy of all communions, to the end of the world. "These Epistles, therefore, ought to be read frequently, and with the greatest attention, by those in every age and country, who hold sacred offices, or who have it in view to obtain them: not only that they may regulate their conduct according to the directions contained in them, but that, by meditating seriously on the solemn charges delivered to all the ministers of the Gospel, in the persons of Timothy and Titus, their minds may be strongly impressed with a sense of the importance of their function, and of the obligation which lieth on them to be faithful in discharging every duty belonging to it. "It is of importance also to observe, that, in these Epistles, there are some explications of the Christian doctrines, and some displays of Saint Paul's views and expectations as an apostle of Christ, which merit our attention. For if he had been, like many of the Greek philosophers, a hypocrite who held a double doctrine, one for the vulgar, and another As In using this expression-Great is the mystery of godliness (iii. 16.), the apostle is generally supposed to allude to the heathen mysteries. those mysteries have always a reference to some deity, this circumstance greatly favours-not to say, confirms-the common reading of this text, which has been so much controverted: for, if no mention had been made in this case of a God, such an omission would have mained the apostle's description in a most essential point, and obscured the beauty of his fine allusion. (Brekell's Discourses, p. 424. note.) On the much litigated question respecting the reading of sos in 1 Tim. iii. 16. the reader will find a perspicuous statement of the evidence in Mr. Holden's Scripture Testimonies to the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, pp. 181-188. There is an elaborate essay on this passage in the Christian Observer for 1809, vol. i. pp. 271-277. See also Dr. Berriman's Critical Dissertation on 1 Tim. iii. 16. 8vo. London, 1741. Velthusen's Observations on various Subjects, pp. 49-104. 8vo. London, 1773. Dr. Hales's Treatise on Faith in the Holy Trinity, vol. ii. pp. 67-104. and Mr. Nolan's Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, pp. 274-276. But the fullest view of the evidence, both external and internal, will be found in the Rev. Dr. Henderson's Great Mystery of Godliness incontrovertible (London, 1830), who has DEMONSTRATED THE GENUINENESS OF THE READING 5, from the united and indisputable testimonies of manuscripts, ancient versions, quotations in the writings of the fathers, and the best printed editions of the Greek Testament, both early and recent, as well as from internal evidence. 2 X VOL. II. been different from those which he publicly professed to the world, he would have given, without all doubt, some insinuation thereof in letters written to such intimate friends. Yet, throughout the whole of these Epistles, no discovery of that kind is made. The doctrine contained in them is the same with that taught in the Epistles designed for the inspection and direction of the church in general: and the views and hopes which he expresses are the same with those which he uniformly taught mankind to entertain. What stronger proofs can we desire of the apostle's sincerity and faithfulness than these ?""2 On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Hora Paulinæ, Chap. XI. I. SECTION XIII. ON THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY. Date.-II. Of the place where Timothy was, when Paul wrote this Epistle to him.-III. Its scope.-IV. Synopsis of its contents.-V. Observations on this Epistle. I. THAT Paul was a prisoner when he wrote the second Epistle to Timothy, is evident from i. 8. 12. 16. and ii. 9.; and that his imprisonment was in Rome appears from i. 17., and is universally admitted. But, whether he wrote it during his first imprisonment, recorded in Acts xxviii., or during a second imprisonment there (which was the uniform tradition of the primitive church), is a point that has been much disputed. The former opinion is advocated by Drs. Hammond, Lightfoot, Lardner, and Hug; and the latter, by Drs. Benson, Macknight, and Paley, Bishop Tomline, Michaelis, Rosenmüller, and others. That the last-mentioned opinion is most correct, we think will appear from the following considerations: 1. A collation of the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, and Philemon (which are known to have been written during Saint Paul's first imprisonment), with the second, Epistle to Timothy, will show that this Epistle was not written during the time when those Epistles were written. In the former Epistles, the author confidently looked forward to his liberation from confinement, and his speedy departure from Rome. He tells the Philippians (ii. 24.), "I trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly." Philemon he bids to prepare for him a lodging; "for I trust," says he, "that through your prayers I shall be given unto you." (ver. 22.) In the Epistle before us he holds a language extremely different: "I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight; I have finished my course; I have kept the faith; henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day." (iv. 6-8.) Again, when the former Epistles were written from Rome, Timothy was with Paul; and he is joined with him in writing to the Colossians, the Philippians, and to Philemon. The present Epistle implies that he was absent. Further, in the former Epistles, Demas was with Paul at Rome: "Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you." In the Epistle now before us: 66 Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is gone to Thessalonica.' Once more in the former Epistle, Mark was with Paul, and joins in saluting the Colossians. In the present Epistle, Timothy is ordered to bring him with him, "for he is profitable to me for the ministry." (iv. 11.) 2. The circumstances of Paul's imprisonment, as referred to in this Epistle, are widely different from the imprisonment related in Acts xxviii. 30, 31. Then he was permitted to dwell alone in his own hired house, and receive all who came to him, and publicly to preach the Gospel, being guarded only by a single soldier. But it appears from 2 Tim. i. 16-18., that the apostle was in close confinement, so that Onesiphorus, on his coming to Rome, had considerable difficulty in finding him out. And that crimes were now laid to his charge very different from those formerly alleged against him, appears from ii. 9.; where he says that he suffers evil, even unto bonds, as a malefactor; plainly implying that he was not only abridged of all liberty, but also that he was bound, hands and feet, in a close dungeon. Dr. Macknight thinks this was probably under the pretence that he was one of those Christians whom Nero accused of having set Rome on fire. Hence the word malefactor (xancvpyes) which in this passage Dr. Macknight's Pref. to 1 Tim. sect. iv. |