No. 530 BROADWAY.
1857.
THE following Lectures were first published in two volumes, which appeared at different times. The original design of the Author, was to illustrate the principal events in the history of the Church, from the ascension of Christ to the meeting of the Council of Jerusalem. He was afterwards induced to extend the selection of passages to the end of the Book; and of these the chief subject is Paul, to whose labours and sufferings the narrative confines our attention. The Lectures have been revised, and are now presented to the Public in one volume.
LECTURE I. | |
---|---|
THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST, HIS LAST INTERVIEW WITH HIS DISCIPLES, AND HIS ASCENSION TO HEAVEN. |
7 |
LECTURE II. | |
THE DAY OF PENTECOST. |
20 |
LECTURE III. | |
THE FORMATION AND ORDER OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. |
31 |
LECTURE IV. | |
THE LAME MAN CURED BY PETER AND JOHN. |
46 |
LECTURE V. | |
PETER AND JOHN EXAMINED BY THE COUNCIL. |
58 |
LECTURE VI. | |
ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA. |
72 |
LECTURE VII. | |
THE COUNSEL OF GAMALIEL. |
85 |
LECTURE VIII. | |
THE INSTITUTION OF DEACONS, AND THE HISTORY OF STEPHEN. |
98 |
LECTURE IX. | |
THE MARTYRDOM OF STEPHEN. |
111 |
LECTURE X. | |
THE HISTORY OF SIMON MAGUS. |
123 |
LECTURE XI. | |
THE CONVERSION OF THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH. |
136 |
LECTURE XII. | |
THE CONVERSION OF PAUL. |
149 |
LECTURE XIII. | |
THE CONVERSION OF CORNELIUS. |
163 |
HEROD AND PETER. |
176 |
LECTURE XV. | |
PAUL AND BARNABAS IN LYSTRA. |
190 |
LECTURE XVI. | |
THE COUNCIL OF JERUSALEM. |
202 |
LECTURE XVII. | |
THE MISSION OF PAUL AND SILAS TO MACEDONIA. |
220 |
LECTURE XVIII. | |
THE CONVERSION OF THE JAILOR OF PHILIPPI. |
234 |
LECTURE XIX. | |
PAUL AND SILAS IN THESSALONICA AND BEREA. |
248 |
LECTURE XX. | |
PAUL IN ATHENS. |
261 |
LECTURE XXI. | |
PAUL IN CORINTH. |
276 |
LECTURE XXII. | |
PAUL IN EPHESUS. |
290 |
LECTURE XXIII. | |
THE UPROAR IN EPHESUS. |
304 |
LECTURE XXIV. | |
THE LAST INTERVIEW OF PAUL WITH THE ELDERS OF EPHESUS. |
319 |
LECTURE XXV. | |
PAUL IN JERUSALEM. |
335 |
LECTURE XXVI. | |
PAUL BEFORE THE COUNCIL. |
349 |
LECTURE XXVII. | |
PAUL BEFORE FELIX. |
363 |
LECTURE XXVIII. | |
PAUL BEFORE FESTUS AND AGRIPPA. |
377 |
LECTURE XXIX. | |
PAUL IN MALTA AND ROME. |
393 |
WE are prompted by curiosity to inquire into the origin of nations, to trace their progress from rudeness to refinement, and to mark the steps by which they rose to eminence in power, in wealth, and in knowledge. To these subjects the researches of profane history are directed; and while its pages communicate instruction and entertainment to every reader, they particularly engage the attention of the statesman, who derives from them a more extensive acquaintance with mankind, and is enabled to add to his experience the accumulated wisdom of ages.
To a Christian the history of the Church must appear more worthy of notice than the revolutions of empire. A society, towards which Providence has, in all ages, exercised a particular care, presents an interesting object of inquiry; and must exhibit, in the detail of events, admirable proofs of the power, and wisdom, and goodness of God. Its history is the history of religion; of the accomplishment of a long series of prophecies; of the execution of a scheme, to which all the other parts of the divine administration are subservient.
The early periods of the history of
nations are generally enveloped in fable; and although the truth could
be discovered through the veil which conceals it, would, for the most
part, present little that is worthy to be known. The human race may
be considered as then in a state of infancy. Their ideas are few and
gross, their manners are barbarous, and their knowledge of arts is
As a record of the Acts, or proceedings of the Apostles, in collecting and modelling the Church, this book forms a valuable portion of Scripture. It contains information upon subjects of great importance; the miraculous manner in which those simple and unlettered men were qualified for their arduous work; the means by which the Church was founded, and rose to a holy temple in the Lord; the rapidity with which the gospel was propagated; the opposition which was made to it by Jews and Gentiles; and the causes to which its unexampled success should be ascribed. The narrative is written in a plain and artless manner; and our pleasure in perusing it suffers no abatement from the suspicion of misinformation, or partiality in the writer.
The historian, as we learn from the introductory verses, was the same person who published the Gospel, which, from the earliest ages, has been uniformly attributed to Luke. He was alive during the events which he records, was an eye-witness of many of them, and inquired, we may believe, into the rest, with the same diligence which he used in compiling his Gospel. Although he was not one of the Apostles, yet he lived in habits of intimate correspondence with them; and the Church has, from the beginning, received his writings as of equal authority with theirs.
I propose to deliver a course of Lectures on some passages of this book, selecting such as relate the more remarkable events in the history of the primitive Church. Of those passages it is not my intention to give a minute explanation, but to illustrate the principal topics, and to deduce such instructions as they seem to suggest. Conformably to this plan, I shall at this time confine your attention to three points, to which the verses now read have a reference; the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead; his last interview with his disciples; and his ascension to heaven.
I. The first point which claims our notice
in this passage, is the resurrection of our Saviour, of which Luke makes
mention in the
It is vain to insinuate,
that the Apostles might be imposed upon by the power of imagination, which
the eagerness of their wishes and expectations had excited, and might
thus fancy that they saw what had no real existence. It does not appear
that they actually expected the resurrection of their Master; but, on
the contrary, there is reason to think, that they had almost given over
all hope of that event. When the women, who had been at the sepulchre,
told them of it, their words seemed as “idle tales;” and the two disciples
on the road to Emmaus may be supposed to have expressed the sentiments
and feelings of their brethren, when they said, “We trusted that it had
been he which should have redeemed Israel;” manifestly using the language of
disappointment and despondency. In such a state of mind, there was no room for
imagination to operate. It will be still more evident, that they were not under
its
Infidels object, that the Apostles,
who were interested persons were the only witnesses of the resurrection,
and that Jesus did not show himself to the Sanhedrim and the inhabitants
of Jerusalem, as he ought to have done, that the reality of the event
might be placed beyond dispute. They affirm, that on this account the
whole narrative is suspicious. There is one important circumstance,
which, perhaps, they willingly forget, that the enemies of Jesus were
the first and immediate witnesses of the resurrection, that event having
taken place, according to Matthew, in the presence of the Roman soldiers,
not before the eyes of the disciples. Sufficient reasons have been assigned
why he did not appear to the rulers and people of the Jews, which your
time will not permit me fully to state. It may be remarked, that although
this demand had been complied with, and our Lord had resorted after
his resurrection to the temple, and walked in the streets of Jerusalem,
it is by no means certain that the purpose which is pretended would
have been gained. We have no ground to think, that the Jews, who would
not believe the testimony of Moses and the Prophets, nor the evidence
of our Saviour’s miracles, would have believed, although they had seen
him risen from the dead. But upon the supposition, that they had been
convinced by this last and seemingly irresistible proof, the truth of
his resurrection would have been as much perplexed as ever by the cavils
of free-thinkers. We should have been told of the superstition and
After this general observation, I may appeal to every unprejudiced person, whether there is any thing in the narrative of this transaction, in its general complexion, or its particular parts, which gives countenance to the suspicion of imposture; or rather, whether it does not bear unequivocal marks of simplicity, candour, and the sacred love of truth. Let it be farther considered, that the testimony of the Apostles was given in public, and before the persons who were above all concerned to detect a falsehood, and possessed the means of detecting it; that it was consistent and uniform, there not being a single instance of retractation or variation among the witnesses; that no motive can be assigned for their conduct if it was false, as in that case they could not expect to be believed, and the only prospect before them was that of persecution and death in this world, without the hope of a recompense in the next; that they did not require men to give credit to their simple testimony, but appealed, in confirmation of it, to miracles wrought, as they affirmed, by the power of him who had been raised from the dead; and, finally, that this testimony was believed by thousands of Jews and Gentiles, although their prejudices against it were the strongest imaginable. I challenge all the infidels in the world to produce a single fact, in the whole compass of history, supported by more decisive evidence.
I shall subjoin a remark upon the qualifications of the Apostles. What
made those babblers so eloquent; those ignorant and illiterate men so
profoundly skilled in the mysteries of redemption; those cowards so
courageous, as to despise every danger, and maintain the truth amidst
the most terrible sufferings? This change could not have been effected
by their Master, if he was still lying in the grave;
II. Our attention is next called to the interview,
which took place between our Lord and his disciples prior to his ascension.
It is mentioned in the
To this question Jesus did not return
a direct answer, but one which implied a reproof of that vain curiosity
which had led them to propose it. “It is not for you to know the times,
and the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.” These
words import, that the revolutions in the civil and religious state
of the world were predetermined by God, as they are all brought to pass
by his providence; that he only knows the order and series of events;
and
This answer, being a rebuke to their unhallowed
curiosity, was calculated to discourage the Apostles. That they might
not be dejected, and no disagreeable impression might be left upon their
minds, our Lord subjoined a promise, well fitted to comfort them. “But
ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you;
and ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea,
and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” In the
The promise, for which
they were commanded to wait, our Saviour called “the promise of the
Father,” to inform his disciples, that it is the Father who sends the
Holy Ghost, to give effect to the death of his Son in the conversion
and sanctification of sinners;
From the mention of the promise of the Spirit, Jesus takes occasion to point out to the disciples the difference between his own administration and that of his forerunner. “For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” The Baptist, although greater than the Prophets, could only sprinkle his disciples with water, to signify their purification from the guilt and defilement of sin; but Jesus was able to communicate the Spirit himself in his regenerating influences, and miraculous gifts. To apply the means of salvation is the province of the ministers of religion; but the wisest and holiest of them can contribute nothing to their efficacy. The source of spiritual life and power is the invisible Head of the Church, “from whom all the body, by joints and hands, having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.” The blessings of grace are entrusted to his disposal; and she gives or withholds them at his pleasure.
That our Saviour when he made this promise, claimed no power of which he was not possessed, the disciples were soon to be convinced by experience. They were commanded to wait at Jerusalem till the promise should be performed. Accordingly, we know that more than ten days did not elapse between this meeting and the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Ghost descended upon them.
The interview now described took place immediately before his ascension; and the historian proceeds to relate the event.
III. “And when he had spoken these things,
while they beheld, he was taken up, and a cloud received him out of
their sight.” Jesus had now fulfilled all the designs of his mission.
He had declared the counsels of God to mankind; he had offered himself
upon the cross as a sacrifice for sin; and having triumphed over death,
he had given his disciples sufficient opportunity to assure themselves
of the truth of the fact. “I have glorified thee on the earth; I
This
event, however honourable to their Lord, and joyful to themselves, had
they understood its design, could not fail to affect the disciples in
a disagreeable manner, in the first moments of surprise, and while they
were not acquainted with the important purposes to be served by the
ascension. To his personal presence they had conceived a warm attachment,
founded in esteem of his excellencies, and experience of his friendship.
From his lips they had heard discourses replenished with wisdom and
grace; and by his hand they had seen works of the most wonderful and
beneficent nature performed. He had been their counsellor in difficulties,
and their comforter in sorrow. To be deprived in a moment of his company;
to be left alone in the midst of numerous and implacable enemies; to
have the prospect of labours, and sufferings, and death, without their
Master at their head, without their condescending and affectionate Saviour
to advise and encourage them; these were circumstances
They did not, however, remain long in this uncomfortable state. “Behold two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come, in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” There is no doubt that these men in appearance were angels; and the splendour of their dress was a sign by which they must have been immediately known to be heavenly messengers. They were a part of that illustrious retinue, which came from the celestial regions to attend our Lord in his ascension, and to heighten the glory of his triumph. Thousands, and ten thousands of angels accompanied him as he passed from earth to heaven, celebrating his praises. “The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them as in Sinai, in the holy place. Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive.” To the sorrowful disciples, the words of the angels were full of comfort. They seem to suggest a resemblance between the ascension of Jesus and his second appearance, and in this way have been frequently explained. But I rather think, that nothing more is intended than to assert, that as certainly as he had ascended to heaven, he would descend from it, at the time appointed by his Father; and that the Apostles should entertain no more doubt of the one event than of the other. Between the ascension and his coming at the end of the world, there is no great similarity of circumstances, unless we should choose to say, that as he departed in a cloud, so with clouds he will return, and that as he was now accompanied by angels, so the same glorious spirits will be his attendants and ministers, when he appears in the character of universal Judge.
But the chief thing to
which the angels called the attention of the disciples, and ours should
be directed, is the certainty of his second
Such was the comfortable prospect which the words of the angels gave to the disciples; and we need not wonder, that their fears and sorrows were dispelled, and that, as we are informed in another place, “they returned to Jerusalem with great joy; and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God.”
I conclude with the following reflections upon the passage.
First, We follow no cunningly devised fable, when we receive
the gospel as an authentic record of the character and doctrine of Jesus
Christ. It is confirmed by “infallible proofs,” by ample and luminous
evidence, which is sufficient to convince every ingenuous mind, every man who
examines it with a candid, dispassionate temper. You may be assured, my
brethren, that it is not for want of evidence that the gospel is in any instance
rejected. Difficulties, indeed, there may be, which are apt to perplex
ill-informed and superficial observers; but the chief objection to it, an
objection level to the comprehension of every depraved heart, is its holiness. “Men hate the light, because their deeds are evil.” This will appear to be no
false charge, if you consider, that there is scarcely any thing that infidels
believe, for which they have half the evidence
In the second place, Christians may place unbounded confidence in their Redeemer, who having conquered their enemies, and triumphed over death and the grave, has ascended, in the most glorious manner, to heaven, where he sways the sceptre of universal government, and bearing his people, and all their interests upon his heart, makes continual intercession for them in the presence of his Father. Why should you be afraid to draw near to the throne of God, and to present your supplications? Is not the merit of our great High Priest sufficient to counterbalance your demerit? And shall not the efficacy of his prayers ensure the acceptance and success of yours, notwithstanding the imperfection which adheres to your best duties? Why should you be discouraged by adverse dispensations of providence, by the power and threatenings of your adversaries, by the afflictions of the Church, by the uproar and confusion of the nations? Is not he who reigns the friend and patron of the righteous, under whose protection they are safe, and by whose almighty agency, and unerring wisdom, the perplexities and turmoils of the present scene shall issue in perfect order and eternal felicity?
Lastly, The attention and the hope of Christians
are now directed to the second appearance of their Saviour. The ancient
Church looked for his coming in the flesh; we, according to his promise,
look for his coming in glory. “Lift up your heads with joy, believers;
for the day of your redemption draweth nigh.” To them alone who are
waiting for him, will he appear for salvation; but there is not an eye
which shall not see him in the clouds, nor a knee which shall not bow
before him. How alarming will be the sight, how mortifying the homage,
to infidels and blasphemers of his gospel, to the enemies of his grace,
to the despisers of his institutions, to the transgressors of his laws?
Professed disciples of the Son of Man, are you prepared to go forth
and meet him? To what class of mankind do you belong? to that which,
standing on his right hand, shall be invited to enter into his kingdom?
or to that which, being ranged on the left, shall be condemned to darkness
THE promise of the Holy Ghost, which our Saviour made to the disciples at his last interview with them, was well fitted to reconcile their minds to his departure, and to encourage them in the view of the various and difficult duties of the Apostolical office. There was but a short interval between his ascension and the performance of the promise; an event of great importance in the history of the Church, and of which the passage now read gives an account.
The first point which requires our notice, is the time when “the promise of the Father,” as it is termed, was performed. We are told
in the
Our attention is next called to the
subjects of this miracle, or the persons upon whom the Holy Ghost descended. “They were all with one accord in one place.” Some suppose, that the
historian refers to the hundred and twenty disciples mentioned in the
Let us now consider the account of the miracle. In the first
place, we must take notice of the symbols, or external signs of it,
which were two; the one addressed to the eye, and the other to the ear.
We read, in the
It may be thought, that a gentle breeze would have been
a more proper emblem of the Holy Ghost than a loud and violent wind;
that it would have accorded better with the purpose of his descent
The other sign which accompanied
this miracle is described in the
After this account of the signs, we proceed to inquire into the nature, of the miracle. “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” The general effect is manifest, namely, the communication of the knowledge of languages, with which the Apostles were formerly unacquainted; but it does not appear, whether the same languages were imparted to them all, or to one was given the knowledge of some, and to another, the knowledge of others. The Holy Ghost could “ divide to every one of them severally as he pleased;” but as they were all destined to preach to different nations, there can be no doubt that they were all furnished with a diversity of tongues.
Language is composed of articulate sounds, which, when uttered by the
mouth, or represented by characters or letters, signify certain ideas.
The connexion between the sounds and the things which they signify is
arbitrary, not founded in nature, but in convention; and, consequently,
a sound can convey no information to the hearer till he have learned
its meaning. Hence the acquisition of a foreign language requires close
application and frequent practice. Much time must be spent, before a
person can be acquainted with the signification of the great variety
of sounds which are used in any country, and be able to understand them
as soon as they are pronounced. It is still more difficult to attain
the power of speaking a foreign language fluently and accurately; or
to become so familiar with its words, as instantly to call them up,
to express the ideas, which arise in the mind. What increases the difficulty
is, that, in all languages, the same word has sometimes a variety of
meanings, so that, if it be not skilfully used, it may suggest a sense
very different from that which it was our intention to express; and
that there is a mode peculiar to every language of combining and arranging
its words, without observing which, a stranger shall speak unintelligibly
to the natives. Those who have engaged in the study of languages can
attest, that it is an arduous task, when one aims at a thorough acquaintance
with them; and although, after much labour, some may be able to understand,
with considerable ease, a book written in a foreign tongue, yet there
is not one in twenty who is capable of carrying on conversation in it
with facility. It may be added, that the sounds of a foreign language
are, in some
These remarks are intended to show you the astonishing nature of the miracle which was performed on the day of Pentecost. The Apostles were illiterate men, who understood no language but that of their own country, and could speak it only according to the rude dialect of Galilee. They had never thought of learning the languages of foreigners; and it is probable, that even the names of some of the nations, mentioned in the following verses, had not reached their ears. Yet, in a moment were those men inspired with the knowledge of an immense number of words, which they had never heard before, and with the knowledge not only of the words, but of the connected ideas, and of the structure, the arrangement, and the peculiar phrases of the languages to which they belonged. At the same time, their organs were rendered capable of adapting themselves to sounds different from each other, as well as from those to which they had been familiarized from their infancy, Notwithstanding this diversity, there was not the smallest confusion in their minds, nor were they in danger of mixing the words of different languages together; but they spoke each as distinctly, as if they had been acquainted with it alone.
It may be safely affirmed, that there is not a more remarkable miracle recorded in the New Testament. It will not, however, appear incredible to any person, who considers, on the one hand, that the cause was adequate to the effect, for it was produced by that Being who made the tongue of man, and was the original Author of language; and, on the other, that it was necessary to qualify the Apostles for executing their commission to preach the gospel to every creature. Without the gift of tongues their ministrations must have been confined to their own countrymen; for it is not probable, that at their time of life, and with their habits, they could have acquired, by ordinary means, a single foreign language so perfectly, as to be able to deliver a discourse in it upon the subject of religion. We have been informed, by the missionaries in Otaheite, that after a residence of several years among the natives, in a situation the most advantageous of all for learning a language, they have not yet ventured to preach or pray publicly in the language of the country.
In the following verses, the historian
relates the impression which the miracle made upon the multitude. “And there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men; out of every
nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude
came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them
speak in his own language. And they were all amazed, and marvelled,
saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans?
And how hear we every man in our own tongue wherein we were born? Parthians,
and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea,
and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt,
and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews
and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues
the wonderful works of God.” It is probable, that the sound of the “rushing mighty wind” alarmed the persons in the neighbourhood, and
drew them to the place from which it proceeded; and the report having
spread through the city, a great number of spectators was speedily assembled.
The Apostles immediately began to exercise the gift of tongues, as they
observed in the crowd strangers from very different parts of the earth.
These had now come to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of Pentecost,
or, as the original term may import, had taken up their residence there,
in the expectation, as some think, of the appearance of the Messiah.
After the Babylonian captivity, many of the Jews remained in the countries
in which they had sojourned during its continuance; and by subsequent
revolutions they were dispersed over all the East, and through almost
every province of the Roman empire. Hence, although they retained their
religion and their peculiar manners, they unavoidably adopted the language
of the natives. Together with the Jews of the dispersion, there were
present also, on this occasion, several persons of heathen extraction,
who, being convinced of the unity of God, and of the divine authority
of the law of Moses, had received the seal of circumcision, and were
incorporated with the peculiar people. These were the proselytes mentioned
in the end of the
How great must have been the astonishment
of this mixed multitude, to hear themselves unexpectedly addressed in
the languages of the countries from which they respectively came: The
assembly was composed of strangers from at least fourteen different
nations; and every man heard the Apostles speak in his own tongue. The
speakers, they perceived, were Galileans, common men, from a part
But a part of the audience did not discover so favourable a
disposition. They attempted to turn the affair into ridicule, and imputed
to intoxication what was manifestly the effect of supernatural influence. “Others mocking, said, These men are full of new wine.” Some commentators
suppose these mockers to have been inhabitants of Jerusalem, who understood
no foreign language, and represent them as acting from ignorance rather
than from malice. But the testimony of the strangers was sufficient
to have convinced: such persons, that there was a real miracle in the
case; and it might have been easily known, that the Apostles were sober,
from the gravity of their appearance and gestures. The true reason of this
calumnious charge is to be found in their opposition to Christ and his religion,
which they heard his ministers proclaiming; for it appears from the ninth verse,
that besides the languages of foreigners they spoke likewise that of Judea. As
the Pharisees, when they saw the miracles of Jesus, malignantly ascribed them to
the assistance of Satan; so these men sought to evade this proof of his
resurrection and ascension, by pronouncing all that passed to be the effect of
intemperance. The evidence in favour of the gospel may be sufficient to convince
the understandings of some men, whose
I shall close this discourse with the following reflections.
Let us, sinners of the Gentiles, consider our interest in this miraculous dispensation, and the obligations which we are under to be thankful for it. It was preparatory to the accomplishment of the gracious designs of heaven towards the nations of the world; who were perishing without a vision, but to whom the salvation of God was now to be revealed. When the law was published from Sinai, it was delivered to the Israelites in their own language, because they were alone to enjoy the benefit of it; but the new law from Sion was promulgated in a diversity of languages, to signify that it was intended to be universal. “Every man was now to hear in his own tongue, the wonderful works of God.” “Let us sing a new song to the Lord, because he hath done marvellous things. The Lord hath made known his salvation: his righteousness hath he openly showed in the sight of the heathen.”
The event, recorded in this passage,
leads us to reflect upon the means by which the Christian religion was
established in the earth. “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit,
saith the Lord.” The first missionaries were destitute of all natural
qualifications for their arduous work; and the world was adverse to
the reception of the faith. But the same Spirit, who endowed them with
supernatural
Lastly, “If the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and
every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward;
how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first
began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that
heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders,
and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to
his own will?” These words are full of alarm to open infidels and to
secret unbelievers. To the former they announce the certainty, and the
dreadful nature of the punishment which awaits them, if they persist
in rejecting and vilifying a religion, stamped with such characters
of truth. Your sneers and cavils cannot make that false which is true;
and if the gospel is true, as we know it to be, and the best and most
enlightened men, in all ages, have believed, think for a moment what
will be your doom! If the gospel is true, so are its threatenings; and
they are awful beyond conception. To the other class of persons, who
are secret unbelievers, but call themselves disciples of Jesus, the
words of the Apostle suggest matter of serious consideration. You profess
to give credit to the gospel, but you do not cordially assent to its
doctrines, nor embrace its promises, nor submit to its authority, nor
cultivate that holiness of heart and life which it enjoins. Shall a
salvation, in its nature so desirable, in the means of its accomplishment
so wonderful, be safely despised? Shall the Son of God be rejected with
impunity? Shall men trample upon his blood, and refuse the testimony
of his Spirit, and yet run no hazard? Is
As the passage now read refers to the preceding part of the chapter,
it is necessary to take a summary view of its contents. Our Lord having,
according to his promise, poured out the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles,
on the day of Pentecost, a mixed multitude of natives and strangers
were collected, to whom they published, in their respective languages, “the wonderful works of God.” Some were astonished, and eagerly inquired
into the cause of that extraordinary event; while others, from malignity
against Jesus and his religion, affirmed that the Apostles were intoxicated.
To satisfy the inquiries of the one class, and to repel the accusation
of the other, Peter rose with his brethren; and having first shown,
by a reference to the national manners, that the supposition of drunkenness
at so early an hour was destitute of all probability, he informed the
audience, that the event which had now taken place was the fulfilment
of a prophecy long since delivered by Joel. He then proceeded to the
main purpose of his speech, to prove that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.
With this view, having reminded them of the miracles performed by our
Saviour during his public ministry, which were the seal of heaven affixed
to his commission, he boldly charges his hearers with the atrocious
crime of putting him to death; but affirms that God had restored him
to life, and that it was not possible that death should have retained
him under its dominion. This fact, which was the point at issue between
the Jews, and the Apostles, he establishes by an argument, the validity
of which they would hardly venture to dispute; by an appeal to a prophecy
of David. After some reasoning, intended to convince them that the passage
which he had cited could not be applied to the Prophet himself, he again
asserts the resurrection of
It awakened compunction, and an eager inquiry with respect to the course which it was necessary for them to pursue. “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said unto Peter, and to the rest of the Apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” The sentence of death was reluctantly pronounced upon our Lord by the Roman governor, whose conscience attested the innocence of the prisoner at his bar, but who was prevailed upon, by the clamours and menaces of the multitude, to disregard its admonitions. The people, the dupes of their priests and rulers, had conceived the most violent prejudice against Christ as an impostor, and were persuaded that they discovered fervent zeal for the glory of God, and the honour of their holy religion, when they demanded his crucifixion. Some women followed him in the way to Calvary with tears and lamentations; but the deluded, infuriated crowd, beheld his cruel sufferings without pity. In how different a light did their conduct now appear to them, when the evidence of the Messiahship of Jesus flashed conviction on their minds! If ever confusion, remorse, and terror, rushed at once into the bosom of a sinner with irresistible force, it was at this moment, when the Jews learned, that the deceiver whom they had nailed to the cross, the blasphemer whose blood they had shed, was the Redeemer promised to the Church, the Son of the living God, the Lord of heaven and earth. What a crime had they committed! The annals of human guilt could not furnish another of equal atrocity. How dreadful was the punishment which they had reason to expect! Now they remembered their own imprecation, “His blood be on us, and on our children;” and they trembled lest its weight should press them down to the lowest hell. Alarmed and perplexed, tortured with a consciousness of guilt, and dreading the just vengeance of heaven, from which they knew not how to escape, they say to Peter and the rest of the Apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” They were anxious to hear from these ambassadors of Jesus, whether there was any hope of pardon for so great a crime, any means of protection from the wrath which was ready to overwhelm them.
To this question, Peter, in the name of his brethren, returned the following answer. “Repent, and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” One general remark must occur to every person who considers this answer, that the Jews are directed to Jesus himself for the remission of their sins. That blood only, which they had impiously shed, could wash them from guilt; and thus what is true in reference to sinners in general, was particularly illustrated in the case of those men, that “his blood speaketh better things than that of Abel,” crying to God for the pardon, not for the punishment, of his enemies and murderers. The particular course which he directs them to take, is repentance and baptism. Repentance cannot here signify remorse and sorrow for sin, for these feelings were already working in their breasts. Nor does it mean the relinquishment of their sins, and the amendment of their lives, because, although reformation will be the undoubted result of contrition of heart, yet there was not time to carry good resolutions into effect prior to baptism, to which the repentance here enjoined was a previous step. The penitent Jews appear to have been immediately baptized. In the present case, therefore, repentance is equivalent to that complete change of views and dispositions which is implied in the cordial reception of the gospel, and consists in a perception of the excellencies of the character of Christ, an approbation of the plan of salvation by his righteousness, and a reliance upon his obedience and blood as the foundation of our acceptance and our hopes. Such sentiments and exercises of mind are very different from those, to which the hearers of Peter were accustomed, who had “gone about to establish their own righteousness;” and from those, which are familiar to a natural man, who sees no comeliness or beauty in, the Saviour for which he should be desired, and disdains “to submit to the righteousness of God.” Yet, till this change, to which the heart is so adverse, and which can be effected only by supernatural power, be experienced, we have no interest in the redemption of Christ; for although God has “set him forth as a propitiation for sin,” he becomes actually such to a sinner, only “through faith in his blood.”
With repentance, baptism in the name, or by the authority of
Christ, is conjoined; and Peter required it from his hearers for the three
following reasons: first, as a solemn and public declaration of the change of
their views and dispositions, the baptism of Christ
To encourage his hearers to comply with this exhortation, he sub joined the following declaration or promise. “And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” When in this book the Holy Ghost is said to be given, the meaning frequently is, that his extraordinary gifts were communicated. This is evident from the cases of those in Samaria who received the word, of Cornelius and his company, and of the disciples of John, who were baptized at Ephesus; and it is observable, that in two of those cases, the persons immediately began to speak with tongues. From these examples, as well as from the consideration, that the words were spoken just after the descent of the Spirit, we may conceive Peter to have assured the Jews, that they should participate of the miraculous gifts which had been conferred upon the Apostles. Yet, as we have no reason to think, notwithstanding the liberal distribution of such gifts in the primitive Church, that they were imparted to every person who believed; it seems proper to interpret the words as referring likewise to the sanctifying influences and comforts of the Spirit, and to consider the Apostle as holding out a promise of these to all, and of extraordinary endowments to such among them as God should be pleased to qualify, in this manner, for the manifestation and establishment of the truth.
“For the
promise,” he adds, “is unto you, and to your children, and to all that
are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” Many commentators
suppose, that he alludes to the promise which God made to Abraham, that “he would be a God unto him, and to his seed after him,” with a design
to convince the Jews, that by embracing the new religion, they should
lose none of the privileges which they enjoyed under the old. The same
promise was continued, and gave them and their children a right to baptism,
the present seal of the covenant, as both had formerly received the
seal of circumcision. If, however, we should rather understand the promise
to be that of the Holy Ghost, which the connexion seems to suggest,
the same argument may be deduced from it: for if the spirit is promised,
not to believers alone, but to their seed, it follows that their seed
are taken into the covenant of God, and, consequently,
To this exhortation he added “many other words;” the purport of which
was to excite them “to save themselves from that untoward generation.” This character is descriptive of the perverseness with which the unbelieving
Jews opposed all the methods of divine grace. Our Saviour had formerly
illustrated their conduct by the capriciousness and pettishness of children. “Whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children
sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, and saying,
We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto
you, and ye have not lamented. For John came neither eating nor drinking,
and they say, He hath a devil. The Son of Man came eating and drinking,
and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a wine-bibber, a friend of
publicans and sinners.” They were offended at the austerity of the Baptist,
and imputed it to the influence of an unsocial, melancholy demon;
they were equally displeased with the more open and familiar manners
of our Lord, and advanced against him a charge of intemperance and licentiousness.
A more complete description of frowardness was never given than the
following, in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians. “The Jews,” says
Paul, “both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own Prophets, and have
persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.” Whatever means were employed for their good, the effect was still the
same, obstinate resistance or sullen contempt. Over this incorrigible
race the judgments of heaven were impending. There was indeed, a season
allowed for repentance, during which the gospel would be preached to
them; but as soon as it should expire, unmingled vengeance would overwhelm
the ungodly nation. Peter exhorts the awakened Jews to flee from the
wrath to come. Joel had long ago foretold the terrors of the day of
the Lord, and the salvation of those who should believe. “I will show
wonders in the heavens, and in
The success of Peter’s sermon is pointed out in the next verse. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.” Their “receiving his word gladly,” signifies their believing and embracing, with joy and gratitude, the tidings of salvation through the crucified Jesus. Such is the reception, which the gospel will not fail to meet with from those, who are awakened to perceive and feel their need of its comforts. A philosopher, a speculatist, who looks upon it merely as a theory, may coolly sit down and discuss its evidence; but the bosom of a convinced and trembling sinner throbs with emotions of desire and transport, when he hears its gracious declarations; and he hastens to lay hold of the offered mercy with the same eagerness, with which a criminal, shuddering under the suspended axe of the executioner, accepts the unexpected pardon of his prince. Their obedience to the gospel whs manifested by submission to the ordinance of baptism, in which they at once expressed their faith in Christ, and recognised him as the Lord of their consciences.
We may
stop, for a few moments, to consider this transaction as a proof of
the sincerity of those converts, of their full conviction of the truth
of the gospel. To an acknowledgement of Christ and his religion, the
prejudices of education, the example of their friends, the authority
of their rulers, and the sacred institutions of Moses, as they were
then explained, presented powerful obstacles. They could not become
his disciples without the renunciation of early and favourite opinions,
and without a sacrifice of principle; and there was every reason to
expect, that they should incur the reproaches of their countrymen, as
apostates, and experience other effects of their intolerant zeal. Yet
these considerations did not deter them from assuming the badge of Christianity;
from standing forth as the marked objects of the hatred and scorn of
their brethren. And how shall we account for their conduct? It can be
explained on no other principle than an irresistible conviction of the
truth, a firm belief of the threatenings and promises of the Apostles,
the
We have seen how the Christian Church was formed. We are next presented with a view of the conduct of its members, in reference to the doctrines and institutions of the gospel. “And they continued steadfastly in the Apostles’ doctrine, and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” Each of these particulars deserves to be distinctly considered.
The first is their continuance in “the doctrine of the Apostles.” It
sometimes happens, that by an artful representation of an object, and
a dexterous appeal to his passions, a person is induced to adopt an
opinion which he formerly reprobated, and which, upon calm reflection,
he will renounce. In the midst of a multitude, a man is hardly master
of himself, and is often hurried away by a sympathetic feeling with
those around him to form resolutions, which in his cool moments he may
see reason to retract. There are instances, too, in which sentiments
are embraced, in the hope that they shall be held without trouble or
inconvenience, but are abandoned as soon as they are found to be incompatible
with reputation and personal safety. The converted Jews had undergone
a very sudden change of their views. At the same meeting, at which the
pathetic address of Peter operated so strongly upon them, they solemnly
declared themselves disciples of Jesus. Yet neither the reflections
which they had afterwards leisure to make upon their conduct, nor the
difficulties which they soon experienced to be inseparable from their
new profession, created any regret at the step which they had taken.
The gospel, the more they examined it, appeared the more worthy of all
acceptation. Its evidence was strengthened every day by the miracles
which were performed before their eyes; and from what passed in their
own minds, they felt the same need of its comforts as ever, the same
delightful calm, the same ineffable happiness, arising from the belief
of its declarations and promises. They continued, therefore, steadfast
in the doctrine
Luke mentions, in the second place, their steadfastness “in fellowship;” by which is meant the communion of saints in the exercise of evangelical love. The gospel is not a selfish religion. It requires, indeed, every man to take care of his own salvation, and shows it to be of such importance, as to be truly worthy of his care; but it teaches him, at the same time, to take an interest in the temporal and spiritual welfare of his Christian brethren. Upon the basis of brotherly love is reared a system of duties, from the cheerful and conscientious performance of which there results great benefit to the Church, and much honour to religion. By exhorting one another daily, by instructing, and reproving, and comforting, and assisting one another in all good things, Christians fulfil the law of Christ, and act as partakers of the same Spirit, and children of the same Father. In these labours of love the new converts were employed; for, in believing the gospel, they had imbibed that pure spirit of Benevolence, which is now so little known, but in those days made the Gentiles say, “Behold how the Christians love one another.”
Farther, they continued
steadfastly in “the breaking of bread.” This phrase does not necessarily
mean the Lord’s supper, as we shall afterwards see; but being introduced
among the religious duties of the primitive Church, it seems, in the
present case, to signify that institution, the whole being denominated
from a part. Perhaps, the celebration of that solemn ordinance is particularly
mentioned, because it was a public and explicit testimony of their attachment
to the Saviour, a recognition of their baptismal engagements, an avowal
that they gloried in the cross of Christ, which was a stumbling block
to their unbelieving countrymen. It is evident that they frequently
commemorated his death; but how often they were thus employed, it is
impossible to ascertain from this passage. No man in his senses can
suppose, that they observed the ordinance as often as they performed
the duties of fellowship, and offered up either secret or social prayer.
I can find nothing in the New Testament, from which any determinate
rule for our conduct can be collected. The arguments for the weekly
celebration of the sacred supper, founded on some incidental expressions,
are too feeble to authorise the strong and peremptory conclusions which
have been drawn from them. Evidence much more ample and decisive would
In the last place, we are informed that they continued
steadfastly “in prayer.” The gospel humbles man, by showing him his
meanness and infirmity. It draws him off from presumptuous confidence
in himself, and directs him to place his trust and hope in God. Prayer
is therefore the natural exercise of a genuine Christian. It
I have given what appears to me to be the genuine sense of this passage; and in doing so have paid no regard to the opinion of some writers, that it is a description of the procedure of the first Christians in their religious assemblies. The opinion receives no countenance from the passage itself, would not occur to an impartial reader unacquainted with the theories of disputants, and is chiefly adopted with a view to establish a favourite point, that the Lord’s supper was a stated part of the worship of the primitive Church. But if we take the liberty to explain the Scriptures as we please, there is no doubt that we may prove from them any fancy however extravagant.
Let us now consider the love of the primitive Christians, as displayed
in the liberality with which they supplied the necessities of their
poor brethren. “And all that believed were together, and had all things
common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all
men, as every man had need.” The expression, “all that believed were
together,” does not mean that they were assembled in one place, but
that they were united in mind and affection, according to the sense
which it bears in some other places of Scripture. “They had all things
common.” It has been supposed, that there was a real community of goods
among the Christians of Jerusalem; or that every man, renouncing all
right to his property, delivered it over to a public stock, to which
all had an equal claim. It appears, however, from the story of Annanias
and Sapphira, that the disciples were under no obligation, or were bound
by no positive law, to dispose of their property for the benefit of
the Church; and that after it was sold, they could retain the whole,
or any part of the
The words, upon
which I shall next make some observations, are contained in the
I shall
farther take notice only of the sentiments with which the rising Church
was regarded by the Jews. It was at once the object of veneration and
of esteem. It is said, in the
Such were the sentiments with which the Jews beheld the primitive Christians; and the impression made upon their minds contributed, through the divine blessing, to bring many of them to the knowledge of the truth. The Church was a growing society. It received daily accessions. The power of God was exerted to carry into effect his purpose of grace with respect to such of the Jewish nation as he had chosen to eternal life. “The Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved.”
I shall conclude with two or three reflections upon the passage.
First, We have before us the pure and perfect model of a Christian Church. The primitive Church was composed of persons awakened and enlightened by the truth, who, having entered into its communion by baptism, continued regular and steadfast in the ordinances and commandments of Christ, and were united by sincere and ardent love. How dissimilar are those societies, the members of which are associated from the mere accident of local situation, or from caprice and prejudice, without knowledge, and without principle; societies made up of such loose and light materials, that a breath of novelty shall blow them asunder, and the most frivolous offence shall occasion their disunion; societies, which having no common purpose, no mutual bond of connexion, are a chaos of discordant elements, in which envy, jealousy, pride, selfishness, calumny, and evil surmisings, produce perpetual agitation and war? Alas! my brethren, we have all departed, more or less, from the Apostolical standard; and we are not likely to return to it, notwithstanding the schemes of improvement which the fertile invention of the present times is almost daily suggesting, till, as in former days, the Spirit be poured out from on high. Then “the wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad, and tile desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose.”
In the second place, The mighty efficacy of the word of God is manifest
in the sudden and complete conversion of the Jews. “Is not my word like
as a fire? saith the Lord: and like a hammer, that breaketh the rock
in pieces?” Let it not be supposed, that as the occasion was peculiar,
the power exerted was unusual, and ought not to be looked for again. “The Lord’s
hand is not shortened that it cannot save.” “The residue
of the Spirit is with him;” and the same effects are still produced
in the conversion of every sinner. Some of the prejudices which influenced
the Jews may not
In the last place, We are presented
with a powerful argument for the truth of the resurrection and exaltation
of Christ. Let it only be admitted, that many of the Jews were converted
to Christianity soon after its publication; and this is a fact which
no man will venture to dispute. By what means, I ask, was their conversion
effected? The Apostles, who addressed them were men of no learning,
of no influence, and unskilled in the arts of sophistry and eloquence.
And what did they require their hearers to believe? Did they not tell
them, that the man whom they had crucified a few weeks before was the
Son of God; that there was no way of salvation but by his blood; and
that God had raised him from the grave, and exalted him to his right
hand in heaven? These were not palatable truths. The Jews could not
assent to them, without acknowledging themselves to be the vilest wretches
upon earth, guilty beyond all other men, and deserving severer punishment;
and without giving up their agreeable dreams, their soothing prospects
of worldly grandeur. We cannot suppose, then, that they would receive
those truths without evidence so strong, as to force conviction upon
their minds. That they did receive them, we know; and we learn from
this chapter on what grounds they were satisfied. The account is consistent
and probable. Infidelity can give no other, which shall not be liable
to unanswerable objections. Assuming, then, that the Holy Ghost was
poured out upon the Apostles, and that they were enabled to speak with
new tongues, and to work miracles before the eyes of their countrymen,
we may demand, by whom the Spirit was sent. Was it not, as they affirmed,
THE Apostles were commissioned to promulgate a religion which, notwithstanding
its intrinsic excellence, the world was ill disposed to receive. To
the Jews, superstitiously attached to the ritual of Moses, and persuaded
of its perpetuity, it appeared in the light of an impious heresy; a
bold attempt to substitute the crude notions of an upstart teacher in
the room of the oracles of heaven. On the part of the Gentiles, accustomed
to pompous ceremonies, and the unrestrained license, in which the ancient
systems of idolatry indulged their votaries, its pure doctrines, and
simple institutions were calculated to excite sentiments of aversion
and contempt. The prejudices, with which the gospel had to contend,
were not likely to be removed by the character and qualifications of
its first preachers. They were not men who could command respect by
their talents and their rank. They were poor and illiterate; they had
sat at the feet of no Jewish doctor, and frequented the school of no
heathen philosopher. Coming from the lips of such men, the religion
of Jesus must have presented itself under new disadvantages, in consequence
of the awkward manner, and unpolished style, in which they may be conceived
to have delivered it. Whence, then, did it succeed? What precautions
were taken to prevent it from being rejected by universal consent? To
the fishermen and publicans of Galilee, upon whom had devolved the important
office of converting the world, Jesus communicated powers of an extraordinary
kind, by which they were better qualified for their work than if they
had possessed the treasures of human learning and eloquence. While,
by the descent of the Holy Ghost, they were inspired with the knowledge
of foreign languages, and could address every man in his own tongue
upon the subject of their mission,
The occasion of performing this miracle was a visit paid by two of the Apostles, Peter and John, to the temple, for the purpose of devotion. “Now Peter and John went up together into the temple, at the hour of prayer, being the ninth hour.” The Jews had stated hours of prayer, the third, the sixth, and the ninth, corresponding to nine in the morning, twelve at noon, and three in the afternoon, according to our division of the day. Two of those hours coincided with the appointed times of offering the daily sacrifices, when those pious Israelites, who resided in Jerusalem, resorted to the temple, that while the smoke ascended from the altar and the censers of the priests, they might present the nobler oblation of holy supplications and thanksgivings. The Apostles, in this instance, complied with the practice of their country, without any intention to bind Christians in succeeding ages, to fixed hours of religious worship, or to represent any particular place as rendering prayer more acceptable to God. Our Churches are quite different from the temple, which was a consecrated house, the chosen habitation of the God of Israel, it is probable, too, that they had another reason for going up to it at this time, namely, to embrace the opportunity of addressing the people, when a considerable number was assembled.
The person, upon whom the miracle was performed,
was afflicted with a lameness, incurable by any means which human skill
could employ; for it did not proceed from an accidental dislocation
of the joints, which might have been reduced, nor from temporary debility,
which would have been gradually removed as he regained his strength,
but from an original defect, or derangement of the parts. He was therefore
a fit subject for displaying a supernatural power with which the Apostles
were endowed by their Master, because, among those who were acquainted
with the case, there could
It is not a matter of any importance
to inquire upon what gate of the temple the epithet Beautiful was bestowed.
It was probably a gate of which Josephus informs us, that it surpassed
all the rest in the richness of its materials, and the splendour of
its ornaments: and, from the purpose for which it was chosen by the
lame man, it seems to have been the principal entrance. The mention
of its name, however, suggests some observations which it may be useful
to state, upon the marks of truth to be found in the record of the miracles
of the gospel. When a story is told in general terms, without date,
or place, or any circumstance which an inquirer might lay hold of to
ascertain its reality, there is reason to suspect it to be a fiction,
or at least, that the writer knows nothing about it but by vague and
uncertain tradition. But when an event is related with a detail of particulars,
with a specification of the time when, and the spot on which, it happened,
and of the witnesses who were present, we are induced to believe that
the narrator
In the present case, Luke does not content himself with saying, that on a certain occasion, the Apostles, somewhere in Judea, cured a lame man; but he points out the individual by such marks as are equivalent to giving his name. He is represented as a sort of public person, having been often seen by those who frequented the temple; the gate at which he was wont to lie is specified; and thus an opportunity was given to every reader at that time to bring the narrative to the test. No reason can be conceived why Luke has inserted, in a history so concise, a circumstance apparently of so little importance, as his being laid at the gate of the temple called Beautiful, but, his knowledge that what he was writing was true, and his willingness to subject it to the most scrupulous examination. Impostors do not write in this manner. They dread inquiry, and use every precaution to elude it.
The lame man begged alms from all the passengers, from the poor
as well as from the rich; and perhaps he often found, that the former
were more ready to give their mite than the latter to bestow their larger
sums. The mitred priest might have passed him without notice, while
the humble mechanic stopped to share with him the scanty earnings of
his industry. There was nothing in the appearance of Peter and John
to encourage him to expect much from them, for in their dress and manner
they were evidently persons of the lowest rank; yet the cripple, as
soon as he saw them, began the wonted tale of distress, entreating them,
we may presume, to help him for the sake of the God whom they were about
to adore. And as their attention was attracted by his piteous story,
he hoped to see them draw forth from their little store
But how must the poor
man have been surprised and disappointed on hearing the following declaration
from Peter? “Silver and gold have I none.1” “What,” he might have said, “have
you indeed no money? Why, then, did you excite my expectation? Might you not
have passed on, as many others have done, without giving heed to my petition?
Surely it is enough that misery is left to pine away in neglect; it is the
wantonness of cruelty to pour into its cup the bitter ingredient of mockery.” “No;” said Peter,
“I have neither
silver nor gold; but I have something better to give; in the name of
Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk.” This was a new kind of
alms, of which the cripple had no expectation. All the physicians in
Judea could not have imparted vigour to his limbs; and how could he
presume, that these plain, uneducated men, were possessed of superior
skill! But it is not by their own skill that they accomplish the cure;
the miracle is performed in the name of Jesus of Nazareth. “Who is he?” might the lame man have replied.
“Is he not the same person.
who was lately crucified without the gates of the city; over whose fall
the priests and rulers exulted; and whose name is never mentioned but
in terms of reproach and execration?” But he had not leisure to reason
in this manner; for no sooner had Peter commanded him to rise, than “he took him by the right hand, and lift him up; and immediately his
feet and ankle-bones received strength.” Observe the simple yet authoritative
manner in which the miracle is performed. No solemn preparations are
made, no mystic ceremonies are used, which might work upon the imagination
of the patient, and excite his reverence and admiration of the persons
of the Apostles. By a few words, pronounced in a serious unaffected manner, the
effect is produced. It is thus that divine power is exerted. It stands in no
need of any artifice to set it off, of any ostentatious display to raise the
wonder of the beholders.
“Silver and gold have I none.” The apostles were poor when they connected
themselves with Christ; and it was not in the hope of improving their
circumstances that they became his disciples; for what could they expect
from a Master who had not “where to lay his head?” They were, indeed,
furnished with powers of an extraordinary nature, which, in the hands
of persons of different views, would have been converted into means
of accumulating wealth. Willingly, we may believe, would those have
loaded them. with gifts, whom they rescued from the languor of sickness,
and the agonies of pain; and those to whose arms they had brought back
their beloved friends from the grave. But their Lord enjoined a disinterested
exercise of their miraculous powers. “Freely ye have received, freely
give.” The missionaries resembled the Author of our religion, who wrought
many miracles to relieve the distresses of others, and sometimes to
supply their bodily necessities, but never exerted his power to provide
for his own wants, except in a single instance, when Peter was sent
to draw a fish out of the sea, with a piece of money in its mouth, to
be applied to the payment of tribute. There were other opportunities
of acquiring riches, which they might have improved, if these had possessed
any charms in their eyes. The new converts of Christianity, under the
influence of the most generous love to their brethren, sold their possessions,
and laid the price at the feet of the Apostles, who thus became sole
trustees of large sums of money. Their characters were free from suspicion;
and such was the confidence placed in their integrity, that no disciple
would have thought it necessary to demand an account of their management.
Here, then, was an occasion, which private interest, had any regard
to it lurked in their breasts, would not have neglected. And how often
has avarice, carefully concealing itself under a cloak of religion and
disinterested zeal, secretly stretched out its hand to appropriate that
wealth which it affected to despise? “My vow of poverty,” said a monk, “has brought me a revenue of a hundred thousand crowns.” How great
do the Apostles appear! how high do they rise in the estimation of every
man who can appreciate moral worth, when they hold up hands which no
bribe had touched, no unlawful gain had polluted! Dispensing the treasures
of the Church under the control of no superintendent, and without the
I cannot pass
on to the sequel of the story, without calling your attention, for a
few moments, to a heathen miracle, which has been confidently brought
forth to confront the miracles of the gospel.
The following description is picturesque. “And he leaping up, stood, and walked, and entered with them into the temple, walking, and leaping, and praising God.” The sacred historian writes without art; but by following nature, and drawing from the life, he has finished a painting, in which the emotions of the soul, in a moment of sudden joy, are represented with truth. Some men, however, can admire nothing of this nature, unless they find it in a heathen or a profane author; their taste is partial as well as their judgment. We see the lame man trying his new powers. He stands, he leaps, he walks, he follows his benefactors into the temple, and mingles with the demonstrations of his joy the praises of God, by whose power he had been cured. He felt a pleasure in the use of his limbs, which he could not conceal. His gestures and motions were those of a man, whom unexpected happiness has almost rendered frantic. Thus the words of the Prophet were literally fulfilled. “Then shall the lame man leap as an hart.”
He was instantly
recognised by the people in the temple. “And all the people saw him
walking and praising God. And they knew that it was he who sat for alms
at the beautiful gate of the temple: and they were filled with wonder
and amazement at that which had happened unto him.” They were not long
in suspense with respect to the persons by whom this unquestionable
miracle was performed; for the man “held Peter and John,” with a design
to point them out to the people, or, perhaps, in the present tumult
of his mind, not well knowing what he did. A crowd was immediately collected,
and gazed upon them with wonder and reverence, as men high in favour
with heaven, who had rendered themselves worthy, by the piety of their
lives, to be invested with extraordinary
The design
of the present miracle is expressed by the Apostle himself. “The God
of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers hath
glorified his Son Jesus: whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the
presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. But ye denied
the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto
you, and killed the Prince of Life, whom God hath raised from the dead;
whereof we are witnesses. And his name, through faith in his name, hath
made this man strong, whom ye see and know; yea, the faith which is
by him, hath given him this perfect soundness, in the presence
But why does Peter, when addressing the Jews
on the subject of this miracle, introduce the mention of their crime,
mixing reproaches with his reasoning? This is not the manner of an artful
deceiver. He would have soothed and flattered his audience, and by avoiding
every offensive term, by using soft and palliating language, would have
endeavoured to remove their prejudices, and to render them favourably
disposed. What but a conviction of the truth, and firm confidence in
the patronage of heaven, could have induced the Apostle to bring forward
a subject so unwelcome and ungrateful to the feelings of his hearers? “Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God, but ye delivered him up, and
pursued him with unrelenting hostility, against the remonstrances of
his judge: he
And now, my brethren,
since the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has glorified his Son; since
he has testified his approbation of him by many “infallible proofs,” let us consider, that we are under an obligation to embrace his gospel
with the full consent of our minds. Our persuasion of its truth should
be in proportion to the evidence. Why were so many miracles performed,
and for what reason were they recorded, but that they who saw them,
and we who read the account, should believe that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of the living God? That a man shall be savingly convinced of
the truth of the gospel by external evidence, it would betray ignorance
of the Scriptures to affirm; but that evidence is sufficient to produce
a rational conviction of the divine origin of Christianity, to prove
that the gospel is indeed the testimony of God, which ought to be believed,
and to establish our faith against the suggestions of Satan, and the
objections of his coadjutors among men. Let us pray, that the account
of the evidence with which
Let us learn from the passage now explained, to join together prayers and alms, that both may come up as a memorial before God; to do good to our brethren with the means which we possess, distributing our worldly substance to relieve their necessities, or bestowing upon them our sympathy, attendance, consolations, and instructions, in imitation of the Apostles, who gave what they had; and, finally, to ascribe to Jesus Christ the glory of all our qualifications and good actions, never daring to arrogate to ourselves any portion of the praise, or to thrust ourselves forward as objects of notice and commendation, but endeavouring to fix our own attention, and that of others, upon his grace, which has “wrought all our works in us.” Do we profess firmly to believe, and cordially to embrace the gospel? It is only by submitting to its institutions, by obeying its laws, by displaying its spirit in our temper and conduct, that we can prove our regard to it to be sincere. It will be evident that we have received the truth in love, when we imitate the noble examples which are set before us, and above all, that of our Redeemer; when we cultivate the dispositions which our religion requires; when devotion, humility, and charity, exert their united influence upon our hearts. Let us then go forth and practise in the world what we assemble to learn in the Church. In the present age, when the distinguishing truths of the gospel are boldly called in question, and its evidence is rejected by many as defective, let us come forward as its friends, not only by argumentation, which often fails to convince, because the heart is indisposed, but by exhibiting in our lives its amiable character, by cultivating those mild virtues which it inspires. The Apostles enforced their instructions by example, made proselytes by the purity of their manners and their deeds of beneficence, as well as by their miracles. Let us do likewise; and while religion shall be exhibited in its native excellence, and shown to be worthy of its author Jesus Christ, and of God, who is said to have patronised it, in a visible manner, at its first publication, we shall enjoy the esteem of the wise and good, the testimony of conscience in our favour, and, what is best of all, the approbation of our Saviour and Lord. “Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.”
IN the last Lecture, I considered the miracle performed by the Apostles upon a lame man, who lay at the gate of the temple called Beautiful, and illustrated part of the discourse which they delivered, on that occasion, to the people. Although the opportunity was tempting to vanity, as it would have been easy to pass themselves for extraordinary persons upon the wondering multitude; yet these honest and humble disciples of Jesus disclaimed the honour of the cure, and transferred all the glory of it to their Master. Their minds were too strongly convinced of his excellence and dignity, and their hearts were too sensible of his love, to permit them to harbour any purpose but that of exalting him in the eyes of their countrymen, and gaining them over to his. religion. With this view, they boldly affirmed, in the presence of his murderers, that he was the Holy One and the Just; and called upon them to acknowledge him as the great Prophet, whom the Church was bound implicitly to obey.
In the mean time, intelligence of these proceedings was conveyed to
the men in power, by some of their zealous partisans, who had mingled
with the crowd, and in whom the miracle and doctrine of the Apostles
had awakened no sentiments but those of hostility. Alarmed at the information,
the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees came in haste,
and laid violent hands upon Peter and John, and committed them to prison.
The situation of affairs was so serious as to call for some prompt and
decisive measure. We are told, that “they were grieved, because the
Apostles taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection
from the dead.” On looking back to their discourse, we do not observe
this
But the priests and Sadducees, although they hastened to the place with all the speed of affronted pride, and irritated zeal, came too late to prevent the effect which they dreaded. The seeds of heresy, as these churchmen would have said, were already sown, and had taken deep root in the hearts of many of the Jews. The Apostles had infused their own sentiments into the breasts of their hearers. The word of God, delivered by these Galilean fishermen with much simplicity, but with the earnestness of conviction, and in the demonstration of the Spirit, had made an impression, which not all the arts of sophistry, nor all the terrors of persecution, could afterwards erase. “Howbeit, many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.” This number is quite distinct from the three thousand converted on the day of Pentecost; and it would be idle to spend time in proving what is plain to every reader. These are all the remarks which I think it necessary to make upon the four introductory verses. Let us proceed to the account of the appearance of Peter and John before the council.
“And it came to pass on the morrow,
that their rulers, and elders, and scribes, and Annas the high-priest,
and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred
of the high-priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem.” This seems
to be a description of the Sanhedrim, or the supreme council of the
Jewish nation, which was composed of the High-Priest, as president,
the Elders of the people, and the Scribes who were learned in the law.
As its jurisdiction extended to all causes relating to religion,
The time passed on, and for several weeks nothing more was heard about him, or his disciples, till suddenly it was rumoured abroad, that they had appeared in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and were addressing, in their respective languages, strangers from every country under heaven. This surprising information must have stirred up afresh all the fears of the Sanhedrim, whose minds were ill at ease; but as we hear of no measure adopted by them on the occasion, they perhaps persuaded themselves, that it was only a sudden burst of zeal on the part of the followers of Jesus, which had been magnified into a miracle by the credulity of the populace. But now, finding that the Apostles persisted in maintaining the resurrection of their Master, that they were attracting the attention of the public, that they were becoming popular, that converts to their cause were fast multiplying, and that they were actually performing miracles in confirmation of their doctrine, they judged it high time to bestir themselves, and to make some great effort to save their honour and interests, which were in imminent danger.
The council was assembled; and Peter and John having been brought out
of prison, and placed at the bar, the president demanded, with a stern
countenance, we may presume, and in an authoritative tone, “By what power, or by
what name, have ye done this?”
“This is the stone, which was set
at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.” The priests and rulers had often sung these words of the Psalmist, and
felt, or thought that they felt, holy indignation against the froward
and impious men, whose conduct they describe. They never suspected,
that the portrait, which they surveyed with so much detestation, was
drawn for themselves. “But you,” said the Apostle, “are the builders,
who have refused to admit that stone which is now the head of the corner.” It was incumbent upon them, as ministers of God, and workers together
with him, to contribute their endeavours to carry on that structure,
which he purposed to erect for the glory of his mercy and wisdom. In
prosecution of this design, they were required, when Jesus Christ, who
was described in prophecy as “the stone which God should lay in Zion,” came into the world, to assign to him his proper place in the building,
by acknowledging him to be the Messiah, and calling upon the people
to believe in him, and to submit to his authority. But, without regarding
the evidence of his divine mission, and inquiring into his qualifications
for saving them from sin and death, they opposed his pretensions, because
he wanted external splendour, because he promised neither wealth nor
worldly honours to his followers, because he did not offer to deliver
the nation from the Roman yoke, and to give them the empire of the world.
For these reasons the builders threw this stone aside as useless. “But God’s thoughts were not as their thoughts; neither were his ways
as their ways.” The despised and neglected stone he raised to the most
elevated and important place in the building, Upon the crucified Saviour
he conferred glory and authority, constituting him the head of the Church,
the centre of union to his people, the bond which connects Jews and
Gentiles, and composes of both one holy temple in the Lord. “The man,” said the Apostle,
It was manifest, then, that Jesus was the only Saviour; and, consequently, that no person could reject him but at his peril.
“Neither
is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under
heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved,” Some suppose the
meaning of these words to be, that the name of Jesus was the only name
which had virtue, when pronounced, to effect miraculous cures; and that
there is a literal reference to the question of the Sanhedrim, “By
what name have ye done this?” They think that the council in their question,
and Peter in his answer, had respect to a notion Which prevailed among
the Jews, and other nations that there was a power in certain names,
to cure diseases. This foolish opinion was adopted by some of the more
superstitious Fathers of the Church.
Let us consider the effect of Peters’s speech upon the council.
The most furious passions, we may well believe, boiled in their
It was
evident that the Apostles were “unlearned and ignorant men,” not only
from their appearance, which discovered the meanness of their condition,
but likewise from their speech; for although our Lord promised to enable
his disciples to plead his cause with irresistible efficacy, yet he
did not promise to qualify them to speak their native language, or that
of any foreign country, with propriety
We are told, that “they took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus.” This remark has been understood to mean, that the rulers of the Jews recognized them to be his disciples, or remembered to have seen them in company with him; for some of the priests and great men occasionally attended our Saviour as spies upon his conduct, and with a design to perplex and ensnare him. I apprehend that something different is intended, namely, that they perceived a resemblance between their manner and that of their Master; the same intrepidity of spirit, the same dignity and energy of address. And when they saw, at the same time, the lame man standing before them, they were confounded. Not one in all the assembly could find any thing to reply. A sullen silence reigned throughout the court; and the proud doctors of Jerusalem felt their inferiority in the presence of two fishermen of Galilee.
What
was to be done in these humiliating circumstances? To confess before
the Apostles that they were vanquished, would have been mortifying in
the extreme; and to sit and say nothing, would have subjected them to
contempt and derision. They commanded the prisoners, therefore, to retire,
that without restraint they might consult together about some expedient
for extricating themselves from their present embarrassment. “But when
they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred
among themselves, saying, What shall we do to these men? for that a
notable miracle hath been done by them, is manifest to all them that
dwell at Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. But, that it spread no further
among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to
no man in this name.” Here, my brethren, a very extraordinary scene is presented
to our view. We see an assembly of men, professors of the true religion, high in
office in the Church, and pretending to be animated with fervent zeal for the
glory of God, deliberating not how they shall prevail upon their countrymen to
embrace Christianity, of the divine origin of which they had before them
undeniable evidence, but what would be the most effectual measure to hinder its
reception. They
The resolution adopted by the council was to charge the Apostles, with threatenings, “to speak henceforth no more to any man in this name.” And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all, nor teach in the name of Jesus.” Foolish men! How could they persuade themselves, that they should be able to stop the progress of the new religion which was patronised by God himself? Could their devices baffle his wisdom? or their authority prevail against his power? Upon the supposition that Peter and John had been terrified into silence, was there no other disciple of a more undaunted spirit, who would raise his voice in behalf of his Master? Although these men had altogether held their peace, surely in such a cause “the very stones would have cried out.” But the specimen which the council had already seen of the character of the Apostles, afforded no reasonable hope that they would pay any regard to their menaces. When they first came into the presence of the Sanhedrim, they appeared to be superior to fear, and dared to publish the truth in a manner the most offensive. It was vain to expect that their courage would fail, after they had witnessed the confusion of their judges; and that they would be intimidated by a command, which could be considered in no other light, than as an ebullition of impotent rage, an expression of obstinate but dismayed hostility.
Accordingly, when they. were again
brought into court, their behaviour was such as might have been looked
for, in these circumstances, from men firm to their purpose. “But Peter
and John answered, and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight
of
The principle which we are now considering
is so obviously just, that we may submit to the most partial judges,
whether it ought not to be steadily acted upon, on all occasions, in
which the authority of God and that of man interfere. It is a principle,
which the light of nature teaches; and we find Socrates declaring to
his judges, that he would not, to save his life, desist from fulfilling
the will of God, by teaching philosophy. “O Athenians, I will obey God rather
than you.”
This bold answer, which must have been regarded by the council
as an open contempt of their authority, was sufficient to have roused
their anger to fury, and to have prompted them to adopt violent measures.
For the present, however, they contented themselves with renewing their
threatenings, not from real moderation, or an aversion to proceed to
extremities, but because they were apprehensive, that a more severe
exercise of their authority would be attended with danger. The truth
of the miracle performed upon the lame man was manifest beyond contradiction.
He had passed his fortieth year, when the disorder in his joints, although
it could have been remedied at an earlier period, was become incurable
by human means. The people glorified God, by acknowledging the cure
to be an immediate effect of his power; and regarded with reverence
and affection, the Apostles, as his favourites and ministers. At this
crisis it would have been hazardous to punish them. The populace, capable
of being easily inflamed, and hurried on to the most dreadful outrages,
might have forgotten their usual respect for their rulers, and have
sacrificed them in a paroxysm of rage. For this reason, the council
dismissed Peter and John, although they knew that they would return
to their former employment, and preach, through Jesus, the resurrection
from the dead with redoubled zeal and courage. “So when they had further
threatened them, they let them go, finding nothing how they might punish
them, because of the people; for all men glorified God for that which
was done. For the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle
of healing was showed.” Thus did our Saviour deliver his faithful servants
out of the
To this illustration of the passage I shall subjoin the following observations.
First, When God is carrying on any design for the manifestation of his glory, great opposition will be made to it. Satan, his implacable adversary will not remain a quiet spectator; and the men, over whom his influence extends, will be stirred up to his assistance. In this combination, it should not surprise us, to find, not only persons of profane principles and wicked lives, but some, who, in consequence of their apparent attachment to religion, might have been expected to range themselves on the opposite side. When God was setting his Son upon his holy hill of Zion, not only did the “Heathen” rage, who were ignorant of prophecy, and had not seen the miracles of Jesus, but the “people” imagined a vain thing; the favoured people to whom the oracles of God were committed, and among whom the Messiah had appeared. Both said “Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.”
In the second place, God
may expose his people to much discouragement, when they are walking
in his own way, and when the undertaking, in which they are engaged,
is patronised by himself. The Apostles preached Christ in consequence
of an express commission from heaven; and upon their success depended
the accomplishment of the divine purposes relative to the establishment
of the Church, and the conversion of the world. Yet in the outset they
were opposed by the supreme authority in the nation. In the course of
their ministry, they were subjected to many dangers and grievous sufferings;
and most of them lost their lives in the cause. Superficial reasoners
may conclude, that God is at variance with himself, embarrassing and
retarding the execution of his own plans; and may complain, that, instead
of rewarding, he punishes men for their zeal and fidelity. “But the
foolishness of God is wiser than men.” By such dispensations, he exercises
the faith of his servants, and makes known the power of his arm, in
carrying on his designs in spite of the utmost efforts of his adversaries;
while, in the conduct of his people, such examples of courage, patience,
and disinterested love are exhibited, as afford no slight testimony
to the truth of religion. Thus he makes “the wrath of man praise him;
and the remainder of it he restrains.” Converts are made by the
In the third place, Jesus Christ requires no service from his disciples, for which he does not furnish them with necessary assistance. He is not a hard task master. “His yoke is easy, and his burden is light;” for as his commandments are reasonable, so by his grace we are enabled to obey them. When Peter and John were called to plead his cause before the Jewish council, they were “filled with the Holy Ghost.” Hence cowardly fishermen became undaunted Apostles; simple and uneducated men have put learning to silence; and delicate women have endured, with unshaken firmness, cruel tortures, and death in its most terrible forms. “As thy days, so shall thy strength be.”
In the fourth place, Great is the truth, and it shall prevail. It confounded and silenced the Jewish council; it made foolish the wisdom of the world, vanquishing its vain philosophy and sophistical eloquence by the plain doctrine of the cross; it will, in like manner triumph over the petulant and malignant opposition of infidelity; and a future age shall see superstition in all its modifications, delusions of every kind, enthusiasm, heresy, error, and licentiousness, vanish before it, as the shade of night before the sun. From what it has already done, we may calculate the effects which are yet to be expected from it. “When the Lord shall send the rod of his strength out of Zion, the people shall be willing in the day of his power; and he shall rule in the midst of his enemies.”
Lastly, Let us be careful to maintain
a good conscience in our religious profession. This was the constant
study of the Apostles, who considered not what was honourable in the
eyes of the world, and advantageous, and safe, but solely what was right.
It was God alone whom they had resolved to obey; and they minded not
the contrary commands and the threatenings of men. You will not enjoy
peace of mind, nor act uprightly and consistently, till you have learned
to regulate your conduct by the fixed standard of truth and rectitude,
and not by the shifting opinions and fancies of men. There is one thing,
in particular, of which you should beware; the vain attempt to serve
two Masters, God and the world, conscience and inclination. The result
of such an attempt will be, that you shall serve neither of them fully,
and shall lose the reward promised by both. Choose your side, and be
honest and uniform
WE have seen the success of the Apostles in persuading many of the Jews to acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth, to whose crucifixion they had lately consented, to be the Messiah promised to their fathers. These converts were formed into a new society, different from other societies, not only in its external aspect, and the design of its institution, but likewise in the principle by which its component parts were united. In associations for political or commercial purposes, all the individuals retain a regard to their private interest in its full strength, and concur in measures for the general good, because they will contribute to their personal advantage. But the first Christians were animated by a nobler spirit. Pure disinterested love was the soul of the rising Church, and gave birth to such expressions of benevolence, as have been rarely equalled in succeeding ages.
Among
those who in the beginning embraced Christianity, it may be supposed
that there were many persons in indigent circumstances. Few of the rich
and great are, at any time, attracted by the humble and spiritual religion
of Jesus Christ; and a profession of it was less likely to be adopted
by many of that description, when the Church was not established by
law, and neither honours nor emoluments were attached to the faith.
It appears, however, that the primitive believers were not all in the
lower ranks of life. Some of them, as we learn from the preceding chapter,
had possessions of lands and houses, which, with generosity hitherto
unexampled, they devoted to the supply of their brethren in need. “They
sold them, and brought the prices of the things, that were sold, and
laid them down at the Apostles’ feet,” that a common stock might be
formed, out of which distribution should be made to
“But a certain man, named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, and kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the Apostles’ feet.” It is evident, that Ananias and Sapphira were numbered among the disciples; and there is no reason to doubt, that they were admitted to enjoy all the external privileges of the Church. As their conduct shows them not to have been sincere, we are led to inquire, by what motive they were induced to connect themselves with a society, which held out no allurement to the worldly passions; and the inquiry may be extended to many others, who, without experiencing the saving power of the truth, have since assumed the Christian profession, and even affected, on some occasions, no common zeal for religion. The same account may. be given of all such cases. There are different motives, which may be conceived to operate upon different minds, yet all terminating in the same result; such a conviction of the truth as commands the assent of the understanding, and overawes conscience, but does not subdue the aversion of the heart; a general persuasion of the necessity of some religion, in consequence of which we embrace that which is best recommended; the example of others, which we implicitly follow; the authority and solicitations of friends; and sometimes a design to conceal, under a show of piety, the moral defects of the character.
It will be granted,
perhaps, that these causes operate with great force in ordinary cases;
but it will be objected, that their efficacy could not be the same in
the days of Ananias and Sapphira, when contempt and persecution were
the portion of the disciples of Jesus. This representation is not perfectly
accurate. The rulers, the priests, and the scribes, looked upon the
Apostles, and their adherents, with detestation and scorn; but the people
at large entertained more favourable sentiments. Luke informs us, that “they were in favour
Ananias, with the consent of his wife, sold his possession. This was the common practice among the believers. It was the fashion of the time; and this couple could not but comply with it. Had they done otherwise, their character might have been suspected; and although the Apostles would not have called them to an account, because the sale of possessions was entirely voluntary, there being no law which obliged to it, there was a probability that their reputation would suffer in the public estimation. They would not be behind the most distinguished of the disciples; they would imitate Barnabas himself. Example has a powerful influence upon hypocrites, not, indeed, to excite them to the sincere practice of the holiness which they see in the saints, but to produce a studied imitation of their most distinguished actions, that tinsel may pass for gold. To the rivalship of excellence, to the love of praise, must be attributed many of those deeds which have a fine show of goodness and generosity; the zeal of religionists, the charities of the ostentatiously liberal, the grimace and fervour of the devotee.
But Ananias and Sapphira, when
they sold their possession, did not, after the example of the other
disciples, bring the whole of the price to the Apostles. Had they been
influenced by a sincere faith, and by that generous love which animated
their brethren, they
Ananias and Sapphira, never doubting that the plan, which they had concerted, and executed with so much privacy, was secure from detection, expected to be welcomed by the Apostles with high commendations of their zeal and liberality. How much, then, must the unhappy man, who came alone with the unhallowed offering, have been dismayed, when Peter saluted him with these terrible words “Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?” His crime is traced to the instigation of Satan, who had filled his heart with vanity, covetousness, dissimulation, and an impious disregard for the omniscience and justice of heaven. This is not to be understood as a figurative expression, denoting the turpitude and atrocity of his conduct; but as a true account of the secret influence by which he was impelled to commit so daring an action. The human heart is itself sufficiently wicked to contrive and perpetrate very aggravated crimes; but some sins are so heinous in their nature, and are marked with such characters of audacity and profligacy, that they seem to have been suggested by a spirit more completely depraved even than man. It is a fact ascertained by the Scriptures, that Satan does tempt the children of men, or that he excites their corrupt principles to action, by stimulating the imagination and the senses, and by perverting the reasoning faculty, although it is impossible to explain the mode of his agency. He is the “spirit, who works in the children of disobedience.”
The sin, to which
Satan had successfully solicited Ananias, consisted “in lying to the
Holy Ghost, and keeping back part of the
That the charge brought by Peter against Ananias may appear to be well founded, it is necessary to recollect, that he and his colleagues acted under the direction, and by the assistance, of the divine Spirit, who not only instructed them in the mysteries of religion, but besides other extraordinary gifts, endowed them with the power of discerning spirits; that is, with the occasional knowledge of the thoughts, purposes, motives, and spiritual condition of certain individuals, for the regulation of their conduct in particular emergencies. When Ananias laid down part of the price at the feet of the Apostles, saying, by this action, which was meant to be understood according to the general practice, that he laid down the whole of it, he unquestionably told a falsehood; and although his intention went no farther than to deceive the Apostles, yet the lie was ultimately told to the Holy Ghost, who resided in them. As they were his ministers and agents, what was done to them was virtually and interpretatively done to him. Those who rejected their doctrine, rejected the Holy Ghost; those who lied to them, lied to the Holy Ghost.
Of this
sin there were two aggravations. First, it was a sin of choice, committed
with perfect freedom of will, and not under the
The conduct of Ananias
was farther aggravated by the dignity of the person against whom it
was an offence. “Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.” He had,
indeed, lied to men, in attempting to deceive the Apostles; but Peter
means that he had not lied to them alone. It is observable, that whereas
he affirms, in the preceding verse, that Ananias had lied to the Holy
Ghost, he now charges him with having lied to God. It follows, that
the Holy Ghost is not a creature, nor a rhetorical name for a divine
operation or influence, but a person possessed of proper divinity. It
is to no purpose to object to this inference, that an equivalent phrase
is used, where it is manifest that the same conclusion cannot be drawn
from it. When the Israelites murmured for want of flesh against Moses
and Aaron, they are said to have murmured against God.
The expostulation of Peter with Ananias was terrible, because every word was re-echoed by his conscience; but still more terrible was the event which immediately followed. “Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and gave up the ghost; and great fear came on all them that heard these things.” The suddenness of his death is not to be attributed to the violent agitation of his mind, as instant dissolution has been known to be the effect of paroxysms of joy and grief. The stroke was inflicted by the hand of God, who was pleased, for reasons which will be afterwards mentioned, to give this example of his holiness and severity. In this case, we see a specimen of those visible and alarming judgments, which, contrary to his usual procedure, he sometimes executes upon distinguished transgressors. In general, “no man knoweth love or hatred by all that is before him. All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked; to the good, and to the clean, and to the unclean.” But on certain occasions, God steps aside from his ordinary course, when, by such deviation, some great end of his moral government will be gained. As it discovers rashness and presumption to construe common calamities as proofs of the peculiar guilt and demerit of the sufferers; so not to observe the clear tokens of the divine displeasure against individuals, which appear in the nature and circumstances of their punishment, indicates a high degree of stupidity, a temper approaching to atheism, under whatever pretences of caution and charity it may be disguised. There is a particular providence; and, consequently, there are particular interpositions of wrath as well as of mercy.
Let it not be supposed, that the severity of Peter, on this occasion, was ill suited to the mild genius of the gospel, and to the character of an ambassador of peace. He rebuked Ananias for his crime with the severity which it deserved; but it was not he who inflicted the punishment, nor is there any evidence that he knew that it would immediately follow. When he afterwards denounced the same judgment upon Sapphira, he might be directed by a supernatural suggestion, or he might infer it from the doom of her husband. Whether he was apprized, or not, of the event, Ananias died by the visitation of heaven; and Peter is vindicated from the suspicion of having carried his zeal and resentment to excess.
The next verse relates the burial of Ananias. “And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.” I have no remarks to make upon these words; and shall not take up your time with inquiring who the young men were, by whom the last office was performed to this unhappy man, as I could only amuse you with conjectures, and the subject is of no importance. Let us proceed to the sequel of the story.
“And it was about the space of three hours
after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.” For what
reason she did not come with her husband, we are not told; but as three
hours had passed since he left her, she had leisure to reflect upon
her conduct, and there was a favourable opportunity for conscience to
remonstrate. It has sometimes happened, that solitude, by leaving a
person to his own thoughts, and leading him to review his purposes,
with their aggravations and probable consequences, has made him startle
at the projects of guilt which he had concerted with others, and tremble
to execute what in company he had cordially approved. The presence of
associates, the courage which they assume, the arguments which they
employ, and the flattering hopes which they hold out, conspire to keep
fear and remorse at a distance. It is not commonly till sinners have
become hardened in iniquity by repeated acts, or by long indulging it
in their hearts, that they are able to bear their own reflections. Sapphira,
however, in the absence of her husband, continued steady to her purpose;
and having received no intelligence of his fate, came, as soon as her
affairs permitted her, to the place where the Apostles were assembled.
Supposing, no doubt, that Ananias was already enjoying the reward of
their pretended generosity, she made haste to share in the admiration
and applause, bestowed by the bystanders upon a pair, so
“And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much. And she said, Yea, for so much.” This question might have suggested to her, that a suspicion was entertained of something unfair in the transaction, as it is not probable that she had ever heard any of the disciples interrogated in the same manner. Peter does not abruptly charge her with dishonesty and impiety, as he had done in the case of her husband. He simply inquires, whether they had sold the land for the sum presented as the full price. The unexpected question would have disconcerted an ordinary transgressor, who finding his plan discovered, would have been overwhelmed with confusion, and have either confessed his crime, or stood speechless. A guilty mind is naturally timid; the utmost precaution cannot render it perfectly secure and quiet; a look, a whisper, a casual expression, which seems to glance at the purpose of which it is conscious, will awaken its fears. Happy would it have been for this woman, if the question had staggered her ill-founded courage, and had led her, with unfeigned repentance, to acknowledge her wickedness. We have no authority to say, that her sin was unpardonable. She might not, indeed, have escaped the temporal judgment which was executed upon her husband, for God sometimes takes vengeance upon the inventions of those whom he pardons; but she would have died, like Achan, glorifying God by making confession. She affords an awful example of obduracy in sin. Still ignorant of the miserable end of her husband, experiencing no uneasiness from conscience, and intent upon consummating the base design in which they were engaged, this audacious woman was determined to brave the Apostle to his face. With a composed countenance, and an unfaltering tongue, she answered, “Yea, for so much;” aggravating her dissimulation by a deliberate and resolute falsehood.
“Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have
agreed together, to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?” To tempt is commonly
used in a bad sense for soliciting a person to evil. “But God cannot
be tempted with evil; neither tempteth he any man.” The word has sometimes
a different meaning in Scripture, signifying to make trial of a person.
Thus, when God “tempted'” Abraham, he did not entice him to sin, but
proposed a difficult act of obedience,
Then follows the sentence pronounced upon the unhappy woman, which divine justice immediately executed. “Behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead; and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.” Both were alike guilty. Whoever suggested the plan, the other party heartily concurred in it. The superior prudence and caution of the husband did not check the forwardness of the wife; nor did the wife, from the timidity natural to her sex, oppose any obstacle to the boldness of her husband. The same unhallowed love of reputation, the same base hypocrisy, the same disregard for the all-seeing eye of heaven, influenced both. They were hateful in their lives, and in their death they were not divided. They perished by the same doom; and their end ministers a solemn warning to others, that they may hear, and fear, and do no more wickedly.
This was the design of the signal vengeance
executed upon those sinners, and was the effect which it actually produced. “And great fear came upon all the Church, and upon as many as heard
I shall conclude with the following reflections upon the passage.
It is vain to expect, that
in this world the Church shall ever be perfectly pure. I mean, not only
that imperfections will always adhere to the members of the Church,
because “there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth
not;” but farther, that hypocrites will be found intermixed with the
saints. The
We should guard against the predominance of every sinful passion, whether it be avarice, ambition, sensuality, envy, pride, or any other lust of the flesh or of the spirit. As “one sinner destroys much good,” so one sin reigning in the heart, counteracts the efficacy of the best means, and may carry us to a very great length in depravity. If the restraints of providence are removed, and a strong temptation is presented in favourable circumstances, it will precipitate us into such excesses, as shall dishonour us in the eyes of men, and provoke God to pour out upon us the fury of his wrath. You see the dreadful effects of vanity and covetousness, in the conduct of Ananias and Sapphira.
Impenitent sinners are always in danger of perishing by the vengeance of heaven. Judgment, indeed, is God’s “strange work;” but it is a work, which a regard to his glory sometimes calls upon him to perform. And when one victim falls, it is impossible to tell who shall be the next. A sentence of death is passed upon all unbelievers, and execution of which is delayed only by the longsuffering and patience of God. Let not men presume upon his patience; for, although divine, it has its limits, beyond which it will not extend. “Let sinners in Zion be afraid; let fearfulness surprise the hypocrites: who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?” Such is the God with whom you have to do. He is a fire to consume the workers of iniquity; it flames around you, and is ready to kindle upon you; and there is no possibility of escaping from it, but by calling for help to Him who rescued the three Jewish confessors from the king of Babylon’s furnace.
Let us, above all things, study to be sincere
in religion. What will hypocrisy avail? Can our artifice impose upon
Cod? Are we able to conceal from him, under a mask of piety and goodness,
the real features of our character? Do not “his eye see, and his eye-lids try,
the children of men?” “There is not any creature that is not manifest
in his sight; but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him
with whom we have to do.” In vain did Ananias and Sapphira secretly
concert their plan, and assume
IT pleased God, as we read in this chapter, to enable the Apostles to work many miracles in confirmation of the gospel. But the stronger the light is, it is the more offensive to a diseased eye. The high priest and his adherents were filled with indignation against the men, who presumed, in defiance of their express prohibition, to preach Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah; and by the wonders which they performed, were gradually undermining the authority of the rulers, in the opinion and affections of the people. They belonged to the sect of the Sadducees, who being a species of free-thinkers, and holding principles subversive of all religion, might have been supposed to view with indifference and contempt contests about articles of faith, and modes of worship. But the experience of late years has convinced us; by the scenes transacted in a neighbouring country, that infidelity and bigotry may be closely allied; and that the persecuting fury of the philosopher was never surpassed by the intolerant zeal of the most sanguinary religionist. There was, indeed, a particular cause for the violence of those impious men, the opposition made to their favourite doctrine, that there was no resurrection of the body; for the great theme of the Apostles’ discourses was the illustrious manifestation of divine power in bringing Jesus from the grave, to establish the truth of his religion, and to give his followers the hope of a triumph over death. The pride of authority, and the pride of wisdom, could ill brook an insult so public, offered, too, by men, in their eyes, of despicable talents and character. “They laid hands, therefore, on the Apostles, and put them in the common prison.”
At this crisis, God miraculously
interposed in favour of his servants, to encourage them to persist in
their duty, and to convince
We are not able
to point out with certainty the motive, which induced him to stand up
in behalf of the Apostles. It has indeed been affirmed, that he secretly
favoured the new religion, and afterwards openly professed it. He has
been represented as a second Nicodemus, who, when the rulers were taking
counsel against Jesus, ventured to say, “Doth our law judge any man
before it hear him, and know what he doth?” But this is one among many
instances, in which men have permitted their wishes and hopes to supply
the place of evidence. There can be no better foundation for this opinion,
if we give credit to the Jews, who show in their liturgy, a prayer said
to have been composed by him, imprecating divine vengeance upon the heretics,
by whom are meant the followers of Jesus. Others have attributed his
interference, not to any generous principle, but to the spirit of party.
As those, who persecuted
The Jews, who were a turbulent people, submitted with great impatience to the Roman yoke. They were indignant at the thought, that the chosen people, who hoped under the Messiah to possess the dominion of the world, should be enslaved and oppressed by foreigners and idolaters. Hence demagogues arose in frequent succession, and erecting the standard of liberty and religion,. collected a number of followers, inflamed with rage, and animated with the prospect of glory and independence. Of this description were Theudas and Judas. The former “boasted himself to be somebody;” pretended to be the Messiah, or a Prophet sent by God, for the deliverance of his people. As the latter rose up “in the days of the taxing,” he probably assumed no higher character than that of a patriot, who wished to emancipate his country from an ignominious and cruel subjection to strangers. But these, and all similar attempts, terminated in the destruction of those who were engaged in them. The wrath of God pursued the unbelieving, impenitent people. Their doom was fixed; and their repeated efforts, to withdraw themselves from the domination of their conquerors, only served to bring down upon them the full weight of their vengeance, by which both Church and state were overwhelmed.
Upon these instances of unsuccessful insurrection and
imposture, Gamaliel founds the following advice. “And now I say unto you,
Refrain from these men; and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be
of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God,
From these incontrovertible facts,
it is evident, that the observation of Gamaliel cannot be adopted as
a maxim which will hold universally, but must be received with certain
limitations, which, indeed, are suggested by himself. By attending to
his words, you will find that he does not lay down a general rule,
but strictly confines himself to the present subject of discussion. “If this counsel
The doctrines which the Apostles preached were ill fitted to attract the attention, and to conciliate the approbation, of mankind. To tell the Jews, that the Messiah was of mean parentage, lived in poverty and affliction, died upon a cross, had now returned to heaven, without achieving the deliverance of his country from the power of the Romans, and had promised nothing to his followers but happiness beyond the grave, was to offend their pride, to disappoint their carnal expectations, to dissipate their dreams of glory and pleasure on the earth. To proclaim him to the Gentiles, was to speak upon a subject of which they had no idea, to recommend a person totally unknown, and whom they must have despised, both as a malefactor and a Jew. His resurrection, to which the Apostles referred as the decisive proof of his divine mission, was calculated to excite their derision, because they considered the resurrection of the body as neither credible nor desirable. To the Gentiles, acquainted only with their vain philosophy, and attached to its erroneous dogmas, the gospel must have seemed to be the wildest, most uncouth, and most unintelligible system, which ever insulted the human understanding.
The duties which this religion enjoined, were repugnant to the preconceived
notions, and the corrupt passions of all classes of men.
Christianity avowed an intention to overthrow all the religions of the earth, and had therefore to contend with the strong attachment, which men generally entertain, to the religion in which they have been educated. Of the zeal of the Jews for their religion, we have abundant proof from Scripture. They gloried in the law of Moses, believed that it would be perpetual, and rested their hope of the divine favour upon the observance of it. The regard of the Gentiles to their superstitions was equally strong. Besides being handed down to them from their remote ancestors, whose authority commanded profound respect, and being considered as intimately connected with private and public prosperity, they allured the senses and the passions, by splendid spectacles, by licentious festivals, by the charms of the fine arts, and by the unbounded toleration of the corrupt propensities of the heart. Christianity came to set aside those religions. It had nothing of the accommodating spirit of paganism, which easily adopted the Gods and rites of other nations; it claimed to be the only true religion, and commanded its own institutions to be exclusively observed.
Lastly, The preachers of this unsocial religion were not,
fitted to
Such were
the improbabilities, that this religion, if it were a human contrivance,
should succeed; or rather they were sure grounds, on which any man might
have predicted, as Gamaliel did, that it would not succeed. It could
hardly have maintained itself for any length of time in Judea; it could
not have made its way at all into heathen countries. We know, however,
that it did prevail in Judea, and gained over thousands and myriads
of the inhabitants; that it spread over the whole extent of the Roman
conquests, and found access to regions which their arms had never reached;
that it humbled the proud philosopher, purified the slave of vice, tamed
the fierce barbarian, and established the empire of truth and holiness
over the fairest portion of the earth. “There is not a nation,” says
one of the Fathers in the second century, “whether of Greeks or of barbarians,
in which prayers and thanksgivings are not offered up to the Father and Maker of
all things, in the name of the crucified Jesus.”
Thus far the reasoning has
proceeded upon the supposition, that the Sanhedrim had adopted the counsel
of Gamaliel, and that the gospel had been suffered to work its own way
in the world. But, although the rulers of the Jews listened at this
time to the voice of reason and moderation, yet it was not long till
they recurred to violence, and began a furious persecution of the Christians.
Their example was followed by the Gentiles; and for nearly three centuries,
the disciples of Jesus were subjected to severe hardships, and cruel
sufferings on account of their religion. Every motive of prudence and
policy conspired to make men decline assuming the Christian name. The
Heathens exhibited no portion of that tolerating spirit towards the
new religion, which was exercised towards their different forms of idolatry;
it was proscribed as a pestilent superstition, hateful to the Gods,
and hostile to the peace and prosperity of the empire. If the seasons
proved cold and barren; if fire consumed any of their cities; if earthquakes
desolated the provinces; the Christians were accused as the cause of
those calamities, and their punishment was demanded by the clamours
of the people. The unresisting victims were driven into exile, doomed
to perish amidst the unwholesome labours of the mines, exposed in the
amphitheatres to be torn in pieces by wild beasts, that the eyes of
their savage persecutors might be feasted with the spectacle, consumed
at stakes, executed upon scaffolds, or put to death by slow tortures,
in devising which, human barbarity, exasperated by hell, exhausted its
ingenuity. Emperors and magistrates, forgetting the dignity of their
character, philosophers their boasted moderation, relatives the sentiments
of nature, and men their feelings of humanity, continued for ages to
embrue their hands in the blood of the inoffensive and patient martyrs
of Jesus. They hoped to subdue their courage, or to exterminate them
from the earth. But all their efforts were baffled. Like the Israelites
in Egypt, the more the Christians were
This event is totally different from the success of the Antichristian and Mahometan religions. These systems arose in a dark and ignorant age; were dexterously accommodated to the prejudices, the superstitious temper, and the licentious inclinations of men; and were propagated by the artifice of imposture, and the terror of the sword. In the success of Mahomet, there is nothing more extraordinary than that of any other conqueror, who flies, from province to province, at the head of a victorious army, and compels the subjugated, terrified inhabitants, to submit to his law. Christianity made its appearance in an age of science and literature, and professed an open hostility to all the sinful passions of men; but although unaided and unfriended, calumniated and opposed by the whole force of the Roman empire, it went forward in its course, like the sun, who sometimes eclipsed, and sometimes darkened with clouds, steadily advances to his meridian altitude, from which he pours a full tide of light and glory on the earth.
Thus I have
considered, at some length, the celebrated counsel of Gamaliel. We have
seen, that if the powers of this world had let the new religion alone,
it was of such a nature, that, had it originated from man, it could
not have succeeded. Its success, therefore, would, in these circumstances,
have been a clear proof of its divinity. But since the rulers of the
earth did not let it alone, the evidence acquires new strength from
the formidable opposition against which it prevailed. Here we perceive
the finger of God; and no
We learn from the following verses, that the rulers of the Jews complied so far with the counsel of Gamaliel, as to desist from their intention to put the Apostles to death. They contented themselves with scourging them, and dismissed them with a command, not “to speak in the name of Jesus.” To this command they paid no regard; and the punishment inflicted upon them, instead of depressing their courage, served to animate their zeal. “And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. And daily in the temple and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.”
I conclude with the three following reflections.
First, It was no easy task in which the Apostles engaged, when they went forth to preach among the nations the gospel of the kingdom. Their situation was very different from that of the old philosophers, who delivered lectures at their ease, to an admiring audience; and front that of ministers of the gospel in the present time, who enjoy the protection of the laws. They were men, “who hazarded their lives,” who rose superior to fear, and shame, and pain, who looked for nothing in this world but sufferings and death. How high does their character rise? It may be compared with that of the most distinguished patriots, and eminent benefactors of mankind. Who could have expected to find such philanthropy, such noble and disinterested sentiments, in persons taken from the lowest ranks of society, and bred to the meanest occupations? To what respect and gratitude is their memory entitled; respect for their illustrious virtues, and gratitude for their generous exertions to promote the best interests of the human race? How should we admire the grace of God, who called them to the arduous work, inspired them with the love, and zeal, and patience, and fidelity with which they performed it, supported them under manifold difficulties, and crowned their labours with success
Secondly, God can always find the means of preserving his servants in
the discharge of their duty. He can make their deliverance come from
an unexpected quarter. He saved the Apostles, on this occasion, by the
interposition of Gamaliel, a Pharisee, and an enemy to the gospel. History
furnishes many instances of persons,
In the last place, from the success of the gospel in past times, we may confidently hope for the fulfilment of the predictions relative to its diffusion and establishment throughout the earth. After its. rapid progress under the Apostles and their successors, in the first ages, Christianity began to decline. Several countries, in which it was professed, were subdued by the Mahometan arms; and its light was almost extinguished in Europe, and the eastern church, by a dark cloud of superstition and idolatry. At the Reformation, it shone forth again; but how small a part of the civilized world enjoys the benefit of its salutary rays! And if we look to other regions of the earth, “behold darkness and sorrow, and the light is darkened in the heavens thereof.” The success of Christian missions has not equalled the examples of former times, and the eager hopes of those who projected them. A few converts, collected, after long labour, out of many thousands, give no animating prospect of the speedy triumph of our religion. If the husbandman should gather two or three straggling stalks of corn, who would call this a harvest? But let us not despond. Jesus Christ lives, and “the residue of the Spirit” is with him. The gospel has nothing more formidable to encounter than the opposition which it has already subdued. When we see the mighty empire of Rome prostrate at the feet of Jesus Christ, and presenting homage to him as its sovereign Lord, we cannot despair, that the time will come, when India and China, and the islands of the sea, shall be added to the trophies of the cross. Let us “remember the years of the right hand of the Most High;” and let us pray, that he would again “make bare his holy arm, and openly show his salvation in the sight of the Heathen.” “Then shall all the ends of the earth see the salvation of our God.”
“YE have the poor always with you, but me ye have not always.” These words were spoken by our Lord in vindication of a woman who had poured a box of precious ointment upon his head, and was accused by the disciples of having profusely wasted what might have been devoted to a charitable use. They might well bear with this occasional testimony of respect for their Master, of whose presence they were soon to be deprived, since, the poor, for whose interests they seemed to be so zealous, should always remain with them. To the poor the gospel was preached. Our Saviour did not address himself exclusively to persons in the higher ranks, whose names would reflect honour on their teacher, and whose munificence would reward him; but he selected, as the particular objects of his gracious instructions, those who were suffering the inconveniences and hardships of life. “God has chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith, and heirs to the kingdom.” In this choice, we see an instance, not only of the sovereignty of God, who in distributing his favours, disregards those distinctions which are so much valued among men, but also of wise provision for the trial and improvement of his people. If they were all rich and prosperous, few occasions would occur for performing the offices of charity; whereas, while some possess, and others want, the comforts and often the necessaries of life, there are constant calls to the exercise of condescension, sympathy, and beneficence. Thus a strong bond of union is formed between the giver and the receiver; and the Church “makes increase unto the edifying of itself in love.”
Among those who first turned to the Lord in Jerusalem, there seem to
have been many in necessitous circumstances. But large
“And in those days, when the number of
the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians
against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily
ministration.” Those Grecians were not Greeks, but Jews born in foreign
countries, who used the Greek language in common conversation, and in
the service of the synagogue. Having taken up their residence in Jerusalem
in consequence of their conversion, or for other reasons, they composed
a part of the Church in that city. They are distinguished, in this passage,
not from Jews, for under this appellation both they and the inhabitants
of Judea were comprehended, but from Hebrews, by whom are meant such
Jews as spoke the Hebrew language, or the mixed dialect, which went
under that name. These were accused by the Grecians of neglecting their
widows, “in the daily ministration,” while they seem to have attended
to their own. The distribution of the public charity, it was alleged,
was not made on fair and equitable terms. How weak a being is man! How apt to be turned aside from the path of rectitude and honour!
Instead of acting on grand and liberal principles, he often permits selfishness
to cramp the best affections of his heart, and draws around himself a narrow
circle, of which he is the centre. Whatever is in any way connected with
himself, acquires importance in his eyes; whatever is distinct or detached, is
undervalued. The comparatively insignificant circumstances of being born in the
same country, speaking the same language, and descending from the same remote
ancestors, shall recommend a per son more to our good will and friendly assistance, than the best qualities of the heart,
and the strongest claims of necessity, in an absolute stranger. Thus,
in the primitive Church, some widows
But how could any just ground for this complaint exist under the ministry of the Apostles, to whose care the contributions of the faithful were committed? Were not the wisdom, the piety, the zeal, the independence of mind, for which they were so eminent, sufficient to preserve them from the influence of local and vulgar prepossessions? If we admit, that they were chargeable with partiality in this matter, how does it appear, that they were worthy of their office, or proper persons to be employed in promulgating a religion, intended to abolish national distinctions, and to make of Jews and Greeks, bond and free, “one new man in Christ?” In answer to these questions, I observe that there is no evidence, that, at this time, the Apostles did manage the affairs of the poor. It is probable, that having found the time and attention which this business required to be more than could be spared from the immediate duties of their office, they had devolved it upon others; and it is to these deputies that the blame of partiality attaches.
This conclusion is supported,
I think, by the second verse. Having called the disciples together,
to propose an expedient for terminating the present dissension, and
preventing any future cause of complaint, the Apostles begin with observing,
that it was not reasonable, “that they should leave the word of God,
and serve tables.” The expression, “to serve tables,” is of the same
import with ministering to the necessities of the poor. Their tables
were to be supplied with food convenient for them; such things as they
wanted, were to be provided; and it would have been neither right nor
becoming, that the Apostles should be so much engaged in this service,
as to omit the more important duties of their office. Jesus Christ had
sent them to preach the gospel; and no inferior design, however useful
and urgent, should interfere with the great object of their commission.
The words of the Apostles have much the appearance of a reference to
a complaint, that if they had cared for the poor as they ought to have
done, the widows of the Grecians
The remedy for the present disorder, which was proposed by the Apostles,
and adopted by the multitude, was the institution of a new order of
office-bearers, who should make the care of the poor the sole object
of their attention. “Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven
men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may
appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to
prayer, and to the ministry of the word.” The institution accords with
the compassionate, benevolent spirit of the religion of Christ. We find
nothing similar to it in the superstitions which prevailed in the Heathen
world; no peculiar provision for the poor; no order of men appointed
to relieve the fatherless, widows, and orphans. These unhappy persons,
the religions of Greece and Rome left to perish, or to drag out an uncomfortable
existence upon the precarious bounty of those, whom nature had inspired
with some sentiments of humanity. It is the amiable character of the
Messiah, that, in a temporal as well as in a spiritual sense, “he delivered
the needy when he cried, the poor, also, and him that had no helper.” The charitable spirit of the gospel excited the wonder and the envy
of the Gentiles; and Julian, the mortal foe of Christianity, reluctantly
confessed its unrivalled excellence, when he attempted to graft upon
the decayed, sapless trunk of Paganism, it fairest fruits of love and
beneficence.
The design of creating the new office-bearers, who are known
by the appellation of deacons, was to distribute to the necessities of the
indigent members of the Church. To preach the gospel was no part of their duty.
The Apostles say, that they would appoint the
As the trust, implied in this office, was important, and the peace of the Church, as well as the private good of not a few of its members, would depend upon the manner in which it was executed, the qualifications of those to whom it should be committed, were pointed out by the Apostles. The choice of the people was confined to such persons among them, as were of “honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom.” They must be men of “honest report,” of tried integrity and blameless reputation, that the members of the Church might place full confidence in them, and enemies might find no occasion of reproach. They must be “full of the Holy Ghost;” an expression which imports, that they should be richly furnished with his sanctifying influences, as Christians in general are exhorted to be “filled with the Spirit;” or that they should possess his extraordinary gifts, agreeably to the meaning which the phrase bears, in other passages of this book. Both senses may be admitted. The sanctifying grace of the Spirit was necessary to inspire them with the love, the fidelity, the zeal, the activity, which their office required; and his extraordinary gifts, although not indispensable, might be considered as highly expedient in men, who sustaining a public character, would have frequent opportunities to demonstrate the truth of the gospel by signs and miracles. In the last place, they must be “full of wisdom,” to distinguish real, from pretended, cases of necessity, to judge of the proportion, and the manner in which the public charity should be distributed, and to administer consolation and seasonable advice to the needy and afflicted. Such were the qualifications required in the first deacons, which rendered them worthy substitutes of the Apostles, in the superintence of the poor. To them they could safely entrust the whole charge, and consequently give themselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.”
There are two particulars which deserve attention, in the appointment
of these men to their office. The choice of them was committed to the
people. “Look ye out among you seven men.”
But the right
of the people extended no farther than the election of the deacons.
They had no power to exercise in their appointment to office. Their
separation to it, their investiture with authority to perform its duties,
was the province of the Apostles. “Look ye out seven men,—whom we
may appoint over this business.” It is the ordinance of Christ, that
to those who sustain any office in the Church, authority shall be transmitted
from himself, its original source, by the medium of its ministers and
rulers. The exclusion of the private members from any share in the transmission
is clearly marked in the passage before us. The limits are distinctly
drawn. The people elected, and the Apostles appointed. We never read
in the Scriptures, that there is a power lodged in the Church at large,
to preach the gospel, administer the sacraments, and govern itself.
The measure proposed by the Apostles was unanimously approved, and was executed without delay. “And the saying pleased the whole multitude; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch: whom they set before the Apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.” The imposition of hands was a rite used on different occasions; in blessing a person, in curing diseases, in imparting spiritual gifts, in setting one apart to an office. For the last of these purposes, it may still be practised, although miraculous communications have ceased. Prayer, which preceded the imposition of hands, was offered up for the divine blessing upon the new institution, and the persons elected, that they might be enabled to perform their duty with fidelity, and to the satisfaction of the Church.
The names of the seven deacons being Greek, it has been
thought, that, with the exception of Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch,
a Gentile formerly converted to Judaism, they were all Grecians, or
Jews of the dispersion, who spoke the Greek language. No persons were
so likely to quiet the jealousies and murmurs of the Grecians, because,
being of their own number, they would not be suspected of neglecting
their widows. How noble was the conduct of the Hebrews, who, with
a view to remove every ground of discontent on
We are informed, in the next verse, that “the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.” Without stopping to make any remarks upon this verse, although the conversion of so many priests, who were engaged in opposition to the gospel, by their prejudices, and pride, and secular interests, might be illustrated as an evidence of its wonderful efficacy, I proceed to consider the history of Stephen.
In the
But, when arguments failed, their malice furnished an inexhaustible resource. “Then they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God.” They hired witnesses, and instructed them what to swear; not scrupling to make use of any means, however dishonourable and unjust, of effecting their purpose; and contriving, perhaps, to conceal the baseness of their conduct even from their own consciences, by the pretext of zeal for the glory of God. The charge, which the witnesses were directed to bring against Stephen, was that “they had heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God.” Blasphemy strictly signifies any thing spoken with a design to vilify the character of God, or to injure him in the opinion of others, by creating unfavourable thoughts of his attributes, his commands, or his dispensations. It conveys, therefore, the idea of the most atrocious and daring' sin of which a creature can be guilty. The term has an odious sound, and awakens ounr abhorrence of the crime, and of the criminal. Hence it has been frequently employed, by religious controvertists, with great address, and with much latitude of application, to stigmatize the opinions and character of their opponents. Honest indignation. may have sometimes had recourse to it, to brand those impious tenets, which subvert the foundations of our faith; but in not a few cases, it has served insidious malignity as an admirable expedient for discrediting a particular doctrine, and exciting clamour and persecution against its author and abettors. It was evidently with this intention, that the charge of blasphemy was now advanced against Stephen; and it had all the success which his enemies wished. The people, the elders, and the scribes, were alarmed; and hastening, with common consent, to bring to condign punishment the man, who had dared to revile the God of Israel, and Moses, his illustrious minister, they apprehended, and arraigned him before the council. This was the Sanhedrim, which had authority to take cognizance of cases of blasphemy.
In the following
verses, and in the next chapter, we have an account
Upon the supposition,
however, that Stephen did say what the witnesses testified against him,
as perhaps he had done on the authority of Christ and the Prophets,
what crime had he committed? in what did the alleged blasphemy consist'?
Had not Shiloh, where the tabernacle once stood, been laid desolate?
Was not the first temple destroyed by the Chaldeans? Why, then, should
the second temple be permitted to stand, if it was turned into a “den
of robbers;” and especially, if the Messiah was come, and had made
the “sacrifice and oblation to cease,” by offering himself upon the
cross? With respect to the law, it was indeed framed by the wisdom,
and enacted by the authority, of God; but it was subservient to a better
dispensation, and was no longer useful when that dispensation was introduced.
Why should the shadow be retained, when the substance was enjoyed? Of
what value was the image to those, who possessed the original? In the
sacred writings of the Jews, there were many intimations, that the religion
of the Messiah
Under the charge of having expressed sentiments so offensive and impious, Stephen had every thing to fear from the furious zeal of his judges. Nothing but his blood could atone for a crime of such magnitude. Yet his confidence did not forsake him, nor was his tranquillity disturbed. Conscious innocence, firm faith in his Saviour, and the hope of immortality, supported and cheered his mind in this trying hour. “All that sat in the council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.” The precise meaning of these words cannot perhaps be ascertained. They seem to signify, that on this occasion there was something preternatural in his countenance, a divine splendour similar to that on the face of Moses when he came down from the mount, and which was a manifest token of the presence and approbation of God; or that there was such a mixture of majesty and mildness in his looks as may be imagined in the face of an angel, if he should become visible to men, and indicated the perfect composure of his mind, and the magnanimity with which he disregarded the malice and rage of his adversaries. He was as a rock in the midst of the ocean, upon which the tempests blow, and the waves dash in vain.
The remainder of this interesting history will be the subject of
First, All the institutions of the Gospel bear a relation to the exigencies of the Church. There is nothing superfluous, nothing intended merely for show, nothing which could have been left out without inconvenience and detriment. In the kingdoms of men. we observe offices which serve no purpose but to augment the splendour of the sovereign, to increase his influence, and to provide honours and emoluments for his favourites. In corrupt Churches, superstition has introduced an expensive and useless appendage of bishops, archbishops, patriarchs, cardinals, and popes. But in the Church modelled after the Scriptural plan, we see no office without its appropriate duties, of which the beneficial tendency is obvious. There are pastors to “feed the people with knowledge and understanding; there are elders to rule over them with vigilance and love; there are deacons to supply the necessities, and sooth the sorrows, of the poor. Every thing has evidently proceeded from him, “who is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working.”
I
observe, in the second place, that the best method to promote the glory
of God, and the public good, is for every man to attend to his peculiar
duties. “Let every man abide in his calling, and study to do his own
business.” This is the sphere in which providence has appointed him
to move. To grasp at something farther, “to stretch ourselves beyond
our measure,” is to violate the order which God has established, and
to forget the limited nature of our faculties, which are distracted
and embarrassed by a multiplicity of objects. The care of the poor would
have been a specious apology for interfering with the management of
their affairs; it had the appearance of great diligence, and great humanity.
Yet, the Apostles declared, that it would have been unreasonable and
incongruous in them to have neglected for this service, the proper duties
of their office. Men never go out of their way without going wrong.
They either mismanage the affairs, with which their inconsiderate zeal
has. incited them to intermeddle, or, when engaged in them, they forget
the business of their own station. “As we have many members in one body,
and all members have not the same office; so we being many, are one
body in Christ, and every one members one of another.” On this ground,
the Apostle addresses the following exhortation to Christians. “Having
then gifts, differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether
prophecy, let us prophesy, according
In the last place, We are admonished by the conduct of the enemies of Stephen, to examine, with care, the nature and motives of our religious zeal. It may be an unhallowed fire, kindled by hell, or by our own passions; not a pure flame, proceeding from love to God and man. “It is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing;” but zeal in a bad cause is the worse, the keener and more vehement it is. “The Jews had a zeal for God, but it was not according to knowledge;” and it hurried them on to the most dreadful excesses; to crucify the Lord of glory, to blaspheme his religion, to murder his servants, to add crime to crime, till, in the righteous judgment of God, they perished in their rage. How little are we acquainted with the spirit by which we are actuated! How apt are we to mistake error for truth, to be misled by fair appearances in ourselves as well as in others, to fancy that our hearts glow with ardour for the glory of God, when it is pride, or self-love, or party affection, which is stirring within us! We may be certain that our zeal is false, when it is excited by matters of less, but is indifferent to such as are of greater, moment; when it is violent against the sins of strangers, but indulgent to those of our friends; when it extinguishes love to the persons against whose opinions or practices it is directed; when it takes pleasure in exaggerating their faults, in expatiating on their blemishes, in holding them up to public detestation; when it is disposed to curse rather than to bless, not to save, but to destroy. May the Spirit of gentleness and love descend into our hearts! The man, in whose bosom he resides, is not the sport of the selfish and malignant passions. He only is a man of disinterested benevolence. He loves the persons whom duty commands him to oppose; his heart melts with tenderness, while he reproves and admonishes them; and the only triumph which he seeks, is the triumph of truth and grace in the salvation of their souls.
IN the last
Lecture, I entered upon the history of Stephen. We have seen, that,
rendered conspicuous by his office, his gifts, and his activity, he
was regarded with a jealous eye by the unbelieving Jews; that their
hostility was exasperated by the ill success of the disputation to which
they had challenged him; and that, with the revenge natural to base
and little minds, they were impatient to destroy by violence, the man
whom they could not vanquish by argument. I shall pass over his speech
before the Sanhedrim, recorded in the preceding part of the chapter,
because, being an abridged narrative of the history of the Jews, it
does not fall within the limits of this course of Lectures, which is
intended to illustrate the principal events connected with the rise
and progress of the Christian Church. There is one observation, which
must occur to every reader, namely, that the speech is incomplete. He
sets out with a detail of the divine dispensations towards the patriarchs
and their seed, and goes on, in regular order, till he come down to
the days of Solomon, when he suddenly breaks off, and addresses his
audience in the language of accusation and reproach. It is probable
that his hearers gave signs of impatience; and Stephen, perceiving that
they were about to interrupt him, seized the moments which remained,
to tell them a few unwelcome truths, which, if they did not arrest them
in their headlong career, would serve as his dying testimony against
the incorrigible enemies of his Saviour. From the strain in which he
speaks of the temple towards the close of his discourse, we may collect,
that he would have proceeded to show that that magnificent structure
was a typical temporary building; that there was no blasphemy in affirming
that it should be destroyed; and that its fall might now be expected,
as, by the incarnation
“When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed upon him with their teeth.” The word rendered, “to cut,” has been chosen to express, in tile strongest manner, the effect of the speech upon his accusers and judges. It signifies to saw asunder, and alludes to that cruel mode of putting criminals to death. The men, in whose presence Stephen now stood, entertained lofty ideas of their own character, and were fully persuaded that they were the favourites and devoted servants of heaven. With what indignation must they have heard, from one whom they so much hated, that they were “uncircumcised in heart,” hypocrites, who had the seal of the covenant in their flesh, but wanted all the qualities of which it was a sign; that they “always resisted the Holy Ghost,” by whom they believed themselves to be moved; and that they had now filled up the measure of the iniquity of their fathers, by betraying and murdering the Messiah? Such accusations inflicted a wound upon their pride, the pain of which goaded them on to madness. When a good man is unjustly reproached, he will feel the injury, and vindicate himself with the dignity of virtue; but he will, at the same time, commit himself, with all meekness, to him “that judgeth righteously.” But when a bad man is charged with his crimes, wanting the support of a good conscience, and that steady confidence in heaven, which is the reward only of innocence, he frets and rages against those who have insulted his honour, and dissipated the pleasing illusions of self-love. Perhaps, his heart, for a moment, misgives him; a sudden ray of conviction, darting into his mind, discovers the hollowness of his pretences, and the baseness of his motives.; stung by transient remorse, he is impatient of the anguish; his passions become ungovernable; and he bursts into fury, which torments himself, while it seeks to destroy the disturbers of his peace. Such were the feelings, and such was the behaviour of the enemies of Stephen. “They were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth;” expressing at once the torture which they suffered, and the ferocity of their temper. They resembled beasts of prey, eager to devour the man who has dared to attack them.
The situation of Stephen was critical. Every look and
gesture
How transporting was the prospect which was presented to Stephen! In this world, good men walk by faith; and are supported amidst their sufferings, by a well-founded assurance of the invisible glories and joys of eternity. They see nothing more than others; they only believe more, and believe on better grounds. By an extraordinary dispensation, the evidence of sense was, in the present case, superadded to the evidence of faith. He, who was first called to seal the truth of the gospel with his blood, was favoured with a particular testimony of the divine approbation, to encourage others: to follow him in the same arduous service. The interest which Jesus Christ takes in his faithful servants, who, for his sake, love not. their own lives, was made manifest, to assure them in every age,. that although they may not see him, as Stephen did, yet he looks on, while they are suffering in his cause, and opens his arms to receive their spirits, as they rise from the scaffold and the stake.; But he being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God.”
The whole of this dispensation was miraculous. Stephen was: probably
in the hall in which the Sanhedrim was assembled, and; his natural sight
was bounded by the roof. Even in the open air, the human eye, which
perceives the sun and stars at the distance
But this was not the only
sight which gladdened the last moments of the martyr. He saw “Jesus
standing on the right hand of God.” The Saviour ascended to heaven
in our nature, which he will wear for ever, and in which the righteous
will behold and admire the perfection of beauty; and he sits at the
right hand of the Father, invested with the highest honours, and exercising
sovereign authority. But on this occasion Stephen saw him standing.
And why does he appear in this unusual posture? One of the Apostles,
with a design to demonstrate his superiority to the Levitical priests,
remarks that they “stood” when they ministered; but that he, having offered his sacrifice for sin,
“for ever sat down on the right hand of
God.” A saint was surrounded with enemies thirsting for his blood,
and in a few moments was to fall a victim to their rage. Jesus Christ
rose up from his throne to observe the courage, the patience, and the
faith of his disciple; to meet and welcome his spirit as soon as it
had escaped into the peaceful asylum of heaven; and to introduce him
into the presence of his Father, that he might receive from his hands
the crown of glory. “When the
In such a state of mind, Stephen could not be silent. Pleasurable emotions of the lighter or gentler kind may be suppressed, as pride or prudence shall direct; but when the heart is strongly affected, and overcome by sudden and excessive joy, it breaks through all restraints, and gives unequivocal signs of its sensations. “Behold,” exclaims the martyr, “I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God.” Although none were near him who feared God, yet he could not forbear to declare “what God had done for his soul.” But his words are not to be considered merely as expressive of his triumph. They were a new testimony to the truth of the religion for which he was to lay down his life, and to the glory of, his Saviour; and in this view, they were fitly spoken in the presence of his enemies. “It is no cunningly devised fable which I follow, when I believe, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, and that he has ascended from the cross to the throne. it is no longer the subject of my faith. I see it with my eyes; I behold him reigning with his Father, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion. The sentence which you dared pronounce upon him as a blasphemer is reversed. There stands the Son of Man, whom you persecuted under that humble title, placed, as he foretold to you, on the right hand of power. Over me it will be easy to prevail; but know that you are contending with him, who can dash his enemies in pieces as a potter’s vessel.”
The passions of his audience, already wound
up to the highest pitch, now burst forth with ungovernable fury. “They
cried out with a loud voice,” to drown the voice of the blasphemer,
and “stopped their ears,” lest they should hear more of his words; and
disregarding the solemnity of the place, and the gravity and deliberation,
“And the witnesses laid down their
clothes at a young man’s feet, whose name was Saul.” Saul was neither
a witness nor a judge; but his furious zeal had brought him to the place,
and he expressed his approbation, we may presume, by gestures and words.
I see him standing, with the rage of bigotry depicted on his countenance,
encouraging the witnesses to avenge the honour of Moses upon the wretch
who had dared to revile him, himself hurling a stone at his head, and
relaxing into a vindictive smile, when the blessed martyr fell lifeless
to the ground. In the school of GamalieI, he had imbibed no portion
of the moderate spirit of his teacher. The fire of youth, blown up into
a flame by religious prejudice, could not be repressed by the calm lessons
of reason and humanity. A career which commenced with such unfavourable
symptoms, promised to be marked, in its progress, with violence and
blood. A
Let us return to Stephen, whom we left in the midst of his enemies. His courage was unshaken, and his mind was calm. “And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” God is a supplement, which would have been better omitted; and the verse should have been rendered thus. “They stoned Stephen, calling upon Jesus, and saying,” &c. Whether we adopt the one translation or the other, the verse furnishes an example of religious worship, offered to Jesus Christ by one of the primitive disciples, standing on the verge of the eternal world, and under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. There is not a higher exercise of faith, nor a more solemn act of religion, than to commit our departing spirits to the care of Him whom we address. This is the last and most important step; and the consequences of a mistake would be irretrievable. And to whom should this homage be paid, but to our faithful Creator? In whose hands can we safely entrust our souls, but in those of him who made them? Here, then, is a proof that our Lord Jesus Christ is a divine person, entitled to the same worship with the Father, unless Stephen died an idolater, and the Holy Ghost had suddenly abandoned him; a proof, which the adversaries of his Deity cannot evade, except by such pitiful shifts, as are sure indications of a desperate cause.
“Lord Jesus receive my spirit.” His earthly tabernacle was battered
and broken, and ready to fall down into the dust. But Jesus had taught
his disciples, “not to be afraid of them that kill the body, and after
that have no more that they can do.” The
The few moments of life which remained, Stephen spent in
prayers for his murderers. Calm amidst their fury, full of charity,
Such language, indeed, is now so common, in consequence of the example exhibited by Stephen, and by our Lord upon the cross, and of the general strain of the doctrines and precepts of our holy religion, that we hear it without much admiration. Almost every profligate, who is brought to the scaffold for his crime, professes to forgive his enemies, and to die in peace with all the world. But the difference is great between the unmeaning cant of virtue, and the real practice of it. It is no vulgar attainment to love the man who hates us; to divest ourselves of a wish to retaliate upon him who has poured bitterness into our cup; sincerely to desire the salvation of those, who, if their power were equal to their malice, would consign us to the flames of hell. Such benevolence never lodged in a soul, whose ideas and affections the Spirit of love had not first purified and elevated.
“Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.” Stephen was fully apprized
The melting charity of this prayer was sufficient to have softened the hearts of savages. Yet, it did not suspend the rage of the murderers of this holy man; but as he closed it, the mortal blow was inflicted, which filled up the measure of their guilt, and dismissed the saint to everlasting rest. “And when he had said this, he fell asleep.” Nature had suffered violence; but the struggle was over, and its convulsive agitation was succeeded by a calm. “He fell asleep.” The word is happily chosen, to express the peaceful nature of the death of the righteous, who, worn out with labour, and exhausted with sorrow, sink down upon the bed of dust to enjoy sweet repose. There let the blessed martyr rest, till the dawn of the last morning, when, awaked by the voice of his Saviour, he shall rise to receive an unfading crown, and to participate in the triumph of truth, which, by patience, and meekness, and blood, shall have overcome the rage of the world, and the malice of hell.
To this Lecture I subjoin the following improvement.
First, None are more violent
and implacable enemies of the truth, than those who live in an insincere
profession of religion. They have peculiar reasons for disliking it.
It detects their hypocrisy, reproves their backslidings, condemns their
innovations and corruptions, and disturbs their proud confidence and
presumptuous hopes. With what indignation and fury do they rise up against
such ungrateful doctrine? They hate it, because “it never speaks good
concerning them, but evil.” We have a pertinent example in the conduct
of the Jews towards Stephen. The apostate Church of Rome has faithfully
trodden in their steps. The most ferocious savages never exercised greater
cruelty upon their deadly foes, than the genuine disciples of Jesus
have suffered from the followers of Antichrist. And what evil had the
victims of their barbarity done. Had they blasphemed the God of heaven;
or committed crimes against the peace of society? No; but the Scriptures
informs us) that they “tormented them who dwelt on the earth,” not
by fires,
In the second place, Jesus Christ will not be wanted to his servants under those sufferings which they endure for his sake. He is too much pleased with their zeal in offering themselves as a sacrifice to his glory, to leave them unpitied and unfriended in distress. Does any man afflict a poor helpless saint, who passes for a mere cipher in the world’s arithmetic? He says, “Thou hast touched the apple of mine eye. I feel the pain, and will avenge the injury.” Are his disciples reproached, tortured, and put to death, by the wanton cruelty of the wicked? A voice cries to them from heaven. “Why persecute you me?” Our exalted Redeemer has a fellow-feeling with his people; and his hand is always ready to obey the suggestion of his sympathizing heart. Invisible to mortal eyes, he stands in the heavenly sanctuary, praying for grace to help them in time of need. Hence human nature has often been so powerfully supported as to astonish the spectators. It has not startled at the sight of death in its most horrible forms; it has shed no tears, and uttered no groans, when it was slowly consumed by fire, and torn in pieces by instruments of iron. Delicate women and children have tired their persecutors by their patience under tortures; and it was only when nature could hold out no longer against the approaches of death, that they yielded with a smile. “My grace is sufficient for thee; for my strength is made perfect in weakness.”
In the third place, In whatever form death may befall a
Christian, his latter end is peace. What! is it peace, if he should expire in
agony, in indigence, and in solitude, without a friend to watch his bed, or a
physician to administer cordials; or should die by the hands of the public
executioner? Even in those cases my brethren, it is peace, because he dies in
the Lord, and falls asleep in the hope of a resurrection to life. He may be
carried away by a whirlwind; but it will convey him, like Elijah, to heaven. Do
you think rather of the rich and honourable man, who is stretched upon a bed of
down, surrounded with weeping relatives, and attended by men of skill, who
exhaust their art to alleviate his pain? Ah! you do not consider, that perhaps
remorse embitters
Who, then, will not say, “Let me die the death of the righteous; and let my last end be like his?” Who would not wish to leave the world with the same inward peace, and the same animating prospect? Remember that this shall be the privilege of those alone, who resemble Stephen in faith and holiness. It is faith in the atonement and intercession of Jesus, and the testimony of conscience to the sincerity of faith, which will cheer the evening of our days, and make the grave appear under the image of a place of rest; a blessed refuge from the malice of men, and the calamities of life.
IN the observations upon the martyrdom of Stephen, we have anticipated the remark with which this chapter begins. “And Saul was consenting unto his death.” His approbation of that murderous deed was attested by the activity with which he engaged in the persecution, carried on, at that time, against the Church in Jerusalem. “As for Saul, he made havock of the Church, entering into every house, and haling men and women, committed them to prison.” The death of Stephen did not appease the fury of the Jews; but having once tasted blood, they thirsted for it with insatiable eagerness. The immediate effect of their violence was the dispersion of many persons belonging to the Church, who, not finding it safe to remain in Jerusalem, followed the direction given by our Saviour: “When they persecute ye in this city, flee ye into another.” The remote effect, of which Saul and his accomplices were not aware, but which was one design of providence in permitting the persecution, was the propagation of the gospel, not only in Judea and Samaria, but, as we learn from the sequel of the history, in more distant regions, inhabited by the Gentiles. God is continually bringing good out of evil. He makes “the wrath of men to praise him; and turns the most adverse events into the means of promoting the cause, which it threatened to destroy.
I should pass on to the history of Simon
the magician, without any other observation upon the introductory verses
of the chapter, had they not been lately brought forward, and, I think,
misrepresented, in the controversy with regard to the persons, who have
a right to preach the gospel. “They were all scattered abroad, except
the Apostles; and they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching
the word.” Upon these passages thus connected,
Its strength depends upon the truth of this
assumption, that the Church of Jerusalem was completely dispersed, all
the private members, as well as the office-bearers, being driven from
the city. This is supposed to be the obvious import of the words, “they
were all scattered abroad.” It is questionable, however, whether this
interpretation is just. Furious as the persecution was, it is not credible
that it compelled all the individuals of a large body, consisting of
many thousands, to leave their homes. Who ever read of a persecution,
which caused, in the course of a few days or weeks, the dispersion of
so numerous a society! Persecution may oblige the pastors and rulers
of a Church, against whom it is chiefly directed, and such of the members
as are distinguished by their rank and zeal, or are more easily intimidated
than their brethren, to seek an asylum in some distant place; but history
will support me in affirming, that, in such cases, the greater part
have remained, sheltered by their obscurity, or by their friends, and
that a Church was never completely scattered, but by a long and uninterrupted
course of cruelty and blood. Besides, if the whole Church was driven
into exile, so that neither man nor woman was left behind, except the
few who were committed to prison, for what purpose did the Apostles
continue in Jerusalem? During so dreadful a storm, they durst not have
appeared in public, unless they had come forth solely with an intention
to suffer martyrdom; they must have carefully concealed themselves.
There was no Church to which they could minister; and, certainly, this
was not a time when there was any prospect, or indeed any opportunity,
of making converts. By staying, therefore, in Jerusalem, they exposed
themselves to danger, without being able to perform any service which
would counterbalance the hazard; and they spent that time in inactivity,
which, had they gone abroad with their brethren, might have been employed
in a more extensive publication of the gospel. This supposition is consistent
neither with the prudence nor with the zeal of
Whoever attentively considers what has now been advanced, will, I trust, be convinced, that the words of Luke do not refer to the whole body of the people. At the same time, the universal term which he employs, points out some class of persons, to which it should be applied. And whom can we so reasonably presume to be meant as those who were associated with the Apostles in preaching the gospel, and dispensing the ordinances of religion, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers? This idea, I am disposed to think, would occur to a careful reader from the words themselves. “They were all scattered abroad except the Apostles.” Why are the Apostles excepted, if not with a design to intimate that the rest were of the same description, persons, who, as well as they, laboured in word and doctrine? How the Apostles could remain in the city, while others found it necessary to flee, I am not able to say. In a narrative so concise, the omission of several circumstances renders it impossible to explain every particular. Perhaps, they had more courage than their brethren; or, being willing to expose themselves to all the danger, they advised the other ministers of the word to retire, for a season, to those places in which they could freely employ themselves to the advantage of the common cause.
It is not a
mere conjecture, that those who were scattered abroad were authorised
preachers of the gospel. The supposition is confirmed by two facts afterwards
recorded. The first among the dispersed disciples, who is said to have
preached, was not a layman, to employ a term of ancient use in the Church,
not a self-created teacher, who judged himself qualified, and therefore,
called, to commence a public instructor. The preacher, as we shall soon
see, was Philip, an Evangelist, that is, an extraordinary office-bearer,
inferior only to the Apostles. The next of whom we have any account,
were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who having gone to Antioch, preached
to the Grecians. We are not informed, on this occasion, whether they
held any office in the Church; but, when Antioch is again mentioned,
we read, that there were Prophets and Teachers in that city, among whom,
we find Lucius, a man of Cyrene. It is highly probable, that he was
one of those Cyrenians by whom the Church of Antioch was founded; and
it is a natural inference, from his being a Prophet or Teacher, that
the rest were likewise
These remarks will at least show, that the argument
for lay-preaching, which has been deduced from this passage, is not so
clear as to justify the confidence with which it has been advanced.
It is an instance, in which, by a mistake of the sound of Scripture
for the sense, an opinion has been adopted, which is contrary to its
explicit declarations in other passages. He who shall consider, that
it was not to the Church at large, but to the Apostles, that Jesus gave
the keys of the kingdom of heaven; that they, and not all the disciples,
of whom there were more than five hundred, received a commission to
go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; that,
when they planted Churches, they ordained elders in every city to instruct
and govern them; that there is not, in the New Testament, a single
case fairly made out, of a person who preached without authority, nor
in the history of the Church, during the first century, as one, profoundly
learned in Christian. antiquity, and unbiassed by any particular interest, has
assured us;”
Samaria was the ancient capital of the ten tribes, who revolted from the family of David; but was now inhabited by the descendants of the mixed people, whom the king of Assyria, when he carried those tribes into captivity, planted in their room. At their first settlement, those foreigners practised the idolatry of the countries from which they respectively came; but afterwards, in consequence of the instructions of an Israelitish priest, who was sent to teach them “the manners of the God of the land;” they associated with their own rites the worship of Jehovah. It was probably from his hands that they received the five books of Moses; and these, corrupted in several places, were the only books of Scripture which they acknowledged. They built a temple on mount Gerizzim, in which they offered sacrifices; and they observed the Jewish festivals, practised circumcision, and expected the Messiah. Of their system of religion, as it existed in the days of our Saviour, it is difficult to obtain a distinct and satisfactory account, because the implacable enmity of the Jews led them to represent it in the most unfavourable light. From the words of Jesus to the Samaritan woman, it appears to have been extremely corrupt.. Ye worship ye know not what.” Yet, as they professed the same religion with the Jews, how much soever they differed in some material points, they are classed with them in the style of the New Testament, and are not reckoned among the Gentiles. The honour of having begun the conversion of the Gentiles, is not ascribed to Philip, who preached with success to the Samaritans, but to Peter, by whose ministry Cornelius, a Roman centurion, was brought to the knowledge of the truth.
From this
imperfect view of the religious state of the Samaritans, it is evident,
that they were not better disposed than their rivals the Jews, to embrace
the doctrine of Christ. Their system was more erroneous, their prejudices
were equally great, and their knowledge was less. When Philip visited
them, there was less hope than ever that they would lend a favourable
ear to the gospel, because their attention and affections were pre-engaged
by one of those impostors, who, in all ages, have sported with the
credulity of mankind. “There was a certain man called Simon, which before-time
in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria,
giving out that himself was some great one: to whom they all gave
To this class of deceivers
Simon belonged. He “used sorcery” in Samaria, or, as the word signifies,
exercised the magical art; and he “bewitched” the people, or astonished
them. In the usual style of such impostors, he gave himself out to be “some great one.” We are not told what character he assumed. Perhaps,
he avoided any specific claim, and asserted his dignity in general and
mysterious terms, calculated, by their indefinite nature, to work upon
the imagination of the crowd, and to raise their admiration to the utmost
height of extravagance. The Samaritans, the dupes of his artifice, exclaimed, “This man is the great power of God.” They were at a loss by what title
to distinguish him; but they regarded him, with reverence and awe, as
a messenger from the God of heaven
Notwithstanding, however, the veneration in which Simon was held by the Samaritans, no sooner did the Evangelist appear, than the mimic wonders of magic shrunk before the genuine works of omnipotence. “What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord.” Magic, with its spells and incantations, its mystic rites and vaunted powers, could not bear to be compared with that splendid train of miracles, by which the gospel was confirmed. Unclean spirits, the pretended agents in this diabolical art, crying out with terror, fled from the bodies of the possessed; the limbs of those who were afflicted with palsy in a moment recovered their vigour; and the lame, throwing away their crutches, or rising from their beds, leaped for joy. By these real wonders, the charm which attached the Samaritans to Simon was broken; their attention was turned to the Evangelist; and they were prepared to give his doctrine a patient and favourable hearing. They believed him to be an ambassador from God, whose instructions they were bound to receive. “And the people with one accord gave heed unto these things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did.”
The labours of Philip were attended
with great success. “The power of the Lord was present, to heal the
Samaritans,” to enlighten their iminds, and to render them obedient
to the faith. Their conversion must be ascribed to the influence of
divine grace upon their souls, and not to the external evidence of miracles
addressed to their senses, or to the arguments and eloquence of the
preacher. “Neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth but
God, that giveth the increase.” “The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness
comprehendeth it not, till God, who commanded the light to shine out of
darkness, shine in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory
of God, in the face of Jesus Christ.” “The
Samaritans believed Philip preaching the things concerning the, kingdom
of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, and were baptized both men and
women.” How did Simon behave on this occasion? He also believed and
was baptized, wondering at the miracles of Philip, which so much surpassed
the feats that the art of magic had' enabled him to perform. As it is
manifest, however, from his subsequent conduct, that he was not a
partaker of the grace of God, from which he should have never fallen,
it is necessary to remark, that it is not always in the same sense that
men are said, in the
Simon was admitted to baptism, because he
made a credible profession of faith, and Philip perhaps did not suspect
his sincerity. He might have long continued to sustain the character
of a believer, had not an event taken place, which presented a temptation
too strong to be resisted. “Now when the Apostles, which were at Jerusalem,
heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them
Peter and John. Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that
they might receive the Holy Ghost. (For as yet he was fallen upon none
of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then
laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” The
design of their mission was to assist Philip in his labours, to confirm
those who believed, and, in particular, to impart spiritual gifts. Philip,
it would seem, did not possess the power of communicating them, which
appears to have been exclusively granted to the Apostles, to distinguish
them as the immediate ambassadors of Christ, and the first ministers
in his kingdom. As yet the Holy Ghost was fallen upon none of them;” that is, his extraordinary gifts had not yet been conferred upon the
Samaritans. They had already received his regenerating influences, for
they already believed, and faith is one of the fruits of the Spirit.
Peter and John therefore prayed, that God would bestow upon them the
same supernatural endowments, which had been so liberally distributed
to the Jewish converts; and then “laid their hands on them.” This solemn
rite, as we observed in a former Lecture, was used in the primitive
Church, both in setting apart a person to a spiritual office, and in
conveying miraculous powers.
It is not necessary to suppose, that the Holy Ghost, in the sense already explained, was given to all the Samaritans who believed, and were baptized. It does not appear, that, even in the Church of Jerusalem, which we may conceive to have been at least as highly favoured in this respect as any other, there was an indiscriminate distribution of his extraordinary gifts. When an election was to be made of persons to take care of the poor, the Apostles commanded the multitude to look out among them men “full of the Holy Ghost;” and the command obviously imports, that every man was not so qualified. In that age, when the Spirit was poured out upon all flesh, upon persons of all ranks and conditions, it is certain that in some cases he was imparted to private members of the Church; but it is probable, that the communication was more commonly made to those who sustained a public character. “To one was given the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues. But all these wrought that one and the self same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he willed.” In this manner, provision was made for the edification of the Church, as well as for the conviction of unbelievers. The first Christians were, for the most part, unlearned; and the pastors were on a level, in this respect, with their flocks. But the want was amply supplied, when “to one was given, by the Spirit, the word of wisdom; to another, the word of knowledge by the same Spirit.” Were any person still in the Church, who could confer the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands, he might dispense with a regular education for the ministry, and employ missionaries recently taken, like Matthew, from the receipt of custom, and Peter, from the trade of a fisherman. It is a surprising mistake to neglect the ordinary means of preparation as unnecessary, when those of an extraordinary nature have ceased. But to preach the gospel seems now to be accounted by some men an undertaking so easy, that almost any person may engage in it.
The character of the
Apostles never appears more august, than when we view them as possessed
of the power which was exercised, at this time, by Peter and John. It
seems to exalt them above the standard of human nature, and to throw
around them some degree
Simon was speedily undeceived with respect to the character of Peter
and John. With what confusion and dismay must he have heard this answer! “Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift
of God may be purchased with money.” it is not to be understood as an
imprecation of divine vengeance upon Simon. Notwithstanding the form
of the words, which seem to contain a prayer or a wish, they amount
to no more than a strong expression of abhorrence. “Let thy money perish
as thou shalt, unless God give thee repentance.” It is the indignant
language of religious principle, resisting a nefarious attempt to corrupt
it. It is a zeal for God kindled into a flame, at the avowed wickedness
of a man, who sought to prostitute the most sacred things in the service
of his passions. Peter proceeded to reprove and admonish him in very
solemn and alarming terms. “Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter:
for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.” He had thrown off the
mask, and discovered his
The spirit
of Simon was appalled at the terrible words of the Apostle; and for
a moment he trembled in the view of his danger. Hence he entreated
Peter and John “to pray to the Lord for him, that none of these things
which they had spoken should come upon him.” But the favourable symptoms
were not of long duration; for we are assured, by the testimony of ancient
writers, that he afterwards apostatized from the Christian religion,
and openly opposed the Apostles. I shall conclude the account of him,
by laying before you a summary of the blasphemous and licentious doctrines
which he is said to have propagated, extracted from Irenæus, who,
in the second century, composed a learned work against heresies. “This man,” he says, speaking of Simon,
“was honoured by many as a
God, and taught that it was he who had appeared among the Jews, as
the Son, among the Samaritans, as the Father, and among other nations,
as the Holy Ghost; and that he was the most sublime virtue, or the Father
of all, by whatever name he was known among men. Having brought from
the city of Tyre an infamous woman called Helena, he carried her about
with him, affirming that she was the first conception of his mind,
the mother of all beings, by whom in the beginning he formed angels
and archangels. He persuaded those who believed in him and this woman,
that they might live as they pleased, because men were saved by his
grace, and not by good works; and that works are not good by nature,
but by accident;” or, in other words, that virtue and vice are arbitrary
and unfounded distinctions. The same Father goes on to inform us, “that his
followers led flagitious lives, that they practised magic, and that they adored
the images of Simon and Helena.”
The example of Simon admonishes us not to be hasty in the conclusions which we draw from the impression made upon the hearers of the gospel. We must not, like some persons of easy belief, reckon every man, who seems to be awakened, a convert, and account a few tears, shed in a moment of compunction, an evidence of genuine repentance. In this way a long list might be speedily drawn up; but a short time would compel us to make many erasures. Let us never forget, that a profligate sorcerer, when be heard the gospel preached by Philip, renounced the magical art, came forward to confess his sins and to be baptized, and for a time was numbered among the disciples of Christ. The conscience of a very hardened sinner may be disturbed with temporary terror; and the passions of the most careless may, by peculiar circumstances, be interested and agitated. But the emotion subsides; the world again prevails by its allurements; sin regains the empire of the heart; and it happens to them according to the true proverb, “The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire.”
Let those, who, like Simon, have disappointed
the good hopes which were once entertained of them, by turning away
from the truth, beware lest “ their hearts be hardened through the deceitfulness
of sin.” Having suppressed their convictions, violated the fidelity
which they had solemnly pledged to Jesus Christ, renounced the friendship,
and forfeited the esteem, of good men, they are placed in very perilous
circumstances. Conscience has sustained an injury by which it may be
rendered insensible; God is provoked
THE preceding part of the chapter contains an account of the labours of Philip in Samaria, where he triumphed over the arts of magic, and prevailed upon the infatuated followers of a specious impostor to become the disciples of Jesus Christ. The passage now read presents him in a different scene, which, although much more contracted than the former, is not less worthy of attention, from the extraordinary means by which he was conducted to it, the distinguished rank of the person whose conversion was the result, and the remarkable display of the power of divine grace in that event.
It is evident, from the history of the Acts, that the Apostles were not left to the conduct of their own zeal and prudence in the choice of places for preaching the gospel. We are certain, that they were, at all times, under the special guidance of Providence and several instances are recorded of immediate interpositions of heaven for their direction. The spirit hindered them from going to some places, which they were purposing to visit, and pointed out others, which were not comprehended in their plan. In the case before us, “the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south, unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.” The wisdom only of the Author of the gospel was competent to determine what spots were the most favourable for first sowing the seeds of divine truth; and to him the book of the decrees of heaven was unfolded, in which are written the names of those who are predestinated to eternal life, and the order in which each is to be called to the enjoyment of it.
The person, for whose sake the Evangelist was sent on the mission,
It may excite your surprise, that a person, born and residing in a country so distant from Judea as Ethiopia was, should have enjoyed opportunities of gaining such an acquaintance with the law of Moses, and the proofs of its divine authority, as had prevailed upon him to submit to it. But, at that time, the Jews were dispersed among all nations; and many thousands of them resided in Egypt, to which they had been attracted by the privileges conferred upon them by Alexander the Great, and his successors, to whose government it was subject. From Egypt some of them might have passed into Ethiopia, and communicated their religion to the inhabitants. According to the account of the Abyssinians themselves, the queen of Sheba, who came to see the glory of Solomon, reigned in their country. Having embraced the religion of that illustrious monarch, she introduced it into her own dominions; and it continued to be professed, till the nation was converted to Christianity. The prevalence of Jewish customs among that people at present, gives some countenance to this relation; and certainly proves, that from whatever cause, the religion of Moses was once generally adopted by them.
The Ethiopian eunuch was a person
of distinguished zeal and devotion. Notwithstanding the multiplicity
of business attached to his office, and the high rank which he held
as a treasurer of the queen, circumstances which generally divert the
minds of the great from religion, and make them regard its institutions
with indifference
The
manner in which he was employed in his return is a farther proof of
his piety. “Sitting in his chariot he read the Prophet Esaias.” It
is not commonly by this expedient that men of rank relieve the tediousness
of their journies. They amuse themselves with the shifting scene before
their eyes, or with meditating schemes of ambition and pleasure, or
with perusing some flimsy production, the offspring of a superficial
understanding and corrupt imagination, which mingles poison with the
entertainment, and while it stimulates the passions, silently undermines
the fortresses of virtue. The Bible is proscribed, as too grave and
too precise, to be the companion of those who wish to enjoy life as
it passes away. Yet it is the best enlivener of solitude, the most faithful
guide in perplexity, the fortifier of every good principle, a never-failing
auxiliary in temptation, the monitor of youth, the comforter of old
age, the light of life, and the only surviving hope in death. The sentiments
which it inspires ennoble the mind, give dignity to the character, and
conduct to true happiness in this world and the next. The fulness of
Scripture presents a pleasing variety; and the events which it records
are better fitted to awaken the great and tender emotions of the soul,
than the transactions of human society, or even the contemplation of
the scenery of nature. To a mind capable of perceiving and relishing
its excellence, the word of God will be a subject of meditation night
and day. In the intervals of business, it will recur to this favourite
study with eagerness; and imbibing its
While the eunuch was reading Esaias the Prophet, “the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?” In our age, when the pride of rank exacts from inferiors distant respect, and repels every attempt to approach nearer as an insult, such a question would be considered as rude and impertinent, and would be answered with a frown, or contemptuously disregarded. But, in ancient times, there was a more familiar intercourse among the different classes of men; and the great were addressed in a style of freedom very remote from modern manners. The passions of mankind are at all times the same; but the artificial forms of society are perpetually changing. It was owing to the simplicity of manners, which still prevails among eastern nations, that this blunt question, proposed to a courtier riding in his chariot, by a stranger walking on foot, and probably appearing by his dress to be a common man, was heard without surprise, and was answered with mildness. “How can I,” said the eunuch, “except some man should guide me?”
There is something very amiable in this answer. It indicates a mind humble and docile. By a proud man the question would have been resented as an impeachment of his understanding; for the great must be treated by others as their superiors in wisdom, as well as in rank and authority. The Ethiopian eunuch frankly acknowledged his ignorance; and instead of endeavoring to palliate it by the pretext that he had not considered the passage, confessed his inability to discover its meaning without assistance. A mind thus conscious of its infirmity was not disposed, like the self-conceited Pharisees and Scribes, to cavil at the doctrines of the gospel, but would receive instruction, as the thirsty earth drinks in the rain. The same unassuming temper must be formed in us all, before we will receive the law from the mouth of Jesus as obedient disciples. “Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
It is not uncommon to meet with persons, who aim
at gratifying their pride by an appearance of humility, and make a show
of ignorance, that the rapidity with which they seem to learn, may excite
admiration. That the ignorance of the Ethiopian eunuch was not affected,
is evident from his question in the
The passage which he was reading when Philip joined him, was the most
proper which could have been found in the Old Testament,
The place of the Scripture which he read was this: “He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and like a lamb, dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth: in his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.” There is some difference between the quotation and the original passage in Isaiah, owing, it is probable, to the former being taken from the Greek version of the Old Testament. The design of this Lecture does not require a particular explanation of it. It may suffice to observe, that it describes the sufferings of the Messiah, which he endured with meekness and resignation, like a sheep quietly following the person who leads it to death, or a lamb submitting in silence to be robbed of its fleece; and declares, that he was condemned through the injustice of men, and by violence was deprived of his life.
Such was the passage which the eunuch was
reading; and the chapter in which it is contained, is one of the clearest
and most affecting prophecies of the sorrows and death of our Redeemer.
An occasion so favourable, and so evidently provided by heaven itself,
the Evangelist could not permit to pass unimproved. “Then Philip,” who
at the desire of the eunuch had ascended his chariot
The effect produced by the
discourse of Philip, is evident from the words of the eunuch. “And
as they went on their way, they came to a certain water; and
the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?” The Evangelist had given a full detail of the religion of Christ, comprehending
its institutions as well as its doctrines. Hence the new convert was acquainted
with baptism. The preacher was wise, the hearer was prompt to learn, and the
Holy Spirit, by illuminating his mind, and affecting his heart, enabled him to
make rapid advances in knowledge. To every person in similar circumstances,
baptism will recommend itself on several accounts. It is the rite by which we
publicly recognise Jesus Christ as our Saviour, and dedicate ourselves to his
service. It is the sign of our admission
into the society of his disciples, in consequence of which we visibly
become “fellow-citizens with the saints, and members of the household
of God.” It is a seal of the covenant of grace, a confirmation of its
promises, by which
“Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” Faith is the qualification for baptism prescribed by our Saviour. “He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved.” To adult persons, this ordinance should not be administered till they are instructed in the principles of the Christian religion: and solemnly profess that they believe them. It is only faith unfeigned which gives any man a right to the ordinance in the sight of God. It is incumbent, therefore, upon those to whom the administration of it is committed, to act with much caution, lest they should be imposed upon by the arts of hypocrisy, to compare the profession of faith with the practice, the only criterion by which we can judge of its nature, and never to proceed without satisfactory evidence of the sincerity of the candidate. Of the prudence which ought to be exercised to preserve the fellowship of the Church in purity, and to guard the institutions of the gospel against profanation, we have an example in the conduct of Philip. “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” This was an appeal to his conscience, as there was not leisure to ascertain the genuineness of his faith in any other way.
The eunuch replied, “I believe that Jesus Christ
is the Son of
The confession of faith made by the Ethiopian eunuch is remarkable for
its simplicity. The articles are few, and are expressed without circumlocution,
or variety of phrase. It would have been well for the Church, if her
creed could have remained equally plain and unembarrassed. But the introduction
of heresies has rendered it necessary to state the opposite truths with
precision; and the dishonest arts of heretics have compelled their antagonists
to counteract their attempts to corrupt and disturb the Church, by a
full and guarded exposition of the faith. They who are loudest in exclaiming
The confession now made being satisfactory, “they went
down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized
him.” Those who understand the original language need not to be told,
that the phrase, translated “to go down into the water,” does not import
that they waded into it, for the purpose of baptizing the eunuch by
immersion. It necessarily implies no more than that they went close
to it. With whatever confidence some affirm, that immersion was the
primitive mode of baptizing, there is no evidence in the New Testament
in favour of that practice. Cases are mentioned, in which it seems incredible
that the body was dipped in water, as when thousands were baptized in
the midst of a city, and families were baptized in their own houses
at midnight. This, however, is not the only instance in which some men
readily believe that things might have been done long ago, which they
would not hesitate to pronounce impracticable in the present times.
The water in baptism is intended to be a sign of the Spirit. Now, among
all the passages which describe, in metaphorical terms, the communication
of the Spirit, there is not one which alludes to immersion. The language
of the Scripture uniformly refers to that mode of applying water which
is practised in our Churches. The Holy Ghost is said “to fall upon men,” “to be
poured out upon them,” “to be shed upon them,” “to
be sprinkled upon them.” These expressions God has selected as the most
proper to signify the communication of his influences. Is it not then
strange to imagine, that a religious rite, and the language of Scripture,
although both intended to give information upon the same subject, bear
no resemblance to each other, and convey quite different ideas? According
to the practice of sprinkling, Scripture and the symbolical action,
harmonize; according to the practice of immersion, Scripture suggests
one idea, and the action, another perfectly opposite. Such discordance
should not be hastily imputed to him; who is “wonderful in counsel, and
excellent in working.” With relation to the present case, tradition and modern
travellers inform us, that the water, to which Philip and the eunuch went down,
was a
It would have been natural for so young a disciple, to wish that his spiritual teacher should remain with him, to instruct him more fully in the doctrines of the gospel, and to fortify his mind against temptations to abandon the faith. A person just initiated, seemed too inexperienced to be trusted alone. But the wisdom of Jesus Christ had otherwise determined. He was able, without the ministry of Philip, to carry on and to perfect the good work which he had begun. The eunuch was now possessed of that faith, which, terminating upon the Saviour himself, maintains an intercourse with him, by which the life of the soul is preserved and cherished. “When they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more.” We are not able, perhaps, to assign the reason of this sudden separation; but the event served to establish the faith of the Ethiopian, to which, at the first view, it seems not to have been favourable. As a miracle, it added the. sanction of heaven to the doctrine of Philip, and exhibited ocular demonstration of the truth of all that he had said relative to the miracles of Christ, and the extraordinary powers conferred upon the Apostles and Evangelists.
Accordingly, the faith of the new convert was not shaken, nor was his
mind in any degree disquieted, by the unexpected loss of the company
of Philip. We are informed, that “he went on his way rejoicing.” And
surely no man ever had better reason to be happy. He had found the
Messiah, the desire of all nations; he had been admitted to partake
of the blessings of salvation; his soul was full of the consolations
of God, and of the hope of immortality. No doubts now perplexed his
mind. The Scriptures were unveiled; cnd the wonders of redemption, which
were unfolded to his view, transported him with admiration and gratitude.
His lips, we may believe, gave utterance to the feelings of his heart;
and the desert, through which he passed, was enlivened with the songs
of salvation. In this happy frame, “he went on his way,” hastening
back to his own country, to impart the joyful tidings to his friends,
and to recommend his new faith by the practice of every virtue. Had
be returned to Jerusalem, he would have enjoyed the society of the Apostles
and disciples; but Ethiopia was the theatre on which Providence had
appointed him to act; and no man can so effectually prove the sincerity
of his conversion, and so successfully promote
I conclude with the following observations.
First, The Lord knows ''them that are his,” and will in due time call them to the enjoyment of salvation. Whatever obstacles are opposed to their salvation, and however far they have wandered from God, his grace will overtake them, and accomplish its designs. This observation is illustrated by the history before us. It does not appear, that in Jerusalem the Ethiopian eunuch had heard any thing about Christ. He had now left that city, and had advanced so far in his journey, that he was entering into countries where the good news of salvation had not been published. He was passing the boundary which separated light from darkness, and returning without the knowledge of the Saviour, to his own land, where he could not have obtained it by ordinary means. At this critical moment, a minister of Jesus was sent, by the special direction of the Spirit, to speak words by which his soul should be saved. “The election shall obtain, although the rest be blinded.” God will either cause the gospel to be preached in the places where his elect reside, or he will bring them into a new situation, in which they shall enjoy the dispensation of it.
The second
observation suggested by this passage, relates to the irresistible efficacy
with which the word of God, accompanied with the influences of the Spirit,
operates upon the soul. “It is quick and powerful.” It may be compared
to the lightning, which, in the twinkling of an eye, flies from the
one end of heaven to the other. Sudden conversions, indeed, should be
carefully examined, lest they be only deceitful appearances; but they
should not be considered as impossible. In every case, the transition
from death to life is instantaneous, although in some there may be
a long preparatory process. This moment, the man of Ethiopia is so ignorant,
that he cannot determine whether Isaiah, in one of the clearest passages
of his writings, speaks of himself or of some other person. The next,
he perceives the prophecy to be a description of the Messiah fulfilled
in the sorrows and death of Jesus of Nazareth, whom he therefore acknowledges,
with faith and joy, as his Saviour. The works of God do not, like those
of man, require time to bring them
In the last place, the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ will dispose those who are possessed of it to submit to his authority. No sooner was the Ethiopian eunuch enlightened, than he professed a desire to dedicate himself in baptism to the service of his Redeemer. You believe that Jesus is the Christ. You therefore believe, that he is not only a Priest to die for your sins, but a Prophet to teach you the way of God, and a Lord to govern you. In all these offices you will acknowledge him, if your faith is sincere. But if there is any of them with which you are dissatisfied; if you would disjoin one from another, seeking, for example, to be saved from wrath by his blood, while you have no desire to be delivered from the dominion of sin by his power, know that Christ is not divided, and that the impious attempt betrays ignorance or hatred of his character. He who comes to Jesus, must resolve “to take his yoke upon him;” and if any of you say in your hearts, or in your conduct, “We will not have this man to reign over us,” beware of the vengeance with which he will vindicate his insulted authority. “Those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”
THE man, whose conversion is the subject of the present Lecture, has been already mentioned in this history; and the incidental hints respecting his sentiments and conduct, give a very unfavourable idea of his character. Young in years, he discovered no symptom of that generous spirit, and that tenderness of feeling, which are expected before the heart is narrowed and hardened by commerce with the world; but with an insensibility, which is the ordinary result of confirmed prejudices, and repeated crimes against humanity, he beheld, with approbation, the cruel death of a righteous man. His zeal hurried him on to take an active part in the persecution of the Church; and “entering into every house, and haling men and women, he committed them to prison.” From this specimen, what could the disciples prognosticate but hostility protracted during life, and augmenting in fury, as its objects multiplied, and its sanguine hopes of success were disappointed? The most perspicacious eye could perceive no trait in his character, from which a change might be predicted. It could still less have been foreseen, that this man should ere long be a preacher of the faith, which he was so eager to destroy. But in the plastic hands of the Almighty, the powers of mind, and the qualities of matter, are passive and pliant. With the rudest and most untoward materials, he can rear a fabric, admirable in its contrivance, beautiful in its construction, and accommodated to the most valuable purposes. It is his glory still to call a magnificent world out of chaos; it is his pleasure to display the sovereignty and power of his grace, upon the most unlikely and forbidding subjects.
When we read, in the beginning
of this chapter, that “Saul, yet
In Damascus, the capital of Syria, it appears that the gospel had made considerable progress. There the disciples multiplied under the protection of the laws, or, at least, not disturbed by the civil authority. It must have been the flourishing state of Christianity in Damascus, which attracted the notice of Saul to a place so remote. He applied to the high-priest for letters to the synagogues, empowering him to demand the surrender of such Jews as, by embracing the new doctrine, had incurred the guilt of apostasy from the religion of Moses. Damascus was in a foreign country, and under a different government; but the high-priest claimed a jurisdiction over all persons belonging to the Jewish Church, wherever they resided, and seems to have been permitted to exercise it, by Aretas the king. The offenders Saul was to bring to Jerusalem because there only it was competent to the high-priest to punish them, or because it was necessary that they should be tried by the Sanhedrim, and the example, it was hoped, would terrify those at Jerusalem, who yet remained obstinate heretics.
Having procured such
letters as lie wished, Saul set out on his journey, and, we may be certain,
suffered neither curiosity nor indolence to detain him on the road.
His heart was too deeply interested in his commission to admit of any
delay in executing it. Already he had approached near to Damascus, and
perhaps within sight of its walls, when, in a very unexpected manner,
his progress was arrested. God often permits the wicked to carry on
their designs
Before we consider the account of the conversion of Saul, it will be proper to make a few observations upon the extraordinary means by which it was effected. Jesus Christ did not call him by the ministry of any Apostle or Evangelist; and he called him, when, instead of attending upon the ordinances of religion, he was engaged in a scheme of persecution. The laws of nature and of grace are nothing but the order, according to which God exerts his power in the production of physical, moral, and spiritual effects. Creatures are obliged to conform to that order; but the Creator may step aside from it, when any end, worthy of his wisdom, is to be gained. Miracles are deviations from the laws of nature; and such conversions as that of Saul, are deviations from the laws of grace. When the world was created the power of God was necessarily exercised in a different manner from that in which it. is exercised in the ordinary government of it. It is not surprising, therefore. that when the Christian Church, which is represented in the Old Testament as a new and more glorious creation, was founded, divine grace should have adopted some unusual methods of accomplishing its designs. But as no man of a sound mind will infer from miracles, that he may safely disregard the established order of nature, and expect, for example, to be cured of an inveterate disease by a word, or to be fed with manna from heaven; so the history before us gives no encouragement to hope, that while men are neglecting and despising the instituted means of salvation, God will employ visions and revelations to awaken and convert them. The case of Saul affords no precedent, except as it shows the freeness of divine grace, to preserve the convinced sinner from despair. This is the only use which we are directed to make of it. “Howbeit, for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first, Jesus Christ might show forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.”
“And as he journeyed,
he came near Damascus; and suddenly there shined round about him a light
from heaven.” The light was instantaneous; not like that of the sun,
for the full splendour of which we are prepared by the gradual illumination
of the atmosphere,
Paul tells us, in one of his Epistles,
that “last of all, Christ was seen of him also, as of one born out
of due time;” and asks, in another place, “Have I not seen Jesus
Christ our Lord?” In the
Such was the effect of this vision, or of
the dazzling brightness with which he was surrounded, that he fell
to the earth. The shock was too violent for his bodily frame, and
his mind was seized with terror. A flash of lightning strikes awe
into the stoutest heart. Man is alarmed at any occurrence which reminds
him of a power superior to his own, that could crush his puny strength;
he looks with dismay at those appearances, which, being out of the
ordinary course of nature, seem to portend the interference of the
Deity, to inflict vengeance upon the guilty. Thus we see the proud
and unrelenting persecutor lying prostrate on the earth. What now
can we expect, but that a sentence of perdition shall be issued against
him, and executed upon the spot? But mercy had cast him down, that
it might raise him up again. We hear, therefore, only the language of
expostulation. “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” How much
must he have been surprised and confounded at this address! Never could
he have suspected, in the pride of self-righteousness, that a voice
from heaven would accuse him of an atrocious crime, or that his present
conduct, which was applauded
Saul was guilty of persecuting Jesus, because he defamed his name and made every effort to extirpate his religion. We say that a man is persecuted after his death, when his memory is loaded with reproaches, and his friends are subjected to ill-usage on his account. Malignity sometimes continues, in the blindness of its fury, to pursue those who have escaped beyond its reach, and cannot be disturbed by it in the sanctuary of the grave. But something more is implied in the charge against Saul. Between Jesus and his people there subsists an intimate union. They are one body and one spirit. Their interests are mutual; their joys and afflictions are common. What is done to them, he accounts to be done to himself, whether it be an act of beneficence or of malice. The contempt and cruelty, of which they are the objects, he considers as a personal insult. “He that toucheth you, toucheth the apple of his eye.” His love to them makes him feel the injury; and the head complains, when any man treads upon the foot. “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?”
While Jesus accuses Saul as his persecutor, he deigns to expostulate with him. “Why persecutest thou me? Whence this furious zeal? What have I done to provoke such determined hostility?” “Lord! why didst thou condescend to reason with this man? It was with the same gracious intention, which induces thee still to reason with us, whom thou mightest overwhelm at once with confusion and ruin to make the guilty reflect upon their conduct, and to excite them, from the fear of thy justice, to supplicate that mercy which thou art willing to exercise.”
Saul heard the voice,
but did not know from whom it proceeded. He therefore said, “Who art thou, Lord?” It was a question not of curiosity, but of anxiety
and terror. “Who art thou whom I have offended?” It could not be the God of Israel, for whose law
he was zealous even above his countrymen;
who then was this person whom he was accused of persecuting? The voice answered,
“I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.” Never did information more unexpected and alarming burst upon the startled ear. Jesus,
whom the Jews had crucified as the vilest of malefactors, without the gates of
their city; Jesus, whom Saul believed to be an impostor, and whose name he had
never mentioned but in terms of execration; Jesus, whose helpless followers he
had, on all occasions,
His own mind would immediately suggest the dangerous and hopeless nature of his undertaking, which is pointed out in the following words. “It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.” This is a proverbial expression, signifying, that the design in which a person is engaged will prove abortive, and will terminate in his ruin. There is an allusion to a fierce ungovernable animal, which kicks at sharp spikes of iron, and while it vents its impotent rage, destroys itself. What has been the result of the frequent persecutions to which the Church of Christ has been exposed? Hypocrites have apostatised; some faithful men have fallen by the hands of their enemies; others have been grievously harassed, and compelled to leave their country and their kindred; but the immortal race of believers remains, and will continue, in defiance of the utmost exertions of the world. What has been the fate of their persecutors? They have fallen and perished, and left their names for a proverb and a curse. “God is known in her palaces for a refuge. For lo, the kings were assembled, they passed by together. They saw it, and so they marvelled; they were troubled and hasted away. Fear took hold upon them there, and pain, as of a woman in travail.” Had Saul been permitted to go on in his career, the disciples in Damascus would have been imprisoned, spoiled of their goods, banished, and murdered; but Christianity would have maintained itself against him, and his confederates. He would have been foiled in the unequal contest; and, sinking into eternal perdition, should have felt how vain it is to contend with superior power.
Astonished
at the unexpected discovery, and trembling from a consciousness of
his crime against the glorified Saviour, Saul said, “Lord what wilt
thou have me to do?” Where is now the fierceness of the persecutor?
Where his haughty defiance of Jesus of Nazareth? These sentiments are
exchanged for profound submission. The disarmed foe lies at the feet
of his omnipotent antagonist, and throws himself upon his mercy. He
bows to his sovereign authority. Any thing which the supreme arbiter
of his destiny shall command, he is ready to do; any thing which will
atone for his past unprovoked opposition. All his strong holds are cast
down;
In
the mean time, “the men which journeyed with him stood speechless,
hearing a voice, but seeing no man.” There seems to be a contradiction
between this account, and that which is given by Paul himself in the
twenty-second chapter; for he there says, that “they that were with
him saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the
voice of him that spake to him.” The accounts are easily reconciled,
by supposing the one to mean, that they heard the sound of the voice,
and the other that they did not distinguish the words.
“And Saul arose from
the earth; and when his eyes were opened,. he saw no man: but they led
him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. And he was three days
without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.” Had this blindness been
the natural. effect of the dazzling light, his fellow-travellers would
have been: affected in the. same manner. It was a temporary punishment,
inflicted by the power of Christ, which showed how easily he could have
struck him dead upon the spot, and cast his guilty soul into hell; and
taught him to admire and praise the gracious Redeemer, who, in the midst
of wrath, remembered mercy to the worst of his enemies. Shut up to his
own reflections, under this blindness, he
The following verses relate the cure of his blindness, his admission into the fellowship of the disciples by baptism, and the zeal and courage which he displayed in the service of Christ.
“And there was
a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias, and to him said the
Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.” This is the language of a faithful disciple, who only waits for the
commands of his Master, that he may obey them. “And the Lord said
unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight,
and inquire in the house of Judas, for one called Saul of Tarsus: for
behold he prayeth.” He no longer breathed out threatenings and slaughter
against the disciples; nothing proceeded from his lips but earnest supplications
for mercy.
Ananias, when first addressed by our Saviour, answered, “I am here,” signifying the utmost readiness to execute his orders; but he hesitates when he hears his commission. “Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: and here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.” “Is it to Saul that thou sendest me? Is it thy will, that I should go and deliver myself into his hands?” The good man does not refuse to obey, but humbly expresses his apprehensions, which were too well justified by the past conduct of Saul. Ananias appears not to have known what had befallen him in the way.
“But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen
vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children
of Israel. For I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name’s
sake.” “Lord! how unsearchable are thy judgments, and thy ways past finding
out!” There were Pharisees in Jerusalem, who were not guilty of such
crimes as Saul; men who disbelieved thy religion, but did not persecute
thy followers; who were restrained by a sense of justice and humanity
from injuring their persons, although they detested their error, These
thou didst pass by, and leave to perish in ignorance; while to this
man, compared with whom they were innocent, a man who impiously waged
war with thyself, and would have rejoiced in the utter ruin of thy cause,
thou wast pleased to exercise pardoning mercy. We adore the sovereignty
of thy grace. Thou makest of the same lump one vessel to honour, and
another to dishonour. Thou choosest the very worst of mankind as the
fittest objects upon whom to display thy goodness, that the disappointed,
confounded pride of man, may never more dare to stand forth as the rival
of thy glory. What art thou not able to do, who couldst transform
This information removed the doubts of Ananias, who hastened with a joyful heart, to execute his commission. “And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him, said, Brother Saul, the Lord (even Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest,) hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost.” Grace makes a man soon forget injurious treatment l and most willingly does a Christian pardon those whom his Lord has forgiven. The blasphemies and cruelties of Saul are remembered no more. Ananias sees in him, not the murderer of the saints, but “a new creature, created in Christ Jesus to good works; and he salutes him by the compellation of brother, bidding him welcome to the privileges of the heaven-born family. By the imposition of his hands, Saul recovered his sight, and received the gifts of the Spirit, which were necessary to qualify him for the Apostolical office. “And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales; and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.” Thus he was received into the communion of the Church, and dedicated to the service of Christ.
Saul immediately joined himself to the disciples, and openly
appeared. as the friend and champion of the truth. “And straightway he
preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God;” in the
same synagogues to which he had carried letters from the high priest,
requiring them to deliver up to punishment those by whom this truth
was avowed. So powerful were his arguments, that the Jews were confounded.
With their objections, he was well acquainted, for they had been often
urged by himself; but he was now able to point out their futility. A
change so sudden and so great was beheld with astonishment. “All that
heard him were amazed and said, “Is not this he that destroyed them
which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent,
that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests!” Some would
be content to wonder; others were stimulated, by offended pride and disappointed
bigotry, to revenge; but a few, we may believe,
The conversion of Paul, considered in all its circumstances, presents
an argument of great strength for the truth of Christianity. About
the fact itself there can be no dispute; and the only question between
us and the enemies of revelation respects the conclusion to be deduced
from it. I acknowledge, that a change from one system to other does
not, in every case, afford evidence against the first, and in favour
of the second, because the change is often the effect of fickleness,
of passion, of self-interest, or of vanity. But when a man forsakes
a religion, which he has long and zealously supported, and goes over
to a religion which he has long and zealously opposed; when every motive
of honour, profit, and personal safety, is on the side of the former,
and all those motives operate against the latter; and when his character
is such, as to obviate any suspicion that he was deceived by others,
or imposed upon by his own imagination; the presumption is strong, that
the evidence in favour of the religion which he has adopted, is at least
probable, and deserves to be carefully examined. The zeal of Paul for
the law of Moses was equalled only by his antipathy to the gospel. Yet,
we find him suddenly changing sides, commencing one of the boldest
and most active propagators of the gospel, and employing his powers
of reasoning to prove, that the obligation of the law of Moses was
annulled, and that no man could be saved by the observance of it. How
shall we account for this revolution in his sentiments and conduct? It
cannot be explained by any of the ordinary principles which influence
the determinations of men. The reasons for continuing in the Jewish
religion were various and weighty. It was the religion of his fathers,
which they had received from God himself; it was the religion of his
country, of the rulers and great men, of his companions and friends; it was the religion which opened to him the only path to reputation
and preferment; it was the religion in which he had made great proficiency,
and on which were founded his hopes of acceptance with God; it was the
religion to which he had, in the most decided manner, given the preference,
and which he could not renounce without acknowledging himself to have
been in an error, and incurring the censures and reproaches of the world.
Christianity was contrary to his Jewish and Pharisaical prejudices
with respect to the character of
In a worldly point of view, the change from, Judaism to Christianity was highly imprudent, or rather would have been a certain indication of madness. But Paul was not mad; he laboured under no disorder of mind, which might have led him to extravagance of conduct; he was not a visionary, who is the sport of the illusions of fancy, nor a weak man, who is the dupe of the artifice of others. All his writings, and all his actions subsequent to his conversion, show him to have been a man of sound judgment, of strong intellectual powers, of consummate prudence, and of steady principles. He was not one of those inconstant, restless beings, who run through every form of religion. He never made but one change, and he persevered in it amidst the severest trials. At the time when he was converted, his mind was not in a state which disposed it to receive strange and unaccountable impressions. He was not troubled with remorse for any crime: he was not apprehensive of danger; he was not labouring under bodily infirmity; he was not in solitude. He was on a journey, in the midst of his friends, and in open day; he was confident of the goodness of his cause; his disbelief of Christianity, and his determination to oppose it, were never more decided. At this moment his views of the gospel underwent a total change. His hostility to it ceased. He acknowledged Jesus Christ to be the Son of God, devoted himself to his service, accepted of one of the highest and most dangerous offices in his Church, and commenced an avowed and indefatigable advocate of his cause.
It is impossible,
I think, when all the circumstances are considered, to account for
this conversion, except on such grounds. as shall fully establish the
truth of the gospel. Nothing could have effected a change so great,
so sudden, so much opposed by all the feelings of human nature, but
evidence, which the mind of Paul was unable to resist. Had the gospel
not been true, it would not have counted Saul of Tarsus among its
friends. Not only does
The case of Paul deserves the serious consideration of infidels, who should either give a satisfactory solution of it, in consistency with their own principles, or admit the force of the argument which it affords in behalf of the gospel. It is an instance of an unbeliever, a man of some learning, and considerable abilities, who yielding to the conviction, publicly adopted our religion after having virulently and pertinaciously opposed it. Their refusal to imitate his example, must proceed from their not having considered the evidence, or from their having found it defective. Among those who have examined the subject, there can be no doubt to which of these causes their conduct should be ascribed. Christianity will stand the test of the strictest inquiry. We have nothing to fear from fair discussion. Unbelief is not the consequence of just reasoning, but of sophistry, prejudice, presumptous ignorance, and licentious dispositions. Infidels sometimes maintain, that God ought to work miracles in every age for the confirmation of the gospel; and, on this ground, may insinuate, that they have the same right as Paul to have their doubts removed by a supernatural interposition. But the demand is not reasonable. If the ordinary evidence is sufficient to satisfy those who will candidly attend to it, God is not obliged, at the request of every caviller, to break in upon the established order of providence. Let them first show, that it is impossible at present to know the gospel to be true without a new revelation; and it will then be time to examine, whether such a revelation should be granted.
To the friends of Christianity, the conversion of
Paul is fraught with instruction. It confirms their faith by a new proof of the
divinity
THE conversion of Cornelius, who was the first-fruits of the Gentiles, is supposed to have taken place about seven or eight years after the ascension of our Saviour. Yet, before he left his disciples, he gave them a commission to go “into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” The terms in which it was expressed were perspicuous; and as there could be no dispute about their duty, so there ought to have been no delay in performing it. During all this time, however, the Apostles confined their labours to their own countrymen, and to the Samaritans. If they did not understand their commission, we see a remarkable instance of the power of prejudice in preventing the mind from perceiving what is perfectly obvious; if they understood, but did not execute it, their conduct shows with what difficulty inveterate opinions and habits are renounced. To whatever cause we impute the delay, it is manifest, that although we should venerate the Apostles as ambassadors of Christ, and gratefully remember their pious labours, the benefit of which we at this moment experience, yet we are not indebted to their liberality for the interest which we possess in the new dispensation. The comprehensive scheme, which associated the Gentiles with the Jews in the enjoyment of the divine favour and the blessings of redemption, was not suggested by their enlightened benevolence.
But the prejudices and the reluctance
of men cannot defeat the purposes of heaven. The gospel had now been
fully preached to the Jews, and the foundation of the Church had been
laid among the children of the covenant. The time was come, when the
designs of mercy to those who were “aliens from the commonwealth of
Israel,” should be accomplished. To ensure the execution of the plan,
extraordinary measures were adopted. By a new revelation,
Of the person, whom divine grace selected to be the first among the Gentiles who should receive the knowledge of the truth, the following account is given in the beginning of the chapter. “There was a certain man in Cesarea, called Cornelius, a centurion of the band, called the Italian band, a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.” By birth he was probably a Roman; by profession he was a soldier; and he resided in Cesarea, with the part of the army under his command. Among military men, examples of piety are rare. They are too commonly distinguished by their irreligion and profligacy. The precariousness of life, amidst the dangers of war instead of exciting them to prepare for eternity, is grasped at as an argument to justify a course of dissipation. “Let us eat and drink: for to-morrow we die.” Too thoughtless to reflect upon any serious subject, and too much the slaves of their passions to submit to the discipline of virtue, they acknowledge no law but the law of honour, which does not refrain from baseness, but resents even to blood the imputation of it; permits without reproach the seduction of the innocent, the desolation of families, and the murder of a friend, who, in an unguarded moment, has offended them; prescribes the exterior forms of politeness, and leaves the heart polluted and degraded by the most odious vices.
Cornelius was an honourable exception; for “he was
a devout man, and one that feared God.” He appears from this account
to have been a proselyte of the gate, which was the designation bestowed
by the Jews upon a heathen living among them, who acknowledged and worshipped
the God of Israel, but did not subunit to circumcision. Such proselytes
were still Gentiles in the estimation of the Jews; whereas proselytes
of righteousness who were circumcised, and kept the whole law, were
incorporated with the nation. The character of a devout man, given to
Cornelius, is illustrated and confirmed by several particulars. “He
feared God with all his house.” The pious sentiments which he entertained
towards Jehovah, he was successful in inculcating upon his family. Although
not a descendant of Abraham, he imitated his example, which God
One of the hours of prayer was the ninth hour, or three o'clock in the
afternoon, when the evening sacrifice was offered. At this time the
piety of Cornelius was rewarded with a divine communication, by which
we are encouraged to imitate his example, in the hope of enjoying fellowship
with God. “He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the
day, an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.” Some of the visions recorded in Scripture, were representations made
to the mind in sleep, but with such characters of their celestial origin,
as easily distinguished them from the wild creations of fancy. When
Cornelius saw this vision, he was awake. The objects which he beheld,
had a real existence, and the words which he heard, were actually pronounced.
The minister of the divine will was an angel, who entering into the
place where the good man was pouring out his soul before God, saluted
him by his name. The suddenness of his appearance, his majestic form,
and that consciousness of inferiority and guilt, which man is apt to
feel when any event takes place out
But if the
prayers and alms of the devout centurion ascended as incense, what more
did he want? Was there any defect to be supplied in his religion, by
which he already enjoyed the divine favour? It cannot be doubted, that
Cornelius was at present in a state of salvation, and that, if he had
resided in Rome, or in some other distant place, where the gospel was
not published, he might have lived and died in peace and safety, without
ever knowing that Jesus Christ had come into the world. His faith
in the Messiah was sincere. But he was now in the country, which
had been the scene of the incarnation, miracles death, and resurrection
of the Son of God; and it was not fitting, that in this situation,
any good man, who was waiting for his manifestation should have remained ignorant of that important
event. An angel, therefore descended
from heaven, as on another occasion a star had appeared, to conduct, this pious
Gentile to Christ. Besides, by the knowledge of the Saviour,
his views would be enlarged, and his spiritual joy would be increased;
and this stranger who although a fearer of God, was excluded by uncircumcision
from the communion of the Jewish Church, would be admitted by baptism
to be a fellow-citizen of the saints. The angel therefore gave the
following direction. “And now send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon,
whose surname is Peter. He lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose
house is by the seaside; he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do.” Cornelius might have received this information from one of the disciples,
whom providence could have introduced to his acquaintance; or an Apostle
might have been sent to Cesarea, to preach the gospel to
It is worthy of observation, that, although God was pleased, for wise purposes, to deviate from his ordinary plan, in order to warn Cornelius of his duty; yet he was, at the same time, careful to maintain the authority and honour of his own institution for the conversion of sinners. The angel did not preach the gospel to Cornelius, but informed him where he should find a person who would preach it. God has not employed as the messengers of his mercy, superior beings whose greatness would have made us afraid, and to the charms of whose eloquence the success of his word might have been ascribed. “He hath put the treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of men.” We are addressed by mortals like ourselves, to whom we can listen without terror, and who being sinful, weak, and imperfectly enlightened, can be considered only as instruments of the divine operations. This contrivance, so admirably calculated to secure glory to God in the salvation of men, no dispensation proceeding from himself, will ever disparage. Angels may sometimes summon sinners to hear the joyful tidings, but they will be proclaimed by one of themselves. The expectation of immediate revelations to awaken the careless, is not justified by any promise of Scripture, or any recorded example; and it could not be realized without weakening the authority, and diminishing the importance, of the ministry of reconciliation.
As soon as the vision was past, Cornelius called two of his servants, and a devout soldier, who waited upon him continually; and having related the message of the angel, in which they were all interested, he despatched them to Joppa. Let us observe in what manner Peter was prepared to comply with the invitation of Cornelius.
“On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh
That we may understand the import of this
vision, it is necessary
The literal meaning of the vision was obvious. How much soever Peter was surprised, he must have understood it to be the will of God, that the precepts with regard to things, clean and unclean, should be abrogated; and that the disciples of Jesus should not be burdened with a yoke, which had been so uneasy to the disciples of Moses. But the ultimate design of it would not so readily occur to his mind. To a Jew it was not a natural thought, that the Gentiles should no more be considered and treated a impure. It was therefore necessary, that the Apostle should be farther enlightened on this new and important subject; and this was done by the arrival of the messengers of Cornelius, and by a suggestion of the Spirit. “While Peter doubted in himself, what this vision which he had seen should mean,” messengers came to invite him to visit a Gentile, and instruct him in religion, and “while he thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee. Arise, therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent thee.” Thus he learned, that what God had cleansed, no man should call common, whether the subject were an animal or a man. The Gentiles were cleansed by the repeal of those laws, which distinguished them from the people of God, and excluded them from the communion of the Church.
The scruples of the Apostles being in this manner removed,
he descended from the roof of the house, and welcomed the messengers
of Cornelius, although it is probable, that they also were uncircumcised.
On the morrow, he set out with them for Cesarea, where the centurion
waited for him, having assembled his kinsmen and friends, to hear the
good news of salvation. “And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met
him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. But Peter took him
up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.” From the simple relation
of this fact, it cannot be determined, whether Cornelius intended to
offer religious worship, or civil homage, to Peter, because among some
nations, both were expressed by kneeling, or by prostrating one’s self
upon the ground. He seems to have been overpowered by a strong sentiment
of veneration for the Apostle; and was unable, in this state of mind,
to fix with precision the boundaries of respect. It is evident that
he was guilty of some excess; and, although we can hardly conceive him
to have honoured Peter as a God, because this
There is one feature in the character of all the Apostles, which must attract the notice of every attentive reader of their history, namely, their disinterestedness. We discover, on no occasion, any symptoms of selfishness. Advantages they undoubtedly enjoyed, in the admiration and zealous attachment of their followers, for personal aggrandizement; but they never yielded to the solicitations of ambition. The glory of their Master, and the salvation of souls, were the great objects which they steadily pursued. They were content to be overlooked and forgotten; and if they sometimes magnified their office, their sole purpose was to promote the ends of their ministry. Instead of encouraging, they immediately checked, a disposition in others, to fix upon them that admiration which was due to Jesus Christ, from whom their miraculous powers, and all their talents, were derived. How marked is the difference between them and their pretended successors at Rome, who, by a long train of artifice and hyprocrisy, rose to a proud domination over the Christian world; or Mahomet, whose imposture rewarded him with an empire? Their disinterestedness is an evidence that they were sincerely persuaded of the truth of the gospel, and the gospel must therefore be true; for as the circumstances in which they are placed, rendered it impossible that they should themselves have been deceived, so it is manifest, that they could have no intention to deceive others. After this seasonable admonition to Cornelius, Peter conversed with him in a friendly manner, and went into the house, where he found a large company assembled. He was aware that the Gentiles would be surprised at his conduct, which was so different from that of his countrymen, and was forbidden by the Jewish religion. He informed them, therefore, that God himself had abolished the distinction between the Jews and other nations. “Therefore,” he says, “came I unto you, without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask, therefore, for what intent ye have sent for me.” In return to this question, Cornelius related his vision; and concluded by declaring to the Apostle, that they were met to receive, with entire submission, the word of God from his lips.
“Then Peter opened his mouth, and said,
Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every
nation, he that
The true meaning of the passage is so obvious, that it is not easy to
conceive how any person could have missed it. To respect persons, is
to be influenced in our treatment of them; by partial considerations,
and not by a fair and equitable view of their case; showing favour to
one on account of his nation, his parentage, his rank, or his relation
to us, and rejecting another equally worthy, because his circumstances
are different. “I perceive,” says Peter, “that in this sense God is
not a respecter of persons; for although he chose the Jews to be his
peculiar people, yet if any man be found among the Gentiles, who fears
him, and works righteousness, he is accepted. Piety and holiness are
equally pleasing to God in the
After this introduction, the Apostle proceeds to give a summary of the gospel, which it does not fall within the design of this Lecture to consider. I shall therefore pass on to the last part of the chapter, which records another miraculous interposition, the manifest intention of which was to obviate all objections to the admission of the Gentiles to a full participation of the privileges of the new covenant.
In the first age
of Christianity, the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit were frequently
bestowed upon the disciples of Jesus; and they were usually imparted,
after baptism, by the ministry of the Apostles. In the present case,
the order and the mode were changed; for the Holy Ghost fell upon Cornelius
and his company before they were baptized, and without the imposition
of hands. “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on
all them which heard the word.” We cannot tell, whether this new event
was necessary to remove some remaining doubts in the mind of Peter himself;
but we may presume, that if he had proceeded, without this interposition,
to baptize and lay his hands upon the Gentiles, the Jews who accompanied
him would have remonstrated; and their brethren in Jerusalem, who afterwards
called him to an account, would not have been so easily satisfied. So
unexpected was the event, and so contrary to their narrow notions, that “they of the circumcision which believed, were astonished, as many
as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out
the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues,
and magnify
How happy was the change which now took place in the condition of the Gentiles! Their own writings contain many melancholy proofs of the ignorance and profligacy into which they had fallen. In genius and taste they may be allowed to have excelled; but a peasant, in a Christian country, is more enlightened, upon the subject of religion, than the wisest of their philosophers, and any illiterate man who sincerely believes the gospel, surpasses them all in the knowledge and practice of virtue. Nothing can be conceived more childish and corrupt than their superstitions; nothing more abandoned than their manners; nothing more cold and unprofitable than their most refined speculations. In this situation, “the day spring from on high visited the heathen world, to give light to them that sat in darkness, and in the shadow of death.” The altars of idolatry were overthrown; the hopes of the guilty were revived by the revelation of a Saviour; the prospect of immortal happiness beyond the grave was opened; the soul was purified by faith; and, in the beautiful language of the prophecy, “the wilderness and the solitary place was made glad, and the desert rejoiced, and blossomed as the rose.” We should never think of the call of the Gentiles, without the most lively gratitude. God hath remembered us in our low estate: for his mercy endureth for ever.”
Let us Gentiles be careful to improve the privileges which have been transferred to us from the Jews. “The kingdom of God was taken from them, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” In these words it is intimated, that God intended to form a people, who should make a better return for his favours than the Jews; and we know with what faith and joy the gospel was received by the Gentiles. But, if they shall prove as perverse as the Jews, is there any reason to expect that they shall be treated with greater lenity than the seed of the patriarchs? We are certain, indeed, that they shall never be cast off in a body; but there is no promise ensuring the continuance of the gospel in any particular nation. Remember the once flourishing Churches of Asia and Africa, which are now extinct, or retain a faint existence amidst ignorance and superstition, under the dominion of their Mahometan oppressors. Our privileges infer an awful responsibility. An account will be demanded by him, who is “no respecter of persons, and will not suffer his grace to be despised with impunity.” Let these words sink down into your ears. “Thou wilt say, then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear; for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold, therefore, the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but towards thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness; otherwise thou shalt be cut off.”
AFTER the persecution, which
arose upon the death of Stephen, the disciples enjoyed an interval of
repose. The rage of their enemies was exhausted, or suspended by some
cause, of which this history does not inform us.
The Chapter now read records a second
persecution to which the rising Church was exposed. “Now about that
time, Herod the
The first sufferers were persons of less note than the Apostles,. probably some of the private members of the Church, who were, distinguished by their station in society, or their activity; and as Herod is said only to have vexed them, it would seem that they were not put to death, but subjected to some lighter punishment.. A nobler sacrifice was necessary to appease the rage of the king, and to satisfy the demands of his sanguinary counsellors. “He, therefore killed James, the brother of John, with the sword.” James is called the brother of John, to distinguish him from another James, the son of Cleophas, who is styled the brother of our Lord, because his mother was sister to the Virgin. When the two sons of Zebedee came to our Saviour, soliciting seats in his kingdom, on his right and left hand, he refused their request, but told them that, “they should drink of his cup, and be baptized with his baptism.” We see the prediction fulfilled with respect to the elder brother, who tasted the bitter cup of affliction, and was baptized with a baptism of blood, when he suffered a violent death.
The Apostolical office was the highest and most honourable
in the Church; but it held out no prize to tempt the ambition of
The death of this
righteous man involved the Church in deep affliction; but it was highly
gratifying to the blood-thirsty Jews. “Ye shall weep and lament, but
the world shall rejoice.” They exulted in the just punishment of an
irreclaimable heretic; they flattered themselves, that the example would
terrify others into a recantation of their error; and they hoped, that
the sword would not be returned to its scabbard, till it had executed
justice upon all the leading men in the Church. These sentiments were
openly expressed; and Herod, eager to ingratiate himself still more
with the people, readily complied with their wishes. “And, because
he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further, to take Peter also.” From whatever motive the persecution was begun, it was continued from
policy. This indeed is the principle, which has commonly directed the
exercise of that power, which civil governments claim, to interfere
in matters of religion. It is not truth, but expediency, which, in most
cases, has regulated its operations. Hence forms of religion, not merely
differing in some particulars of inferior importance, but directly opposed
to each other, have been successively patronised by the same legislature,
and even established, at the same time, in different provinces; plainly
because nothing was thought of but to secure the authority and influence
of government, by gratifying the wishes and prejudices of the people.
The alliance between Church and State is conceived to be so close, that
if the one fall, the other cannot long be supported. The Church, therefore,
“Then were the days of unleavened bread.” The Israelites were commanded to eat unleavened bread for seven days at the time of the passover. The season is mentioned, to assign the reason why the king did not immediately put Peter to death. He was more scrupulous than the priests, at the time of our Saviour’s crucifixion, and would not profane the feast by a public execution; or he was afraid, lest the friends of Peter should excite the people, to make use of their right to demand the release of a prisoner, for obtaining his pardon.
“When he had apprehended Peter, therefore, he put him in prison, and
delivered him to four quarternions of soldiers,” that is, to sixteen
soldiers, four of whom guarded him by turns; “intending after Easter
to bring him forth to the people.” The term,
“Peter, therefore, was kept in prison;” and while he was so strictly watched, there was no prospect of his escape. “But prayer was made, without ceasing, of the Church unto God for him.” The danger of Peter must have excited particular interest, as his services had been so valuable, and his loss would be severely felt. But hope is the life of prayer, for who would ask what he knew to be unattainable? and, in the present case, hope seemed to have no rational foundation. The death of the Apostle was fixed for the next day; and, during the short interval, what could occur to prevent it? The first Christians were persuaded that nothing is impossible to him who believes, because nothing is impossible to God. Daniel was preserved in a den of lions, and the three Jewish confessors, in the midst of a fiery furnace. God could bend the heart of the tyrant to mercy, or defeat his purpose by his sudden death, or incline the people to intercede for the life of his servant, or deliver him by a miracle. They did not limit the Holy One of Israel, and say, “How can this thing be!” Reflecting on his power, they overlooked the obstacles to the answer of their prayers, and “being strong in faith gave glory to God.”
The event showed, that the prayer of faith is effectual, and
encourages us to trust in God, in seasons of the greatest perplexity. And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was
sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains; and the keepers
before the door kept the prison.” How happy is the man who is at peace
with God! Assured of his favour, and resigning himself to the disposal
of infinite wisdom and goodness, he enjoys an inward calm amidst the
fiercest storms of adversity. It was the last night of Peter’s imprisonment,
and on the morrow he was to suffer a violent death; yet he sleeps more
soundly, perhaps, than Herod in his palace, not because nature was
exhausted d
In the account of his deliverance, there is little which requires illustration. The minister of providence was an angel, to whom the gates and guards presented no obstruction. As soon as he entered, a light shone in the prison, which showed him to be a heavenly messenger, and assisted Peter to find his way without difficulty. When he awoke the Apostle, and commanded him to rise, the chains fell from his hands, and the words of the Psalmist were literally fulfilled, “The Lord looseth the prisoners.” He then ordered him to gird himself, and bind on his sandals, and cast his garment about him. These things would be wanted, when he had left the prison. There were two wards to be passed, at which guards were stationed; but there they met with no opposition. All the soldiers were cast into a deep sleep. It is evident from the stir among them in the morning, that they were ignorant of the transactions of the night. The iron-gate, which led into the city, was opened by an invisible hand. The angel and Peter went out, and both walked together through one street, when the angel departed. The miraculous interposition terminated, where ordinary means were sufficient. The presence of the angel was no farther necessary to Peter, who could easily find a place of safety from the pursuit of his enemies.
The age of miracles is past.
Angels do not now come, in a visible manner, to perform services to
the saints; but their agency is as real and beneficient as ever. “They
are all ministering spirits,
Peter was suddenly awaked out of a sound sleep; his eyes were dazzled with the light which shone in the prison; the deliverance was altogether unexpected; and the mode of effecting it was miraculous. These circumstances conspired to agitate his mind, and to render him incapable of calm and regular thought. Hence, “he wist not that it was true which was done by the angel: but thought he saw a vision.” But when he was left alone, “he came to himself,” or recovered from his surprise; and finding himself freed from his chains, and in one of the streets of the city, he said, “Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews.” His grateful heart would send up ejaculations of praise to the Saviour, and be inspired with new ardour to serve so gracious a Master.
He then reflected upon
the course which it would be proper to pursue, both for his own safety,
as a strict search would be made for him, and for the relief of the
anxiety of his friends; “and when he had considered the thing, he came
to the house of Mary, the mother of John, whose surname was Mark, where
many were gathered together praying.” In those days there were no Churches,
or buildings appropriated to religious worship. The disciples met
At
this moment, “Peter knocked at the gate; and a damsel came to hearken,
named Rhoda. And when she knew Peter’s voice, she opened not the gate
for gladness, but ran in, and told how Peter stood before the gate.” The description of this young woman, forgetting, in a tumult of joy,
to open the gate to admit him, although this was the first step which
cool reflection would have dictated for his safety, is perfectly natural,
and would be injured, instead of being improved, by a commentary. “They said unto her, Thou art mad.” So much did the answer of their prayers
exceed their hopes, that they could not believe it; and the person who
told them of their success, appeared to be out of her senses. “But
she constantly affirmed that it was even so. Then said they, It is his
angel.” As the word, translated angel, is used also for an ordinary
messenger, some have thought, that they supposed the person at the gate
to be a messenger come with intelligence from Peter. But Rhoda knew
him by his voice; and from this circumstance they must have concluded
that it was either Peter himself, or some being who could personate
him. The Jews believed, that every good man was attended by a particular
angel, to whose care he was entrusted. Judging it impossible that it
was Peter himself, the disciples assembled in the house of Mary said, “It is his angel;” imagining that the angel, who constantly waited upon the
Apostle, was come to give notice of him to his friends. But, although the
“But Peter continued knocking: and when they had opened the door, and saw him, they were astonished. But he, beckoning unto them with the hand to hold their peace, declared unto them how the Lord had brought him out of prison.” The joy of the disciples must have been great, to see their beloved brother snatched by divine power from impending death, and their prayers answered in so surprising and seasonable a manner. “And he said, Go show these things unto James, and to the brethren,” that they also might admire the goodness of the Saviour, and turn their prayers into praises. “And he departed, and went into another place” of greater security. Having been delivered by a miracle, he was to save himself from the pursuit of his enemies by the exercise of his prudence.
The two following verses give an account
of the consternation and bustle of the soldiers, when they found, the
next day, that the prisoner was gone. Neither their search, nor the.
diligence of Herod, could find him. Disappointed in his design against
the life of the Apostles, and mortified at not being able to gratify
the expectation of the people, he wreaked his vengeance upon the soldiers,
who were guilty, in his eyes, of an unpardonable offence. And, indeed,
as they could give no account of the matter, he would naturally suspect,
either that they had slept upon guard, a crime not to be forgiven, or
that they had connived at the escape of the prisoner. After these events,
Herod went to Cesarea, to celebrate games in honour of Cesar. The death
of James was forgotten; or if he remembered it, it was with regret,
that he had been prevented from sacrificing this other victim to his
bigotry or his policy. He was supported by the approbation of the people;
and there was n(. earthly tribunal to which he was amenable. But there
was a God in heaven, who makes inquiry after blood, and whom the death
of a righteous man, how much soever undervalued by the world, interests more
than the fall of a mighty monarch. His justice sometimes pursues
the guilty with a quick pace; and forces to their lips
Tyre and Sidon were maritime cities, in the vicinity of the dominions of Herod. The inhabitants, being employed in trade, had perhaps neglected agriculture; and their territories were too small to yield what was sufficient for the annual consumption. With the profits of trade, or with the wares which they manufactured and imported, they purchased corn and cattle in Judea, or in some of the provinces belonging to the king. Hence, when by some cause not mentioned, they had incurred the displeasure of Herod, they were anxious to pacify him. They dreaded his resentment, which they were unable to resist, and by which they might be deprived of the necessary supplies. To, ensure the success of their embassy, they had made Blastus, the chamberlain, their friend. Kings, who are regarded as independent sovereigns, the arbiters of nations, are often mere pageants, moved by persons of inferior rank behind the curtain. When war and peace are traced to their sources, they are found, in many cases, to proceed, not so much from the ambition and caprice of the ostensible lords of the world, as from the passions of their ministers, and the secret influence of women and favourites. The springs and wheels, which move the mighty machine, are not seldom constructed of the vilest and most contemptible materials.
The favour of the king being gained by the mediation of his
chamberlain, Herod, on the second day of the games, as Josephus informs
us, sat upon his throne, arrayed in royal apparel, curiously wrought
with silver, which being struck by the beams of the rising sun, emitted
a dazzling lustre, that filled the spectators with awe. The oration,
which he delivered to the ambassadors of Tyre and Sidon, might be worthy of
admiration for its eloquence and wisdom; but the applause of the people is an
equivocal proof. Truth seldom reaches the ears of kings. They are addressed in
the smooth language of flattery, which exaggerates, with unrestrained license,
any good qualities of which they are possessed, and blushes not to adorn the
most stupid and worthless, with the highest endowments of intellect, and the
noblest attributes of virtue. The grossest adulation is eagerly received by men,
whom power and splendour have intoxicated. “The people gave a shout, saying, It
is the voice of a God, and not of a man.” Such extravagant flattery, to which
the heathens were accustomed, was altogether unprecedented among the Jews.
Perhaps, they were heathens who joined in this idolatrous
In the fulness of his pride, he overlooked these monuments of
his frailty. No reprimand, or frown, checked the madness of the people.
Elevated upon his throne, the puny wretch snuffed up, with self-complacency,
the incense offered by his worshippers. “But he was a man, and no God in the
hand of him that slew him.” “Immediately the angel of the Lord
smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms,
and gave up the ghost.” The angels are always ready to execute the orders
of their Lord, and fly with equal speed to confer benefits upon the
righteous, and to inflict punishment upon the wicked. Herod did not
give glory to God, by checking the idolatrous flattery of his subjects,
and referring to him all his power and greatness. The measure of his
iniquity was full. To injustice and cruelty he now added blasphemous
pride. The divine honour, thus openly insulted, demanded his destruction.
In the midst of the acclamations of the multitude, and the impious triumph
of the king, he was
Thus perished this impious persecutor; and the hand of God has since been visibly displayed in the destruction of others, who had distinguished themselves as the enemies of his Church. “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord.”
I conclude with a few reflections suggested by this passage.
First, Self-denial and courage are qualities, which enter
into the composition of the Christian character. Self-denial is necessary,
because there are many privations to which the follower of Jesus must
submit, many acts of mortification which he must perform, many hardships,
unpleasant to human nature, which he must undergo. Without courage,
he could not face the formidable obstacles which lie before him in the
path of obedience, nor endure the trials of his faith and patience.
Neither a selfish nor a timid man is fit to be a Christian. He alone
is worthy of this character, who, entirely devoted to his Saviour, is
willing to sacrifice every personal consideration for his glory, and
is resolved that nothing shall stop him in the course of his duty. Such
were the Christians of the Apostolic age. Such was James, who laid down
his life for the gospel; and such was Peter, who cheerfully consented
to follow his Lord to prison and to death. Our circumstances, indeed,
through the goodness of Providence, are different from theirs; we enjoy
peace and security in the profession of religion. But in the most tranquil
season, we must bear the world’s scorn, and resist the world’s solicitations;
and the hour of temptation may come suddenly upon the Church, that they
who are approved, may be made manifest. The following words of Christ
are applicable to every period. “If
In the second place, When we reflect upon the terrible sufferings of the primitive Christians, and of the faithful in succeeding ages, let us submit, without repining, to the comparatively slight inconveniences, which we may incur in the cause of religion. Perhaps, we have been compelled by conscience to adopt a form of religion which is not fashionable, and, on this account, are deprived of some advantages which we should enjoy by conforming to the established faith. We may be a proverb of reproach among fools, and among pretenders to wisdom. It may occasionally be our lot to encounter the sneer of contempt, and to be the butt of ridicule, and wit embittered by malignity. Our familiar friends forsake us; and by the companions of our former folly, we may be branded as hypocrites or madmen, because we will no longer run to the same excess of riot. These, it must be owned, are trials which will be keenly felt by every honest and delicate mind. But we have not yet “resisted unto blood, striving against sin.” Our lives have not been endangered; our property has not been confiscated; nor have we been compelled to exchange the sweets of liberty for the gloom of a prison. With the history of the martyrs before our eyes, shall we not be ashamed to complain? Surely, if we escape thus, let us be thankful that our passage to heaven is so easy, while to others it has been difficult and boisterous.
In the third place, Let us proceed with confidence in the performance of our duty, since we are assured, “that the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptation.” The case of Peter shows, that no earthly power can prevent their deliverance. God can restrain the fury of their enemies, or, permitting it to operate, can afford protection to its intended victims. “Why art thou afraid of a man that shall die, and of the son of man, that shall be made as grass?” Is he not in the hands of the Lord? And if the breath of the Almighty blow upon him, shall not his goodness wither, and his power and glory be laid in the dust? Know, Christian, that thou art safe in the path of duty; but that, when thou hast left it, thou hast no promise of divine protection. The wisest and most comfortable plan, is to commit ourselves to God, to resign the management of our affairs to his unerring wisdom, to confide in his power, and to believe, that, in obeying the dictates of reason and religion, it shall ultimately be well with us.
In the last place, All the impenitent
enemies of the Church shall perish. Defended by omnipotence, she is
invincible. Assaulted by the mightiest potentates of the earth, she
remains, while they have fallen and not a vestige can be traced of their
kingdoms and empires. “In that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome
stone for all people; all that burden themselves with it shall be cut
in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against
it.” An eloquent Father of the Church has left a treatise on the deaths
of persecutors, which records many instances of the miserable end of
those who had distinguished themselves by their opposition to the gospel.
ANTIOCH of
Syria was the first city, in which the gospel was publicly preached
to the Gentiles. “The hand of the Lord was with his ministers: and
a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.” In the same city,
the disciples received the appellation of Christians, by which they
have ever since been distinguished. By these remarkable events, Antioch
has acquired celebrity in the annals of the Church; and it appears to
have been chosen by Providence as a central spot, from which the rays
of divine truth should be diffused throughout the heathen world. In
the beginning of the thirteenth chapter, there is an account of the
separation of Barnabas and Paul, to the work of preaching to the Gentiles,
in consequence of a command of the Spirit, addressed to the Prophets
and Teachers in Antioch. The opposition which they encountered in the
course of their mission was not strange, as their doctrine was new,
and adverse to the opinions and corrupt passions of mankind; but it
seems to have chiefly proceeded from the Jews. That incorrigible race
discovered in every country the same hostile spirit to Christianity
and its Author. Justin Martyr affirms, that they not only did not repent
of their wickedness in crucifying the Messiah, but sent chosen messengers
from Jerusalem to all nations, to inflame the minds of men against his religion.
The passage which I have read, begins with the account of a miracle, performed in the first of those cities. “And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in his feet, being a cripple from his mother’s womb, who never had walked.” His case resembles that of the man who was cured by Peter and John at the gate of the temple; and a particular statement of it is given, to show the reality, and the greatness of the miracle. It was not an incidental, but a radical infirmity, which was removed. He was impotent in his feet; he had been lame from his birth; and the disorder was such, that at no period of his life had he been able to walk. His situation rendered him the proper object of a miracle. No person of humanity could look upon him without pity; and his cure would appear to all to be the effect, not of superior skill, but of supernatural power. Thus, the design of the miracle would be gained, which was not only to relieve the patient, but to demonstrate to the inhabitants of Lystra, that God was present with Paul and Barnabas, and consequently that their doctrine was true.
Miracles are a sign to “them that believe not.” They are not merely prodigies, or strange
sights, intended to raise the wonder of the spectators, and to draw
their attention to the person who performs them, but tokens, or proofs,
of the divine approbation of him, and of the religion which he teaches.
To the Jews, the argument from prophecy was sufficient to prove that
Jesus was the Christ; and accordingly, we find the Apostles insisting
much upon it, in their discourses to that people. But to the Gentiles,
it would not have been addressed with propriety, or any hope of success,
because they were not acquainted with the prophecies, and had no evidence,
that the books containing them, were written prior to the event. Miracles
were an obvious and easy species of evidence. It required no investigation
or discussion; it pressed upon the senses; and the right inference could
be drawn by the plainest understanding. “Rabbi, we know, that thou art
a teacher come from God; for no man can
Paul perceived that the lame man had “faith to be healed.” This faith seems to signify either a general belief of the power of Barnabas and Paul, or rather of Jesus Christ, whose ministers they were, to heal infirmities and diseases or a persuasion, that a cure would be performed upon himself in particular. In the former case, his faith was founded on the account which he had heard of the character and miracles of Christ, and of the extraordinary gifts which he had bestowed upon his followers; in the latter, it was the effect of a supernatural impression upon his mind. This faith Paul perceived by the power of discerning spirits, or the power with which the Apostles were occasionally endowed, of discovering the thoughts and dispositions of men. “If thou canst believe,” said our Lord to a father deeply afflicted by the sufferings of his son; “if thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.” The expectation which the promises of God, or the suggestions of his Spirit have excited, shall not make him ashamed. “Paul therefore, steadfastly beholding this man, said with a loud voice, Stand up right on thy feet. And he leaped and walked.” The cure immediately followed the command. The disorder in his joints was removed; his limbs recovered strength, and with the fondness so natural to a man who has recently acquired a new power, which he had long and earnestly desired, but despaired of ever possessing, he tried it in every way, leaping and walking.
Paul said, “with a loud voice,” Stand up right on thy feet. The miracle was wrought for the sake of
the inhabitants of Lystra, as well as of the impotent man; and for this
reason it was publicly announced. The circumstances in which the miracles
of the gospel were performed, leave no room for suspecting, that they
were dexterous impositions upon the credulity of mankind. That they
were real miracles is evident from this important fact, that they were
not done in a corner, but in the chief places of concourse; in the streets
of cities, in the midst of assembled multitudes, in the presence of
enemies as well as of friends. The miracles of false religions were
performed, or are said to have been performed, in distant ages, of which
we have only fabulous accounts; in remote
The evidence of miracles is not irresistible, but may be counteracted
by the power of prejudice. The Jews attributed the miracles of our Saviour
to Satanical influence; the Gentiles believed, that those of the Apostles
were operations of magic; and the inhabitants of Lystra were disposed
to turn this miracle into an argument in favour of their own idolatrous
religion. “And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lift up
their voices, saying, in the speech of Lycaonia, The Gods are come down
to us in the likeness of men.” The Gentiles had corrupted the fundamental
doctrine of the unity of God; and their various systems of religion
were founded on the supposition of a plurality of Deities, male and
female, differing in their rank, their attributes, and the provinces
or functions assigned to them. These imaginary beings were conceived
to superintend the affairs of the earth. There was, indeed, one sect
of philosophers, the disciples of Epicurus, who, while they admitted
their existence, denied that they governed the world; but they were
justly suspected of atheism.
As soon as the idea was adopted, that Paul and Barnabas were Gods, the people assigned to them their respective names. “They called Barnabas Jupiter, and Paul Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.” Jupiter was the Supreme Divinity of the heathens, whom they called the Father of Gods and men, and represented as swaying his sceptre over heaven and earth. Sometimes they speak of him in a style not unworthy of the true God, describing him as shaking heaven with his nod, and terrifying the world by his thunder; but, at other times, they degrade him below the dignity of a man, by portraying him with the basest passions, and foulest crimes, of a profligate. There is something mysterious and inexplicable in the creed of the Gentiles, affording a lamentable proof of the astonishing, and almost incredible, blindness and stupidity of the human mind. This Jupiter, whom they placed at the head of the universe, they believed to have been a man, who was born, reigned, and died, in the island of Crete. An inextricable confusion pervades the Pagan mythology; it is full of inconsistencies and absurdities, which,. one should think, could not have been digested by the most barbarous nation, and still less by the learned Greeks and Romans; and there is no way of accounting for the fact, that they did give credit to the tales of their priests and poets, but by the information of Paul, “that because they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind.” Mercury was one of the sons of Jupiter. Among the various offices with which he was invested, it is necessary to mention only, that he was reputed the messenger of the Gods, and the interpreter of their will. Paul was called Mercury, because he most frequently addressed the people. If he was a God, there was none whose character so exactly suited him, as that of the Deity who conveyed the messages of Jupiter to mankind. Barnabas was supposed to be Jupiter, because he was older than Paul, or of a more dignified appearance.
If the Gods had condescended
to visit the city of Lystra, religion required that they should be received
with appropriate honours. “The priest of Jupiter, therefore, which
was before their city,” or had a temple without the walls, or in the
suburbs, “brought oxen
The intended
sacrifice was prevented by the zeal of Barnabas and Paul. “Which, when
the Apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes,
and ran in among the people, crying out, and saying, Sirs, why do ye
these things?” In the usual sense of the term, Barnabas was not an Apostle;
but it literally signifies a person sent, a messenger, or missionary,
and the title is probably given to him in reference to his mission from
Antioch, to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. Paul, in one of his Epistles,
speaks of certain brethren, who were “the messengers or Apostles of
the Churches, and the glory of Christ.” When Paul and Barnabas were
informed of the intention of the people, they “rent their clothes.” This was a custom of the Jews, at the death of their friends, in times
of public calamity, and when they heard blasphemy, or witnessed any
great transgression of the law. The Apostles therefore expressed, after
the manner of their country, grief at the conduct of the people, and
abhorrence of their idolatry. “They ran in among them, saying, Sirs,
why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you.” It has been remarked, that the word translated,
“of like passions,” properly signifies, subject to the same infirmities and sufferings,
or fellow mortals. Their being of “like passions” with them would not
have appeared to the Gentiles a good reason why Paul and Barnabas should
not be worshipped; for Jupiter and Mercury, and all the Gods and Goddesses
of Paganism, were supposed to be actuated by the same passions with
men, and, if history might be credited, had given many shocking displays
of wrath, revenge, envy, and lust. But, if they were fellow-mortals,
beings subject, like others, to disease and death, it
In the Old Testament, the heathen Gods are frequently styled vanities.
It is a contemptuous title, which at the same time, is expressive of
their nature. Of the Deities, whom the blinded nations adored, some
had no existence, except in the imagination of their worshippers; and
the rest were dead men and women, whom the gratitude and admiration
of posterity had consecrated. Their images, in which a divine virtue
was supposed to reside, were constructed of stone, and wood, and the
precious metals; and were alike unworthy of religious honours, and incapable
of doing either good or evil, as inanimate matter in any other shape. “They had eyes, but they saw not; and ears, but they heard not. They
that made them were like unto them; so was every one that trusted in
them.” All was vanity. These pretended Gods, and their unprofitable
service, the apostles called upon the men of Lystra to forsake, and
henceforward to worship “the living God.” The living God is Jehovah
the self-existent being, who comprehends in himself the past, the present,
and the future, and is the source of life to all who breathe and think.
His existence alone is necessary and immutable; that of all other beings
is contingent and fluctuating. He is here opposed to the Gods of the
Gentiles, who were dead men, or imaginary beings, and whose lifeless
images, enveloped in
But if the God, whom Paul and Barnabas
preached, was the true God, the Creator of the world and its inhabitants,
why was he so late in asserting his claim to their homage? Whence had
he remained unknown for many ages, while other beings were suffered
to usurp his place and his honours? To obviate this objection against
the Christian doctrine as a novel system, which laboured under the great
disadvantage of being opposed to the ancient established opinions of
mankind, the Apostles subjoin the following remark. “Who in times past
suffered all nations to walk in their own ways.” The cause of the recent
introduction of his worship, was, not that he was an upstart God, a
Divinity of yesterday, but that, for wise and holy reasons, he had permitted
the nations, during a long succession of ages, to apostatize from himself,
and follow the suggestions of their vain imaginations. Although, as
we shall afterwards see, he did not leave himself altogether without
a witness, yet he laid no restraint upon them in their deviations from
truth; and employed no extraordinary means to stem the torrent of apostasy.
No Prophet arose among them to reprove their errors, and restore the
knowledge and service of the Creator. “The times of this ignorance
he winked at,” seeming to take no notice of it, as a man closes his
eyes, that he may not observe what is passing around him. Every nation
was suffered to adopt whatever form of religion was most agreeable to
its taste. Gods were multiplied by the creative power of superstition;
temples rose in every city, and altars in every grove; so that the true
God was banished from the greater part of his own world. The duration
of this period of darkness and impiety is expressed by the indefinite
phrase, “times past.” Idolatry seems to have begun early after the flood.
It was practised in the family of Abraham prior to his call.
Notwithstanding the rejection of the Gentiles, their idolatry was inexcusable, because “God did not leave himself without a witness, in that he did good, and gave them rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with food and gladness.” Canaan was a land “flowing with milk and honey,” and it is called “the glory of all the lands.” But notwithstanding the high character bestowed upon it, in consequence of the divine blessing, which rendered it uncommonly fertile, the other regions of the earth were not deserts, yielding only briers and thorns. Some of the countries, which the Gentiles inhabited, abounded in the choicest productions of the vegetable kingdom. The rain fell upon their fields, and the year was crowned with the goodness of the Lord. There is not a more agreeable prospect than a country smiling under the influences of heaven, presenting to the eye vallies covered with corn, and mountains clothed with pasture, or shaded with forests. As such a scene charms us with its beauties and cheers our hearts with the hope of plenty, so it is fitted to raise our thoughts to the source of all good, the almighty, and beneficent Parent of the universe. A reflecting mind learns wisdom from trees, and flowers, and every thing.
No man, who consults
his reason, can consider the productions of the earth as the result
of chance, because chance signifies no cause of any kind, but merely
expresses our ignorance. It is not less irrational to imagine, that
vegetation is the effect of certain independent qualities, or powers
of matter. Men may impose upon themselves by words and theories; but
it is impossible to conceive what is lifeless and inert to act, without
being first acted upon by some external cause, or an unconscious substance
to work according to a regular and uniform plan. Wherever we observe
design, wherever we see an end aimed at, and a series of means employed
to accomplish it, reason and experience point to an intelligent agent.
It was never supposed by any man in his senses, that a watch was
This process is so often repeated, that it attracts little notice. Many a careless spectator of the varied scenes of spring, summer, and autumn, never extends his thoughts beyond the objects before his eyes. But the changes produced upon the face of the earth, by the vicissitudes of the seasons, are unquestionable proofs of divine wisdom and beneficence. The heathens, amidst their ignorance, were not so atheistical as some modern philosophers, who would confine the attention of others, as well as their own, to the operation of natural causes. They erred only in overlooking the true Author of their enjoyments, and returning thanks for their fruitful seasons to Jupiter, and Ceres, and Pomona, instead of acknowledging the various productions of the earth to be the work of one God, “from whom cometh down every good and perfect gift.” The uniformity amidst variety, which is observable in the system of nature, the regularity of the seasons, the connexion and combination of the causes which contribute to the fertility of the earth, and the sameness of the result, afford evidence upon which we may safely rest this conclusion, that there is one First Cause, “who worketh all in all.” Thus in the darkest times of heathenism, there were not wanting testimonies to the existence and perfections of God. “The invisible things of him were clearly seen from the creation and government of the world, even his eternal power and godhead; so that the Gentiles were without excuse.” This is the important truth, which it was the intention of Paul and Barnabas to establish.
It was, however, with difficulty, that they prevailed upon the people to abstain from offering sacrifice to them. The men of Lystra were addicted to idolatry, in which they had been trained from their earliest years; and so fully were they persuaded of the divinity of the two Apostles, that their own testimony hardly sufficed to convince them of their error. It was with reluctance that they renounced the flattering idea, that their city had been honoured with a visit of the Gods.
We learn from this passage, that the contemplation of nature should be rendered subservient to the purposes of piety. God did not place so many glorious luminaries in the heavens, nor diversify the surface of the earth with mountains and vallies, nor collect the immense mass of water in the ocean, merely to furnish us with the pleasures of imagination. Man is delighted with the view of what is sublime and beautiful, and with the instances of curious contrivance, and exquisite workmanship; but the ultimate design of this delight, is to conduct him to the knowledge and love of its Author. All the objects around us bear witness to the existence of God. Philosophy will afford us much entertainment, by unfolding the secret operations of nature; but the pleasure of the unlettered Christian, who knows scarcely any thing about the laws of the material system, the structure of plants, and the mechanism of animals, is incomparably greater, when he traces, in the grand outlines of creation, the footsteps of his Father, and sees in its varying scenes, the wonders of his power, and the smiles of his goodness.
Let us give
thanks to God for our deliverance from that gross idolatry, which once
prevailed. among all nations except the Jews. It is not to reason that
we are indebted for this deliverance. We indeed find no difficulty in
proving, that there is only one God, the exclusive object of religious
worship; but to demonstrate a truth already known, is a much easier
task than to discover a truth buried under the rubbish of prejudice
and superstition. The wisest and greatest men of antiquity were polytheists.
They adored, with the vulgar, the Gods of their country. The doctrine
of the unity of God has never been publicly professed by any people,
who had not been previously enlightened by revelation. The Mahometans
have learned this fundamental truth from our Scriptures. Notwithstanding
the ignorant declamations of infidels concerning
In a word, As we profess to be the servants of the living God, let us remember, that it is a pure and spiritual worship which he requires. He must not be treated as one of the idols of the Gentiles, to whom their votaries presented the empty homage of ceremonies and oblations. Then only do we serve him, in a manner worthy of his character and attributes, when we present to him the offering of our hearts; when we love him above all things, confide in his power and faithfulness, commit ourselves to the direction of his wisdom, submit to his authority, and regulate our thoughts and actions by his law. Then only do we acceptably serve him, when we offer up praises from a grateful heart, and prayers expressive of holy desires; and when we perform all our religious duties in the name of the great Mediator, the High-Priest of our profession. “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”
THE important nature of the transaction, related in this passage, and the discussion into which we shall be unavoidably led, in consequence of the different systems which it has been brought forward to support, might draw out this discourse to an inconvenient length. I shall therefore consume no part of our time with any introductory remarks, and shall study the greatest possible brevity, while I endeavour to explain, as distinctly as I can, the three parts into which the chapter naturally divides itself; the dispute in Antioch, which was the occasion of a reference to the Apostles and elders at Jerusalem; their deliberations and decision upon the question; and the letter containing their decree, which was sent to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia.
The origin of the dispute is stated
in the
Some, perhaps, are surprised
that the men from Judea should have dared to contend with Paul and Barnabas,
of whom the one was an Apostle, and the other a Prophet. Were any person
now alive invested with the same authority, and endowed with the same
extraordinary gifts, we are apt to think that we should willingly submit
to the decision of this infallible judge. But we impose upon ourselves,
by not attending to the difference of our circumstances. We look back
to Barnabas and Paul with veneration, unabated by any personal quarrel,
or by a near inspection of their frailties. We view them only at a distance,
and in the august character of ambassadors of Christ. But were they
living, and associating with us, we should be familiarized to their
presence, and, amidst a conflict of opinions and interests, should be
ready enough to forget the respect, to which, in our calm moments, we
deemed them entitled. The opposition made to them on this occasion,
is not a proof that
The controversy might have been determined in Antioch. The authority of Paul was as great as that of any other Apostle; Barnabas was a Prophet; and there were other inspired men in the city, as we are informed in the thirteenth chapter, as well as ordinary teachers, who had power to rebuke and exhort, and to reject heretics, after a first and a second admonition. But such was the violence of party, that a decision on the spot was not likely to terminate the difference; and it was expedient to refer the question to a higher assembly, in whose authority all would acquiesce. Besides, it was not a local, but a general question, which might be agitated in any other part of the world; so that it was necessary to obtain a final sentence, which should be alike respected in Antioch, and in all the cities of the Gentiles, “They determined, therefore, that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and elders about this question.”
Different opinions have been entertained with respect to the persons by whom this resolution was adopted. The supposition that Paul and Barnabas were commissioned by the false teachers, is, on many accounts, highly improbable. There is as little ground to think that the determination was made by the brethren, or private members of the Church; mentioned in the first verse. The structure of the passage does not give countenance to this idea. Zeal for the pretended authority of the Church in its collective capacity, is carried to excess, when an Apostle and a Prophet are represented as receiving and executing its commands. We know that there were in Antioch Prophets and Teachers, with whom Paul and Barnabas associated in their ordinary ministrations; and it is consonant to all our ideas of propriety and order, to conceive the determination to have been their deed. They alone were concerned, by the express command of the Spirit, in the separation of Paul and Barnabas to the work of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles; and no satisfactory reason can be given for supposing, that their authority was inadequate to the present purpose, or that it was suspended to make way for the interference of the people.
The history of this transaction is very short, and several particulars
Whatever opinion is formed upon the subjects it is evident that the
reference was made to the Apostles and elders. When the Apostles are
considered as the immediate ambassadors of Christ, the highest office-bearers
in his Church, they appear in a character peculiar to themselves, and
exercise functions, in which no person
Some, with
a view to prove that the present case does not furnish an example of
a reference from an inferior to a superior court, assign as the sole
cause of submitting the question to the elders, as well as the Apostles,
that as the men from Judea pretended to have received authority from
the elders, it was necessary to apply to them for the knowledge of the
fact. But the truth could have been
There are no remarks, connected with the main design of this Lecture, suggested by the two next verses, which indeed are so plain, as to require no illustration. In the fifth verse, we are informed, that “there arose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” I am inclined to consider these words as a part of the speech of Paul and Barnabas, in which they relate the cause of their coming to Jerusalem, rather than as the statement of a new fact, that the doctrine, which had caused so much disturbance in Antioch, was espoused by some persons in the former city.
Let us now attend to the proceedings of the assembly which met to discuss the important question, upon which the peace and enlargement of the Gentile Churches depended. “And the Apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter,” to canvass the arguments on both sides, and to pass a final sentence. In the form of procedure, there was nothing different from what may be practised, and often is practised, in other assembles. No person rose and pronounced the dictates of inspiration, by which the rest were overawed; but Apostles and elders consulted together on equal terms, and the decree was the result of their united deliberations. It was founded upon a well-known fact, corroborated by other facts, which were brought forward in the course of the inquiry; and upon an argument drawn from the Scriptures.
It appears from the following verses, that there were other persons
present, besides the Apostles and elders, and the commissioners from
Antioch, who are called “the multitude,” and “the whole Church.” Nothing,
however, can be plainer, than that they were present to hear, not to
deliberate and judge; for, besides that the reference was not made to
them, Luke expressly affirms, that none came together to consider this
matter but “the Apostles and elders.” As the question, however, was
of the greatest importance, affecting the interests of the Gentile believers,
and prescribing the terms of their admission to the privileges of the
gospel, it could not but excite
When the Apostles and elders came together to consider this matter, there
was “much disputing;” not, we may presume, among
When Peter had, finished his speech, Barnabas and Paul successively rose to support it, by the relation of many similar facts; and they were heard with that profound attention which the novelty and importance of the detail naturally excited. “Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.”
The
last person who delivered his sentiments upon the subject was James.
Having recapitulated the speech of Peter, he adds, “And to this agree
the words of the Prophet, as it is written, After this I will return,
and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down;
and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: that
the residue of men might seek after the Lord, band all the Gentiles,
upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doth all these things.” I shall lay before you the original passage in the prophecies of Amos.
In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen,
and close up the breaches thereof, and I will raise up his ruins, and
I will build it as in the days of old: that they may possess the remnant
of Edom, and of all the heathen which are called by my name, saith the
Lord, that doth this.” There is a considerable difference between the
two passages; and to reconcile them has caused no small perplexity and
labour to commentators. The translation of the seventy comes very near
the words of James; but it is evident that it could not be cited at
this time, when the Apostle was addressing an assembly of Jews in their
own language. Some have recourse to the supposition, that the passage
in Amos has been since corrupted by the Jews, who are accused, by the
Fathers, of having vitiated other parts of Scripture, which most expressly
militated against them. This, however, is an idea which should not be
hastily admitted. Perhaps, we may account for the difference, by saying
that James intended to give the sense, not the exact words, of the prophecy;
and in respect of the sense, the two passages perfectly harmonize. In
both, God promises “to raise up the fallen tabernacle of David;” or
to raise his family, when sunk into obscurity, to greater glory than
ever, by the birth of Jesus Christ, who should ascend the throne of
that monarch,
“Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them which from among the
Gentiles are turned to God; but that we write unto them, that they abstain from
all pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and
from blood.” “Pollutions of idols,” are explained, in the
Whether
this was a temporary prohibition, or was intended to be binding upon
the Church in every age, is not a question connected with the religious
principles of any party. Christians, in different communions, have been
divided in their sentiments. It is affirmed by some, that “things strangled,
and blood,” were prohibited, because they were used by the Gentiles
in their idolatrous sacrifices. The Psalmist speaks of their “drink-offerings
of blood.” According to this opinion, the prohibition must be considered
as occasional and local. In a Christian country, where such idolatrous
rites are not practised, the reason of it does not exist, because the
use of blood gives no countenance to the worship of idols, and, consequently,
cannot be a cause of offence. It is maintained by others, that the
prohibition was not founded in any temporary cause, but has the same
authority under the gospel which it had under the law, and even from
the time of the deluge, when the command to abstain from the use of
blood was given to Noah and his sons. No argument can be drawn in favour
of this opinion, from its being introduced in the same decree with fornication,
which is always unlawful, because duties ceremonial and moral are often
mingled in the same general precept, without any distinction of their
nature. It is not a proof of the perpetuity of the prohibition, that
it was not peculiar to the Mosaic covenant, but was in force from the
period of the flood. That there were ceremonial ordinances before the
law was given from Sinai, is evident from the institution of sacrifices
and circumcision, and from the distinction of animals into clean and
unclean, which already existed when Noah went into the ark. As these
rites, some of which were of a still more ancient date, are confessedly
abolished, the antiquity of the precept concerning blood can throw no
light upon the question respecting its duration. It is a groundless
fancy, that there is a moral reason for
It is surprising, if this precept was intended to continue in force to the end of the world, that there is no mention of it in any of the Epistles, nor so much as a distant allusion to it. Paul seems to teach a different doctrine, when he condemns those who command to abstain from meats, which “God hath created to be received with thanksgiving, of them which believe and know the truth.” “For every creature of God;” that is, unquestionably, every creature fit for food, for of others he cannot be supposed to speak; “every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it he received with thanksgiving.” If blood is excepted, why does the Apostle say “every creature?” Why does he not, to prevent mistake, rather say, every creature, “except such as God has reserved out of the general grant?” As he was warning Christians against the doctrine of those who should afterwards introduce a superstitious distinction of meats, we cannot but wonder that he has taken no notice of a distinction, which, if it exist at all, is an important part of religion. No accurate writer would lay down a general rule without stating the exceptions, especially when he was bringing forward the rule, in opposition to those who had subjected it to arbitrary limitations.
Let it not be objected, that, in the
On these grounds, I consider the precept as a temporary expedient, adapted to a particular state of the Church. Its obligation has long since ceased; and “to him that esteemeth any kind of meat to be clean, to him it is clean.” But let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. “Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth.”
It was the judgment of James, that the yoke of the ceremonial law should
not be imposed upon the Gentiles; and that, with the exceptions already
considered, they should enjoy perfect liberty. In this judgment the
whole council acquiesced. “Then pleased it the Apostles and elders,
with the whole Church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch,
with Paul and Barnabas; namely Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief
men among the brethren: and wrote letters by them after this manner,
The Apostles, and elders, and brethren, send greeting unto the brethren
which are of the Gentiles in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia.” It is
In the letter of the Council, there is scarcely any thing which has not been already considered; and I shall therefore pass it over with a few remarks. It contains a censure of the doctrine of the false teachers, who “troubled the Churches with words, subverting their souls.” It denies that they had received authority from the Apostles and elders, as they appear to have pretended. “To whom we gave no such commandment.” It mentions the names of the messengers sent by the Council, to deliver their decree, and more fully explain it. “It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you, with our beloved Barnabas and Paul; men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.” It declares the exemption of the Gentiles from the law of Moses, and points out the limitation, to which they were required to submit, in the exercise of their liberty.” For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.” It recommends obedience to the decree as conducive to their personal holiness, and to the peace of the Church. “From which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.” Lastly, it concludes with a wish or prayer, for the welfare of the Churches. “Fare ye well.”
The decree is announced with
great solemnity. “It seemed good to us, and to the Holy Ghost;” that
is, it seemed good to the Council, because it seemed good to the Holy
Ghost. This ought not to be considered as a claim of inspiration, but
as a simple assertion, that the sentence was not expressive of their
private opinion, but of the mind of the Spirit, which they had collected
from Scripture,
In the two following verses we are informed, that the messengers of the Apostles and elders repaired to Antioch, and delivered the Epistle to the multitude, who “rejoiced for the consolation.” The controversy was satisfactorily terminated; and their privileges were established by such authority, as would preclude the danger of future disturbance.
From the preceding illustration it appears, that the Church in the Apostolic
age, was not broken down into small parts, detached and independent, but was
united, not only by love and a common profession, but by the external bond of a
general government. The assembly which was held in Jerusalem, may, with
propriety, be called a Council or Synod, between which words there is only this
difference, that the one was used by the Latins, and the other by the Greeks. It
was an assembly summoned to decide upon a cause, which affected itself not
alone, but the whole Christian world. The members of whom it was composed, were
the Apostles, the representatives of the Catholic Church, the elders, and the
delegates from Antioch, among whom there probably were deputies from the
Churches of Syria and Cilicia. A controversy, which could not be determined
In
all past ages, the meeting at Jerusalem has been considered as a Council.
Modern Independents, indeed, generally object to this opinion, for obvious
reasons; but it was adopted and maintained by some of their wiser and
more enlightened predecessors. In this number was the celebrated Dr.
Owen, whose distinguished piety, extensive learning, and profound knowledge
of the Scriptures, have placed him in the first rank among Christian
divines. I shall conclude their argument with the following quotation,
which is worthy of particular attention. “No Church is so independent,
as that it can always, and in all cases, observe the duties it owes
unto the Lord Christ, and the Church Catholic, by all those powers which
it is able to act in itself distinctly, without conjunction with others.
And the Church that confines its duty unto the acts of its own assemblies,
cuts itself off from the external communion of the Church Catholic;
nor will it be safe for any man to commit the conduct of his soul to
such a Church.”
We have arrived at a remarkable period in the history of the primitive Church. Its constitution, as arranged by the Council of Jerusalem, was to continue unaltered to the end of the world. From that time, Jews and Gentiles were to compose one holy people in the Lord. The law of Moses, which was abrogated by the death of Christ, was gradually forsaken by the believing Jews; and, after the destruction of Jerusalem, the observance of its rites was abandoned by all who professed Christianity, except a few obscure heretics, who were excluded from the communion of the Catholic Church.
Let us rejoice, that God has established a Church upon earth,
enlightened by heavenly truth, governed by divine laws and institutions,
invested with high privileges, and protected by his gracious providence; and
that in consequence of the free access into it which has been conceded to the
Gentiles, the prophecy is fulfilled, “Mine
IN the fifteenth chapter, we have an account of the proceedings of the first Christian Council, which was assembled to maintain the purity of the gospel against the attempts of some men to corrupt it, and to settle the terms on which Jews and Gentiles should unite in one holy society. It was unanimously determined, that obedience to the law of Moses was not necessary to justification; and that the Gentile converts should not be required to observe its rites, which were no longer obligatory, as the design of their institution had been accomplished by the sufferings and death of the Messiah. In accommodation to the present circumstances of the Church, two exceptions were made, of meats offered to idols, and of blood; partly to guard the believing Gentiles against a relapse into idolatry, but chiefly to concede a little to the prejudices of the Jews, that they might the more readily consent to the exemption of the Gentiles from the general system of ceremonies. We see, in the conduct of the Council, an example worthy to be imitated by the rulers of the Church, who should unite with their zeal for reform, attention to the most prudent measures for the preservation of peace and unity among the disciples of Christ.
This chapter begins with the relation
of a fact, concerning the propriety of which doubts may be entertained,
after the solemn decision of the Council, and the part which Paul had
acted in procuring it. “Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and behold a certain
disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a
Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: which was well reported of by
the brethren which were at Lystra and Iconium: him would Paul have to go forth
with him, and took and circumcised him, because of the Jews which were in those
quarters: for they all knew that his father was a Greek.”
It would be an abuse of this example, to infer from it, that we may comply with all the prejudices of others, and conform to all their customs, for their good. The limits, within which this liberty is permitted, are very circumscribed; and prudence, conscience, and the word of God, must determine them. In general, it should be regarded as a sacred and inviolable maxim, that we never should “do evil, that good may come.” To adopt this licentious principle, would be to destroy the distinction between virtue and vice, and to pretend to serve God by trampling upon his laws.
Timothy being now associated
with Paul and Silas, “they went through the cities, and delivered them
the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the Apostles and elders,
which were at Jerusalem.” The sentence of the Council is called a decree,
to signify, that it was not merely an advice, or a simple declaration
of their judgment, but an authoritative decision, to which the disciples
were bound to submit, if they would remain in the fellowship of the
Church. Although there was only one general decree embracing the several
subjects of discussion, yet the historian speaks of it in the plural
number, because it related to more points than one, declaring that circumcision
and obedience to the law of Moses were not necessary to salvation, exempting
the Gentiles from any obligation to observe it, and at the same time,
prescribing some limitations to the exercise of their liberty. As the
decree was delivered to the Churches in other countries as w&ll as
to those of Syria and Cilicia, who had sent deputies to Jerusalem,
the Council which met there, must be considered as a general one, exercising
jurisdiction over the Catholic Church.
Of the happy consequences which
resulted from the publication of the decree, we are informed in the
In the verses which are
next in order, there is a concise account of the progress of Paul and
Silas. “Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia, and the region of
Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in
Asia, after they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia:
but the Spirit suffered them not. And they passing by Mysia, came
down to Troas.” Asia does not signify, in this passage, the whole of
Asia Minor, which comprehended Galatia, and Bithynia, and many other
provinces; but that part of it which was distinguished by the name of
proconsular Asia. In this region they were forbidden to preach by the
Holy Ghost, who also hindered them from going into Bithynia. The reasons
of these restrictions we cannot as
It is proper to
remark, that although the Holy Ghost now forbade Paul and Silas to preach
the word in Asia and Bithynia, it was not his intention to exclude them
for ever from the enjoyment of the gospel. It was afterwards published
in those countries with success; and in Nice, the capital of Bithynia,
a general Council was assembled, in the reign of Constantine, the first
Christian emperor, to oppose the progress of the Arian heresy. But the
time of
While they were in Troas, “a vision appeared to Paul in the night: There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us.” Among the various methods, by which God, in ancient times, revealed his will to the Prophets, one was by visions, which were representations of certain objects and transactions to the senses of a person when awake. In sleep, they were instructed by dreams, which among the heathens also, were considered as a medium of communication with the Gods. “If there be a Prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.” In the vision of Paul, “there stood a man of Macedonia,” or the appearance of a man, whose country was known by his dress, as well as by his words; for “he prayed Paul, saying, Come over to Macedonia, and help us.” The request was concise, but pressing. It represented the inhabitants of Macedonia as in circumstances of want or danger, from which they were unable to extricate themselves, and the gospel which Paul preached as the only mean of relief. Some of the heathen nations were celebrated for their skill in civil and military affairs, and had cultivated with great success, the fine arts of painting, poetry, music, architecture, and statuary.
These attainments, however,
related merely to the accommodation and embellishment of this transitory
life. They had applied, likewise, to the study of philosophy, and had
displayed great ingenuity and subtilty in the various branches of geometry,
logic, and ethics. But their researches into the nature of God, the
sources and extent of virtue, and final destination of man, being conducted
by the uncertain light of reason, had served only to bewilder them.
“Professing themselves to be wise they became fools.” Of the true
method of propitiating the Deity they were utterly ignorant; and the
plans which fancy had suggested, had multiplied crimes, and augmented
the load of guilt, with which their consciences were already oppressed.
The lapse of ages beheld them departing farther and farther from the
truth. The corruption of morals kept pace with their errors in speculation.
Their philosophers could give them no information respecting the true
religion, which was unknown to themselves. They were idle theorists,
and often impudent profligates, who extolled virtue, and practised the
most
Paul having inferred from the
vision, that he was called to preach the gospel in Macedonia, set out,
without delay, for that country, and, after a prosperous voyage, arrived
at Philippi. “And after he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavoured
to go into Macedonia, assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us
for to preach the gospel unto them. Therefore, loosing from Troas, we
came with a straight course to Samothracia, and the next day to Neapolis;
and from thence to Philippi, which is the chief city of that part of
Macedonia,” or the first city, to which a person came, who wars travelling
from Neapolis; “and a colony,” being inhabited by Roman settlers, and
governed by the Roman laws. After an interval of some days, Paul and
his companions went “on the Sabbath out of the city by a river side,
where prayer was wont to be made.” It is probable that this place of
prayer was one of those oratories, which the Jews erected for the purposes
of devotion; for we can hardly think, that prayer was wont to be made
on the naked bank of the river, where the persons assembled would have
been liable to be disturbed and insulted. These oratories were different
from synagogues. The latter were houses, constructed like our Churches,
for the reception of a congregation, in which all those parts of divine
worship that were not peculiar to the temple; were performed; whereas
the former were open above, commonly shaded with trees, and intended
solely for prayer and meditation. They were usually built in retired
places, on mountains, on the banks of rivers, and on the shore of the sea. It
has been supposed, that it was to one of those sacred places to which our
Saviour repaired, when “he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued
Paul addressed “the women, which resorted thither,” declaring to them first the doctrine of salvation. Had any men been present, the historian, we presume, would have mentioned them, and the Apostle would not have confined his discourse to the women. There were undoubtedly men in Philippi, who professed the Jewish religion; but it has been remarked, to the honour of the female sex, that they often excel us in the punctuality with which they perform the duties of religious worship, and in the ardour of their devotion, in consequence, perhaps, of their being less distracted by the business and commerce of the world, or of the greater warmth of their affections. Women ministered to our Saviour during his humiliation upon earth; women first visited his sepulchre in the morning of his resurrection; women performed good offices to the, Apostles, and assisted them in their labours; and a woman was the first in Philippi who embraced the Christian faith.
“And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the
city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened,
that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.” The opening of the
heart is expressive of that operation of divine grace upon the soul of Lydia,
which disposed her to give serious attention to the doctrine which Paul
preached. The human heart is naturally shut against the truth by spiritual
blindness, and the influence of sinful affections. The unregenerated man is
incapable of perceiving its excellence, and dislikes it, because it aims at
humbling his pride, and detaching him from the unhallowed objects of his love.
External means are not sufficient to remove those obstacles to a cordial
reception of the gospel. You may describe colours, in appropriate terms, and
with glowing eloquence, to a blind man; but no distinct idea of them will be
excited in his mind, while he is without the organ, by which only they are
perceived. In what manner God acts upon the soul when he renews it, it is
impossible to explain. The Scriptures inform us, that “he opens our eyes,
enlightens our understandings, changes our hearts, makes us willing, and fulfils
in us all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power.”
With these and similar declarations we should be satisfied. In the economy
The sincerity of her faith was demonstrated by her immediate submission to the institutions of Christ, and by her kindness to Paul and his brethren. Nature teaches us to love our benefactors, and the grace of God will inspire a particular affection to those who have been the instruments of our spiritual good. Indifference to the persons and interests of the ministers of religion proceeds from indifference to religion itself, and may be justly considered as a proof, that those, in whom this temper prevails, have not experienced the peace and comfort, which the instructions and exhortations of the faithful servants of Jesus Christ communicate to believers. “And when she was baptized and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us.”
The gospel which was now preached for the first time in Philippi,
was confirmed by a display of that miraculous power, which Jesus Christ
had conferred upon the Apostles. “And it came to pass, as we went to
prayer, a certain damsel, possessed with a spirit of divination, met
us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying.” Those who can
consult the original, will find, that the spirit, who possessed this
young woman, was the same, who was supposed to inspire the priestess
of Apollo at Delphi, and to deliver oracles in the name of that pretended
Deity. That this was a real possession might be proved by all the arguments,
which apply to
The demon who resided in this woman, is called “a spirit of
divination,” agreeably to the import, although not to the literal sense,
of the original term. To divine, is to disclose secrets, and foretel
future events. It is easy to conceive Satan, if his preternatural agency
upon the mind be admitted, to have enabled the subjects of his inspiration
to reveal secrets, because deeds committed in darkness, and in the closest
retirement, are open to the inspection of a spirit. He could farther
have made them acquainted with distant transactions, the immediate knowledge
of which it was impossible to have obtained by natural means. He might
have given them some notices of futurity, by informing them of such
things as he intended to do, or as were already in a certain train to
be accomplished He undoubtedly can conjecture with much greater sagacity
The possessed woman “brought her masters much gain by soothsaying,” or prophesying. She acted the same part, we may presume, with our own fortune tellers, and amused the credulous multitude with liberal promises of future felicity. If her predictions happened to be fulfilled in one or two instances, her credit would be maintained, notwithstanding their failure in many. The eager desire of mankind to anticipate their future fortunes, prepares them to listen, with fond credulity, to the pretensions of impostors, and long maintains the delusion, in spite of the plainest admonitions of reason and experience. It is with inexpressible mortification, that they, at last, see the book of fate snatched from them, at the moment when they expected to break its seals, and peruse its mysterious contents.
The conduct of the damsel in reference to Paul and his brethren, is
not so easily explained. “The same followed Paul and us, and cried,
saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which show
unto us the way of salvation.” This account of Paul and Silas was certainly
just They were indeed the servants of God, who had come to Macedonia
to declare to the inhabitants of that country the way of salvation from
sin and death. But why did the unclean spirit bear so honourable a testimony
to men, in whose success his destruction was involved? Shall we say,
that he was compelled by the superior power of Jesus Christ, to publish,
to his own confusion, what he would have willingly suppressed? or were
the words spoken in derision of their character and pretensions?
Whatever was the motive of this unexpected eulogium, “Paul was grieved.” Religion stands in no need of commendation from the father of lies. He therefore “turned and said to the spirit, I command thee, in the name of Jesus Christ, to come out of her.” In these words there was a virtue, which the demon, with all his pride and malignity, was unable to resist. “And he came out the same hour.” The name of Jesus, whose voice made the spirits of darkness tremble, when he sojourned on the earth, was still terrible to them. The authority, which accompanied it, drove them from their strongholds, and wrested from their hands the unhappy captives, whose minds and bodies they had cruelly abused. This was a triumph gained over Satan in his own territories, and in the presence of his devoted subjects. By the dispossession of the demon, the superiority of Jesus whom Paul preached, was demonstrated. The tendency of the miracle was to persuade the Philippians to abandon their idols, of whose disgrace and defeat they had been witnesses; and we know, that to some of them, this evidence of the truth of Christianity was not presented in vain. Lydia was not the only convert in the city. There were some brethren, as we learn from the last verse of the chapter; and a Church was formed in Philippi, to which Paul afterwards addressed one of his Epistles. Of the tumult which ensued, and the sufferings which Paul and Silas endured, an account will be given in the next Lecture.
The passage which has now been explained, suggests the following remarks.
First, The sovereignty of God, displayed in sending the gospel to one
nation in preference to another, lays those to whom it is granted, under
a strong obligation to thankfulness. The value of the gift is enhanced
by the discrimination which is exercised in conferring it. I would not
be understood to insinuate, that common blessings should be lightly
esteemed. Selfishness may wish to monopolize the goodness of heaven;
but a generous heart, feels its own happiness augmented by the happiness
of others. This, at least, all must acknowledge, that our individual
share of enjoyment is not impaired by the admission of our brethren
to partake
Secondly, The consideration of divine
grace as the sole cause of the success of the gospel, is not a speculative
point, but a principle calculated to produce the best effects upon the
heart. It has a direct tendency to encourage the spirit of devotion.
It makes us look up to God as the source of all good, depend upon him
for the salvation of our souls, and hope in his favour and assistance
for all our advances in goodness and happiness. This is certainly the
most becoming and pious state of mind; and that doctrine may be presumed
to be from God, which promotes it. It gives no countenance to pride
and self-conceit, which are fostered by the opinion, that the success
of the gospel depends upon the sincerity and other good dispositions
of the hearers. To teach sinful men, that their own will must finally
decide, whether the grace of God shall be received or rejected, turns
their attention to themselves, and cherishes a sentiment of self-estimation
and self-confidence, which is inconsistent
Thirdly, When the gospel comes to any nation, or to any individual, in the power and demonstration of the Holy Ghost, it destroys the works of the devil. We know no instance of possession in the present times; but the apostate spirit “still works in the children of disobedience.” He has established his dominion in their hearts; and he maintains it by ignorance, unbelief, the love of the world, and the complicated system of corrupt affections. By the word of God, his authority is subverted, and his strongholds are overthrown. He is expelled from the souls, as, in former times, he was driven from the bodies, of men. The spiritual darkness, amidst which he reigned, vanishes when the light of truth enters the mind; the lofty imaginations, the proud self-sufficient thoughts, which he encouraged as the bulwarks of his kingdom, are laid low in the dust; the fascinating influence of sin is dissolved; and the soul now possessed of other views and principles of conduct, gladly returns to the service of its rightful sovereign. Although we have now no opportunity to observe the miraculous effects of our Saviour’s name upon demons, yet his power in destroying their spiritual domination, strengthened as it is by the consent of their subjects, is daily exerted. Every convert feels it; every believer can bear testimony to it from his own success in resisting temptation. It is visible in the change which it produces upon those who are brought to the knowledge of the truth: for when he who was the slave of vice becomes the servant of God; when the pursuits of sensuality are abandoned for the duties of piety and holiness, it is manifest, that the person, who is thus transformed, has been delivered out of the snare of the devil.
I ENTERED, in the last Lecture, upon a review of the transactions of Paul and Silas in Philippi. Soon after his arrival, the Apostle repaired to a place without the city, where prayer was wont to be made, and addressed the women who were assembled there on the sabbath. We have seen him performing a miracle upon a young woman, who was possessed by a spirit of divination, which demonstrated, that Silas and he were truly “the servants of the most high God, which showed unto men the way of salvation.”
It might have been expected, that the sudden and
wonderful effect of a few words spoken in the name of Jesus, would have
made a strong impression upon the witnesses, and that, if they were
not persuaded to embrace Christianity, they would, at least, have been
afraid openly to oppose it. Whatever were the sentiments and feelings
of others, the masters of the young woman thought of nothing but revenge. “They saw, that the hope of their gains was gone.” Delivered from the
power of the demon, who had been permitted to use her as his instrument
for deluding them people, she could no longer reveal secrets, and tell
fortunes. The revenue which had flowed from the credulity of the multitude,
was irrecoverably lost. Idle and profligate, as persons concerned in
such affairs usually are, they foresaw, that instead of living at their
ease upon the profits of imposture, they should be compelled to betake
themselves to honest industry in order to procure a subsistence. With
this prospect in their eye, they were not disposed to consider the miraculous
nature of the event, to inquire into the power by which it was effected,
and to examine the character of the religion, which it was intended
to attest. About these subjects, persons of
They, therefore, “caught Paul and Silas and drew them into the
market-place, unto the rulers, and brought them to the magistrates,
saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city.” The
masters of the young woman had probably little knowledge of the character
of Paul and Silas. Christianity was new in Philippi, and such persons
would be among the last who turned their attention to it. By calling
the two preachers Jews, they seem to have supposed that they were propagating
Judaism, or the peculiar tenets of some of its sects. Christianity was
for some time, confounded with the Jewish religion, by the heathens,
who viewed it at a distance, and with such contempt, as prevented a
particular inquiry into its nature. Hence, Christ is carelessly represented
by an ancient historian, as one of those seditious leaders, who frequently
appeared among the Jews, and excited them to rebel against the Roman
government.
The masters of the young woman accused Paul and Silas of “troubling
the city;” of introducing innovations, and exciting disputes, from which,
unless they were speedily checked, no person could tell what serious
consequences might ensue. We see that the charges commonly brought against
those who promulgate opinions contrary to the established faith, are
not of modern date. The same unmeaning outcry was raised in Philippi,
which has been a thousand times repeated by the ignorant or the interested,
against dissenters from the national creed. “These men are discontented
and disloyal: they wish to become leaders of a faction; religious reform
is merely a pretext; and so close is the alliance of Church and State,
that the fall of the one, will involve the other in its ruin.” It is
thus, that the majority in Heathen and Christian countries, and among
all denominations of Christians, Roman Catholics and Protestants, Episcopalians
and Presbyterians, usually represent the few, who venture to exercise
the right of private judgment in the choice of their religion. Who are
foremost and loudest in advancing these accusations? Are they persons,
who, after a deliberate and impartial investigation, are fully convinced
of the truth of their own system? Are they in earnest about religion,
and do they “tremble for the ark of God,” lest, by controversies and
novel opinions, the minds of men should be misled and unsettled? No;
in their principles and motives, they, for the most part resemble the
masters of the woman, from whom Paul expelled a spirit of divination,
and like them are alarmed for their gain, or are influenced by some
consideration not more honourable. They enjoy emoluments which might
be lost, should the established system be
Let us now observe
what was the effect of the accusation upon the people and the magistrates.
“And the multitude rose up together against them.” The passions of the
people are easily roused, and a rumour, or bold assertion, is sufficient
to bring them together, and impel them to action. In heathen countries,
they were generally more attached to their superstitions than the higher
ranks; and in any country, they are ready, under the dexterous management
of those who expect to profit by their excesses, to display a furious
and destructive zeal for their religion. The magistrates seem to have
been as intemperate as the people. Without waiting to make inquiry
into the true state of the case, dr allowing the accused to defend themselves, “they rent off their clothes, and commanded to beat them.” A summary
sentence was pronounced, and executed on the spot. And that Paul and
Silas might be reserved for such other punishment as their conduct should
be found to deserve, they were committed to prison; and the jailor inflamed
with the same zeal against those blasphemers of the Gods, which his
superiors displayed, treated them with great severity. “They cast them
into prison, charging the jailor to keep them safely; who, having received
such a charge, thrust them into the inner prison, and made their feet
fast in the stocks.” Paul and Silas might have saved themselves from
punishment, by the declaration which they made next morning, that they
were Roman citizens; but they did not choose to plead their privilege,
when it might have been construed as a proof of unwillingness to suffer
for the gospel. They submitted to stripes and imprisonment, because
they were called to bear testimony to the truth, by their patience,
as well as by their miracles. Their meekness and resignation might be
rendered,
But however unjustifiable was the conduct of the magistrates in treating Paul and Silas as criminals, without any proof of their guilt, Providence over-ruled it for promoting the object of their mission to Philippi. Their prison proved a scene in which the power and grace of the Saviour were displayed. “And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God: and the prisoners heard them.” Prayer is the natural language of the soul, imploring, in its distress, divine assistance and consolation. It was therefore, an exercise suited to the present situation of these good men, to whom the grace of God was necessary, that they might bear the present trial with patience, and be prepared for the issue of it. But, why did they also sing praises to God? Is there any thing calculated to inspire cheerfulness in the condition of men, whose backs have been torn with a scourge, and whose feet are made fast in the stocks? Do songs accord with the gloom of a prison? A Christian has causes of joy and gratitude, independent upon external circumstances. Paul and Silas gave thanks to God for the high honour of being called “to suffer shame for the name of Christ;” for the peace of mind which they enjoy amidst their outward troubles; for the certain knowledge of the love and care of their Redeemer; and for the hope of immortality which raised them above the fear of death. “God their Maker gave them songs in the night,” which they sang with such devout fervour and animation, that the other prisoners heard them. At this moment, God was pleased to bear testimony, by a miracle, in favour of his suffering servants, and, by one of those extraordinary methods, which were sometimes employed in the commencement of Christianity, to save a “vessel of mercy.” “And suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened, and every one’s bands were loosed.”
There is every reason to suppose, from the time when this earthquake
happened, and the purpose which it served, that it was preternatural.
Its effects were moderated by the power of God, so that the foundations
of the prison were shaken, but it was not thrown down; and although
the chains of the prisoners were loosed, none of them was permitted
to escape. They were detained by
To this
rash and impious deed, the mind of a heathen was familiarized. It was
approved, in certain circumstances, by the different sects of philosophers;
it was practised by some of their most eminent men; and no suspicion
was entertained that it was offensive to the Gods. Nature, indeed, exclaims
against it; but her voice is not heard amidst the tumult and uproar
of passion. When a great and unexpected loss is sustained; when the
proud spirits, overwhelmed by disgrace; when the mind is agitated by
the prospect of some dreadful calamity; when the bright visions of honour
and felicity, which enchanted the imagination, are dispelled, and hope
seems to have fled for ever, the heart sickens at existence, and sees
in its lengthened line, only the prolongation of its misery. Death appears
to afford the sole means of relief. “Rather than be thus tormented,” cries the impatient, desponding sufferer,
“it is better to rid myself
at once of all my sorrows, and either to take my chance of another state
of being, or to sink into insensibility.” This is the phrensy of the
mind, during which the admonitions of reason and religion are disregarded.
Could men summon up as much fortitude as to bear the first onset of
calamity, its violence might gradually abate. The passion, which torments
them, might at length lose its influence. Time lays its healing hand
upon the wounds of the heart. To him who has resolved to live, some
unforeseen deliverance may arise in the perpetual vicissitude of human
affairs; but our hopes are sealed up in the grave. How can he expect
a welcome in the other world, who rushes into it, stained with his own
blood? Will the Father and Fountain of Life, show mercy to those who
indignantly throw his own gift in his face?
The design of the jailor was prevented by Paul, who “cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm; for we are all here.” These seasonable words arrested his arm, already raised against himself. But although he was delivered from the dread of temporal punishment, his mind was not at ease. He was distracted with new terrors; he felt the anguish of an awakened conscience. The impression was sudden, and was undoubtedly produced by the power of the Spirit of God. Perhaps, the jailor had heard as much of the doctrine of Paul and Silas, from their own lips, or from the report of others, as was sufficient now, when he was led seriously to reflect upon it, to excite an anxious concern for the welfare of his soul. At any rate, although a heathen, he had such knowledge of good and evil, as would convince him, under the faithful admonitions of conscience, that he was a guilty creature, and was exposed to the wrath of his Maker. Although the Gentiles had not the written law, yet “the work of the law was written in their hearts, so that their thoughts sometimes accused, and sometimes excused them.” These notices of duty, rendered clearer and more authoritative by the divine Spirit, darted a light into his mind, which showed him his character in all its deformity, and overwhelmed him with confusion and dismay. Hence, “he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas; and brought them out, and said “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
It is not to be supposed, that the jailor had distinct ideas
of the nature of the salvation which is revealed in the gospel. But
he was convinced, that a creature fallen under the displeasure of God,
is in most alarming circumstances; and that to be delivered from this
condition, to escape the vengeance, and to be restored to the favour
of the Almighty, is a blessing of greater value than any which the world
can bestow. The first object of the desire of an awakened sinner, is
pardon. His conscience pronounces a sentence of condemnation upon him,
which the law of God confirms. While its awful threatenings sound in
his ears, like the tremendous voice of the trumpet on Sinai, which made
Moses fear and quake, he longs to hear the gentle and tranquillizing
language of mercy. What would not this man give for peace with his offended
Creator? In his present state he can find no rest. His mind is incessantly
The answer of Paul and Silas is related in the next verse.
“And they
said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and
thy house.” This short sentence contains the substance of the gospel;
but we can consider it as only a summary of what was spoken in reply
to the question. It was necessary to inform the jailor, who Jesus Christ
was, for he cannot be supposed to have. known much more concerning him
than his name, and what is that salvation, of which he is the author,
as well as to explain the nature of faith which was recommended to him,
as the mean of obtaining an interest in it. A heathen would have naturally
thought of purifications and sacrifices, as expedients for rendering
the Deity propitious. He had been accustomed to attach great importance
and efficacy to these observances. So every man who is convinced of
sin, his own heart suggests penitential tears, confession, acts of mortification,
and amendment of life, as the only recommendations, to the divine favour;
for the idea of obedience or good works, as the condition of the blessings
which we expect from our Creator, is interwoven with the frame and principles
of our nature. Man, in a. fallen state, fondly recurs to that constitution, which was adapted only to a state of innocence and perfection. But
the gospel points
The jailor was encouraged
to believe, by the promise of salvation not to himself alone, but also
to his house. “Thou shalt be saved, and all thy house.” These words
cannot signify, that through his faith, all the persons, old and young,
belonging to his family, should be entitled to salvation; but that such
of them as believed in Jesus Christ should be saved, as well as himself;
and that his children should be admitted into the covenant of God, and
to their seed after them.” The children of believers enjoy great advantages
from the prayers, the instructions, and the example of their parents,
which are often followed, through the blessing of God, with happy effects.
The actual salvation of them all, cannot, with any appearance of truth,
be affirmed, because we observe too many instances of their forsaking
the God of their fathers; but certainly there is ground of hope, with
respect to such of them as die in early life. That there were other
adult persons in the family, besides the jailor himself, is evident
from the
How happy was this family! The new convert rejoiced, and so did all his house. “The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tabernacles of the righteous.” There is no joy like that which flows from the belief of the gospel. It purifies, while it refreshes the soul; it gives a more elevated tone to the feelings than worldly pleasures can give; it contains no poisonous mixture, which afterwards corrodes the heart; it sheds a lustre upon every object, and cheers even the dark hours of adversity; and, in a word, it is permanent, going with us, whithersoever we go, accompanying us to death, and springing up within us, as “a well of living water,” in the world to come.
Remark
the great change which has taken place in the temper and manners of
this man. The day before, he had treated Paul and Silas with cruelty,
aggravating the unjust sentence of the magistrates, by the unfeeling
harshness with which he executed it. But now he soothes and comforts them, not only from gratitude to the men, who had been the instruments
of bringing salvation to his house, but from that humanity, which the
grace of God never fails to inspire. “And he took them the same hour
of the night, and washed their stripes. And when he had brought them
into his house, he set meat before them.” Do you wish to see a man of
feeling? Look not for him in the stories of romance, nor among those
affected sentimentalists whose tears flow at tales of fictitious
I shall
pass over the remaining verses with a few remarks. “And when it was
day, the magistrates sent the sergeants, saying, Let these men go. And
the keeper of the prison told this saying to Paul. The magistrates have
sent to let you go: now therefore depart, and go in peace.” During the
night, the passion of the rulers bad subsided, and reflecting upon what
they had done, they perceived that they had been guilty of an abuse
of their authority, for which they might be called to account. They
had punished and imprisoned two men, upon a simple accusation, without
allowing them to defend themselves. They gave orders, therefore, to
set the prisoners at liberty, not doubting that they would quickly withdraw
from the city. But Paul and Silas now thought it proper to assert their
rights. They were Roman citizens, whose persons and privileges were
guarded by the laws with jealous care. To scourge a Roman was a crime,
which subjected the offender to severe punishment; and it was an aggravation
of the present case, that citizens had been scourged without any evidence
of their guilt. “They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans,
and have cast us into prison, and now do they thrust us out privily?
nay verily; but let them come themselves, and fetch us out.” Had those
ministers of Jesus Christ been governed by the same principles which
usually influence men on similar occasions, they would have prosecuted
the magistrates with the utmost rigour of law. They were satisfied,
however, with alarming and humbling them, not to gratify their pride
and resentment, but, in the most public manner, to vindicate their own
character, for the credit of the gospel. It would add to its reputation
in the eyes of the people, that its
How
submissive have those insolent magistrates suddenly become! Instead
of resenting the answer of Paul and Silas, as disrespectful to their
dignity, they go to the prison, implore the forgiveness of the men,
whom they had treated so ignominiously, and request, for they would
not now venture to compel them, to depart out of the city. Had they
known the character of the persons whom they had injured, they would
not have been so much afraid. From their resentment they had nothing
to dread. Those meek disciples of Jesus were ready to pardon their worst
enemies, and would, the next moment, have performed any office of kindness
to them. Their Master had taught them “to love their enemies, to bless them
that cursed them, to do good to them that hated them, and to pray for them which
despitefully used them, and persecuted them.” “For your
hatred,” said a bishop and a martyr, addressing himself to the heathens, “we render benevolence; and in return for the torments and punishments
which are inflicted upon us, we show the way of salvation. Believe and
live; and may you who persecute us in time, rejoice with us through
eternity.”
We learn from the history which we have considered, what state
of mind is necessary to prepare us for giving serious attention to the gospel.
It was not, till the conscience of the jailor was alarmed, that he began to
inquire what lie should do to be saved. We know with what indifference we listen
to a discourse which does not interest us. While it excites, perhaps, the
liveliest emotions in others, it procures our attention with difficulty. Such is
the nature of the gospel, that without a peculiar train of sentiments and
affections, it must be the most insipid of all subjects. What pleasure can a
person, whose thoughts are engrossed by the pursuits of the present life, and
who is careless of his immortal soul; what pleasure can he derive from hearing
of the love of God in giving his only begotten Son, and of Jesus Christ in dying
upon the cross for our salvation; of the riches of divine grace in the
justification of the ungodly; and of the sanctifying influences of the spirit?
While the awakened sinner grasps at every word of consolation which the
The question, “What shall I do
to be saved?” is the most important which can be proposed. It is a question
in which all men are equally concerned. The reason that so few are earnest
in the inquiry, is to be found in the insensibility of their hearts:
but why are they so insensible? Why are they alive to all interests
but those of their souls? Why are they eager in the pursuit of wealth,
honour, and amusement, while the great salvation is neglected? If any
awakened sinner is putting the question; if, under an apprehension of
the wrath of God, he is desirous to know by what means he shall escape,
we have no other answer to return than that of Paul and Silas, “Believe
in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” How thankful should
we be, that we are not left to conjectures, where uncertainty is so
distressing, and an error would be fatal! As conscience retains some
degree of authority among the Gentiles, they must often feel a sense
of sin, and be perplexed in their endeavours to find out the means of
relief. “Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before
the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves
of a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with
ten thousands of rivers of oil! Shall I give my first-born for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” Disregarding the voice
of revelation, men, in Christian countries, have suffered themselves
to be misled by the suggestions of pride, and the dreams of superstition.
We see the sinner labouring to conciliate the favour of his Maker, at
one time, by vows, prayers, and penitence, and at another, by pilgrimages,
austerities, and ceremonial
THE treatment which Paul and Silas had met with in Philippi, gave them no encouragement to continue their labours in Macedonia. They had been accused of violating the laws, scourged in an ignominious manner, and committed to prison. From this specimen of the dispositions of the people and their rulers, they had cause to reckon upon persecution in every city; and had they consulted their personal safety, they would have speedily retired from a country, in which it was manifestly dangerous to remain. But Paul and Silas were men of bold and intrepid spirit. Their call to visit this region of the earth was express. They were certain, from their commission, as well as from their experience at Philippi, where some persons had been converted, that their exertions should not prove altogether vain; and they were willing to contribute to the glory of Jesus Christ, and the salvation of souls, at the hazard of their lives. Hence, upon leaving Philippi, they went forward to Thessalonica the capital of Macedonia.
“Now when they had passed through Amphipolis
and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the
Jews.” This verse has been supposed to throw light upon the account
which Paul gives of his travels, in the Epistle to the Romans. “From
Jerusalem and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the
gospel of Christ.” Illyricum was a province, or rather the common name
of several provinces, stretching along the Danube, from the Hadriatic
gulph to the confines of Macedonia. It has been inquired at what time
that country was visited by the Apostle, as there is no express mention
of it, in the history of his peregrinations by Luke. His words now quoted,
do not necessarily imply,
In Thessalonica, Paul and Silas found a synagogue of the Jews. In all countries, into which that people were dispersed by the Babylonian captivity, and by subsequent events, they retained the faith of their fathers, and openly professed it, when they were permitted by the governments, to which they were subject. At a distance from Jerusalem, it was not lawful to offer sacrifices, because there was only one altar, which was erected by divine appointment in the temple; but they could assemble in any place to hear the law expounded, to join in prayers and thanksgivings to God, and to inflict censures on such of their brethren as were guilty of offences against religion. For these purposes, when there was a sufficient number of Jews in the city, they built a synagogue, which was fitted up like the Churches of Christians, for the performance of public worship.
“And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them.” It appears
from these words, to have been the custom of Paul to go into the synagogues, and
preach the gospel to the Jews. Although he calls himself the Apostle of the
uncircumcision, signifying that the Gentiles were the chief objects of his
ministrations, yet he did not consider himself as precluded from addressing the
Jews; in the same manner as Peter, who was the Apostle of the circumcision,
occasionally
In the synagogue of Thessalonica, “Paul reasoned with the Jews three
sabbath days out of the Scriptures.” The Jewish sabbath was now virtually
abolished, and the Lord’s day was substituted in its room. The Apostles
might occasionally observe it from the same motive, which led them to
comply with some of the ceremonial institutions; and, at the same time,
it afforded them a favourable opportunity of preaching to their countrymen,
who were assembled on that day to worship God according to the law.
The subject upon Paul chiefly insisted, in his discourses to the Jews
and to the Gentiles, was “Christ crucified.” Although it was offensive
to both, yet he made it his favourite theme. There was a particular
reason for introducing it. in an assembly of Jews. The death of the
Messiah was the point at issue between them and the Apostles. The former
objected to it as inconsistent with the design which, they supposed, the
Messiah was to accomplish, and consequently as a proof, that the person,
whom it had befallen, was a deceiver; the latter affirmed it to be the
only mean of effecting what was the real object of his mission, the
spiritual redemption of the people of God. The objections of the Jews
arose from their own misconceptions. They were a carnal race, attached
to the covenant which God
The gospel could not be believed by the Jews, unless their erroneous
ideas respecting the Messiah and his work were corrected. The method
which Paul employed for this purpose, was to reason with him out of
the Scriptures, “opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have
suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus whom I
preach unto you, is Christ.” In every controversy, it is necessary that
there should be some common principle, in which both parties agree,
because without such agreement, arguments may be multiplied, and the
dispute may be prolonged, without end. The Scriptures of the Old Testament
were received by the Jews as the oracles of God, the infallible standard,
by which all opinions and practices in religion should be tried. Paul
appealed to this standard, and showed, that the prevailing ideas of
the character and office of the Messiah, were completely at variance
with it. He pursued the same plan, which our Lord followed in his conversation
with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, proving from Moses and
the Prophets, that the Christ must have suffered, before he could enter
into his glory. The prophecies of Isaiah alone were sufficient for his
purpose, as they contain descriptions of the humiliation and death of
the Messiah, so minute and plain, that it is not easy to conceive how
the Jews could overlook or misunderstand them. The necessity of the
sufferings of our Redeemer was an obvious inference from the prophecies,
because what God has expressly foretold must be accomplished; and this
proof was all that was requisite for the conviction of his audience.
But the Apostle would farther show that his sufferings were necessary,
from the justice of God, which required the blood of our Saviour to
be shed, as the meritorious cause of the remission of sins. They would
have
The arguments which Paul deduced from the Scriptures, were intended to prove not only the death, but also the resurrection of Christ, which it was predicted with equal clearness, and was, with great propriety, submitted to the consideration of the Jews, to reconcile them to the idea of his death, as not inconsistent with the design of saving his people, nor fatal to their hopes, because he had been restored to life, and invested with supreme authority over heaven and earth. It was the decisive evidence that he was the true Messiah. It refuted the calumnies of the Jews, who charged him with imposture and blasphemy; and was the testimony of God himself, that he was his beloved Son.
From this general reasoning concerning the death and resurrection of the Messiah, the transition was easy to the particular proof, that “this Jesus, whom Paul preached, was Christ.” The Apostle had only to show, that the prophecies, which he had cited, were fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth.
The effect of his discourse is pointed out in the fourth verse. “And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas,” leaving
the synagogue, and forming a new religious society, which professed
faith in Jesus Christ, and observed the ordinances of the gospel. It
is plain, however, that all the Jews did not believe, although they
all heard the reasoning of the Apostle. To what, then, should we attribute
this difference? Not to the superior discernment of those who were convinced,
nor to their greater candour and docility, but to the grace of God,
from which the efficacy of the truth is derived. “I have planted, Apollos
watered; but God gave the increase. So then, neither is he that planteth
any thing, neither he that watereth: but God that giveth the increase.” These Jews were not the only converts.
“Of the devout Greeks a great
multitude believed, and of the chief women not a few.” The devout Greeks
were those persons who are commonly called proselytes of the gate. The
appellation is founded on the words of the law, “the stranger that
is within thy gates,” and was given, in the first instance, to Gentiles
living among the Jews, who remained uncircumcised, but acknowledged
and worshipped the God of Israel. It was afterwards
The success of Paul was contemplated by the unbelieving Jews,
with great dissatisfaction. They were offended at the doctrine which he
preached, and the more displeased, because it was favourably received by some of
their own countrymen, and by many of the Greeks. With th6 zeal of religionists,
therefore, and the jealousy of rivals, they bestirred themselves to arrest its
progress. “But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them
certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the
city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them
out to the people.” The associates of the Jews are described as “lewd fellows of
the baser sort,” or worthless persons of the lowest class, who sauntered about
the market place, and other places of public resort, and having nothing to do,
were prepared to assist in any kind of mischief. They were choice materials, of
which to compose a mob, ready, at the instigation of its leaders, to commit
violence upon persons and property. It is the complaint of one of the Fathers,
that the most active enemies of the Christians, were the off-scouring of
society, the vile rabble, the unjust, the impious, and the base, who were
abhorred by the Gentiles themselves. With the assistance of such friends, he
Jews assaulted the house of Jason, in which Paul and Silas
Disappointed in their design against Paul and Silas, “they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, saying, These men that have turned the world upside down, are come hither also, whom Jason hath received.” The men of whom they complain, were Paul and Silas, whose doctrine, they affirm, had caused disturbance and disorder wherever it was preached, and would produce the same effects, if they were permitted to remain in Thessalonica. In a certain sense, it was true, that the Apostles “did turn the world upside down.” The gospel professed an intention to change the face of human affairs; to overthrow all the religions which existed in the earth; to abolish idolatry, and withdraw the worshippers of the Gods from the temples; to put an end to barbarous shows and licentious festivals; to make the slaves of vice sober, chaste, just, and merciful; to call off the thoughts and affections of men from the vanities of time, and to raise them to eternal and invisible objects. This is the grand revolution which it proposed to accomplish, and which it did actually effect in many regions of the earth. Compared with the advantages resulting from it to mankind, as inhabitants of this world, and expectants of another, those which have arisen from the happiest political changes, are unworthy to be mentioned.
The accusation of the Jews, however, was of a different
nature. “These all do contrary to the decrees of Cesar, saying, That
there is another king, one Jesus.” Paul and Silas had transgressed
the law of the senate, and emperor of Rome, which enacted, that no person
should assume the title of king without their permission. But this was
not the whole of their crime. By calling Jesus of Nazareth a king, they
set up a rival monarch, and persuaded the subjects of the emperor to
transfer their allegiance to him. They proclaimed another king besides
Cesar, whose authority was to be established upon the ruins of the existing
government. Who is not shocked at the deliberate malice of these Jewish
zealots? They knew well, that the royalty which the Christians ascribed
to their Lord, did not interfere with the claims of earthly princes
and
Religion is
artfully loaded with false imputations, because it is only by this expedient
that its adversaries can hope to expose it to hatred and contempt. Were
it exhibited in its genuine character, it might not command the sincere
esteem, and cheerful submission of all to its authority; but scarcely
any man would be bold enough to avow opposition to it. In the first
ages, Christianity was malignantly represented as an innovation, which
threatened to subvert the whole system of human affairs, to overthrow
civil establishments, and to propagate faction and rebellion. Insinuations,
and public charges of the same nature, have since been advanced, not
indeed against religion itself, of which even its worst enemies know
how to speak with respect; but against every attempt to free it from
corruptions, and restore it to its primitive purity. The exertions of
reformers have been associated with the movements of sedition; and magistrates
have been called upon. to watch and to repress them, as dangerous to
the peace of society. If, indeed, a false religion were so closely interwoven
with a particular form of government, that they could not be separated
without dissolving the complex system; the general reception of pure
Christianity, and the fall of that government, would be connected as
cause and effect. But such a revolution would be purely accidental.
In other circumstances, the government would sustain no injury by the
change. The gospel does not intermeddle with the constitution
The Jews, by their false accusation of Paul and Silas, “troubled the people and the rulers of the city,” who were probably afraid of being punished for allowing another king to be proclaimed in Thessalonica. As the offenders themselves, however, could not be found, they were satisfied with taking security from Jason and the other brethren, that they would behave like good subjects, and exert themselves to preserve the peace of the city.
It being no longer safe for Paul and Silas to remain in Thessalonica, “the
brethren immediately sent them away by night unto Berea; who coming thither,
went into a synagogue of the Jews.” “These,” the historian
adds, “were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received
the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily,
whether those things were so.” He compares the Jews of the two cities,
and gives the preference to those of Berea, whom he calls more noble
than the others. He does not allude to their birth, or their rank in
life, but to the qualities of their understandings and hearts. The Jews
gloried in their extraction as noble, because they were descended from
Abraham, a man illustrious among his contemporaries, and a distinguished
favourite of Heaven. But the boast of ancestry is a vain thing; and
true nobility consists, not in an honourable pedigree, but in integrity
of heart, and the love of truth. The Jews of Berea were
But why, it may be asked, did they adopt this procedure? If Paul was an inspired ambassador of Christ, was he not entitled to the same ready and undoubting assent as the Prophets? Whence, then, was it necessary for those whom he addressed, to compare his doctrine with theirs, before they should believe it? I answer, that to such as acknowledged the Apostolical authority of Paul, the comparison was not absolutely necessary, although even their faith must have been confirmed, by observing the exact correspondence between the gospel and the law. This correspondence would afford them, and it still affords us, a pleasing and satisfactory proof, that both have proceeded from the same author, “the Father of lights, with whom there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” But, there is no evidence, that the divine commission of Paul was, at this time, recognised by the Jews of Berea. We are not told, that he had performed any miracles before them. As they could not, therefore, regard him in any other light than as a person, who delivered what he honestly conceived to be the truth, both prudence and piety required them to appeal to the Scriptures, and to bring his doctrine to the test of that infallible standard. It was by the argument from prophecy, that they were convinced of the. divine authority of the gospel.
The conduct of the Berean Jews must
be commended, and ought to be imitated, by us all. The clear and unequivocal
declarations of Scripture demand our assent, without inquiry or hesitation.
The result of the inquiry instituted by those Jews, was the conversion of many of them; and, at the same time, the gospel was believed by a considerable number of the Greeks. The news of this success having reached Thessalonica, the Jews of that city came to Berea, and so inflamed the inhabitants against Paul, that he was compelled to withdraw to another place. Passing these events without farther notice, I conclude with the following reflections.
First, The difficulties which we may encounter
in the course of our duty, will not justify us in abandoning it. When
Paul and Silas found it necessary to leave Philippi, they repaired to
Thessalonica; and upon meeting with opposition in Thessalonica, they
went to Berea. Persecuted in one city, they fled to another, not to
remain there in concealment and inactivity, but to persist in the perilous
work of preaching the gospel. Christians are not, indeed, required to
disregard the suggestions of prudence, and to expose themselves wantonly
to danger; but in the way which Providence has clearly marked out to
them, they should resolutely advance, without turning to the right hand
or to the left. If we perform our
Secondly, The opposition which has been made, in past ages, to the gospel, reflects honour upon it. Its excellence may be inferred from the character of the men, by whom the opposition has been conducted. It has not proceeded from the sober, the humble, and the candid, from such as were in earnest about religion, and spent their days in piety and holiness: but from persons full of prejudice, and governed by interest, like the Jews; from “fellows of the baser sort,” the gross vulgar, immersed in ignorance and low habits of vice; or from men conceited of their fancied wisdom, rioting in luxury, engaged in the pursuit of wealth and honours, and hostile to religion in any other view than as an engine of state. It is a strong presumption in favour of the gospel, that such men have condemned it. That religion, surely, has descended from heaven, which pride, sensuality, and covetousness, have united to oppose.
Thirdly,
We should beware of forming our opinion of men, and parties, from the
representations of enemies. Were we to judge of Christianity itself
by this rule, we should conclude, that, instead of being worthy of all
acceptation, it deserved to be rejected by the universal suffrage of
mankind. The Jews affirmed, that it was calculated “to turn the world
upside down.” Prejudice is apt to misapprehend, and malice is disposed
to misrepresent. Without being conscious of any unfair intention, we
observe the character and conduct of our opponents with a partial eye;
and too often, we allow ourselves to paint their actions with colours
purposely shaded, to impute motives to them which charity would not
suspect, and to condemn them with a degree of severity, which our consciences
do not approve. By a person, therefore, of candour and prudence, the
testimony of an adversary will not be received, unless it be favourable,
or be supported by unquestionable evidence. We hear, almost every day,
reports circulated to the disadvantage of sects and individuals, which
we find, upon inquiry, to have no foundation, or to have taken their
rise from circumstances wilfully exaggerated, or hastily misunderstood.
Let us, on all occasions, strictly adhere to
In the last place, There is a perfect harmony between the law and the gospel, between the religion of Moses and that of Jesus Christ. The latter, indeed, is only a continuation of the former, with such alterations and improvements, as were adapted to the progress of events. The external form is different, but the substance is the same. In both, the object of worship, the foundation of hope, the spiritual promises, and the moral precepts, are the same; and they are chiefly distinguished by the degrees of light, and the measures of divine communication, under each. Christianity was not a new religion to those who understood the design of the institutions of Moses, and had given attention to the instructions of the Prophets. The Jews who examined their ancient Scriptures with discernment and impartiality, immediately embraced the gospel as the completion of the law. We have seen an instance in the conduct of those of Berea. From the beginning of the world, God has been carrying on one consistent scheme for the salvation of mankind by his Son Jesus Christ, who was first revealed in promises, types, and predictions, and was afterwards manifested in human nature, “to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” There is but one Church under a diversity of administrations, composed of believers in every age; and, for this reason, the admission of the Gentiles into the Christian Church is described by their “sitting down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.” The work of God in our redemption is great and wonderful, comprehending all time, embracing all events, which, in one way or another, are rendered subservient to it, and in its consequences stretching into eternity. It is worthy to be studied, and cannot be contemplated without admiration and praise. “Of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory, for ever. Amen.”
THE obstacles to the success of the gospel, when it was first published, were of too formidable a nature, to have been surmounted by human courage and prudence. It was encountered by the prejudices and bigotry of the Jews; by prejudices the more obstinate, as they were founded in reverence for the religion which their ancestors had received from God himself; by bigotry originating in the distinction which had long subsisted between them and the Gentiles, and anxious to secure the perpetual monopoly of the blessings of the covenant. But, it was not in the moral state of the Jews alone, that Christianity met with opposition, which no imposture, however dexterously managed, could have overcome. The age in which it appeared, was an age of learning and science. The boundaries of knowledge were extended; the human mind was highly cultivated; and the mythological tales of antiquity were despised, and openly derided. A new system of falsehood had no chance of eluding the test of severe examination, and could not have defended itself, against the arguments and the scorn of philosophical inquirers. We have already seen the gospel triumphing over the hostility of the Jews, many of whom embraced it as the completion of their law, and became the disciples of Him, whom their rulers had rejected and crucified. We are now to observe the issue of its conflicts with the philosophy of Greece. By some men, whose minds the pride of wisdom had elated, Paul was treated with great contempt; but even in Athens, the school of science and refinement, Christianity could boast of its success; and we know, that before three centuries had elapsed, it trampled in the dust the sophistry and eloquence of the heathen world.
The Apostle having been compelled, by the arts of the Jews, to leave Berea, was conducted to Athens, where he remained for some time expecting the arrival of Silas and Timotheus. Athens was the most celebrated city of Greece. Originally the capital of a small and barren principality, it rose to distinction, not only by the number of its inhabitants, and the magnificence of its buildings, but by the influence which it acquired over the counsels and affairs of the Greeks, by its extensive commerce, its numerous and flourishing colonies and dependencies, the wars in which it was engaged, and the exploits of its statesmen and generals; but, above all, by the unrivalled eminence which it attained, in the arts and sciences. In this city, genius, taste, and skill in the elegant and ornamental studies, seemed to be assembled, as in their favourite residence. Here, philosophy carried on its profound and subtile researches into the nature of man, and the constitution of the universe; here, eloquence rose to a degree of excellence, which has seldom been equalled, and never surpassed; here, architecture and statuary displayed those exquisite productions, the remains of which are beheld with admiration, and present the finest models to modern artists. But, while we fondly cherish the memory of the polite and ingenious Athenians. how mortifying is it to reflect, that when Paul visited the city, it was “wholly given to idolatry!” We perceive the strength of our faculties contrasted with their weakness; and the melancholy conviction is forced upon us, that the highest cultivation of reason, unassisted by revelation, is insufficient to preserve us from the utmost extravagance and folly in religion. The most enlightened city in the heathen world, was full of idols. It was crowded with images, and temples, and altars. The Athenians were more addicted to idolatry, and had multiplied the objects of it more than any of their neighbours. “In this city,” says an ancient writer, “It is easier to find a God than a man.” How just is the account given by Paul of the Gentile philosophers! “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools: and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.”
“The spirit of
Paul was stirred in him,” by the idolatry of the Athenians. The indignity
offered to the true God, by the worship of his unworthy rivals, roused
his zeal, and he felt the most lively pity for a people, who, notwithstanding
their distinguished attainments, were, in the language of the Scriptures,
“sitting in darkness,
The attention of the Athenians was excited by this
new system, so different from their own religion, and from all the modifications
of polytheism, with which they were acquainted. The philosophers were
surprised and displeased, that a barbarian, for such they accounted
Paul, should presume to appear in Athens, and publish doctrines contrary
both to the established faith, and to their peculiar dogmas. We are
informed, that “certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the
Stoics encountered him.” It was natural that these should be the first
to contend with him, because among all the sects of philosophy, there
was none, to whose tenets Christianity was more adverse. The Epicureans
were Atheists. According to them the world was formed by chance, out
of materials which had existed from eternity. Acknowledging from complaisance,
the Gods, who were publicly worshipped, they excluded them from any
concern in human affairs, and affirmed, that regardless of the prayers
and actions of men, they contented themselves with the enjoyment of
indolent felicity. They pronounced pleasure to be the chief good, and
the business of a wise man to consist, in devising the means of spending
life in ease and tranquillity. All the genuine motives to the practice
of virtue, and all just ideas of virtue itself, were banished from the
philosophy of the Epicureans, which made self love the sole spring of
our actions, and gave loose reins to the sensual appetites. The system
of the Stoics was of a different character. They believed the existence
of God, his government of the universe, and the subsistence of the soul
after the death of the body. But they confounded the Deity with his
own
“The Stoics
and Epicureans, therefore, encountered him: and some said, what will
this babbler say?” It is unnecessary to detail the criticisms of learned
men upon the word rendered “babbler.”
“And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus.” The
Areopagus was a court of great authority, which derived its name from the place
where its meetings were held, a hill in the city sacred to Mars. It was composed
of a considerable number of judges, who were persons of experience, integrity,
and blameless reputation, and had power to superintend the manners of the
people, and to punish offences against religion and the state. Paul does not
seem to have
Having been requested to explain the nature of his doctrine,
Paul addressed the Court of Areopagus in a speech, which consisted of two parts,
in one of which he exposed the folly of heathen idolatry, and, in the other,
announced the most important articles of the Christian faith. “Then Paul stood
in the midst of Mars hill,” or Areopagus, “and said, Ye men of Athens, I
perceive, that in all things ye are too superstitious.” There is an inaccuracy
in the translation of this verse. Superstition conveys the idea of something
wrong in religion. It originates in misconceptions of the object of worship,
which give rise to a multiplicity of arbitrary and fanciful observances, with a
view to appease his anger, and conciliate his favour. The Apostle might have
justly accused the Athenians of superstition, or rather of idolatry; but it may
be doubted, whether, at this time, he intended to bring forward either the one
charge or the other. To call a man too superstitious implies, that he might,
without a fault, be superstitious in a moderate degree. It
In proof of their uncommon devotion, Paul appeals to an altar, which
he had seen in the city, with this inscription, “To the unknown God;” and which afforded decisive evidence of the extraordinary piety of the
Athenians. It discovered so anxious a desire to leave no Divine Being
without his due honours, and to secure the favour of all who might have
influence over human affairs, that rather than be guilty of an omission,
they would pay homage to a Deity, with whose name and attributes they
were not acquainted. Different accounts have been given of the occasion
on which this altar was erected. We are told, that during a pestilence,
which desolated the city, the Athenians having in vain applied for relief
to their national Gods, were directed, by the philosopher Epimenides,
to offer sacrifices to the unknown God, as alone able to remove the
calamity.
The Apostle begins
with informing his audience, that the unknown God was the Creator of
the world, and of all the orders of beings which inhabit it. “God made
the world, and all things therein.” In particular, he asserts that he
was the Maker of man. “He hath made of one blood all nations of men,
for to dwell on all the face of the earth.” Concerning the origin of
the universe, different opinions were entertained by the Gentile philosophers.
The Epicureans taught, that it was formed by chance, or by a fortuitous
concourse of atoms, and pretended to account for the production of men
and other animals, without the interposition of the Gods, in a manner
not more creditable to their understandings than to their piety. Others
believed the world to be eternal; or holding the preexistence of matter,
assigned to the Deity merely the office of giving it its present form
and arrangement. By all the philosophers, the idea of a proper creation
was rejected, as being contrary to their established maxim, that out
of nothing, nothing could be made.
He proceeds to lay down, in the next place, the doctrine of providence. God who made the world is “the Lord of heaven and earth: He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things: He hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of our habitation.” The Apostle adds, “In Him we live, and move, and have our being;” and quotes the saying of the poet Aratus, “For we are also his offspring.” The doctrine of providence was not new to the Gentiles, like that of creation. It was, indeed, denied by the followers of Epicurus, who represented the Gods as indifferent spectators of what was passing on the earth, and the Stoics, notwithstanding their fine sayings on the subject, may be charged with having virtually overthrown it, by their notions of fate; but other philosophers, and the common people, believed, that the Divine government extended to this world, and regulated the affairs of individuals, and nations. Hence, the supplications, thanksgivings, and sacrifices, which were offered up on public and private occasions. Our views of providence have been enlarged and corrected by revelation, which informs us, that God is constantly present with his works; that he cares for all his creatures, and for the individual, as well as the species; that our situation in life, and the changes in our condition, are determined and disposed by his wisdom; and that the laws of nature are the operations of his power, by which the order of the universe is maintained. “All things,” said a heathen poet, “are full of God.” The enlightened eye perceives him, not only in that majestic orb of light, which blazes in the heavens, but in the meanest reptile, and in the humblest weed which springs from the earth. We feel him stirring within us. It is by his secret influence, that our blood circulates, our stomach digests its food, and our lungs perform their important functions; it is by him, that our spirit thinks, and wills, animates our bodies, and receives impressions from the organs of sense. The universal Parent sustains and nourishes every being, to whom he has imparted life, and exercises a particular care towards men, “for we are also his offspring.”
From these principles Paul draws the following inferences.
First, God is not confined to a particular place. “Seeing
that he is Lord of heaven and earth, he dwelleth not in temples made
with hands.” The Gentiles believed, that, by the performance of certain
ceremonies, the Gods were induced to descend into the temples which
had been erected to their honour, and that they resided in the images
by which they were represented. Their deluded worshippers.
Secondly, He is independent and self-sufficient. “Neither is he worshipped
with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing.” Although the more
enlightened Heathens were convinced, that the Gods were not in want
of any thing, which it was in the power of men to bestow, yet the common
people believed, that in presenting costly oblations, they conferred
a favour upon them which they were bound to repay; and, hence, they
reproached them with ingratitude, and treated them with indignity, when
they were disappointed of the blessings which they expected to obtain.
Some were even so gross as to imagine, that their Deities were gratified
with the smell of the incense and the sacrifices which were burnt upon
the altars.
Thirdly, He is a spiritual
and invisible being. “Forasmuch then, as we are the offspring of God,
we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver,
or stone graven by art and man’s device.” The Heathen Deities were supposed,
by their votaries, to
With these reasonings,
Paul intermixes an observation upon the duty of men in reference to
their Maker, the knowledge of whom they should have exerted the utmost
diligence to acquire; for he had revealed himself in the works of creation
and providence, with a design, “that they should seek the Lord, if
haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far
from every one of us.” Reason, the distinguishing attribute of man,
finds its noblest employment, in tracing the power, and goodness, and
wisdom of its Author, in the frame and constitution of the Universe.
Before the eyes of all nations the book of nature is unfolded, in which
the existence and attributes of God are written in legible characters.
His works were the only means of knowing him, which the Gentiles possessed.
The Apostle represents those means as not the most favourable to the
success of their inquiries, because the information
Although it was
the will of God, that men should seek after him, yet the Gentiles had
not found him. They had embraced the illusions of fancy for truth, and
had adored the creature in the room of the Creator. God had left them
to the swanderings of their vain minds, and had not interposed to check
the progress of error. “The times of this ignorance he winked at.” This
is an allusion to a person who intending not to intermeddle with what
is transacting around him, closes his eyes, that he may seem not to
observe it. God gave no revelation of his will to the Gentiles; he sent
no inspired messenger to reclaim them from idolatry. Does it appear
strange, that he should have neglected so great a portion of his rational
offspring, although he beheld them engaged in pernicious errors, and
departing farther and farther from his ways? Let it be considered, that
he was under no obligation to interpose in favour of persons, who had
already disregarded the voice of nature, and had voluntarily permitted
their reason to be warped and blinded by their passions. Besides, it
seems to have been his intention in leaving men to multiply follies
and crimes from age to age, till religion and virtue were utterly lost,
to demonstrate the necessity of revelation,
But the season of dereliction was past. God had remembered his forlorn creatures, and mercifully provided means for reclaiming them from ignorance and impiety. “But now he commandeth all men every where to repent.” These words do not imply, that the former idolatry of the Gentiles was innocent, and that now only it was their duty to forsake it; but they obviously signify, that the plan of the divine procedure towards them was changed. God had sent forth his ministers to convince them of their wickedness, in apostatising from their Maker and Benefactor, and to command them to return to his service. This command was enforced by one of the most awful doctrines of our religion, that of the future judgment, in its circumstances more solemn than the judgment which the Gentiles expected; not a private inquiry into the actions of each individual at his death, but a public trial of the human race, assembled together to hear the sentence, which will consign them to everlasting happiness, or misery. “Because he hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.” The mention of the judgment, led the Apostle, by a natural transition, to the grand subject of his mission. It does not appear, whether he was permitted to illustrate the topics, introduced in the conclusion of his speech; but it is not improbable that the Athenians, from curiosity, would listen for some time, to his account of Jesus and the resurrection.
The curiosity of a part of the
audience was soon satisfied; and the doctrine of Paul seemed to them
to be less deserving of patient attention, than of ridicule. “When
they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked.” By the Gentiles,
a resurrection was accounted neither credible nor desirable. They believed
that at death, the body mingled for ever with its native earth; and
that, if the soul was not extinguished with the breath, it subsisted
in an unembodied state, or was clothed with a new and purer vehicle. They
laughed, therefore, when Paul assured them, that, at some distant period, the
dust lying in the grave should resume its original form, and be again
There were a few, however, to whom his doctrine seemed not only curious and probable, but true. Among these, were Dionysius, a member of the court of Areopagus, and a woman called Damaris, and some others, whose names are not mentioned. The number of converts was small, but they were the first-fruits of an abundant harvest. The philosophical pride of Athens ere long humbled itself before the cross of Christ; and Jehovah reigned alone, amidst its deserted temples, and its idols laid prostrate in the dust.
Let the boast of
reason cease. Let infidels no longer dare to decry revelation as unnecessary,
and to extol the powers of the human mind as a sufficient guide in religion.
The strength of reason has been tried; and the experiment was made in
the most favourable circumstances. You have not been hearing of barbarous
tribes, among whom intellect had received no cultivation, and we perceive
rather the instincts of the lower animals, than the nobler faculties
of man. You have been introduced to the Athenians, the most enlightened
and refined people of antiquity. And what were the achievements of reason,
in the seat of elegance and philosophy? Did it discover the unity of
God, and present to him a pure and rational worship? Do we find in the
writings of those polished Greeks, a complete system of natural religion?
Alas! we see in Athens, not only the common idolatry of heathen cities,
but its utmost extravagance, as if unassisted reason, the more it was
improved, had served the more, by its false lights, to lead mankind
astray. Let us learn from this memorable example, that we stand in
need of a surer and a more perfect guide; let us rejoice, that the gospel,
like “the day-spring from on high,” has arisen upon us, to conduct
us in the way of truth and peace. Infidels themselves are indebted to
it, although they disdain to acknowledge the obligation. By its aid,
they see farther and more distinctly than the greatest philosophers
of ancient times, whom they do not surpass in intellectual vigour, nor
equal in diligence of research. Yet, with base ingratitude, they
Let us remember, that great privileges infer high responsibility. “The times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent.” At no time, indeed, did he tolerate idolatry, for it was impossible, that he should have ever approved of those who worshipped and served the creature, instead of the Creator. In the Epistle to the Romans, Paul asserts, that the Gentiles were “without excuse.” But, our Saviour has shown, that the punishment inflicted upon sinners in the future state, will bear an exact proportion to their means of information, and their excitements to duty.
Speaking of the city, by the inhabitants of which his Apostles should be rejected, he says, “It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city.” He selects the worst of the heathens, and declares, that their doom shall be less severe than that of the despisers of the gospel. Our privileges are greater than even those of the hearers of Christ, during his ministry upon earth. Revelation is completed; it is confirmed by ample and luminous evidence; and the Holy Ghost is sent forth to enlighten our minds. If, after all, we remain ignorant of the true God, or form false and dishonourable conceptions of his attributes and dispensations; if we neglect to worship him, or content ourselves with offering to him only bodily service; if we give that obedience to the world and the flesh, to which he alone is entitled, what apology can we plead for our conduct? Are we not the most ungrateful and perverse of men? What then can we expect, but that in the day of retribution, our privileges, of which we vainly boast, shall each of them have a voice to accuse us, and shall demand our condemnation, for the glory of divine justice? Happy are they who live in a Christian land, if they only prize and improve their advantages. But as for those by whom they are neglected, it would have been better for them, that they had lived and died among heathens. They should have perished by a milder doom. “For this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world; and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.”
THE commission of Jesus Christ to his Apostles, authorised them to preach the gospel, and to form Churches, in every region of the earth. As it was impossible for them literally to execute this commission, we must conceive it to have been delivered to them as the first in a long succession of preachers, whose progressive labours should ultimately diffuse the light of truth throughout the habitable world. Yet, no exertion was wanting on their part, to disseminate, as extensively as possible, the religion of their Master. With more enlightened views, and purer motives than the Pharisees, they compassed sea and land, to make proselytes to Christianity. The notion that some of the Apostles were bishops of particular cities, is inconsistent with the nature of their office. They were not sent to preside over the Church of Jerusalem, of Antioch, or of Rome. The whole world was their diocese, and the catholic society of believers was their flock. In general, they did not stay long in a place; but having sown the seeds of truth in one city, or country, they made haste to perform the same salutary work, in another. We have seen Paul preaching in several provinces of Asia, then passing over to Macedonia, and afterwards making Greece the scene of his labours. We have seen him in Athens, disputing with the philosophers; and we are now to see him in Corinth, conflicting with the obstinacy and furious zeal of the Jews.
Corinth
was a city of Greece, which enjoyed, from its situation, uncommon advantages
for commerce, being built upon a neck of land, which was washed on both
sides by the sea. It was taken and destroyed by the Romans; but it soon
rose from its ashes, and, at the time when Paul visited it, was in a
very flourishing state.
When Paul came to Corinth, “he found a certain Jew, named
Aquila, born in Pontus, lately from Italy, with his wife Priscilla,
(because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome,)
and he came unto them.” When the emperor Claudius ascended the throne,
he made laws in favour of the Jews, who had been grievously harassed
by his predecessor Caligula; but about the eighth or ninth year of his
reign, he withdrew his protection from them, and published an edict
banishing them from Italy. The historian Suetonius is supposed to refer
to the event, which is here related by Luke, when he says in his life
of Claudius, that “he expelled from Rome the Jews, who were constantly
exciting tumults, at the instigation of Christ.”
Paul associated with them, as being, perhaps, the only Christians in the place; “and because he was of the same craft, he abode with them and wrought, for by their occupation they were tentmakers.” The Apostle, who was a disciple of Gamaliel, had applied to the occupation of tent-making, not so much from necessity, we may presume, as in compliance with a national custom. Among the Jews, it was usual for persons of education to learn a trade, by which, if circumstances should require it, they might support themselves, without being burdensome to others. It is a saying of one of the Rabbis, “that he who does not teach his son some art or calling, acts no better than if he taught him to be a thief.” No honest employment was accounted dishonourable. Paul engaged in work with Aquila and Priscilla, because there was yet no Church in Corinth, to which he could look for maintenance, according to this incontrovertible maxim, “The labourer is worthy of his hire.” In certain cases, when there were Churches, he declined making a demand upon them, in consideration of their peculiar circumstances, or to prevent any from alleging or suspecting, that he was influenced by mercenary views, and to show by his disinterestedness, how fully he was convinced of the truth of the gospel, and how pure was his zeal for the salvation of souls. But his claim was unquestionable; and he did not fail to assert it in the most implicit terms, even when he waved the exercise of it, from prudence or generosity.
Concerning Aquila and Priscilla we may remark, that although
they may seem to have been persons of an obscure condition, depending
for subsistence upon their own labour, yet their names are recorded
in Scripture, to be transmitted with honour to the latest posterity.
Mention is made of them in several places of the New Testament. In the
Epistle to the Romans, Paul speaks of them in the following terms; “Greet
Priscilla and Aquila, my helpers in Christ Jesus: who have for my life
laid down their own necks; unto whom not only I give thanks, but also
all the Churches of the Gentiles.” This example holds out an inducement
to others in similar circumstances, to exert themselves in the service
of religion. Their situation may preclude them from obtaining the celebrity
which is attached to eminence in learning and science, and to splendid
achievements; but by the faithful performance of Christian duties, by
usefulness within the sphere of their influence,
The business of tent-making did not hinder Paul from discharging,
as he had opportunity, the duties of the Apostolical office. “He reasoned
in the synagogue every sabbath; and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.” The gospel treats us as rational creatures, propounding arguments to
convince our understandings, and motives to interest our hearts. When
the heathens reproached the Christians, with demanding a blind assent
to their religion, and saying to them, “Do not examine, but believe,” they had forgotten, or they intentionally overlooked the evidences,
which the gospel exhibited of its divine authority, and the means employed
by the first preachers of Christianity, to prevail upon men to embrace it.
“When Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was
pressed in spirit, and testified to the Jews, that Jesus was Christ.” On the
arrival of these friends and fellow-labourers, he felt an unusual earnestness
for the conversion of his countrymen. His zeal was animated by their presence,
or by the agency of the Spirit of God upon his mind. The word translated
“pressed,” is the same which is used, when our Lord says, that he had a baptism
to be baptized with, and was “straitened” till it was accomplished;
His labours were bestowed upon an ungrateful people. “They opposed themselves and blasphemed.” They cavilled at his arguments, and treated his affectionate exhortations with contempt. Their furious bigotry broke out in reproaches, not only against Paul, as an apostate from the religion of his fathers, but against Jesus, whom they reviled as an impostor. Their violence would be the greater, because they felt themselves pressed by his reasonings. Men full of prejudice, can hardly be expected to listen calmly to those who would convince them of their error; and what is wanting in argument, they usually supply by vehemence and abuse. It is an expeditious and easy plan, to blacken the reputation of an antagonist, to whom they are unable to reply.
Finding it to be
in vain to make any farther attempts for their conversion, the Apostle “shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own
heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.” Our
Lord commanded his Apostles, when the inhabitants of any city would
not receive them, “to shake off the very dust from their feet, for
a testimony against them.” That dust would remain as a memorial, that
the ministers of salvation had come to them, and had been despised;
or the action was intended to signify, that those ministers should henceforth
have no communication with such obstinate sinners. With the same design,
Paul now shook his garment, or shook off the dust which adhered to his
garment. Symbolical actions were frequent among the Prophets, and were
probably so congenial to the manners of the Jews, as to be easily understood.
“Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean.” “If you perish, it
is by your own fault; I am free from blame.” Although every man shall
be finally condemned for his personal sins, yet others may be accessary
to his ruin. They contribute to it, who tempt him to commit sin; who,
in any way, encourage him to continue in it; who withhold that instruction,
and those admonitions, by which he might have been preserved
While the Apostle laid the guilt of their perdition upon the Jews themselves, he intimated, that they should be deprived of the means of salvation which they had contumaciously resisted. “From henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.” The gracious designs of Heaven were not to be disappointed by their rejection of the gospel. There were others, to whom the good news might be published, and by whom they would be joyfully received. “I will now preach to the Gentiles.”
The opposition of the Jews did not discourage
Paul from proceeding in his work. “He departed thence, and entered into a
certain man’s house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined
hard to the synagogue.” These words do not mean, that leaving Aquila and
Priscilla, he went to live with Justus; but that not finding it safe to resort
any more to the synagogue, or being positively excluded from it, by a decree of
the rulers, he accepted the offer made by this proselyte of his house, for
holding religious assemblies. Some of the Jews were persuaded by the reasonings
of Paul. Of this number was “Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, who
believed in the Lord with all his house. And many of the Corinthians hearing
believed, and were baptized.” These were not Jews alone, but natives of the
place, who were converted
“Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night
by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace. For I
am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: For I have
much people in this city.” The Apostle was not a timid man. Of a firm
and ardent temper, he engaged with earnestness in any enterprise, and
was prepared to abide by his purpose, in the face of opposition. But
the most courageous are but men, who may experience moments of weakness,
and disappoint the expectations of others, by a cowardly flight from
danger. Jesus Christ, therefore, appeared to his faithful servant, to
assure him of his assistance and protection. There were other trials
awaiting him, besides those which he had already undergone. “Speak,
and hold not thy peace.” The policy of worldly men is supple and accommodating.
Keeping its own interest, the main spring of all its actions, continually
in view, it consults the tastes and humours of others, and, with dexterous
facility, adapts itself to the ever varying aspect of affairs. Its looks
are studied; its words are carefully weighed. It seeks by flattery to
gain the heart, and thus to make sure of the object of its arts, who
will suffer himself to be led, in the chains of vanity and self-love,
a captive at its pleasure. What is agreeable and soothing is readily
told; but if any thing would wound the pride of others, or offend their
prejudices, the salutary truth is buried in silence. The Apostles of
Jesus Christ renounced the artifices of dishonesty. Their aim was not
the praise of men, but their salvation, not their own private interests,
but the honour of their Master; and to accomplish these important ends,
they did not “hold their peace,” although they foresaw, that their
words should excite the ridicule or the indignation of their audience.
In the present case, Paul was assured, not that his doctrine should
be applauded, and his person held in admiration, nor that he should
escape without reproach, and suffer no sort of molestation; but solely
that “no man should set on him to hurt him.” He might be persecuted,
but he should not be destroyed. This promise did not fail, when the
Jews laid hold of him, and led him to the tribunal of Gallio; for the
deputy refused to hear their accusation, and dismissed the prisoner
in peace. Almighty power controls the wrath of the wicked, and, when
it rages
The care of Providence
was exercised towards Paul, that by his ministrations many of the Corinthians
might be saved. “I have much people in this city.” It is almost unnecessary
to remark, that this declaration does not refer to the few, who were
already converted, but to those who were yet to be called. They were
all known to the Son of God, who sees the future as well as the past,
and, by means of the gospel, carries into effect his eternal purpose
of grace with respect to his elect. Some would persuade us, with a design
to obscure the evidence arising from this passage in favour of the doctrine
of election and sovereign grace, that nothing more is intended than
that Jesus Christ “who searches the heart, and tries the reins of the
children of men,” perceived, that many of the Corinthians, who were
yet in a state of heathenism, were disposed to believe. But when the
Scripture accounts for the conversion of sinners, it does not ascribe
it to their previous good dispositions, but to the mercy of God. “So
then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of
God that showeth mercy.” How the Corinthians, who were ignorant of
the true God, and engaged in the errors and crimes of polytheism; who
having lost all just ideas of religion, were either seduced by a proud
and ostentatious philosophy, or immersed in the grossest sensuality,
were prepared to receive the heavenly doctrines, and pure precepts of
Christianity, we shall leave it to the authors and abetters of this
absurd notion to explain. Let them show us, in what intelligible sense
idolaters and profligates were disposed to become the disciples of Christ.
His people in Corinth were such persons, as are elsewhere termed “the
election,” and “vessels of mercy;” or such as he had predistinated to
salvation, and to faith and holiness, as the means of obtaining it.
Those whom he has predestinated, he calls by the gospel, which his providence
sends to the places where they reside, and continues there, till they
are all converted. Of this class there are many in the city; and while
the sovereignty of divine grace appears in the case of every individual,
who is chosen to eternal life, it is displayed, in a very strong and
impressive light, in the instance before us. There were many of the
elect, in one of the most debauched cities of the heathen world. It
is evident, therefore, that the purpose of God is not founded in the
foresight of good qualities in the objects of his choice, but in the
independent determination
Encouraged by this promise not only of protection but of success, Paul, “continued in Corinth a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.” The Jews beheld the progress of the gospel with an evil eyei and at length, their zeal being unable to restrain itself, “they made insurrection with one accord against Paul, when Gallio was the deputy of Achaia, and brought him to the judgment-seat, saying, This fellow persuadeth men to worship God contrary to the law.” This charge was founded not only upon his teaching that Jesus was the Messiah, but upon his doctrine with regard to the institutions of Moses, which, he maintained, were not to be imposed upon the believing Gentiles, and having received their completion in the gospel, were to be abolished. There was nothing in this doctrine hostile to the law; but the Jews did not understand the harmony between the two systems, and the subservience of the one to the other. He, therefore, who affirmed, that circumcision was not necessary, that sacrifices were no longer required, that there was no distinction of meats into clean and unclean, and that the Gentiles were admitted, through faith, to the possession of the same spiritual privileges with the Jews, seemed to teach men to worship God contrary to the law.
“When Paul was about
to open his mouth,” to reply to the accusation of the Jews, Gallio,
without waiting to hear him, said, “If it were a matter of wrong, or wicked
lewdness, O ye Jews, reason would that I should bear with you.” “A matter of wrong or wicked lewdness,” signifies any crime committed
against the peace of society, any act of injustice, violence, or fraud.
Society cannot
The reason for which he declined to consider
questions relative to the law, may thus be explained. Under the government
of the Romans, the Jews enjoyed the benefit of a religious toleration,
They were permitted to worship the God of Israel, and to observe the
ordinances of Moses, not only in Judea, but in the various provinces
of the empire. Accordingly, it appears from this history that they had
synagogues in the different countries of Asia and Europe, which Paul
visited. At the time when he was brought before the tribunal of Gallio,
the Christians had not attracted the particular notice of the Romans.
Regarding the religion of the Jews with contempt, they did not pay such
attention to it, as might have led them, in the infancy of the Church,
to discover the difference between the followers of Jesus, and the disciples
of Moses. Paul appeared, therefore, to the proconsul, to belong to some
Jewish sect, similar to the sects which had long subsisted among that
people, under the names of Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. With their
internal divisions, the laws of the empire did not interfere, but protected
all parties under the general denomination of Jews, and left their differences
of opinion to be settled by themselves. On this account, Gallio refused
to judge, and seems to have considered himself as having no authority
to judge of their religious disputes. He
The motives of his conduct have been misunderstood. He has been represented as a profane man, who accounted Christianity a question about “words;” and his name has become the proverbial appellation of a person, careless and indifferent about religion. But, the manner in which lie speaks of Christianity, is an evidence not of his profaneness, but of his ignorance. In what other light could the present dispute appear to a stranger, than as a question of words and names? The charge of indifference is equally unfounded. Gallio acted the part of a prudent and impartial judge, who would not pronounce sentence in a cause which he did not understand, and which was not within the sphere of his jurisdiction. While he was ready to do justice between man and man, to redress grievances, and punish crimes, he resolved to preserve inviolate the toleration which the laws of the empire accorded to the Jews. It did not pertain to him as a Roman magistrate, to decide concerning the interpretation of their national law, and the comparative merits of their sects. He has been blamed, therefore, for scrupulously confining himself within the limits of his duty.
It would have been happy for the Christian world,
if the conduct of Gallio, instead of being calumniated through ignorance
and false zeal, had been imitated by persons in authority. Our religion,
which always suffers by the misconduct of those who profess it, would
not have been loaded with the reproach of persecution. Let magistrates
inquire into every matter of “wrong and wicked lewdness.” Let them
animadvert, with due severity, upon acts of violence and dishonesty,
and secure to their subjects the enjoyment of their rights, and of the
fruits of their industry. But, let them remember, that God alone is
the Lord of the conscience; and that it is to be governed by the dictates
of reason and Scripture, not by the mandates of human authority. With
the religion of their subjects they have nothing to do, but to protect
them in the exercise of it, and to prevent them from disturbing one
another. To maintain that they have a right to interfere any farther,
under the pretext of checking heresies and errors, is to destroy the
clear and essential distinction between Church and State; to impose
a restraint upon freedom of inquiry; to make civil rulers infallible
interpreters of Scripture, while they are not more able to interpret
them than the people; and to entrust them with a power, which, the history
of
The indifference with which Gallio witnessed a riot in the court where he presided, cannot be so easily defended. “Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment-seat; and Gallio cared for none of those things.” A judge should have repressed such an outrage committed in his own presence, and should have severely punished the offenders. We are not, however, so fully acquainted with the circumstances, as to be qualified to pass sentence upon his conduct. It has been supposed, that he permitted the Greeks to beat the rulers of the synagogue, in order to deter the Jews from again troubling him with similar accusations. Be this as it may, by the moderation and equity of the proconsul, the promise made to Paul, that no man should set on him to hurt him, was performed. His life and liberty were preserved; and the Jews, mortified and intimidated by this unexpected check, would not venture again to disturb him in the discharge of his duty.
I shall subjoin the following observations.
First, The success of the gospel does not always correspond with the
ideas which have been previously entertained upon the subject. The divine
procedure is not regulated by those appearances and probabilities, which
are the grounds of our expectations. The Jews who heard the voice of
Moses and the Prophets, rejected the gospel; but it was gladly received
by the Gentiles, who had lived in profound ignorance of the purposes
of grace. The converts to Christianity in Athens seem not to have been
so numerous as those in Corinth. Athens, indeed, was full of superstition,
and very gross vices prevailed among its inhabitants; but the manners
of the Corinthians were still more depraved. Men of learning and reflection
are sometimes prompted, by the pride of reason, to treat revelation
with neglect and contempt; whereas others of a careless and superficial
temper, are led, by particular circumstances, to give such attention
to it, as terminates in a firm conviction and cordial belief. Persons
of sober habits not seldom appear to be strangers to vital godliness,
while sinners of the most worthless character, are “washed, and sanctified,
and justified.” How shall we account for these things? Are they not
so many arguments, n confirmation of the doctrine, which we hold upon
the authority of Scripture, that
In the second place, We observe a proof of the wisdom and care of God, in the protection afforded to the Church in its infancy. The Church was destined to undergo severe trials, to contend with the power of the Roman empire, to resist unto blood, in the struggle with Satan and the world; but while it was yet forming, it pleased God to proceed much in the same manner, in which he acted towards the Israelites, immediately after their deliverance from Egypt. “He did not lead them through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for he said, lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt.” The disciples of Jesus, indeed, were soon exposed to the malignity of the Jews; but the troubles which these excited, were partial, and of short duration. It was not till the reign of Nero, that the Christians were persecuted by the Roman government; nor till a considerable time after, probably about the beginning of the second century, that express laws were enacted against them. During this interval, they were, in some measure, sheltered under the toleration granted to the Jews. The Church was fully formed, and established, and had spread far and wide, before those formidable attacks were made, which might have proved fatal to it at an earlier period. God proportions trials to the strength of the sufferer; and will not expose his people to any temptations, “which they are not able to bear.”
In the last place, Let Christians be careful
to conduct themselves in such a manner, that, if they shall be brought
before the judgment-seat of their civil rulers, it may not be for any
offence against the just laws of the state, but for some question relative
to the law of their God. “Let none of you suffer as a murderer, or
as a thief, or as an evil-doer, or as a busy body in other men’s matters.
Yet, if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let
him glorify God on this behalf.” My brethren, if you act according to
the spirit and precepts of our holy religion, it is impossible, that you can ever be justly charged with a
“matter of wrong, or wicked lewdness;” for your hands will be free from violence and injustice, and your hearts,
from the selfish and malevolent passions. The tongue of calumny may
impeach you, as it did not spare your blessed Master, and his holy Apostles;
“but your righteousness shall go forth as the light, and your judgment as the
noon-day.”
THE mention of Apollos
in the first verse, leads us back to the last part of the preceding
chapter, where that eminent minister of the gospel is first introduced
to our notice. He was a Jew, born in Alexandria, well acquainted with
the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and was possessed of a great share
of eloquence. At the time of his appearance in Ephesus, he was imperfectly
instructed in the religion of Christ, for he knew only the baptism of
John. But, Aquila, and Priscilla who had removed from Corinth to that
city, having expounded to him the way of God more perfectly, when he
was disposed to pass into Achaia, he was sent to that country with recommendatory
letters; and he seems to have been allowed to preach there in the assemblies
of the Christians, as well as in those of the Jews. No argument can
be fairly drawn from this case, for the right of every person, who is
qualified, to commence a preacher of the gospel, although it has been
sometimes represented as decisive of the question. The practice of the
Jewish synagogue, in which private persons were permitted to explain
the Scriptures, and to exhort the congregation, is not a precedent for
the Christian Church; and it was only in the synagogue that Apollos
preached, during his residence in Ephesus. The sequel of his history
is so concise that no considerate person would choose to found upon
it the determination of any point in debate. It is certain, that by
one Church which was acquainted with his character and qualifications,
he was recommended to another, and that in consequence of that recommendation
he discharged the duties of a public teacher in the latter. While we
perceive some traces of regular procedure in this business, the particular
steps are obviously omitted. As those parts of Scripture which are obscure,
or defective, should
“While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul, having passed through the upper coasts, came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, he said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?” John baptized his disciples into the faith of the Messiah, as soon to be manifested to Israel. The men whom Paul found at Ephesus, seem to have been disciples of John, who, having acquired some knowledge of Jesus, and of the evidences of his divine mission, believed in him as the Messiah whose approach their Master had proclaimed. But, from circumstances of which we are not informed, the distance, perhaps, at which they lived from Judea, or the want of an opportunity to hear the Apostles or to converse with any of the Christians, they entertained a very imperfect idea of the nature and privileges of the new dispensation; for when Paul asked them, whether they had received the Holy Ghost, they answered, “We have not so much as heard, whether there be any Holy Ghost.” In the New Testament, this name sometimes signifies the operations of the Spirit; and in several passages, not his sanctifying, but his miraculous influences. In the latter sense it must, at present, be understood; for Paul did not inquire whether those disciples had been regenerated, but whether the extraordinary gifts, which where then common, had been communicated to them. When they did receive the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands, we read, that “they spake with tongues, and prophecied.”
Unless we consider the question of Paul as referring to the operations
of the Holy Ghost, the answer will import, that those men, although
disciples of John, and believers in Christ, did not know whether there
was such a person as the Spirit. This, however, is an incredible degree
of ignorance in Jews, who had often read, in the Scriptures of the Old
Testament, of the Spirit of the Lord, by whom the Prophets were inspired.
But, according to the explanation we have given of the name, not to
know whether there was a Holy Ghost, signifies that they were not apprized
of the miraculous dispensation, which had commenced on the day of Pentecost.
They had not heard, that the Holy Ghost was restored to Israel, who
according to the saying of the Rabbis, departed from it, after the
From their answer, the Apostle took occasion to
point out the nature and design of the baptism of John. “Then said Paul,
John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance.” It is called the
baptism of repentance, because he required from those whom he admitted
to it, the confession and renunciation of their sins, and such a change
of views and dispositions, as was necessary to prepare them for becoming
disciples of the Messiah. For the Baptist, faithful to his commission,
used no art to draw the attention of the people to himself, but directed
their expectations to Him, who was soon to appear to claim their homage,
and to save them from their sins. “He said unto the people that they
should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ
Jesus.” From all quarters, the people flocked to the ministry of John,
as no person
The following words have been the subject
of much controversy. “When they heard this, they were baptized in the
name of the Lord Jesus.” Some maintain that they are the words of Paul,
relating the success of the ministry of John, and import, that many
were persuaded to receive baptism from him, not as a rite of initiation
into his service, but as a token of their faith in the Messiah, whose
superior dignity and near approach he had foretold. It will be acknowledged,
I presume, that this is not the sense of the words, which first presents
itself to the reader, and it has not, therefore the recommendation of
being obvious and natural. Besides, John did not baptize his disciples “in the name of the Lord Jesus,” unless this expression be used in
some forced and unusual meaning. He merely commanded them to believe
in the Messiah, without pointing him out by person, or by name. Others
contend, that these are the words of Luke, who records the result of
the conversation between Paul and those disciples of the Baptist. As
soon as the Apostle had convinced them, that the great design of the
ministry of John, was to prepare men for becoming disciples of Christ,
not to form a sect or party which should be called by his own name,
they submitted to baptism, as a public testimony of their faith in our
Saviour, and of their dedication to his service. It is objected to this
view of the passage, that it supposes the baptism of John and that of
Christ to have been different; and that it furnishes an example in justification
of those who assert, that, in certain cases, baptism should be repeated.
But, there seems to be no necessity for so identifying the baptism of
John and that of Christ, that both could not be lawfully administered
to the same individual. John baptized his disciples into the faith of
the Messiah as to come; we are baptized into the faith of the Messiah
as actually come. The baptism of John was evidently instituted to serve
a temporary purpose, in common with all the other parts of his ministry;
the baptism of Christ is to continue to the end of the world. The one
did not properly belong to the Christian economy, but was preparatory
to it;
It is unhappy, when we bring to the study of the Scripture, our preconceived notions, our jealousy for favourite opinions, our dread of giving advantage to an antagonist, our anxious care to guard against the dangers, real or imaginary, which threaten our system. In this state of mind, it is impossible that we should be candid and impartial, in the interpretation of it. We must feel a strong inclination to make it express our sentiments, and when it refuses its evidence, to torture it to confess. This is the true source of the forced and unnatural expositions of Scripture, which are too frequent in the writings of all parties. Let the word of God explain its own meaning without any restraint; and if it should not, on every occasion, speak in conformity to our wishes, it will be always consistent with itself.
As soon as the disciples were
baptized, “Paul laid his hands upon them, and the Holy Ghost came upon
them; and they spake with tongues and prophesied.” Imposition of hands
was a rite practised in the primitive times, for various purposes, and
particularly for the communication of supernatural gifts, which were imparted
Let us proceed to consider the labours of Paul in Ephesus, and the miracles, by which his doctrine was confirmed. Conformably to his usual practice, “he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.” He explained the nature of the dispensation of grace, and exerted his holy eloquence to prevail upon the Jews to embrace the gospel as the end and completion of the law. In our times, when the doctrine of the cross is recognised by the Christian world as the foundation of their hopes, to avow our belief of it is an easy matter; and we shall with little difficulty persuade others to concur with us. But, in the Apostolic age, no man could have said, without heroic courage, without having his mind elevated by the love of truth, above the consideration of honour and personal safety, “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ.” It required boldness to maintain principles, which appeared foolish to the wise men of the world, and drew upon their friends ridicule and persecution. In the synagogue, Paul was surrounded with men, avowedly hostile to the cause which he defended, and, from the violence of their zeal, capable of the greatest excesses. Yet, he dared to proclaim, in their presence, the crucified Jesus to be the Messiah. He “disputed” in the synagogue, replying to the objections of the Jews, and supporting his doctrine by arguments from Scripture. Disputation, however unpleasant, is unavoidable, when we meet with captious and unreasonable opponents. If it often irritates, it sometimes convinces; and, whatever may be its effects upon individuals, it is necessary, for the honour of the truth, that the mistakes, misrepresentations, and sophisms of adversaries, should be detected and exposed.
But, although Paul, we may believe,
refuted, in the most triumphant manner, the arguments of the Jews, there
were some too proud and obstinate to yield. “Divers were hardened,” that is, their tempers were ruffled, and, agreeably to the frequent
result of
In this seat of idolatry and magic, the gospel
stood in need of the powerful support, afforded by the miracles which
God enabled his servant to perform. “And God wrought special miracles
by the hand of Paul: so that from his body were brought unto the sick
handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the
evil spirits went out of them.” No person was bound to believe the gospel,
till satisfactory evidence of its truth and authority had been produced.
The testimony of the apostles themselves was not sufficient to prove
that they were messengers from God, because they might be misled by
enthusiasm, or might have an intention to deceive, and the same character
had been assumed and maintained, with the utmost confidence, by many
impostors. The power of working miracles was conferred upon them, to
attest their commission, and showed that God was with them, by a proof
perfectly decisive, and so perspicuous, that the dull and illiterate
In the present case, there was something unusual, as Luke intimates, by saying that God wrought “special” miracles. The way in which the Apostles commonly performed such miracles as are here recorded, was, either commanding, in the name of Jesus Christ, the disease to depart, or by laying their hands upon the patient. But, now handkerchiefs and aprons, which had been applied to the body of Paul, were carried to the sick, who, upon touching them, or applying them to their own bodies, were instantly cured. Virtue proceeded from him in as wonderful a manner as it had proceeded from our Saviour himself, when a woman having touched the hem of his garment, immediately felt herself made whole. This extraordinary scene might have led the spectators to form too exalted an idea of Paul. Dispensing to all who not only approached him, but even at a distance implored, or stood in need of his assistance, the inestimable blessing of health, he seemed to be rather a God than a man; and we should not have been surprised, if the astonished heathens, supposing him to be one of their Deities, who had descended to the earth, had attempted to pay divine honours to him. But, this misconception was prevented by his explicit and uniform declaration, that he was only a minister of God; and by the performance of his miracles in the name of Jesus. On every occasion of this nature, the language of all the Apostles was the same with that of Peter and John. “Look not on us as though by our own power and holiness we had done these things. It is the power of Jesus of Nazareth which has effected them.”
The working of miracles by handkerchiefs and aprons, taken
from the body of Paul, has been supposed, by superstitious men, to
The
success of Paul, in curing all diseases, whether of the body or of the
mind, by the name of Jesus, suggested to some Jews, who were pretenders
to preternatural powers, the idea of making an experiment of its efficacy. “Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call
over them which had evil spirits, the name of the Lord Jesus, saying:
We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.” I had occasion, when explaining
the history of Simon, to make a few remarks upon magic. The object of
that science of declusion and imposture, was to cultivate an intercourse
with invisible beings, by whose assistance the person
This
pretended science, which the wiser and better part of the heathens condemned,
had, at this time or perhaps earlier, gained credit among the Jews,
by some of whom it was studied and practised. This may be collected
from the story now under consideration, and is fully proved by the
testimony of Josephus, who relates some of the methods which they used
in performing cures, and informs us, that they had books teaching the
modes of exorcism and incantation, which they asserted to have been
composed by Solomon.
The actors in the present scene, were “vagabond Jews,” or
persons who strolled from place to place, like the jugglers and fortunetellers
of other nations, to practise their arts, wherever they could find people
sufficiently credulous. They are called exorcists, because they adjured evil
spirits, or solemnly commanded them, in the name of God, to leave the bodies of
the possessed, accompanying the adjuration with magical rites. Their success had
hitherto been only apparent through a collusion between them and the other
party, or had consisted in certain effects produced upon the imagination of the
patient. But, now observing that real dispossessions were effected by the name
of Jesus, and that no case was so obstinate as to resist its influence, they
were tempted to make trial of its power in preference to the forms of exorcism,
which they
Among the Jewish exorcists, “There were seven sons of one Sceva a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.” But these audacious imposters speedily found, that although there was a mighty efficacy in the name of Jesus, it did not proceed, as they probably imagined, from the sound of the word, but from his divine power, which he could exert or restrain, at his pleasure. He had lent it to Paul, to attest his commission, and to promote the interests of the religion which he published; but he would not lend it, to give countenance to magic. There was no charm in the name itself to drive the demon from his hold; and, accordingly, he treated this impotent attempt to dispossess him, with scorn. “Jesus I know, and Paul I know.” “Yes; I know Jesus, and tremble at his power; and I know Paul to be his servant, armed with authority to expel me and my companions from the bodies of men: but who are ye? What right have ye to speak to me in the style of command?” The name of Jesus pronounced by the lips of the profane, and the sign of the cross made by the sons of superstition, are pointless weapons, which the Leviathan of hell accounts mere stubble. The impiety of those magicians was instantly punished; for the man, with the assistance of the indignant spirit, “leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.”
I shall not enlarge upon the particulars of the
story, but shall content myself with remarking, that the disaster which befel those profligate Jews, served two important purposes, connected
with the honour and the success of the gospel. First, it demonstrated
the vanity of the magic, by proving the insufficiency of one of its
boasted resources, the virtue, which certain names and words were supposed
to possess. Of this there could remain no doubt, since a name, which,
when pronounced by one person, never failed to expel unclean spirits,
had no efficacy, when pronounced by another. It was manifest, that its
virtue was not in the sound. Secondly, it afforded the clearest evidence,
that the miracles of the gospel were performed by a power superior to
magic; for while a demon acknowledged his submission to the one he held
the other in the utmost contempt. The name of Jesus was used by those
vagabond Jews solely as a magical incantation. It took away, therefore,
any pretext for confounding the Christian miracles with the feats of
magic, as the heathens
It appears, from
the next verse, that the event made a strong and general impression. “And this was known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling at Ephesus;
and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.” In particular, it brought magic into discredit with many who had formerly
been devoted to it. “And many that believed came, and showed their deeds. Many
also of them which used curious arts, brought their books together, and burned
them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty
thousand pieces of silver.” In Ephesus, the study
of magic was prosecuted with great ardour. Ephesian incantations were
proverbial; and the Ephesian letters were certain words, which were
believed to have sovereign efficacy in charms and invocations. But,
now many who had been deluded by that vain science “showed their deeds,” acknowledging their past folly and wickedness, and vowing to renounce
it for ever. They abandoned “their curious arts,” their inquiries into
the names and operations of invisible beings, the modes of invoking
them, and the mystical rites to be practised in their service. They,
collected the books, containing the mysteries of magic, upon which they
had expended large sums; and that they might be under no temptation
to return to this enticing study, as well as to testify the abhorrence
in which they held it, they publicly committed them to the flames. Their
value has been differently estimated, according to the coin which is
supposed to be meant by a piece of silver; but, perhaps, it amounted
to several thousand pounds. It was a sacrifice to the glory of God,
consumed in a fire, kindled by the hand of holy zeal. Some persons would
have contented themselves with sending the books out of their houses,
and would not have scrupled to dispose of them to others, who chose
to prosecute the study. But, the converted Ephesians were actuated by
more disinterested motives. Those books, over which they had wasted
many a guilty hour, should no more minister to unhallowed curiosity,
and serve to uphold the impure mysteries of paganism. While their indignation
was roused against the impious art, their own loss did not engage their
attention for a moment; and they had leisure to think only of the most
effectual means of arresting its progress. And in an
The narrative is concluded with this remark: “So mightily grew the word of God, and prevailed.” It made its way with irresistible force, amidst the obstacles which opposed its progress. It was an evidence of its power, that it prevailed upon so many of the Ephesians to renounce an art, which, from the eagerness of mankind in all nations, and almost in every age, to acquire it, appears to be highly gratifying to the vain curiosity of the human mind; to acknowledge before all men, that what they lately esteemed wisdom was worse than folly; and to present the treasures of their learning as a sacrifice to the honour of religion.
The power of the gospel is as great in our times,
as it was in the days of the Apostle. We may not, indeed, often observe
it accomplishing a change so sudden and general, in the conduct of a
large society; but it continues to produce effects similar and equal,
upon the hearts and manners of the individuals who believe it. If it
find a man conceited of his understanding, elated by science, full of
worldly wisdom, and wedded to opinions inconsistent with the doctrines
of revelation, it makes him renounce them as foolishness, and, from
a conviction of his ignorance of the things of God, submit with humility
to the instructions of Christ. If it find a man engaged in an unlawful
employment, or conducting a lawful one, without regard to the principles
of honour and justice, it persuades him to forego the gains of iniquity,
and to prefer poverty with a good conscience, to the wealth which is
the wages of sin. If it find a man pursuing a course of unhallowed pleasures,
whatever power they have acquired over his heart, and however long he
has been addicted to them, he instantly abandons them in disgust, and
is ever after distinguished by sobriety and purity. In short, as an
eloquent writer has said, if it find a man passionate, avaricious, sensual,
and cruel, it will make him meek, liberal, temperate, and merciful. “For so great is the power of divine wisdom, that it is able to expel
at once folly the mother of sin.”
Let us, then, by this criterion, determine whether our faith is sincere. If the gospel has humbled our pride, corrected our corrupt inclinations, reclaimed us from errors in principle and practice, and prevailed upon us, after the example of the Ephesians, to part with our favourite but unlawful pursuits, for the glory of God, it has come to us, “not in word only, but in power.” But, let that man, who retains his avarice, his dishonest arts, his intemperance, his envy and malice, know, that “his faith is vain, and he is yet in his sins.” The word of God “grows mightily and prevails,” not when it gives rise to much discussion about religion, and an ostentatious profession, accompanied with no solid fruits of holiness in the life; but when it silently purifies the heart, and gives a new form and direction to the conduct. Those who sincerely believe, pass, like the converted Ephesians, from the service of Satan to that of Jesus Christ. Recognising him as their Lord and Saviour, they submit to his authority; and whatever loss of property and reputation they may incur by the change, they cheerfully acquiesce in it, from a sense of duty, and in the assured hope, that they shall be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.
WHEN the seventy disciples returned from their mission, and related to our Saviour, that the devils were subject to them through his name, he said “I beheld Satan, as lightning fall from heaven.” The design of his undertaking was to overthrow the empire which the adversary of God had established over the human race, and which was upheld by ignorance and depravity. By the one, he enslaved the understandings of men, and by the other their affections. The gospel which the Apostles preached to Jews and Gentiles, dispelled the darkness of the mind, and conquered the rebellion of the heart. Communicating new and just ideas of God, their duty, and their interest, it made thousands revolt from the degrading servitude of Satan, and seek, in the service of Jesus Christ, happiness and spiritual liberty.
Every art had been employed by the God of this world, to give
security and permanence to his kingdom. Amidst his deluded and wondering
subjects, he appeared in the character of the true God, affecting to
possess his most glorious attributes, and imitating his dispensations,
with a bold and impious hand. If Jehovah had his oracles and Prophets
in the land of Judea, there were not wanting among the Gentiles the
arts of divination, pretenders to the knowledge of futurity, and temples
in which the Gods returned answers to the inquiries of their worshippers.
If the Almighty displayed his wonders before his chosen people, to confirm
their faith, and to assure them of safety under the protection of his
providence, the religions of heathenism were supported by fabulous prodigies,
and the juggling tricks of magicians. But, the reign of imposture was
come to an end. The pagan oracles were silenced by the gospel; the Prophets
of idolatry were confounded; amidst the splendid train of
But Satan, although defeated, was not subdued. Determined to contend for empire to the last, he employed all his resources to retain that dominion over mankind, which he had long quietly enjoyed. When his frauds were detected and exposed to public contempt, he tried what force could effect. There were still persons in Ephesus attached, from selfish motives, to his cause, by whose aid he hoped to crush the rising interests of Christianity. In the verses now to be explained, we have an account of an attempt to support the reigning system of idolatry by persecution.
Paul was “in labours more abundant;” not indeed exceeding the measure
of his duty, but rising above the proportion with which men of ordinary
zeal would have been satisfied; and continuing his activity, after his
uncommon exertions might have seemed to entitle him to repose. No sooner
was one plan happily executed, than his mind was employed in digesting
another. His unexhausted benevolence sought new channels of communication.
He wished to add other trophies to those which he had already gained
to the cross; to carry the light of the gospel into regions which were
yet enveloped in darkness; and to diffuse it more extensively in those,
where it had begun to shine. Then only should this indefatigable missionary
have thought of desisting from his work, when the whole world was converted,
and all the Churches were established in the faith, beyond the danger
of falling. We are informed, that when “these things were ended,” namely
the transactions in Ephesus, related in the preceding verses, “Paul
purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia, and Achaia,
to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must also see
Rome.” Of the execution of this purpose an account is given in the next
chapter, from which we learn, that after the uproar, which is to be
the subject of the Present Lecture, had ceased, Paul set out for Macedonia;
that he afterwards spent three months in Greece; and then, as we find
in another chapter, he returned to Jerusalem. His design to visit Rome
was also accomplished, but in a way, which, it is probable,
“And the same time there arose no small stir about that way;” that is, about the gospel which Paul preached, or the new religion which
he was propagating. It originated in the alarm of some men at his success,
which threatened to deprive them of their gain from the prevailing superstition.
Demetrius, by profession a silver-smith, made silver shrines for Diana,
who was worshipped in the magnificent temple of Ephesus, and employed
several others, in the same lucrative trade. These shrines were small
temples, formed after the pattern of the large one, and containing images
of the Goddess, which the Ephesians placed in their houses as objects
of private devotion, and in the confidence, that they should thus ensure
her favour and protection. Amos refers to the same practice among the
Israelites, which they had probably learned in Egypt, when he introduces
God reproaching them for it in the following words; “But ye have borne
the tabernacle of your Moloch, and Chiun your images, the star of your
God, which ye made to yourselves.” The temples were formed of a precious
metal, and were, no doubt enriched with costly ornaments; and the people,
mad upon their idols, grudged no expense to procure a treasure, which
they probably valued more than all their other possessions. It is an
observation worthy of attention, that false religions have commonly
been more successful
Although Demetrius was the first who publicly expressed his apprehensions, yet it cannot be supposed, that his brethren had been unconcerned spectators of the success of the gospel. Interest renders men quick to perceive the first symptoms, which threaten their prosperity. He addressed an audience prepared to adopt and anticipate his sentiments, when having called together the workmen of the like occupation, he said, “Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth.” As they all derived profit from the established religion, they would the more readily concur in any measure for supporting it. “Moreover,” he adds, “ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but also throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying, that they be no Gods which are made with hands.” Such was, indeed, the doctrine of Paul, who publicly taught that there was but one God, the Creator of heaven and earth; that the Gods of the Gentiles existed only in the imagination of their worshippers, or were dead men and women, or unclean spirits; and that their images, in which they were supposed to be present, were alike unworthy of divine honours, as gold and silver, wood and stone, in the rudest and most unshapely forms. If this doctrine should prevail, as there was reason to fear, from the great number who had already embraced it, those craftsmen would starve for want of employment. The Ephesians would no longer purchase models of a temple, which they considered as profane, and images of a Goddess, whom they had learned to despise.
The opposition which the gospel encountered in the first
ages
Princes and magistrates were alarmed for the safety of the state,
which was supposed to be closely and inseparably connected with the
established religion. Religious rites were intermixed with all civil
and political transactions, and the public prosperity was ascribed to
the favour of the Gods. The introduction of a new religion threatened
to subvert the foundation, which supported the mighty empire of Rome.
Accordingly, we find, that Christianity was accused of being the cause
of the wars, earthquakes, tempests, and pestilences, with which the
offended Gods afflicted and desolated the provinces.
Philosophers treated with disdain the doctrines of the gospel, which wanted the ornaments of eloquence, and were repugnant to the principles which they held, upon the subject of God and religion. They were indignant at illiterate men, who presumed to controvert their favourite opinions; and they dreaded the propagation of the new system, as fatal to their interests and their fame. Their wisdom would be derided as folly; their schools would be deserted; and they themselves would be held in contempt, as deserving no other character than that of eloquent babblers.
The priests, the augurs, and the whole train of persons, who were employed in the immediate service of the Gods, were menaced with the total loss of their honours and emoluments. They must fall with the religion of which they were the ministers. The temples would be abandoned; the sacred fire of the altars would be extinguished; gifts and sacrifices would no longer be presented; and they would be disregarded and. execrated, as the supporters of a vile superstition, by which mankind had for ages been deluded.
There still remained a numerous class of persons, who contributed by
their various occupations to uphold the worship of the
“Sirs,
ye know that by this craft we have our wealth.” This was an appeal to
a principle, the influence of which is universally felt. About concerns
of the greatest magnitude, their religion, their country, the fate of
their friends, and the moral improvement of their families, men sometimes
discover surprising indifference; but if their temporal interests are
endangered, if they are threatened with a reverse of fortune, with the
loss or diminution of the affluence and, splendour in which they have
been accustomed to live, we see them suddenly roused to vigilance and
activity, and making every exertion to ward off the impending calamity.
But, a regard to our private good, although the spring of many of the
common actions of life, as well as of more splendid achievements, is
a principle too low to be on every occasion avowed. Our selfishness
is concealed from others under a mask of benevolence; and we even wish
to hide it from ourselves. If we can contrive to mix our own interests
with those of the public, to connect our honour, our emolument, or our
power, with the prosperity of our country, or with the defence of religion,
we can prosecute our schemes, under this disguise, with more ardour
than we should have ventured to display, had they alone seemed to engage
us; and we may hope to be applauded for what should have otherwise subjected
us to reproach. Demetrius, therefore, artfully added, “Moreover ye see
and hear, that not alone at Ephesus but almost throughout all Asia,
this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying, that they
be no Gods which are made with hands: so that not only this our craft
is in danger to be set at nought, but also that the temple of the great
Goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed,
whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.” “The prospect of the loss
of employment would justify us in taking measures to defend ourselves;
but this is an inferior consideration. Our religion is in danger; and
the Divinity who protects our city, and
On this occasion, Demetrius acted the part of a dexterous politician. He held forth a pretext well fitted to recommend his cause to the attention and favour of the public. The injury sustained by a body of artificers would hardly have roused the whole city of Ephesus, unless their interest had been associated with objects of general concern. At the same time, it is not improbable, that Demetrius was sincere in his zeal for Diana, whom he had long regarded with sentiments of religious respect; and there is no reason to doubt, that the other craftsmen felt for the honour of their tutelar Goddess, as well as for themselves, when they burst forth into the exclamation mentioned in the following verse. The chief motive was a regard to their own interest, but they might not be conscious of its predominant influence. Men are often not more successful in in imposing upon others, than they are in deceiving themselves. The operations of the human mind are exceedingly subtile and refined. Different motives are frequently so blended together, that it is impossible to separate them, and to assign to each its exact share in our actions; and sometimes the motive which exerts the greatest influence, is of all the least perceived. Many a theological polemic, when opposing heresies and errors, has imagined that he was actuated by the pure love of truth, while he was excited solely by pride of understanding. Many a person, who had persuaded himself, that in defending his principles, and the religious society to which he belonged, he had no other intention than to be faithful to Jesus Christ and his Church, has been as much governed by the spirit of party, as the most unblushing supporter of a political faction. The reproof of our Saviour to his two intemperate disciples, is applicable to not a few zealots for religion: “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.”
In the present case, we perceive
religion serving as a cloak to cover the designs, and as an engine to
forward the schemes, of self-interest. The example of Demetrius and
his fellows has been diligently imitated. With what apparent zeal for
the advancement of piety have establishments been upheld, under which
it had long been oppressed, but which rewarded those who defended them,
with honours and emoluments? With what clamorous accusations of profaneness
and atheism, have they been pursued and hunted down, who attempted to
purify the temple of God, by driving out of it
The union of devotion and interest gave full effect to the speech of Demetrius. It produced a phrensy of religious zeal, and the craftsmen, with one voice, exclaimed in honour of their Goddess, whose divinity Paul had dared to deny, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” They seem to have left the house in which they were assembled, and to have rushed into the street, where they raised this cry, as a signal to the worshippers of Diana to appear in her defence. The expedient succeeded. “The whole city was filled with confusion.” The cry was re-echoed from street to street, the alarm became general; the inhabitants deserted their houses; “and having caught Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, and Paul’s companions in travel, they rushed with one accord into the theatre.” The theatres in Rome and in the provincial cities, were commonly large buildings, capable of containing many thousand spectators. They were principally intended to exhibit shows and games for the entertainment of the people; but sometimes public business was transacted in them, and criminals were tried, and executed, by being thrown to wild beasts. The Ephesians dragged Gaius and Aristarchus into the theatre, that they might be judged and punished as accomplices of Paul, in the insult which had been offered to Diana.
At this critical moment, Paul would have
gone into the theatre to defend himself and his friends, and to embrace
this opportunity of addressing the assembled city, upon the important
subject of religion. But, while we must admire the courage of the Apostle,
who was not dismayed by the presence of danger, and his generous ardour
in willingly exposing his life for the honour of the gospel, and the
salvation of souls, we may be permitted, in this instance, to call in
question his prudence. How could he expect, that an infuriated multitude
should listen to him? Was there not reason to apprehend, that without
allowing him to open his lips, they would immediately fall upon him,
and tear him in pieces? Such are the reflections which occur to us when
considering his conduct; and they are confirmed by the opinion of those,
who being upon the spot,
The next verse contains a just and lively description of a mob suddenly collected. The assembly in the theatre was a scene of absolute confusion. The greater part were ignorant of the cause which had brought them together. The noise in the streets had alarmed them, and seeing others running to the theatre, they had followed. Some cried one thing, and some another. Every man was impatient to speak; every man bawled as loudly as he could; and amidst the universal uproar, no man could be heard.
During this tumult, an attempt was made on the part of the Jews to address the assembly, in order to turn away the torrent of popular indignation from themselves, to Paul and his companions. “And they drew Alexander out of the multitude, the Jews putting him forward. And Alexander beckoned with the hand, and would have made his defence unto the people.” Luke, indeed, does not affirm, that this was their design; but it is a construction, which may with some probability, be put upon his words. Alexander was a Jew, he was put forward by the Jews, and he would have made his defence to the people. It is implied in this account, that the Jews had been accused, or at least were conscious that they might be accused, of the same crime, with which Paul was charged. Their doctrine with respect to the theological creed of the heathens, exactly agreed with that of the Christians. They pronounced it to be false and idolatrous; and they had reason, therefore, to fear, that, as they were equally guilty in the eyes of the Ephesians, they should be involved in the same condemnation. From this apprehension proceeded the eagerness which they showed to make their defence, by one of their number. There is no doubt, that, if he had been permitted to speak, he would have endeavoured to save himself and his brethren by some artful explanations and distinctions, and to leave the Christians alone exposed to the rage of the multitude.
Whatever was the intention of Alexander, the assembly in the theatre was too much agitated by the impetuosity of passion, to permit him to address them. He was known to be a Jew, and consequently an enemy to the religion which they had come together to support; and, in a transport of zeal, “they all with one voice, about the space of two hours, cried out, Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” By this tumultuous outcry they intended to silence and confound the impious blasphemers of their Goddess. Perhaps, there never was exhibited a more ludicrous scene than the inhabitants of a whole city, vociferating for two hours in succession, the praises of the divinity whom they adored, while for this ebulition of religious fervour no reason could be given, but the attempt of a person of a different persuasion to speak to them. We see to what a height the passions of a multitude may be raised by a trivial incident; with what rapidity the contagion of passion spreads in a crowd; how feeble a barrier truth, justice, and reason oppose to their proceedings; and how ill qualified an assemblage of people without education, without experience, without character, and without responsibility, is, to decide upon questions of politics or religion. The sentences of a mob are passed, as in the present case, by acclamation. The enthusiastic cry, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians,” decided the controversy between the living God, and the dead idols of the Gentiles.
The uproar was quelled by the town-clerk, or secretary
of the city, a person of considerable authority, in the Asiatic cities,
who having obtained a hearing, delivered the speech recorded in the
subsequent verses, of which I shall briefly illustrate the several parts.
“Seeing then that these things cannot be spoken against, ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly. For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of Churches, nor yet blasphemers of your Goddess.” The truth of his first assertion was incontrovertible, namely, that Paul and his companions were not sacrilegious persons or robbers of temples; for so the word should have been translated, because Churches signify, in our language, houses in which Christian worship is performed. There were no Churches in Ephesus, nor, perhaps, at that time, in any part of the world. They had not stolen the sacred treasures from any of the temples. If, by affirming that they were not blasphemers of the Goddess, the town-clerk meant only, that they had not indulged themselves in the use of intemperate and scurrilous language against her, this assertion is equally true as the other. Language offending against propriety, and dictated by passion, did not proceed from the lips of the meek Apostles of Christ. Yet, Paul had undoubtedly maintained, that Diana was a pretended Goddess, and that her image was entitled to no religious veneration; and in the opinion of the Ephesians this was blasphemy. It must, therefore, be acknowledged, that the speaker, wishing by any means to soothe and quiet the minds of the people, did not scrupulously adhere to the truth, but gave such a representation as was best calculated to accomplish his purpose.
Of the real cause
of this popular commotion, he seems to have been apprized, and to have
considered it as originating in a personal quarrel of Demetrius and
the workmen with Paul. “If Demetrius and the craftsmen which are with
him, have a matter against any man, the law is open, and there are deputies;
let them implead one another.” Courts of law were appointed to take
cognizance of private causes, before which the parties concerned might
bring forward their accusations and defences; but these were not subjects
of sufficient importance to engage the attention of the citizens at
large.
By this speech, which was conducted with much prudence and address, the fury of the people was calmed, and they were persuaded to return peaceably to their homes. Thus God delivered Paul and his companions, from the perilous circumstances in which they were placed. Means and instruments are never wanting, by which he may preserve his faithful servants in the discharge of their duty, without any miraculous interposition. There is no reason to suppose, that the town-clerk of Ephesus was a friend to Christianity. But, he was alarmed, as every wise man will be, at the probable consequence of a popular tumult; he wished no innocent person to suffer, not even the guilty to be condemned without a trial, and to fall victims to the fury of a mob; and while he interposed solely from motives of justice and humanity, and a regard to the public peace, Providence made use of him for the protection of Paul, who had yet many important services to perform.
The passage which has been illustrated, suggests the following reflections.
First, The
opposition which has been made in past ages to the gospel, has proceeded
from the depraved passions of men, their avarice, their ambition, and
their love of earthly pleasures. Its adversaries have not been the sincere
friends of truth and virtue,
Secondly, The
sacred name of religion has been prostituted to serve the most infamous
purposes. It was the pretext, under which Demetrius and his accomplices
concealed their design, to secure the gain which they derived from the
folly and delusion of their countrymen. In the name of religion, priests and monks have amassed enormous wealth, and guarded against intrusion
those dark retreats, in which they wallowed in the grossest sensuality.
In the name of religion, conquerors have desolated the earth, and made
havock of the human race to gratify their avarice and ambition. In the
name of religion, persecutors have committed cruelties, at which every
feeling of our nature revolts. Scaffolds have streamed with blood; fires
have blazed with victims; the dwellings of the innocent have been plundered
and razed to the ground; and the houseless
Thirdly, The concurrence of a multitude in support of a cause, is no proof of its justice. Truth is not to be decided by numbers. In the passage which has been explained, we see the whole city of Ephesus defending the honour of their Goddess Diana against the claims of the living God, to be the sole object of their adoration. But, this is not a solitary instance. In the old world, Noah alone was found faithful, while the rest of mankind had corrupted their ways. In the wilderness, all the Israelites rebelled except Caleb and Joshua. When our Saviour appeared upon earth, how few of the Jews acknowledged him to be the Messiah? And in the dark ages, did not “all the world wonder after the beast?” The maxim, that the voice of the people is the voice of God, is, for the most part, evidently false, and, in no case, can be admitted without many limitations. It is, indeed, universally true, that the resolutions and proceedings of the multitude are the will of Providence, which permits and overrules them for its own wise and holy ends, or that they are consistent with the divine decrees, and are the means of executing them: but in this view, the maxim is vague, and of no value, because it implies nothing more than what may be affirmed of the counsels and operations of devils. What, in most cases, is the voice of the people but the voice of thoughtlessness, prejudice, and passion? What is it, in fact, but the voice of a few artful men, who make use of the people as the blind instruments of accomplishing their private designs? They speak as they are directed and act as they are impelled.
Lastly, God reigns, and carries on the designs of his
government, amidst the commotions of the world. He rules not only over
the unconscious elements, the lightning, the wind, and the rain, but
likewise over the passions of men. When these passions are most headstrong
and impetuous, he controls their fury, directs their course, and suffers
them not to proceed beyond the limits which he has prescribed
WHEN Paul had left Ephesus, in consequence of a popular tumult, he went to Macedonia and Greece. On his return from those countries, he landed at Troas, where he spent some days with the disciples, and celebrated the Lord’s supper on the first day of the week, In his voyage from Troas, he passed by Ephesus because he wished to arrive at Jerusalem before the feast of Pentecost and would not expose himself to the importunities of his friends, who might solicit him to stay. But, being now to leave this part of Asia for ever, he would not depart, till he had delivered to the pastors and rulers of the Church, his solemn counsels and exhortations. From Miletus, therefore, he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the Church.
In the style of the New Testament, an elder does not signify
a person advanced in years, but one invested with authority. The title
is given to the rulers of the Jews, who are frequently called the elders
of the people, and to certain office-bearers in the Christian Church,
of whom two classes are pointed out by Paul in one of his Epistles,
elders who only rule or govern, and elders who both rule, and labour
in word and doctrine. Of the latter description, I apprehend, were the
elders of Ephesus, for they are exhorted “to feed” the Church; a duty
of the pastoral office, which consists in preaching the gospel for the
edification and comfort of the people. “I will give you pastors according
to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.” It deserves notice, that the same persons, who here receive the appellation
of elders, are called, in the
Paul begins his address to the elders of Ephesus, by reminding them of his manner of life, during the course of his ministry among them. “Ye know from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons, serving the Lord with all humility of mind, and with many tears, and temptations which befel me, by the lying in wait of the Jews.” Humility was a virtue, by which the Apostle was eminently distinguished. Elevated to the highest rank in the Christian Church, more learned than any of his brethren, and possessed of great natural talents, and of miraculous p6wers, he was not elated with an idea of his superiority, nor haughty and overbearing in his intercourse with others.
The pious reflection
which he introduces in one of his Epistles, was always present to his
mind, “By the grace of God I am what I am.” He did not dare to be
proud of qualifications and privileges which he had not merited, but
divine goodness had freely bestowed upon him. His ambition led him,
not to assume a lordly dominion over the heritage of God, but to abound
in labours for the honour and advancement of the gospel. He treated
the disciples as his equals, mingled familiarly with them, meekly instructed
the ignorant, and condescended to the infirmities of the weak. “We preach
not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants
for Jesus sake.” His tears were expressive of his tender concern, for
the souls of men, of the compassion with which he regarded those who
were perishing in their sins, as well as of his sympathy with the disciples,
in their common afflictions, and in their sufferings for religion. He
was not a man of a stern unfeeling temper; but in him a tender heart
was conjoined with a vigorous understanding.
Of his constancy and fidelity he has given an account, in the
verses which are next to be considered. “And how I kept back nothing that was
profitable unto you, but have showed you, and have taught you publicly, and from
house to house, testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance
toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” In this summary of
Christianity, repentance is of the same import with conversion, and signifies
that change of views, disposition, and principles, which takes place when the
soul is regenerated, and terminates in the sincere dedication of the heart and
life to the service of God. It is this repentance, and not transient remorse for
sin, or partial and temporary reformation, which the gospel proposes to
accomplish. It calls upon the prodigal son to return to his offended but
merciful Father; it teaches him who has strayed in pursuit of the low and
polluted pleasures of the world, to elevate his desires to the pure joys of
religion. This design it effects by means of faith in Jesus Christ, whom it
exhibits as the Mediator, whose blood has reconciled God and man, and opened a
friendly intercourse between them. The love of God displayed in the dispensation
of grace, melts the heart into genuine
The instructions of Paul were not confined to a few favourite topics, but comprehended a complete system of necessary truths. “I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you.” Those who are influenced by selfish considerations are in constant danger of forsaking the path of rectitude. Instead of preaching those doctrines which would be profitable to others, they are tempted to preach such only as are profitable to themselves. The Apostle was a man of a different spirit. To the suggestions of worldly prudence he paid no attention; his counsellor was conscience; and the source of his actions was a benevolent heart, which sought the salvation of others with an ardour little inferior to that with which it laboured for its own. Contenting himself with the consciousness of upright intention, and the approbation of his Master in heaven, he did not hesitate to bring forward, in the proper season, whatever would contribute to the instruction and establishment of those to whom he ministered. If his doctrine should ultimately be productive of salutary effects, he was satisfied, although, in some instances, it should awaken temporary displeasure. In religion, as in medicine, things are often wholesome which are not agreeable to the taste; and the physician of the soul may occasionally expect, like the physician of the body, to incur the censures of the patient. But, he who is bound by his office, as well as prompted by his feelings, to do good to others, must be superior to every consideration but that of his duty. He must even undertake the ungracious task of endeavouring to serve them in opposition to their wishes, and at the risk of offending them in the mean time; trusting to their wiser thoughts and subsequent experience for the justification of his conduct, or calmly waiting the sentence of God, who, in recompensing his servants, will regard their intention, and not their success.
The diligence of the Apostle was not confined to his public ministrations. He taught the Ephesians “from house to house;” and, we may presume, pursued the same plan in other Churches. In his private intercourse with the disciples, he inculcated the doctrines and duties which he had delivered in their religious assemblies. In their own houses, he could descend to a more detailed exposition, and a more personal application of the truth, than the nature of his public discourses would admit. He could inquire into their spiritual state, their temptations, their perplexities, and their sorrows, and tender such counsels, and reproofs, and encouragements, as the case of individuals demanded. Like a good shepherd, Paul looked well to the state of his flock.
He proceeds to inform the elders of Ephesus of the object of his present voyage. “And now behold, I go bound in the Spirit unto Jerusalem.” The expression “bound in the Spirit,” has been considered as importing his earnest desire, or his fixed purpose, to visit that city, a purpose from which no ordinary occurrence would divert him. But, it may be understood to signify a strong impulse upon his mind from the Holy Ghost, which will appear the more probable sense, if we reflect, that the Apostles, in choosing places for exercising their ministry, were, in several instances recorded in this book, directed by the Spirit of God. And, when we consider the important consequences of this journey, we shall the more readily believe, that it was undertaken by particular command.
Of the things which should happen to him in Jerusalem,
he had received no information. He did not, however, flatter himself
with the hope of a favourable reception from his countrymen; but was
prepared to expect persecution, in consequence of a general intimation
by the Spirit. “Not knowing the things that shall befall me there;
save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying, that bonds
and afflictions abide me.” When Jesus Christ commanded his Apostles
to go and preach the gospel to the world, he sent them upon a mission
full of difficulty and danger. His religion, although it breathed the
spirit of love and peace, kindled war wherever it came. It found an
enemy in every man, who was enslaved by his passions, and was unwilling
to renounce the pleasures of sin. Peaceable as was the demeanour of
his ministers, and benevolent as were their intentions, they were treated
as the foes of the human race; and a conspiracy of Jews and Gentiles
was formed for their destruction. Of the hardships which they should
This is not the language
of one of those lying philosophers, who pretended that pain is not an
evil, and affected to smile amidst exquisite tortures. Paul felt as
a man, and never attempted to disguise his feelings. But, the afflictions
which awaited him in every city, did not so move him as to turn him
aside from his purpose. They did not intimidate him, nor cool the ardour
of his zeal, nor prevent him from going to any place, to which Providence
called him. Although he understood, that new sufferings were reserved
for him in Jerusalem, he was resolved to prosecute his journey in obedience
to the command of the Spirit. Even life itself he was willing to offer
up as a sacrifice to the glory of his Saviour. “All that a man hath,”
it has been said, “will he give for his life;” but the assertion is
not universally true. A coward, a person void of principle and honour,
a man of this world, whose views rise no higher than himself, and whose
hopes are confined within the narrow boundaries of time, may part with
every thing as the price of deliverance from death. But, a Christian
would not injure his conscience to preserve his life; he would not save
it at the expense of renouncing the service of Christ, or of neglecting
the least of his commandments. To a good man, truth, duty, and the approbation
of his own mind, will appear incomparably more valuable than a long
series of years, spent in the sunshine of prosperity. “I know,”
The Apostle now proceeds to the great design of his speech; and that the elders of Ephesus, and all those who were present, might give the more serious attention to it, he declares that he is now addressing them for the last time. “And now behold, I know, that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.” That these prophetic words were verified by the event, there is no reason to doubt. Upon his arrival at Jerusalem, as we shall afterwards see, he was apprehended by the Jews, and was sent to Rome, by the governor of the province, to appear before the tribunal of Nero; but, although he regained his liberty, and afterwards spent some time in preaching the gospel, it should seem, that he never returned to Ephesus or Miletus.
At the moment of final separation, the Apostle makes the following solemn
appeal to his hearers. “Therefore I take you to record this day, that
I am pure from the blood of all men.” The language is metaphorical,
for Paul is not asserting his innocence in respect of murder, but of
the perdition of souls. As the shedding of blood signifies, in the style
of the Scriptures, the taking away of the life of another by injustice
or violence, the same phrase is used to express the guilt of destroying
the souls of our brethren. In this sense, he was free from blood. Individuals
had, perhaps, perished in sin under his ministry, but their ruin was
entirely owing to themselves. No man could charge him with negligence
and unfaithfulness. That minister alone can adopt the same language,
who is not accused by his conscience of having omitted any thing, which
he might have done for the salvation of his people; who has not lulled
them into security by his doctrine or his example, nor flattered them
in sin, nor withheld necessary counsels and admonitions, how unwelcome
soever they were likely to prove, nor ceased to urge and beseech them
to mind “the things which belonged to their peace.” “When I say unto
the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning,
nor speakest to warn the wicked from his
But, Paul had warned his hearers, for “he had not shunned to declare unto them all the counsel of God;” and for the truth of this assertion, he boldly appealed to those who had been the objects of his ministry, and the constant witnesses of his conduct. “All the counsels of God,” is equivalent to the whole system of revealed truth. The Apostle was not one of those preachers, whose discourses run the perpetual round of a few subjects, which exhaust their poor stock of knowledge, or are selected, because they are easily discussed, and are the best fitted to gain popular applause. As his mind was capable of taking a comprehensive view of the various doctrines and duties of Christianity, so he exhibited them in their order and connexion, carefully adapting his instructions to the diversified characters and circumstances of the members of the Church, and leading them on to perfection. “This scribe who was instructed unto the kingdom of heaven, was like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.” He was a wise as well as a faithful preacher; and as he never obtruded subjects unseasonably upon the Church, so he did not conceal any truth which he was called to publish, how contrary soever it might be to the ideas and inclinations of those to whom he ministered. What painful study, what profound meditation, what extensive knowledge of the Scriptures, and of other subjects which throw light upon them, what intimate acquaintance with the human heart, and experience of the ways of men, are necessary to enable a minister of the gospel to tread in the footsteps of Paul! “Who is sufficient for these things?” is a reflection which will often occur to the preacher, who bas been most diligent and successful in his preparations. What, then, shall we think of those presumptuous intruders into the sacred office, who are not qualified to explain, in a satisfactory manner, a single doctrine of religion?
The Church of Ephesus was no
longer to enjoy the instructions and pastoral care of so able and faithful
a minister of Christ. On the eve of his departure, therefore, he exhorts
the elders “to take heed unto themselves, and to all the flock, over
which the Holy Ghost had made them overseers, to feed the Church of
God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” They are required
first “to take heed to themselves,” that they might not be diverted
from their duty by the cares and amusements of life, nor through indolence
In this part of his address,
Paul introduces several considerations, admirably calculated to excite
the elders of Ephesus, and others upon whom the same office has been
conferred, to exercise a watchful care over the Church. It is the “Church of God,” that is, of Jesus Christ, who is
“God over all blessed
for ever,” as we learn from the last part of the verse, where God is
said “to have purchased
Besides these considerations, which are of the same force in every age, there was a particular reason which induced Paul, to enjoin upon the elders of Ephesus strict attention to their charge. He foresaw the approach of perilous times. “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.” There is no reference in these words, as some have supposed, to the persecution of Nero, which commenced some years after; but they are an evident prediction of the rise of heresies, by which the Church was very early infested. In the book of Revelation, we read of the sect of the Nicolaitans, whose licentious tenets Jesus Christ abhorred.
Cerinthus, who vented many wild and blasphemous
opinions, is said to have been contemporary with the Apostles, or at
least with John, who survived his brethren; and when we look into the
Epistles
In the prospect of the perils to which the Church should be exposed, the Apostle exhorts the elders to watch. It was not a time for the shepherds to sleep, when wolves were ready to break into the fold. It would not, indeed, be possible, by the utmost care, to prevent the Church from being, in some degree,. injured by the doctrines of false teachers; but their mischievous tendency might be, in a great measure, counteracted by timely and vigorous resistance. Paul proposes his own conduct as an example to the pastors of Ephesus, and reminds them of his admonitions and his tears, to excite them to the same fidelity, and the same affectionate concern for the souls of men. “Therefore watch, and remember that by the space of three years, I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.”
Finally, “he commends them to God, and to the word of his
grace, which was able to build them up, and to give them an inheritance
among all them that are sanctified.” By “the word of his grace,” some
are of opinion, that Jesus Christ is meant, who is the “Word of God,” and may be called the word of his grace, because by him divine grace
was revealed to the world. “Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” And to whom is it so fit, that Christians, whether ministers or people,
should be commended, as to him who died for their salvation, and intercedes
in heaven, that their faith may not fail? Others think, that “the word
of his grace” is the gospel, which in the twenty-fourth verse of this
chapter, is called “the gospel of the grace of God;” and it must be
acknowledged, that this is the most obvious and natural meaning. There
is, indeed, something unusual in commending Christians to God and to
the gospel: but, with respect to the latter, nothing more can be understood
than a reference to it, or a direction attentively to consider it, as
containing the promises, which are the objects of their faith, and the
sources of their consolation, and as furnishing the most powerful motives
to steadfastness in their profession, and
The diligence of Paul in ministering to the Church did not proceed from a selfish or mercenary principle. He was entitled, indeed, in justice and reason, to a recompense from those who enjoyed the benefit of his labours; but, in many instances, he chose rather to support himself by his own industry. Let it not be said, that as the first Christians were so poor, that they could not reward their teachers, the generosity of Paul was the effect of necessity. The representation is not agreeable to truth. Some of them had possessions of houses and lands; and the zeal of them all was so fervent, that, like the Galatians, “they would, if it had been possible, have plucked out their own eyes, and have given them to him.” But, the Apostle, who was desirous to recommend the gospel by every lawful expedient, willingly declined the exercise of his right, when his self-denial would procure a favourable reception to his doctrine. “What is my reward then? Verily, that when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel. For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.” In this disinterested manner he had acted in Ephesus; and he could say, in the presence of the elders of that Church, “I have coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or apparel. Yea, you yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me.”
His conduct was
not intended to be a precedent to the ministers of religion in every
situation, but was accommodated to the circumstances of the time, and
was an illustration by example of those lessons of generosity and love,
which he had inculcated
Here Paul closed his address. And now, like a pious and affectionate
father, who is about to take the last farewell of his family, he knelt
down in the midst of the elders, and in a solemn prayer commended them
to God. The historian has said nothing of his feelings on this affecting
occasion; but we know that a man of so tender a heart, could not separate,
without lively emotions of grief, from those whom he dearly loved. The
tears which the disciples
From this portion of the history of Paul, we learn what will give us comfort in the solemn hour, which shall terminate our intercourse with those whom we love. All earthly relations are of temporary duration; the pastor must leave his spiritual flock, and the union, which has been cemented by an interchange of good offices, during many years, must be dissolved. It will alleviate our grief, if when we look back upon our past connexions, our consciences bear witness, that we have faithfully endeavoured to perform the duties be longing to them. A retrospect of our mercies will give us no pleasure, unless they have been improved. The reflection that they have been neglected and abused, will prove a sting in our hearts, which will exasperate our natural feelings, and overwhelm us with sorrow and remorse. How dreadful the thought to a minister of religion, that he has slept over his charge, and suffered immortal souls to perish in ignorance and vice! How would it rend the heart of a father, when looking at the lifeless body of his son, to remember that he had treated him with harshness and cruelty! How much more bitter his anguish, if, at this awful moment, conscience should lift up its voice, and accuse him of having done nothing for the salvation of his child; and if the terrible idea should rush into his mind, that, perhaps, his own offspring, in a state of torment, is cursing him as the cause of his eternal perdition! Happy the dying saint who can say, “I am free from the blood of all men. I have endeavoured with much imperfection, indeed, but with sincerity and diligence, to serve my generation according to the will of God. Lord! thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold I have gained besides them five talents more.”
Farther, The example of Paul shows us in what manner every Christian
should study to acquit himself, in the station which Providence has
assigned to him. We see a man intent upon the performance of his duty,
indefatigable in his exertions, and acting
THE first part of this chapter contains a narrative of the journey of Paul from Miletus to Jerusalem. It would serve no valuable purpose to trace his progress more fully than the inspired historian has done. To engage in a minute detail of the places mentioned in Scripture, of their situation, the character of their inhabitants, and their general history, is justifiable only when the knowledge of such particulars will throw light upon the passages to which they relate; and without this reference, is to give, under the name of a religious discourse, a geographical lecture, which is addressed with manifest impropriety to a worshiping assembly. There were, however, some incidents in his way to Jerusalem, of which it is necessary to take notice, before we procceed to consider what befel him on his arrival in that city.
The first is recorded in the fourth verse, which informs us, that on landing at Tyre Paul found disciples, “who said to him through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.” If we understand his words in the preceding chapter, “And now behold, I go bound in the Spirit unto Jerusalem,” to import, that he had undertaken this journey by the suggestion of the Holy Ghost, we here encounter a difficulty; for it would seem, that the Spirit had retracted his own order, and that having first commanded, he now forbade, the Apostle to go.
Besides, since Paul, notwithstanding the advice or prohibition
of those disciples, did proceed to Jerusalem, must we not pronounce
him to have been guilty of the high crime of disobeying a divine command,
and, consequently, account the troubles, in which he was
The next remarkable circumstance occurred at
Cesarea, where Paul remained for some time with Philip the Evangelist. “There came down from Judea a certain Prophet named Agabus. And, when
he was come to us, he took Paul’s girdle, and bound his own hands and
feet, and said, thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem
bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the
hands of the Gentiles.” Concerning this prediction, the fulfilment of
which is afterwards related, I remark, that although it is said that
the Jews should bind Paul, and deliver him up to the Gentiles, yet he
was actually bound by the Gentiles, or by the captain of the Roman garrison,
who had rescued him out of the hands of the Jews. There is, however,
no contradiction between the prophecy and the event, because in the
prophetical style, and indeed in the common style of the Scriptures,
things are represented to have been done by a person which were done
by others at his command, or through his influence, direct or indirect.
It was in consequence of he rage which the Jews expressed against Paul,
that the Romans seized and bound him. Agabus accompanied the prediction
of his sufferings with a symbolical action or an action expressive of
their nature. Actions of this kind are frequent among nations
How was Paul affected by the repeated notices of the
afflictions, which he was to endure in Jerusalem? Sometimes, when a man is
suddenly involved in perilous circumstances, his mind, by an instinctive effort,
rises up to his situation; and, amidst his active exertions to save himself, he
has not leisure to take a full and deliberate view of his danger. Few are
possessed of such strength of mind, and cool courage, as to look forward with
composure to the scene of troubles, through which they are destined to pass. He
who is a hero amidst the tumult of a battle, would, perhaps, prove a coward, if
he were waiting the slow approach of death in a prison, or on a sick bed. Dark
and alarming as was the prospect before him, Paul betrayed no symptoms of fear;
but retained his self-command, and the firmness of his resolution. Like his
Master, with the cross in his eye, he “steadfastly set his face to go to
Jerusalem;” and like him too, he reproved those friends, whose unseasonable
kindness would have dissuaded him from his duty. “And when we heard these
things, both we and they of that place besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.
But Paul answered, What mean ye to weep, and to break mine heart? for I am ready
not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord
Jesus.” The concern which the disciples expressed for his safety, was natural.
They loved him as a friend, and his life was valuable to the Church. As a proof
of their affection, their tears could
“And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying,
The will of the Lord be done.” His friends perceiving that he acted
under a divine impulse, to which the common maxims of prudence must
yield, desisted from their importunities; and their solicitude for his
safety gave place to a superior principle, reverence for God. Their
conduct affords an example of acquiescence in the dispensations of
heaven, which we should imitate, when our friendship and affection are
severely tried by a separation from those whom we love. It is the duty
of rational creatures to acknowledge, not in words only, but in practice,
the supreme authority of their Maker, who has an undoubted right to
dispose of them and their affairs according to his pleasure. To this
duty Christians are under peculiar obligations, arising from the certain
knowledge, that his procedure is always wise and gracious, and that
submission to his decrees will be productive of the happiest consequences.
Into the hands of our Father and our Sovereign we should surrender what
is dearest to
Let us now proceed to consider the transactions of Paul in Jerusalem. The day after his arrival, he paid a visit to James and the elders, who were assembled to receive him. “And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.” It was a narrative of splendid achievements. Without any disposition to boast, Paul could relate a series of flattering successes, of astonishing miracles, of multiplied hardships and perils which he had encountered with heroic courage. Yet, without those emotions of envy which the superior excellence of others is so apt. to excite in little, and sometimes even in great minds, the audience listened with pleasure to the detail, and with one voice “glorified the Lord.” They were animated by the liberal spirit of Christianity, which engages with such ardour in the cause of religion, and, from a conviction of its importance, is so earnest in wishing its success, that if the work is done, it cares not who is the agent; and is content, if such is the will of God, to labour in obscurity, while others are appointed to act upon a conspicuous theatre.
During the successful labours of Paul among
the Gentiles, the gospel had made great progress in Judea. “Thou seest,
brother, how many thousands” (the word signifies ten thousands) “of
Jews there are which believe, and they are all zealous of the law.” The zeal of the unbelieving Jews for the law was founded in the persuasion,
that it was the only acceptable mode of serving God; and it excited
them to reject Christianity as a false and heretical religion. The Jewish
converts, while they received the gospel, believed at the same time,
that the law retained its authority; and hence, although they observed
the institutions of Christ, they lived, in all other respects, like
the disciples of Moses. Some proceeded so far as to maintain, that obedience
to the law was necessary to justification. It may be presumed, that
an opinion so contrary to the truth, and so expressly condemned by the
Council of Jerusalem, was not common among the Christians of that city;
but it would
Among those zealots, a report had been spread, which was calculated to prejudice them against Paul. “They are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews, which are among the Gentiles, to forsake Moses, saying, that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. What is it therefore? The multitude must needs come together, for they will hear that thou art come;” and there was reason to fear, that at this meeting, Paul would be publicly accused by the zealots for the law, and much ill humour would be discovered. To guard against such disagreeable consequences, James and the elders proposed the following expedient. “Do therefore this that we say to thee: we have four men which have a vow on them; them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them that they may shave their heads: and all may know, that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee are nothing, but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.” The vow which those men had made, seems to have been the vow of the Nazarite, by which an Israelite engaged to drink no wine or strong drink, during the period of his separation, and not to suffer a razor to come upon his head. At the expiration of his vow, he shaved his head, and presented in the temple certain offerings, which the law had prescribed. It appears from the writings of the Jews, not to have been uncommon for persons, who had not come under this vow, to assist the Nazarites in defraying the expense of the customary sacrifices. This the elders advised Paul to do, or to adopt their own words, “to be at charges with the men, that they might shave their heads.” The shaving of the head was an expression used to denote the completion of the vow. Thus it would be understood, that there was no foundation for the account which had been circulated concerning him as an enemy to the law; for the Jews would see him giving an unequivocal proof of his regard to it, by the observance of one of its remarkable institutions.
“As touching the Gentiles which believe,
we have written and concluded, that they observe no such things, save
only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from
blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.” The elders refer to
the decree of the Council of Jerusalem, which exempted the Gentiles
from the Jewish law, and subjected them only to the restrictions here
The transaction which has now been explained,
is involved in difficulties, and has given rise to objections affecting
not only the wisdom but the integrity of all who were concerned in it.
Was it not a true report respecting Paul, it has been said, which the
brethren in Judea had heard? Did he not teach the Jews to forsake Moses,
and tell them, that his law had lost its power of obligation? On what
ground, then, can James and the elders be justified in suggesting a
plan, the express design of which was to persuade the disciples in Jerusalem
of the contrary? Should it be insinuated, that they might not be well
acquainted with the doctrine of Paul, a supposition which has little
probability, did not the Apostle himself know, that he had taught the
exemption of the Jews as well as of the Gentiles from the yoke of ceremonies?
Why, then, did he consent to act in such a manner as should make it
be believed that “those things whereof the brethren had been informed
concerning him were nothing,” when in substance they were unquestionably
true? Was he ashamed or afraid to profess in Jerusalem, what he had
boldly avowed in Greece and Asia? Why did he not with his wonted candour
declare, that the Jews were no longer bound to circumcise their children;
that in Christ Jesus circumcision was of no avail; and that nothing
was required by the gospel, but faith which works by love? It must be
acknowledged, that the conduct of all parties in this affair, seems
to give ground for these, or similar objections; and to some they have
appeared so strong, and so incapable of a satisfactory solution, that
their minds have been much perplexed.
Let us examine the transaction more minutely, and we shall,
perhaps, discover, that the conduct of Paul and the elders was not so
unjustifiable as at first sight it appears. It may be remarked, that the
unfavourable report respecting Paul, which the proposed plan was intended to
disprove, was not true in its full extent. He taught indeed, in every place,
that obedience to the law of Moses was not necessary to justification, and did
not hesitate to declare,
But why, it may be asked,
did James, and the elders, and Paul, concur in encouraging the converted
Jews, who were zealous for the law, to think, that its obligation continued,
although they were aware, that it was abrogated by the death of Christ?
Did they not lend their influence to foster a prejudice, which they
should rather have exerted their authority to eradicate? It is certain,
that the Jews who believed, were emancipated from the Mosaic institute,
and might have refused to be any longer in bondage to the elements of
the world. But, it appears from the New Testament, that God was pleased,
in condescension to the peculiar circumstances of that people, to permit
their ancient law to be observed for some time, by those who had embraced
Christianity. This permission, I say, was granted from respect to the
circumstances of the Jews, whose zeal for the law will not appear surprising
to those who attend to the reasons on which it was founded. From their
earliest years they had imbibed a sacred reverence for its institutions;
and, prior to their conversion, they had regarded it as the only system
of religious worship which was acceptable to God. They were fully assured,
that its origin was divine, and they had been accustomed to believe
it to be of perpetual obligation. To adopt the idea, that
After that event, the law was forsaken by all the Jews who professed Christianity, except a few zealots, who having adopted, at the same time, some heretical opinions concerning the person of our Saviour, were expelled from the communion of the Catholic Church. The conduct of the elders and Paul was conformable to this plan of gracious condescension. Respecting the prejudices of the Jews, in favour of the institutions which God himself had delivered to them, and the abrogation of which was not generally understood, they complied with them for a time; and choose rather to expect their removal, by the silent influence of the truth and the progress of events, than to run the risk of irritating their minds, and turning their zeal into inflexible obstinacy, by demanding an immediate renunciation of their ancient habits and attachments.
In this manner the transaction
may be explained, so as to preserve our respect for the wisdom and integrity
of the persons concerned in it. If, however, there should be some, to
whom this explanation does not seem satisfactory, they may be reminded,
that while we believe the Apostles to have been inspired, and infallibly
directed in the revelations which they made to the world, we do not
maintain, that their conduct was, on every occasion, exempt from error.
Peter and Barnabas were once guilty of dissimulation from fear of giving
offence to the Jews; and if James had been betrayed into the same fault
by the same temptation, no conclusion to the discredit of Christianity,
or of the Apostolical office, could be drawn from the one case, any
more than from the other. We should only have another proof, that the
highest attainments in gifts and grace do not raise the possessors to
perfection; and that
Some may be disposed to infer the unlawfulness of the transaction from its unhappy termination, which may be construed into a declaration of Providence against it. It must, indeed, be acknowledged, that we can hardly conceive any scheme to have a more unfortunate issue. The believing Jews were, no doubt, convinced, that Paul was not such an enemy to the law of Moses as they had been led to believe; but this was an object of little importance. With respect to himself, the consequences were of a serious nature; for he was involved in a long series of troubles, was shut up in prison for several years, and was exposed to the risk of closing his invaluable labours, by a premature and violent death. This unprosperous result would almost lead us to suspect, that God was displeased with the measure, did we not know, that the dispensations of providence towards individuals afford no certain criterion of their character and the nature of their actions; and that hisservants have often experienced great opposition and incredible hardships, when they were obeying the clearest dictates of his word.
“Then Paul took the
men, and the next day purifying himself with them, entered into the
temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification; until
that an offering should be offered for every one of them.” It seems
to have been his design, in going into the temple, to give notice to
the priests, that he had joined with the four men, and would observe
the purity which was required from the Nazarite, for seven days, at
the end of which their vow would expire. The temple was surrounded with
two courts, separated by a wall of three cubits in height, which was
sufficient to mark their boundaries, and, at the same time, permitted
those who were in the one court to see what was passing in the other.
Into the interior court none but a Jew was permitted to enter; the presence
of a stranger would have profaned it. The exterior court was open to
the Gentiles; but pillars were erected at proper intervals, with an
inscription warning them to proceed no farther, and threatening the
impious intruder with death. Some Jews from Asia, who had seen Paul
in the streets of Jerusalem, accompanied by Trophimus, a native of Ephesus,
hastily concluded, when they again saw him in the temple, that the same
person was along with him; and that having formerly spoken, as they
affirmed, in disrespectful terms
These accusations. produced an instantaneous and violent commotion. “All the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took
Paul, and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut.” There is a degree of fury approaching to madness, observable in the
proceedings of the Jews against the followers of Jesus, which was the
effect of the fierce temper of that people, exasperated by religious
bigotry. When the passions of any mob are let loose, law, justice, and
humanity present but feeble barriers to their outrages; but a Jewish
mob was still more furious and ungovernable, and resembled a number
of savage beasts thirsting for blood. It was a principle publicly avowed,
and, in the latter period of their history, frequently acted upon, that
zeal for the glory of God would justify them in putting transgressors
of the law to death, without a judicial trial. In the hands of such
men, Paul was in imminent danger; and had not Providence seasonably
interposed, he should now have closed his labours and his life. “But
as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief captain
of the band,” or the garrison of Roman soldiers, stationed in a tower which
commanded the temple, “that all Jerusalem was in an uproar; who immediately took
soldiers, and centurions, and ran down unto them, and when they saw the chief
captain, and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul.” The Roman commander
interfered to suppress the tumult; and finding Paul to be the
It is unnecessary to make any observations upon the remaining part of the chapter. We have seen on what occasion, and by what means Paul was deprived of his liberty, which he did not regain for several years. I shall, in the next Lecture, call your attention to his appearance before the Sanhedrim.
We perceive from the events which have now come under review,
that among the disadvantages under which the gospel laboured at its
first publication, its contrariety, real or apparent, to the existing
religions, was not the least unfavourable to its success. To all the
modifications of paganism it was professedly hostile; and it demanded
the immediate and unqualified renunciation of the objects and the rites
of their worship. Its opposition to the religion of Moses was only apparent;
but the appearance was so strong as to alarm the Jews, and rouse them
to the most determined resistance. It required them to desist from circumcision,
sacrifices, and the other ceremonial ordinances, and to adopt in their
room the simple and spiritual institutions of the gospel. Notwithstanding
the fickleness which men often discover in matters of taste and fashion,
and even in affairs of much greater importance, there are some cases,
in which the power of habit operates with so much force, as to render
a change exceedingly difficult. Having long acquiesced in a set of opinions
and practices, they startle at every proposed alteration, and will not
listen with patience to the arguments which are intended to show that
it is an improvement. We wonder at the obstinacy, with which the believing
Jews retained their ancient usages, although they might have understood
that they had lost their meaning and use. It is evident, at the same
time, that no people were ever so justifiable in being slow to admit
a change, because their religion had been delivered to their fathers
by God himself, and was contained in books, which they justly regarded
as divine. May we not wonder much more at some persons among ourselves,
who entertain the same sacred respect for human dogmas, matters of doubtful
disputation, and mere forms, which have nothing to recommend them but
the authority of their ancestors, who had no better right
Let us remark with pleasure, in the triumph of the gospel over every kind of opposition, a proof of its divinity, and an earnest of its future victories. Heathenism, with all the assistance which it received from the secular power, and the strong interest which it possessed in the corrupt passions of mankind, was not able to stand against it. Judaism yielded to its superior influence. Myriads of the Jews embraced Christianity. That religion, indeed, still subsists; but in what condition? Is it not divested of its glory, without its temple, its priests, and its sacrifices? Has it not degenerated into an absurd and contemptible superstition, which is retained only by the outcasts of mankind? It is the meagre and lifeless image of what it once was; and while it points its impotent malice against Christianity, it involuntarily does it homage, by bearing testimony to the truth of its predictions, in every region of the earth.
My brethren, our hearts are ready to despond when we consider the formidable
obstacles, which oppose the diffusion of evangelical truth. Heathen
idolatry and Mahometan superstition are established throughout a great
part of the earth. In other regions, Antichristian delusion have spread
far and wide their baleful influence, and infidelity boasts of its numerous
disciples. Ignorance, dissipation, and the love of worldly things have
alienated the minds of most men from serious subjects. But meditate
now upon the works of the Lord, and remember the years of his right
hand. Have we forgotten the victories, which it has gained? Do we suspect
that it has lost its vigour, or that God will never again pluck it out
of his bosom? If his power seems at present to slumber and sleep, it
is that it may awake with greater energy than ever. “Behold, I create
new heavens, and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered,
nor come into mind.” Let us not perplex ourselves
WE have seen, in the last Lecture, to what danger Paul was exposed, not long after his arrival at Jerusalem. He was saved from the fury of the Jews, who intended to put him to death for the supposed crimes of blasphemy against the law, and profanation of the temple, by the commander of the Roman soldiers, who kept guard in the castle of Antonia. In the end of the twenty-first chapter, we are informed, that, after some conversation with that officer, he was permitted to address the people; and in the twenty-second chapter, we have an account of his speech. He begins by assigning the reason, which had induced him, who was once zealous for the law, and a persecutor of Christianity, to become its friend and advocate. The sudden and surprising change is attributed to a miraculous appearance of our Saviour, which convinced him, that he was the true Messiah, and not an impostor as he had hitherto believed.
There is one
fact, not recorded in any of the preceding chapters, the mention of
which gave great offence to his hearers, and was the occasion of the
abrupt termination of his speech. I shall relate it in the words of
the Apostle. “And it came to pass, that when I was come again to Jerusalem,
even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance, and saw him saying
unto me, Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they
will not receive thy testimony concerning me. And I said, Lord, they
know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue, them that believed
in thee. And when the blood of thy martyr, Stephen, was shed, I also
was standing by, and consented unto his death, and kept the raiment
of them that slew him. And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send
thee far hence unto the Gentiles.” It was impossible
The chief captain, who could not comprehend the cause
of the uproar, either because he did not understand the Hebrew language,
in which Paul delivered his speech, or because he was ignorant of the
points in dispute between the Christians and the Jews, “commanded him
to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by
scourging, that he might know wherefore they so cried against him.” He ordered Paul to be scourged, that the severity of pain might extort
a confession of his crime; for, at present, there was no proof of his
guilt, and the only presumption against him was the general clamour
of the multitude. The barbarous practise of subjecting an accused person,
to torture, was, in certain cases, permitted by the Romans, and has
been adopted by some modern nations, in contradiction to the plainest
dictates of justice and common sense. It is evidently unjust to punish
a man, who, for aught his judges know, is innocent; and there is not
a more precarious method of discovering the truth than the confession
of a person in pain, who cannot be supposed to be master of his own
thoughts, and may be induced to make any declaration, which shall procure
immediate relief from his sufferings. “But as they bound him with thongs,
Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to
scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?” The law forbade a Roman
citizen to be scourged; and Paul inherited this character by birth,
although his parents were Jews. Tarsus, the place of his nativity, was
favoured by Julius Cesar and Augustus; and it is probable, that the
right of citizenship was one of the privileges which the latter had
conferred upon its
The assembly,
before which Paul appeared on this occasion, was that which was commonly
known by the name of the Sanhedrim, and was the highest court in the
nation. The Jewish writers affirm, that it subsisted during all the
ages of their commonwealth, and was instituted in the wilderness, when
seventy elders of Israel were chosen to assist Moses in the government.
The Sanhedrim was composed of the same number of members. Some, however,
are of opinion, that its commencement can be traced no farther back
than the return from the Babylonian captivity. It was a court to which
appeals were made from the sentences of inferior judicatories; but there
were some causes of greater difficulty and importance, in which it claimed
a sole right to judge. When our Lord said, that “it could not be that
a Prophet should perish,” that is, should die by a judicial sentence, “out of Jerusalem,” he seems to have referred to the Sanhedrim, which
met in that city, and assumed the exclusive authority to try the pretensions
of the Prophets, and to punish those who were found guilty of imposture.
In the degenerate times, which preceded the downfal of the Jewish state,
a true Prophet was more likely to be condemned, than to be recognised
and honoured by men, who were corrupted by false notions of religion,
and by the vices of the age. The Council was now summoned by the chief
captain, as it had been called together, at the birth of our Saviour,
by Herod. Its independence was lost, and its jurisdiction was abridged,
during the reign of that
In the presence of this august assembly, Paul was not abashed and intimidated. Alone in the midst of enemies, who had both the inclination and the power to injure him, he surveyed them with an undaunted countenance; supported by consciousness of innocence, and the expectation of that assistance, which Jesus Christ had promised to his disciples, when they should be brought before governors and kings for his sake. Instead of endeavouring to disarm their resentment, and to court their favour by any mean concession, or any retractation of his principles, he dared to assert the purity of his motives, and the rectitude of his conduct. “And Paul earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God, until this day.”
The import of this declaration is easily understood,
from the frequent occurrence of the same language in ordinary conversation.
When a person affirms, that he said or did any thing with a good conscience,
he means, that he was not influenced by improper motives, but by a conviction
of duty; and that his own mind was so far from condemning him, that
it approved of his conduct. In this sense, Paul could truly assert,
that he had lived in all good conscience before God, not only since
his conversion to Christianity, but also prior to that remarkable change
of his views. “I verily thought with myself,” he says, in his speech
to king Agrippa, “that I ought to do many things contrary to the name
of Jesus of Nazareth.” When opposing him and his religion, he was fully
persuaded, that he was performing an acceptable service to God, because
he sincerely believed our Saviour to be an impostor. Still he was “a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an injurious person; but he obtained
mercy, because he did it ignorantly, in unbelief.” His activity did
not originate in malice, but in a mistaken idea of duty. That he acted
with the same integrity in the subsequent period of his life, it is
impossible to doubt. It was upon the most satisfactory evidence, that
he embraced the religion which he had persecuted, and from the purest
motives, that he underwent so much toil and suffering in propagating
and defending it. “This was his rejoicing, the testimony
Ananias, the high-priest, offended at the presumption of Paul, who had spoken before leave was granted by the court, and still more at this bold testimony to the goodness of the cause in which he was embarked, commanded those who stood by him, to “smite him on the mouth.” Among the Jews, this seems to have been a customary mode of expressing reproof and contempt. Zedekiah, a false Prophet, “smote Micaiah a Prophet of the Lord on the cheek, and said, Which way went the Spirit of the Lord from me to speak unto thee?” and when our Saviour stood before Caiaphas, the officers “smote him with the palms of their hands, saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, who is he that smote thee?”
“Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite
thee thou whited wall.” A whited wall, or a wall daubed with plaster,
which gives it a goodly appearance, is an expressive figure to denote
a man, whose real dispositions are different from the character which
he assumes. “They are sordid and base,” says a heathen philosopher,
speaking of some persons who made a false show, “but outwardly they
are adorned after the similitude of their walls.” From the high-priest
and the president of the Sanhedrim, the strictest regard to justice
might have been reasonably expected; but the conduct of Ananias too
plainly showed, that he was liable to be transported by passion, beyond
the bounds of decorum, and was capable of violating the law, when he could do so
with impunity.” Sittest thou to judge me after the law,
and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?” It was contrary to the
law, which forbade the judges “to do any unrighteousness in judgment,” and
directed them, when a person was accused, “to inquire, and make search, and ask
diligently,” before they passed sentence upon him, to order a man to be smitten,
who had not been proved guilty of a crime. “God,” says Paul, “shall therefore
smite thee.” These words ought not to be considered as a passionate exclamation,
or an imprecation
To the by standers, the language of Paul seemed unguarded and indecent. He had reproached a man, whose character should be held sacred on account of his office. “Revilest thou God’s high-priest?” Paul answered, “I wist not brethren,” or I did not know, “that he was the high-priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.” This was a wise law, founded in the principles of justice and expediency. Not only is respect for our superiors necessary to the support of their authority, which is weakened by want of confidence in their talents and virtues; but when we consider that they are but men like ourselves, whose judgments are not infallible; that they may err with the best intentions, and while they have no object in view but the public good; and that they are often surrounded with persons whose interest is to deceive and mislead them; we shall perceive the equity of requiring us, to be candid in forming an opinion of their proceedings, and cautious in our language, when it is necessary to blame them.
The answer of the
Apostle is attended with some difficulties. How was it possible, it
has been said, that Paul should not have
But, if Paul had known the rank of the person, who commanded him to be smitten, would he have refrained from speaking as he did? Does not this seem to be the import of his reference to the law, “Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people?” And if his language admitted of correction, where was the promise of the Saviour, “that he would give a mouth and wisdom to his Apostles, which all their adversaries should not be able to gainsay nor resist?” This is a greater difficulty than the other, although it has attracted less attention; but it may be satisfactorily explained. Paul, I apprehend, does not quote the law, with a design to convince his accusers, that as he distinctly remembered it, he could be charged only with an unintentional transgression. Ignorance of the person of the high-priest would not have acquitted him from a breach of the precept, which was equally violated by reviling the other members of the Sanhedrim, who were all invested with the dignity of rulers. Nay, to speak evil of any man, although the lowest and most obscure member of society, was contrary to the law of love, which has, indeed, received new enforcements from the gospel, but was binding under the Mosaic dispensation. The question to be considered is, whether Paul was actually guilty of reviling Ananias; and it may be confidently answered in the negative. If, as we have already supposed, he was under a prophetic impulse, his language, however different from the style, in which ordinary men are bound to address their civil and ecclesiastical superiors, was not disrespectful. In truth, the words were not his own, but the words of God, who pours contempt upon the wicked princes of the earth, and counts them as vanity. A Prophet claimed superiority to the greatest of men; and it was the prerogative of his office to reprove magistrates and kings, and to denounce against them the judgments of Heaven. Our Lord, who never “rendered railing for railing,” and “when he was reviled, reviled not again,” called Herod the tetrarch, “a fox,” on account of his cunning and cruelty.
We are next to consider, by what expedient
Paul defeated the design of the Sanhedrim, which, we may confidently
affirm, from our knowledge of the implacable enmity entertained by the
unbelieving Jews against the disciples of Jesus, had assembled with
a
When Paul
perceived that the one part of his judges were Sadduces, and the other
part were Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Men and brethren,
I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of
No blame can be justly imputed to the Apostle
for this avowal of his sentiments, although it was made with a design
to divide the members of the council. Our Lord has recommended to his
disciples “the wisdom of the serpent,” as well as “the harmlessness
of the dove;” not the practice of deceit and wicked policy, but the
enlightened prudence, which knows how to improve favourable opportunities,
and to avoid danger without a desertion of duty. No man is required
to die for religion, unless he cannot live, but by renouncing and dishonouring
it. If a seasonable declaration of the truth would save the life of Paul, by
what law was he bound to be silent? And, if by so innocent an expedient he could
turn the hostility of the adversaries of the gospel against one another, while
The plan which he adopted
was successful. “And when he had said so, there arose a dissension
between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the multitude was divided.” In the
In this way, I think, their conduct should be explained. But, by whatever motive they were influenced, the contest between them and the Sadducees became so vehement, and was carried on with so much noise, that the Sanhedrim could not proceed in the trial. The chief captain being afraid lest Paul should fall a victim to the violence of the parties,” commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle.” In this manner, the design of the Jews against him was defeated; and he was preserved, as the Lord told him the following night, to bear testimony to the gospel in Rome, as he had already done in Jerusalem.
To this discourse I shall subjoin a few practical inferences.
First, We learn how desirable it is to enjoy the testimony of a good
conscience, particularly in the season of adversity and trial. A well-grounded
persuasion of the goodness of the cause in which we are engaged, and
consciousness of the purity of our motives, will support our minds under
reproach, and arm us with courage in the midst of dangers. A conscience
enlightened by Scripture and purified by faith, will prove a source
of satisfaction, into whatever difficulties we are brought by our religious
profession; whereas the man whose heart accuses him of insincerity,
must blush at his own baseness, even when his hypocrisy is rewarded
with the most flattering commendations A good conscience is a preservative
from remorse and fear, two inmates which torment the soul in which they
reside. What embarrassment and anxiety should the Apostle have felt
in his present circumstances, had he been acting the part of an impostor?
But, we have seen him collected and undaunted; and being at peace with
himself and with God, he did not dread the power of the Jewish rulers,
who had condemned his Master, and were actuated by the same hostile
sentiments towards himself. “If our heart condemn us not, then have
we confidence towards
Secondly, Let us be careful to discover a meek and quiet spirit, when we are injured and ill treated by others. We, indeed, hear Paul, when Ananias commanded him to be smitten on the mouth, saying, “God shall smite thee, thou whited wall.” But we should consider that the actions of other men which were right, are to be imitated by us, only when we are in the same circumstances; and that it is an abuse of examples, to make a general and indiscriminate application of them. The disciples wished to be permitted to bring down fire from heaven upon a Samaritan village, as Elijah had done to the bands of armed men, which were sent by the king of Israel, to seize him; but they had not the spirit of Elijah. Paul, we have reason to believe, was moved by the Spirit of prophecy; and words spoken under a divine impulse, however severe, were not inconsistent with Christian charity. Our rule is plain, “not to render railing for railing, but to bless them that curse us, and pray for them that despitefully use us, and persecute us.” Above all other examples is that of Jesus Christ, who instead of upbraiding his murderers with their wickedness, and denouncing the vengeance of Heaven against them, said, when he hung upon the cross, and felt their cruelty in every member of his body, “Father forgive them: for they know not what they do.”
Lastly, How easily can God defend his own cause!
By a word spoken in season, the designs of the Jewish Sanhedrim against
Paul were defeated. When the enemies of the truth are united to oppose
it, they are but men; and God says to his Church, “Who art thou, that
thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die, and of the son of
man which shall be made as grass?” At his command, their breath goes
out, or their power and their wisdom strangely fail, so that “their
hands cannot find their enterprise.” Besides, although in their conspiracy
against religion, they seem to be in perfect concord, yet they are influenced
by very different motives, which may happen to clash with one another;
and in the common affairs of life, they are divided by envy, jealousy,
resentment, and an interference of pursuits. There is no true friendship
among the wicked; it is merely a temporary connexion of interest, or
a combination of mischief. With how much ease can Providence turn their
union into open hostility, as in the case of the Ammonites, the Moabites,
and the inhabitants of mount Seir, who having invaded
WE have seen what courage and prudence Paul displayed in the presence of the high-priest and the rulers of the Jews, and by what expedient he defeated the purpose, for which the counsel was assembled. A few words seasonably spoken, revived the hostility of two rival sects, which were united for a moment in the prosecution; and so violent was the contest, that the Roman commander was obliged to interfere, and to carry back the prisoner to the castle.
By this disappointment, the malice of his enemies was exasperated. Paul
had been marked out as a victim to their zeal; his death was deemed
necessary to vindicate the honour of their religion; and if it could
not be accomplished under the forms of law, which have often given the
colour of justice to the most iniquitous deeds, it was determined, that
he should perish by the hands of assassins. We are informed in the preceding
chapter, “that when it was day, certain of the Jews banded together,
and bound themselves under a curse, saying, that they would neither
eat nor drink, till they had killed Paul.” Such a conspiracy must excite
our detestation, whether we reflect upon the purpose for which it was
formed, or upon the solemn bond, by which the members pledged themselves
to execute their plan. Having resolved upon the death of the Apostle,
they guarded against the influence of their cooler thoughts, and the
feelings of compunction or pity which these might have awakened, by
engaging under a dreadful imprecation speedily to perpetrate the murder.
Their own lives were staked upon the success of the enterprise; and
the God of mercy and justice was invoked, to witness and to ratify a
combination of blood. From this transaction we learn how much conscience
may be debauched
There is a particular account, in the preceding chapter, of the manner in which this conspiracy was discovered by the chief captain, and of the plan which he immediately adopted for the security of Paul. He sent him under a strong guard to Felix the governor of Judea, who resided in Cesarea, and gave orders to his accusers to follow him. The chapter now before us relates the proceedings at this new tribunal.
Let us attend, in the first place,
to the speech of Tertullus, an orator, whom Ananias and the elders had
chosen, on account of his eloquence and address, to conduct the prosecution.
Felix, before whom he was appointed to plead, was a freedman of the
emperor Claudius, by whom he had been entrusted with the government
of Judea. The accounts of his conduct in this high station, which have
been transmitted to us by both Jews and Romans, are exceedingly unfavourable.
He had, indeed, dispersed and destroyed some bands of robbers who infested
the country, and to this very proper exercise of his authority Tertullus
seems to allude, when he says, “By thee we enjoy great quietness;” but from the general history of his administration, he appears to have
been a man void of all regard to justice and humanity. Under his government
the people were subjected to innumerable vexations and injuries, and
their property and lives were wantonly sacrificed, to gratify his avarice,
or his revenge. Impatient of control, he procured the assassination
of Jonathan the high-priest, whose only crime it was, that he had freely
remonstrated against his tyrannical proceedings. In a word, relying
upon the influence of his brother Pallas, who was in high favour with
the emperor, “he exercised royal authority,” to adopt
After this description of the character of Felix, with what
surprise must we read the speech of Tertullus! “Seeing that by thee we enjoy
great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy
providence, we accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix, with all
thankfulness.” What! was this man a stranger in Judea? Had he never heard the
complaints and curses of the people against their unrighteous governor?
Tertullus was one of those orators whose talents are exposed to sale, and are
purchased by the highest bidder; a venal pleader, prepared to espouse either
side of a question, and to employ, without moral discrimination, the means which
seemed best adapted to ensure success. In order to obtain the condemnation of
Paul, he endeavoured to gain the favour of the judge by flattery, than which
nothing more readily steals upon the heart, and renders it more pliant and
accommodating. The flattery was certainly gross, and had scarcely the semblance
of truth; but Tertullus had, perhaps, studied human nature so well as to know,
that none are more eager to grasp at the praise of virtue, than those who least
deserve it. To them, indeed, it is most necessary, because, in the want of the
reality, they may derive some advantage from the name. Eloquence, exerting its
powers in giving a luminous and impressive statement of truth; in portraying the
charms of virtue, and exhibiting the deformity of vice; in defending the
innocent against oppression and calumny, and dragging forth the wicked to
execration and punishment; eloquence employed in these important offices, and
uniting with the clear deductions of reason and experience, all the energies of
language, and all the ornaments of an ardent and cultivated imagination, is
undoubtedly one of the noblest and most enviable talents, which a mortal can
possess. It may uphold the religion and morals of a nation, and may save a
sinking state from ruin. But; when it aims at exciting the passions, without
enlightening the understanding; when, with its false colouring, it makes the
worse appear the better cause; when it corrupts the imagination, and undermines
the principles of morality; when like a base prostitute, it offers its services
to every person who solicits its assistance; when it substitutes flattery for
honest reproof, and condemns what it ought to applaud and
Tertullus proceeds to exhibit the grounds of accusation against the prisoner at the bar, which were three, sedition, heresy, and profanation of the temple. The charge of sedition is contained in these words. “We have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world.” From our knowledge of the history of Paul, we may boldly pronounce this charge to have been unfounded. But, as it was more likely than any other to prejudice a judge so jealous and suspicious, the unprincipled orator did not hesitate to advance it with all the confidence of truth. He is accused of heresy, when he is called “a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes;” an appellation given from contempt to the followers of Jesus, who lived in Nazareth, out of which no good thing was expected to come. The new religion was deemed a heresy, to which the Jews affixed the ideas of faction, error, and apostacy. Lastly, he is represented as “having gone about to profane the temple,” because it was supposed that he had brought Trophimus, an uncircumcised Gentile, into its sacred inclosure. These were serious charges, which, had his enemies been able to substantiate them, would have subjected him to punishment, according to both the Jewish and the Roman law. Tertullus includes with an insinuation against Lysias, the chief captain as having obstructed the course of justice, by violently carrying off Paul, when the Sanhedrim was met to judge him. He says nothing respecting the intention of the Jews to put him to death, when he was found in the temple, or the conspiracy which some of them afterwards formed to assassinate him, and by the discovery of which, Lysias was induced to send him to Cesarea. With the art of an orator, he sets the conduct of his clients in the fairest light, and suppresses every circumstance unfavourable to their cause.
With this tissue of flattery
and falsehood, let us contrast the simple and honest defence of the
Apostle. “Forasmuch as I know, that thou hast been of many years a
judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself.” This is not, like the introductory address of Tertullus, an insincere
and
undeserved compliment to Felix. Paul does not call him a righteous governor,
and praise the mildness and equity of his administration; but merely
expresses his happiness in having an opportunity to plead for himself
The Apostle proceeds to reply to the several accusations in their order. The charge of sedition he expressly denies, and challenges his adversaries to prove, that he had been found in the temple, in the synagogues, or in any part of the city, engaged in disputation, or attempting to sow the seeds of disaffection to government. “Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship. And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city: neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.” Paul, indeed, declined no proper opportunity of preaching the gospel, and defending it against its adversaries; but he always conducted himself with meekness and prudence. His behaviour as well as that of the other Apostles, was strictly conformable to the duty of good citizens. He exemplified the precept which he inculcated upon others, to be subject to the higher powers. In the primitive ages, Christianity was not propagated by exciting insurrections among the people, by inflaming their minds against the government, and by the overthrow of civil institutions; but by a simple manifestation of the truth, and by leaving it silently to work a change in the sentiments of mankind. The Christians cheerfully obeyed the laws, as far as was consistent with obedience to God; and when conscience forbade them to comply, they patiently submitted to sufferings. No bitterness of spirit was mingled with the disputes in which they were compelled to engage; no intolerant zeal was displayed against the most unreasonable and malignant opponents of truth. Like their blessed M/Taster, “they did not cry, nor lift up, nor cause their voice to be heard in the streets.”
To the charge of heresy he pleads
guilty. “But this I confess
To the last charge of profaning the temple
he answers in the following words. “Now after many years, I came to
bring alms
Such is the defence which the Apostle made for himself, simple, distinct, dignified, and in every part of it, strictly conformable to truth. We may remark the courage which he displayed, when standing alone before his accusers and his judge; his calmness in replying to misrepresentation and falsehood; and the confidence with which he maintained his innocence. Instead of shrinking from an investigation of his conduct, he claimed it as his right.
Felix resolved to delay giving judgment, till Lysias, the
chief captain should arrive, from whom he expected a full and impartial account
of the matter. It is remarked by Luke, “that he had more perfect knowledge of
that way;” or that in consequence of having lived several years in Judea, he was
acquainted with the history and doctrines of the Christian religion. He probably
considered it as a harmless superstition, and suspecting, perhaps, that this
prosecution had originated in bigotry, he was not disposed to give implicit
credit to the accusations of the Jews. He could not, however,
The knowledge of the new religion which the governor, who
seems to have been no careless spectator of what was passing around
him, had already acquired, excited his curiosity to hear an accurate
detail of its principles from Paul, who was one of its most eminent
teachers. “And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla,
which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith
in Christ.” Drusilla was the daughter of the Herod whose tragical end
is related in the twelfth chapter of this book. She was first married
to Azizus king of Emesenes, who had consented for her sake to embrace
the Jewish religion; but not long after she deserted him, and was married
a second time to Felix, who had seduced her affections. IH-er conduct
gave great and just offence to the Jews, who detested her as an adulteress,
and a traitress to her religion, which condemned her for entering into
this relation with a Gentile.
Paul
having been requested by Felix to explain “the faith in Christ,” willingly
embraced this opportunity to give a summary account of the doctrines
and institutions of his religion. To preach Christ “as the power of
God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first, and
also to the Greek,” was his favourite employment. He was not ashamed
of this subject, however strange and foolish it might seem to men whose minds
were preoccupied by the maxims of a vain philosophy, and the tenets of a corrupt
theology. His heart warmed with love and gratitude to the Saviour. rendered his
tongue eloquent in commending him to the world. But, Paul was too wise and too
faithful a preacher, to suppress any part of the truth, when circumstances
required him to publish it. He adapted his discourses not to the taste, but to
the character and
A courtly preacher, when addressing such auditors, would have contented himself with representing the gospel as a new theory of religious opinions, and with a vague declamation upon virtue and vice, more calculated to amuse than to reform. Paul, dismissing the arts of accommodation, as, in the present case, inconsistent with the fidelity which he owed to God and to the souls of men, selected a subject, which, although not grateful to the feelings, through the divine blessing, would be profitable. He reasoned on justice and temperance in the presence of Felix, who openly lived in the neglect of those virtues. He held up a faithful mirror before him, which exhibited his features in all their deformity. A lecture on justice and temperance was a direct reproof of the man, who had often abused his power to oppress those whom he ought to have protected, and who in order to gratify his sensual appetites, had invaded the most sacred domestic rights, and broken the dearest bonds of society.
It is possible to declaim against vice in
terms so soft and gentle, that our words, like pointless arrows, shall
not penetrate the conscience. It may be represented as a failing or
impropriety, which a regard to decorum requires us to correct, and as
productive of such consequences to our reputation, our health, our worldly
interest, and our domestic comfort, as it will be prudent to avoid.
Paul thundered against it with the honest indignation of a virtuous
mind, and with the authority of a messenger from God, commissioned to
denounce the punishment which awaits the guilty and impenitent. To Felix
and Drusilla, to whom also a part of his discourse was directed, he
gave warning of the judgment to come, at which the great and the small,
without distinction of persons, shall appear before God, and be recompensed
according to their deeds. The principles of morality are exposed, without
defence, to the inroads of our impetuous passions, if they are not exhibited
in connexion with a future retribution. A perception of the beauty of
virtue and the deformity of vice, which has been represented as sufficient
to excite us to our duty, and to guard our hearts against temptation,
The power of the word of God appeared in the impression which it made upon Felix. “As Paul reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, he trembled.” Conscience reminded him of his crimes against the laws of God and man, and summoned him to a more awful tribunal than that of the Roman emperor. What a surprising spectacle is now presented to us! The Apostle, whose liberty and life depended upon the will of Felix, dares to address him in the language of truth, without being deterred by the thought, that so wicked a man was more likely to be offended than reformed. Felix sitting as his judge, surrounded with his guards, and invested with supreme power in the province of Judea, trembles at the words of a poor unfriended prisoner. They have exchanged situations. Felix is the criminal, arraigned and convicted; and Paul is the judge, or rather the accredited deputy of the Sovereign Judge of heaven and earth.
But, although Felix felt a momentary conviction of guilt, his heart was not changed. Truth was an unexpected and unwelcome visitant, whose presence troubled him, and interrupted those pleasures to which he was still attached; and he made haste, therefore, to dismiss it. “Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.” What! was any other business more urgent than the reformation of his conduct, or more important than the salvation of his soul! The governor would have found leisure to listen to Paul, if he had relished his doctrine, and been as deeply affected as the jailor of Philippi, who exclaimed, “What must I do to be saved?” but an hour, or a minute, appears too long, when we are compelled to hear those practices exposed and condemned, which we cannot justify, and are resolved not to forsake.
We do not find that a convenient season ever occurred to Felix, for hearing Paul on the same subject. The governor, indeed, sent often for him; but he confined him, we may presume, to general topics, and cautiously avoided the repetition of those truths, which had given him so much uneasiness. He was a base, unprincipled man. Convinced of the innocence of Paul, he retained him in custody, expecting that his friends would purchase his liberty with money. Felix would not do justice without a bribe. As a bribe was never offered, Paul remained in prison,/till Felix was recalled, when he left him in bonds, to please the Jews; trusting, that by this instance of attention to their wishes, they should be so much gratified, as to forgive the crimes of his administration. In this hope, however, he was disappointed, for soon after his return, the chief men of the nation followed him to Rome with their complaints, and he narrowly escaped the just punishment of the wrongs with which he had afflicted Judea, by the intercession of his brother, who was, at that time, in favour with the emperor.
From the history of what passed between Felix and Paul, when the latter reasoned before him concerning righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, we may draw the following instructions.
First, We conceive what power
the word of God can exert upon the conscience. There is, indeed, no
greater virtue in the terms in which his will is expressed, than in
those of ordinary language, nor can the sound of them, like the pretended
incantations of magic, produce any mysterious effect upon the hearers.
The letter is dead; it is the Spirit who gives life. When the secret
influence of its Author accompanies the simple words in which it is
delivered, the impression made upon the mind is more wonderful than
human eloquence was ever able to effect. Felix might have been quite
composed, and might have even been entertained, by the elegant declamation
of a philosopher against vice; but when a plain Apostle preaches, without
a nice selection of terms, and without rhetorical ornaments, the governor
trembles. He sees, or seems to see, the God of justice and purity seated
on his throne of judgment; he hears a voice accusing him of his crimes,
and demanding his punishment. “Is not my word like as a fire? saith
the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?” It
is the word of Him, who can impress upon the soul such a sense of his
majesty
I remark, therefore, in the second place, that those to whom it is addressed, are not all affected by it, in the same manner. Felix trembled, when Paul reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come; but we do not read that Drusilla experienced a similar agitation. She seems to have retained the utmost composure, during a discourse which should have alarmed her as well as her husband. Perhaps, she supported her courage by the thought, that although an adulteress, she was guilty of none of those acts of injustice with which Felix was chargeable, for in the estimate of some persons, a less degree of wickedness is positive virtue; perhaps, she was a more hardened and determined sinner than he; perhaps, being a Jewess, she contrived to persuade herself, that as one of the chosen people, she should find favour with her Maker, notwithstanding the disorders of her life. It is impossible to enumerate or to conceive the various methods, by which sinners fortify themselves against the influence of the word of God. Their success in the art of deceiving themselves is manifest, from their indifference to the most solemn and momentous truths. While one man startles at his danger, and makes haste to escape from it, another hears the doctrines by which he is awakened, with consummate listlessness. Salvation is equally necessary to all, but few seek it with earnestness. “Many say, Peace and safety, although sudden destruction is coming upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.”
In the third place, impressions
and emotions, which seemed to prognosticate conversion, frequently pass
away, without producing any lasting effect. Who would not have augured
good from the fears of Felix? But the fit of terror was transient; he
exerted himself to put a stop to it, by dismissing the preacher; and
he immediately returned to his former course of injustice and profligacy.
Often have men exclaimed, in a moment of alarm, What must we do to be
saved? who never honestly and resolutely engaged in the work of salvation.
Sinners contrive a variety of expedients to recall the hopes which had
fled from them, and again please themselves with their own delusions.
Starting up, like a man who is roused from
Lastly, Let us beware of trifling with the word of God, by dismissing it, when it solicits our attention, and deferring the duty which it immediately demands, to a future opportunity. “Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.” In this disrespectful manner, it is often treated, when it is pressing upon the attention of men the concerns of their souls, and has begun to exert its power upon their consciences. But, they promise to themselves, that the business which is neglected to-day, shall be attended to to-morrow. It is a promise which they have no serious intention to perform; for if they were sincerely resolved to engage in the work of salvation, they would presently enter upon it. It would be of such magnitude in their eyes, that the delay even of an hour would seem too long. They would dread impediments, which the progress of time might create; and would be urged on by the uncertainty of life, the unexpected termination of which might send them down into the grave with their resolutions unexecuted. “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave whither thou goest.”
Procrastinating sinners, why is the present
not a convenient season? Do you expect, that as you advance in life,
your hearts will grow softer, and the influence of the world upon them
will decline? Ah! how much are you deceived? The result will be totally
different; for your hearts will become callous, and earthly cares will
twist themselves more closely about them. Is any business more interesting
than the well-being of your souls, which are far more precious than
ten thousand worlds, and through your neglect, may be lost for ever?
Are you at this moment in no danger of eternal perdition? Is there no
sentence against you in the word of God, the execution of which is deferred
only by his patience, upon the
FELIX, whose character and conduct were reviewed in the last Lecture, was one of those in whom conscience has not entirely lost its authority, but whose sinful habits and propensities are so strong, as to counteract the force of its commands. He was convinced that Paul was innocent of the crimes laid to his charge, and was, therefore, bound in justice to set him immediately at liberty. But he retained him in bonds from a motive of avarice; and when he was recalled from the government of Judea, he left him in prison, in the hope that by this instance of complaisance to the Jews, he should prevent them from carrying their complaints of his cruelty and extortion to the emperor.
Felix was succeeded by Festus, who a few days after his
arrival in the province, went up from Cesarea to Jerusalem. The hatred of the
chief priests and rulers against Paul was implacable. Time had not abated its
violence, nor had his sufferings during an imprisonment for at least two years,
inclined them to relax the severity of their measures. Hence, they now
endeavoured to persuade Festus to send for him to Jerusalem, that he might there
undergo a trial; under this apparently reasonable and harmless request,
concealing a most nefarious design. During the long interval which had elapsed
since they resolved upon the assassination of Paul, they had not repented of
their purpose. Often, we may believe, it had been the subject of reflection and
conversation in their confidential meetings; but the only sentiment which ever
arose in their minds was regret that they had been prevented from accomplishing
it. A false zeal for God had perverted their moral judgment and feelings.
Religion, misunderstood, and corrupted by the
With this request Festus refused to comply; and the enemies of Paul were obliged to repair to Cesarea, where he successfully defended himself against their accusations. As the governor, however, in consequence of fresh solicitations, or with a view to conciliate the favour of the Jews, at the commencement of his administration, now discovered an inclination to transfer the judgment of the cause to Jerusalem, the Apostle found it necessary to appeal to Cesar. This appeal to a foreign judge was not made with a view to reflect upon the laws of his country as insufficient for the security of innocence, but from his certain knowledge, that he had no justice to expect from the partial and hostile tribunal of the Sanhedrim. As a Roman citizen, he had a right to claim the protection of the Roman laws; and it was the privilege of a citizen, to carry his cause from an inferior judicatory to the emperor himself, not only when a sentence, by which he deemed himself aggrieved, had been pronounced, but at the commencement, or at any stage of the process. This expedient was calculated to secure an impartial execution of the laws. It was a check upon those magistrates of cities, and governers of provinces, who were disposed to abuse their power; and it afforded an accused person the benefit of a second trial, before a court where the partialities and prejudices arising from local circumstances, which frequently obstruct the course of justice, would not operate to his disadvantage. Paul expected fairer treatment from a heathen emperor than from, the supreme council of the Jews; and was willing to submit his ca ise rather to Nero than to the high priest.
By the appeal to Cesar, the proceedings were stopped;
and the Apostle was remanded to prison, till an opportunity should occur
of sending him to Rome. In the mean time, Agrippa and his sister
When the court was assembled, Paul having been permitted to
speak for himself, began by expressing his happiness in being called to plead
his cause, before so competent a judge as Agrippa. He does not, indeed,
insinuate, that he expected him to be more candid than Festus, nor does it
appear, that the governor entertained any prejudice against him, and was
disposed to favour his accusers. But, Agrippa, who had been educated in the
knowledge of the law of Moses, and of the writings of the Prophets, was better
qualified to decide upon the merits of the question than Festus, who had lately
come into Judea, and was not acquainted with its religion and customs. “I think
myself happy, king Agrippa, because I shall answer for myself this day before
thee, touching all the things whereof I am accused of the Jews; especially
because I know thee to be expert in all customs and questions which are among
the Jews.” The man who addresses an audience, to whom the subject of discourse
is new, and who are ignorant of the principles, without which it cannot be
understood, is placed in disadvantageous circumstances. When delivering the most
important truths, he may seem to utter crude fancies, and the reveries of a
disordered brain. Festus thought Paul mad, when he was stating
After this introduction, Paul proceeds to give an account of himself prior to his conversion, in order to pave the way for the relation of that event. “My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews which knew me from the beginning, (if they would testify,) that after the most straightest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.” The Jews were divided into several sects, differing widely in their sentiments and practices, although they were united in the same religious fellowship. Of all those sects the Pharisees were the strictest. Professing a sacred reverence for the law, they were scrupulously punctual in observing the ceremonial duties which it enjoined, and the traditions of the elders, in which religion was supposed chiefly to consist. Josephus informs us, that they were accounted more pious than others, and more exact in the interpretation of the laws. To this sect Paul was attached in the preceding part of his life. He adopted its peculiar tenets, rigidly conformed to its institutions, so that “touching the righteousness which was in the law, he was blameless,” and imbibed the vehement zeal, which distinguished the Pharisees, and usually characterises those sects, which affect pre-eminence in orthodoxy and purity.
His connexion with
the Pharisees he had now renounced, as well as some of their tenets,
which were contrary to the Christian faith; but he retained such of
them as were agreeable to Scripture. For why did he now stand a prisoner
at the tribunal of Festus? Had he committed any crime against the state,
or was he guilty of any offence against religion? No; he was persecuted
by his countrymen, for his steadfast adherence to the promises of God,
which they also professed to believe. “And now I stand, and am judged
for the hope of the promise made of God, unto our fathers: unto which
promise our twelve tribes, constantly serving God day and night, hope
to come; for which hope’s sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews.” The promise made to the fathers is the
If the question which follows, be considered as addressed to Agrippa, it is not easy to perceive the propriety of it. “Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?” The resurrection of the dead was not deemed incredible by the Jews, in whose Scriptures it is expressly taught, and who entertained such conceptions of the power of God, as removed the difficulties with which it seems to be encumbered. They did not disbelieve the resurrection of our Saviour, because they judged it to be impossible, but because they counted him an impostor, in whose favour it was absurd and blasphemous to suppose God to have exerted his miraculous power. I consider the question, therefore, as addressed to the Gentile part of the audience, to whom the resurrection did seem incredible. As it was a doctrine of great importance in the Christian system, Paul was careful in this stage of his discourse, to obviate an objection against it, which arises from the complete destruction of the body in the grave. How can it be believed that its parts, which are separated, decomposed, and in appearance annihilated, shall be collected together, and arranged in their original order; and that it shall live again, after an interval of hundreds or thousands of years? He reminds the Gentiles that, however strange it may seem, the event ceases to be improbable, as soon as we reflect upon the agent, to whose power no limits can be assigned. He who created the body of man, is undoubtedly able to restore it, after it had been blended with its native elements. Nothing which may be done, is impossible to omnipotence; no effect, how much soever it may surpass the common operations of nature, should be accounted too wonderful to be believed, when God has declared his intention to produce it. “Ye do err,” said our Lord to the Sadducees, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.”
Paul returns to his
own history. While he lived a Pharisee, he
Paul proceeds to account for his subsequent conduct,
in endeavouring to propagate the religion which he had laboured to destroy. “Whereupon as I went to Damascus, with authority and commission from
the chief priests, at mid-day, O king, I saw in the way a light from
heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me, and
them that journeyed with me. And, when we were all fallen to the earth,
I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul,
Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee to kick against the
pricks. And I said, who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom
thou persecutest.” As the conversion of Paul was the subject of a former
Lecture, it is not necessary now to give a particular illustration of
it.
The first remark relates to its extraordinary nature. Paul was not brought to the knowledge of the truth, by the ordinary means, but by an unusual, and what we may strictly call a miraculous, dispensation. We do not know of a similar interposition in favour of any other person, although it would, perhaps, be presumptuous to affirm, that God has never again stept aside from his established method, for the salvation of a sinner; but we are certain, that it is not by visions and voices from heaven, that men are commonly converted. From his character and circumstances, Paul seems to have been beyond the reach of the ordinary means. Yet, it was not properly for his own sake, that this singular plan was adopted, for in the sight of God, Saul of Tarsus was of no more importance than any other Jew, but to make his conversion at once a striking proof of the truth of Christianity, and an illustrious display of the sovereignty of divine grace.
I remark, in the second place, that at the time of his
conversion. his mind was in a state highly unfavourable to a change. Had he been
a man of loose manners, an open transgressor of the law of God, his conscience
might have been easily alarmed, so that he should have willingly listened to the
gospel, proclaiming pardon to
In the third place, this event affords a striking illustration of the grace of God, or of the free, unconditional exercise of his mercy. It elucidates and confirms the doctrine, that salvation is not of works, but of grace. Much has been said concerning certain qualifications which a sinner must possess, that he may be a proper object of the favour of his Maker; but to this idea the case before us gives no countenance. In Paul, at the time of his conversion, there was no qualifications, which could recommend him to divine mercy, or render it congruous and equitable, that it should be extended to him in preference to others. He was actuated, in a high degree, by all those passions, which are just objects of abhorrence and punishment, pride, rage, enmity to the truth, and implacable hatred against good men. There was no relenting of heart, nor so much as a doubt in his mind with respect to the propriety of his conduct; he was decided in his opposition to the gospel, and bent upon the extirpation of it from the earth. It was at this moment, the most unlikely of all to be the season of gracious visitation, that Jesus whom he persecuted, chose to appear, not to punish but to pardon his crimes, and to employ the blasphemer and persecutor in his service. Was not Paul, without controversy, saved by grace? And with this example in his eye, why should any man, however unworthy, despair of obtaining salvation, when he seeks it by faith?
In the last place, the conversion of Paul was sudden and complete.
It may be said, indeed, of every convert, that he passes at once from
a state of nature to a state of grace, because a middle
The office with which Paul was invested was of the most
honourable nature; and such it seems to every Christian. But, in the state of
the world at that time, it subjected him to the contempt and hatred of all
classes of men. By the Greeks he was accounted a babbler, and by the Jews an
apostate and a heretic; and we shall, perhaps, form an idea of his situation
tolerably exact, by supposing it to have been similar to that of the ringleader
of some illiterate and enthusiastic sect in our own age, whom high and low,
learned and unlearned, never mention but in terms of scorn and detestation, with
this difference, however, that while our laws protect every man in the exercise
of his religion, the life of the Apostle was exposed
While the Apostle was relating
the manner of his conversion, and the doctrines which he had since preached
to Jews and Gentiles, he was interrupted by Festus, who exclaimed, “Paul, thou art beside thyself: much learning doth make thee mad.” If
we reflect upon the character and circumstances of Festus, we shall not
be surprised, that Paul appeared to him in the light of a madman. The
governor was a heathen, who probably knew little about the Jewish religion,
and had scarcely heard of Christianity, before he came into Judea. To
such a man, how strange must every thing relative to it have seemed!
What could he think of Paul’s miraculous conversion How different from
his views of religion, was the account which the apostle gave, of the
design of his ministry, to open the eyes of sinners, to deliver them
from the dominion of Satan, and to sanctify them through faith and of
the grand facts on which Christianity is founded, the death and resurrection
of its Author! These were subjects which the governor could not comprehend,
and which excited no distinct notions in his mind. The discourse which
he had heard, seemed to be a jumble of waking dreams, a collection of
extravagant fancies, more resembling the ravings of an insane person,
than the thoughts of a man in his senses. At the same time, as Paul
had referred to the writings
To this abrupt and indecent charge Paul replied with
temper and politeness. He remembered the respect due to the supreme
magistrate of the province, and displayed the meekness, which should
characterise a Christian, upon every occasion. A passionate answer would
have been unsuitable to his present circumstances, and to the spirit
of religion, which he was endeavouring to vindicate and recommend. “I
am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of truth and
soberness.” In support of this assertion, he appealed to Agrippa. “For
the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for
I arn persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this
thing was not done in a corner.” To Agrippa, a professor of the Jewish
religion, the writings of the Prophets, which foretold the sufferings
and glory of the Messiah, were familiar. He could not be ignorant of
the history of Jesus of Nazareth, and of the report of his resurrection,
which was publicly and confidently asserted by his disciples. He had
undoubtedly heard of the conversion of Paul, which, whether we consider
the character of the man, or the suddenness of the change, must have
been a subject of general conversation. With respect to both these events,
it was true, “that this thing was not done in a corner.” The conversion
of the Apostle was soon made known by his appearance in the character
of a preacher of the gospel; and, besides, the men who accompanied him
to Damascus, were witnesses of the miraculous interposition by which
it was affected. The resurrection of Jesus was a fact of public notoriety.
The Roman soldiers, who were stationed to watch the sepulchre, saw the
angel descend, and roll away the stone which closed the entrance to
it; the body could not be found; the disciples appeared in the streets
and in the temple, affirming that their Master was risen; and many miracles
were performed in confirmation of their testimony. It is an argument
of great weight in favour of the gospel, that it was published at the
time, when the events which it records, are said to have happened; that
it was submitted to the examination of those, who, had it been a human
contrivance, could have easily convicted it of imposture; and that it
stood this severe
After this indirect appeal to Agrippa, Paul turns from Festus to the king himself. “King Agrippa, believest thou the Prophets? I know that thou believest.” Agrippa and all the Jews, believed that the Prophets were divinely inspired, and consequently, that their predictions should be punctually fulfilled. But, no man who held this belief, and understood the prophetical writings, could refuse to acknowledge Jesus to be the Messiah, because his character and the events of his life are so clearly described in them. The argument from prophecy was sufficient for the conviction of the Jews; and accordingly, we observe, that the mind of Agrippa was strongly affected by it. He said to Paul, “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.”
It is evident, that in this summary of his speech, Luke merely gives an account of the general source, from which the arguments were drawn. Paul had endeavoured to show the exact correspondence between ancient prophecy and the history of our Saviour; and Agrippa acknowledged that there was such a degree of probability in the reasoning, as almost induced him to admit the conclusion, that Jesus was the Christ. But he stopped here, either because his humble life and ignominious death were contrary to the notions of the pomp and splendour of the Messiah and his kingdom, which a Jew was accustomed to entertain; or because he was restrained, by worldly considerations, from candidly declaring his sentiments. The remains of his Jewish prejudices, or a dread of the consequences, if he should avow his convictions, and embrace Christianity, arrested his progress. It would have been no easy matter, in that age, for a king to profess the despised and offensive doctrine of the cross. The rage of the Jews against him would have been without bounds; and he would have incurred the displeasure of the Roman emperor, and probably have been degraded from his royal honours. Whatever was the motive which prevented him from becoming an entire convert to the religion of Christ, his conscience compelled him to acknowledge, that there were strong presumptions of its truth.
The reply of the Apostle breathes the spirit
of benevolence, by which a genuine Christian is influenced even towards
his enemies. “I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that
hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except
these bonds.” This wish or prayer might have seemed ridiculous to
When Paul had closed his defence, his judges withdrew, and having consulted
together, were unanimously of opinion, that he had done nothing “worthy
of death or of bonds.” Agrippa was almost convinced of the truth of
Christianity; and Festus regarded it as a harmless superstition. There
was nothing, therefore, to hinder him from being set at liberty but
his appeal to the emperor, which, perhaps, he had not power to withdraw,
and an inferior court could not set aside. We may, therefore, be disposed
to regret that Paul had made this appeal, as he might have been immediately
dismissed from the bar of Festus, and have returned to the free exercise
of his Apostolical office, which had been so long interrupted. It is
evident, however, that it was a measure absolutely necessary at the
time, to preserve him from falling into the hands of the Jews, who were
resolved upon his destruction. By the Head of the Church, it was overruled
as the occasion of sending him to Rome, the centre of concourse to all
the nations of the earth, where he preached the gospel, which he had
already published in many of
This chapter would furnish a variety of useful remarks; but I shall conclude with a few reflections, suggested by the impression which the speech of Paul made upon Agrippa. “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” We learn from this example, that there may be convictions of the truth, which are prevented by certain causes from terminating in conversion; or that particular persons may make such approaches towards religion, as in the language of our Saviour, “not to be far from the kingdom of heaven,” and yet may not fully submit to its authority.
Perhaps, there may be found, among professed infidels themselves, some persons, the state of whose minds much resembles that of Agrippa. They are secretly convinced that Christianity is true, or the evidence in its favour appears so strong, that they entertain suspicions and presumptions of its truth; but they are hindered from pursuing the inquiry, and avowing their sentiments, by pride, by the prevalence of corrupt propensities, by a dread of the reproaches of their companions in unbelief, or by some other base consideration, which counteracts the suggestions of conscience. Their hearts misgive them, when they seem to be boldest in expressing their contempt for religion, and they tremble while they pretend to set its awful sanctions at defiance. How unhappy must such persons be! There is a frequent and painful struggle in their breasts between inclination and a sense of duty; they are desirous to taste and they venture to pluck, the forbidden fruit; but they have not yet been able to fully persuade themselves, that the threatening is only an imaginary terror. Of religion they know as much as disturbs them in their pleasures, but not so much as to prevail upon them to give their cordial consent to it. While they hate the light and refuse to come to it, lest their deeds should be reproved, what a dreadful load of guilt do they accumulate? No man can despise religion without sin; but how great, how inexcusable is the sin of those, who affect to despise it, although their hearts secretly bear witness to its truth and excellence!
Again, Among the members of the Church, there are persons,
who believe the gospel to be true, and profess an attachment to it,
Lastly, There is a third class of persons,
to whom the words of Agrippa may be applied. They have not only the
form, but they seem also to have experienced the power, of religion.
They trust, as they flatter themselves, in the mercy of God, and hope
for eternal life; they take delight in hearing the doctrines and promises
of salvation; they engage in the exercises of devotion with fervour,
and punctually perform many of the common duties of life. Yet, their
religion is a false show; there is nothing real under those specious
appearances. They are not, indeed, deliberate hypocrites, studying for
fame or gain to impose upon others; but they are themselves imposed
upon by their own feelings. There is no radical change of their principles;
they are not new creatures in Christ Jesus; they are almost, but not
altogether persuaded to be Christians. Remember the account given by
our Saviour, in the parable of the sower, of some “who receive the
word with joy, and continue for a season, but have no root in themselves.” It, therefore, deeply concerns the professors of religion to examine
the emotions of their minds, and the attainments which they suppose
themselves to have made, by the criterion of Scripture. No man should,
upon slight evidence, or by a hasty induction, produce a sentence in
his own favour. Let him reflect, that the heart is deceitful above all
things; and that there may be a strong movement of the affections, and
even a reformation of the conduct, while it remains under the
THIS chapter begins with showing us Paul and his company safely landed in the Island of Melita. He had been sent by sea, with other prisoners, to Italy; and the incidents of the voyage are related in the preceding chapter. After stopping at several places, and encountering adverse winds, they were overtaken by a tempest, which drove them upon an unknown coast, were the vessel was stranded. Of this disaster Paul had given early notice, not by his skill in maritime affairs, but in consequence of a divine revelation. The centurion to whose charge he was committed, was more disposed to believe the master and the owner of the ship, who seemed to have suspected no danger; and the voyage was continued. When the storm arose, an angel was sent to inform Paul, that the lives of all the company, consisting of sailors, soldiers, and prisoners, should be preserved. The next day, he communicated this information, which was intended not only to comfort his own mind, but by exhibiting him as a man who enjoyed intercourse with Heaven, to recommend him to the favour of the centurion. Accordingly, he was held in such esteem by that officer, that for his sake, he would not permit the soldiers to murder the prisoners, as they had proposed to do, in order to prevent their escape. The prediction of Paul was exactly fulfilled; for, notwithstanding the wreck of the vessel at some distance from the shore, of two hundred and seventy-six persons, not an individual perished, but by different expedients they all got safely to land.
It is worthy of observation, that although Paul expressly
foretold, that there should be no loss of lives during the voyage, yet when the
sailors were attempting to escape by means of the boat, he said
When God decreed an event, he, at the same time, decreed, that it should
take place in consequence of a train of other events, or as the result
of certain previous circumstances. Thus, he did not propose to save
Paul and his companions unconditionally, by means of the seamen remaining
on board to manage the ship, till it should be driven on the coast of
Melita. In the same manner, he has not determined to save sinners, let
them live as they will; but he has chosen them to salvation, “through
the sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth.” To say,
therefore, that unless the means be employed, the ends will not be accomplished,
is to assert a very simple and self-evident truth, that the purposes
of God will not be fulfilled, unless they be fulfilled. Had Paul and
his company been preserved without the aid of the sailors, the decree
of God would not have been executed; nor would it be executed, if it
were possible
“And when they were escaped, they knew
that the island was called Melita.” There were two islands bearing this
name in ancient times;. the one belonging to Dalmatia, and the other
lying in the Mediterranean, between Sicily and Africa. The course which
Paul was steering, and several circumstances in the history of his voyage,
has given currency to the common opinion, that the island upon which
he was shipwrecked, was Malta, which has lately attracted our notice,
as the scene of our military operations, and is now a part of the British
dominions.
The island was originally peopled by strangers
from Africa or Phenicia. If the term, barbarous, is used to denote a
people rude
While the inhabitants of Malta were sympathizing with the unfortunate strangers, their attention was directed to Paul, by a very extraordinary incident. “And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live.” The conclusion was such as would naturally occur to persons, persuaded that a moral government is exercised over mankind, but whose views were not corrected and enlarged by Scripture, or by accurate observation and extensive experience. They were right in believing, that God who knows the actions of men will recompense them according to their desert, and that he sometimes interposes, in a visible manner, to punish atrocious crimes. But, they erred in supposing such interpositions to be so regular, as to afford certain grounds for interpreting the design of every calamitous event. When a viper issuing from the fire fixed upon Paul’s hand, they immediately inferred that he was a murderer, whom the vengeance of Heaven had overtaken. They were more ready to consider him as a criminal, because he was a prisoner; and they probably charged him with murder, because it has been observed, that of all crimes, it most rarely escapes with impunity. They did not reflect that this world is not the place of retribution; that although there are occasional manifestations of justice, the exercise of it is for the most part delayed; that notorious transgressors sometimes live long, and die in peace; and that the lot of good men is often full of affliction and sorrow.
These reflections; which arise from a very slight view of human life, seem not to have occurred to the unenlightened inhabitants of Malta. How great was their surprise, when they saw Paul shake off the viper into the fire; and having expected “that he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly, they perceived no harm come to him?” They were, no doubt, well acquainted with the properties of the animal, and had frequently observed the deleterious effects of its poison. But, they did not know, that this man was a servant of the Lord of the universe, who had said concerning those who believed, “that they should take up serpents, and that if they drank any deadly thing, it should not hurt them.” Astonished at the event, they passed from one extreme to another, and concluded that Paul was a God. Those poor heathens, who had long been accustomed to believe that their Deities sometimes assumed the human form, supposed him to be one of them, who, for some unknown reason had descended to the earth. We see in this instance, a true picture of man, who judges by appearances and equivocal signs, and changes his opinions as often as the scene around him fluctuates. If he has pronounced a first sentence rashly, the second is, perhaps, more foolish and extravagant. Paul was not a murderer; but he was still less a God. He was only a minister of Jesus Christ, who had destined him to important services, and honoured him with his particular protection.
We are informed of other miracles, which Paul performed during his stay
in the island. “In the same quarter were possessions of the chief man
of the island, whose name was Publius, who received us, and lodged us
three days courteously. And it came to pass, that the father of Publius
lay sick of a fever, and of a bloody flux: to whom Paul entered in,
and prayed, and laid his hands on him, and healed him. So when this
was done, others also which had diseases in the island, came and were
healed.” The first miracle had so astonished the ignorant inhabitants,
that they supposed Paul to be a God; but this honour he would reject
with indignant zeal. We have seen in what manner he and Barnabas acted,
when the inhabitants of Lystra having fallen into the same mistake,
on a similar occasion, were preparing to offer sacrifice to them, in
the characters of Jupiter and Mercury. The Apostle was, no doubt, equally
careful to undeceive the Maltese, and to instruct them in the knowledge
of the Creator, who alone is God, and is exclusively entitled to religious
worship. There was, however, an inferior
The kindness which the inhabitants
showed to the strangers, who had escaped the perils of the sea, when
they were first cast upon their coast, was continued to Paul and his
friends, from respect to his character, and gratitude for the favours
which they had received from him. “Who also honoured us with many honours,
and when we departed they laded us with such things as were necessary.” When our Lord conferred miraculous powers upon the Apostles, he enjoined
a free and generous exercise of them. They were not to set a price upon
their cures, but to heal the sick, and cast out devils, without demanding
or expecting a reward. By this injunction, however, they were not restrained
from accepting the gifts which should be presented to them, by those
who esteemed them “for their work’s sake.” It was reasonable, that
they should be recompensed by the persons to whom they devoted their
time and labour; and a man of the purest generosity, who would scorn
a bribe as the motive to his duty, will be pleased with tokens of
When winter was past, and the season became favourable for the prosecution of their voyage, the centurion with the prisoners under his care, sailed from Malta, in a ship of Alexandria; and having passed the island of Sicily, arrived at Puteoli, a city of Italy, not far distant from Naples. From this place Paul proceeded to Rome by land. In the way he was met by some Christians from that city, who, having heard of his approach, went to meet him as far as Appii Forum, and the Three Taverns, two cities at the respective distances of fifty, and thirty miles from the capital. They had probably never seen the Apostle, but they had heard his fame, and enjoyed the benefit of his instructions; for he had sent an Epistle to their Church, which makes a part of the sacred canon of the New Testament. The present circumstances of Paul were not calculated to induce strangers to court an acquaintance with him. Associated with a number of prisoners who were accused of different crimes, he was on his way to the tribunal of Nero, by whose sentence he might be deprived of his life. No honour could result from a connexion with such a man; and his friends might be involved in trouble and danger, by the suspicion and jealousy of government. But, it was the glory of the disciples of Jesus in those early ages, that they were united in the bonds of affection, which the severest trials were not able to dissolve. They did not selfishly and pusillanimously abandon him, who was singled out to encounter the hostility which the world entertained against them all. They gathered around him in the hour of adversity, to sustain his courage, and to alleviate his sorrows, by their presence and their counsels. When Jesus Christ was sick and in prison, in the persons of his faithful servants, they accounted it both a duty and a privilege to visit him.
This unexpected visit had an agreeable effect upon the mind of the Apostle. “When he saw them, he thanked God,” who had disposed those brethren
to show him kindness in the time of danger; “and he took courage,” or felt his resolution confirmed in the prospect of the troubles, which
might befal him in Rome. “Iron sharpeneth iron, so a man sharpeneth
the countenance of his friend.” By the simple presence and approving
looks of his friends, as well as by their exhortations, a sufferer shall
be sustained, in the severest
Upon his arrival in the city, the centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the guard, or the commander of the pretorian bands, which were stationed in Rome, to guard the person of the emperor, and to retain that mighty capital in subjection. But, Paul was permitted to dwell by himself, or as we learn from the thirtieth verse, in a house which he had hired. This favour was probably obtained by the intercession of the centurion, who had conceived a friendship for him, and would be more readily granted, because he had not come to Rome properly in the character of a criminal, but rather as a man, who had been compelled to appeal to Cesar, by the injustice of his countrymen. He was attended by a soldier to whom he seems to have been fastened, according to the custom of the Romans, by a chain fixed to the right hand of the prisoner, and the left hand of his guard. “For the hope of Israel,” he says I am bound with this chain.”
These words were addressed to the chief men
of the Jews, whom Paul had called together three days after his arrival
in Rome. “And when they were come together, he said unto them, Men
and brethren, though I have committed nothing against the people or
customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem
into the hands of the Romans, who, when they had examined me, would
have let me go, because there was no cause of death in me. But when
the Jews spake against it, I was constrained to appeal unto Cesar, not
that I had ought to accuse my nation of. For this cause, therefore,
have I called for you, to see you and to speak with you: because that
for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.” It was evidently
the design of this speech, to remove the prejudices which the Jews might
have conceived against him, that they might be prepared to listen patiently,
when he pleaded in defence of Christianity. He had not violated the
laws of his country, nor was it his intention to accuse his own nation
to the emperor.
The Jews answered, “We neither received letters out of Judea, concerning thee, neither any
of the brethren that came, showed or spake any harm of thee.” It is
surprising that the priests and elders at Jerusalem, who persecuted
Paul with implacable hostility, had not endeavoured by letters or messengers,
to prejudice their brethren in Rome against him. As their sentiments
had not undergone a change in his favour, their silence may, perhaps,
be accounted for, by the want of an opportunity to send information
to Rome, in consequence of the lateness of the season, when Paul set
out on his voyage. “But we desire,” they add, “to hear of thee what
thou thinkest: for as concerning this sect, we know that every where
it is spoken against.” Christianity made its first appearance under
the disadvantage, of a bad name, which was principally owing to the
malignant industry of the Jews, as we learn from an ancient writer,
who informs us, that they sent messengers from Jerusalem to their synagogues
in foreign countries, announcing that an impious and lawless sect had
been formed by a certain impostor, Jesus of Galilee.
Notwithstanding the reports to the disadvantage of the gospel; the Jews, with whom Paul was now conversing, had not come to a final determination to reject it. They were willing to hear both sides. Having seen it attacked, they also wished to see it defended. A day being fixed, “there came many to him into his lodging: to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the Prophets, from morning till evening.” The discourse was long, because the subject was ample, much reasoning was necessary, and probably many objections were proposed. The Apostle “expounded the kingdom of God,” or explained the nature of the new dispensation of religion, and proved that Jesus was the Christ, by testimonies from the law of Moses, and the prophetical writings. In an address to the Jews, no other mode of proof could have been attempted with propriety. If an appeal had been made to the evidence of miracles, they would have replied, that their law expressly forbade them to hearken to a Prophet, who should endeavour, by signs and wonders, to entice them from the religion of their fathers. I do not mean, that there was any defect in this evidence, which that of prophecy was necessary to supply. It was by the miracles of the Apostles, that the Gentiles, who did not know the books of the Prophets, were convinced. But, since God had provided another species of proof, in the harmony between the old and the new dispensation, and had directed the Jews to look for it, no reasoning, in which this essential part was omitted, could have justified them in receiving the gospel as a divine revelation. It was necessary to demonstrate, that Jesus of Nazareth was the person whose character and actions are described by Moses, David, and Isaiah; and that his religion possessed all the properties of the new covenant, which God had promised to make with his people in the latter days. Our Lord adopted this plan in his discourses to the Jews; and we see from many occurrences in this book, that his ministers followed his example.
Among the Jews whom Paul addressed, there were, no doubt persons of
different dispositions, and different degrees of information; some,
who had considered the prophecies with more attention than others; and
some, who being less prejudiced against the notion of a spiritual Messiah,
would not be so averse to recognise him in the person of the crucified
Jesus. At the same time, it should be remembered, that the grace of
God is the efficient cause of the
The assembly being divided, a discussion ensued, in which the one part
maintained the doctrine of Paul against the other. Before they separated,
he reminded them of a prophecy in the book of Isaiah, the application
of which to the unbelieving part of his audience was obvious. From the
frequent mention of it in the New Testament, and, in particular, from
the words of the Evangelist John, it appears to have been ultimately
intended to represent the character and conduct of the Jews, at the
commencement of the Christian dispensation. It begins with foretelling,
that they should be delivered up, in the righteous judgment of God,
to a blinded mind, and a hardened heart; or, at least, that they should
discover the most surprising stupidity and insensibility, so as not
to understand what was plainly told, nor to see what was placed before
their eyes. “Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the Prophet, unto
our fathers, saying, Hearing ye shall hear, but shall not understand;
and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive.” The exact fulfilment of
this part of the prophecy, is evident from their obstinate rejection
of our Saviour as an impostor, notwithstanding the splendid train of
miracles, by which his mission was attested, and the manifest accomplishment
of ancient predictions in his death, and the various circumstances in
his life. The prophecy goes on to account for their conduct. “For
the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of
hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with
their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart,
and should be converted, and I should heal them.” This description of
their spiritual taste seems to be taken from a man addicted to gluttony
and drunkenness, whose mental faculties are benumbed, whose very senses
are blunted, and who, oppressed by the effects of intemperance, sinks
into a profound sleep. The unbelief of the Jews was not the consequence
of involuntary and invincible ignorance, but of the predominance of
sinful affections. They were not willing to understand and perceive.
Jesus Christ, in his humble form, had no attractions for men, who desired
nothing so much as the honours and pleasures of the world. They would
not believe that he was the Messiah, because they
To this prophecy Paul directed the attention of the unbelieving Jews, as a subject of serious consideration. It was calculated to alarm them all, and might, through the blessing of God, rouse some of them from their spiritual lethargy, which was an awful prognostic of eternal death. He concluded with a declaration, which was always mortifying to the Jews, but which he now made, not with a design to irritate them, but to provoke them to jealousy. When better motives failed, the dread of being superseded in their privileges, might render them cautious of rashly and perversely rejecting the gospel. Although they should resist its evidence, yet the Gentiles would believe, and be admitted into the place which they had long held in the favour of God. “Be it known unto you, therefore, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.”
“And when he
had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among
themselves.” The gospel was the subject of their private conferences,
in which the arguments on both sides were canvassed. Those who were
convinced of its truth, would be eager to convert their unbelieving
brethren; and we may conceive the unbelievers to have been equally earnest
to reclaim them from heresy. How those reasonings terminated we are
not informed; but it may be presumed, that while some were at last
The chapter closes with a short account of Paul during the period of his imprisonment. He was permitted to dwell in his own hired house, to which every person, who chose to visit him, had access, and to preach the gospel without restraint. Although the Apostle was in chains, the word of God was not bound. He was likewise employed in writing letters to the Churches in different parts of the world. The Epistles to the Ephesians, the Philippians, and the Colossians, and the short letter to Philemon, bear internal marks of having been composed during his confinement in Rome. Whether the second epistle to Timothy should be dated from his first or his second imprisonment, is a question, about which learned men are not agreed. The Epistle to the Hebrews, which is ascribed with more probability to Paul than any other person, seems to have been written after he was loosed from his bonds. He was restored to liberty, in consequence of a full proof of his innocence, or through the intercession of some friends in the household of Cesar, who had embraced the Christian religion. The accounts of the subsequent part of his life, of the places which he visited, and the time which he spent in his Apostolical labours, are, for the most part, uncertain and conjectural. We know, however, that he was again imprisoned in Rome, and in that city, sealed with his blood the doctrine which he had long and faithfully preached.
I
have traced, as far as any authentic records remain, the history of
this illustrious servant of Jesus Christ, whose exertions in the cause
of the gospel, were adequate to the high expectations which might have
been entertained, from the extraordinary manner in which he was called
to the Apostolical office. By immediate revelation he was furnished
with a profound knowledge of the mysteries of redemption; and in natural
abilities he was, perhaps, superior to his brethren, in supernatural
endowments, certainly not behind the chief of the Apostles. Transferring
to the service of religion the activity and ardour of mind which he
inherited from nature, he declined no labour, and shrunk from no danger,
in endeavouring to advance the glory of his Saviour, and the best interests
of the human race. It was his most delightful employment to preach the
doctrine of salvation by the cross, without being at all
I have now brought to a conclusion this course of Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles. After tracing the history of the Church, from the ascension of Christ to the meeting of the first Christian Council in Jerusalem, I have surveyed the principal events in the life of Paul, to which the subsequent narrative confines our attention. Although he seems to have been “in labours more abundant,” yet we are not to suppose, that the other Apostles were inactive, or that their transactions furnished nothing unworthy to be known. Invested the same commission, actuated by the same zeal, endowed with the same supernatural powers, and assisted by the same Spirit, they, undoubtedly, exerted themselves, with unwearied diligence, to diffuse the knowledge of the gospel; but, with the exception of some particulars, it has seemed good to the Holy Ghost to pass over their history in silence. After the list of their names, which is inserted in the first chapter, most of them are never again mentioned in any part of these inspired memoirs.
Five years are elapsed since this course
of Lectures commenced;
Remember, that it is the Holy Spirit only, by whom the pen of Luke was guided in composing this history, and the other sacred writers were inspired, who can open your understandings to understand the Scriptures, and dispose you to receive the word of God, with reverence and love. May he bless what has been spoken, according to his own will, that our preaching and your hearing may not be in vain! I conclude with the words of Paul to the Church of Thessalonica. “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Now, our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation, and good hope through grace, comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.” Amen!
Joshua
Acts
1:1-11 1:4 1:4 1:6 1:15 1:26 2:1 2:1-13 2:2 2:3 2:10 2:37-47 2:43 2:46 3:1-16 4:1-22 5:1-11 5:34-42 6:1-15 6:5 7:54-60 8:1-24 8:26-40 8:34 9:1-22 9:17 10:1-48 10:28 12:1-25 14:8-18 15:1 15:1-31 15:5 15:28 15:29 16:1-18 16:5 16:19-40 16:32 17:1-12 17:4 17:15-34 18:1-17 19:1-20 19:21-41 20:7 20:17-28 20:28 21:1-32 23:1-10 23:9 24:1-27 26:1-32 28:1-31
1 Corinthians
i ii iii iv v 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407