Page images

our prayers, remembering without ceasing your

work of faith, and labour of love, i Theff. chap. i. ver. 3. To Timothy : “ I thank God, whom I serve from my fore“ fathers with pure confcience, that with“out ceasing I have remembrance of thee “ in my prayers night and day,” 2 Tim. chap. i. ver. 4. In thefe quotations, it is usually his remembrance, and never his hear. ing of them, which he makes the subject of his thankfulness to God. As great difficulties stand in the


of supposing the epistle before us to have been written to the church of Ephesus, fo I think it probable that it is actually the epistle to the Laodiceans, referred to in the fourth chapter of the epistle to the Colossians. The text which contains that reference is this: - When this epistleis read among you,

cause 66 that it be read also in the church of the “ Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the “ epistle from Laodicea,” chap. iv. ver. 16. The “ epistle from Laodicea" was an epistle sent by St. Paul to that church, and by them transmitted to Coloffe. The two churches were mutually to communicate the epistles


[ocr errors]

they had received. This is the way in which the direction is explained by the greater part of commentators, and is the most probable sense that can be given to it. It is also probable that the epistle alluded to was an epistle which had been received by the church of Laodicea lately. It appears then, with a considerable degree of evidence, that there existed an epistle of St. Paul's nearly of the same date with the epistle to the Colossians, and an epistle directed to a church (for such the church of Laodicea was) in which St. Paul had never been. What has been observed concerning the epistle before us, shews that it answers

perfectly to that character. Nor does the mistake seem


difficult to account for. Whoever inspects the map of Asia Minor will see, that a person proceeding from Rome to Laodicea would

pro: bably land at Ephesus, as the nearest frequented sea-port in that direction. Might not Tychicus then, in passing through Ephesus, communicate to the Christians of that place theletter, with which he was charged? And might not copies of that letter be mul


tiplied and preserved at Ephesus? Might not some of the copies drop the words of designation εν τη Λαοδικεια *, which it was of no consequence to an Ephesian to retain ? Might not copies of the letter come out into the Christian church at large from Ephesus; and might not this give occasion to a belief that the letter was written to that church? And, lastly, might not this belief produce

« And

# And it is remarkable that there seem to have been some ancient copies without the words of designation, either the words in Ephesus, or the words in Laodicea. St. Basil, a writer of the fourth century, speaking of the present epistle, has this very singular passage : “ writing to the Ephesians, as truly united to him who “ is through knowledge, he (Paul) calleth them in a

peculiar sense such who are; saying, to the saints who are and (or even) the faithful in Christ Jesus; for so those “ before us have transmitted it, and we have found it in “ ancient copies.” Dr. Mill interprets (and, notwithstanding some objections that have been made to him, in my opinion rightly interprets) these words of Balil, as declaring that this father had seen certain copies of the epistle in which the words “ in Ephesus” were wanting. And the passage, I think, must be considered as Basil's fanciful way of explaining what was really a corrupt and defective reading; for I, do not believe it possible that the author of the epistle could have originally written Syoss T015 dow, without any name of place to follow it.


the error which we suppose to have crept into the inscription ?

No. V.

As our epistle purports to have been written during St. Paul's imprisonment at Rome, which lies beyond the period, to which the Acts of the Apostles brings up his history; and as we have seen and acknowledged that the epistle contains nó reference to any transaction at Ephesus during the apostle's residence in that city, we cannot expect that it should supply many marks of agreement with the narrative. One coincidence however occurs, and a coincidence of that minute and less obvious kind, which, as hath been repeatedly observed, is of all others the most to be relied

upon. Chap. vi. ver. 19,20, we read, “ praying “ for me, that I

that I may open my mouth boldly to make known the mystery of the gospel, 66 for which I am an ambassador in bonds." " In bonds," şv ahurei, in a chain. In the twenty-eighth chapter of the Acts we are informed, that Paul, after his arrival at Rome, was suffered to dwell byhimselfwith a soldier,


[ocr errors]

that kept him. Dr. Lardner has shewn that this mode of custody was in use amongst the Romans, and that whenever it was adopted the prisoner was bound to the soldier by a single chain; in reference to which St. Paul, in the twentieth verse of this chapter, tells the Jews, whom he had affemblad, 66 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,anu anuo IV TAUTTU Deporterpeas. It is in exact conforinity therefore with the truth of St. Paul's situation at the time, that he declares of himself in the epittle, πρεσβευω εν αλυσει. And the exactners is the more remarkable, as anuois (a chain) is no where used in the fingular number to express any other kind of custody. When the prisoner's hands or feet were bound together, the word was doneos (bonds), as in the twenty-fixth chapter of the Acts, where Paul replies to Agrippa, “ 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," Tapexτος των δεσμων τουτων. . When the prisoner

« EelmineJätka »