Not Paul, But Jesus

12

Since what is in the text was written, maturer thoughts have suggested an interpretation, by which, if received, the sad inferences presented by the doctrine, that misdeeds, and consequent suffering that have had place, could by a dip into a piece of water be caused never to have happened, may be repelled. According to this interpretation, the act of being baptized – the bodily act – is one thing; an act of washing away the sins – the spiritual act – another. The effect produced is – not the causing the misdeeds and sufferings never to have had place, but the causing them to be compensated for, by acts productive of enjoyment, or of saving in the article of sufferings, to an equal or greater amount.

13

See Ch. xvii. §. v. 4. Peter's and Cornelius's visions.

14

See Bentham's Church of Englandism examined.

15

Acts vii. ver. 47. Speech of St. Stephen. "But Solomon built him an house. Howbeit the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?" In itself, perfectly comfortable all this, to the dictates of reason and the instruction of Jesus: but not the less clear blasphemy against the Mosaic law.

16

Acts ix. ver. 1 and 2. "And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the Disciples of the Lord, went unto the High Priest, – And desired of him letters to Damascus to the Synagogues, &c."

17

Acts xxii. ver. 5. "As also the High Priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the Elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem for to be punished."

18

Yet, for even at the outset, after certain "days spent with the disciples," and employed of course in receiving from them the necessary instructions, he preached Jesus with such energy and success as not only to "confound," Acts ix. 19 to 24, the unbelieving among the Jews, but to provoke them to "take counsel to kill him."

19

Paul, says – 2nd Cor. 11:6 – "For though I be rude in speech yet am I not in knowledge nay, in everything we have made it manifest among all men to you-ward, or did I commit a sin in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I preached to you the Gospel of God for naught? I robbed other Churches, taking wages of them that I might minister unto you; and when I was present with you I was in want, I was not a burden on any man; for the brethren, when they came from Macedonia supplied the measure of my want, and in everything I kept myself from being burdensome unto you and so I will keep myself. As the truth of Christ is in me no man shall stop me of this glorying in the regions of Achaia, &c."

When ever we get a Temperamental and psychological view of Paul, we see verified the deductions of the author of this treatise, that he was a transparent imposter. An unscrupulous adventurer. With talent well adapted to dogmatically command the attention of the ignorant and especially those of organized hereditary idolatry, the extreme vanity, the vain glorious pretensions of this new priest was well adapted to obtain obsequious complacence from such people. He always presents himself in a controversial spirit of self-exaltation.

His egotistic diction could hardly be made more manifest than in the terms above quoted, to wit: – "I robbed other Churches taking wages of them that I might minister unto you, &c." It presents a striking contrast to the benevolent and fraternal spirit of Christ and his disciples.

20

N.B. The editor at this place inserts pages of discussion – which the author exhibited by way of an appendix. At the expense of a little redundancy and incongruity the editor inserts it in this place. – Ed.

21

According to the Acts' account, this same stoning, if it was the same, was much in the style of that same resurrection of Eutychus, which we have seen in Chapter xiii. §. 10. As to Paul, when this martyrdom had been suffered by him, – "some" says Acts xiv. 19, were "supposing he had been dead: " and on that supposition, "drew him out of the city." Paul, on the other hand, thought otherwise: he supposed himself alive, and, on that supposition, he walked off, as if nothing had been the matter with him. "Certain Jews … say verses 19 and 20, having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead. Howbeit, as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up, and came into the city: and the next day he departed with Barnabas to Derbe."

22

Gal. i. 18. "Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days."

23

Of any mention made of Galatia, in any of the Books of the New Testament, the following are, according to Cruden's Concordance, the only instances: 1 Cor. xvi. 1. "… have given order to the churches at Galatia." Times, assigned to these Epistles, A.D. 59. 2 Tim. iv. 10: "Crescens is departed to Galatia." A.D. 66. 1 Pet. i. 1: "to the strangers scattered in Galatia." Date A.D. 60.

24

Acts xv. 1-4. 1. "And certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. – When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them should go up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question. – And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. – And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the Church, and of the Apostles and Elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them."

25

Be this as it may, that he must have been in the way to hear, from various persons present, accounts, such as they were, of what was said by Paul, – seems to follow almost of course. This seems applicable even to the latest of the two occasions; for, though the place, Cæsarea, was some distance from Jerusalem, 56 miles, – yet the distance was not so great, but that the persons, who were attached to him, might, for the most part, be naturally supposed to have followed him: and in particular the historian, who, according to his history, continued in Paul's suite till, at the conclusion of this his forced excursion, he arrived at Rome.

But, on the subject of possible materials, one concluding query here presents itself. On a subject such as that in question, on an occasion, such as that in question, for a purpose such as that in question, a speech such as either of those in question, might it not, by a person in the historian's situation – not to speak of other situations – be just as easily made without any special materials, as with any the most correct and complete stock of materials?

26

Between Paul's third visit, and that which is here reckoned as his fourth, another is, by some, supposed87 to, have been taken place; on which supposition, this concluding one, which is here styled the fourth, ought to be reckoned the fifth.

But, for the support of this supposition, the grounds referred to for this purpose do not seem sufficient: – not that, if the supposition were true, any consequence material to the present purpose would follow.

For this supposition, what ground there is, consists in a passage in the Acts: – Acts 18:20, 21, 22.

20. When they, the Jews at Ephesus, desired [him] to tarry longer time with them, he consented not;

But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem; but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus.

And when he had landed at Cæsarea, and gone up, and saluted the church, he went down to Antioch.

There we have the grounds of the supposition. But, what is the support they give to it? – declaration, affirming the existence of an intention, is one thing; actually existing intention is another. Even supposing the existence of the intention in question, – intention is one thing; corresponding action, another. Jerusalem is not mentioned. Cæsarea being on the sea-coast, Jerusalem is indeed in the interior: and therefore, it may be said, is a place, to which, if a man went from Cæsarea, he would "go up:" but, from Cæsarea, it being on the coast, a man could not go to any place in Judaea not on the coast, without going up.

So much for place: – and now as to time. The time mentioned as the object of the intention, is the passover; but, that the time, at which, being gone up, Paul "saluted the church" – this being all which, upon this going up, he is here stated as doing – that this time was the passover, is not stated.

As to the salute here stated as given to the church, – at the conclusion, and as a material part of the result, of this inquiry, it will appear plain beyond all doubt, that, if by "the church" be understood any member of it at Jerusalem, besides two, or at most three, of the Apostles, – according to this interpretation, from the time of his Conversion Visit to Damascus antecedently to his first visit to Jerusalem, down to the last visit here reckoned as his fourth – there never was a day on which the church would have received his salute.

What will also be rendered manifest is – that it was an object with the author of the Acts, to induce a belief, that Paul, before the conclusion of his first visit, was upon good terms with the church, and so continued to the last: and that, to this end, a purposed misrepresentation was employed by the historian.

Not that, in regard to the visit here in question, to the purpose of the argument – it makes any sort of difference, whether it had place or had not. If it had place, neither the conclusion, nor any part of the argument, will be seen to require any variation in consequence.

27

In the current chronology, this Epistle to the Galatians is placed in the year 58; on the part of the author of the Acts, the first mention of his being in the company of Paul is placed in the year next following, to wit, 59. Note, that at the end of the Epistle to the Galatians, it is stated to be written from Rome: yet, according to the current chronology, his arrival at Rome, in custody, from Jerusalem, – at which time unquestionably he had never as yet visited Rome, – did not take place till the year 62.

28

First time, Acts ii. 45. Second time, Acts iv. 34.

29

"I conferred not with flesh and blood." (Gal. ii. 16.) "Of those who seemed to be somewhat, whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me." Not till "after three years" did I go "up to Jerusalem to see Peter." With language in this strain, it would have harmonized but indifferently, to have added, "nor should I have seen him then, had it not been for Barnabas."

30

Acts 20:35. It is in the parting scene – when about to break from his dissuading disciples, and enter upon his invasion project – that Paul is represented as saying to them: "Remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive." Whence this self-appointed and posthumous Apostle of Jesus got these words of Jesus – if such they were – must be left to conjecture. In the works of the four received biographers of Jesus, with Cruden and his Concordance for guides, all search for them has been fruitless.

31

Acts xv. 1 to 4: – "1. And certain men which came down from Judea, taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. – 2. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question. – 3. And being brought on their way by the Church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. – 4. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the Church, and of the Apostles and Elders; and they declared all things that God had done with them."

32

Gal. i. 18, 19. "Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. – 9. But other of the Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother."

Acts 15:4. "And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the Church, and of the Apostles and Elders; and they declared all things that God had done with them."

The cause of this contrariety lies not far beneath the surface. Paul had one object in view; his historiographer another. In the two passages, they wrote at distant times, and with different purposes. In his address to his Galatian disciples, Paul's object was to magnify his own importance at the expense of that of the Apostles: to establish the persuasion, not only of his independence of them, but of his superiority over them. The generality of them were not worth his notice; but having some business to settle with them, Peter, the chief of them, he "went" to see, and James, as being "the Lord's brother," he vouchsafed to see. On that particular occasion, such was the conception which Paul was labouring to produce: and such, accordingly, was his discourse. As for the historiographer, his object was, of course, throughout, to place the importance of his hero on as high a ground as possible. But, in this view, when once Paul had come to a settlement with the Apostles, the more universal the acceptance understood to have been received by him – received from the whole body of Christians, and from those their illustrious leaders in particular, – the better adapted to this his historiographer's general purposes would be the conception thus conveyed: accordingly they were received, he says, "of the Church, and the Apostles, and Elders."

33

Acts xv. 4. "And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the Church and of the Apostles and Elders, and they declared all things that God had done unto them."

34

Gal. ii. 6. "But of those who seemed to be somewhat, whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person: for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me. – And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. – Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do. – But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed."

35

Acts 15:5-21. 5. "But there rose 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. – And the Apostles and Elders came together for to consider of this matter. – And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the Gospel and believe. – And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; – And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. – Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? – But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. – 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. – And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: – Simon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. – And to this agree the words of the prophets; 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, and all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. – Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. – 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 pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. – For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day."

36

After the word blood, the mention made of things strangled seems to have been rather for explanation than as a separate ordinance. Of strangling, instead of bleeding in the Jewish style, – what the effect would be, other than that of retaining blood, which the Mosaic ordinance required should be let out, is not very apparent.

37

Another observation there is that applies even to the Jews. By Moses were all these several things forbidden. True: but so were a vast multitude of other things, from, which (after the exceptions here in question) the prohibition is, by this decision, taken off. These things, still proposed to be prohibited, as often as they entered a synagogue, they would hear prohibited: but, so would they all those other things, which, by this decision, are left free.

38

In the account of this excursion, Galatia – now mentioned for the first time in the Acts, – is mentioned, in the number of the countries, which, in the course of it, he visited. It stands fourth: the preceding places being Derbe, Lystra, Iconium and Phrygia. Acts 16:1 to 6. In Acts 18:23, "He … went over [all] Galatia … strengthening the disciples."

39

Acts 16:1 to 3. 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 that were at Lystra and Iconium. – Him would Paul have to go forth to him, and took and circumcised him, because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.

40

Gal. 2:1. "Then fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also."

41

2 Cor. 2:32. "In Damascus, the governor under Aretas the king kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me," &c. namely, on his conversion.

42

To this same Partition Treaty, allusion seems discernible in Paul's Epistle to his Roman adherents. Romans 15:15 to 22. "Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you, in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God, – That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the Gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost. – I have therefore whereof I may glory through Jesus Christ in those things which pertain to God. – For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed, – through mighty signs and wonders by the power of the spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ. – Yea, so I have strived to preach the Gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation: – but, as it is written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand. – For which cause also I have been much hindered from coming to you."

43

From this passage in Paul's Epistle to his Galatians88, compared with a passage in his first Epistle to the Corinthians89 – the Bible edited by Scholey, in a note to Acts xv. 39, (being the passage in which the rupture between Paul and Barnabas is mentioned), draws the inference, that, after this rupture between Paul and Barnabas, a reconciliation took place.

From the passage in question, if taken by itself, true it is that this supposition is a natural one enough. For, according to all appearances, the date of this Epistle to the Corinthians is posterior to that of the rupture: and, from the conjunct mention of the two names, if there were no evidence on the other side, it might naturally enough be supposed probable, how far soever from certain, that the intention was thereby, to report the two persons, as operating in conjunction, and even in each other's company. But, to the purpose of the argument no such supposition (it will be seen) is necessary. Labouring they both were herein represented to be, and to all appearance were, in the same field, viz. the field of the Gentiles: labouring, after and in conformity to this same treaty – the agreement made by them with the Apostles – the partition treaty so often mentioned. But, from this it followed not, by any means, that they were labouring in the same part of that field. For the purpose of the argument, the question was – What was the sort of relation, that had taken place, between these two preachers on the one part, and their respective disciples on the other? It is of this relation that it is stated by Paul, and stated truly, that as between him and Barnabas, it was the same: both being actual labourers in their respective parts of the same field: both being equally at liberty to cease from, to put an end to, their respective labours at any time: not that both were labouring in the same place, or in any sort of concert. "Or I only, and Barnabas, have not we, says Paul, power to forbear working?"

Thus inconclusive is the argument, by which the existence of a reconciliation is inferred. Against evidence so weak, the contrary evidence seems decisive. After mention made by him of the rupture, – had any reconciliation ever taken place, within the compass of time embraced by his history, would the author of the Acts have left it unnoticed? That, among his objects was the painting every incident, in colours at least as favourable, to the church in general, and to Paul in particular, as he durst, – is sufficiently manifest. By a rupture between two such holy persons, – a token, more or less impressive, of human infirmity, could not but be presented to view: and, to any reflecting mind – in those marks of warmth at least, to say nothing worse, which, from first to last, are so conspicuous, in the character and conduct, of this the historian's patron and principal hero, ground could scarce fail to be seen, for supposing – that it was to his side rather than that of Barnabas – the generous and ever-disinterested Barnabas – that the blame, principally, if not exclusively, appertained.

44

Acts 9:32. "And it came to pass, as Peter passed through all quarters, he came down also to the saints which dwelt at Lydda."

45

Acts 11:25. "Then departed Barnabas for to seek Saul." A.D. 43.

46

Acts 9:30, "Which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Cæsarea and sent him forth to Tarsus."