III

"linus, concerning the ftudie of the Scriptures, feems to promise a bare "hiftorie, and an account of the early infance of the Church: but if we "confider, that the writer is Luke the Physician, we shall at the fame "time difcern, that every word is suited to heal the maladies of the foul." 5. Says Auguftin: "Luke (z) after having writ a Gospel, containing a hiftorie of Christ's words and works to the time of his refurrection "and afcenfion, wrote fuch an account of the Acts of the Apoftles, as "he judged to be fufficient for the edification of believers. And it is "the only hiftorie of the Apostles, which has been received by the "Church: all other having been rejected, as not to be relied upon."

6. I beg leave to refer my readers to the paffages of Chryfoftom, already (a) tranfcribed, relating to this book: and to the whole of his first homilie upon it. I add now only one paffage more out of the fame homilie. "The (b) Gofpels, fays he, are the hiftorie of the things, which "Chrift did, and fpake. The Acts the hiftorie of the things, which "another Paraclet fpake and did."

7. It is not needful for me to make a distinct enumeration of the things contained in this book. Every one who has perused it with care, cannot but know, that it contains an account of the choice of Matthias to be Apoftle in the room of the traitor, of the wonderful and plentiful pouring out of the gift of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles, and other difciples of Jefus at Jerufalem, at the Pentecoft next fucceeding his crucifixion, and of the teftimonie bore by the Apostles to his refurrection and ascension in their discourses, and by many miracles, and various fufferings: their preaching firft at Jerufalem, and in Judea, and afterwards by themselves, or their affiftants, in Samaria: and then to Gentils in Judea, and afterwards out of it, as well as to Jews: and of the converfion of Paul, and his preaching, miracles, labours, fufferings, in many cities and countreys, parts of the Roman Empire, and the polite world, and at length in Rome itself.

8. If we were to indulge ourselves in making remarks upon this useful and excellent performance, nothing, perhaps, would be more ob. fervable, than it's brevity and concifeneffe: by which means many things must have been omitted, which happened during the period of that hiftorie. For it is very true, which Chryfoftom said, that (c) Luke leaves us thirsting for more.

9. Says Le Clerc : "Luke's (d) Apoftolical Historie relates the begin

❝ings

fcentis Ecclefiæ infantiam texere. Sed fi noverimus, fcriptorem eorum Lucam effe Medicum, cujus laus eft in evangelio, animadvertemus pariter, omnia verba illius animæ languentis effe medicinam. Ad Paulin. ep. 50. al. 103. T. 4. P. 2. p. 574.

(x) See Vol. x. p. 237. 238.

(a) See Vol. x. p. 323... 330.

(6) Τὰ μὲν ἦν ἐυαγγέλια ὧν ὁ χριςὺς ἐπόιησεν καὶ εἶπεν ισορία τίς ἐστὶν· αι δὲ πράξεις, ὧν ὁ ἕτερος παράκλητος εἶπε καὶ ἐπόνησε. In Ad. hom. i. Tom. 3. p. 9. B.

(c) Vol. x. p. 327.

(d) Hic vero definit Lucæ Hiftoria Apoftolica, quâ initia prædicationis evangelicæ apud Judæos, Ethnicofque, et minifterio quidem Petri et Pauli potiffimum fcribere adgreffus eft. De ceteris Apoftolis altum ubique apud eum eft filentium. . . Utinam vero, vir quifpiam apoftolicus, pari judicio et fide, ceterorum res geftas literis mandaffet, quæ narrationi Lucæ defunt fupplere voluiffet, idque opus ad nos perveniffet! Cler. H. E. An. 61. n. iv.

i

"ings of the preaching of the Gospel among Jews and Gentils, chiefly "by the miniftrie of Peter and Paul. For of the other Apoftles he is "almoft entirely filent. . . I wish, fays he, that fome other Apoftolical << man, of like judgement and integrity, had writ the hiftorie of the other "Apostles, and had undertaken to supply what was wanting in Luke's "hiftorie, and that this work had come down to us." But, however defirable it may now appear to us, we cannot perceive from ecclefiaftical hiftorie, that ever fuch a work was published.

10. Eftius imagined, "that (e) Luke, poffibly, intended to write a "third book, to fupply, particularly, the omiffions of the two years, "which St. Paul spent at Rome." But I verily believe, there is no ground at all for that conjectural fuppofition.

11. Again: Le Clerc, above mentioned, thinks, "that (ƒ) Luke breaks off the hiftorie of St. Peter, of whom he had faid fo much before, very abruptly, in those words, Acts xii. 17. And he departed, and went to another place." Nevertheless St. Luke afterwards drops St. Barnabas in a like manner. ch. xv. 39. And in the end he will take his leave of the Apoftle Paul himself without much more ceremonie.

12. Thofe omiffions are no reflection upon the writer, nor any disparagement to his hiftorie. The proper deduction to be made by us is this: We hereby perceive, that it was not the defign of St. Luke, to aggrandize Peter, or Paul, or any of the Apostles, nor to write their lives: but to record the evidences of our Saviour's refurrection, and to write a historie of the first preaching and planting the Chriftian Religion in the world. This defign he has admirably executed. And having filled up his plan, he concluded.

13. However, undoubtedly, many things are omitted by St. Luke. Some of which we may learn from St. Paul's epistles. I fhall obferve

fome omiffions.

14. St. Luke has not in the course of his historie, mentioned the writing of any of St. Paul's epiftles. It is probable, that he was at Corinth, when the Apostle wrote thence his large epiftle to the Romans. Nevertheless he takes not any notice of it, nor of the epiftles writ by St. Paul at Rome, when he certainly was with him, nor indeed of any other. By comparing the epiftles themselves, and St. Luke's hiftorie of the Apoftle in the Acts, we are enabled to trace the time and place of divers of thofe epiftles. But they are no where particularly mentioned by the historian.

15. In Acts ix. 19. 26. St. Luke after the account of St. Paul's converfion, speaks of his being at Damafcus, and his preaching there, and of the oppofition, which he there met with from the Jews, and his escape thence, and then going to Jerufalem. But St. Paul Gal. i. 17.

18. informs

Ac for

(e) Sed proculdubio multa actorum Pauli a Luca funt omiffa taffe Lucas meditabatur tertium librum, in quo repeteret acta illius biennii ... ficut Act. i. quædam expofuit tacita ultimo capite Evangelii. Eft. ad Aa. Ap. xxviii. 30.

(ƒ) Mirum eft, Lucam, poftquam liberationem Petri e carcere narravit cap. xii. 17. eumque in alium locum, hoc eft, extra Ierofolymam, iviffe dixit, ne verbulum quidem de eo habere, de quo tam multa alia dixerat. Id. ibid.

18. informs us, that after his converfion he went into Arabia, and then returned to Damafcus: and that three years paffed between his converfion and his going to Jerufalem. This is an inftructive inftance. For the omiffion is certain, and undoubted. I am of opinion, that St. Luke did not omit the journey into Arabia, because he did not know of it: but defignedly, and because he did not judge it neceffarie to be mentioned. Jerome (g) has taken particular notice of the omiffion of that journey into Arabia.

16. Like omiffions are in St. Luke's Gofpel. I fhall take notice of two. 1.) Having given the historie of our Lord's prefentation at the temple, he fays ch. ii. 39. And when they bad performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth. Nevertheless, I think, the holy family did not now go directly from Ferufalem to Nazareth, but to Bethlehem. There, as I fuppofe, our Lord received the homage of the Magians. And afterwards, to avoid the perfecution of Herod, they removed thence to Egypt, and then returned to Nazareth. All which is recorded Matth. ii. I..... 13. The vifit of the Magians must have been after the presentation at the temple. If it had been before, and if they had prefented their gifts, gold, and frankincenfe, and myrrh: mentioned Matth. ii. 11. Marie would not have made the leffer offering for her purification, mentioned Luke ii. 23. 24. Nor could the child Jefus have been fafely brought to Jerufalem, er fuch notice have been taken of him at the temple, as St. Luke particularly relates, ch. ii. 25... 38. if Herod, and all Jerufalem, had been juft before alarmed by the inquiries of the Magians: Where is he that is born King of the Jews? Matth. ii. 1. 2. Omitting therefore all those things, St. Luke says, as above obferved, and afterwards they returned to Nazareth, the place of their ufual abode. Which is agreeable to Matth. ii. 22. 23.

2.) Another thing obfervable is, that all our Saviour's appearances to his disciples, after his refurrection, recorded by St. Luke ch. xxiv. were at Jerufalem, or near it. He takes not any notice of our Saviour's meeting the difciples in Galilee, fo particularly mentioned Matth. xxviii. 7. and Mark xvi. 7. St. John alfo ch. xxi. I 23. fpeaks of our Saviour's fhewing himself to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias. And St. Paul affures us, that our Lord was feen of above five hundred brethren at ence. 1 Cor. xv. 6. Which, probably, was in the fame countrey. And though at the beginning of his book of the Acts, St. Luke refumes the account of our Saviour's fhewing himself to the disciples after his refurfection; there is nothing more about Galilee, than in the former relation. Infomuch, that, if we had St. Luke's hiftories only, we might have been apt to conclude, that all the appearances of our Saviour to his difciples were at Jerufalem, or near it, and no where elfe.

17.

St. Paul's epiftles inform us of many things omitted by St. Luke.

But

(g) Lucam vero idcirco de Arabia præteriiffe, quia forfitan nihil dignum apoftolatu in Arabia perpetrarat: et ea potius compendiofa narratione dixiffe; quæ digna Chrifti evangelio videbantur. Nec hoc fegnitiæ Apoftoli deputandum, fi fruftra in Arabia fuerit: fed quod aliqua difpenfatio et Dei præceptum fuerit, ut taceret. Hier. in Ep. ad Gal. cap, i. T. 4. p. 235. VOL. II.

H

But we should have known many more, if we had had a parallel hiftorian. A comparison of St. Luke's hiftorie of our Saviour with that of the other Evangelifts may affure us of this.

18. In the eleventh chapter of the fecond epiftle to the Corinthians, St. Paul mentions divers vifions and revelations, with which he had been favored. But St. Luke has not taken notice of any of them. St. Paul in his fpeech to the people at Jerufalem, recorded by St. Luke Acts xxii. 17. mentions a tranfe, which he had in the temple. But St. Luke has no where told us the exact time of it. Nor has he otherwise mentioned it.

19. I do not think, that these things were omitted by St. Luke, becaufe St. Paul concealed them from him: or because by fome other means he was unacquainted with the time and place of them. But it was a regard to brevity, that induced him to pass them over. They were not neceffarie to be inferted in his hiftorie. Without them he has recorded fufficient atteftations of Paul's apoftolical authority, and of the truth, and divine original of the doctrine taught by him.

20. Says St. Paul, unwillingly, and conftrained by the disadvantageous infinuations and charges of felf-interested and defigning men. 2 Cor. xi. 23. Are they minifters of Chrift? [I speak as a fool:] I am more. In labours more abundant, in ftripes above measure, in prifons more frequent, in deaths oft.

In prifons more frequent. Therefore before writing this epiftle, in the year 57. Paul had been imprisoned several times: though St. Luke has mentioned before this time one imprisonment only, which was at Philippi. Acts xvi. 23. .. 40. Upon which Eftius (b) obferves, that Paul did and fuffered many things, not mentioned in the Acts. And Rom. xvi. Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinfmen, and my fellow-prifoners. who alfo were in Chrift before me. Paul was not a prifoner, when he wrote the epiftle to the Romans, in the beginning of the year 58. But (i) he had been in prison before with those two early Chriftians, his relations. But where, or when, we cannot exactly fay.

7.

21. Ver. 24. of the Jews five times received I forty ftripes fave one. Nevertheless St. Luke has not mentioned one of thofe times. Eftius conjectures, that (k) Luke omitted these, and many other things, because he was not with the Apostle, when they happened, and Paul out of mo

deftie

(b) De Paulo autem incarcerato ante hanc epiftolam, in Actis Apoftolorum non legimus quidem, nifi cap. xvi. ubi a Philippenfibus in carcerem miffus legitur. Sed permulta Paulus et fecit et paffus eft, quæ in Actis non fcri buntur. Eft. ad 2 Cor. xi. 23.

(i) Porro concaptivos intellige, quod aliquando communia cum Paulo vincula pro Chrifto paffi fuiffent. Ubi tamen, aut quando factum fit, ignoratur. Eft, ad Rom. xvi. 7.

(k) Sed cur Lucas in Actis ne unius quidem flagillationis ex quinque meminit ? ldeo videlicet, quod de Paulo pene ea fola, quibus ipfe, præfens fuit, figillatim recenfeat: alia vero vel filentio pertranfeat, vel fummatim ac breviter referat... Qua in re notanda humilitas Pauli, qui fuas tot et tam graves pro Chrifto paffiones Lucæ comiti fuo non aperuerit, ne hic qui, dem recitaturus, nifi coëgiffet eum amor falutis Corinthiorum. Id. ib. ad

Br. 24.

deftie forbore to tell him of them. I rather think, that Luke was fully acquainted with Paul's hiftorie. But he aimed at brevity, and judged the things mentioned by him to be fufficient.

22. Ver. 25. Thrice was I beaten with rods: meaning, I fuppofe, by, Roman Magistrates. But St. Luke has mentioned one inftance only of this: which was at Philippi, when Paul and Silas both underwent this hard ufage. Acts xvi. 19... 40. Of this (1) likewife Eftius has taken notice in his Commentarie.

Once was I ftoned: undoubtedly meaning at Lyftra in Lycaonia, as rė lated by St. Luke Acts xiv. 19. 20.

Thrice I have fuffered shipwreck. St. Luke has recorded but one inftance, which was not until after this time, in the Apoftle's voyage from Judea to Rome. Acts xxvii. Which therefore must have been the fourth.

A night and a day have I been in the deep. At one of thofe times I efcaped with the utmost difficulty, by getting on a plank, and floating in the fea a night and a day, or a whole day of four and twenty hours. 23. Ver. 26. In journeyings, often, in perils of waters, or rather rivers. Which (m) are fometimes very dangerous. But St. Luke has not recorded any dangers of the Apoftle upon rivers, either in croffing them, or failing upon them.

24. Says Tillemont in his life of St. Paul: "The (n) greatest part of interpreters think, that St. Paul made no voyages, but those, which are "taken notice of in the Acts. . . . Nevertheless we must neceffarily ac"knowledge, that befide what St. Luke informs us of the fufferings of "St. Paul, this Apostle was five times fcourged by the Jews, twice beaten “with rods, and thrice fhipwrecked. All this happened, before he wrote his fecond epiftle to the Corinthians: that is, in the time, of "which St. Luke has writ the hiftorie. Nevertheless St. Luke fays no"thing of all this. It is certain therefore, that either he has omitted "the circumstances of the most remarkable events, which he relates, or that St. Paul made several voyages, of which he has taken no "notice."

25. The reason of St. Luke's filence here I take to be the fame that has been already affigned of his filence upon other occafions. It was not neceffarie, that these things should be related. To have writ an account of all the Apostle's journeys, and dangers, would have rendered the work more voluminous and prolix, than was judged proper. When St. Luke fet about compofing and publishing this book, he had all the materials before him, and his plan was formed. Agreeably to which, he determined to write at large the hiftorie of St. Paul's voyage from Judea to Rome, in which are many remarkable incidents, and to omit some other of

(1) Ter virgis cafus fum: a Gentilibus. Erat enim Romanis confuetudo, virgis cœdere nocentes. . Porro Lucas tantum femel meminit hujus contu. melia Paulo illatæ: fcilicet Act. xvi. ubi scribit eum una cum Sila virgis cæfum a Philippenfibus. Eft. in loc.

(m) Periculis fluminum: quæ interdum non minus periculofa funt navigantibus, quam mare. Eft. in loc.

{n) Mem. Ec. T. i. St. Paul, note xviii.