Animadverfions upon Epiphanius, though it be fomewhat long. I do it the rather, because he is an older author than any of thofe, hitherto cited in behalf of this interpretation. He is confidering what Epiphanius fays of Luke's being one of Chrift's feventy difciples. The fum of what he advanceth is to this purpose: "He dares not affirm, that Luke "was a difciple of Chrift, because many of the Fathers have thought "otherwise. But he fays, there is nothing in St. Luke's introduction to “induce us to think, he was not a disciple of Chrift, or that he had not "feen a large part of the things related by him: but rather the contrarie. "And he was willing to fhew, that Epiphanius is not contradicted by St. "Luke himself."

7. St. Luke was for a good while a conftant companion of St. Paul. But he was alfo acquainted with other Apostles.

Tertullian, and Chryfoftom, as we have seen, call St. Paul Luke's Mafter. But they need not be understood to intend, that Luke learned nothing from other Apoftles. So Irenaeus faid: "Luke, the companion of Paul, put down in a book the Gospel that had been preached by Paul.” But in another place he fays: "That (*) Luke was a fellow-laborer of the Apoftles, especially, of Paul." And in another place he calls Luke (**) a follower and difciple of the Apoftles." And Eufebius faid: Luke was for the most part a companion of Paul, but had alfo more than a flight acquaintance with the other Apoftles." And Jerome fays: "It was fuppofed, that Luke did not learn his Gofpel from the Apoftle "Paul only, who had not converfed with the Lord in the flesh, but also "from other Apoftles. Which alfo he acknowledgeth at the begining "of his volume, faying: Even as they delivered them unto us, who from the "beginning were eye-witnesses of the word."

That must be right, I think, because it is agreeable to the writer's own words in the introduction to his work. I always confider Paul as an eye-witnesse. But he was not an eye-witneffe from the begining: nor a minifter of the word, from the begining. He must have had a distinct knowledge of all things concerning the Lord Jefus. Chriftianity, as has been often, and justly said, is founded in facts. In order to preach it, Paul must have had a knowledge of Chrift's life, preaching, miracles, death, refurrection, and afcenfion. As he was not inftructed by other Apostles in the doctrine preached by him, he must have had it from revelation. And I fuppofe, that a man, who, like Luke, often heard Paul preach, might have compofed a Gospel, or hiftorie of Jefus Chrift from Paul's fermons, preached in divers places, and to men of all characters. And the ancients feem to have supposed, that Luke had thereby great affiftances for compofing his Gofpel. Which I do not deny. Nevertheless it feems fairly to be concluded from his own introduction, that he had confulted others alfo.

It might not be amifs, if I had room for fuch obfervations, to com- pare St. Luke's Gospel and the hiftorical parts of St. Paul's Epiftles, and

(*) Quoniam non folum profequutor, fed et cooperarius fuerit Apoftolorum, maxime autem Pauli. Iren. l. 3. c. 14. n. 1. p. 201. b. (**) Lucas autem sectator et difcipulus Apoftolorum. Ibid. cap. x, [al, xi.] in p. 189..

...

and alfo of his discourses recorded by Luke himself in the book of the Acts. It is reasonable to think, that wherever any difciples of Jefus preached the Chriftian Religion, they gave an account of the things concerning Chrift. Wherever the Apoftles, or others, preached, in order to induce faith in Jefus and his doctrine, their firft difcourfes must have been historical. The reason of the thing leads us to this. And we are affured of it from their discourses, of which we have an account. We perceive this in the discourses of St. Peter at Jerufalem. Acts ii. 22. 36. iii. 12... 26. iv. 10. and at the house of Cornelius in Cefarea, x. 34... 43. from Paul's discourses in the fynagogue at Antioch in Pifidia. Ch. xiii. 23... 38. at Athens xvii. 31. at Corinth. xix. 8. before the Governor Feftus, and King Agrippa, ch. xxvi. and at Rome: though then many years had paffed, fince the afcenfion of Chrift, and fince his religion had begun to be preached, and propagated in the world. St. Luke's general account of Paul there is thus: And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired houfe, and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jefus Chrift. xxviii. 30. 31. "That is, fays (d) Grotius, his miracles, "doctrine, death, refurrection, and the miffion of the Spirit: by which "things men were affured, that the heavenly kingdom was fet up.' And this may have been the occafion of the frequent ufe of thofe expreffions, preaching Chrift, and preaching Jefus Chrift, as equivalent to preaching the Christian Religion, or the doctrine of the Gospel.

I must own, that in the furvey of St. Luke's Gospel, and St. Paul's difcourfes and epiftles, I have not difcerned any fuch special agreement, as to be induced to think, that one of them had copied the other.

St. Paul fays, at Antioch in Pifidia Acts xiii. 23. Of this man's feed has God raifed unto Ifrael a Saviour, Jefus. And 2 Tim. ii. 8. Remember, that Jefus Chrift, of the feed of David, was raifed from the dead, according to my gospel. These things are agreeable to St. Luke's Gofpel. But they are alfo in St. Matthew's. And muft have been taught by all the Apoftles, and all preachers of the gospel.

Acts xx. 35. And to remember the words of the Lord Jefus, how he faid: It is more bleffed to give, than to receive. That faying of our Lord is not recorded by St. Luke in his Gospel, nor by any other of the Evangelifts.

1 Cor. xv. 5...7. And that he was feen of Cephas, then of the Twelve. After that, be was feen of above five hundred brethren at once... After that he was feen of James, then of all the Apoftles. St. Luke's account of our Saviour's appearances after his refurrection are in ch. xxiv. and Acts i. I... 12. And if they are obferved, I fuppofe, that no remarkable agreement between Paul and Luke will be difcerned, but rather the contrarie. The five hundred brethren, mentioned by St. Paul, probably, faw Jefus in Galilee: where, as in Matth. xxvi. 32. xxviii. 7. and Mark xvi. 7. he appointed to meet the difciples. But of this there is nothing in St. Luke. And all our Saviour's appearances to the disciples, mentioned

(d) Miracula ejus, et præcepta, et mortem, et refurrectionem, et miflionem Spiritus Sancti. Per que certi fiebant homines de regno illo cœlefti. Grot. ad Act. xxviii. 31.

tioned by him, were at Jerufalem, or in it's neighborhood. Nor does Luke give any hint of that particular appearance to James, mentioned by St. Paul. Not now to add any thing farther.

However, I shall transcribe below (e) some observations of Mr. Wetftein, relating to this matter.

8. It may be reckoned probable, that St. Luke died a natural death: forafmuch as none of the most ancient writers, fuch as Clement of Alexandria, Irenæus, Origen, Eufebius, Jerome, fay any thing of his martyrdom. Gregorie Nazianzen, in (f) one of his orations, seems to put Luke among Martyrs. Nevertheless, as is well obferved by (g) Tillemont, Elias Cretenfis, in the eighth centurie, famous for his Commentaries upon Gregorie, fuppofeth it certain, that (b) Luke did not dye a Martyr any more than John, the Apoftle and Evangelift: but that after having fuffered much in the cause of Chrift, and the gofpel, he returned in peace to the God of peace. Gaudentius, Bishop of Brescia, about 387. obferves, that (i) in his time it was generally faid, that Luke and Andrew finished their courfe at Patre in Achaia. He does not fay, in the way of martyrdom. I do not perceive Paulinus, about the year 403. to (k) celebrate Luke, as a Martyr, but rather Nazarius, mentioned in the next verfe. If Martyr belongs to Luke, it may be understood in a general fenfe, as equivalent to Confeffor, or a great fufferer for the gofpel.

9. Cave fays, that (1) Luke lived a fingle life, and died in the 84. year of his age, about the year of Chrift 70. but of what death, is uncertain. And it is true, that Nicephorus, in the fourteenth centurie, fays, that (m) Luke died in the So. year of his age. And in fome editions of Jerome's book of Illuftrious Men there is a passage, near the end of the article of St. Luke, importing, that he lived 84. years in celibacie. But Martiany, the learned Benedictin editor of Jerome's works, Lays,

(e) Si Lucas vel Pauli hortatu, vel peculiari Spiritus San&ti aflatu ad fcribendum impulfus fuiffet, rem memoratu tam dignam . . . filentio neutiquam tranfiiffet. Quod vero quidam exiftimant, ex locis 2 Tim. ii. 8. et i. Cor. xv. 4. collatis cum Luc. x. 7. et xxiv, 34. probari, Luce, quod dicitur, Evangelium ad Paulum potius auctorem effe referendum, nobis parum fit verofimile. Wetfiein. ad Luc. cap. i. ver. 3. Tom. i. p. 644.

(f) Orat. 3. p.76.

(g) St. Luc. Mem. Ec. T. 2.

(b) Quippe ne longe abeam, Joannes ... et item Lucas haudquaquam interempti fuere, verum cum permultas propter Chriftum et ejus evangelium calamitates pertuliffent, in pace ad eum qui pacis Deus eft, reverfi funt. El. Cr. Annot. p. 322.323.

tur.

(i) Andreas et Lucas apud Patras, Achaia civitatem, confummati referunGaud. Serm. 17. ap. Bib. PP. Tom. 5. p. 969. C.

(k) Hic pater Andreas, et magno nomine Lucas,

Martyr et illuftris fanguine Nazarius.

Paulin. Ep. 32. p. 210. Couf. Annot. p. 75. Paris 1685.

(1) Vitam egit cœlibem, ac mortuus eft anno ætatis 84. circa annum (ut nonnulli volunt,) 70. Quo vero mortis genere incertum eft. Hift. Lit. p. 25.

(m) Ογδοήκοντα ἐτῶν γενόμενος, ὥς φασιν. Niceph. 1. 2. C. 43.

says, that (n) paffage is not in any manuscripts. Nor does he know, whence that filly fiction was borrowed. Fabricius (0) confirms that ac

count.

The Time of

this Gofpel.

IV. There is no great difficulty in fettling the time of St. Luke's writing his Gofpel. The Acts of the Apostles were published in 63. or 64. and not long after his Gospel, as is generally allowed. Accordingly Dr. Mill (p) fuppofeth those books to have been two parts of one and the fame volume, and to have been published in the year of Chrift 64.

This argument was reprefented at length (9) formerly. The reader is referred to it, that I may not enlarge upon it in this place.

V. However, I cannot forbear to obferve fome marks Marks of Time in of time in the Gospel itself. the Gospel itself.

1. The occafion of writing it, as St. Luke affures us in the introduction, was, that many had already published narrations of these things. But it cannot be reasonably thought, that many fhould have writ hiftories of Jefus Chrift presently after his afcenfion, nor indeed till many years after it.

2. There are several things in the Gospel, from which it may be fairly argued, that it was not writ, till after Peter and Paul, and perhaps other Apostles likewife, had preached to Gentils, and received them into the Church, without their embracing the peculiarities of the law of Moses.

3. In ch. ii. 1o. the angel fays to the fhepherds near Bethlehem: I bring you good tidings of great joy to all people. At ver. 30... 32. Simeon says, at the presentation of Jefus in the temple: Mine eyes have feen thy falvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people: a light to lighten the Gentils, and the glorie of thy people Ifrael. In ch. iii. 8. fays John the Baptift: God is able of thefe ftones to raise up children to Abraham. And I might here refer to ch. i. 78. 79. I fuppofe, that when St. Luke recorded these things, he understood them. Which he could not do, till after the gospel had been freely and fully published among Gentils.

4. That St. Luke understood the fpirituality of the doctrine of the gofpel, may be concluded from the account, which he has given of our Lord's difcourfe, recorded ch. vi. 20. . . 49. I might for this refer to ch. i. 74. 75. and other places.

5. Ch. vii. 9. When our Lord had heard the centurion's profeffion of faith, he marvelled at bim, and said: I have not found so great faith, no

not

(7) Falfo additur in hoc loco: Vixit octoginta et quatuor annos, uxorem non babens. Nullum exftat veftigium horum verborum in manufcriptis codicibus. Neque novi, unde putida hæc commenta fluxerint. Martian.

(o) Sed illa Erafmus, Martinus Lipfius, et Suffridus Petri, in exemplaribus fuis mff. non invenerunt. Fabr. in loc. ap. Bib. Ecclef.

() Voluminibus hujus D. Lucæ partem pofteriorem, feu Aéyor dévrepor quod attinet, librum dico Actuum Apoftolorum, haud dubium eft, quin is fcriptus fuerit ftatim poft óyor parov, five Evangelium. Poleg. num. 121. (9) See in this volume ch. iv. fe&t. iv.

not in Ifrael, In Matth. viii. 11. 12. is a farther enlargement. The like to which may be seen in Luke xiii. 28. . . 30.

6. In ch. xiii. 6. . . . 9. is the parable of the fig-tree, fpared one year more: reprefenting the ruin of the Jewish church and people as near, if they did not speedily repent.

7. In ch. xi. 48.. 51. are predictions of the calamities coming upon the Jewish people. In ch. xiii. 34. 35. are our Lord's lamentations over the city of Jerufalem, in the view of the calamities coming upon it. See likewife xvii. 22. 37. xix. II. 27. xx. 9... 18. xxi. 5. . . . II. and ver. 20. . . 35. As St. Luke enlargeth so much in his accounts of these predictions, it may be argued, that the accomplishment was not far off, when he wrote.

.

8. In ch. xiv. 16... 24. is the parable of a great fupper. When they who were first invited, refused to come. Whereupon the invitations were enlarged, and made more general. And in the end he who made the fupper declares, that they who were first bidden, fhould not taft of it: representing the call of the Gentils, and the general rejection of the Jews for their unbelief.

9. In ch. xiii. 18... 21. are the parables of the grain of mustard-feed, and leaven, representing the wonderful progreffe of the gofpel: of which, probably, St. Luke had been witneffe, when he recorded them.

ro. Ch. xxiv. 46. 47... And he said unto them... that repentance and remiffion of fins fhould be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerufalem. When St. Luke wrote this, it is very likely, that he well understood the commiffion of the Apoftles, as reaching to men of all denominations, throughout the whole world.

11. But I need not enlarge farther on these internal characters of time, the other argument being fufficient and fatisfactorie.

The Place, where VI. I muft fay fomething concerning the place, it was writ. where St. Luke's Gospel was writ.

Jerome, as before (r) quoted, in the prologue to his Commentarie upon St. Matthew, fays, that (s) Luke, the third Evangelift, published his Gospel in the countreys of Achaia and Bocötia. In his book of Illuftrious Men he fays, the (t) Acts were writ at Rome. Gregorie Nazianzen says, that (u) Luke wrote for the Greeks, or in Achaia. And speaking of the provinces of divers of the Apoftles and Evangelists, he (x) affigns Judea to Peter, the Gentils to Paul, Achaia to Luke, Epirus to Andrew, Ephefus or Afia to John, India to Thomas, Italie to Mark: in which countrey, undoubtedly, many of the ancients believed this laft mentioned Evangelift to have writ his Gofpel. Chryfoftom does not fay, where Luke wrote: but only that (y) he wrote for all in general.

We are told by (z) Philoftorge, that in the reign of the Emperour Conftantius St. Luke's reliques were tranflated from Achaia to Conftanti

(r) Vol. x. p. 84. 85.

(s) In Achaiæ Boeotiæque partibus volumen condidit. Ibid.

(t) Ib. p.95.

(u) Vol. ix. p. 133.

nople.

(*) Εγω πέτρε ἡ ἰεδαῖα, τί πάυλῳ κοινὸν πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη, λυκᾶ πρὸς ἀχαίαν . . μαρκῷ πρὸς ἰταλίαν; Gregor. Οr. 25. p. 438. Α.

() Vol. x. p. 318.

(x) Vol. vii. p. 317.