according to his works: of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly 15 withstood our words [or, our preachings].

At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I 16 pray God that it may not be laid to their charge. Notwithstanding the 17 Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might hear and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion. And the Lord shall deliver me 18 from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom : to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

:

Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the houshold of Onesiphorus. Erastus 19 abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.

EXPLANATION.

20

The book of the Acts of the Apostles closes with a statement that the apostle Paul remained in Rome for two full years; during which time, although a prisoner, and therefore under restraint, he was allowed to live in a house hired by himself, where he freely received all persons who chose to visit him; and that during this period he was engaged continually in preaching the gospel, and giving instructions in the doctrine of salvation by the Lord Jesus Christ. This he did openly and boldly, no person placing any hindrance in his way.

To the information with which this book closes, we are however enabled to add several particulars connected with the writing of St. Paul's later Epistles; of which we have not found the occasion in the course of the history. By a careful comparison of the Epistles themselves, we may gather much information respecting the period at which they were written, and of several events incidentally referred to. This information shall now be arranged in order, as a kind of supplement to the Acts of the Apostles. For this purpose, the several passages from the Epistles, to which reference must be made, are placed at the head of this portion.

It appears that the first Epistle which Paul wrote from Rome, was that to the Ephesians, which he sent to them by the hands of Tychicus. (Eph. vi. 21, 22.) Before however Tychicus left Rome, after the Epistle was written, Timothy and Epaphroditus (or Epaphras, as his name is otherwise written) arrived there. Paul then wrote his epistle to the Colossians, which he entrusted to the

same Tychicus, with whom he associated Onesimus, a christian, who being a domestic slave belonging to Philemon, had left his master and come to Rome. (Col. iv. 7-9.) At the same time Paul wrote a special letter to Philemon himself, who appears to have resided at Colosse ; and sent it to him by the hands of his fugitive slave, whom he restores to him, and commends to his kindness and mercy. Tychicus with Onesimus having departed, charged with these three letters, (to the Ephesians, to the Colossians, and to Philemon), Paul wrote another epistle, addressed to the Philippians; this he sent by the hands of Epaphroditus, who had been seriously ill. All these letters were written during the latter part of the two years referred to in the Acts of the Apostles; and were the only epistles written during that period.

After giving this summary of the facts, it will be interesting to state how they may be gathered from the several Epistles.

It is first of all very clear that, when Paul wrote all these epistles, he was a prisoner in bonds; and several circumstances combine to shew, that the place of his imprisonment was Rome. (Eph. iii. 1, 13; vi. 19, 20. Col. i. 24; iv. 3. Philemon 9, 13. Phil. i. 7, 12-14.) In opening the epistle to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Philippians, he associates Timothy with himself in the salutation: but this he does not do in the epistle to the Ephesians, which shews that Timothy could not have been at Rome when Paul wrote his letter to the Ephesians. The letter to the Ephesians, and the letter to the Colossians, were both sent by Tychicus; and therefore it may be inferred that, immediately after the epistle to the Ephesians was written, and before it was despatched, Timothy arrived at Rome.

About the same time Epaphroditus also arrived; and as he and Timothy appear to have been previously associated at Philippi, (Phil. ii. 19, 22, 25), they most probably came from that place together, Epaphroditus being charged with some offering for the apostle's need, which he delivered to Paul at Rome. (Phil. iv. 18, 19.)

When Epaphroditus, (or Epaphras, the names being the same), brought the gift from Philippi, he also communi

cated to the apostle an account of the flourishing condition of the church at Colosse (Col. i. 7, 8); which induced Paul to write to them; and he probably wrote at once, in order to take advantage of the same conveyance as that by which he was just despatching his letter to the Ephesians. (Col. iv. 7, 8.) This inference is strongly confirmed by the remarkable similarity that exists between the epistle to the Ephesians and that to the Colossians. This is so striking, that the latter has been considered as an abridgement of the former; and some have supposed that the epistle to the Ephesians is that which the apostle means, when he tells the Colossians of a certain letter which he had written to the church in Laodicea. (Col. iv. 16.) The connection in point of time with the epistle to Philemon is plain; as that is stated to have been sent by Onesimus, who is also mentioned as accompanying Tychichus in conveying the letter to the Colossians.

After this Epaphroditus became ill; but upon recovering, was sent by the apostle to Philippi with his letter, acknowledging the service and affection of the Philippians to their father in the Lord Jesus. (Phil. ii. 25-30.) In this Epistle, Paul expresses an expectation of returning to Philippi (Phil. i. 26; ii. 24); and in that to Philemon, he even desires that a lodging may be prepared for him. (Philemon 22.) These are indications that all these four letters must have been written at the time when the apostle was expecting to obtain his release, which shortly after took place; and therefore that they cannot be dated earlier than the latter part of the year 60, as St. Paul arrived at Rome early in the year 59.

While this is all that we can gather from the epistles to have happened during the two years referred to at the end of the Acts of the Apostles, we have the means of tracing some further events which occurred during at least five years more. As Paul's release took place two years after his arrival at Rome, it has been reasonably conjectured that he then fulfilled the purpose mentioned in his letter to the Romans some time before; and that being at liberty, he proceeded to do what he had then told them was his intention, by going to Spain. (Rom. xv. 28.) There are historical records existing which confirm the belief that he

did so; and that for about two years he was engaged in preaching the gospel to that people. Whether this be so or not, we have a scriptural proof that he returned to Italy, for the epistle to the Hebrews gives evidence of this. That epistle was written from Italy; and by tracing the course of the subsequent events, we may arrive at the conclusion that it was written in the year 63. (Heb. xiii. 24.)

When Paul left Rome in the year 61, Timothy was there, and at liberty; and when he wrote the epistle to the Hebrews in the year 63, Timothy had been in confinement, but had been "set at liberty." (Heb. xiii. 23.) The next thing we find is, that Paul passed through Crete; very probably on his way to Jerusalem,-a journey of which he expressed the anticipation, in writing to the Hebrews. (Heb. xiii. 19.) At Crete he left Titus to superintend the church (Titus i. 5); and then we find him passing through Ephesus into Macedonia, most probably on his return from Jerusalem. At Ephesus he left Timothy as he had left Titus at Crete. (1 Tim. i. 1—4.)

There is reason to suppose that his letter to Titus was written from Macedonia, at the time last referred to. In that letter he speaks of his intention to pass the winter at Nicopolis. (Titus iii. 12.) This must have been written in the summer of the year 64, referring to the forthcoming winter of 64-5. It was during this winter that his first epistle was written to Timothy from Nicopolis.

There is an interval after this, which is filled up by many suppositions; but nothing is known certainly of the apostle's course, until we find from his second letter to Timothy, that he had been at Corinth, and at Miletum. (2 Tim. iv. 20.) The letter itself was evidently written at Rome. The apostle had been again apprehended, and conveyed as a prisoner to Rome. It is conjectured from 2 Tim. i. 15, that he was seized in Asia. The second epistle to Timothy was written immediately before his martyrdom, of which he declares his prophetical anticipation. (2 Tim. iv. 5-8.) The date of this epistle is about the year 66.

To complete the history of what the Apostles did, we will add an account of what may be inferred with respect

to the other epistles, which are commonly called "General Epistles "-those of St. James, St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude. With regard to these, there is not the same scriptural reason as we have gathered in order to establish the dates of those of St. Paul. Still there is sufficient agreement in the opinions of those who have studied the subject, to enable us to class these epistles in the following

order.

We have seen that there is reason to believe, that the apostle Peter went forth from Antioch upon a general missionary journey to the Jews, at the same time that the apostle Paul commenced his missionary journey to the Gentiles from the same place; and that he passed through Corinth on his way to Rome. This was in the year 52, (see page 254.) Whether he arrived at Rome, and how long he remained there, cannot be stated upon any certain authority; but there is every reason to believe that his first general epistle was written in the year 59, and that epistle was evidently written at Babylon. This could scarcely have been the ancient Babylon (1 Pet. v. 13) in Mesopotamia, which had been destroyed long before Peter's time: neither could the name of Babylon have referred at that time to Rome; as there is no reason to suppose that the one city was ever called by the name of the other, even in a figurative or symbolical sense, until the publication of the vision of the Apocalypse; which took place 38 years after the first epistle of St. Peter. But there was another city called Babylon in Egypt; which was a military station belonging to the Roman government of Egypt, and must therefore have been a place of considerable consequence. Mark was with Peter at the time he wrote this epistle; and that Mark was afterwards made bishop of Alexandria in Egypt (which is recorded in history) strengthens the supposition that it was this Babylon from whence the letter was written.

Between these two epistles of Peter, historical records make it necessary to place the date of the epistle general of the apostle James the Just, or the Less as he is generally called, in order to distinguish him from the other apostle James the son of Zebedee. We learn from ecclesiastical history that James the Just, being Bishop