itself, and not to a fmall town in the neighbourhood. Befides, there would have been a manifeft impropriety in fending to the Coloffians anfwers to questions, with which they were not acquainted, and then, after they had the Epiftle, which contained the anfwers, defiring them to read that, which contained the queftions. 2. Another opinion is, that St. Paul meant an Epiftle which he himself had written at Laodicea, and fent from that place to Timothy, because the Greek fubfcription to the firft Epiftle to Timothy is, Пgos Τιμόθεον εγράφη απο Λαοδίκειας. This opinion is defended by Theophylact: but it is undoubtedly falfe. For it is evident from Col. ii. 1. that St. Paul had never been at Laodicea, when he wrote his Epiftle to the Coloffians and if he had, he would not have diftinguifhed an Epiftle, which he had written there, by the place where it was written, but by the perfon or community, to which it was fent. It was not St. Paul's custom to date his Epiftles: for the fubfcriptions, which we now find annexed to them, were all added at later period, and by unknown perfons. If therefore he had meant an Epiftle, which he himself had written at Laodicea, he certainly would not have denoted it by the title of ή επιςολη εκ Λαοδικείας. 3. There remains therefore no other poffible interpretation of these words than an Epiftle, which the Laodiceans had received from St. Paul,' and which the Coloffians were ordered to procure from Laodicea, when they communicated to the Laodiceans their own Epistle. But, as among the Epiftles of St. Paul in our own canon, not one is addreffed to the Laodiceans in particular, the question again occurs: Which, and where is this Epistle? 1. There exifts an Epiftle, which goes by the name of St. Paul's Epiftle to the Laodiceans. But this is undoubtedly a forgery, though a very ancient one: for Theodoret, who lived in the fifth century, speaks of it in his Note to the paffage in queftion, and fays, αυτικά αντικα τοινυν και προφέρεσι πεπλασμένην επιςολήν. That the reader may judge of its au liente i I will intert the whole of it, as printed in Fabricii Culex Apocryphus Nov. Tef. Tom. I. p. 873 - 879. Παύλος από σολος, εκ απ' ανθρώπων, εδε δι' ανθρώπων, αλλά δικ Ιησε Χρισε, τοις εν Λαοδικεία αδελφοίς χαρίς ύμιν και ειρήνη από Θε8 πατρος, και Κυριε ήμων Ιησε Χρισα. Ευχαρισω τῷ Θεῷ με τῳ Χρισῳ παντοτε εν ταις προσευχαίς με, ότι εκμενοντες και προσκαρτερέντες ὑμεις σε επ' έργων καλων, προσδεχομενοι την επαγγελίαν εν ήμέρα κρίσεως. Και μη ταράξωσιν ύμας μαται αλογίας τινών, των ὑποκρινημένων την αλήθειαν, τα διαςρέψαι μας απο της αληθείας τε ευαγγελια τα ευαγγελισθέντος απ' έμε. Νυν δε ποιησει ὁ Θεος, ἵνα παντες οι εξ εμε εισιν, εις την τελειότητα της αληθείας το ευαγγελια φέρωνται, το ποιησαι την χρησότητα των εργων, ἃ πρέπει τη σωτηρία της ζωής αιωνιό Και νυν φανεροι εγένοντο οι δεσμοί με, εν οις δεσμοις ειμι εν Χρισῳ, και εν τέτῳ χαίρω αλλα και χαρησομαι, οίδα γαρ, ότι τατο μοι αποβήσεται εις σωτηρίαν αίω σου, ό εγένετο бья της ύμων δεήσεως και επιχορηγίας τα πνεύματος άγιε, ειτε δια ζωης, είτε δια θανατο, εμοι γαρ το ζήν Χρισος, και το απο θάνειν χαρα. Αυτος δε ὁ Κύριος ήμων εν ύμιν ποιήσει τὸ ἔλεος αυτε μεθ ύμων, ἵνα την αυτην αγαπην έχοντες σύμψυχοι αυτό φρονητε. Δια τ8το, αγαπητοι, καθώς ηκέσατε την παρεσαν τα Κύριε, έτως φρονείτε και ποιείτε εν φόβῳ τα Θε8, και και ύμιν ζωη αιώνιος, γαρ Θεός εσιν ενεργων εν ύμιν. Πάντα ποιείτε χωρίς γογγισμών και διαλογισμών. λοιπον, αγαπητοι, χαίρετε εν τῷ Κυρίῳ Ιησε Χρισῳ, και όρατε, και φυλάσσεσθε από πάσης αισχρο κέρδος πλεονεξίας. Παντα τα αιτήματα ύμων παρρησία γνωρίζεσίω προς τον Θεον, και βεβαιοι γινεσθε εν νοι τα Χρισε. εν και το Χρισε. Και το λοιπον, αδελφοι, όσα εσιν αληθη, όσα σεμνα, όσα άγνα, όσα δίκαια, όσα προσφιλή, ταύτα πράσσετε. Και ο ηκέσατε και παρελάβετε, εν καρδίαις ύμων κατέχετε, και εσαι ύμιν ειρηνη. Ασπάσασθε τας αδελφες παντας εν φιλήματι άγιῳ. Ασπαζονται ὑμᾶς οἱ ἅγιοι παντες. Η χάρις το Κυριο Ιησε Χρισε μετά τα πνευματος ύμων. Αμην. Ποιήσατε ίνα ή επιστολη και εν τη Κολοσσων εκκλησία αναγνωσθη, και εκ Κολόσσων ἵνα και ύμεις αναγνώτε. This Epiftle is likewife contained in the old German Bibles printed about the year 1462; for inftance, in την Και τὸ that that which I have defcribed in the Syntagma Commentationum, Tom. I. Num. 1. and in which this Epiftle is placed between the Epiftles to the Galatians and Ephefians. But it is manifeftly a mere rhapsody, collected from St. Paul's other Epiftles, and which no critic can receive as a genuine work of the Apoftle. It contains nothing, which it was neceffary for the Coloffians to know, nothing that is not ten times better and more fully explained in the Epiftle, which St. Paul fent to the Coloffians; in fhort nothing, which could be suitable to St. Paul's design. 2. As the Epiftle therefore, which now goes by the name of St. Paul's Epiftle to the Laodiceans, is a forgery, the Apostle might mean an Epiftle, which he had fent to the Laodiceans, and which is now loft. An objection however to this opinion, (namely, that he had fent an Epiftle to the Laodiceans in particular) may be made from Col. iv. 15. where St. Paul requests the Coloffians to falute Nymphas, who was a Laodicean. If he had written a particular Epiftle to the Laodiceans, he would have faluted Nymphas rather in this Epiftle, than in that to the Coloffians. 3. There remains a third explanation, which is not clogged with the preceding difficulty, namely that St. Paul meant an Epiftle, which he had written partly, but not folely for the ufe of the Laodiceans. This Epistle may be that, which is called the Epiftle to the Ephefians, and of which I fhall treat in the following chapter. CHAP. XX. OF THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. SECT. I. Examination of the question, whether the Epiftle, which is called the Epistle to the Ephefians, was really addreffed to the Ephefians. OT only the superfcription to this Epiftle is NOT προς Εφεσίες επισολη, which indeed is of no great authority, but St. Paul's own words, ch. i. 1. are Tois άγιοις τοις εσιν εν Εφεσω. If therefore this reading be genuine, the queftion is at once decided. But there are feveral eminent critics, efpecially Mill, J. Peirce, Whifton, S. Crell, Wall, Benfon, the younger Vitringa, Venema, and Wetstein, who prefer the reading 2015 2014 εν Λαοδικεία. Wetftein has placed it under his text as preferable to the common reading: and Bowyer, in his edition of the Greek Teftament, has taken it into the text itself. That men of fuch learning as those, whom I have juft quoted, efpecially Wetstein, who was not inclined to make alterations in the text of the Greek Teftament, not even where it fuited his own theological opinions, did not adopt this reading without ftrong grounds, may be eafily fuppofed, without my afferting it. But the queftion is, are thefe grounds fufficiently ftrong, to prove that the reading Eper is fpurious? εν Εφεσῳ This queftion has been very fully examined by Lardner", to whom I fhall frequently have recourfe, though I differ from him in feveral material points. That m Supplement to the Credibility of the Gospel Hiftory, vol. II. ch. 13. That the reading Epro is fpurious, is hardly credible. On the contrary, I have no doubt that it is genuine: but I will not therefore affert, that it is the only genuine reading, any more than I would affert that, because I believe the religion, in which I have been educated, leads to falvation, it is therefore the only one, which does fo. That v Epecy is genuine, we must conclude from this circumstance, that it is confirmed by the authority of all the Greek manufcripts hitherto collated, of all the ancient verfions, and of the Greek Fathers, who, as Lardner has fhewn, are unanimous in their opinion, that the Epiftle was written to the Ephefians, and have quoted in no inftance Ev Aaoding in this paffage, inftead of Epery. Nor is any other reading quoted by the Manichæans, though they were in general difpofed to make alterations in the New Teftament. The authority of the Greek Fathers is in the prefent inftance of much greater importance, than in moft other critical queftions: it is in fact decifive. The teftimony of Ignatius alone is fufficient: for he not only lived at the fame time with St. Paul, but was particularly connected with the Ephefians, and wrote to them an Epiftle and moreover, when he wrote to them his Epiftle, several members of the Ephefian church were with him, namely Burrhus, who was deacon at Ephefus, Crocus, Euphus, and Fronto". Under these cit cumftances it is abfolutely impoffible, that Ignatius should not have known, whether the Epiftle, which is called St. Paul's Epiftle to the Ephefians, was addreffed to the Ephefians, or not. But it is a certain fact, that Ignatius confidered this Epiftle as one addreffed to the Ephefians. In the twelfth chapter of the Epiftle, which he himself wrote to the Ephefians, he calls them Παύλε συμμύσαι το ἡγιασμένε, and adds ός εν παση επισολής μνημονεύει ύμων εν Χρισῳ Ιησε. The expreffion εν παση λ cannot be tranflated in every Epiftle,' for in VOL. IV. Lardner, p. 408. every |