Images de page
PDF
ePub

paffed fourteen days. But this objection implies, what is a matter of very great doubt, that St. Paul was the author of it. Even were this matter certain, instead of being doubtful, yet St. Paul had been feveral times at Jerufalem, he had collected alms in diftant countries for the Chriftians of that city, and brought them in perfon: and even if the cafe were otherwife, ftill it might be faid of an Apoftle, who had been releafed from difficulty and danger, that he was reftored to the Chriftians of every country. Nor is Wetstein's argument, which is founded on ch. xiii. 24. they of Italy falute you,' of greater weight. Wetstein namely contends, that the brethren of Italy could have had no acquaintance with the Jewish converts in Jerufalem, by which, if I underftand him rightly, he means perfonal acquaintance. But that they really had, is furely not improbable, fince the Jews, who lived in countries at a distance from Palestine, fometimes went up to Jerufalem to celebrate the grand festivals: and even if Wetftein's affertion admitted of no doubt, yet it frequently happens that mutual falutations are fent from thofe, who are not perfonally known to cach other.

But there is an objection, which is really of fome inportance. It appears from ch. xiii. 23. that St. Paul intended to pay a vifit to thofe Hebrews, to whom he addreffed the Epiftle. But it may be thought improbable, that he would take another journey to Jerufalem, which was not only at a confiderable diftance from Rome, but was the place where he had first fallen into the captivity, which had lafted feveral years. It is true, that before his laft vifit to Jerufalem he forefaw the danger which would attend him there, and that this danger did not deter him from the profecution of his journey: and Lardner has obferved, that fince St. Paul had been finally acquitted in Rome, he had lefs reafon to apprehend any future moleftation from the Jews. But on the other hand, it may be afked, whether it would not have been imprudent in St. Paul to have returned to a city, where

• Acts XX, 22-25. xxi, 10-Ig, .

the

the captain of the Roman guard, to fecure him from open violence, had judged it neceffary to give him an elcort of four hundred and feventy men: and, whether the Roman magiftrates, at the time of his acquittal, would not have cautioned him againft going to a place, where the fafety of his perfon would occafion difficulty to the government, and perhaps the fhedding of blood. The objection delivered in this form appears to be of fome weight but then it prefuppofes that St. Paul was the author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews, which is very far from being certain. I fhall therefore confider it in a fubfequent fection.

SECT. V.

Of the opinion of other writers on the question, who the Hebrews were, to whom this Epistle was fent.

[ocr errors]

Tis neceffary at prefent, that I fhould give at least a fhort account of the opinions of other writers on this fubject: but a particular confutation of them must not be expected, fince I have already affigned, in the preceding fection, the reafons which induce me to diffent, and which it would be ufelefs to repeat. From the lift of opinions, which I am going to enumerate, I exclude however that, which makes the Epiftle written tothe Hebrews in general, difperfed throughout the world: for in fuch a general Epistle, the author of it, whether St. Paul, or any other perfon, could certainly not have written, ch. xiii. 23. that as foon as Timothy arrived he intended. to pay them a vifit. The following then are the feveral opinions, relative to, the Hebrews, to whom this Epiftle was addreffed.

1. That they were Hebrews in Afia Minor, namely, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Afia, and Bithynia; to

which fome writers likewife add Achaia and Macedonia. This opinion is grounded on the fuppofition, that the Epiftle to the Hebrews is quoted by St. Peter: but as I have already fhewn in the third fection of this chapter, that fuch a fuppofition is incapable of defence, the opi nion, which refts on it, lofes all fupport. Other objec tions to this opinion have been delivered in the laft fection.

2. That they were Hebrews in Afia Minor, who had fled into that country from Jerufalem, a fhort time before its deftruction. This opinion was advanced by the great Newton, in his Obfervations on the Apocalypfe. P. 244 but this likewife supposes that the Epiftle to the Hebrews was quoted by St. Peter, and therefore likewife falls with that fuppofition. Besides, there is no historical evidence for the affertion, that Jews fled to Afia Minor from Jerufalem, before the deftruction of the city for the accounts on record make mention of no other flight, than that to Pella.

3. Wetstein in his Preface to this Epiftle, Vol. II. p. 386. of his Greek Teftament, contends that it was addreffed to Hebrews in Rome.

4. Others, for inftance the late Ludwig, fuppofe that it was fent to Hebrews in Spain. This conjecture took its origin from the circumftance that in ch. xiii. 23. a vifit was promifed to the Hebrews, and St. Paul in his Epiftle to the Romans, ch. xv. 24. expreffed an intention, after he had been in Italy, of going to Spain. But this conjecture is again founded on the fuppofition, that St. Paul was the author of the Epiftle, and moreover takes for granted, that the intention was actually put in execution, though we have no knowledge of it, and though five years must have elapfed, before it could have been executed. Befides, the paffage itself, to which appeal is made in the Epiftle to the Ro mans, is unfavourable to the opinion, that the Epistle to the Hebrews was addreffed to Hebrews in Spain: for St. Paul intended to go to Spain because the Gofpel had not been preached there; whereas the Hebrews,

Hebrews, to whom the Epiftle in queftion was addreffed, already formed very flourishing Chriftian communities, which were in danger of falling back from Chriftianity to Judaifm. Further, the whole Epiftle has the appearance of being written to perfons, with whofe circumstances the author was intimately acquainted: but the circumstances of Chriftian communities in Spain could not have been fo well known to St. Paul, before he had ever been in that country.

5. In the opinion of Dr. Noeffelt, this Epiftle was fent to the Theffalonians, and likewife to the Macedo nians in general, and was the firft which St. Paul wrote; for this opinion alfo is founded on the fuppofition that St. Paul was the author. It is delivered in a treatife entitled, De tempore, quo fcripta fuerit Epiftola ad Ebræos, deque Ebræis, quibus fcripferit, publifhed in the first volume of his Opufcula, printed in 1771, and reprinted in 1785. And as the arguments, by which it is fupported, are delivered in fuch a manner, as to render it very plaufible, it will be neceffary to give a short ftatement of them, with references to the sections of the treatise, in which they are contained. Dr. Noeffelt contends then, that it was the first Epistle, which was written by St. Paul, that he wrote it at Corinth, and fent it to the Macedonians, especially to thofe at Theffalonica. (§ 11.) In Macedonia were many Jews, and likewise, as appears from the Acts of the Apostles, many profelytes to Judaifm, who were alfo included under the name of Hebrews. (§ 12. 13.) They of Italy,' mentioned ch. xiii. 24. are Aquilas and Prifcilla, with other Jews, who were lately arrived at Corinth, in confequence of their banishment from Rome by Claudius, Acts xviii. 2. Aquilas had a Jewish fchool in his houfe in Rome (την κατ' οίκον αυτών εκκλησίαν, Rom. xvi. 5.) in confequence of which he was known to the Jews of Macedonia. From Hebr. xiii. 23. it appears, that Timothy had been fent away this St. Paul had done at Corinth. Compare 1 Theff. ii. 18. iii. 1. Acts xviii. 8. The Epistle to the Hebrews was written before the firft to the Theffa

lonians,

lonians, which is the reafon why the latter contains none of the melancholy of the former, for the Theffalonian community had been amended by it. (§ 8.) In ch. x. 34. Dr. Nocffelt adopts the common reading, tos depois, which other critics reject, and understands thefe bonds, on which the Hebrews had pity, as denoting St. Paul's imprisonment at Philippi, Acts xvi. 24. 26. (§ 9. 10.) At Theffalonica likewife St. Paul was in danger, and was refcued by his friends there. Jafon was deprived of his property, becaufe the avaricious magiftrates of Theffalonica had demanded of him bail for St. Paul, Acts xvii. 9. which he forfeited in confequence of St. Paul's not appearing moreover his houfe was plundered, and he himielf was forced to quit Theffalonica, for it appears from Rom. xvi. 21. that he was with St. Paul at Corinth. (§ 14).

Thefe are the outlines of what Dr. Noeffelt has advanced on this fubject: but I think his reprefentation of the matter rather improbable. That Macedonian Jews, who fpake only Greek, fhould be called Hebrews, is hardly credible, and ftiil lefs fo, that uncircumcifed heathen profelyte fhould receive this appellation: at leaft, I cannot admit this application of the word, till examples have been produced of its having been actually ufed in this extraordinary fenfe. The bonds of St. Paul, or his imprisonment at Philippi, were not of a nature to excite much pity: for on the day after his imprisonment, the magiftrates affembled in a body, and requested him to leave the prifon, by which meafure they made him ample fatisfaction, fo that their proceedings, inftead of raifing pity, muft rather excite a fimile. The cafe would be different, if the question related to the ftripes which had been inflicted on St. Paul at Philippi: but in the prefent inquiry we are concerned only with the word bonds.' If Jafon gave bail for St. Paul, and the

Apoftle

That Jafon was with St. Paul at Corinth, is no proof, that he was obliged to quit Theffalonica.

The term avaricious,' which D. Nocffelt applies to the magif trates at Philippi is without foundation; nor can this epithet be juilly applied to any of the Greek or Roman magiitrates mentioned in the Acts of the Apoftles.

« PrécédentContinuer »