INTRODUCTION.

IN

I. THE VARIETY OF SCRIPTURE.

N his unerring wisdom God did not give us the Scriptures in one connected treatise, but in sixty-six distinct books. Of these thirty-nine are in the Old Testament, and twenty-seven in the New. The word of God contains a number of historical books. Others are poetical. Some are didactic; others, polemic. Some are marked with the best style of proverb; others, with the best kind of parable and allegory. All Scripture is inspired by God, and is profitable.

The first three books of the New Testament contain sketches of the life of Jesus Christ. The fourth is evidently written chiefly to establish his divinity, and show forth his glory. The fifth records the early labors, successes and sufferings of the apostles in planting churches throughout the world. The last book of Scripture is chiefly prophetical. Many things in it foretold are yet to be accomplished. The remaining twenty-one books of the New Testament are strictly in the form of Epistles. Of these one is written by James, the son of Alpheus, often (from his stature) called the Less; one by Jude (Judas not Iscariot); two by Simon Peter, son of Jonas; and three by John. The remaining fourteen are written by Paul. Of these some are addressed to churches, and some to particular persons; some are mainly doctrinal and some chiefly practical; some are specially designed to instruct Jews; and some, Gentiles; some teach the laity their duties and some give good counsels and precepts to pastors and evangelists.

It is worthy of notice that while the Old Testament does not contain one entire book, but at the most a few verses in an epistolary form, yet of the two hundred and fifty-six chapters in the New Testament one hundred and seventeen are in that form. Of these Paul wrote eighty-seven chapters, containing two thousand and nine verses. Of the Pauline epistles the first three contain more matter than the remaining eleven. On the other hand, the New Testament has in it but little poetry, and that quoted from heathen

poets or from Christian hymns. Various reasons are assigned for this abounding of epistles in the New Testament. The Holy Ghost, who inspired the writers, chose this form of communication, and that will satisfy the pious mind. But the state of literature throughout the world about the time of the first propagation of the Gospel greatly favored this style of communication. Long treatises were written in the epistles of learned men. We might cite those of Cicero, Seneca, Symmachus and Pliny, the Younger. In fact both ancients and moderns have in this way handled a great variety of topics, friendship, art, science, politics, literature and religion. There are a thousand ways of writing a good letter. All the peculiarities of the writer's genius may have full scope in that kind of composition. If he does not rise to the sublime, or the beautiful, he did not promise to do so. If he dwells on very familiar topics, that well agrees with this kind of composition. The best letters on moral subjects are marked with clearness, brevity and plainness, and with constant allusions to things well understood between the writer and his friends. Because a letter is long, it is not necessarily tedious. Many a good letter has not in it an epigram or an antithesis. While epistles should not be set lectures, they may be solid, weighty, and even argumentative. Easy and familiar as epistles may certainly be, we have a right to expect that they be courteous, giving no just cause of offence. No greater influence is exerted among men than that of epistolary ' correspondence. Lord Bacon says: "Such letters, as are written from wise men, are of all the words of man, in my judgment, the best; for they are more natural than orations and public speeches, and more advised than conferences or private ones." Over other kinds of writing epistles have one advantage they are always read, sometimes often read. If Paul ever wrote anything but epistles, we neither have it nor any reliable account of it.

II. WHAT WE KNOW OF PAUL'S EARLY LIFE.

Our knowledge of Paul is derived chiefly from the account we have of him in the Acts of the Apostles, written by his companion, Luke, and from his own epistles. By comparing "what Paul says of Paul" with what Luke says of him, we gain a sufficient insight into his history. Most of the unwritten traditions respecting him are wholly unreliable, some are probable, and a few are apparently countenanced by hints in the Scriptures.

In Hebrew he was called Saul. The precise import of this name is uncertain. Some think it signifies a pit, the sepulchre or death; others, that it signifies lent or demanded, as if he had been given to

his parents in answer to prayer. It is of the less importance to look into this matter, as he entirely dropped this cognomen soon after his conversion, and ever after bore the name of Paul. Some think this word means a worker; but others think it is taken from the Latin, Paulus, which means little. This is the more probable opinion, and well coincides with the lowliness of this apostle often expressed, and particularly where he says, "I am less than the least of all saints," Eph. 3: 8. This is a better explanation than that which makes the apostle take his name from Sergius Paulus, one of his converts, Acts 8: 7. But Origen, Tholuck and others think that along with his Jewish name, this apostle in common with many Israelites, who lived among the Romans, had a Latin name, and that there is no special significancy in his change of

name.

Both of Paul's parents were of the seed of Jacob. So that phrase, "a Hebrew of the Hebrews," clearly teaches. Like king Saul, our apostle was of the tribe of Benjamin. He was a native of Tarsus, in Cilicia, “no mean city." To all its freemen Augustus had given the freedom of Roman citizens, because of their fidelity to his interests. The time of Paul's birth is uncertain. From something said by Chrysostom, in one of his homilies, some have inferred that Paul was born two years before our Lord. But this is pretty certainly a mistake; for he was still "a young man at Stephen's martyrdom, which occurred certainly as late as A. D. 33. And a man from thirty-five to thirty-seven years old would not be so spoken of. It is therefore highly probable that Paul was considerably younger than Jesus of Nazareth.

In religious persuasion and profession before his conversion Paul was a Pharisee of "the most straitest sect." He had remarkable advantages for 'profiting' in his knowledge of his national religion and in the learning of his times. The school at Tarsus was well known in the Roman empire. It furnished professors for other famous seats of learning in those days. At an early age Paul was placed under the tuition of that renowned doctor of the law of Moses, Gamaliel, Acts 22: 3. This school was at Jerusalem. In his outward observance of the ritual and morals of his religion, Paul was "blameless," Phil. 36. But he was grossly ignorant of the holy and spiritual character of the decalogue. Rom. 7: 7. Nor had he any knowledge of the great truth that equal love to man and supreme love to God were the sum of the law. Consequently when a mere youth, from a wretched wrong-headedness of conscience, he became a persecutor of the most malignant type. He held the clothes of the men, who stoned Stephen, and consented to his cruel death. From that time he was like a ravening wolf in

66

the flock of Christ. He had no mercy, and seems to have had no remorse, unless that phrase " It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks," teaches that he had compunctions. He verily thought he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. He therefore "made havoc" of the church. He was exceeding mad" against the Christians. His very breath stank of blood. He "breathed out threatenings and slaughter." How long he pursued this flagitious course is not certain; but it was probably for fifteen or twenty months. His zeal and bitterness at length knew no bounds. He went unto "strange cities" in quest of prey. But the prayer of dying Stephen and of other holy martyrs for their enemy and murderer, and especially the intercession of our great High Priest, prevailed, and next we read of

III. THE CONVERSION OF PAUL.

This great moral change in his character is thrice recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. It is commonly, and with reason, supposed to have occurred about two years after Christ's ascension from Olivet. It was attended with remarkable circumstances, yet produced in him no permanent effects but such as were necessary to fit him for his work, sufferings and triumphs. Luke, who wrote the Acts of the Apostles, thus narrates this great event:

"And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, and desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem. And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven, and he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished, said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. And Saul arose from the earth, and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man; but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink. And there was a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord. And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street