me." Since it appears from the former quotation | that St. Paul wrote this epistle in confinement, it will hardly admit of doubt that the word chain, in the latter quotation, refers to that confinement; the chain by which he was then bound, the custody in which he was then kept. And if the word "chain" designate the author's confinement at the time of writing the epistle, the next words determine it to have been written from Rome: "He was not ashamed of my chain; but when he was in Rome he sought me out very diligently." Now that it was not written during the apostle's first imprisonment at Rome, or during the same imprisonment in which the epistles to the Ephesians, the Colossians, the Philippians, and Philemon, were written, may be gathered, with considerable evidence, from a comparison of these several epistles with the present. I. In the former epistles the author confidently looked forward to his liberation from confinement, and his speedy departure from Rome. He tells the Philippians (ch. ii. 24,) "I trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly." Philemon he bids to prepare for him a lodging: "for I trust," says he, "that through your prayers I shall be given unto you," ver. 22. In the epistle before us he holds a language extremely different: "I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day," ch. iv. 6-8. II. When the former epistles, were written from Rome, Timothy was with St. Paul; and is joined with him in writing to the Colossians, the Philippians, and to Philemon. The present epistle implies that he was absent. III. In the former epistles, Demas was with St. Paul at Rome: "Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you." In the epistle now before us: "Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is gone to Thessalonica." IV. In the former epistles, Mark was with St. Paul, and joins in saluting the Colossians. In the present epistle, Timothy is ordered to bring him with him, "for he is profitable to me for the ministry," ch. iv. 11. hind at Corinth, when St. Paul left it. But this could not be meant of any journey from Corinth which St. Paul took prior to his first imprisonment at Rome; for when Paul departed from Corinth, as related in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, Timothy was with him: and this was the last time the apostle left Corinth before his coming to Rome; because he left it to proceed on his way to Jerusalem; soon after his arrival at which place he was taken into custody, and continued in that custody till he was carried to Cæsar's tribunal. There could be no need therefore to inform Timothy that "Erastus staid behind at Corinth" upon this occasion, because if the fact was so, it must have been known to Timothy, who was present, as well as to St. Paul. 2. In the same verse our epistle also states the following article: “ Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick." When St. Paul passed through Miletum on his way to Jerusalem, as related Acts xx, Trophimus was not left behind, but accompanied him to that city. He was indeed the occasion of the uproar at Jerusalem, in consequence of which St. Paul was apprehended; for "they had seen," says the historian, "before with him in the city, Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple." This was evidently the last time of Paul's being at Miletus before his first imprisonment; for, as hath been said, after his apprehension at Jerusalem, he remained in custody till he was sent to Rome. In these two articles we have a journey referred to, which must have taken place subsequent to the conclusion of St. Luke's history, and of course after St. Paul's liberation from his first imprisonment. The epistle, therefore, which contains this reference, since it appears from other parts of it to have been written while St. Paul was a prisoner at Rome, proves that he had returned to that city again, and undergone there a second imprisonment. I do not produce these particulars for the sake of the support which they lend to the testimony of the fathers concerning St. Paul's second imprisonment, but to remark their consistency and agreement with one another.-They are all resolvable into one supposition: and although the The case of Timothy and of Mark might be supposition itself be in some sort only negative, very well accounted for, by supposing the present viz. that the epistle was not written during St. epistle to have been written before the others; so Paul's first residence at Rome, but in some future that Timothy, who is here exhorted "to come imprisonment in that city; yet is the consistency shortly unto him," ch. iv. 9, might have arrived, not less worthy of observation: for the epistle and that Mark, "whom he was to bring with touches upon names and circumstances connecthim," ch. iv. 11, might have also reached Romeed with the date and with the history of the first in sufficient time to have been with St. Paul when imprisonment, and mentioned in letters written the four epistles were written; but then such a during that imprisonment, and so touches upon supposition is inconsistent with what is said of them, as to leave what is said of one consistent Demas, by which the posteriority of this to the other with what is said of others, and consistent also epistles is strongly indicated; for in the other epis- with what is said of them in different epistles. tles Demas was with St. Paul, in the present he Had one of these circumstances been so described hath "forsaken him, and is gone to Thessalo-as to have fixed the date of the epistle to the first nica." The opposition also of sentiment, with respect to the event of the persecution, is hardly reconcileable to the same imprisonment. The two following considerations, which were first suggested upon this question by Ludovicus Capellus, are still more conclusive. 1. In the twentieth verse of the fourth chapter, St. Paul informs Timothy, "that Erastus abode at Corinth," ESTOS ESIVED BY Kov. The form of expression implies, that Erastus had staid be imprisonment, it would have involved the rest in contradiction. And when the number and particularity of the articles which have been brought together under this head are considered; and when it is considered also, that the comparisons we have formed amongst them, were in all probability neither provided for, nor thought of, by the writer of the epistle, it will be deemed something very like the effect of truth, that no invincible repugnancy is perceived between them. No. II. In the Acts of the Apostles, in the sixteenth chapter, and at the first verse, we are told that Paul "came to Derbe and Lystra, and behold a certain disciple was there named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek." In the epistle before us, in the first chapter and at the fourth verse, St. Paul writes to Timothy thus: "Greatly desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy, when I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that one precept is joined with, and followed by a train tended. Chap. iii. 10, 11. "But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, persecutions, afflic tions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured; but out of them all the Lord delivered me." The Antioch here mentioned was not Antioch in thee also." Here we have a fair unforced example of coincidence. In the history, Timothy was the "son of a Jewess that believed:" in the epistle, St. Paul applauds "the faith which dwelt in his mother Eunice." In the history it is said of the mother, "that she was a Jewess, and believed:" of the father, "that he was a Greek." Now, when it is said of the mother alone "that she believed," the father being nevertheless mentioned in the same sentence, we are led to suppose of the father that he did not believe, i. e. the capital of Syria, where Paul and Barnabas either that he was dead, or that he remained un-resided "a long time;" but Antioch in Pisidia, to converted. Agreeably hereunto, whilst praise is bestowed in the epistle upon one parent, and upon her sincerity in the faith, no notice is taken of the other. The mention of the grandmother is the addition of a circumstance not found in the history; but it is a circumstance which, as well as the names of the parties, might naturally be expected to be known to the apostle, though overlooked by his historian. No. III. Chap. iii. 15. "And that from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation." This verse discloses a circumstance which agrees exactly with what is intimated in the quotation from the Acts, adduced in the last number. In that quotation it is recorded of Timothy's mother, "that she was a Jewess." This description is virtually, though, I am satisfied, undesignedly, recognized in the epistle, when Timothy is reminded in it, "that from a child he had known the Holy Scriptures." "The Holy Scriptures," undoubtedly meant the Scriptures of the Old Testament. The expression bears that sense in every place in which it occurs. Those of the New had not yet acquired the name; not to mention, that in Timothy's childhood, probably, none of them existed. In what manner then could Timothy have known "from a child," the Jewish Scriptures, had he not been born, on one side or on both, of Jewish parentage? Perhaps he was not less likely to be carefully instructed in them, for that his mother alone professed that religion. No. IV. Chap. ii. 22. "Flee also youthful lusts; but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart." "Flee also youthful lusts." The suitableness of this precept to the age of the person to whom it is addressed, is gathered from 1 Tim. chap. iv. 12: "Let no man despise thy youth." Nor do deem the less of this coincidence, because the propriety resides in a single epithet; or because this I which place Paul and Barnabas came in their first apostolic progress, and where Paul delivered a memorable discourse, which is preserved in the thirteenth chapter of the Acts. At this Antioch devout and honourable women, and the chief men the history relates, that the "Jews stirred up the of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts. But they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came into Iconium.... And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed; but the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made their minds evil-affected against the brethren. Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands. But the multitude of the city was divided; and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles. And when there was an assault made both of the Gentiles and also of the Jews, with their rulers, to use them despitefully and to stone them, they were aware of it, and fled unto Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and unto the region that lieth round about, and there they preached the Gospel.... And there came thither certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded the people, and having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead. Howbeit, as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up and came into the city: and the next day he departed with Barnabas to Derbe and when they had preached the Gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch." This account comprises the period to which the allusion in the epistle is to be referred. We have so far therefore a conformity between the history and the epistle, that St. Paul is asserted in the history to have suffered persecutions in the three cities, his persecutions at which are appealed to in the epistle; and not only so, but to have suf fered these persecutions both in immediate suc cession, and in the order in which the cities are mentioned in the epistle. The conformity also extends to another circumstance. In the apostolic history, Lystra and Derbe are commonly mentioned together: in the quotation from the epistle Lystra is mentioned, and not Derbe. And the distinction will appear on this occasion to be accurate; for St. Paul is here enumerating his persecutions: and although he underwent grievous persecutions in each of the three cities through which he passed to Derbe, at Derbe itself he met with none: "The next day he departed," says the historian, "to Derbe; and when they had preached the Gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra." The epistle, therefore, in the names of the cities, in the order in which they are enumerated, and in the place at which the enumeration stops, corresponds exactly with the history. But a second question remains, namely, how these persecutions were "known" to Timothy, or why the apostle should recall these in particular to his remembrance, rather than many other persecutions with which his ministry had been attended. When some time, probably three years, afterwards, (ride Pearson's Annales Paulinas,) St. Paul made a second journey through the same country, "in order to go again and visit the brethren in every city where he had preached the word of the Lord," we read, Acts, chap. xvi. 1, that, "when he came to Derbe and Lystra, behold a certain disciple was there named Timotheus." One or other, therefore, of these cities, was the place of Timothy's abode. We read moreover that he was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium; so that he must have been well acquainted with these places. Also again, when Paul came to Derbe and Lystra, Timothy was already a disciple: "Behold, a certain disciple was there nained Timotheus." He must therefore have been converted before. But since it is expressly stated in the epistle, that Timothy was converted by St. Paul himself, that he was "his own son in the faith;" it follows that he must have been converted by him upon his former journey into those parts; which was the very time when the apostle underwent the persecutions referred to in the epistle. Upon the whole, then, persecutions at the several cities named in the epistle are expressly recorded in the Acts: and Timothy's knowledge of this part of St. Paul's history, which knowledge is appealed to in the epistle, is fairly deduced from the place of his abode, and the time of his conversion. It may farther be observed, that it is probable from this account, that St. Paul was in the midst of those persecutions when Timothy became known to him. No wonder then that the apostle, though in a letter written long afterwards, should remind his favourite convert of those scenes of affliction and distress under which they first met. Although this coincidence, as to the names of the cities, be more specific and direct than many which we have pointed out, yet I apprehend there is no just reason for thinking it to be artificial: for had the writer of the epistle sought a coincidence with the history upon this head, and searched the Acts of the Apostles for the purpose, I conceive he would have sent us at once to Philippi and Thessalonica, where Paul suffered persecution, and where, from what is stated, it may easily be gathered that Timothy accompanied him, rather than have appealed to persecutions as known to Timothy, in the account of which persecutions Timothy's presence is not mentioned; it not being till after one entire chapter, and in the history of a journey three years future to this, that Timothy's name occurs in the Acts of the Apostles for the first time. CHAPTER XIII. The Epistle to Titus. No. I. A VERY characteristic circumstance in this epistle, is the quotation from Epimenides, chap. i. 12: "One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies." Κρήτες από ψευσται, κακα θηρία, γαστέρες αρχαιο I call this quotation characteristic, because no writer in the New Testament, except St. Paul, appealed to heathen testimony; and because St. Paul repeatedly did so. In his celebrated speech at Athens, preserved in the seventeenth chapter of the Acts, he tells his audience, that "in God we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." του γαρ και γένος εσμέν. The reader will perceive much similarity of manner in these two passages. The reference in the speech is to a heathen poet; it is the same in the epistle. In the speech, the apostle urges his hearers with the authority of a poet of their own; in the epistle he avails himself of the same advantage. Yet there is a variation, which shows that the hint of inserting a quotation in the epistle was not, as it may be expected, borrowed from seeing the like practice attributed to St. Paul in the history; and it is this, that in the epistle the author cited is called a prophet, one of themselves, even a prophet of their own." Whatever might be the reason for calling Epimenides a prophet: whether the names of poet and prophet were occasionally convertible; whether Epimenides in particular had obtained that title, as Grotius seems to have proved; or whether the appellation was given to him, in this instance as having delivered a description of the Cretan character, which the future state of morals among them verified: whatever was the reason (and any of these reasons will account for the variation, supposing St. Paul to have been the author,) one point is plain, namely, if the epistle had been forged, and the author had inserted a quotation in it merely from having seen an example of the same kind in a speech ascribed to St. Paul, he would so far have imitated his original, as to have introduced his quotation in the same manner; that is, he would have given to Epimenides the title which he saw there given to Aratus. The other side of the alternative is, that the history took the hint from the epistle. But that the author of the Acts of the Apostles had not the Epistle to Titus before him, at least that he did not use it as one of the documents or materials of his narrative, is rendered nearly certain by the obser vation, that the name of Titus does not once oc- The same observation belongs to another singncur in this book. larity of expression, and that is in the epithet It is well known, and was remarked by St. Je-"sound" (,) as applied to words or doctrine. rome, that the apophthegm in the fifteenth chapter of the Corinthians, "Evil communications corrupt good manners," is an iambic of Menander's: Φθείρουσιν ήθη χρησί" ομιλίαι κακαι, Here we have another unaffected instance of the same turn and habit of composition.-Probably there are some hitherto unnoticed; and more, which the loss of the original authors renders impossible to be now ascertained. No. II. It is thus used, twice in the First Epistle to Timothy, twice in the Second, and three times in the Epistle to Titus, besides two cognate expressions, υγιαίνοντας τη πίστει and λόγου υγιη ; and it is found, in the same sense, in no other part of the New Testament. The phrase, "God our Saviour," stands in nearly the same predicament. It is repeated three times in the First Epistle to Timothy, as many in the Epistle to Titus, and in no other book of the New Testament occurs at all, except once in the Epistle of Jude. Similar terms, intermixed indeed with others, are employed in the two epistles, in enumerating the qualifications required in those who should be advanced to stations of authority in the church. "A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, giren to hospitality, apt to teach, not given to vine, no striker, not greedy of filthy luere; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity," 1 Tim. chap. iii. 2-4. There exists a visible affinity between the Epistle to Titus and the First Epistle to Timothy. Both letters were addressed to persons left by the writer to preside in their respective churches during his absence. Both letters are principally occupied in describing the qualifications to be sought for, in those whom they should appoint to offices in the church; and the ingredients of this description are in both letters nearly the same. Timothy and Titus are likewise cautioned against the same prevailing corruptions, and in particular, against the same misdirection of their cares and "If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, studies. This affinity obtains, not only in the having faithful children, not accused of riot, or subject of the letters, which from the similarity unruly. For a bishop must be blameless, as the of situation in the persons to whom they were steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, addressed, might be expected to be somewhat not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy alike, but extends, in a great variety of instances, lucre; but a lover of hospitality, a lover of good to the phrases and expressions. The writer ac-men, sober, just, holy, temperate," + Titus, chap. costs his two friends with the same salutation, and passes on to the business of his letter by the same transition. "Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord. As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia," &c. 1 Tim. chap. i. 2, 3. "To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. For this cause left I thee in Crete,” Tit. chap. i. 4, 5. If Timothy was not to "give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions," 1 Tim. chap. i. 4, Titus also was to "avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions," chap. iii. 9; and was to rebuke them sharply, not giving heed to Jewish fables,” chap. i. 14. If Timothy was to be a pattern, (ruos,) 1 Tim. ch. iv. 12, so was Titus, chap. ii. 7. If Timothy was to "let no man despise his youth," 1 Tim. ch. iv. 12, Titus also was to let "no man despise him," chap. ii. 15. This verbal consent is also observable in some very peculiar expressions, which have no relation to the particular character of Timothy or Titus. i. 6—8. The most natural account which can be given of these resemblances, is to suppose that the two epistles were written nearly at the same time, and whilst the same ideas and phrases dwelt in the writer's mind. Let us inquire, therefore, whether the notes of time, extant in the two epistles, in any manner favour this supposition. We have seen that it was necessary to refer the First Epistle to Timothy to a date subsequent to St. Paul's first imprisonment at Rome, because there was no journey into Macedonia prior to that event, which accorded with the circumstance of leaving "Timothy behind at Ephesus." The journey of St. Paul from Crete, alluded to in the epistle before us, and in which Titus "was left in Crete to set in order the things that were wanting," must in like manner, be carried to the period which intervened between his first and second imprisonment. For the history, which reaches, we know, to the time of St. Paul's first imprisonment, contains no account of his going to Crete, except upon his voyage as a prisoner to Rome; and that this could not be the occasion referred to in our epistle is evident from hence, that when St. Paul wrote this epistle he appears to have been at liberty: whereas after that voyage, he con * Δεν ουν τον επισκοπον ανεπίληπτου είναι, μιας γυναικός άνδρα, νηφάλιον, σώφρωνα, κόσμιον, φιλόξενον, διδακτικον, μη παροινον, μη πλήκτην, μη αισχροκερδή αλλ' επιεική, άμαχον, αφιλαργυρον του ιδίονοι και καλώς προισταμενον, τέκνα 4X0VTX SV υποταγήματα πάσης The phrase, "it is a faithful saying" (s 207) made use of to preface some sentence upon which the writer lays a more than ordinary stress, occurs three times in the First Epistle to Timothy, once in the Second, and once in the epistle before us, and in no other part of St. Paul's writings;MPOTATOS." and it is remarkable that these three epistles were probably all written towards the conclusion of his life; and that they are the only epistles which were written after his first imprisonment at Rome † " Ει τις εστιν ανεγκλητος, μιας γυναικός ανήρ, τέκνα εχων πιστα, μη εν κατηγορία ασωτίας, η ανυπότακτα. Δει γαρ τον επίσκοπον ανεγκλητον είναι, ως Θεον οικονός μου, μη αυθάδη, μη οργίλου, μη παροινον, μη πλήκτην, με αισχροκερδή άλλα φιλοξένον, φιλαγαίου, σωφρονα, δια παιον, οσιον, εγκρατη. tinued for two years at least in confinement. | Philemon might have been a Thessalonian, a Again, it is agreed that St. Paul wrote his First Philippian, or an Ephesian, as well as a ColosEpistle to Timothy from Macedonia: "As I be- sian. Put the two epistles together, and the sought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I matter is clear. The reader perceives a junction went (or came) into Macedonia." And that of circumstances, which ascertains the conclusion he was in these parts, i. e. in this peninsula, at once. Now, all that is necessary to be added in when he wrote the Epistle to Titus, is rendered this place is, that this correspondency evinces the probable by his directing Titus to come to him genuineness of one epistle, as well as of the other. to Nicopolis: "When I shall send Artemas unto It is like comparing the two parts of a cloven tally. thee, or Tychicus, be diligent (make_haste) to Coincidence proves the authenticity of both. come unto me to Nicopolis: for I have determined there to winter." The most noted city of that name was in Epirus, near to Actium. And I think the form of speaking, as well as the nature of the case, renders it probable that the writer was at Nicopolis, or in the neighbourhood thereof, when he dictated this direction to Titus. No. II. And this coincidence is perfect; not only in the main article of showing, by implication, Onesimus to be a Colossian, but in many dependent circumstances. 1. "I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have sent again," ver. 10-12. It appears from the Epistle to the Colossians, that, in truth, Onesimus was sent at that time to Colosse: "All my state shall Tychicus declare, whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, with Onesimus, a faithful and beloved brother," Colos. chap. iv. 7-9. 2. "I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, appears from the preceding quotation, that Onesimus was with St. Paul when he wrote the Epistle to the Colossians; and that he wrote that epistle in imprisonment is evident from his declaration in the fourth chapter and third verse: Praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds. Upon the whole, if we may be allowed to suppose that St. Paul, after his liberation at Rome, sailed into Asia, taking Crete in his way; that from Asia and from Ephesus, the capital of that country, he proceeded into Macedonia, and crossing the peninsula in his progress, came into the neighbourhood of Nicopolis; we have a route which falls in with every thing. It executes the inten-whom I have begotten in my bonds," ver. 10. It tion expressed by the Apostle of visiting Colosse and Philippi as soon as he should be set at liberty at Rome. It allows him to leave "Titus at Crete,' and "Timothy at Ephesus, as he went into Macedonia:" and to write to both not long after from the peninsula of Greece, and probably the neighbourhood of Nicopolis: thus bringing together the dates of these two letters, and thereby accounting for that affinity between them, both in subject and language, which our remarks have pointed out. I confess that the journey which we have thus traced out for St. Paul, is, in a great measure, hypothetic: but it should be observed, that it is a species of consistency, which seldom belongs to falsehood, to admit of an hypothesis, which in cludes a great number of independent circumstances without contradiction. CHAPTER XIV. The Epistle to Philemon. 3. St. Paul bids Philemon prepare for him a lodging: "For I trust," says he, "that through your prayers I shall be given unto you." This agrees with the expectation of speedy deliverance, which he expressed in another epistle written during the same imprisonment: "Him" (Timothy) "I hope to send presently, so soon as I shall see how it will go with me; but I trust in the Lord that also myself shall come shortly," Phil. chap. ii. 23, 24. 4. As the letter to Philemon, and that to the Colossians, were written at the same time, and sent by the same messenger, the one to a particular inhabitant, the other to the church of Colosse, it may be expected that the same or nearly the same persons would be about St. Paul, and join with him, as was the practice, in the salutations of the epistle. Accordingly we find the names of Aristarchus, Marcus, Epaphras, Luke, and THE singular correspondency between this Demas, in both epistles. Timothy, who is joined epistle and that to the Colossians has been remark-with St. Paul in the superscription of the Epistle ed already. An assertion in the Epistle to the to the Colossians, is joined with him in this. Colossians, viz. that "Onesimus was one of them," Tychicus did not salute Philemon, because he acis verified, not by any mention of Colosse, any companied the epistle to Colosse, and would unthe most distant intimation concerning the place doubtedly there see him. Yet the reader of the of Philemon's abode, but singly by stating Onesi- Epistle to Philemon will remark one considerable mus to be Philemon's servant, and by joining in diversity in the catalogue of saluting friends, and the salutation Philemon with Archippus; for this which shows that the catalogue was not copied Archippus, when we go back to the Epistle to the from that to the Colossians. In the Epistle to the Colossians, appears to have heen an inhabitant of Colossians, Aristarchus is called by St. Paul his that city, and, as it should seem, to have held an fellow-prisoner, Colos. chap. iv. 10; in the Epistle office of authority in that church. The case to Philemon, Aristarchus is mentioned without stands thus. Take the Epistle to the Colossians alone, and no circumstance is discoverable which any addition, and the title of fellow-prisoner is given to Epaphras. * makes out the assertion, that Onesimus was one of them." Take the Epistle to Philemon alone, and nothing at all appears concerning the place which Philemon or his servant Onesimus belonged. For any thing that is said in the epistle, to * Dr. Benson observes, and perhaps truly, that the to Epaphras, did not imply that they were imprisoned appellation of fellow-prisoner, as applied by St. Paul together at the time; any more than your calling a per |