58, which was the fifth of Nero. As to Paul's mother, it was probably fome aged matron to whom he was under particular obligation, and to whom he might, on this account, give fuch an endearing appellation. Or if it was his natural mother, improbable as, no doubt, it was, it was not abfolutely impoffible, but that he might be at Rome.

4. "But in the eleventh chapter," Mr. Evanfon fays, p. 260," the author clearly betrays him

felf to be, not St. Paul, but fome perfon who "lived and wrote fome time after the destruction "of Jerufalem and the difperfion of the Jews; "for to thefe events alone, can the following fen"tences refer. Verfe 12, If the fall of them (the Jews) be the riches of the world, and the dimi

nishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how "much more their fulnefs? Again, v. 15, If the "cafting away of them be the reconciling of the "world, what shall the receiving of them be?

Again, v. 21 and 22, If God fpared not the na"tural branches, take heed left he also spare not "thee. Behold the goodness and feverity of God: "on them which fell feverity; but towards thee "goodness, if thou continue in goodness; other"wife thou alfo fhalt be cut off," &c.

This objection goes upon the principle that Paul could have no idea of the deftruction of Jerufalem, and the fubfequent difperfion of the Jews, but after the events. But if this was the cafe, as the fame rule must apply to all other writers as well as Paul,

Luke

Luke not excepted, his Gospel must have been

written after thofe events. But had Paul never heard of our Saviour's prophecies, and if fo, might he not allude to the events predicted by him? Befides, he himself faw fo much of the incredulity of the Jewish nation, that he might be well fatisfied that the time of their general converfion was at a great distance, and their cafting away means nothing more than their general unbelief.

If the writer of this Epiftle could not allude to any events but fuch as he was witnefs to himself, how could he allude, as he evidently does, to the general converfion of the Jews, and the effect it would have upon the Gentiles, which has not taken place even yet? This is certainly a prophecy, and therefore might have been expected to recommend this epiftle to Mr. Evanfon. Or, if we confider it as nothing more than a probable conjecture, might he rot fuppofe the allufion to the deftruction of Jerufalem to be a conjecture too, and therefore no proof of the epiftle having been written after the event?

LETTER X.

Of Mr. Evanfon's Objection to fome other Epiftles in the New Teftament.

DEAR SIR,

ONE Letter more relating to Mr. Evanfon's objections to fome other epiftles in our canon of the New Teftament fhall clofe all that I have to obferve of this kind.

I.

1. "The Epiftle to the Ephefians," he says, p. 261, "is alfo written in the name of St. Paul, "but under a fuppofition that a Chriftian church "was settled at Ephefus, before Paul himself preach"ed the Gospel there; for c. i. v. 15 and 16, the "writer makes him fay, Wherefore I also after I "heard of your faith in the Lord Jefus and love unto "all the Saints, cease not to give thanks for you, " &c. and c. iii. v. 1, &c. for this caufe, I Paul, "the Prisoner of Jesus Christ, for you Gentiles, if

ye have heard of the difpenfation of the grace of "God which is given to me to you-ward: how "that by revelation he made known unto me the "mystery (as I wrote afore in few words;) whereby "when ye read ye may understand my knowledge "in the mystery of Christ. This fuppofition,

" however,

"however, cannot poffibly be allowed by any one "who credits the hiftory of the Acts of the Apof"tles; for in that we are exprefsly told, c. 18 and

19, that St. Paul himfe'f preached the gospel at

Ephefus, firft, in the fynagogue of the Jews at "two different times, and afterwards in the school "of Tyrannus, for the pace of two years; and to "read over his valedictory difcourfe to the elders of "the church of Ephefus, at Miletus, recorded "Acts 20, is amply fufficient to convince every impartial mind, that St. Paul could never have "written to the Ephefians in the above quoted language of this Epiftle. Some critics indeed, "without the leaft proof, fuggeft that this Epiftle

was originally infcribed to the church of Laodicea, " and not of Ephefus; but if there was really any "fatisfactory evidence, that, notwithstanding the

great diffimilarity of the names, the tranfcribers " of all the exifting copies had conspired to make "fo extraordinary a change, ftill the difficulty "would not be removed; becaufe, according to "the Acts, St. Paul was the first preacher of the "Gospel at Laodicea alfo, and every other part of

"Afia Minor."

Now it by no means appears from the Acts of the Apostles, that Paul could be faid to have planted the Chriftian church at Ephefus, though he greatly promoted the Chriftian caufe in that city. Paul visited Ephefus for the first time on his way from Corinth to Jerufalem, whither he was

making all the hafte that he could. He there fore only preached in the Jewish fynagogue, and immediately left the place. It is not faid either that he was the firft Chriftian who had preached there, or that he then made any converts, Acts xviii.

18-21.

After this we find Apollos preaching at Ephefus, where he was farther instructed by Aquila and Prifcilla, v. 24-28. When, after this, Paul came to refide at Ephefus, he found fome perfons, twelve men in all, who were only acquainted with the baptifm of John; but it is not faid that these were the only difciples in the place. If fo, the preaching of Apollos had produced no effect, the contrary of which is ftrongly intimated. After this Paul continued two years in this city. just objection to the genuineness of this epiftle to the Ephefians, which has the unanimous teftimony of all antiquity, confirmed by many internal marks, that Paul should mention his bearing of their faith?

How then is it any

Befides, confidering how long Paul had been abfent from Ephesus, his saying that he had heard of their faith was by no means unnatural, though he himself had been the firft to preach among them; fince in the mean time they might haye fwerved from the faith, or at leaft their zeal might have abated.

Though the epistles of Ignatius and Polycarp are, I believe, greatly interpolated, and especially the former, yet there is evidence that they did write, fuch epiftles as those that are ascribed to them, and, therefore,