themselves in common, which strictly construed apply only to the parties addressed. It is still true that St. Paul, though he might receive his commission from our Lord himself, and be made acquainted with Christian facts and doctrines by direct inspiration from above; had never heard our Lord or seen him, while he was conversant in his ministry upon earth. The same consideration of what he himself was by his office, and what they were whom he was about to address, might give occasion also to the omission of his name, and of the usual form of his salutations, at the head of the Epistle; but, as to supposing that he was writing anonymously, and that the Hebrew Christians did not very well know from what source the Epistle emanated; it is both absurd in itself, and directly contradicted by the Epistle.

The time and the circumstances when, and under which, it was written, are a more uncertain, and so far a more important point, than the question who was its author: and yet, with respect to these, we may safely collect first, that it was written from some part or other of Italy, but not as it appears from Rome; secondly, it was written when the author himself was at large, but before he had returned to Judæa; thirdly, it was written just after the release of Timothy, who must consequently have been previously in confinement; and while the writer was waiting somewhere or other in Italy, expecting that he would come to him shortly, but not without some degree of uncertainty as to whether he would or not, before the time when he himself must be departing".

Now if our conjecture before stated, with respect to the first arrival of Timothy at Rome, was correct, he did not arrive there before the middle of U. C. 813;

w Hebr. xiii. 24. 23. 19. 23.

that is, the last half of the sixth of Nero; and when he arrived there he certainly did not arrive as a prisoner. But if there be any meaning in this allusion of the writer to the Hebrews to the fact of his being released or set at liberty; it must imply that he was previously in confinement: it is absolutely impossible that he could otherwise have been released. It follows, then, that between the time of the arrival of Timothy at Rome, (soon after which the Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Philippians were all written, and at the moment of writing which Timothy was at large,) and the time of writing the Epistle to the Hebrews, when he had been just released, he must have been imprisoned, or in some manner or other put under restraint at Rome.

It is no objection to the fact of such an imprisonment that we have no account of it in the Acts; for the history of the Acts probably expires before it took place: nor, indeed, is there any mention in the Acts of any thing, which happened at Rome, during St. Paul's two years' sojourn there, excepting the little which transpired at the very beginning of the period*.

*I am aware that the words in the original, which I understand to speak of Timothy's release from confinement, are construed by many commentators, of his having taken his leave, set out on his journey and the like. The verb, drow, is certainly so used, in the first sentence of the song of Symeon ; though even there it has still ultimately the same proper notion of release or liberation.

Without entering upon the critical discussion of the term, I will observe only that the construction in question involves

an absurdity, of which we cannot suppose that the writer himself could be guilty. If all that the words imply, is the fact that Timothy had set out from some quarter, upon some journey, why does he add, that if he joined him in time, they would both endeavour to revisit Judæa in company? "If he come quickly." If the writer himself was in Italy, waiting to be joined by Timothy, knowing that Timothy was already on his road to him, he could scarcely speak in terms of so much uncertainty about his joining

For the same reason, neither can any objection to this fact be taken from Philippians ii. 19-24, and much less from Philemon 22. The actual imprisonment of Timothy, if it ever happened, must have happened after each of these Epistles; and it is manifestly possible that St. Paul, who was still uncertain about the issue of things as it concerned himself, might labour under a similar uncertainty respecting the disposal of Timothy. It is by no means certain that, much as might be revealed upon some subjects to the Apostles, they were aware beforehand of every thing which should happen to themselves; and much less to their friends or followers. That perfect knowledge of the future was the prerogative of our Saviour only. We have St. Paul's assurance to the elders of the Ephesian church, that he was then going up to Jerusalem, not knowing the things which should happen to him there: and though he adds, Save that the Holy Ghost witnessed in every city that bonds and tribulations awaited him; this does not alter the truth of the assurance: for it is abundantly clear from a comparison with other passages, that he means by this witnessing, no revelations made to himself, but communications made to others in different cities, and through them to himselfy.

And this, in defect of any other, would still be a

him, within a certain time, or not. Not so, however, if he merely knew that he was at liberty to set out; that he was his own master, and might travel in any direction, and within whatever time, he pleased. He might know thus much about him; and yet not know whether

x Philipp. i. 27. ii. 23.

he would make such an use of his freedom, and with such dispatch, as to join himself by a given time; especially if he had himself only a set time to wait in, whereas Timothy was not obliged to be gone from wherever he was, within a certain time.

y Acts xx. 22, 23. xxi. 4. 11.

sufficient answer to the inference deducible from Acts xx. 25; as though, after such a declaration, St. Paul never could visit Ephesus again. The inference, however, goes on the supposition that the words are to be rendered; And now, behold, I know that none of you, among whom I went preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face again: whereas, it is my own conviction both from the order of the terms, and from the emphasis laid on the vμeîs távtes, that they ought to be rendered; And now, behold, I know that ye will not all of you, among whom I went preaching the kingdom of God, see my face again. The fulfilment of this prediction would require no more than that some of the persons, then present, should never see St. Paul again. And this might easily be the case; for between the time of this address, U. C. 809, and that when St. Paul was first at liberty to come back to Asia in U. C. 816, there were eight years complete, or nearly so at least and in eight years' time, great changes might take place any where and in any society.

In fact it must have been the case: for first, after St. Paul's departure, grievous wolves were to come among the church of Ephesus, who should not spare the flock; and, secondly, St. Paul was addressing the elders of the Ephesian church, and them, as it would seem, exclusively. Ephesus then and its church, at this time, were not in want of elders; but when St. Paul wrote his First to Timothy, which was long after this time, Ephesus and its church were either still in want of elders, or had but recently been supplied therewith. What then had become of the elders whom he was now addressing? could all be still alive, or still present in Ephesus? Is it not a natural inference that between the time of this address and the date of the Epistle to Timothy, the previously undis

turbed and quiet order of the Ephesian church had been agitated in some manner or other, and the integrity of its community had suffered in the loss even of some among its governors themselves; which loss could be repaired only by the appointment of fresh ones?

It is possible then that Timothy, for some reason or other, might be placed in confinement at Rome, after the Epistle to the Philippians itself was written; and if so, in the latter half of U. C. 813, at the earliest: and therefore if his imprisonment, a priori, was likely to last as long as St. Paul's had done, his release was not to be expected before the same time in U. C. 815, at the soonest. Let us suppose that this was the case; and, consequently, that the Epistle to the Hebrews, written soon after this release, was written either in the last half of U. C. 815, or in the first of U. C. 816. The probability of both these suppositions may be further confirmed as follows.

It is manifest from Rom. xv. 24-28, that St. Paul had projected a visit to Spain, even before he designed to go to Rome; or rather, that the visit to Rome was something ek Tapéρyou with respect to this visit to Spain; something which he intended to do by the way in comparison of that, and over and above, though preparatory to, the execution of his original purpose. And still more evident it is that, for those who were travelling either by land or by sea from Asia, or from Greece, to Spain; Italy in general, and even Rome in particular, would lie directly in the line of the course which they must take.

Now if St. Paul had deliberately conceived the design of such a visit before he went up to Jerusalem; and if he went up to Jerusalem, though with a particular ignorance yet under a general assurance that