to be cultivated by fuch as profess themselves the difciples of Jefus, in every age and nation, though all are not obliged to exert it in the fame manner or degree.

Another event connected with this community of goods, on which it may be neceffary to make fome remarks, is the punishment of Ananias and Sapphira, A&ts v. Their crime then feems to have confifted (vid. fupra) not in with-holding part of the price of the land, for the whole of this "was in their own power;" but in bringing part of the price, and falsely afferting that they had brought the entire; whence it would feem they also might claim a right to be fupported out of the common fund, as if they had given up their all to encrease it.

46

This conduct was certainly highly criminal; it included the greatest vain-glory, the groffeft hypocrify and falfehood, combined with fraud, and this practifed on the apoftles, whom they daily beheld exercising a fupernatural power; whom they pretended to believe gifted with the spirit of God, and commiffioned by him to instruct mankind; and to whom they profeffed the most implicit obedience. Falfhood under fuch circumftances, when all other Chriftians were animated with fuch an oppofite temper, seems to have been as great an act of impiety as can well be imagined: and furely we cannot therefore wonder that the divine juftice fhould inflict a fignal punishment on fuch perfons, to prevent the authority of the apostles, and the holy spirit which actuated them from falling into total contempt, and the Christian society from being over-run with fraudulent impoftors, practifing on the pious benevolence of the first converts.-And this effect was produced, ❝* for great FEAR fell on all the people; and though believers were daily added to the Lord, yet, of the reft, durft no man join himself to them." But in this whole tranfaction the apoftles were merely the inftruments of the divine will; they only denounced, from a fupernatural impulse, the impending punishment which divine power inflicted. Such feverity may, perhaps, have been peculiarly neceffary at the beginning of the new difpenfation, like thofe fignal examples of feverity recorded in the Old Testament; as in the inftances of Nadab and Abihu, Levit. x.-and Korah, Dathan and Abiram, Numb. xvi.

• Acts v. 13, 14.

For further information on this fubject, confult Benfon's History of Chriftianity, vol. 1, book 1, chap.iii. fect. 4, in fine, and Leland's Anfwer to Morgan, ch. xiii.

P. 103-116. "The teftimony of the miracles "wrought by the miffionaries of the new faith confi"dered."

Acts xi. 15. Peter relates to the Chriftians affembled to confider his conduct in preaching the gofpel to the Gentiles, "As I began to speak, the Holy Ghoft fell on them, as on us, at "the beginning," and he repeats the fame affertion before the council, A&s xv. 8.—and in verfe 12. "The multitude kept "filence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring "what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the "Gentiles by them." And this was done to influence the decifion of the council, which it did effectually.

P. 118.

"In a violent tumult at Jerufalem, &c." In defence of St. Paul's conduct on this occafion, confult Limborchi Collatio cum Judæo, p. 134-165, and Benson's History of Christianity, vol. 3. book 3, chap. viii. fect. 3, p. 241. edit. 2. and Doddridge's Expofitor, in Loc. vol. 3. p. 365.— and Leland's Anfwer to Morgan, chap. xiv. The objection that St. Paul diffembled his profeffion of Chriftianity in order to efcape danger, is advanced by Orobio, the Jew, in his Amica Collatio cum Limborcho, p. 134, in these words,-" In Judea, (fays he)" where the danger of perfecution was imminent, "where he was accused of apoftatizing from the law of the "Jews, and had been taken by the Roman procurator; he, "before Feftus and Agrippa, denied all things of which he

was accufed, faying, that he had taught nothing contrary to "circumcifion, or the laws of his country, but that the people "perfecuted him because he preached the refurrection of the “dead, and related that he had seen some celeftial vision, (to "which the Pharifees, in oppofition to the Sadducees, afsented) "and because he taught repentance; though it was not true, "that it was on account of these things he had excited the ha"tred of the people, but because he turned away the Jews from "circumcifion, and other legal rites, as abundantly appears

"from

from the Acts of the Apoftles, and the Epiftles. Thus did "they to the utmost of their power avoid danger." Limborch's Anfwer, p. 165, feems very fatisfactory," in exclaiming in the Jewish fenate, that "for the hope and refurrection of the dead "he was called in question; and thus exciting a diffention between "the Pharifees and Sadducees, how was Paul culpable? "Did he deny he was a Chriftian? No-he only faid he was brought into judgment, on account of the refurrection of the “dead; and was not this true? was it not the principal doctrine of the Christian religion, that Christ had rifen, and "that all who believe and obey him should rise like him [rather "that all mankind fhould rife to judgment.] Thus he who is "tried for the Christian religion, is really tried for the refur"rection of the dead. Paul was too well known to the Jews,

and it was too notorious that he was a Chriflian for him to "deny it, if he even wished to do fo, or for the Pharifces to "believe his denial. Paul spoke in the Sanhedrim not directly

of Chrift, but of the refurrection of the dead, that he might "fhew that the Pharifees had no caufe to perfecute the Chriftian

religion, fince it fo ftrongly fupported the principal doctrine which they efpoufed against the Sadducees."-So far Limborch.

We may add, Paul's conduct was the more juftifiable, as Ananias, who was a Sadducee, and probably the chief of the fect, was fo incensed against him, he would not afford him any opportunity of exculpating himself, but interrupted him with a grofs infult in the very first sentence of his defence; there feemed therefore no other expedient to procure an impartial hearing, but that of interefting fome of the Sanhedrim to interfere in fupport of the apostle, and curb the violence of Ananias and his party. The mode adopted by St. Paul, feemed most likely to effect this; but fo heated were the paflions of his enemies, even this could not fucceed; the diffenfion excited by the leaft attempt to protect the accufed apoftle, was fo violent, that the chief captain was obliged to interfere, and take him by force from amongst them, leaft they should tear him to pieces. Had Paul not employed this expedient, the entire Sanhedrim would have probably unanimoufly condemned him to death, and, as probably, on the inftant executed their fentence, by

what they termed a judgment of zeal. Thus St. Paul feemed to have no means of obtaining an opportunity to vindicate his innocence, or even of faving his life, but that which he adopted, in which he did not in the leaft violate truth, or deny Christianity.

What Orobio afferts of St. Paul's conduct before Feftus and Agrippa, is an abfolute falfehood. Before them he openly avows his faith in Chrift, relates his miraculous converfion to that faith, and ftrenuously defends its truth.

The propriety and wisdom of his conduct, as to the obfervance of the Jewish law, are, I truft, fufficiently vindicated in this chapter.

P. 123. And this to carry on a deceit, which, "instead of being (as fome have wickedly and falfe“ly termed it a pious fraud) would have been the "most impious and blafphemous impofture which "human imagination can conceive; exalting a cru"cified deceiver, a man rejected and abandoned of "God, as the Son of God and judge of the

"world."

It should have been added, that it would have been alfo an imposture of the most cruel and treacherous kind, involving their converts in the most severe diftreffes and perfecutions, nay, expofing them to the most cruel tortures and deaths; and still further, to aggravate the guilt of this deceit, the more humble and benevolent, the more virtuous and pious men were, the more likely it was that they should become the victims of this fatal delufion, the conductors of which on this fuppofition prac tifed on the virtues of their unhappy dupes, whom they expofed to almost certain mifery, by flattering them with the hopes of another life; hopes which these deceivers could not but know were grounded on facts palpably falfe, but which they folemnly attefted as true. Vid. this point excellently illuftrated by Doddridge, in his fecond fermon on the Evidences of Christianity, head the 2d. In Piftorius's Notes on Hartley, vol. 3. from p. 613 to 619, and Lord Lyttleton on the Converfion of St. Paul, p. 22.

P. 121.

P. 121.

The testimony of history renders pro"bable what St. Paul infinuates, that Ananias was not in truth at that time high priest.

66

Confult on this fubject Michaeli's Lectures, tranflated by Marsh, vol. 1. p. 52.

'

P. 138. Throughout the four evangelifts not one vifion to any of the writers is fo much as' "mentioned."

Perhaps I ought to have excepted the transfiguration of our Lord on Mount Tabor, related by three of the evangelists. It may be observed on this, as well as every other fupernatural appearance recorded in the hiftory of the New Testament, which was not attended by some certain miracle, fubmitted to the deliberate examination of the reafon, as well as the fenfes of the spectators; that they were not intended or used as proofs of a divine miffion, but are reprefented as deriving their entire credibility from their connection with the plain and fenfible miracles, to which alone our Lord and the apoftles appealed, as proofs of their divine authority. Thus our Lord commands the apostles, who were witneffes of his transfiguration, "to tell no man what vifion they had feen, till the Son of Man fhould "be rifen from the dead :". '—an event established by fuch undeniable evidence of fenfe, as would cvince the credibility of the transfiguration, while it would also explain its real meaning, and prevent it from being mistaken as a presage of that splendid, but temporal kingdom, which it was expected the Meffiah fhould affume. Thus while the claims of enthusiasts are fupported folely by tranfitory vifions and fecret miracles, the founders of Christianity, even when they relate fuch occurrences as having really happened; yet expressly distinguish between them and the unquestionable facts which they adduce, as the only proofs of their divine miffion. Can any contrast be more ftriking than this ?-yet this diftinction has not been fufficiently attended to by deiftical writers, to prevent their charging the apoftles with fanaticifm. On this fcore St. Paul in particular has been violently accused of it, in confequence of the vifion related by him in the fecond Epiftle to the Corinthians, chap. xii.