tinguished from other Ifraelites by this appellation, on ac count of their being natives of Greece, or of fome Grecian colony, and as fuch using the Greek language, as fome contend? ()-Or, were they profelytes to the Jewish religion, born of Grecian parents, as others conceive? (m) If they were of this latter defcription, and not born in Judæa, they might with fome little appearance of propriety be fet in oppofition to Jews, and thofe Cyprian and Cyrenian preachers, by avoiding to make any overture of the Gofpel to fuch perfons, may be faid to have preached to none but Jews only.-But if they were Jews, grecifing in their language, and ufing the Greek verfion of the Septuagint, with what propriety could they, being Jews themfelves, though perhaps not born in Judæa, be fet in oppofition to dispersed Jews who generally made ufe of the fame language?-and especially to thofe living in a city where the Greek language feems to have been pretty generally spoken, perhaps more than the original language. of the country: (n) if not, fo much at leaft, that the believers there were called by a Greek appellation, inftead of a Syriac. Had they been fet in oppofition to Hebrews here, as well as in the former inftance, there would have been no room to queftion the propriety of the diftinction, but as they are fet in comparison with Jews, and with Jews difpersed in a country where the Greek language was generally spoken, it is not eafy to guefs at the reafon.

"to none

To afcertain the ground of the diftinction, is however not so material a point, as to difcover the reafon why thofe preachers are faid to have addreffed themselves but to Jews only" before they reached Antioch, and then to have preached to Helienifts. Are we to conclude from this, that those preachers did not meet with any Hellenists of either fort all the way from Jerufalem to Antioch ?—Or, that they paid no attention to fuch perfons till they came to Antioch? As we read of Hellenifls even at Jerufalem, may we not prefume that there may have been fome either in Phenice, or in Cyprus as well, if not in both places? What elfe could that profelyte of Antioch with a Greek name have been, who was one of the feven deacons ? Indeed if the name be

(1) Among whom Heinsius.

(m) Among whom Salmasius.

(n) Alexandri posteri et successores reges in Ægypto et Syria eam linguam adeo fundarunt, ut præ patrio Syrorum et Ægyptorum sermone Græcus prævaluerit. SALMASIUS, De linguâ Hellenisticâ. p. 442,

be properly applied to thofe Jews who ufed the Greek language, how will it be made to appear that thofe very preachers themfelves were not Hellenifts? At least how could they converfe with Hellenifts without being in fome measure acquainted with the Greek language?-Befides-Is it credible that they refrained at all from preaching to perfons of this defcription? Would it not be abfurd to fuppofe they did, when it is confidered that in all probability, they must have affociated with Hellenifts as members of the church at Jerufalem, before the death of Stephen; and have known that the admiffion of Hellenifts into the church was no uncommon practice prior to that event? And a practice too that obtained without oppofition? We read indeed of a difcontent that prevailed among the Helleniftic believers on account of the misbehaviour of the Hebrews, but it was not on account of their being objected to as believers, it was be cause their widows were neglected by them in the daily mi niftration. To remove the cause of fuch partiality in future, we find, that the feven deacons, who were then appointed, had each of them a Greek name.-In fhort-fince both the preceding part of the hiftory, and the true caufe of the dif tinction between Jews and Hellenists render the meaning of this paffage queftionable, let us proceed to inquire whether the continuation of the hiftory of the tranfactions at Antioch will increase or diminifh its ambiguity.

We read further that "the hand of the Lord was with them"-and-" that a great number oλus agious believed and turned to the Lord"-and-" that much people onhos xavos, was added to the Lord" foon after the arrival of Barnabas among them.--Now what are we to underftand by this? And what conclufion ought to be drawn from Barnabas' thinking it advifable to apply elfewhere for affiflance? For we are told that perceiving on his arrival at Antioch how profperous the caufe was in that city--and alfo what he himfelf was capable of doing among the inhabitants, he departed to Tarfus to feek Saul" And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. And it came to pafs that a whole year they affembled themfelves with the church and taught much people." (0)

Was the whole church here fpoken of compofed only of Jews and Hellenifls properly fo called-or-io fpeak with greater accuracy, were all the believers at Antioch of Jewish extraction, though differently denominated by their language

(0) Acts xi. 26.

or

or country,-or, Ifraelites thus diftinguished and their Grecian profelytes? Whatever they were, the number of those among them who fpoke Greek, muft be, allowed to have been confiderably the greater, fince it would be otherwise difficult to account for their being called Xpisia voi, (p) or rather, for their calling themselves fo. Did Barnabas then think it neceffary to take this step because the number of such converts only was fo confiderable in that city, that he could not, even with the affiftance of those who firft preached the gospel there, administer edification properly to all of them?

But the most ftriking circumftance of all, attending this matter, is, that Barnabas fhould have refolved fo readily to go to Tarfus to feek Saul. He had been deputed to Antioch by the church at Jerufalem; if then he found affiftance neceffary, why did he not fend to Jerufalem for it, instead of going elsewhere himself? The communication between those two cities muft, on account of Jewish connections, have

been

(p) The fixing of this honourable name upon the disciples of the crucified Jesus was done at Antioch (as an ancient historian informs us) about the beginning of Claudius his reign, ten years after Christ's ascension; nay he furthermore adds, that Euodius, lately ordained bishop of that place, was the person that imposed this name upon them, styling them Christians, who were before called Nazarenes and Galileans. Τε αυτό επισκοπε Ευοδια προσομι λησαντος αυτοίς το ονομα τετὸ προην γαρ Ναζαραίοι εκαλέντο και Γαλί alos exaλevo or Xpsiavor, as my author's words are. I may not omit what a learned man has observed-that the word xnutioai (they were called) used by St. Luke, implies the thing to have been done by some public and solemn act and declaration of the whole church, such being the use of the word in the imperial edicts and proclamations of those times, the emperors being said χρηματίζειν (to style themselves), when they publicly proclaimed by what titles they would be called. When any province submitted itself to the Roman empire, the emperor was wont by public edict xnx TICE EQUTOV to entitle himself to the government and jurisdiction of it, and the people to several great privileges and immunities. In a grateful sense whereof the people usually made this time the solemn date of their common Epocha or computation. Thus (as the forementioned historian informs us) it was in the particular, case of Antioch, and thence their public æra was called xnatio PLOS TWY AVTIONEN, the ascription of the people at Antioch. Such being the general acception of the word, St. Luke (who was himself a native of this city) makes use of it to express that solemn declaration, whereby the disciples of the Christian religion entitled themselves to the name of Christians. CAVE'S LIFE OF ST. PAUL, Sect. ii. p. 72, 73.

been pretty confiderable-probably much more on that account, than that between Antioch and Tarfus, though this latter place was much nearer than Antioch. And befides, it appears he was not fure of finding Paul on his arrival there. When this is confidered, it furely will be allowed that Barnabas must have had fome particular reafon for taking such a step.

On the whole then-The word in our copy of the Greek Teftament, reprefented by the word "Greeks" in our verfion is evidently very queftionable. Of this some divines feem to have been aware, by fuggefting the fubftitution of Eaves in its ftead, which we find is fometimes used to de note the people of the country, (q) whether really Greeks or not, in oppofition to Jews and their profelytes. The propriety of this fubftitution feems to have been admitted by the authors of our tranflation, who have adopted the English word which correfponds with the above fubftitute.-Befides, we are told (r) that the Alexandrian manufcript and all the Eastern verfions, together with the vulgate, confirm this reading. If this be the word really ufed by St. Luke, we feem to have pretty good reason to conclude that though thofe Cyprians and Cyrenians would not prefume to make an overture of the Gofpel to any befides the different denominations of Jews and their profelytes, before they arrived at Antioch, yet after they were there, they undertook to preach to the inhabitants at large (s) (which furely they may have

done,

(9) It is common with authors to call the people who inhabited the cities of Asia and Syria, Greeks. See Acts xix. 10 and 17. Indeed the New-Testament writers seem to have called the nations in general by this narne, as appears by Rom. x. 2. 1 Cor. xii. 12. Gal. iii. 28. Col. iii. 2. Sunt enim Exλnves generali appellatione desumpta a Græcorum gente, dicti omnes incircumcisi. BEZA, Acts vi. 1.

1

(r) In our common copies of the Greek-Testament, the reading is πpos Tus Exanvisas to the Hellenists or Græcising Jews; but in the Alexandrian manuscript, and in the Syriac, Vulgate, Coptic, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions, it is πpos res Eλanvas, to the Greeks, or uncircumcised Gentiles; and all the best commentators are agreed, that this is evidently the true and original reading; for St. Luke had spoken of the conversion of the Gentiles long before, See ch. vi. 1. DODD on Acts xi. 20.

(s) Soon after this, some of those who were scattered abroad upon the persecution, went to Antioch, and there spake to Greeks or Gentiles, preaching the Lord Jesus, WATSON'S TRACTS, Vol. ii. p. 54,

These

done, and yet be faid, with no great impropriety, to have preached to none but Jews only on the road thither, though they may have preached to the converts of Judaifm as well) -And (as it feems likely that the Twelve may have been apprised of it) that they had not any difinclination to encourage (t) others to accomplish the will of their Lord among Gentiles, though they themselves feem to have had very little inclination to depart from Jerufalem for that purpose, -And though the Greek word in our copy of the NewTeftament

These men had preached the gospel to Jews, and the proselytes to Judaism, in Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch. But some time after their arrival at Antioch, hearing of Peter's having opened the door of the kingdom of heaven to Gentiles at the house of Cornelius, they began to preach also to the Greeks at Antioch,that is to the people of the country: who might, possibly some few of them, have been like Cornelius, who even before his conversion was a worshipper of the true God, the God of Israel: but the greatest part of them must have been heathen Idolaters: &c. Watson's Tracts, Vol. ii. p 205.

Ut sit, Gentiles hic intelligi res ipsa clamat. Atque hoc primum exemplum est Evangelii publice gentibus prædicati. Nam alterum illud Cornelii non nisi domesticum fuit. Quum vero Dei favoram in sancto hoc opere insigniter experirentur fideles illi Cyprii ac Cyrenenses, multusque Græcorum numerus, fide ipsis habitâ converteretur ad Christum, non potuit tantæ rei fama Hierosolymitæ ecclesiæ proceres diu latere. WITSIUS de

vitâ Pauli. Sect. iii. n. 3.

But this cannot be St. Paul's meaning. For most, if not all the converts at Antioch, must have been Idolaters. Watson, Vol. ii. P. 417.

This Church of Antioch, I suppose with Witsius, to have consisted of Jews and partly of Gentiles. Ditto. p. 211.

Erat urbs Gentilis, et ecclesia ibidem collecta omnium prima, quæ partim Judæis, partim conversis Gentilibus constabat.

(t) It is very observable that when tidings "came to the ears of the church at Jerusalem" that many Gentiles had been converted at Antioch, by some of those who were scattered abroad by the persecution they sent forth Barnabas." Ditto. p. 52.

-He afterwards brought Paul thither. And from that time forward the Gospel was freely preached to Gentiles, as well as Jews; and with great success. Ibid. p. 421.

Though the Apostles did not leave Judæa themselves they encouraged those who did, who preached the Gospel abroad whether to Jews or Gentiles. Of this there is an instance with regard to the church of Antioch, related Acts xi. 19...22. And there may have been many other like instances. Ibid. p. 57.

LL