Chapter V: , speaking of that--his second Jerusalem Visit, by the name
of the _Money-bringing Visit_.
But,--what may easily enough have happened, distance in time and place, together considered, is--that to those particulars, which composed no more than the surface of the business, _their_ knowledge was confined: while _we_, though at the distance of more than seventeen centuries, know more or less of the inside of it,--let into it, as we have been, by the author of the Acts.
As to their arriving sooner or later, at the suspicion, or though it were the discovery, that the money had not, any part of it, reached the hands it was intended for, nor was in any way to do so,--what bar could the apprehension of any such result oppose, to the enterprise, systematic, as we see it was, of the creator of Antichrist? When, to a man, who occupies a certain situation in the eye of the political world, calls for accounts are become troublesome,--Scipio might have informed him, if he had not well enough known of himself, how to answer them.
When a charge made upon you is true--evidence full against you, and none to oppose to it,--fly into a passion, magnify your own excellence--magnify the depravity of your adversaries. This mode, of parrying a charge, is perfectly well understood in our days, nor could it have been much less well understood in Paul's days. As for _his_ adversaries, Paul had a storm _in petto_ at all times ready for them: for the materials, turn to any page of his Epistles: whatever, in this way, he had for rivals,--_that_ and more he could not fail to have for accusing witnesses. To the creator of Antichrist--sower of tares between Pharisees and Sadducees,--whatever were the charges, defence, the most triumphant, could never be wanting: arguments, suited with the utmost nicety, to the taste of judges. He would warn them, against false brethren, and liars, and wolves, and children of Satan, and so forth: he would talk to them, about life and death, and sin and righteousness, and faith and repentance, and this world and that world, and the Lord and resurrection: he would talk backwards and forwards--give nonsense for mystery, and terror for instruction: he would contradict everybody, and himself not less than anybody: he would raise such a cloud of words, with here and there an _ignis fatuus_ dancing in the smoke,--that the judges, confounded and bewildered, would forget all the evidence, and cry out _Not Guilty_ through pure lassitude.
As to us,--the case being now before us, what shall be our verdict? Obtaining money on false pretences is the charge. Guilty shall we say, or not guilty? Obtainment on a certain pretence, is proved by _direct_ evidence--his own evidence: proof, of falsity in the pretence, rests, as it could not but rest, on _circumstantial_ evidence.
One observation more: for another piece of circumstantial evidence has just presented itself: it consists of the utter silence, about the receipt of the money or any particle of it,--when, if there had been any such receipt, occasions there were in such abundance for the mention of it. A.D. 57, in his first to his Corinthians,--there it is, as we have seen, that he urges them to lay by money for him, declaring it is for the saints at Jerusalem; and that on this same errand it is, that he is going to Macedonia,--and that in his way to Jerusalem he will give them another call, to receive, for that same purpose, the intermediate produce of these proposed _saving-banks_. In his letter to the Romans, written the next year, A.D. 58--written at Corinth,--then it is, that he has already made the said intended money-gathering visit, and with success:--with success not only in Macedonia, as he had proposed, but in Achaia likewise: and, with this money in his hand, and for the purpose of delivering the money to those for whom he obtained it;--for this purpose (he says) it is, that he is at that moment on his way to Jerusalem--the place of their abode. This is in the year A.D. 58. Well then: after this it is, that he takes up his abode at Ephesus. And when, after his contests with the church silversmiths there, he departs from thence, whither does he betake himself? To Jerusalem? No: he turns his back upon Jerusalem, and goes for Macedonia (Acts xx. 1.) then into Greece, where he stays three months; and purposes, Acts 20:3, to return through Macedonia. A.D. 60, it is, that, for the first time, Acts 20:16, any intention of his to visit Jerusalem is declared, he having coveted no man's silver or gold, as his historian, Acts xx. 33, makes him assure us. When, at length he arrived there, what his reception was, we have seen. Had any of the _money_ been received there, would such as we have seen have been the reception given to the _man_? When, by the Christians at Jerusalem, Agabus was sent to him, to keep him if possible from coming there,--is it in the nature of things, that they should have already received any of it, or been in any expectation of it? In what passed between him and the Elders, headed by the Apostle James, is any the slightest allusion made to it? When, in Cæsarea, all in tears, Acts 21:12, 13, his attendants were striving, might and main, to dissuade him from going to Jerusalem,--did he say anything about the money--the money he had been so long charged with? Oh no; not a syllable: to Jerusalem he is resolved to go indeed: Oh yes: but not the shadow of a reason can he find for going there.
When arrived at Jerusalem, the brethren, says the Acts 20:17, received him gladly. The brethren: yes, what adherents he had, would of course receive him gladly, or at least appear to do so. But the money? On their side, was anything said about the money? Not a syllable. Either at this time by his own hand, or any time before, by other hands, had they received this money, or any considerable part of it, could they have received him otherwise than not only gladly, but gratefully?
All the time, the hero was thus employed in money-craving and money-gathering, the historian, let it never be out of mind, was of the party: four years before, A.D. 53, had he been taken into it; yet not any the least hint about these money-matters does he give. So far indeed as regarded what was avowedly for Paul's own use, neither could the receipt nor the craving of the money from their customers, have been unknown to him; for this was what they had to live upon. But the letters his master wrote--wrote to their customers everywhere--letters, in which the demand was made, for the so much more extensive purpose,--of these, so many of which have reached these our times, the contents may to him have easily enough remained a secret: little reason had he to expect, none at all to fear, the exposure,--which now, at the end of more than seventeen centuries, has, at length, been made of them,--confronted, as they may now be, with the particulars he himself has furnished us with.
FOOTNOTES:
[13] Acts vii. ver. 47. Speech of St. Stephen. "But Solomon built him an house. Howbeit the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?" In itself, perfectly comfortable all this, to the dictates of reason and the instruction of Jesus: but not the less clear blasphemy against the Mosaic law.
[14] Acts ix. ver. 1 and 2. "And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the Disciples of the Lord, _went_ unto the _High Priest_,--And _desired_ of him letters to Damascus to the Synagogues, &c."
[15] Acts xxii. ver. 5. "As also the High Priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the Elders: from _whom also I received letters_ unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem for to be punished."
[16] Yet, for even at the outset, after certain "days spent with the disciples," and employed of course in receiving from them the necessary instructions, he preached Jesus with such energy and success as not only to "confound," Acts ix. 19 to 24, the unbelieving among the Jews, but to provoke them to "take counsel to kill him."
[17] Paul, says--2nd Cor. 11:6--"For though I be rude in speech yet am I not in knowledge nay, in everything we have made it manifest among all men to you-ward, or did I commit a sin in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I preached to you the Gospel of God for naught? I robbed other Churches, taking wages of them that I might minister unto you; and when I was present with you I was in want, I was not a burden on any man; for the brethren, when they came from Macedonia supplied the measure of my want, and in everything I kept myself from being burdensome unto you and so I will keep myself. As the truth of Christ is in me no man shall stop me of this glorying in the regions of Achaia, &c."
When ever we get a Temperamental and psychological view of Paul, we see verified the deductions of the author of this treatise, that he was a transparent imposter. An unscrupulous adventurer. With talent well adapted to dogmatically command the attention of the ignorant and especially those of organized hereditary idolatry, the extreme vanity, the vain glorious pretensions of this new priest was well adapted to obtain obsequious complacence from such people. He always presents himself in a controversial spirit of self-exaltation.
His egotistic diction could hardly be made more manifest than in the terms above quoted, to wit:--"I robbed other Churches taking wages of them that I might minister unto you, &c." It presents a striking contrast to the benevolent and fraternal spirit of Christ and his disciples.
[18] N.B. The editor at this place inserts pages of discussion--which the author exhibited by way of an appendix. At the expense of a little redundancy and incongruity the editor inserts it in this place.--Ed.
[19] According to the Acts' account, this same stoning, if it was the same, was much in the style of that same resurrection of Eutychus, which we have seen in Chapter xiii. §. 10. As to Paul, when this martyrdom had been suffered by him,--"some" says Acts xiv. 19, were "supposing he had been dead:" and on that supposition, "drew him out of the city." Paul, on the other hand, thought otherwise: he supposed himself alive, and, on that supposition, he walked off, as if nothing had been the matter with him. "Certain Jews ... say verses 19 and 20, 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."
CHAPTER III.
_Paul disbelieved.--Neither his divine Commission nor his inward
Conversion ever credited by the Apostles or their Jerusalem
Disciples.--Source of Proof stated._
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
Not Paul, but JesusChapter V: , speaking of that--his second Jerusalem Visit, by the name
0%8 min left in chapter