In his

delivered to them. It contains no history of the introduction of Christianity into numerous countries, which we are assured received the divine religion within the apostolic age; nor even of the origin of many of those churches which are recognised as existing and flourishing in the subsequent parts of the New Testament. It gives a minute account of some detached labours and discourses of Peter; but it does not follow him into those wider spheres of exertion which we have reason to believe that he actually occupies. Though it treats the most copiously of the actions of Paul, yet it by no means furnishes a complete history of his life and services to the cause of Christianity, down to the time at which it closes; and where it stops short, leaving a most interesting portion of the apostle's life without a memorial. own epistles there are allusions to many and very important circumstances, which occurred even during the period embraced by the narrative of Luke; but of which this narrative takes not the smallest notice.' The book, valuable and sacred as it is, cannot. therefore with propriety be called The Acts of the Apostles. It does not profess to occupy so wide a field: nor does it even propose a regular history of the select persons and facts upon which it dwells, often with a circumstantial minuteness. It is rather a collection of anecdotes and particular memoirs, referring to the actual commencement of the Christian dispensation, detailing some events in the history of the churches at Jerusalem and Antioch, and occupying its latter half with many and interesting transactions of

1 For instances, see 2 Cor. xi. 23—28; xii. 2. Gal. i. 17; ii. 1. 2 Thess. ii. 2. Titus i. 5.

the apostle Paul, but, as we have remarked, not including a perfect series of them during the period that is embraced.

The annunciation of his design which Luke gives in the preface to his Gospel, seems very justly to comprehend both the parts of his work: and, if this be admitted, it will supply us with a sufficient reason why the book called The Acts was drawn up in its particular manner and order; and it will prevent our disappointment at not meeting with those statements, in either history or doctrine, which an incorrect estimate of its intention might lead us to expect.

Whoever Theophilus, to whom the two books are inscribed, was, it is plain that the writer's design was, not to make him acquainted with the fundamental truths of Christianity, for in them he had been already instructed; but to furnish him with a selection of facts, relative to the actions, discourses, and sufferings of the Lord Jesus, and the diffusion of his religion in some particular places, and by some particular persons. Those places and persons, it is highly probable, had some connexion with Theophilus more than other places or persons would have had: and thus, some specialty of circumstances was the principle which guided the selection. By the interest which he would feel, from the associations thus formed in his mind, it was the design of the evangelist to increase his assurance of the truth of those doctrines, and the force of those obligations, in which he had already received information: "It seemed proper to me, who have accurately investigated all [the circumstances] from the first, "to describe [them] to thee in order, most noble "Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty

66

"of the declarations in which thou hast been in"structed."2

As we are not to regard the book of the Acts in the light of a regular history, so this view of its design will prevent our expecting from it a body of Christian doctrine. It supposes the reader to be, like Theophilus, already acquainted with the great principles of that doctrine: and it is, therefore, occupied in giving him the facts which formed the basis of evidence for those principles, or which were examples of their diffusion and influence among men. If any person were to contend that any given doctrine is not a genuine, or at least not an important, part of Christianity, because it is not made prominent in the narrative, or in the discourses, of this book; I would request him to consider, whether the principle which he is assuming, would not lead him to regard every moral duty as indifferent, or at least of questionable obligation, except what are enjoined in the apostolic rescript as "the things which are necessary."3

An attentive examination of the book appears to warrant our distinguishing between the design of the narrative and that of the particular discourses which are introduced into it. The scope of the former seems to have been, to evince the propriety and divine warrant of communicating the gospel to the Gentiles; and, in a very important subordination to this, to establish the apostolic authority of Paul, a point which Jewish Christians were reluctant to admit. To the men of following times it is also peculiarly valuable, for another reason which, though

2 Luke i. 4.

3 Acts xv. 28. See Kypke, Schleusner, and Kuinoel.

probably not in the mind of the writer, was undoubtedly in the contemplation of Divine wisdom: that it should be an authentic testimony to the manner in which Christianity was introduced and made its way among mankind; that this was not by state-authority, or by the power of the sword, or by any other mode of worldly inducement; but solely by its own rational evidences and peaceful influence. With respect to the separate discourses, of which the outlines or any parts are inserted by the sacred writer, it is observable that, however different they may be in minor respects, they all point to one or more of the following objects :

1. That Jesus was the Messiah foretold and described in the ancient scriptures; to which as the acknowledged documents of revelation, and to ulterior Christian instruction, an habitual reference is, directly or implicitly, made for more complete information.*

2. To show, by the adducing of numerous instances, and those occurring under a great variety of circumstances, that all the bestowments of heavenly grace and mercy are conferred upon mankind through the mediation of Jesus as the Christ. The mode of denominating the gospel message, at the moment of its transition to the Gentiles, powerfully expresses this sentiment:-"The word which God sent-pro"claiming the glad tidings of PEACE THROUGH JESUS "CHRIST:-he is LORD OF ALL."

4

5

995

Chap. ii. 25, 34; iii. 18, 22, 25; iv. 11, 25; viii. 35; x. 43; xiii. 23, 32-35, 47; xvii. 2, 3, 11; xxvi. 22, 23; xxviii. 23, 31. Chap. x. 36, and the same idea is prominent in chap. i. 8; ii. 36, 38, 39; iii. 16, 26; iv. 12; v. 31, 42; ix. 15, and other passages through the whole book, too numerous to be particularized, and sufficiently obvious to an attentive reader.

3. The rights of gentile Christians, and their freedom from any obligation to observe the peculiarities of Judaism."

4. The accountableness of men to God, for the moral state of their affections and conduct, and especially for the manner in which they treat the gospel testimony."

From these preparatory observations, the justness of which is submitted to the examination of the impartial inquirer, we proceed to collect the testimonies which are afforded by this part of the New Testament, on the Person and Characters of Jesus the Christ.

I. The real HUMANITY of Christ is stated in the clearest terms.

"Of the seed of David hath God, according to "[his] promise, brought forth to Israel a Saviour, "Jesus: Jesus the Nazarene, a man from God, "demonstrated unto you by powers and miracles and signs, which through him God did among you.

66

"God consecrated him the Messiah, by the Holy Spirit and power. Thy holy Son, Jesus, whom

"thou hast consecrated the Messiah !

"whom he hath ordained." 8

6 Chap. x. xi. xv.

7

The man

Chap. ii. 38, 40; iii. 19, 23; vii. 51; xiii. 10, 38—41, 46, &c.

8

Chap. xiii. 23, yayɛ, the reading approved by Mill, Matthäi, Griesbach, Heinrichs, Knapp, Kuinöl, Vater, Lachmann, Nähbe, Scholz, and others; but the prince of critics, the younger Tittmann, retains yɛɛ, in favour of which Dr. Bloomfield has a judicious Note, which the reader would do well to consult. The ultimate sense, however, is the same with either reading. - ii. 22; x. 38. Expirev It seems highly probable that in passages which clearly refer to the qualifications and office of our Lord, this verb is used with a designed reference to the appellative Messiah or Christ: as