might happen; but all of them linked to one another by the bonds of amity, and unity of principle and practice.
In such a capital as Damascus, Straight Street might have been as long as Oxford Street; and, unless the style of building in those earlier days had much more of convenience and luxury in it than in these latter days, was much more crowded. Conceive a man at this time of day, going to Oxford Street with the intention of finding the house, in which, thirty years ago, a man of the name of Brown or Smith had his residence,--to wit, on some indeterminate day, of the number of those included within the space of an indeterminate number of years; and this, for the purpose of ascertaining whether, on this indeterminate day, and by this Smith or this Brown, a vision, not seen by anybody else, had been seen. Suppose a man in Rome set out on such an errand--and then say what would be the probable result of it.
TOPIC 4.--_Vision reported to Ananias by the Lord as having been seen by Paul._ Of the report then given of this anterior vision, the character is too remarkable to be given, as it were, in a parenthesis: it is therefore referred to a separate head. Acts ix. 12. "And Paul hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him that he might receive his sight."
TOPIC 5.--_Ananias's Objection to the Lord's Commands to visit Paul--He informs the Lord what he had heard about Paul._ By the two first speeches of this dialogue, we are given to understand that Ananias had already held intercourse with the Lord; an intercourse which, the nature of the two parties considered, could not have been other than a supernatural intercourse: yes, and on this very subject: for, if not on this particular subject, the subject of it, whatever it was, could not but have called for notice and communication. But, no sooner does this next speech commence, than we are given to understand that there had not--could not have been any such intercourse: for if there had been, what follows would have been rendered useless and needless. Upon receiving the command, Ananias's first thought is--to endeavour to excuse himself from paying obedience to it; for in this endeavour it is, that he gives the Lord a piece of information; to wit--of what, in relation to Paul's character, he (Ananias) had heard. Acts ix. 13: "Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem. And here he hath authority from the Chief Priests to bind all that call on thy name." Thus then, commands known to have been the Lord's, having that instant been received,--the man by whom they have been received--so small is the confidence, reposed in the Lord by this his favoured disciple--instead of paying obedience to them, answers them by an objection. This objection, prepared for it or not prepared for it, the Lord, as might well be expected, immediately overrules.
A question that here presents itself is--Since it was from _many_, i.e.
_many men_, that Ananias had heard, not only what everybody had been hearing for weeks, or months, or years,--viz. of the evil that Paul had been doing to the Jerusalem saints, but of the authority that he had so lately received, to bind at Damascus all the Damascus saints he could find--since it was from so many, who then were these many? How was it, that in the compass of the three days (ver. 9), during which Paul had remained without sight or nourishment, a commission,--to the execution of which secrecy was so obviously necessary,--had to such a degree transpired? Suppose the secret to have thus transpired,--two results would, in any natural and credible state of things, have been among the consequences. The persons thus devoted to destruction would have made their escape; the commission by which alone the supposed proceedings against them could have found a justification or a cause, not having been delivered. On the other hand, hearing that Paul was there, and that he either was, or pretended to be, in the house in question, or in some other, in the extraordinary condition above described,--the persons spoken of in the Acts under the name of _the Synagogue_, would not have left him there, but would have convened him before them, and, if he really had any such commission, have caused it to be produced, and read it: convened before them, not only Paul with his supposed commission, but those companions of his that we have already heard of, if any such he had[8].
But of these there will be occasion to speak in another place.
TOPIC 6.--_The Lord's Answer, obviating the objection, and giving intimation of his designs in favour of Paul._ This objection, no sooner has the Lord overruled it, than he undertakes to answer it, and to explain to this his so singularly favoured old disciple the intentions he had formed in favour of his intended new convert, whose conversion is, however, as yet but in progress (ver. 14): "But the Lord said to him, Go thy way; for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel:--For (continues the Lord) I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake." Being, and therefore at the time of Paul's vision purposing to be, in relation to his designs for Paul, thus communicative to this same Ananias, who is a perfect stranger to this same Paul,--to what purpose, on the occasion of his supposed visionary intercourse with Paul, should _the Lord_ have stopped short; reserving the communication, for the intention of giving it him at second-hand by the mouth of that same stranger? This is one of the swarms of questions which an account of this sort could scarcely fail to present to any inquiring mind.
Meantime, as to the Lord's having thus stopped short, this we shall see is in full contradiction with the account which the historian makes him give in his supposed second reported speech, to wit, the supposed premeditated one, spoken before Agrippa, who, under the proconsul Festus, was king of the Jews, and who, on that occasion, is spoken of as being assessor to the said proconsul Festus. On that occasion the Lord is represented as explaining himself more fully to Paul himself, than here, for the benefit of Paul, through Ananias.
ANANIAS: HIS VISIT TO PAUL AT DAMASCUS.
We now come to the visit, which, we are to understand, was, in reality, paid to Paul by Ananias, in consequence of this vision, in obedience to the command imagined to be given in it.
Note that, though, in the original--in _the including vision_, as it may be called--the command is given to inquire in the house in question for the person (Saul) in question,--this is _all_ the command which, in that least visionary of the two visions, is delivered. In the first instance to make the inquiry, and in conclusion to go his way--this is all to which the commands given to him in the direct way extend themselves. To accomplish the object of this intercourse--to do anything towards it beyond the making of this inquiry--he has to take hints and to draw inferences:--inferences from the Lord's speech, which is thus continued, Acts ix. 12: "And (Paul) _hath seen in a vision_ a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him that he might receive his sight."
From having been told what--in a vision, to wit, this _contained or included vision_--this same Paul had been _fancying_ he _had_ seen him (Ananias) do--from this he was to conclude that it was the Lord's will that he (Ananias) _should_ do _in reality_ that which Paul had been fancying him to have done; though the only effect, for the doing of which it had so been fancied to have been performed, had never been produced. This was what he was to conclude was the Lord's will; although the Lord himself, who (if any person) should have known how to speak plainly and beyond danger of misconception, had forborne to tell him as much.
On the occasion of this important visit--this visit of Ananias to Paul,--the double light--the light cast by the first of the two oratorical accounts--to wit, the supposed unpremeditated one, upon the historical one--recommences.
Follows now--and from both sources--the account of the interview, and of the cure performed in the course of it. ACTS' ACCOUNT.--Ch. ix. ver. 17-22.
And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him, said: Brother Saul, the Lord, _even_ Jesus, that _appeared_ unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, _and be filled with the Holy Ghost_.--And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been _scales_: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and _was baptized_.--And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul _certain days_ with the disciples which were _at Damascus_.--And straightway he _preached_ Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.--But all that heard _him_ were amazed, and said: Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the Chief Priests?--But Saul _increased the more_ in strength, and _confounded the Jews_ which dwelt at _Damascus_, proving that this is very Christ.
PAUL'S ACCOUNT.--ACTS, Ch. xxii. ver. 12-16.
12. And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt _there_,--Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me: Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.--And he said: The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and _see_ that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.--For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast _seen_ and heard.--And now, why tarriest thou? arise, and _be baptized_, and wash away thy sins; calling on the name of the Lord.
TOPIC 1.--_On visiting Paul, Ananias's Introductory Speech--Preliminary Recital._ I. In the historical account, the speech has in it several distinguishable parts.
I. "Brother Saul."
First comes the address, in which Saul, the future Paul, is addressed by disciple Ananias by the name of _brother_. If, as between Jew and Jew, this was a common form of salutation,--so far everything is in order.
But, if it was only in consideration of his having been denominated a disciple, to wit, of Jesus,--the salutation is rather premature: the conversion, supposing it effected, is, at any rate, not yet declared.
Not only in the historical account is this appellation employed, but likewise in the oratorical one. The attention of Paul being thus bespoken by his visitor, mention is thereupon made of the purpose of the visit.
I. In the first place comes a recital. "The Lord (says he), even Jesus, that _appeared_ unto thee on the way as thou camest, hath sent me"...Unfortunately, according to the historian himself, this assertion, as we have seen already, is not true. In no manner or shape did the Lord Jesus, or any other person, make his appearance;--all that _did_ appear was the light--the light at midday: so he has just been writing, and before the ink, if ink it was that he used, was dry, already had he forgotten it.
This, however, is but a collateral averment:--a recital, an episode, matter of _inducement_, as an English lawyer would phrase it.
TOPIC 2.--_Declared Purposes or Objects of the Visit._ Purpose the first. "That thou mightest," says Ananias, "receive thy sight." Thus says Ananias in the historical account: in the supposed oratorical one he is more concise. No supposed past occurrence referred to:--no purpose declared. "Receive thy sight" are the words.
Purpose the second. That thou mightest "be filled with the Holy Ghost," says the historical account. But in a succeeding passage what is the purpose, which, in the supposed oratorical account Ananias is made to speak of, in the design that it should be taken for the purpose which the Lord by his commandment meant to be accomplished? Not the being filled by the Holy Ghost; only the being baptized. "And now, why tarriest thou? (Acts xxii. ver. 16) Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." Well but (says somebody) receiving the Holy Ghost, and being baptized,--by these two expressions, is not one, and no more than one effect--one and the same effect--to be understood? No, in truth, if the historian himself is to be believed. Turn to another chapter--the very next chapter before this, Acts 12 to 17, and there you will see, that the being baptized was one thing, the receiving the Holy Ghost another thing, and much more. For administering the ceremony of baptism, a single Apostle, Philip, was sufficient: whereas, for the causing the Holy Ghost to be received, nothing less was requisite than the cooperation of two Apostles, and those two commissioned by the rest.
So serious always, according to this historian, was the difference, that it was after he had been already baptized, and baptized gratis in a crowd, that for the power of conferring this benefit, whatever it was that it was composed of, Sorcerer Simon made to the two Apostles, those offers--those pecuniary offers--which are said to have been no sooner made than rejected. Acts 13 to 24.
TOPIC 3.--_Actual Effects of the Visit, and the Application in consequence made in the course of it._ Effect 1. _Scales fall from Eyes, and Sight is received in consequence._ In the historical narrative, the effect is as complete as it is remarkable. Fall from his eyes a portion of matter of the nature or resemblance of scales: whereupon he receives sight forthwith.
In the supposed oratorical account, whatsoever had been meant by scales, nothing is said of them. Neither is the declaration made of the completeness of the case quite so explicit. One look he gave--gave to his wonder-working surgeon--and instead of its being given forthwith--to give this one look required, it should seem, if not a whole hour, at any rate so little less, that any time less than an hour could not--such, in this supposed unpremeditated speech, was the anxiety felt for correctness--could not be ventured to be particularized. The more closely these scales, or things resembling scales, are looked at, the more difficult will it be to find them amount to anything. In no cure, performed upon eyes in any natural way, in these our days--upon eyes that have lost their sight--do any scales fall off, or anything in any degree resembling scales;--in no disorder of the eyes, known to have place in these our days, do scales, or anything like scales, come over the eyes. By the taking of matter from the eyes, sight, it is true, is every now and then restored: but this matter is not matter, foreign in relation to the eye and exterior to it; but one of the component parts called _humours_ of the eye, which, by losing its transparency having suspended the faculty of vision, is let out by a lancet; whereupon not only is the faculty of sight restored, but the part which had been extirpated restored likewise; and without any expense in the article of miracles.
On the supposition of falsity,--quere the use of this circumstance?
_Answer._ To afford support to the conception, that memory and not imagination was the source from which the story was derived. True it is, that, instead of support, a circumstance exposed to contradiction would be an instrument of weakness: if, for example, on the supposition that Paul had no companions on the road, names indicative of really existing and well-known persons had been added, to the intimation given in the _Acts_, of the existence of such companions. But to no such hazard was the story of the scales exposed: not to any great danger, on the supposition of the existence of Paul's Ananias: not to any danger at all, upon the supposition of his non-existence.
But, upon this occasion, now again once more present themselves--present themselves to the mind's eye--Paul's companions. That they were blinded at all can scarcely, it has been seen, be believed, if on this matter the historian himself is believed. For, per Acts ix. 8, "they led him by the hand:" so, per Paul 1st, Acts xxii. 11, "When I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of those that were with me, I came unto Damascus." But if, notwithstanding so it was that _they_ too were blinded,--how was it with _their_ eyes? Had _their_ eyes scales upon them? did these scales ever fall off?--if so, by what means were they made to fall off? _their_ evidence would have been not much, if anything, less impressive,--and it would have been much less open to suspicion,--than Paul's evidence, supposing him to have spoken of these scales--which the historian, to whom, if he is to be believed, their existence is so well known, did not take upon him to represent Paul as saying that he did. But if so it was, that, though rendered blind as Paul's, no scales were superinduced upon, nor consequently made to fall off, the eyes of those nameless and unknown persons,--how came they to be superinduced upon and made to fall off from the eyes of their singularly favoured principal? If, for a length of time more or less considerable, they really were made blind,--it was, if the historian is to be believed, by the same cause by which, in the instance of Paul's eyes, this same effect was produced:--the same cause, to wit an extraordinary light at noonday. If, whatsoever was the matter with them, the eyes of these ordinary persons could be set to rights without a miracle, what need could there be of a miracle for the producing the same desirable effect in the person of this their leader or master, extraordinary as this same leader or master was? TOPIC 4.--_Baptism--was it performed? when, where, by whom, &c.?_ The baptism thus spoken of--was it performed? Yes: if you will believe the historian, speaking in his own person, speaking in his own historical account: "And forthwith," in the first place, "Paul recovered his sight;"--then, when, his sight having been recovered, he was able to go about as usual,--he arose and was baptized: baptized--that is say, as from this expression taken by itself any one would conclude--baptized, as soon as he arose, to wit, as soon as water could be found for the purpose: that water, which his guest Ananias, foreknowing what was to come to pass, and what was to be done to make it come to pass, might naturally be expected to have provided, and this without any supernatural foresight: in a word, without the expense of any additional miracle in any shape:--the water being thus ready upon the spot, and he in equal readiness to administer it.
This, according to the historian, speaking in his own person: but, when the time comes for giving an account of the matter in the person of Paul himself,--to wit in the supposed unpremeditated oratorical speech,--then, for whatever it was that stopped him, (whether the supposed urgency of the occasion on which the supposed speech was supposed to be made, or any thing and what else,) so it is, that he gives not any such information: he leaves the matter to hang in doubt:--a doubt, which, down to the present day remains unsolved.
A command to this effect is spoken of as having been given: thus much is said. But, what is not said is--whether to this same command any or what obedience was paid.
Thus it is that, instead of an _effect_ which it seems desired that we should consider as being produced, what we see directly stated as being produced, is nothing more than a _command_--a command, by which, as by its cause, we are to suppose the effect to have been produced. What is more, in the same blind way, is intimation given us, of another and very different effect--_the washing away of sins_--as if produced by the first-mentioned physical operation;--namely, by that of a man's being dipped in, or sprinkled with, water: and thus it is, that from a mere physical operation of the most trivial nature, we are called upon to infer a spiritual and supernatural effect of the most awful importance; the spiritual effect stated as if it were produced by the physical operation, to which it has no perceptible real relation--nothing but the mere verbal one thus given to it; produced by it, and following it, as of course--just as if sins were a species of dirt, which, by washing, could as surely be got off as any other dirt.[9] And was he then really baptized? If so he was, then also if, speaking in the person of his hero, the historian is to be believed,--then also, by this ceremony, the name of the Lord being at the same time called upon,--then also were his sins washed away; his sins washed away; the sinner, therefore and thereby, put into the same case as if the sins had not any of them been ever committed. How can it be understood otherwise?
for if, in and by this passage, intimation--sufficiently perfect information--is given, that the ceremony was performed--then also is sufficiently perfect information given, that such was the effect actually produced by it. "Arise" (Ananias is made to say)--"_Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord._" This is no light matter: if so it really were, that according to the religion of Jesus, by such a cause, such an effect was on that occasion produced;--that such effect could, in a word, on any occasion, in any case be produced,--that _murders_, or (not to embarrass the question with conceits of local jurisprudence) _killings_ of men--killings of men by persecution carried on, on a religious account--slaughters of Christians by non-Christians--could thus, as in Paul's case, be divested of all guilt, at any rate of all punishment, at the hands of Almighty Justice;--if impunity could indeed be thus conferred by the sprinkling a man with water or dipping him in it, then would it be matter of serious consideration--not only what is the _verity_ of that religion, but what the _usefulness_ of it, what the usefulness--with reference to the present life at any rate, not to speak of a life to come: what the usefulness of it; and on what ground stands its claim to support by all the powers of factitious punishment and factitious reward, at the hands of the temporal magistrate.[10] TOPIC 5.--_Performance of the Promise, supposed to have been made by the Lord, in favour of Paul, to Ananias._ If the supposed promise is inadequate to the occasion, the supposed performance is still more inadequate with reference to the promise. In the supposed promise are two distinguishable parts, and in neither of them is the one thing needful to be found. Of these two parts, the only one in which in any direct stage the matter of a promise is contained, is the one last mentioned: it is the promise to show him, (Paul) what sufferings he will have to undergo in the course of the career, whatever it is, in which he is about to engage: to wit, in name and profession, the preaching the religion of Jesus: "for I will show him," says the Lord, according to the historian,--"I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake." If so it was, that upon this promise, such as it is, performance never followed, the regret for the failure need not be very great. Whatsoever were the sufferings that he was predestined to undergo, that which was _not_ in the nature of this foreshowing, was--the lessening their aggregate amount; that which _was_ in the nature of it was--the making an addition to that same afflicting aggregate; to wit, by constant and unavoidable anticipation of the approach of such sufferings.
Of this talk, vague as it is, about sufferings, the obvious enough object was--the giving exaltation to the idea meant to be conveyed of the merits of the hero:--an object, which, by this and other means, has accordingly, down to the present day, in no small degree been accomplished. So much as to sufferings: as to enjoyments, by any idea entertained of the enjoyments derived by him from the same source, this design would have been--not promoted, but counteracted. But, when the time arrives, whether the mass of suffering was not, to no small amount, overbalanced by that of his enjoyments--meaning always worldly sufferings and worldly enjoyments--the reader will be left to judge.
Here then we have the only promise, which in any direct way is expressed:--a promise which, in the first place would have been useless, in the next place worse than useless.
TOPIC 6.--_Indirect Promise, that Paul shall spread the Name of Jesus._ In the whole substance of this promise, if there be anything, which, with reference to the professed end--to wit the giving extension to the religion of Jesus--would have been of use, it is in the foregoing part that it must be looked for. In this part then, if there be any such matter to be found, it will be this: to wit, a promise that he (Paul) shall bear, and therefore that he shall be enabled to bear, the name of the Lord, to wit, the name of Jesus, before the classes of persons specified, to wit, the Gentiles, and kings, and children of Israel: Acts ix. 15. But, only in an indirect way is this solely material part of the promise expressed: "He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name," &c.
_i.e._ When I chose him, it was my design that he should do so. But, in the case of the Lord, according to the picture drawn of him by this historian, how very inconclusive evidence _intention_ is of _execution_, there will, in the course of this work, have been abundant occasion to see.
Bear the name of Jesus? so far, so good. But for this function no such special and supernatural commission was necessary: without any such commission, the name of Jesus had been borne to the people at large, if in this particular the Gospel history is to be believed. Luke ix. 49, 50: "And John answered and said, 'Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name: and we forbad him, because he followed not with us.' And Jesus said unto him, 'Forbid him not, for he that is not against us, is for us.'" How inadequate soever, with reference to the professed end, to wit, giving extension to the religion of Jesus, the promise was perfectly adequate, and commensurate, to what we shall find to be Paul's real design; to wit, the planting a Gospel of his own, as, and for, and instead of, the Gospel of Jesus. The Gospel of Jesus was the Gospel of Jesus: and the Gospel, which, availing himself of the name of Jesus, it was Paul's design and practice to preach, was, as he himself declares,--as we shall see him declaring in the plainest and most express terms,--a Gospel of his own; a Gospel which was not the Gospel of the Apostles, and which, for fear of its being opposed by them, he kept studiously concealed from those confidential servants and real associates of Jesus, as may be seen in the following passages: Gal. i.
9, 11, and 12; "As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other Gospel unto you, than that ye have received, let him be accursed.--But I certify you, brethren, that the Gospel which was preached of me is not after man.--For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." Gal. 2:2: "And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that Gospel which I preach among the Gentiles; but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means, I should run, or had run, in vain."
In the course of Paul's dialogue with the voice on the road--that voice which we are given to understand was the Lord's, _i.e._ Jesus's--the promise supposed to be made to Paul, it must be remembered, was--the promise to tell him, when in the city, what he was to do. "What thou must do," says the historian in his historical account:--"all things which are appointed for thee to do," says the historian in the supposed unpremeditated oratorical account, which, in this so often mentioned first of the speeches, he is supposed by the historian to have delivered.
Among all these things,--one thing, which it is manifestly the design of the historian, as it was that of his hero, to make men believe, was accomplished: to wit, the satisfying them what was the religious doctrine, for the dissemination of which the expense of this miracle was incurred. This, moreover, is the promise; which, in the reading of the story everybody looks for: this too is the promise which in the reading of this same story, the believers in the religion of Jesus have very generally been in the habit of considering as performed. Not in and by this history, however, will they have any such satisfaction, when the matter comes to be looked into. For, in respect of this information, desirable as it is,--Paul is, in this strangely supposed intercourse, put off--put off to another time and place: put off, for no reason given, nor for any substantial reason that can be imagined. Further on, when a show of performing the promise comes to be made, then, instead of accomplishment, we have more evasion. Instead of furnishing the information to Paul himself--to Paul directly--for, when the time and place for performance comes, performance--what the Lord is not supposed so much as to profess to do, what he professes to do is--to make the communication to this man, who, his existence being supposed, was an utter stranger to Paul--namely to this Ananias. Well, and for the conveying the information, in this indirect and inadequate way--for conveying it to and through this same Ananias--what is done?--as we have seen, what amounts to nothing. When, for affording the information--had any information been intended to be afforded--the time and place are come; when Ananias and Paul have been brought together; what is it that, from the information afforded us by the historian, we are to understand, passed? _Answer_, that, after the scales had fallen from his eyes, Paul was baptized; that he ate meat, and that after he had eaten meat he was strengthened: strengthened, we are warranted to suppose, by the meat which he had so eaten. Moreover, that somehow or other, in this large city he was certain days--number not specified,--with certain disciples--neither names nor number specified,--and preached Christ in the synagogues, saying that he was the son of God.
Thus far then we are got; and, of the supposed revelation, in all this time nothing revealed. Promises, put-offs, evasions--and, after all, no performance.
Among the purposes of this work, is the satisfying the reader--not only that Paul received not any revelation from the Almighty; but that, even upon his own showing, never did he receive any such revelation: that, on pretence of his having received it from the Almighty by a special revelation, he preached indeed a certain doctrine; but that this doctrine was partly one of his own, contrary to that of Jesus's apostles, and therefore contrary to that of Jesus: and that, in the way of revelation, he never did receive anything; neither that doctrine of his own which he preached, nor anything else.
TOPIC 7.--_Doctrine, supposed to be preached by Paul at Damascus in the synagogues._ Straightway, if the historian is to be believed;--straightway after being strengthened by the meat;--and straightway after he had passed the certain days with the disciples;--then did Paul preach Christ in the synagogues--preach that he is the son of God.
Here, had he really preached in any such places--here would have been the time, and the best time, for telling us what, in pursuance of the supposed revelation, he preached. For, whatever it was, if anything, that he ever learnt from his supposed revelation, it was not till he had learnt it, till he made this necessary acquisition, that the time for beginning to preach in the synagogues in question or anywhere else was come. And, no sooner had he received it, than then, when it was fresh in his memory--then was the time for preaching it. But, never having received any such thing as that which he pretended, and which the historian has made so many people believe, he received,--no such thing had he to preach at any time or place.
Whatever of that nature he had had, if he had had at any _time_, Damascus was not the _place_, at any rate at _that time_, for him to preach it, or anything else, in synagogues--in any receptacle so extensively open to the public eye.
Preach, in the name of Jesus--in the name of that Jesus, whose disciples, and with them whose religion, he now went thither with a commission to exterminate,--preach in that name he could not, without proclaiming his own religion--his own perfidy;--his own rebellion, against the authorities, from which, at his own solicitation, the commission so granted to him had been obtained:--his own perfidious contempt--not only of those Jerusalem rulers, but of those Damascus authorities, from whom, for that important and cruel purpose, he was sent to receive instruction and assistance. At some seven-and-twenty years distance in the field of time, and at we know not what distance in the field of space, probably that between Rome and Damascus, it was as easy for the historian to affirm the supposed preaching, as to deny it: but, as to the preaching itself, whether it was within the bounds of moral possibility, let the reader judge.
TOPIC 8.--_Supposed Amazement of the People of Damascus at this Paul's supposed preaching of Christ in the Synagogues there._ Had there really been any such preaching, well might have amazement followed it. But there was no such preaching, therefore no such amazement. Had there been real preaching, and real amazement produced by it--what would have been the subject of the amazement! Not so much the audacity of the preacher--for madmen acting singly are to be seen in but too great frequency: not so much the audacity of the speaker, as the supineness of the constituted authorities; for, madmen acting in bodies in the character of public functionaries have never yet been visible.
And if any such assemblage was ever seen, many such would be seen, before any one could be seen, whose madness took the course of sitting still, while an offender against their authority, coming to them single and without support,--neither bringing with him support, nor finding it there,--continued, at a public meeting, preaching against them, and setting their authority at defiance.
TOPIC 9.--_Matter of the Revelation, which, in and by the supposed unpremeditated Oratorical Account, is supposed to have been made._ Forgetting what, as we have seen, he had so lately been saying in his own person--in the person of Paul,--he on this occasion, returns to the subject: and more evasive is the result.
On this occasion--this proper occasion--what is it that he, Paul, takes upon him to give an account of.--That which the Lord had revealed to him?--revealed, communicated in the supernatural way of revelation, to him--Paul? No; but that which, according to him,--if he, and through him the historian, is to be believed,--the Lord communicated to Ananias concerning him--Paul. The Almighty having minded to communicate something to a man, and yet not communicating to that man any part of it, but communicating the whole of it to another! What a proceeding _this_ to attribute to the Almighty, and upon such evidence!
Still we shall see, supposing it communicated, and from such a source communicated--still we shall see it amounted to nothing: to