must have been chosen by them as men they could truft for their zeal in that cause. What should induce them to the betraying that bufinefs they were employed in? Does it even appear that they had any connection with the man they fo lyed for, before or after this time, or any reward from him for it? This is therefore a difficulty in the first outfet of this impofture not be overcome. But further, he was to be inftructed by one at Damafcus. That inftructor therefore muft have been his accomplice, though they appear to be abfolute ftrangers to one another, and though he was a man of an excellent character, who had a good report of all the Jews that dwell at Damafcus, and fo was very unlikely to have engaged in fuch imposture. Notwithstanding thefe improbabilities, this man, I fay, must have been his confident and accomplice in carrying on this wicked fraud, and the whole matter must have been previously agreed on between them. But here again the fame objection occurs: How could this man venture to act fuch a dangerous part without the confent of the other Disciples, especially of the Apostles, or by what means could he obtain their confent? fent? And how abfurdly did they contrive their business, to make the converfion of Saul the effect of a miracle, which all those who were with him muft certify did never happen! How much easier would it have been to have made him be present at fome pretended miracle wrought by the difciples, or by Ananias himself, when none were able to discover the fraud, and have imputed his converfion to that, or to the arguments used by some of his prifoners whom he might have difcourfed with, and questioned about their faith, and the grounds of it, in order to colour his intended converfion? As this was the safest, so it was the most natural method of bringing about such a change; instead of ascribing it to an event which lay fo open to detection. For (to use the words of St. Paul to Agrippa) this thing was not done in a corner*, but in the eye of the world, and fubject immediately to the examination of those who would be most ftrict in fearching into the truth of it, the Jews at Damafcus. Had they been able to bring any shadow of proof to convict him of fraud in this affair, his whole scheme of im • Acts xxvi. 26. fraud pofture must have been nipt in the bud. Nor were they at Jerufalem, whofe commiffion he bore, lefs concerned to difcover fo provoking a cheat. But we find that many years afterwards, when they had all the time and means they could defire to make the Atrictest enquiry, he was bold enough to appeal to Agrippa* in the prefence of Feftus, upon his own knowledge of the truth of his ftory; who did not contradict him, though he had certainly heard all that the Jews could alledge against the credit of it in any particular. A very remarkable proof both of the notoriety of fact, and the integrity of the man, who with fo fearlefs a confidence could call upon a king to give teftimony for him, even while he was fitting in judgment upon him. But to return to Ananias. Is it not strange, if this story had been an imposture, and he had been joined with Paul in carrying it on, that after their meeting at Damafcus we never fhould hear of their conforting together, or acting in concert, or that the former drew any benefit from the friendship of the latter, when he became fo confiderable among the Christians? Did Ananias engage and continue * Acts xxvi. 26. in in fuch a dangerous fraud, without any hope or defire of private advantage? Or was it fafe for Paul to fhake him off, and rifk his refentment? There is, I think, no other way to get over this difficulty, but by fuppofing that Ananias happened to die foon after the other's converfion: Let us then take that for granted, without any authority either of history or tradition, and let us fee in what manner this wondrous imposture was carried on by Paul himself. His first care ought to have been, to get himself owned, and received as an Apostle by the Apostles. Till this was done, the bottom he ftood upon was very narrow, nor could he have any probable means of fupporting himself in any esteem or credit among the difciples. Intruders into impoftures run double risks; they are in danger of being detected, not only by those upon whom they attempt to practise their cheats, but alfo by thofe whofe fociety they force themselves into, who must always be jealous of fuch an intrusion, and much more from one who had always before behaved as their enemy. Therefore to gain the Apoftles, and bring them to admit him into a participation of all their mysteries, all their designs, defigns, and all their authority, was abfolutely neceffary at this time to Paul. The least delay was of dangerous confequence, and might expofe him to fuch inconveniences as he never afterwards could overcome*. But instead of attending to this neceffity, he went into Arabia, and then returned again to Damafcus; nor did he go to Jerufalem till three years were past. Now this conduct may be accounted for, if it be true that (as he declares in his epiftle to the Galatians †) he neither received the Gospel of any man, neither was he taught it, but by the revelation of Jefus Chrift.' Under fuch a mafter, and with the affistance of his divine power, he might go on boldly without any human affociates; but an impoftor, so left to himself, fo deprived of all hope, all support, all recommendation, could not have fucceeded. Further; we find that at Antioch he was not afraid to withstand Peter to his face, and even to reprove him before all the Difciples, becaufe be was to be blamed. If he was an im * Gal i. 17, 18. ii. 11, 14. + Gal, i, 12, 1 Gal. poftor, |