appears from his fpeech to the elders of Ephefus at Miletus, Acts xx. 31. Remember, that by the space of three years, I ceafed not to warn every one, &c. These three years were completed in the following manner: At his firft coming to Ephefus, he abode only a few weeks, Acts xviii. 19.-21. When he re turned, he preached in the fynagogue three months, then taught in the fchool of Tyrannus two years. On leaving the school of Tyrannus, he preached and wrought miracles more publicly; the effect of which was, that many believed, and came and confeffed their evil deeds, Acts xix. 18. Many alfo who used curious arts, being converted, brought their books and burned them, ver. 19. After which the apoftle fent Timothy and Eraftus into Macedonia, but he himself staid in Afia till the riot of Demetrius. The things which happened after Paul left the school of Tyrannus, to the riot of Demetrius, may have taken up five months; and these added to the two years and four months before mentioned, make his abode in Ephesus, from his first arrival, to the riot, in whole, only two years and nine months. Wherefore, the remaining months of his three years abode at Ephefus, muft have paffed after the riot; unless we are of opinion, that his tranfactions from the time of his leaving the fchool of Tyrannus, to the riot, occupied eight months. However, as fome of the Afiarchs were his friends, Acts xix. 31. there is nothing improbable in fuppofing, that he remained in safety at Ephefus, or in the country adjacent, even after the riot; especially if he no longer taught publicly, but contented himself with instructing and comforting the disciples in their own houses, and employed himself privately in fettling the affairs of the churches of Afia, before his departure for Macedonia.

The apostle, during his long abode in Ephefus and its neighbourhood, gathered a very numerous Chriftian church, which was as remarkable for the quality, as for the number of its members. According to Strabo, Ephefus was the greatest trading town in Afià, on this fide Mount Taurus. It was alfo the refidence of the Roman Proconful, who governed the province of Afia, and the feat of the Courts of Justice; confequently, it was the place to which men of fortune, and learning, and genius reforted. Being thus inhabited, we cannot doubt, that among

P4

those

those whom Paul converted, there were people of diftinction. In particular, fome of the converted, who had formerly been magicians, were men diftinguished by their natural parts, and by their literature; as may be inferred from the value of their books which they burned, amounting to fifty thousand pieces of filver, fupposed to be equal to five thousand pounds of our money. The Afiarchs, also, or priests of Diana, who had the care of the games celebrated in her honour at Ephesus, and who are called Paul's friends, may have been converted, or in a difpofition to be converted. Nay, the town-clerk, in his fpeech to the multitude, fhewed that he entertained a good opinion of the Christian teachers, and of their doctrine, Acts xix. 37. The church at Ephefus, therefore, merited all the pains the apoftle had bestowed in gathering it, and the care which he afterwards took to fecure it against the erroneous doctrines, and vicious practices which the false teachers endeavoured to introduce into it. See Pref. to 1 Tim. fect. 2.

From 2. Cor. ii. 12, 13. we learn, that on leaving Ephesus after the riot, the apostle did not go straightway into Macedonia, but abode awhile at Troas, where also he had great fuccefs in preaching. Nevertheless, having no resti n his spirit, because he did not find Titus, whom he expected to meet in his way from Corinth to Ephefus, he took leave of his difciples at Troas, and went forward to Macedonia. There Titus, at length, came to him, and made him happy by the account which he gave him, of the good difpofition of the Corinthians towards him, their fpiritual father. In Macedonia, the apoftle received the collections which the churches in that province had made for the poor of the faints in Judea; then went to Corinth, where he remedied the disorders which had taken place in that church; and having received their contributions, with those of the other churches of Achaia, he proposed to fail from Cenchrea to Judea. But, understanding that the Jews lay in wait for him in Cenchrea, he altered his refolution, and returned through Macedonia. From Macedonia he went by fea to Miletus, and fent for the elders of Ephefus to meet him there; and when they came, he delivered to them the pathetic exhortation, recorded Acts xx. 17.—35. then failed away to Syria. But he no fooner appeared in the temple at Jerufalem, than the unbelieving Jews who had come

from

from Afia, raised a great tumult against him, in which he muft have been killed, if he had not been rescued by the Romans; but which ended in his imprisonment, first in Jerufalem, after that in Cefarea, and last of all in Rome.

SECT. II. Shewing that the Epiftle which, in our Canon, is inscribed to the Ephefians, was actually written to them, and was not originally inscribed to the Laodiceans.

Since the publication of Mill's edition of the Greek New Teftament, many learned men have adopted his opinion, that the epiftle in our Canon, infcribed To the Ephefians, was not written to the Ephefians, but to the Laodiceans. This opinion Mill hath endeavoured to support by the following arguments: 1. The teftimony of Marcion the heretic, who, as Tertullian reports, faid the Epiftle to the Ephefians was written to the Laodiceans; or called this the Epistle to the Laodiceans.-2. St. Bafil, in his fecond book against Eunomius, infinuates, that the first verse of the epistle to the Ephefians, ran originally in this manner: To the faints who are, and to the faithful in Chrift Jefus, without the words, in Ephefus.-3. Certain paffages in the epistle itself, which, in Mill's opinion, are neither suitable to the character of the Ephefians, nor to the habits which fubfifted between them and their spiritual father, Paul.

But to these arguments Lardner, who maintains the common opinion, opposes, 1. The agreeing teftimony of all the antient MSS. and verfions of this epiftle now extant; particularly the Syriac, Vulgate, Perfic, and Arabic, all which, without exception, have the words v Epeow, in Ephefus, in the first verse. For, as he very well obferves, "It is inconceivable how "there fhould have been fuch a general agreement in this "reading, if it was not the original infcription of the epiftle."

2. The unanimous confent of all the ancient fathers, and Christian writers, who, without exception, bear witness, that this epiftle was written to the Ephefians, and never entertained the leaft doubt of it. This argument is well represented by Lardner, who, after the most accurate search into every thing pertaining to Ecclefiaftical Antiquities, hath thus written, Can.

vol. ii. page 394.
"That this epiftle was fent to the church at
"Ephefus, we are affured by the teftimony of all Catholic
"Christians of all past ages. This we can now say with con-
"fidence, having examined the principal Chriftian writers of
"the first ages, to the beginning of the twelfth century; in all
"which space of time, there appears not one who had any
"doubt about it." Of these teftimonies, that of Ignatius,
Bishop of Antioch, in the end of the first century, is very re-
markable. In a letter, which he wrote to the Ephefians, from
Smyrna, in his way to Rome, he fays, chap. xii. " Ye are the
" companions in the mysteries of the gospel of Paul the fancti-
"fied, the martyr, defervedly moft happy; at whose feet may
"I be found when I fhall have attained unto God, who, warn
σε επισολη (for όλη επισολή, as πασα οικοδομη, Ephef. ii. 21. is put
"for an,) throughout all his epiftle, makes mention of you in
"Chrift." Muovever iμuv, Makes honourable mention of you
So the Greek phrase fignifies, Matth. xxvi. 13. Mark xiv. 9.
Acts x. 4. Ignatius means, that Paul commended the Ephe-
fians, and never blamed them throughout the whole of his
epiftle, as he did some others, in the letters which he wrote to
them. This is exactly true of the prefent epiftle to the Ephe-
fians. Moreover, by calling them ouuuuro, companions, or par-
takers of the myfleries of the gospel of Paul, he alluded to those
paffages in the prefent epistle to the Ephefians, where the gospel
is reprefented as a mystery made known to the apostle, and by
him to them. Ignatius having thus plainly defcribed our epistle
to the Ephefians, there can be no doubt of the genuineness of
its infcription. For if that epiftle was written in the 9th of
Nero, and Ignatius' epiftle in the 10th of Trajan, as Bishop
Pearson fuppofes, the distance between the two epiftles will be
only forty-five years; confequently, Ignatius being of age at
the time Paul is fuppofed to have written to the Ephefians, he
could not be ignorant of the truth concerning it. But, without
citing more teftimonies, it is fufficient to obferve with Lardner,
in the general, "that Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Ter-
"tullian, Origen, and Cyprian, writers of the second and third
"centuries, quote this epiftle as written to the Ephefians, as
"freely and plainly as they do his epiftles to the Romans, Gala-
❝tians, Corinthians, or any other of the acknowledged epiftles

" af

"of Paul; and that it is quoted in like manner, by all the "writers of every age, Latins, Greeks, and Syrians." Canon ii. page 408.

3. As to Marcion, on whofe affirmation Mill lays fo great a stress, Lardner obferves, that his credit is very little in an affair of this kind. For Tertullian, who fays Marcion called this the Epifle to the Laodiceans, fays also that Marcion rejected the epistles of Paul to Timothy and Titus. And though Grotius has remarked, that in fpeaking of the epiftle to the Ephefians, Marcion had no temptation to falfify, the answer is, all the catholic writers of that age, have called this the Epifle to the Ephefians, and they had no temptation to falfify; for they had no intereft to ferve by it. And if Marcion ever faid this epiftle was written to the Laodiceans, meaning thereby that it was written, not to the Ephefians, but to the Laodiceans, he affirmed what was false; as we are expressly affured, by the unanimous teftimony of men who had no intereft to deceive us in this matter, and who could not be deceived themselves.-Farther, though Tertullian hath said that Marcion called this the Epiftle to the Laodiceans, he hath not faid, that Marcion founded his opinion on the authority of any ancient MSS. he had ever feen. On the contrary, there is reason to believe, that the copy of this epiftle which Marcion used, was infcribed, not to the Laodiceans, but to the Ephefians; as Lardner has fhewed. Befides, as it is not faid that Marcion founded his opinion on any ancient MSS. he had ever seen, so neither is it faid, that any perfon who had opportunity to know the matter, told him that this epiftle was written, not to the Ephefians, but to the Laodiceans. We have good reason, therefore, to believe, with Lardner, that if this was Marcion's opinion, he took it up without enquiry; being led to it, perhaps, as others fince his time have been, by the mention that is made, Col. iv. 16. of an epiftle from Laodicea.

4, With respect to St. Bafil's infinuation, that the words, in Ephefus, were wanting in the original infcription of this letter, Lardner hath observed, that if any ancient MSS. wanted these words, they were fo little regarded, as not to be followed by any of those who tranfcribed the fcriptures. For there are no MSS. now extant, in which that reading is preserved. And