Thus closes this most precious monument of the beginnings of the Christian Church, in its march from East to West, among the Jews first, whose center was Jerusalem; next among the Gentiles, with Antioch for its headquarters; finally, its banner is seen waving over imperial Rome, foretokening its universal triumphs. That distinguished apostle whose conversion, labours, and sufferings for "the faith which once he destroyed" occupy more than half of this History, it leaves a prisoner unheard, so far as appears, for two years. His accusers, whose presence was indispensable, would have to await the return of spring before starting for the capital, and might not reach it for many months; nor, even when there, would they be so sanguine of success-after Felix, Festus, and Agrippa had all pronounced him innocent-as to be impatient of delay. And if witnesses were required to prove the charge advanced by Tertullus, that he was "a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the (Roman) world" (Acts 24:5 ), they must have seen that, unless considerable time were allowed them, the case would certainly break down.
If to this be added the capricious delays which the emperor himself might interpose, and the practice of Nero to hear but one charge at a time, it will not seem strange that the Historian should have no proceedings in the case to record for two years. Having begun this history of his, probably, before the apostle's arrival, its progress at Rome under his own eye would furnish exalted employment, and beguile many a tedious hour of his two years' imprisonment. Had the case come on for hearing during this period, much more if it had been disposed of, it is hardly conceivable that the History should have closed as it does. But if, at the end of this period, the Narrative only wanted the decision of the case, while hope deferred was making the heart sick ( Proverbs 13:12); and if, under the guidance of that Spirit whose seal was on it all, it seemed of more consequence to put the Church at once in possession of this History, than to keep it back indefinitely for the sake of what might come to be otherwise known-we cannot wonder that it should be wound up as it is in its two concluding verses. All that we know of the apostle's proceedings and history beyond this must be gathered from the Epistles of the Imprisonment-those to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, and to Philemon-written during this period; and from the Pastoral Epistles-those to Timothy and that to Titus-which in our judgment are of subsequent date. From the former class of Epistles we learn the following particulars:
First, That the trying restraint laid upon the apostle's labours by his imprisonment had only turned his influence into a new channel, the Gospel having in consequence penetrated even into the palace, and pervaded the city, while the preachers of Christ were emboldened; and though the Judaizing portion of them, observing his success among the Gentiles, had been led to inculcate with fresh zeal their own narrower gospel, even this had done much good by extending the truth common to both. (See the notes at Philippians 1:12-18; Philippians 4:22). Secondly, That as, in addition to all his other labours, "the care of all the churches came upon him from day to day" ( 2 Corinthians 11:28 ), so with these churches he kept up an active correspondence by means of letters and messages, and on such errands he wanted not faithful and beloved brethren enough, ready to be employed-Luke, Timotheus, Tychicus, (John) Mark, Demas, Aristarchus, Epaphras, Onesimus, Jesus, called Justus, and, for a short time, Epaphroditus. (See the notes at Colossians 4:7; Colossians 4:9-12; Colossians 4:14; Philem 23-24 ; and Introd. to Eph., Phil., and Philem.) That the apostle suffered martyrdom under Nero at Rome has never been doubted.
But whether this took place at the close of this present imprisonment, or whether he was acquitted and set at liberty on this occasion, resumed his apostolic labours, and after some years more was again apprehended, condemned, and executed-is a question which has latterly given rise to much discussion. In the absence of explicit testimony in the New Testament, the burden of proof lies certainly with the advocates of a second imprisonment. Accordingly, they appeal, first, to the Pastoral Epistles, as referring to movements of the apostle himself and of Timothy, which cannot, without straining, be made to fit into any period prior to the appeal which brought the apostle to Rome; which bear marks throughout of a more advanced state of the Church, and more matured forms of error, than can well have existed when he came first to Rome; and which are couched in a manifestly riper style than any of his former Epistles.
And they appeal, secondly, to the testimony of the fathers-Clement of Rome, Eusebius, and Jerome-as at least confirming these conclusions. On the other hand, it is contended by several modern critics (DeWette, Winer, Wieseler, Davidson, Schaff, not to mention Petavius and Lardner formerly), that no mention is made in the New Testament of any liberation and second imprisonment; that no earlier writer than Eusebius, in the fourth century, expressly states it as a fact, and he apparently on no good authority, while Jerome and others appear to have simply followed Eusebius; and that as to the evidence from the Pastoral Epistles in favour of this theory, it is more apparent than real. To discuss these arguments would be unsuitable here: they belong rather to an Introduction to the Pastoral Epistles; but they have been handled with great ability by the advocates of a double imprisonment (Michaelis, Hug, Gieseler, Neander, Credner, Lange, etc., besides earlier critics), whose arguments appear to us as convincing, as their number is far greater than that of their opponents.
Remarks: If ever that great characteristic of genuine love - "that it beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things" - was pre-eminently exemplified, it was by him who penned that description of it, in his treatment of his brethren after the flesh, from the very beginning of his labours among them as a preacher of Christ up to the last interview with them recorded in this chapter. And there are special features of this character in him which, the more they are studied, will the more raise him in our estimation, as, next to his Great Master, perhaps the noblest model for imitation by Christian ministers in general, by converted Jews in particular, as missionaries to their brethren according to the flesh, and by those priests of the Church of Rome whose eyes have been opened to see its errors, and whose services thenceforward have been consecrated to the trying work of preaching Christ to their former co-religionists.
Alas! how little do we see of that combination of burning zeal with large wisdom, of that union of firmness and flexibility, of that high-minded sensitiveness to what was due to himself, and yet readiness to put up with affronts and return good for evil, which constitute such marked features in the great apostle's character, such potent elements in his success as a servant of Christ, and so much of the secret of his surpassing and enduring influence on Christendom. To Peter, it is true, was assigned distinctively "the gospel of the circumcision," while that "of the uncircumcision was committed" to Paul ( Galatians 2:7); but while out of his Jewish sphere Peter was nothing, Paul, besides his incomparable services in the Gentile field, was the most powerful of all labourers among his own countrymen also. There is not one recorded instance of the conversion of Gentiles through Peter's sole instrumentality-the case of Cornelius and his party being that of one divinely brought to him (if we may so say), and of whom it was told him that he was all ready to receive the truth from his lips; and as Peter needed a vision from heaven to convince him that Gentiles were, under the Gospel, on the same footing before God as the Jews, so when he did open the Gospel to this proselyte and prepared Gentile, he did it in a way peculiarly Jewish, such as we should expect from one cast (so to speak) in the mould of the ancient economy.
On the other hand, while the appropriate sphere of our great apostle was undoubtedly among the Gentiles, and the Church of Christ has taken its stamp of universality from him pre-eminently, how powerful were his reasonings, and how noble his appeals to his own countrymen in the synagogues, in the streets of Jerusalem, and before the legal tribunals, not to speak of the wonderful light which he throws upon the Old Testament Scriptures in his Epistles! To this we have adverted once and again in the course of our Exposition of this precious record of the first triumphs of the Gospel; but the scenes with which it closes constrain us to leave our readers with this commanding figure before their eye-yet not without writing beneath it two mottoes from his own pen:
"By the grace of God I am what I am,"
AND
"God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world"!