SL^BSCHIPTIONS OF THE EPlSTLEb. 203 



during the same journey through Macedonia ; for, in the 

 epistle to the Corinthians, Timothy appears to have been 

 ivith St. Paul ; in the epistle addressed to him, to have been 

 left behind at Ephesus, and not only left behind, but directed 

 to continue there till St. Paul should return to that city, 

 fn the second place, it is inconceivable that a question should 

 be proposed concerning the priority of date of the two epis' 

 ties ; for when St. Paul, in his epistle to Timothy, opens his 

 address to him by saying, " as I besought thee to abide still 

 at Ephesus when I went into Macedonia," no reader can 

 doubt but that he here refers to the last interview which 

 had passed between them ; that he had not seen him since : 

 whereas, if the epistle be posterior to that to the Corinthians, 

 yet written upon the same visit into Macedonia, this could 

 not be true ; for as Timothy was along with St. Paul when 

 he wrote to the Corinthians, he must, upon this supposition, 

 have passed over to St. Paul in Macedonia after he had been 

 left by him at Ephesus, and must have returned to Ephesus 

 again before the epistle was written. What misled Ludo- 

 vicus Capellus was simply this, that he had entirely over- 

 looked Timothy's name in the superscription of the second 

 epistle to the Corinthians. Which oversight appears not 

 only in the quotation we have given, but from his telling us 

 as he does, that Timothy came from Ephesus to St. Paul at 

 Corinth; whereas the superscription proves that Timothy 

 was already w4th St. Paul when he wrote to the Corintb/ans 

 from Macedonia. 



