P A 
in the New Teftament, not in chronological order, but ac¬ 
cording to the fuppofed rank and importance of the com¬ 
munities or perfons to whom they were addrelfed. Hence 
the Epiftles which were fent to whole bodies of Chriftians 
are placed before thofe which were fent to individuals. 
Thefe Epitlles are fourteen in number; and are replete 
with argumentative doctrinal learning, pradtical inftruc- 
tion, and invaluable information to the ftudents of facred 
hiltory. The firft of the feries, for the reafons we have 
affigned, is the Epiltle to the Romans, as Rome was then 
the miftrefs of the world ; the Epiltle to the Corinthians 
has the next (tation, Corinth having been the capital ot 
Greece; the one to the Galatians the third, becaufe ad- 
dreffed to the ftveral churches eftablilhed among that 
people; the Epiltle to the Ephelians immediately follows, 
Ephefus having been the capital of pro-confular Afia ; 
that to the Philippians next, out of compliment to Rome, 
to which Philippi was a colony ; and thofe to the Coiof- 
fians and Theffalonians complete the number. The 
Epiftles to Timothy ftand firft among thofe to individuals, 
from the circumftance of Timothy having been of high 
rank, and the particular friend and difcipleof the apoltle; 
and the one to Titus before that to Philemon, becaufe 
Titus was a preacher, and Philemon only a private perfon. 
The Epiftle to the Hebrews, although always acknow¬ 
ledged as apoftolical, was not at firlt attributed to St. 
Paul; but, when the church was fatisfied as to that fa 61 , 
it was added to his ineftimable writings; and, not to dif- 
turb the order in which the other Epiftles had been 
placed, it was made of neceftity the laft in the feries, in- 
ftead of being placed before thofe to individuals, and in 
the pre-eminent ftation it otherwife would have been en¬ 
titled to. 
But a queftion has been agitated, whether thofe now 
extant are the only Epiftles which St. Paul ever wrote? 
Among the learned men who have maintained the affirm¬ 
ative, Lardner has produced the moft fubftantial argu¬ 
ments for his hypothefis ; but we muft confefs that the 
replies to them by Michaelis are of no little weight in 
favour of the oppofite fide of the queftion. Should it be 
fuppofed that his opinion is well founded, we fee no evil 
that could poffibly arife from admitting it; fince, however 
gratifying it might be to poffefs more remains of this great 
apoftle, we have every reafon to be fatisfied, that whatever 
was of real importance, relative either to dodtrine or in- 
ftrudtion, has been tranfmitted to us. And we think, 
with that critic, that “it was no more neceffary that all 
the epiftles of the apoftles Ihould be preferved, than that 
all the difcourfes of Chrift, which were certainly of not 
lefs importance, Ihould be recorded by the evangelifts, 
who have thought proper to deliver only a deleft part of 
them.” Among the fpurious pieces which were circu¬ 
lated under Paul’s name in the early age of the church, 
w'ere, The Travels of Paul and Theda, The Ads of Paul, 
and Paul’s Revelation ; but the forgery of their authors 
was detected and expofed by the ancients. Larduet's 
Supp. to Cred. vol. ii. chap, u, 12. Michaelis's Iutrod. 
to New Tefi. vol. vi. ch. 10—24. Machnight's Life of 
Paul. Calmct's Did. Gen. Biog. 
PAUL of Samosata, fo denominated from the place 
ofhis birth, was a celebrated Unitarian prelate in the third 
century, after whom fuch Chriftians as entertained the 
fame opinions were generally called Paulians, or Paulia- 
nijls, till the council of Nice. In the year 260 he was 
chofen biffiop of Antioch, and by his talents and charac¬ 
ter recommended himfelf to the favour of Zenobia, the 
famous confort of Odenatus ; which refleds on him no 
little honour, if fhe was fo excellent a princefs as hiftorians 
report. Having had fome difference with his preffiyter 
Malchion, the latter procured a council to be affembled 
at Antioch in the year 264, before which he accufed Paul 
of dangerous herefy, and of a life and converfion un. 
w’orthy of the epifcopal charader. That thefe charges 
were not eftablilhed to the convidion of the affembly, 
may be concluded from their not paffing a fentence of 
U L. . 401 
condemnation upon Paul, but only direding that he 
Ihould be admoniffied. For this eafy judgment he was 
greatly indebted to the prudence and moderation of the 
excellent Firmilian, • bilhop of Ctefarea, who appears to 
have prefided in the council, and prevented them by his 
influence from adopting any harffi meafures. From this 
time we do not read of Paul’s meeting with any molefta- 
tion before the year 269, or 270, when a fecond council 
was alfembled at Antioch, in order to take into confidera- 
tion the principles and condud of the biffiop. Firmilian 
was fummoned to this council, but died on his journey 
towards Antioch. To this event it was probably owing 
that Paul’s enemies fucceeded in their defign againft him, 
and procured a fentence which condemned him to be de¬ 
puted from his epifcopal dignity. Paul, however, refufed 
iubmilfion to the decree of the council, and retained pof- 
feffion of the “houfe of the church,” by which we are to 
underftand either the biffiop’s dwelling-houfe, or the- 
houfe in which the Chriftians held their affemblies ; and 
in this ftep he appears to have met with fupport both in 
the protection of Zenobia and the good will of the people. 
But, when that princefs was driven from Antioch, Paul’s 
enemies petitioned the Pagan emperor Aurelian to expel 
a Chriftian bilhop who had been favoured by his rival; 
with whole requeft he complied in the year 272 or 273. 
What became of Paul after this event is not known. 
That he was the author of fome publications appears from 
an obfervation made by his adverfaries, that “ there was 
fcarcely a page in his works without citations out of the 
Old or New Teftament;” but no remains of them have 
defcer.ded to modern times. 
His doftrine leems to have amounted to this : that the 
Son and the Holy Ghoft exift in Godin the fame manner 
as the faculties of reafon and aflivity do in man ; that 
Chrift was born a mere man; but that the reafon or vvif- 
dom of the Father defcended into him, and by him 
wrought miracles upon earth, and inftrudted the nations; 
and, finally, that on account of this union of the Divine 
Word with the man Jefus, Chrift might, though impro¬ 
perly, be called God. It is alfo faid, that he did not bap¬ 
tize in the name of the Father and the Son, &c. for which, 
reafon the council of Nice ordered thofe baptized by him 
to be re-baptized. He may be confidered as the father 
of the modern Socinians ; and his errors are feverely con¬ 
demned by the council of Nice, whole creed differs a little 
from that now ufed, under the fame name, in the church 
of England. The creed agreed upon by the Nicene 
fathers, with a view to the errors of Paul of Samofata, 
concludes thus : Toes ch ^eyotrca; »3V ttote ovx yiv xca 
yzvvriS-/)Va.l, ovx. yv, ScC. rot/lov? n xaDoAiKij xat 
a. 7 roo-loXix.y v/.x 7 w<nci. “But thofe who fay there was a time 
when he was not, and that he was not before he was born, 
the catholic and apoftolic church anathematizes.” 
PAUL Warnefrid, or, as he is often called, Paul the 
Deacon, an eminent hiftorian of the middle ages, was 
born of Lombard origin, in the eighth century, at Cuidad 
del Friuli. He was educated in the court of Rachis, 
king of the Lombards, and afterwards ordained deacon 
of Aquileia. Defiderius, the laft: king'.of the Lombards, 
invited him to his court, employed him as a notary or 
fecretary, and railed him to the polts of counfellor and 
chancellor. After the kingdom of Defiderius was over¬ 
thrown, and the monarch made prifoner by Charlemagne 
in 774, the private hiltory of Paul becomes obfcure, and 
is very differently related by different biographers. It is 
generally fuppofed that he firft retired to his native coun¬ 
try of Friuli, and that, after the overthrow and death of 
Rodgaufo, duke of that province in 776, he took the mo¬ 
nadic habit. By fome means his literary merit became 
known to Charlemagne, who took him into France, and 
perhaps employed him in his plans of promoting learning 
in his dominions. He was well acquainted with the 
Greek and Latin languages, and inftrufted in the former 
thofe clergymen who were felefted to accompany the 
emperor’s daughter, Rotrude, to Conftantinople, where 
fhe 
