578 
tion of ntine Mr. Marfh has thought fit 
to notice, in page 153 of his Notes to 
Ch. vi. Se&t. 111. of Michaelis’s Introduc=> 
tion, as a queflion flartea—‘* Whether Si- 
Jas, who is mentioned im feveral places of 
the Acts, be not the fame perfon with the 
Evangel f{ Luke.” And, as he ftates the 
fimilarity of meaning of ‘thofe twoonames 
to be the only argument urged in defence 
of the affirmative, it is plain he had not 
read the two pafiages quoted above: for, 
af he had, he muti have knéwn, that the 
fimilarity of meaning of the two names 
was not mentioned by me as an argument 
for their denoting the fame perfon; but 
merely to account for the writers of the 
Second and third centuries calling the au- 
thor Luke, though in his own Hiftory he 
calls himielf Silas. And fureiy there is 
no improbability in fuppofing, that, after 
Suas had written that Hiitory, the verfecu- 
tion infiituted by Nero, or fome other fuch 
caufe,might have induced him, {from pruden- 
tial confiderations, to adopt another name, 
which, though of different founds to the 
Romans and Greeks, might equaily corre- 
foond to his original name in Hebrew: 
a circumftance, which would account for 
his being called by the laft adopted name by 
Chriftians of the fucceeding centuries. 
Should this letter to you, Sir, be feen 
by the very learned and candid tranflator 
and annotator of Michaelis, I truft he will 
do me the juftice to perufe what I really 
have advanced in proof of this important, 
though fo long unnoticed, matter of fact. 
J beg him alfo to confider. that, though 
there may be fome inftances of refpeéiable 
hiftorians of tranfactions in which they 
themfelves have been perfonally concerned, 
who have written in the firft perfon, and 
many more of thofe who have written of 
themfelves in the third perfon, not a fingle 
infiance can be produced of any fuch wii- 
ter, who does nor {peak of himfelf in one 
or the other of thofe perfons ; and that it is 
abfolutely impoffible for any faithful, ac- 
curate writer of hiftory to be guilty of 
fuch an omifiion. Yet, according to the 
hypotheiis of Mefirs. Marfh and Michze- 
lis, the Agts of the Apoftles afford a foli- 
tary in sfance of fuch an unfaithful inaccu- 
yate hiftorian. For it reprefents the au- 
thor avowing his convittion of haying, at 
Troas, received a fuper-natural: acer 
fion from the Deity to preach the Golpel 
in Macedonia, in aflociation with Paul, 
Silas, and Timotheus; and having ac- 
com panies them for that purpofe to > Phi- 
l:ppi, and been an 1 idle witnefs, to ufe the 
words of St. Paul, of the “ /ame/ul treat. 
Olfervations on Mr. Marfh byMr. E 
vanfone [Dec 1, 
ment” of him and Silas by the Philippians, 
withdrawing himfelf from that aflociated 
commiffion, on which God had fent him 5 
remaining in that city, contrary to every 
degree of probability, after Paul and Si- 
las had been miraculoufly releafed from 
prifon, and induced, by the requeft of the 
magifirates, to quit it, with Timotheus ; 
aficr an ablence of three years, joining his 
former affcciates again during their fe- 
cond vifit to Macedonia and Greece, and 
then continuing with St. Paul to the final 
period of the hiRory, without once men- 
tioning bis own name, either in the fir. 
cr third perfon ; faying when or where he 
joined Sr. Pans either in Afia or Greece, 
or why he left bim at Philippi, or record- 
ing a fingle thing that he did or fuffered 
in the execution of that divine commiffion, | 
which he acknowledges he received ; 5 whilft,, 
at the fame time, their hypothelis repre-. 
fents Paul himfelf to have been fo unrea- 
fonably capricious and inconfiftent as to 
feparate from his firft refpectable affociate, . 
Barnabas, rather than admit the company 
of Mark, becaufe he had left them before, 
and refufed to go with them in a volun- 
tary excuifion on the bufivels of the Gof 
pel, and yet to re-admit this ideal Luke, 
after fo {candalous a delertion of the 
work on which they had been jointly fent ~ 
by Heaven, and after fo long a feparation 
from them; and to continue | affociated 
with him to the end of this hiftory!!! 
The truth is, that this hiftory is minute- 
Jy particular in recounting all theApoftle’s . 
aflociates at different times and places ; 
and that, according to the exprefs words 
of the narration, no perfon was in compa- 
ny with Paul at Troas befides Silas and 
Timotheus. Indeed thefe learned critics 
do not pretend, that there exifts any do- 
cument to warrant their affertion, that a 
fourth pfee of the name of Luke was 
with them there. But they choofe to iz- 
fer it, without any authority, merely be- 
caufe they find themfelves at a lofs to ac- 
count for Sijas, if he was the author, 
{peaking of himfelf fometimes in the third 
perfon, and fometimes in the firt plural 
(for in the firt perfon fingular he never 
{peaks). Yet, it feems eafy to account 
ie if we confider—1. that the heavenly 
delegation, in which he was. included, au- 
thorifed rather more felf-importance, ‘than 
he had ever before aflumed ; and 2, that 
it was the moft concife way in which he 
could fpeak of the whole affociated com- 
miffion ; and both from this hiftory, and 
from St. Paui’s Epifiles to the Converts'‘of 
Corinth and Theilalonicay particular ly 
from 
