of these reasons have no force. If the third proves any thing with regard to the date of the Epistle to Philemon, it proves the same respecting that to the Philippians, because in that also he expresses the hope of being soon at Philippi. These expressions only prove that the apostle had been led to postpone the execu- tion of the purpose which he had formed long before of visiting Spain. There seems, therefore, to be no reason to depart from the commonly received opinion that the Epistle to the Ephe- sians was written from Rome.
§ IV. The persons to whom this Epistle was addressed.
As to this point there are three opinions. 1. That it was addressed to the Ephesians. 2. That it was addressed to the Laodiceans. 3. That it was a circular letter designed for all the churches in that part of Asia Minor.
In favour of the first of these opinions it is urged, 1. That the epistle is directed τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν Edéow to those who are in Ephesus. If this is the true reading, it settles the question, at least so far as this, that whatever may have been its further destination, it was primarily designed for the church in Ephe- sus. That the reading above given is the true one, is proved because it is found in all extant MSS., in all the ancient ver- sions, and in all the Fathers. This array of extempal evidence is decisive. No critic would venture to alter the text against these authorities. The only opposing evidence of a critical nature is, that it appears from the comment of Basil that the words ἐν Edéow were not in the copy which he used, and that in the MS. B. they stand in the margin and not in the text, and in MS. 67, they are inserted asa correction. This is alto- gether insufficient to outweigh the concurrent testimony above mentioned. On all critical principles, therefore, the reading ἐν Ἐφέσῳ must be pronounced genuine.
2. That this epistle was addressed to the Ephesians is proved by the concurrent testimony of the ancient church. This Basil does not question; he only explains τοῖς οὖσιν in such a way as to show that they were not followed in his copy by the words ἐν E¢eow. These two considerations would seem to