Thus the second portion of the Acts, from the beginning of the 1st M.J. (13'-28'"), covers a period of fourteen years, certainly not less, and appar- ently not more ; and if the starting-point was rightly placed in a.d. 47, the fourteen years will come to an end in A.D. 61.
(b) The Epistles of St. Paul.
Of these tlie Pastoral Epistles fall outside the Acts, and have been dealt with already (p. 421"). The two to the Thess. were written in tlie company of Silas and Tituothy, the first not long after leaving Athens, 1 Th 1' 3>- »•«, 2 Th 1' ; tliat is to gay, during the long stay at Corinth on the 2nd M.J., A.D. 51 (50-52). The two to the Cor. fall, the one just before, the other soon after, the depar- ture from Ephesus for Macedonia, towards the end of the 3rd M.J., a.d. 55 (see above, p. 422''). Tlie Epistle to the Rom. belongs to the winter residenc* at Corinth, A.D. 55-56 (Ho le^ 15^-^ = Ac 19^). The Epistles to Philippi, Ephesus, Colossaj, and to Philemon belong in all probal)ility to the Roman imprisonment, A.D. 59-61. But the one Epistle which contains something of a chronology of St. Paul's life (Gal l'»-2'), the one Epistle which would bring together a point in the second half of the Acts with a point m the first, is also, from the absence of allusions to contemporary history, nnfortunately the most difficult to date of all the Epistles.
Date of the Galatian Epistle. — (i.) Resemblance of style and subject-matter has generally led critics to assign Gal to the second group of Epistles, with 1, 2 Co and Ro, or even to a particular place in that group, between 2 Co and Ro (so l.ightfoot, Galatinn.r, jip. 44-56), i.e. on tlie chronology above adopted, in the latter part of A.D. 55. But perhaps too much stress has been laid on such resemblances taken alone, — as though St. Paul's history was so strictly uniform that a given topic can only have been handled at a given moment, — and too little on the intluenco of external circumstances to revive old ideasor call out new ones. Thus the I'liilippian and Eiihesian letters belong to the same period ; but tlie dill'erence of conditions between the 'Asiatic' province and a Romanized community in Macedonia has produced a marked dill'erence of topics and illustrated a marked progress of
thought. Conversely, Gal and Ro may grapple with the same problems on the same lines (and yet what an alteration of tone between the two !) with- out being at all nearlj' synchronous with one another. The Galatian Epistle must be earlier than the Roman, earlier, that is, than A.D. 56; nothing more can be asserted positively, so far. (ii.) At the other end, the terminits a quo for the Epistle is the 1st M.J. ; thus, even if addressed, as is [)rob- able, to the Churches then founded, it falls after A.D. 48. Further, the phrase in 4" 'because of weakness of the flesh I preached the cosjiel to you tA Trpbrepop,' implies either some con.siderable lap.se of years, ' in the old time,' or a second visit ' on the former of my two visits.' With the first alternative a date aa late as A.D. 53-55 is possible ; with the other, the Epistle must fall between the second and third visits, i.e. between the spring of A.D. 50 and the autumn of A.D. 52 [supra, p. 422).
(Ramsay (St. Paul, p. 189) dates the letter from Antioch S. immediately before the third visit, and finds a reason for this precision in the assertion that bo critical a situation must have called of necfssily for a prompt personal inspection ; but it might be urged with at least equal reaj^on, from Gal 16 ^utok rx^iwf fMTaT.thffOi, that the interval after St. Paul's last riait — whichever that was — had not been a long one.]
Visits to Jerusalem in the Galatian Epistle. — For the date, then, the years A.D. 50-55 remain open ; and therefore St. Paul when he wrote had paid according to the Acts either three visits to Jerus., — Ac 9-«-*> after the flight from Damascus, Ac ll** 12'-^ the contribution for the famine, c. A.D. 46, Ac 15''"*' the apostolic Council, A.D. 49, — or four, adding to the three former Ac IS'", the flying visit at the end of the 2nd M.J., A.D. 52. In the Epi.stle, on the other hand, two visits only are named, the first a fortnight's visit to Cephas (Gal 1'*), the second an official visit of the repreaeuta tives of Gentile to the representatives of Jewish Christianity (Gal 2'""'). Ihus, even if St. Luke's enumeration is exhaustive, St. Paul omits either one or two visits altogether. But if this seems a diffi?ulty, the solution is simple; St. Paul is enumerating, not his visits to Jerus. per se, but his visits for intercourse with the elder apostles, xptK Toi'js TTpi ip.oO djro(7T6Xous ((!al I"), and would neces- sarily omit any visit when they were absent. What, then, of the occasion when the famine con- tribution was brought to Jerusalem ? If St. Luke mentions only elders or presbyters as the recipients of the bounty (Ac 11*"), the natural, though of course not the only possible, explanation is that tlie elders — that is, the local ministry with St. Jaincs the Lord's brother at their head — were by that time the supreme authority. Certain it is that, whether gradually or at some definite moment, the Twelve did separate themselves from the Church at Jerus., and became'more completely the niis.sionaries which after all their commission from Christ and their very title of 'apostles' meant them to be. After the persecution of Herod they are never mentioned at Jerus. save during tlio Council of ch. 15. Doubtless, they returned from time to time, as opportunity olfered, to keep the feasts like other Jews ; but neither at St. Paul's fourth nor at his fifth visit is there the least hint of their presence. [If the ancient tradition that the aiiostles, according todivine command, remained at Jerus. for twelve years after the Ascension (Prailicdtio Petri, ap. Clem. Al. Strom, vi. 5; Ajiollonius an. Eus. IJE v. 18: Hamack, o.e. p. 2-1 H ; von Dobscliiitz, Tcxte u. Unters. xi. 1, pp. ■'j'J, 148) 8ul)staiitially represents historic fact, as mav well be the case, then A.D. 41 or thereabouts will mark their departure.] Here is ample reason for St. Paul's silence about the visit of Ac 11. 12 and (if the Epistle was written after the summer of A.D. 52) tliat of Ac 18. Thus the first visit of Gal