ACTS viii. 18, 19.
Change in Confirmation at Reformation--Yet the Rite remained Essentially the Same as of Old--Importance of Tertullian's Testimony for its Primitive Origin-- Cyprian's and Augustine's View--Relation of Cyprian to Tertullian--Imposition of Hands United with Prayer in Ancient and Modern Church--Utility and Blessings of the Rite--Improvement which might be made in its Administration--Conduct of Simon Magus--He was Intellectually Convinced but Spiritually Unconverted-- Application of his Example to Foreign Missions--Late Controversy Concerning Educational Missions--Simon's Conduct and Simony--Definition of Simony--Sin not Confined to Established Churches--Takes Subtle Shapes in Every Community--St. Peter's Exhortation to Simon Magus--Corrects a Modern Error 385-397
ACTS viii. 26-8; ix. 32.
Those Passages Typical of Evangelistic Efforts and Qualifications for Success in them--St. Philip Contrasted with St. Peter--Need of Education for Mission Field--Christian Missionaries of Early Centuries Partook of Highest Culture--Pantænus--Origen--Clement-- These Texts show Importance of Clear Conception in Theology--Clear Views need not be Narrow Views--Distinction between St. Philip's Guidance and that of St. Peter--Reasons for Angelic Interference--Archbishop Trench on John v. 4.--Apostolic Labours all tended Westward--Philip's Mission towards Gaza--Obstinate Paganism of Gaza-- Proved by Survey of Palestine--Ethiopian Eunuch--Candace and her Kingdom--St. Philip's Doctrines--Abyssinian Traditions--Revised Version and the Eunuch's Confession-- Creed of Apostolic Church--Witness of Aristides' _Apology_ 398-419
"The former treatise I made, O Theophilus, concerning all that Jesus began both to do and to teach, until the day in which He was received up, after that He had given commandment through the Holy Ghost unto the apostles whom He had chosen."--ACTS i. 1, 2.
These words constitute the very brief preface which the writer thought sufficient for the earliest ecclesiastical history ever produced in the Church of God. Let us imitate him in his brevity and conciseness, and without further delay enter upon the consideration of a book which raises vital questions and involves all-important issues.
Now when a plain man comes to the consideration of this book one question naturally strikes him at once: How do I know who wrote this book, or when it was written? What evidence or guarantee have I for its authentic character? To these questions we shall apply ourselves in the present chapter.
The title of the book as given in our Bibles does not offer us much help. The title varies in different manuscripts and in different ancient authors. Some writers of the second century who touched upon apostolic times call it by the name our Bibles retain, The Acts of the Apostles; others call it The Acts of the Holy Apostles, or at times simply The Acts. This title of "Acts" was indeed a very common one, in the second and third centuries, for a vast variety of writings purporting to tell the story of apostolic lives, as an abundance of extant apocryphal documents amply proves. The Acts of Paul and Thecla, the Acts of St. Thomas, of St. Peter, and of St. John, were imitations, doubtless, of the well-known name by which our canonical book was then called. Imitation is universally acknowledged to be the sincerest form of flattery, and the imitation of the title and form of our book is an evidence of its superior claim and authority. One of the oldest of these apocryphal Acts is a document celebrated in Christian antiquity as the Acts of Paul and Thecla. We know all about its origin. It was forged about the year 180 or 200 by a presbyter of Asia Minor who was an enthusiastic admirer of the Apostle St. Paul. But when we take up the narrative and read it, with its absurd legends and its manifold touches and realistic scenes drawn from the persecutions of the second century, and well known to every student of the original records of those times, we can at a glance see what the canonical Acts of the Apostles would have been had the composition been postponed to the end of the second century. The Acts of Paul and Thecla are useful, then, as illustrating, by way of contrast in title and in substance, the genuine Acts of the New Testament which they imitated.[11]