was able to go about as usual,--he arose and was baptized: baptized--that is say, as from this expression taken by itself any one would conclude--baptized, as soon as he arose, to wit, as soon as water could be found for the purpose: that water, which his guest Ananias, foreknowing what was to come to pass, and what was to be done to make it come to pass, might naturally be expected to have provided, and this without any supernatural foresight: in a word, without the expense of any additional miracle in any shape:--the water being thus ready upon the spot, and he in equal readiness to administer it.
This, according to the historian, speaking in his own person: but, when the time comes for giving an account of the matter in the person of Paul himself,--to wit in the supposed unpremeditated oratorical speech,--then, for whatever it was that stopped him, (whether the supposed urgency of the occasion on which the supposed speech was supposed to be made, or any thing and what else,) so it is, that he gives not any such information: he leaves the matter to hang in doubt:--a doubt, which, down to the present day remains unsolved.
A command to this effect is spoken of as having been given: thus much is said. But, what is not said is--whether to this same command any or what obedience was paid.
Thus it is that, instead of an _effect_ which it seems desired that we should consider as being produced, what we see directly stated as being produced, is nothing more than a _command_--a command, by which, as by its cause, we are to suppose the effect to have been produced. What is more, in the same blind way, is intimation given us, of another and very different effect--_the washing away of sins_--as if produced by the first-mentioned physical operation;--namely, by that of a man's being dipped in, or sprinkled with, water: and thus it is, that from a mere physical operation of the most trivial nature, we are called upon to infer a spiritual and supernatural effect of the most awful importance; the spiritual effect stated as if it were produced by the physical operation, to which it has no perceptible real relation--nothing but the mere verbal one thus given to it; produced by it, and following it, as of course--just as if sins were a species of dirt, which, by washing, could as surely be got off as any other dirt.[9] And was he then really baptized? If so he was, then also if, speaking in the person of his hero, the historian is to be believed,--then also, by this ceremony, the name of the Lord being at the same time called upon,--then also were his sins washed away; his sins washed away; the sinner, therefore and thereby, put into the same case as if the sins had not any of them been ever committed. How can it be understood otherwise?
for if, in and by this passage, intimation--sufficiently perfect information--is given, that the ceremony was performed--then also is sufficiently perfect information given, that such was the effect actually produced by it. "Arise" (Ananias is made to say)--"_Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord._" This is no light matter: if so it really were, that according to the religion of Jesus, by such a cause, such an effect was on that occasion produced;--that such effect could, in a word, on any occasion, in any case be produced,--that _murders_, or (not to embarrass the question with conceits of local jurisprudence) _killings_ of men--killings of men by persecution carried on, on a religious account--slaughters of Christians by non-Christians--could thus, as in Paul's case, be divested of all guilt, at any rate of all punishment, at the hands of Almighty Justice;--if impunity could indeed be thus conferred by the sprinkling a man with water or dipping him in it, then would it be matter of serious consideration--not only what is the _verity_ of that religion, but what the _usefulness_ of it, what the usefulness--with reference to the present life at any rate, not to speak of a life to come: what the usefulness of it; and on what ground stands its claim to support by all the powers of factitious punishment and factitious reward, at the hands of the temporal magistrate.[10] TOPIC 5.--_Performance of the Promise, supposed to have been made by the Lord, in favour of Paul, to Ananias._ If the supposed promise is inadequate to the occasion, the supposed performance is still more inadequate with reference to the promise.
In the supposed promise are two distinguishable parts, and in neither of them is the one thing needful to be found. Of these two parts, the only one in which in any direct stage the matter of a promise is contained, is the one last mentioned: it is the promise to show him, (Paul) what sufferings he will have to undergo in the course of the career, whatever it is, in which he is about to engage: to wit, in name and profession, the preaching the religion of Jesus: "for I will show him," says the Lord, according to the historian,--"I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake." If so it was, that upon this promise, such as it is, performance never followed, the regret for the failure need not be very great. Whatsoever were the sufferings that he was predestined to undergo, that which was _not_ in the nature of this foreshowing, was--the lessening their aggregate amount; that which _was_ in the nature of it was--the making an addition to that same afflicting aggregate; to wit, by constant and unavoidable anticipation of the approach of such sufferings.
Of this talk, vague as it is, about sufferings, the obvious enough object was--the giving exaltation to the idea meant to be conveyed of the merits of the hero:--an object, which, by this and other means, has accordingly, down to the present day, in no small degree been accomplished. So much as to sufferings: as to enjoyments, by any idea entertained of the enjoyments derived by him from the same source, this design would have been--not promoted, but counteracted. But, when the time arrives, whether the mass of suffering was not, to no small amount, overbalanced by that of his enjoyments--meaning always worldly sufferings and worldly enjoyments--the reader will be left to judge.
Here then we have the only promise, which in any direct way is expressed:--a promise which, in the first place would have been useless, in the next place worse than useless.
TOPIC 6.--_Indirect Promise, that Paul shall spread the Name of Jesus._ In the whole substance of this promise, if there be anything, which, with reference to the professed end--to wit the giving extension to the religion of Jesus--would have been of use, it is in the foregoing part that it must be looked for. In this part then, if there be any such matter to be found, it will be this: to wit, a promise that he (Paul) shall bear, and therefore that he shall be enabled to bear, the name of the Lord, to wit, the name of Jesus, before the classes of persons specified, to wit, the Gentiles, and kings, and children of Israel: Acts ix. 15. But, only in an indirect way is this solely material part of the promise expressed: "He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name," &c.
_i.e._ When I chose him, it was my design that he should do so. But, in the case of the Lord, according to the picture drawn of him by this historian, how very inconclusive evidence _intention_ is of _execution_, there will, in the course of this work, have been abundant occasion to see.
Bear the name of Jesus? so far, so good. But for this function no such special and supernatural commission was necessary: without any such commission, the name of Jesus had been borne to the people at large, if in this particular the Gospel history is to be believed. Luke ix. 49, 50: "And John answered and said, 'Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name: and we forbad him, because he followed not with us.' And Jesus said unto him, 'Forbid him not, for he that is not against us, is for us.'" How inadequate soever, with reference to the professed end, to wit, giving extension to the religion of Jesus, the promise was perfectly adequate, and commensurate, to what we shall find to be Paul's real design; to wit, the planting a Gospel of his own, as, and for, and instead of, the Gospel of Jesus. The Gospel of Jesus was the Gospel of Jesus: and the Gospel, which, availing himself of the name of Jesus, it was Paul's design and practice to preach, was, as he himself declares,--as we shall see him declaring in the plainest and most express terms,--a Gospel of his own; a Gospel which was not the Gospel of the Apostles, and which, for fear of its being opposed by them, he kept studiously concealed from those confidential servants and real associates of Jesus, as may be seen in the following passages: Gal. i.
9, 11, and 12; "As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other Gospel unto you, than that ye have received, let him be accursed.--But I certify you, brethren, that the Gospel which was preached of me is not after man.--For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." Gal.
2:2: "And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that Gospel which I preach among the Gentiles; but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means, I should run, or had run, in vain."
In the course of Paul's dialogue with the voice on the road--that voice which we are given to understand was the Lord's, _i.e._ Jesus's--the promise supposed to be made to Paul, it must be remembered, was--the promise to tell him, when in the city, what he was to do. "What thou must do," says the historian in his historical account:--"all things which are appointed for thee to do," says the historian in the supposed unpremeditated oratorical account, which, in this so often mentioned first of the speeches, he is supposed by the historian to have delivered.
Among all these things,--one thing, which it is manifestly the design of the historian, as it was that of his hero, to make men believe, was accomplished: to wit, the satisfying them what was the religious doctrine, for the dissemination of which the expense of this miracle was incurred. This, moreover, is the promise; which, in the reading of the story everybody looks for: this too is the promise which in the reading of this same story, the believers in the religion of Jesus have very generally been in the habit of considering as performed. Not in and by this history, however, will they have any such satisfaction, when the matter comes to be looked into. For, in respect of this information, desirable as it is,--Paul is, in this strangely supposed intercourse, put off--put off to another time and place: put off, for no reason given, nor for any substantial reason that can be imagined. Further on, when a show of performing the promise comes to be made, then, instead of accomplishment, we have more evasion. Instead of furnishing the information to Paul himself--to Paul directly--for, when the time and place for performance comes, performance--what the Lord is not supposed so much as to profess to do, what he professes to do is--to make the communication to this man, who, his existence being supposed, was an utter stranger to Paul--namely to this Ananias. Well, and for the conveying the information, in this indirect and inadequate way--for conveying it to and through this same Ananias--what is done?--as we have seen, what amounts to nothing.
When, for affording the information--had any information been intended to be afforded--the time and place are come; when Ananias and Paul have been brought together; what is it that, from the information afforded us by the historian, we are to understand, passed? _Answer_, that, after the scales had fallen from his eyes, Paul was baptized; that he ate meat, and that after he had eaten meat he was strengthened: strengthened, we are warranted to suppose, by the meat which he had so eaten. Moreover, that somehow or other, in this large city he was certain days--number not specified,--with certain disciples--neither names nor number specified,--and preached Christ in the synagogues, saying that he was the son of God.
Thus far then we are got; and, of the supposed revelation, in all this time nothing revealed. Promises, put-offs, evasions--and, after all, no performance.
Among the purposes of this work, is the satisfying the reader--not only that Paul received not any revelation from the Almighty; but that, even upon his own showing, never did he receive any such revelation: that, on pretence of his having received it from the Almighty by a special revelation, he preached indeed a certain doctrine; but that this doctrine was partly one of his own, contrary to that of Jesus's apostles, and therefore contrary to that of Jesus: and that, in the way of revelation, he never did receive anything; neither that doctrine of his own which he preached, nor anything else.
TOPIC 7.--_Doctrine, supposed to be preached by Paul at Damascus in the synagogues._ Straightway, if the historian is to be believed;--straightway after being strengthened by the meat;--and straightway after he had passed the certain days with the disciples;--then did Paul preach Christ in the synagogues--preach that he is the son of God.
Here, had he really preached in any such places--here would have been the time, and the best time, for telling us what, in pursuance of the supposed revelation, he preached. For, whatever it was, if anything, that he ever learnt from his supposed revelation, it was not till he had learnt it, till he made this necessary acquisition, that the time for beginning to preach in the synagogues in question or anywhere else was come. And, no sooner had he received it, than then, when it was fresh in his memory--then was the time for preaching it. But, never having received any such thing as that which he pretended, and which the historian has made so many people believe, he received,--no such thing had he to preach at any time or place.
Whatever of that nature he had had, if he had had at any _time_, Damascus was not the _place_, at any rate at _that time_, for him to preach it, or anything else, in synagogues--in any receptacle so extensively open to the public eye.
Preach, in the name of Jesus--in the name of that Jesus, whose disciples, and with them whose religion, he now went thither with a commission to exterminate,--preach in that name he could not, without proclaiming his own religion--his own perfidy;--his own rebellion, against the authorities, from which, at his own solicitation, the commission so granted to him had been obtained:--his own perfidious contempt--not only of those Jerusalem rulers, but of those Damascus authorities, from whom, for that important and cruel purpose, he was sent to receive instruction and assistance. At some seven-and-twenty years distance in the field of time, and at we know not what distance in the field of space, probably that between Rome and Damascus, it was as easy for the historian to affirm the supposed preaching, as to deny it: but, as to the preaching itself, whether it was within the bounds of moral possibility, let the reader judge.
TOPIC 8.--_Supposed Amazement of the People of Damascus at this Paul's supposed preaching of Christ in the Synagogues there._ Had there really been any such preaching, well might have amazement followed it. But there was no such preaching, therefore no such amazement. Had there been real preaching, and real amazement produced by it--what would have been the subject of the amazement! Not so much the audacity of the preacher--for madmen acting singly are to be seen in but too great frequency: not so much the audacity of the speaker, as the supineness of the constituted authorities; for, madmen acting in bodies in the character of public functionaries have never yet been visible.
And if any such assemblage was ever seen, many such would be seen, before any one could be seen, whose madness took the course of sitting still, while an offender against their authority, coming to them single and without support,--neither bringing with him support, nor finding it there,--continued, at a public meeting, preaching against them, and setting their authority at defiance.
TOPIC 9.--_Matter of the Revelation, which, in and by the supposed unpremeditated Oratorical Account, is supposed to have been made._ Forgetting what, as we have seen, he had so lately been saying in his own person--in the person of Paul,--he on this occasion, returns to the subject: and more evasive is the result.
On this occasion--this proper occasion--what is it that he, Paul, takes upon him to give an account of.--That which the Lord had revealed to him?--revealed, communicated in the supernatural way of revelation, to him--Paul? No; but that which, according to him,--if he, and through him the historian, is to be believed,--the Lord communicated to Ananias concerning him--Paul. The Almighty having minded to communicate something to a man, and yet not communicating to that man any part of it, but communicating the whole of it to another! What a proceeding _this_ to attribute to the Almighty, and upon such evidence!
Still we shall see, supposing it communicated, and from such a source communicated--still we shall see it amounted to nothing: to nothing--always excepted the contradiction to what, in relation to this subject, had, by this same historian, been a little before asserted.
Observe what were the _purposes_, for which, by this Ananias, Paul is supposed to be made to understand, that God--the God, says he, of our fathers--had chosen him.
1. Purpose the first--"To know his will." His will, respecting what? If respecting anything to the great purpose here in question, respecting the new doctrine which, to this Paul, to the exclusion of the Apostles of Jesus, is all along supposed to have been revealed. Of no such doctrine is any indication anywhere in these accounts to be found.
2. Purpose the second--"And see this just one." Meaning, we are to understand, the person all along spoken of under the name of the Lord; to wit, Jesus. But, in the vision in question, if the historian is to be believed, no Jesus did Paul see. All that he saw was a light,--an extraordinary strong light at midday; so strong, that after it, till the scales fell from his eyes, he saw not any person in any place: and this light, whatever it was, was seen by all that were with him, as well as by him.
3. Purpose the third--"And shouldest hear the voice of his mouth." Oh!
yes; if what the historian says in that other place is to be believed--hear a voice he did; and if the historian is to be again believed, that voice was the Lord's. But, by hearing this voice, how was he distinguished? those that were with him, according to the historian's own account, heard it as well as he. And what was he the wiser? This also, it is hoped, has been rendered sufficiently visible--just nothing.
Purpose the fourth and last--"Thou shalt be his witness (the Lord's witness), of everything thou hast seen and heard:"--that is, of that which was nothing, and that which amounted to nothing.
Unhappily, even this is not all: for, before the subject is concluded, we must go back and take up once more the supposed premeditated and studied speech, which, on the second occasion, the self-constituted Apostle is supposed to have made to the Sub-king of the Jews, Agrippa, sitting by the side of his superior--the Roman Proconsul, Festus.
In the course of this long-studied speech,--to whom, is the communication, such as it is,--to whom, in an immediate way, and without the intervention of any other person, is it supposed to be made? Not to Ananias;--not to any such superfluous and unknown personage;--not to Ananias, but to Paul himself: viz. to the very person _by_ whom this same communication, supposed to have been made to him, is supposed to be reported (Acts xxvi. 16 to 18): to this principal, or rather, only person concerned:--to this one person, the communication, such as it is, and to him the whole of it at once, is supposed to be made.
Here then is this Ananias discarded:--discarded with this vision of his, and that other vision which we have seen within it: the communication, which, speaking in the first place in his own person,--and then, on one occasion, in the person of this same hero of his--the historian had just been declaring, was made--not to Paul, but to Ananias;--this all-important communication, speaking again in this same third person, but on another occasion--the discourse being supposed to be a long-studied one--he makes this same Paul declare, was given--not to any Ananias, not to any other person--but directly to him, Paul, himself.
Let us now see what it amounts to. In the most logical manner, it begins with declaring the _purposes_ it is made for; and, when the purposes are declared, all that it does is done. Ver. 16. "But now: rise, and stand upon thy feet; for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose."...In this purpose are several parts: let us look into them one by one.
1. Part 1. "To make thee (says the Lord) a minister and a witness, both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee." But, as to the things which he had seen, by this same account they amounted to nothing but a glare of light. Here then was the light to _bear witness of_, if it was worth while: but, as to the _ministering_, here was nothing at all to minister to: for the light was past, and it required no ministering to, when it was present. Had it been the light of a lamp--yes; but there was no lamp in the case.
Thus much, as to these things which he had seen. Thereupon comes the mention of those things "in the which, the Lord is supposed to say, I will appear unto thee!" Here, as before, we have another put-off. If, in the way in question, and of the sort in question, there had been anything said, here was the time, the only time, for saying it. For immediately upon the mention of this communication, such as it is, follows the mention of what was due in consequence of it, in obedience to the commands supposed to be embodied in it, and by the light of the information supposed to be conveyed by it. "Whereupon, says he, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision..."
Part 2. The purpose continued.--"Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I now send thee." This, we see, is but a continuation of the same put-off: no revelation, no doctrine, no Gospel here. As to the doctrine--the Gospel--that Gospel which he preached, and which he said was his own, no such Gospel is on this occasion given to him; and, not being so much as reported to have been given to him on any other occasion, was it not therefore of his own making, and without any such supernatural assistance, as Christians have been hitherto made to believe was given to him?
As to the deliverance from the people and from the Gentiles, this is a clause, put in with reference to the dangers, into which the intemperance of his ambition had plunged him, and from whence in part it had been his lot to escape. Here then the sub-king and his Roman superior were desired to behold the accomplishment of a prophecy: but the prophecy was of that sort which came after the fact.--"Unto whom now I send thee..." In this they were desired to see a continuation of the prophecy: for, as to this point, it was, in the hope of the prophet, of the number of those, which not only announce, but by announcing contribute to, their own accomplishment.
Part 3. The purpose continued.--"To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God..." Still the same nothingness: to his life's end a man might be hearing stories such as these, and still at the end of it be none the wiser:--no additional doctrine--no additional gospel--no declaration at all--no gospel at all--here.
Part 4. The purpose continued and concluded..."that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me." Good. But this is not doctrine; this is not gospel; this is not itself the promised doctrine: but it is a description of the effect, of which the promised doctrine was to be the cause.
Now it is, as we have just seen, that Paul is represented as commencing his preaching, or sallying forth upon his mission; preaching, from _instructions_ received in a supernatural way--received by revelation.
Yet, after all, no such _instructions_ has he received. Thrice has the historian--once in his own person, twice in that of his hero--undertaken to produce those instructions. But by no one, from first to last, have they anywhere been produced.
Truly, then, of his own making was this Gospel which Paul went preaching; of his own making, as well as of his own using; that Gospel, which he himself declares to his Galatians was not of man, was not, therefore, of those Apostles, to whom the opposition made by him is thus proclaimed.
When, after having given in his own person an account of a supposed occurrence,--an historian, on another occasion, takes up the same occurrence; and, in the person of another individual, gives of that same occurrence another account different from, and so different from, as to be irreconcileable with it; can this historian, with any propriety, be said to be himself a believer in this second account which he thus gives? Instead of giving it as a true account, does he not, at any rate, in respect of all the several distinguishable circumstances in which it differs from the account given in his own person--give it in the character of a fable? a fable invented on the occasion on which the other person is supposed to speak--invented in the intent that it shall promote the purpose for which this speech is supposed to be made? Yet this account, which in the eyes of the very man by whom it is delivered to us, is but a fable, even those to whom in this same character of a fable it is delivered--this account it is that _Christians_ have thus long persisted in regarding, supporting, and acting upon, as if it were from beginning to end, a truth--a great body of truth!--O Locke! O Newton! where was your discernment!
On such evidence would any Judge fine a man a shilling? Would he give effect to a claim to that amount? Yet such is the evidence, on the belief of which the difference between happiness and misery, both in intensity as well as duration, infinite, we are told, depends!
SECTION 5.
VISION III.--PAUL'S ANTERIOR VISION, AS REPORTED BY THE LORD TO ANANIAS.
By the nature of the acts which are the objects of it, the command, we see, is necessarily pregnant with information: but now comes the information given as such--the piece of information with which the command is followed. This information--in and by which another, an antecedent vision, is brought upon the carpet, and communicated--has been reserved for a separate consideration.
This information is in its complexion truly curious: to present a clear view of it, is not an altogether easy task. The information thus given by the Lord--given to this Ananias--this information, of which Paul is the subject, is--what? that, on some former occasion, neither time nor place mentioned, he, Ananias, to whom the Lord is giving the information, had been seen by this same Paul performing, with a certain intention, a certain action; the intention being--that, in relation to this same Paul, a certain effect should be produced--to wit, that of his receiving his sight. The Lord declares, Acts ix. 12, to Ananias, that Paul "had _seen in a vision_ a man, Ananias himself, coming and putting his hand on him, that he (Paul) might receive his sight."
Well then--this action which the Lord thus informs Ananias that he, Ananias, had performed,--did he, at any time and place, ever perform it?
Oh, no; that is not necessary: the question is not a fair one; for it was only in a vision that it was performed. Well then--if it was only in a vision that it was performed, then, in reality, it was never performed. The Lord said that it had been performed; but in so saying the Lord had said that which was not true. The Lord had caused him to believe this--the Lord knowing all the while that it was not true. Such is the deed, which, according to our historian, the Lord relates himself to have achieved.
But the _intention_, was that true? Oh, no; nor was there any need of its being so: for the intention, with which the act was supposed to be performed, was part and parcel of the divinely-taught untruth.
The effect, the production of which had been the object of the intention, was it then--had it then been--produced? Wait a little; no, not at that time. But the time was not then as yet come; and now it is coming apace.
But this effect--what is it? a man's receiving his sight; this same Paul's receiving his sight; this same Paul, of whom Ananias knew nothing, nor had ever heard anything, except what he had just been hearing--to wit, that, by a man of that name, he, Ananias, had once been seen--seen to do so and so--he, all the while--he, the doer, knowing nothing of what he was doing--knowing nothing at all about the matter.
However, only in a vision did all this pass; which being the case, no proper subject of wonder was afforded to him by such otherwise somewhat extraordinary ignorance.
But this sight--which, at the hands of this seer of visions, to whom this information is thus addressed, this stranger, whose name was still _Saul_, was to receive--how happened it that it was to him, Ananias, that he came to receive it? This faculty--at his birth, was he not, like any other man, in possession of it? If he was, what was become of it? In this particular, the information thus supposed to have been given by Omniscience, was rather of the scantiest.
Supposing the story to have any foundation in truth,--such, to Ananias, it could not but have appeared; and, supposing him bold enough to ask questions, or even to open his mouth, a question, in the view of finding a supply for the deficiency, is what the assertion would naturally have for its first result. No such curiosity, however, has Ananias: instead of seeking at the hands of Omniscience an information, the demand for which was so natural, the first use he makes of his speech, or rather would have made of it, if, instead of being imagined in a vision, the state of things in question had been true, is--the furnishing to Omniscience a quantity of information of a sort in no small degree extraordinary. For, hereupon begins a speech, in and by which Ananias undertakes to give Omniscience to understand, what reports, in relation to this same Paul, had reached his (Ananias's) ears. What he is willing thus to _speak_ is more, however, than Omniscience is willing to _hear:_ the story is cut short, and the story-teller bid to "go his way." "Then Ananias," says the text, Acts ix. 13. "Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem. And here he hath authority from the Chief Priests to bind all that call on thy name. But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way; for..." &c.
But, though thus cut short, he is far from being in disgrace. So far from it, that he is taken into confidence. Then comes--still in a vision, and the same vision--information of the till then secret acts and intentions of Omnipotence in relation to this same Paul: he had actually been "chosen" as "a vessel to bear the Lord's name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:" and the determination had been taken, says the Lord in this vision, "to show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake." "For I will show him," says the Acts, ix. 16, "how great things he must suffer for my name's sake."
And, with the announcement thus made of this determination, the historical account, thus by the historian in his own person given, of this same vision, closes.
Thus highly distinguished, and favoured with a confidence, equalling, if not surpassing, any which, according to any of the Gospel accounts, appears ever to have been imparted to any one of the Apostles, how comes it that Ananias has never been put in the number of the _Saints?_ meaning always the Calendar _Saints_--those persons, to wit, who, as a mark of distinction and title of honour, behold their ordinary names preceded by this extraordinary one? Still the answer is: Aye, but this was but in vision: and of a vision one use is--that of the matter of which all that there is _not_ a use for, is left to be taken for false; all that there _is_ a use for, is taken, and is to pass, for true. When, by the name of Ananias, who, humanly speaking, never existed but in name, the service for which it was invented has been performed--to wit, the giving a support to Paul and his vision,--it has done all that was wanted of it: there is no, further use for it.
Supposing that thirdly mentioned vision really seen, at what point of time shall we place the seeing of it? In this too there seems to be no small difficulty.
Between the moment at which Paul is said to have had his vision, if a vision that can be called in which, the time being midday, he saw nothing but a glare of light,--between the moment of this vision, of which a loss of sight was the instantaneous consequence--between the moment of this loss of sight and the moment of the recovery of it, the interval is mentioned: three days it was exactly. Acts ix. 9, "And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink."
The time during which, in verse 9, he has just been declared to have been the whole time without sight,--this is the time, within which he is declared--declared, if the historian is to be believed, declared by the Lord himself--to have seen this introductory vision--this preparatory vision, for which it is so difficult to find a use. And thus it is, that in a vision, though _vision_ means seeing, it is not necessary a man should have sight.
Meantime, of all these matters, on which his own existence, not to speak of the salvation of mankind, so absolutely depends, not a syllable is he to know, but through the medium of this so perfectly obscure and questionable personage--this personage so completely unknown to him--this same Ananias.
Three whole days he is kept from doing anything: during these three whole days the business of the miracle stands still. For what purpose is it thus kept at a stand? Is it that there might be time sufficient left for his learning to see, when his sight is returned, this preparatory vision, by which so little is done, and for which there is so little use?
SECTION 6.
VISIONS, WHY TWO OR THREE INSTEAD OF ONE.
As to the matter of fact designated by the words _Paul's conversion_, so far as regards _outward_ conversion, the truth of it is out of all dispute:--that he was _converted, i.e._ that after having been a persecutor of the votaries of the new religion, he turned full round,