Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

sonings, must needs create some obscurity. Origen and St. Jerome sometimes observe, that besides this he uses many of his native phrases of the Cilician dialect, which being in a great measure foreign and exotic to the ordinary Greek, introduces a kind of strangeness into his discourse, and renders it less intelligible. Epiphanius tells us, that by these methods he acted like a skilful archer, hitting the mark before his adversaries were aware of it; by words misplaced making the frame of his discourse seem obscure and entangled, while in itself it was not only most true, but elaborate, and not difficult to be understood; that to careless and trifling readers it might sometimes seem dissonant and incoherent, but to them that are diligent, and will take their reason along with them, it would appear full of truth, and to be disposed with great care and order.

(for what ends I stand not now to inquire) to
write books, and publish them under the name of
some apostle, is notoriously known to all who are
the least conversant in church antiquities. Herein
St. Paul had his part and share, several supposi-
titious writings being fathered and thrust upon
him. We find a gospel ascribed by some of the
ancients to him, which surely arose from no other
cause, than that in some of his epistles he makes
mention of " my gospel." Which, as St. Jerome
observes, can be meant of no other than the gos-
pel of St. Luke, his constant attendant, and from
whom he chiefly derived his intelligence. If he
wrote another epistle to the Corinthians, prece-
dent to those two extant at this day, as he seems
to imply in a passage in his first epistle. "I have
wrote unto you in an epistle, not to keep compa-
ny,' "* &c., a passage not conveniently applicable
to any part either in that or the other epistle; nay,
a verse or two after, the first epistle is directly
opposed to it; all that can be said in the case is,t
that it long since perished, the Divine Providence
not seeing it necessary to be preserved for the
service of the church. Frequent mention there
is also of an epistle of his to the Laodiceans,
grounded upon a mistaken passage in the epistle
to the Colossians; but besides that the apostle
does not there speak of an epistle written to the
Laodiceans, but of one from them, Tertullian tells
us, that by the epistle to the Laodiceans is meant
that to the Ephesians, and that Marcion, the
heretic, was the first that changed the title; and
therefore, in his enumeration of St. Paul's epistles
he omits that to the Ephesians, for no other rea-
son, doubtless, but that according to Marcion's
opinion, he had reckoned it up under the title of
that to the Laodiceans. Which yet is more clear,
if we consider that Epiphanius, citing a place

10. As for the order of these epistles, we have already given a particular account of the times when, and the places whence they were written. That which is here considerable, is the order according to which they are disposed in the sacred canon. Certain it is, that they are not placed according to the just order of time wherein they were written; the two epistles to the Thessalonians being on all hands agreed to have been first written, though set almost last in order. Most probable therefore it is, that they were placed according to the dignity of those to whom they were sent; the reason, why those to whole churches have the precedency of those to particular persons; and among those to churches, that to the Romans had the first place and rank assigned to it, because of the majesty of the imperial city, and the eminency and honorable respect which that church'derived thence; and whether the same reason do not hold in others, though I will not positively as-quoted by Marcion out of the epistle to the Laodisert, yet I think none will over-confidently deny. The last inquiry concerns the subscriptions added to the end of these epistles; which, were they authentic, would determine some doubts concerning the time and place of their writing. But, alas, they are of no just value and authority, not the same in all copies, different in the Syriac and Arabic versions, nay, wholly wanting in some ancient Greek copies of the New Testament; and were doubtless at first added at best upon probable conjectures. When at any time they truly represent the place whence, or the person by whom the epistle was sent, it is not that they are to be relied upon in it, but because the thing is either intimated or expressed in the body of the epistle. I shall add no more but this observation, that St. Paul was wont to subscribe every epistle with his own hand, "which is my token in every epistle; so I write."* Which was done (says one of the ancients) to prevent impostures, that his epistles might not be interpolated and corrupted, and that if any vented epistles under his name, the cheat might be discovered by the apostle's own hand not being to them; and this brings me to the last consideration, that shall conclude this chapter.

11. That there were some, even in the most early ages of Christianity, who took upon them

* 2 Thess. iii. 17.

ceans, it is in the very same words found in that
to the Ephesians at this day. However, such an
epistle is still extant, forged, no doubt, before St.
Jerome's time, who tells us, that it was read by
some, but yet exploded and rejected by all. Be-
sides these there was his Revelation, called also
'Avaßarikov, or his Ascension, grounded on his
ecstasy or rapture into heaven, first forged by the
Cainian heretics, and in great use and estimation
among the Gnostics. Sozomen tells us, that this
apocalypse was owned by none of the ancients,
though much commended by some monks in his
time; and he further adds, that in the time of the
emperor Theodosius, it was said to have been
found in an underground chest of marble in St.
Paul's house at Tarsus, and that by a particular
revelation. A story which, upon inquiry, he found
to be as false as the book itself was evidently
forged and spurious. The Acts of St. Paul are
mentioned both by Origen and Eusebius, but not
as writings of approved and unquestionable credit
and authority. The epistles that are said to have
passed between St. Paul and Seneca, how early
soever they started in the church, yet the false-
hood and fabulousness of them is now too noto-
riously known to need any further account or de-
scription of them.

[blocks in formation]

SECTION IX.

The principal controversies that exercised the church in his time.

THOUGH Our Lord and his apostles delivered the Christian religion, especially as to the main and essential parts of it, in as plain a manner as words could express it, yet were there men of perverse and "corrupt minds, and reprobate concerning the faith," who from different causes, some ignorantly or wilfully mistaking the doctrines of Christianity, others to serve ill purposes and designs, began to introduce errors and unsound opinions into the church, and to debauch the minds of men from the simplicity of the gospel; hereby disquieting the thoughts, and alienating the affections of men and disturbing the peace and order of the church. The first ringleader of this heretical crew was Simon Magus, who not being able to attain his ends of the apostles, by getting a power to confer miraculous gifts, whereby he designed to greaten and enrich himself, resolved to be revenged of them, scattering the most poisonous tares among the good wheat that they had sown, bringing in the most pernicious principles; and as the natural consequent of that, patronizing the most debauched villainous practices; and this under a pretence of still being Christians. To enumerate the several dogmata and damnable heresies, first broached by Simon, and then vented and propagated by his disciples and followers, who though passing under different titles, yet all ccntered at last in the name of Gnostics, a term which we shall sometimes use for conveniency, (though it took not place till after St. Paul's time) were as needless as it is alien to my purpose. I shall only take notice of a few of more signal remark, and such as St. Paul in his epistles does eminently reflect upon.

was more immediately couched, was craftily adapted to those times of suffering, and greedily swallowed by many, hereby drawn into apostacy. Against this our apostle antidotes the Christians, especially the Jewish converts, among whom the Gnostics had mixed themselves, that they would not suffer themselves to be drawn aside by "an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God:"* that notwithstanding sufferings and persecutions, they would "hold fast the profession of the faith without wavering, not forsaking the assembling of themselves together, as the manner of some is," (the Gnostic heretics;) remembering how severely God has threatened apostates, that "if any man draw back, his soul shall have no pleasure in him," and "what a fearful thing it is thus to fall into the hands of the living God."+

And

3. But besides this, Simon and his followers made the gate yet wider, maintaining a universal licence to sin; that men were free to do whatever they had a mind to; that to press the observance of good works was a bondage inconsistent with the liberty of the gospel; that so men did but believe in him and his dear Helen,‡ they had no reason to regard law or prophets, but might do what they pleased, they should be saved by his grace, and not according to good works. Irenæus adds, (what a man might easily have inferred, had he never been told it,) that they lived in all lust and filthiness: as indeed whoever will take the pains to peruse the account that is given of them, will find that they wallowed in the most horrible and unheard of bestialities. These persons St. Paul does as particularly describe, as if he had named them, having once and again with tears warned the Philippians of them, that "they were enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things." elsewhere to the same effect, that they would 2. Amongst the opinions and principles of Si-"mark them that caused divisions and offences, mon and his followers, this was one, that God did not create the world, but that it was made by angels. That divine honors were due to them, and that they were to be adored as subordinate mediators between God and us. This our apostle saw growing up apace, and struck betimes at the root in that early caution he gave to the Colossians, to "let no man beguile them in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind; and not holding the head,"* i. e. thereby disclaiming Christ, the head of the church. But, notwithstanding this warning, this error still continued and spread itself in those parts for several ages, till expressly condemned by the Laodicean council. Nay, Theodoret tells us, there were still oratories erected to the archangel Michael in those places, wherein they were wont to meet and pray to angels. Another Gnostic principle was, that men might freely and indifferently eat what had been offered in sacrifice to idols; yea, sacrifice to the idol itself, it being lawful confidently to abjure the faith in time of persecution. The first part whereof St. Paul does largely and frequently discuss up and down his epistles; the latter, wherein the sting and poison * Col. ii. 18.

[blocks in formation]

contrary to the doctrine which they had learned, and avoid them; for they that were such, served not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, by good words and fair speeches deceiving the hearts of the simple." This I doubt not he had in his eye, when he gave those caveats to the Ephesians, that "fornication, and all uncleanness, and inordinate desires, should not be once named amongst them, as became saints, nor filthiness nor unclean talking;" being assured by the Christian doctrine, that "no whoremonger, nor unclean person," &c. could be saved; that therefore, "they should let no man deceive them with vain words; these being the very things for which the wrath of God came upon the children of disobedience;" and accordingly it concerned them, "not to be partakers with them." Plainly intimating, that this impure Gnostic crew (whose doctrines and practices he does here no less truly than lively represent) had begun by crafty and insinuative arts to screw itself into the church of Ephesus, cheating the people with subtile and flattering in

* Heb. iii. 12.

+ Heb. x. 23, 25, 31, 38. + His mistress, in whom he said dwelt the original seed of all human souls.-ED. Phil. iii. 17, 18.

§ Rom. xvi. 17, 18. Eph. v. 3, 4, &c.

sinuations, probably persuading them that these things were but indifferent, and a part of that Christian liberty, wherein the gospel had instated them. By these and such like principles and practices (many whereof might be reckoned up) they corrupted the faith of Christians, distracted the peace of the church, stained and defiled the honor and purity of the best religion in the world.

ment in this place. And hither it was that some of the Jewish converts, being come down from Jerusalem, taught the Christians, that unless they observed circumcision, and the whole law of Moses, they could not be saved.* Paul and Barnabas, then at Antioch, observing the ill influence that this had upon the minds of men, (disturbing many at present, and causing the apostacy of some afterwards,) began vigorously to oppose this

spirit that had been raised up, they were despatched by the church at Antioch to consult the apostles and governors at Jerusalem about this matter: whither being come, they found the quarrel espoused, among others, by some converts of the sect of the Pharisees, (of all others the most zealous assertors of the Mosaic rites,) stiffly maintaining that besides the gospel, or the Christian religion, it was necessary for all converts, whether Jews or Gentiles, to keep to circumcision and the law of Moses. So that the state of the controversy between the orthodox and these Judaizing Christians was plainly this :-Whether circumcision and the observation of the Mosaic law, or only the belief and practice of Christianity, be necessary to salvation? The latter part of the question was maintained by the apostles; the former asserted by the Judaizing zealots, making the law of Moses equally necessary with the law of Christ; and no doubt pretending that whatever these men might preach at Antioch, yet the apostles were of another mind; whose sentence and resolution it was therefore thought necessary should be immediately known.

4. But the greatest and most famous contro-growing error; but not able to conjure down this versy that of all others in those times exercised the Christian church, was concerning the obligation that Christians were under to observe the law of Moses, as necessary to their justification and salvation. Which because a matter of so much importance, and which takes up so great a part of St. Paul's epistles, and the clearing whereof will reflect a great light upon them, we shall consider more at large: in order whereunto three things especially are to be inquired after, that is, the true state of the controversy, what the aposles determined in this matter, and what respect the most material passages in St. Paul's epistles, about justification and salvation, bear to this controversy. First, we shall inquire into the true state and nature of the controversy; and for this we are to know, that when Christianity was published to the world, it mainly prevailed among the Jews, they being generally the first converts to the faith. But having been brought up in a mighty reverence and veneration for the Mosaic institutions, and looking upon that economy as immediately contrived by God himself, delivered by angels, settled by their great master, Moses, received with the most solemn and sensible appearances of 5. We are then next to consider what determidivine power and majesty, ratified by miracles, nation the apostolic synod at Jerusalem made of and entertained by all their forefathers as the pe- this matter; for a council of the apostles and culiar prerogative of that nation, for so many ages rulers being immediately convened, and the quesand generations, they could not easily be brought tion, by Paul and Barnabas, brought before them, off from it, or behold the gospel but with an evil the case was canvassed and debated on all hands; eye, as an enemy that came to supplant and un- and at last it was resolved upon by their unanidermine this ancient and excellent institution.-mous sentence and suffrage, that the Gentile conNay, those of them that were prevailed upon by the convictive power and evidence of the gospel, to embrace the Christian religion, yet could not get over the prejudice of education, but must still continue their observance of those legal rites and customs wherein they had been brought up. And, not content with this, they began magisterially to impose them upon others, even all the Gentile converts, as that without which they could never be accepted by God in this, or rewarded by him in another world. This controversy was first started at Antioch, a place not more remarkable for its own greatness than the vast numbers of Jews that dwelt there, enjoying great immunities granted them by the king of Syria. For after that Antiochus Epiphanes had destroyed Jerusalem, and laid waste the temple, the Jews generally flocked hither, where they were courteously entertained by his successors, the spoils of the temple restored to them for the enriching and adorning of their synagogue, and they made, equally with the Greeks, freemen of that city; by which means their numbers increased daily, partly by the resort of others from Judæa, partly by a numerous conversion of proselytes, whom they gained over to their religion. Accordingly Christianity, at its first setting out, found a very successful entertain

verts were under no obligation to the Jewish law; that God had abundantly declared his acceptance of them, though strangers to the Mosaical economy; that they were sufficiently secured of their happiness and salvation by the grace of the gospel, wherein they might be justified and saved without circumcision or legal ceremonies, a yoke from which Christ had now set us free. But because the apostles did not think it prudent in these circumstances, too much to stir the exasperated humor of the Jews, (lest by straining the string too high at first they should endanger their revolting from the faith,) therefore they thought of some indulgence in the case; St. James, then bishop of Jerusalem, and probably president of the council, propounding this expedient, that for the present the Gentile converts should so far only comply with the humor of the Jews, as to "abstain from meats offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from fornication." Let us a little more distinctly survey the ingredients of this imposition. "Meats offered to idols," or as St. James in his discourse styles them αλισγηματα των ειδώλων, "the pollution of idols," the word aypara, properly denoting the meats that were polluted by

* Acts xv. 1.

[ocr errors]

being consecrated to the idol. Thus we read of "polluted bread upon God's altar;" i. e. such probably as had been before offered to idols. So that these meats offered to the idols were parts of those sacrifices which the heathens offered to their gods, of the remaining portions whereof they usually made a feast in the idol-temple, inviting their friends thither, and sometimes their Christian friends to come along with them. This God had particularly forbidden the Jews by the law of Moses: "Thou shalt worship no other God; lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice."* And the not observing of this prohibition cost the Jews dear, when invited by the Moabites to the sacrifices of their gods, "they did eat with them, and bowed down to their gods." Sometimes these remaining portions were sold for common use in the shambles, and bought by Christians; both which gave great offence to the zealous Jews, who looked upon it as a participation in the idolatries of the heathen: of both which our apostle discourses elsewhere at large, pressing Christians to "abstain from idolatry," both as to the idol-feasts, and the remainders of the sacrifice: from the former, as more immediately unlawful; from the latter, the sacrificial meats sold in the shambles, as giving offence to weak and undiscerning Christians. For though in itself "an idol was nothing in the world," and consequently no honor could be done it by eating what was offered to it; yet was it more prudent and reasonable to abstain, partly because fleshmeats have no peculiar excellency in them to commend us to God; partly because all men not being alike instructed in the knowledge of their liberty, their minds might be easily puzzled, their consciences entangled, the Gentiles by this means hardened in their idolatrous practices, and weak brethren offended; besides, though these things were in their own nature indifferent, and in a man's own power to do or to let alone, yet was it not convenient to make our liberty a snare to others, and to venture upon what was lawful, when it was plainly unedifying and inexpedient. "From blood" this God forbad of old, and that some time before the giving of the law by Moses, that "they should not eat the flesh with the blood, which was the life thereof." The mystery of which prohibition was to instruct men in the duties of mercy and tenderness even to brute beasts; but (as appears from what follows after) primarily designed by God as a solemn fence and bar against murder, and the effusion of human blood: a law afterwards renewed upon the Jews, and inserted into the body of the Mosaic precepts. "From things strangled;" that is, that they should abstain from eating of those beasts that died without letting blood, where the blood was not thoroughly drained from them; a prohibition grounded upon the reason of the former, and respecting a thing greatly abominable to the Jews, being so expressly forbidden in their law. But it was not more offensive to the Jews than acceptable to the Gentiles, who were wont, with great art and care, to

[blocks in formation]

strangle living creatures, that they might stew or dress them with their blood in them, as a point of curious and exquisite delicacy. This and the foregoing prohibition, abstinence from blood, died not with the apostles, nor were buried with other Jewish rites, but were inviolably observed for several ages in the Christian church, as we have elsewhere observed from the writers of those times. Lastly, "From fornication:" this was a thing commonly practised in the heathen world, which generally beheld simple fornication as no sin, and that it was lawful for persons, not engaged in wedlock, to made use of women that exposed themselves; a custom justly offensive to the Jews, and therefore to cure two evils at once, the apostles here solemnly declare against it. Not that they thought it a thing indifferent, as the rest of the prohibited rites were; for it is forbidden by the natural law, (as contrary to that chasteness and modesty, that order and comeliness which God has planted in the minds of men,) but they joined it in the same class with them, because the Gentiles looked upon it as a thing lawful and indifferent. It had been expressly forbidden by the Mosaic law: "There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel;"* and because the heathens had generally thrown down this fence and bar set by the law of nature, it was here again repaired by the first planters of Christianity, as by St. Paul elsewhere: "Ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus; for this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication; that every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honor, not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles, which knew not God."+Though, after all, I must confess myself inclinable to embrace Heinsius's ingenious conjecture, that by Topvia, fornication, we are here to understand opvns powμa, "the harlots' hire," or the movin voia, the offerings which those persons were wont to make. For among the Gentiles nothing was more usual, than for the common women that prostituted themselves to lewd embraces (those especially that attended at the temples of Venus) to dedicate some part of their gain, and present it to the gods. Athanasius has a passage very express to this purpose. "The women of old were wont to sit in the idol temples of Phoenicia, and to dedicate the gain which they got by the prostitution of their bodies as a kind of first-fruits to the deities of the place; supposing that by fornication they should pacify their goddess, and by this means render her favorable and propitious to them." Where it is plain he uses opveia, or fornication, in this very sense, for that gain or reward of it which they consecrated to their gods. Some such thing Solomon had in his eye, when he brings in the harlot thus courting the young man: "I have peace-offerings with me, this day have I paid my vows." These presents were either made in specie, the very money thus unrighteously gotten, or in sacrifices bought with it, and offered at the temple, the remainders whereof were taken and sold among the ordinary sacrificial portions. This as it holds the nearest corrcs

* Deut. xxiii. 17. t1 Thess. iv. 2, 3, 4, 5.
+ Prov. vii. 14.

pondence with the rest of the rites here forbidden, | accommodated to the state of the Jews' common

so could it not choose but be a mighty scandal to the Jews, it being so particularly prohibited in their law, "Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow, for it is an abomination to the Lord."*

wealth, as all civil constitutions, restrained men from the external acts of sin; the ceremonial laws came somewhat nearer, and besides their typical relation to the evangelical state, by external and symbolical representments, signified and exhibited 6. These prohibitions here laid upon the Gen- that spiritual impurity, from which men were to tiles, were by the apostles intended only for a tem- abstain: the moral laws, founded in the natural porary compliance with the Jewish converts, till notions of men's minds concerning good and evil, they could, by degrees, be brought off from their directly urged men to duty, and prohibited their stiffness and obstinacy; and then the reason of prevarications. These three made up the entire the thing ceasing, the obligation to it must needs code and pandects of the Jewish statutes; all of cease and fail. Nay, we may observe that even which our apostle comprehends under the general while the apostolical decree lasted in its greatest notion of "the law," and not the moral law singly force and power, in those places where there were and separately considered, in which sense it never few or no Jewish converts, the apostles did not appears that the Jews expected justification and stick to give leave, that except in case of scandal, salvation by it; nay, rather that they looked for any kind of meats, even the portions of the idol- it merely from the observance of the ritual and sacrifices might be indifferently bought and taken ceremonial law; so that the moral law is no by Christians as well as heathens. These were further considered by him in this question, than all which in order to the satisfaction of the Jews, as it made up a part of the Mosaical constitution, and for the present peace of the church, the of that national and political covenant which God apostles thought necessary to require of the con- made with the Jews at Mount Sinai. Hence, the verted Gentiles; but that for all the rest they were apostle all along in his discourses constantly opperfectly free from legal observances, obliged only poses the law and the gospel, and the observation to the commands of Christianity. So that the of the one to the belief and practice of the other; apostolical decision that was made of this matter which surely he would not have done, had he simwas this "That (besides the temporary obser- ply intended the moral law, it being more expressvation of those few indifferent rites before men- ly incorporated into the gospel than ever it was tioned) the belief and practice of the Christian re- into the law of Moses. And that the apostle does ligion was perfectly sufficient to salvation, without thus oppose the law and gospel, might be made circumcision and the observation of the Mosaic evident from the continued series of his discourslaw." This synodical determination allayed the es; but a few places shall suffice. "By what law controversy for a while, being joyfully received by (says the apostle) is boasting excluded? by the the Gentile-Christians. But, alas, the Jewish zeal law of works?"* i. e. by the Mosaic law, in whose began again to ferment and spread itself; they peculiar privileges and prerogatives the Jews did could not with any patience endure to see their strangely flatter and pride themselves? "Nay, beloved Moses deserted, and those venerable insti- but by the law of faith," i. e. by the gospel, or tutions trodden down, and therefore labored to the evangelical way of God's dealing with us. keep up their credit, and still to assert them as And elsewhere giving an account of this very connecessary to salvation. Than which nothing creat- troversy between the Jewish and Gentile converts, ed St. Paul greater trouble at every turn, as he he first opposes their persons, "Jews by nature,' was thereby forced to contend against these Ju- and "sinners of the Gentiles;" and then infers, daizing teachers almost in every church where he "that a man is not justified by the works of the came; as appears by that great part that they law," by those legal observances whereby the bear in all his epistles, especially that to the Ro-Jews expected to be justified, "but by the faith of mans and Galatians, where this leaven had most diffused itself, whom the better to undeceive, he discourses at large of the nature and institution, the end and design, the antiquating and abolishing of that Mosaic covenant, which these men laid so much stress and weight upon.

7. Hence then we pass to the third thing considerable for the clearing of this matter, which is to show, that the main passages in St. Paul's epistles, concerning justification and salvation, have an immediate reference to this controversy. But before we enter upon that, something must necessarily be premised for the explicating some terms and phrases frequently used by our apostle in this question; these two especially-what he means by law, and what by faith. By law, then, it is plain he usually understands the Jewish law, which was a complex body of laws, containing moral, ceremonial, and judicial precepts, each of which had its use and office as a great instrument of duty; the judicial laws being peculiar statutes

* Deut. xxiii. 18.

Christ," by a hearty belief of, and compliance with that way which Christ has introduced; for "by the works of the law," by legal obedience, "no flesh," neither Jew nor Gentile, "shall" now "be justified." "Fain would I learn, whether you received the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" That is, whether you became partakers of the miraculous powers of the Holy Ghost, while you continued under the legal dispensation, or since you embraced the gospel, and the faith of Christ; and speaking afterwards of the state of the Jews before the revelation of the gospel, says he, "before faith came, we were kept under the law;" i. e. before the gospel came, we were kept under the discipline of the legal economy, "shut up unto the faith," reserved for the discovery of the evangelical dispensation, "which should afterwards" (in its due time) "be revealed" to the world. This in the following chapter he discourses more at large. "Tell me,

* Rom. iii. 27. + Gal. ii. 15, 16. Gal. iii. 2-5 II Ver. 23.

« AnteriorContinuar »