It  will  never  be  possible  for  any  one  to  believe  St.  Paul  to  have  been  a  mere
fanatic,  who  duly  considers  his  calmness,  his  wisdom,  his  prudence,  and,
above  all,  his  humility,  a  virtue  which  is  not  less  inconsistent  with  fanati-
cism than  with  imposture.  And  how  can  we  suppose  that  he  was  an  im-
postor who  changed  his  religion  for  selfish  purposes  ?  Was  he  influenced
by  the  ostentation  of  learning  ?  He  suddenly  cast  aside  all  that  he  had
been  taught  by  Gamaliel,  or  acquired  through  long  years  of  study,  and
took  up  the  opinions  of  fishermen  of  Galilee,  whom  he  had  scarcely  ever

1  Luke  iv.  1.  iii.  and  2  Cor.  xi.     Barnabas,  though  a  Cypri-

2  Gal.  i.  1.  This  retirement  into  Arabia  an,  was  a  Levite,  and  why  not  Paul  a  Jew,
is  itself  an  indication  of  his  independent  call.  though  a  Tarsian  ?  And  are  we  to  believe,
See  Prof.  Ellicott  on  Gal.  i.  17.  he  adds,  what  Ebion  says  of  Paul,  or  what

»  Acts  xxi.  9.  Peter  says  of  him  ?  (2  Pet.  iii.)

*  Epiphanius,  after  telling  the  story,  argues  ^  Lord  Lyttelton's  Observations  on  the  Con-

its  impossibility  from  its  contradiction  to  Phil.       version  and  Apostleship  of  St.  Paul.
