The Acts of the Apostles

WRITTEN OR ORAL SOURCES 237
additional information concerning the character and
practice of the Apostle—no matter whether it is to
his credit or not^—we have only to examine most
carefully whether this additional information is to
the point. In my opinion, it stands the test. More-
over, in judging of St. Paul and his controversy with
the Jewish Christians, people are always overlook-
ing the fact the liberty of all Christians was not
the subject of debate but the freedom of the Gentile
Christians from the yoke of the Law. There was no
question at all as to the practice of Jewish Christians
in reference to the Law, so far as their own persons
were concerned. As for the point of the defence
made before the Jewish tribunal, St. Luke may well
have added an accent or an emphasis which might
here so readily suggest itself to him. But the main
question, that St. Paul in his apology laid the
greatest stress upon his teaching in defence of the
Resurrection of the dead and of the Hope of Israel
(xxiii. 6y!; xxiv. 14 y!
; xxvi. 6y*. ; xxviii. 17, 20;
see, however, on the other hand, xxvi. 23), and
that he also emphasised points wherein he agreed
with the Pharisees as opposed to the Sadducees, may
very well be historical. Perhaps St. Luke might
with advantage to St. Paul have shown a little finer
ethical feeling in his reproduction of these speeches,
but in my opinion it is only a question of nuance.
Accordingly there is no justification for the assertion
* He loses somewhat in determination and in that consistency of
character wherein the eye is always sharply fixed upon a single
object, but he gains in freedom and in absolute devotion to the
interests of the mission.