Wright - BT300 W8 1788

386 The NEW and COMPLETE LIFE of our BLESSED LORD St. BARTHOLOMEW, the APOSTLE. WE learn from-the evangelical hiflory of the eleaion of the apoflles, that St. Bartholomewwas one of the twelve : but becaufe he is but jull'named, without any further notice taken of 'him, the gene- rality of writers, ancient and modern, fup- pofe that he lay concealed under the name of Nathanael, one of the firft difciples that Tame to CHRIST. Accordingly, we may obferve, that as St. John never mentions Bartholomew in the number of the apoftles, fo the other eva.ngelifis take no notice of Nathanael, probably as being the fame perfon under two different names : and as in St. John, Philip and Nathanael arejoined -together in their coming to CHRIST; fo in the reft ofthe evangelios, Philipand Bartho- lomew areconflantly put together; certainly for no other reafon, than becaufe they were jointly called to the difciplefhip: butwhat renders this opinion Hill more probable, is, that Nathanael is particularly mentioned amongst the other apoflles, to whom our Lord appeared at the fea of Tiberias after, his refurree-ion. It is not reafonable to fuppofe that Bar- tholomew was the proper name of this apoflle, any than Bar-jona was the proper name of Pete; but given to de- note his relative capacity, either as a fon' or a fcholar. If it refers to his father, he was the fon of Thalmai, a name not un- common amongft the Jews : if to his felt as a fcholar, he was of the fchool of the Thalmasans, fo called from their founder Thalmai, fcholar to Heber, the ancient mailer of the Hebrews. Now it was ufual for radian, out of a great reverence to their mafier, or firfl inflitutor ofthe order, to adopt his name, as Ben-ezra, Ben-uziel, 2 and the like : but which ever of thefe con- je&ures appears molt fatisfaflory to the reader, either will be fufficient for my purpofe, namely, to reconcile the difference there feems to be between St. John and the other evangelios about the name of this apoflle, the one calling him by his proper name, and the other by his relative or paternal appellation. St. Augufline indeed feemed to objefl, that it is not probable that our bleffed Sa- viour, who propofed to confound the wif- dom of this world by the preaching of illi- terate men, would chufe Nathanael, a doc- tor of the law, to be one of his apoflles : but this objea-ion will appear to be built on a fandy foundation, if we confider, that the fame argument is as flrong againfl Philip, ofwhole knowledge in the law and the prophets, there is as flrong evidence in the hillory of the gofpel as for that of Nathanael ; and may be urged with 1lilt greater force againfi St. Paul, whole abi- lities in human learning were remarkably great, and fewwere more complete mailers of the Jewilh law, than that great apoflle. This difficulty being removed, we Mall proceed to the hiflory of this apoole, and confider the names of Nathanael and Bar- tholomew as belonging to one and the fame, and not to two perlons. As to his 'delcent and family, force are ofopinion that he was a Syrian, and that he was defcended from the Ptolemies of Egypt; probably for no other reafon than the mere analogy and found of the name : but it-is plain from the evangelical hiftory, that he was a Galilean, St. John having exprefsly told us, that Nathanael was of Cana .in that part of Judea. His trade and

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=