At the time of the publication of the Summary View,--for the more complete and satisfactory demonstration of the relative insufficiency of the narrative in question, a short but critical sketch was, as herein stated, intended to be given, of the parts not before noticed of the _History of the Church_,--from the ascension of Jesus, being the period at which that narrative commences, to that at which it terminates,--to wit, about two years after the arrival of Paul at Rome, Acts 28: the history--to wit, as deducible from the materials which, in that same narrative, are brought to view: the duration of the period being, according to commonly received computations, about 28 or 30 years[A]: the author of "_The Acts_" himself,--if he is to be believed,--an eyewitness, during a considerable portion of the time, to the several occurrences which he relates. On this occasion, and for this purpose,--the history in question had been sifted, in the same manner and on the same principles, as any profane history, in which, in a series of occurrences mostly natural, a few, wearing a supernatural appearance, are, here and there, interspersed: as, for instance, in Livy's, and even in Tacitus's Roman History: on the one hand, the authority not being regarded as affording a sufficient foundation, for a belief in the supernatural parts of the narrative; nor, on the other hand, the sort of countenance, given to the supernatural parts, as affording a sufficient reason, for the disbelief of those, which have nothing in them that is unconformable to the universally experienced course of nature. In respect of _doctrine_, the conclusion is--that no point of doctrine, which has no other authority than that of Paul's writings for its support, can justly be regarded as belonging to the religion of Jesus,--any more than if, at this time of day, it were broached by any man now living: that thus, in so far as he is seen to have _added_ anything to the religion of Jesus, he is seen to set himself _above_ it and _against_ it: that, therefore, if this be true, it rests with every professor of the religion of Jesus, to settle with himself, to which of the two religions, that of Jesus and that of Paul, he will adhere: and, accordingly, either to say, _Not Jesus but Paul_,--or, in the words of the title to this work, _Not Paul but Jesus_.[B] FOOTNOTES: [A] To prevent, if possible, an embarrassment, which might otherwise be liable to have place on the part of the reader,--and therewith, the idea of inconsistency, as having place here and there in the work,--the following indication may be found to have its use.