Let us now examine it as used by St. Luke.  And here almost every consideration makes against it, as an established title.  In the first place, the wisest commentators do not know who Theophilus was.  It has been supposed by many learned fathers, such as Epephanius, Salvian, and others, that St. Luke, in addressing his gospel to Theophilus, addressed it as the words, “excellent Theophilus” import, to every “firm lover of God,” or, if St. Luke uses the style of [51]Athanasius, to “every good Christian.”  But on a supposition that Theophilus had been a living character, and a man in power, the use of the epithet is against it as a title of rank; because St. Luke gives it to Theophilus in the beginning of his gospel, and does not give it to him, when he addresses him in the acts.  If therefore he had addressed him in this manner, because excellent was his proper title, on one occasion, it would have been a kind of legal, and at any rate a disrespectful omission, not to have given it to him on the other.  With respect to the term noble as used by St. Paul to Festus, the sense of it must be determined by general as well as by particular considerations.  There are two circumstances, which at the first sight make in favour of it as a title,[52]Lysias addresses his letter to the “most excellent Felix,” and the orator [53]Tertullus says, “we except it always and in all places most noble Felix!” But there must be some drawback from the latter circumstance, as an argument of weight.  There is reason to suppose that this expression was used by Tertullus, as a piece of flattery, to compass the death of Paul; for it is of a piece with the other expressions which he used, when he talked of the worthy deeds done by the providence of so detestable a wretch, as Felix.  And it will always be an objection to noble as a legal title, that St. Paul gave it to one governor, and omitted it to another, except he did it for the reasons, that have been before described.  To this it may be added, that legal titles of eminence were not then, as at this time of day, in use.  Agrippa had no other, or at least Paul gave him no other title, than that of king.  If Porcius Festus had been descended from a Patrician, or had had the statues of his ancestors, he might, on these accounts, be said to have been of a noble family.  But we know, that nobody on this account, would have addressed him as noble in those days, either by speech or letter.  The first Roman, who was ever honoured with a legal title, as a title of distinction, was Octavius, upon whom the senate, but a few years before the birth of Paul, had conferred the name of Augustus.  But no procurator of a province took this title.  Neither does it appear that the circumstance gave birth to inferior titles to those in inferior offices in the government.  And indeed on the title “Augustus” it may be observed, that though it followed the successors of Octavius, it was but sparingly used, being mostly used on medals, monumental pillars, and in public