No judgment therefore can be pronounced in favour of a title by any analysis of the word.
[Footnote 50: [Greek: kralistos]] 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.