Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

his epistles, use expressions, denoting two codes, or collections, one of gospels, the other of epistles of apostles. Such volumes there were then, and may have been some good while before. I shall here remind my readers of a few other like instances. In the epistle to Diognetus, certainly very ancient, and by some ascribed to Justin Martyr, are these expressions: The fear of the Lord' is celebrated, and the grace of the prophets is known, the faith of the gospel ' is established, and the tradition of the apostles is kept.' By these last expressions denoting, as is reasonable to think, a volume of the gospels, and another of epistles of apostles. Irenæus speaks of the evangelic and apostolic writings in a passage, which will be alleged presently. Tertullian speaks of the sayings of the prophets, the gospels, and the apostles.' And in another place says: This I perceive both in the gospels, and the apostles.' I go no lower, my intention at present being only to allege a few writers of the earliest times.

с

3. As before shewn from Eusebius, they who in the reign of Trajan, about the year 112, travelled abroad to teach the Christian religion in remote countries, took with them the scriptures of the divine gospels.' Nor can there be any reason to doubt, that our ecclesiastical historian here speaks of the four gospels, so well known in his own time.

4. By Justin Martyr, about the year 140, in his account of the Christian worship, which is in his apology to the emperor and senate of Rome, the whole world was assured, that the gospels, which he calls Memoirs of the apostles, and their companions, were publicly read in the assemblies of Christians every Lord's day.

Certainly, the gospels were then well known, and had been so for some while before.

5. Tatian, who flourished some time before and after the year 170, composed a harmony of the four gospels. We have full assurance of it. Is not this sufficient evidence, that the gospels were then, and had been for a good while, generally known, and in common use? And does it not also afford reason to believe, that it was then, and had been for some while, an established, or generally received opinion among Christians, that there were four, and no more than four authentic memoirs or histories of Jesus Christ?

6. I forbear to allege any thing from Clement of Alexandria, Irenæus, or Tertullian, for shewing the notoriety of the books of the New Testament in early times, because I now insist only upon writers of the highest antiquity. But I shall take notice of some things, which we have in the accounts of the heresies of the second century.

However, that this argument may not be too prolix, I entirely pass by Basilides.

h

7. Valentinus is placed by Cave as flourishing about the year 120. By Basnage1 he is placed at the year 124. By Mill* between 123, and 127. And by Irenæus we are assured, that the Valentinians endeavoured to support their opinions from texts of the evangelic and apostolic scriptures, or of the gospels and apostles, that is, both parts of the New Testament and thatTM they argued especially from the gospel according to John.'

n

[ocr errors]

And Tertullian allows, that Valentinus used the books of the New Testament entire, without altering them, as Marcion did.

Mr. Wetstein says, the Valentinians rejected the Acts of the apostles. And he thinks this appears from Irenæus. But to me it appears manifest from Irenæus, that they received the Acts. For in this confutation of them, in his third book against heresies, he argues against them largely, first from the gospels, then from the book of the Acts, and lastly from the epistles of apostles. And Massuet, the learned Benedictine editor of Irenæus, allows, that according to that ancient writer, the Valentinians did not reject any books of the New Testament.

See Vol. i. p. 322, 323, and 324. and this Vol. p. 100, 101, 102. b See Vol. i. p. 351.

• Compendiis paucorum verborum, quot attinguntur edicta. Prophetarum, evangeliorum, Apostolorum? De Oratione cap. 9. p. 125. C. quoted Vol. i. p. 432.

See Vol. i. p. 336, and this Vol. p. 102.
See Vol. i. p. 345, and this Vol. p. 102.
See Vol. i. p. 354, 505, and this Vol.
h Hist. Lit. p. 50.

Proleg. num. 265.

d Ibid.

P. 103.

* Ann. 124. num. vii.

1 Και ου μόνον εκ των ευαγγελικων, και των αποςολικών πειρώνται τας αποδείξεις ποιείσθαι. Iren. l. i. c. 3. n. 6. p. 17. Hi autem qui a Valentino sunt, eo quod est secundum Joannem plenissime utentes, ad ostensionem conjugationum

suarum, ex ipso detegentur, nihil recte dicentes. Id. l. 3. cap. xi. n. 7. p. 190.

n Alius manu scripturas, alius sensus expositione intervertit. Neque enim si Valentinus integro instrumento uti videtur, non callidiore ingenio, quam Marcion, manus intulit veritati. Marcion enim exerte et palam machærâ, non stylo, usus est; quoniam ad materiam suam cædem scripturarum confecit. Valentinus autem pepercit; quoniam non ad niateriam scripturas, sed materiam ad scripturas, excogitavit. De Præsc. Hær. cap. 38. p. 246.

• Acta Apostolorum rejecerunt Valentiniani. Quod constat ex Irenæo. Hær. iii. 2. Wetsten. N. T. tom. ii. p. 455. Vid. Iren. contr. Hær. 1. 3. cap. xi. xii.

At ipsi Valentino nihil simile usquam adscribit Irenæus.

Irenæus, as we have just seen, says, that the Valentinians endeavoured to support their opinion's by the evangelic and apostolic scriptures. The Acts were included in this second volume of the New Testament, according to the method of the ancient Christians.

8. Heracleon, a learned Valentinian, is supposed by Grabe to have been contemporary with his master, Valentinus, and to have appeared about the year 123. However, he might continue a good while after that. Basnage speaks of him at the year 125. And Cave placeth him at 126. They who are so pleased, may recollect what was said of his age formerly.

с

d

Heracleon seems to have written commentaries upon several parts of the New Testament. Clement of Alexandria having quoted the words of Matt. x. 32, or Luke xii. 8, and of Luke xii. 11, 12, says: Heracleon explaining this place has these very words,' which I need not transcribe at present, though it be a valuable passage. There is in Clement' another short passage of Heracleon's commentary upon St. Luke.

g

Origen, in his commentary upon St. John's gospel, often quotes Heracleon. The passages of Heracleon's commentary upon that gospel, with Origen's remarks, are collected by Grabe. And from him they have been placed by Massuet in his appendix to Irenæus. The passages of Heracleon, quoted by Origen, are above forty in number, and some of them long.

'Heracleon's commentaries upon the gospels of St. Luke and St. John, are an early proof of the respect shewn to the books of the New Testament. And it may be reasonable to think, that others beside Heracleon, both catholics and heretics, published about the same time commentaries upon some of the books of the New Testament.

h

Origen has at once given us Heracleon's observations upon Matt. viii. 12, and Is. i. 2. Heracleon likewise received St. Paul and his writings. For he quotes as his the beginning of the twelfth chapter of the epistle to the Romans. Moreover Origen has given us Heracleon's interpretation of 1 Cor. xv. 53, 54.

I might add here some other things. But this is sufficient to shew that in the very early days of Christianity, the books of the New Testament were well known, much used, and greatly respected.

n

m

9. Marcion about the year 138, placed by some sooner, in 127, or 130, had, and probably in imitation of other Christians, a gospel, and an apostle, or an evangelicon, and apostolicon.

P

[ocr errors]

In the former, as is generally said, was St. Luke's gospel only, and that curtailed. But Mr. Lampe says, that ' Marcion did not reject the other gospels, though he preferred St. Luke's. This he infers from a passage in Tertullian, which seems to shew that Marcion did not reject St. Matthew's gospel.

Imo tum loco mox citato, tum lib. I. cap. viii. et ix. et alibi passim, satis significat, Valentinianos sibi coævos sic canonem scripturarum novo Evangelio auxisse, ut nihil quidquam, nullum librum integrum, nullam ejusdem partem, (quod Marcioni non semel exprobrat) ab eo abjecissent; sed vel parabolas Dominicas, vel dictiones Propheticas, aut sermones Apostolicas, ad hypothesim suam aptare conatos, calumniam intulisse Scripturis. Massuet. Diss. i. num. ix. P. xvii.

Spicil. T. I. p. 62. T. II. p. 69. et 80.

b Ann. 125. num. iii.

d Vol. i. p. 410. note

H. L.
p. 53,

• Τέτον εξηγέμενος τον τόπον Ἡρακλεων.

κατα λεξιν

φησιν. -Strom. 1. 4. p. 502. AD.
Vid. Eclog. Proph. ap. Cl. Al. p. 804. D. et Grabe Spic.
T. II. p. 85.
8. Spic. T. II. p. 85-117.

i

h Origen. Comm. in Joan. T. II. p. 256. C. Huet. καθ ̓ ὁ και ο αποςολος διδασκει, λέγων, λογικήν λατρείαν την τοιαυτην θεοσέβειαν. Ap. Orig. ib. p. 217. E. et Grabe Spic. p. 101.

k Ap. Orig. ib. p. 255. D. et Grabe. p. 110.

1 Vid. Pagi Ann, 144. n. iii. et Asseman. Bib. Or. T. I. p. 389 note (4.)

m Vid. Cav. H. L. p. 54. &c. S. Basnag. ann. 131. iii. -v. 133. iv. Mill. Prol. num. 306, 307.

• Adamant. Απο ποιων γραφων δείξαι ταυτα επαγγελλή; Marc. Απο το ευαγγελιο και το αποτολ8. Dial. contr.

[ocr errors]

Marcion. sect. 2. p. 54. Basil. 1674. p. 821. D. T. I. Bened.
Vid. et Epiph. H. 42. n. ix.

Et super hæc, id quod est secundum Lucam Evangelium circumcidens. Iren. 1. 1. cap. 27. 2. al. cap. 29.

Nam ex iis Commentatoribus, quos habemus, Lucam videtur. Marcion elegisse, quem cæderet. Tertull. adv. Marc. 1. 4. cap. 2. p. 503. Vid. et Epiph. Hær. 42. n. ix.

P Verum hinc quoque plus elicitur, quam voluit Marcion. Non enim asserere Marcion ausus est, Evangelia, quæ extra Lucam habemus, esse conficta et falso Evangelistis supposita. Nemo Patrum antiquiorum hujus criminis Marcionem accusavit. Id tantum voluit, Luca Evangelium, ductu Pauli conscriptum, reliquis Evangeliis præferendum esse.. Clarissima hæc esse puto. Et quod prætensionem interpolationis attinet, hujus insigne statim cap. 7, [lib. 4. contr. Marc.] exemplum affertur: Cæterum et loco et illuminationis opere secundum prædicationem occurrentibus Christo, jam cum Prophetam incipimus agnoscere, ostendentem in primo ingressu venisse se, non ut Legem et Prophetas dissolveret, sed ut potius adimpleret. Hoc enim Marcion, ut additum erasit. Cum enim hæc verba Matthæi v. 17, inveniantur, hinc inferimus, Marcionem Evangelium Matthæi non simpliciter negâsse, sed quæcumque erroribus ejus non patrocinabantur, pro lubitu erasisse. Atque ita proculdubio etiam cum reliquis Evangelistis egit. Lampe Proleg. ad Joan. Evang: 1. 2. cap. 1. n. iv. p. 136, 137.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

I shall add another from Isidore of Pelusium, where he says: Take the gospel [or the evangelicon] of Marcion, and you will presently see at the very beginning a proof of their impudence. For they have left out our Lord's genealogy from David and Abraham. And if you proceed a little farther, you will see another instance of their wickedness, in altering our 'Lord's words. "I came not," says he, "to destroy the law or the prophets." But they have made it thus: "Think ye, that I came to fulfil the law or the prophets? I am come to destroy, not to fulfil." Matt. v. 17.

It might be also argued from the dialogue against the Marcionites, that they used St. Matthew's gospel. But I forbear to allege any places in particular.

So that it may be reckoned probable, that Marcion did not reject any of the four gospels. But undoubtedly he made alterations in them, agreeable to his own particular opinion, under a pretence that they had been corrupted by some before his time.

с

Perhaps Marcion filled up St. Luke's gospel out of the rest, taking from them such things as suited his purpose. Tertullian says, that his gospel, or evangelicon, had no title. That may have been the reason of it. And we can hence conclude, that in very ancient times, among the catholics, the four gospels were entitled, and inscribed, with the names of the several evan-gelists. Which has been denied, or doubted of by some.

f

Marcion had also an apostolicon. In this were ten epistles only of St. Paul, and those diminished, at least some of them. Their order according to him, as we are informed by Epiphanius, was this: the epistle to the Galatians, the first and second to the Corinthians, to the Romans, the first and second to the Thessalonians, to the Ephesians, the Colossians, Philę. mon, the Philippians.

g

He received not any other epistles of St. Paul. It is supposed likewise, that he rejected the catholic epistles, and the Revelation. Whether he received the Acts of the apostles, I cannot say certainly: though some learned men think he did not receive them. But then it should be observed by us, that the Marcionite apostolicon was reckoned very defective by the catholic Christians.

h

And it may be inferred from the accounts which we have in the best writers of the most early ages, that Marcion was the most arbitrary, and most licentious of all the ancient heretics, in his judgment concerning the scriptures that should be received, and in his manner of treating such as were received by him. So that his opinion can be no prejudice to the genuineness, or the notoriety of any of those books of the New Testament, which were received by the catholics, and indeed by most heretics likewise. I shall place below a remarkable passage of Irenæus, where he says: • Marcion and his followers curtail the scriptures with great assurance, rejecting 'some entirely, and diminishing the gospel according to Luke, and the epistles of Paul, affirming those parts of them alone to be genuine which they have preserved.All others, who are puffed up with the science falsely so called, receive the scriptures, whilst they pervert them by 'wrong interpretations."

k

In another place he says, that Marcion alone had openly dared to curtail the scriptures."

* Ει προϊσχεται ὁ τῆς Μαρκίωνος συνήγορος βλασφημίας, το παρ' εκείνοις ονομαζόμενον ευαγγελιον λάβων αναγνωθι, και εύρήσεις ευθύς εν προοιμίω την ατοπίαν. Αυτήν γαρ την κατα γεσαν επί Χρισον απο Δαβίδ και Αβρααμ γενεαλογιαν απετε μεν. Και μικρον ύσερον προϊων αλλην οψει κακονοιαν. Αμει ψαντες γαρ την τε κύρια φωνην, Ουκ ήλθον, λέγοντος, κατάλυ σαι, τον νόμον, η τες προφητας, εποίησαν Δοκείτε, ὅτι ἦλθον πλήρωσαι τον νομον, η τες προφητας ; Ηλθον καταλυσαι, αλλ' wλypwoai. Isid. Pel. I. i. ep. 371.

b Vid. Tertull. adv. Marcion. 1. 4. cap. 4.

Occurrit primo loco Marcion et Marcionitæ, qui corruperunt libros N. T. resectis omnibus iis, quæ Judaïcæ religioni favere putabant, et contracto toto N. T. in duos codices, quorum priorem vocabant Evangelium, ex Lucâ maximam partem conflatum, et subinde ex reliquis Evangelistis integratum. Wetst. Proleg. N. T. tom. I. p. 79.

Contra Marcion Evangelio, scilicet suo, nullum adscribit auctorem; quasi non licuerit illi titulum quoque adfingere, cui nefas non fuit ipsum corpus evertere. Et possem hic jam gradum figere, non agnoscendum contendens opus, quod non erigat frontem, quod nullam constantiam præferat, nullam.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

a

And my readers may easily recollect, how severely Tertullian censures Marcion for altering the text of the scriptures, openly employing a knife, as he says, not a style, to render them agreeable to his erroneous opinions.

However, I think, here is full proof, that the books of the New Testament were well known, in Marcion's time, and before him: and that they were collected together in two parts or volumes, an evangelicon and apostolicon. He and other Christians had a gospel and an apostle. But theirs were fuller than his.

10. We might, perhaps, not unprofitably recollect here those passages of Eusebius of Cæsarea, where he speaks of the scriptures of the New Testament: some of which were universally received, others were contradicted: divers of which last, nevertheless, were received by many. The universally received by the sounder part of Christians, were the four gospels, the Acts of the apostles, thirteen epistles of Paul, one of Peter, one of John. It may be reckoned not unlikely, that all these had been from ancient time inserted by most Christians in their two volumes of the gospel and apostle. And, probably, divers of the other books, called controverted, or contradicted, were joined with the rest in the volumes of a good number of Christians. III. There are some observations of Mr. Henry Dodwell concerning the late forming of the canon of the New Testament, which cannot be easily overlooked, and seem to require some notice in this place.

d

1. He says, that the canon of the sacred books was not determined, nor what number of them should be of authority in points of faith, before the time of the emperor Trajan, who began his reign in the year of Christ 98.'

Ans. If hereby be meant all the books of our present canon, this may be true. But then it is a trifling proposition. For some of them were not written, or have been supposed by many not to have been written, till near the end of the first century. How then could they be sooner made a part of sacred scripture? or how could they be placed in the number of books, esteemed to be the rule of faith? But the first three gospels of St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke, and possibly the fourth likewise, St. John's, and many of the epistles of the New Testament, were well known before the reign of Trajan, even as soon as they were written. And wherever they were known, and by whomsoever they were received, they were reckoned a. part of the rule of faith.

[ocr errors]

2. The same learned man says likewise: the canonical scriptures of the New Testament lay hid in the cabinets of particular churches, and private persons, till the reign of Trajan, and perhaps till the reign of Adrian.'

But I presume we have now sufficiently shewn the falshood of this, and that the gospels, and other books of the New Testament, were written and published with a design to be read and made use of, and that they were soon divulged abroad, and not purposely hid by any.

3. Farther, says Mr. Dodwell: The epistles of Paul were well known soon after they ' were written. His many travels, and the mark of his hand at the end of them, occasioned

"this."

We readily acknowledge it. It is very true. We think also, that the gospels, the Acts, and other books of the New Testament, were well known soon after they were written: and that in a short space of time many copies were taken of them, and thus they were divulged abroad. The first three gospels were well known to St. John, and to many others, before he wrote his gospel. Which must have been written before the end of the first century, and, probably, a good while before the end of it.

4. The same learned writer, speaking of the apostolical fathers, Clement of Rome, Barnabas,

circumcidere Scripturas, &c. Iren. 1. i. cap. 27. n. 4. p. 106. al. cap. 29. Vid. ib. num. 2.

a See Vol. i. p. 431.

[blocks in formation]

ab eorum usu deinde caverent. Dodw. Diss. Iren. i. num. 39. in. p. 67.

Latitabant enim usque ad recentiora illa seu Trajani, seu etiam fortasse Hadriani tempora, in privatarum ecclesiarum, seu etiam hominum scriniis, scripta illa canonica, ne ad ecclesiæ catholicæ notitiam pervenirent. Ibid. num. 38, p. 66.

Sequuntur Epistolæ Paulinæ, quas a primâ usque scriptione celeberrimas fecere ipsius Apostoli tam crebræ peregrinationes, et nota ejus in omni epistolâ manus.-Proinde meminit eorum et Petrus, meminit S. Clemens, meminit Ignatius, et Polycarpus. Ibid. num. 41, p. 73.

a

Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp, says, they several times quote apocryphal books. And he so expresseth himself, as if he intended to affirm this of all of them.

To which I must answer, that so far as I am able to perceive, after a careful examination, there are not any quotations of apocryphal books in any of the apostolical fathers. They who are desirous of farther satisfaction therein, are referred to their several chapters in the first volume of this work, and to some additional observations in the Recapitulation of the second. part of the Credibility, which is in this volume.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

5. Once more. The same learned writer says, that before the reign of Trajan, the pseudepigraphal books of heretics had not been rejected. Nor had the faithful been cautioned not to make use of them.'

d

Which appears to me an observation of little or no importance. If those pseudepigraphal books were not in being before the reign of Trajan, how should they be rejected before that time? That they were not sooner in being, has been sufficiently shewn. They are the productions of heretics, who arose in the second century: who asserted two principles, had a disadvantageous opinion of marriage, and denied the real humanity of our Saviour. In that second century many pseudepigraphal gospels, Acts, travels, or circuits of apostles were composed. Which were afterwards made use of by the Manichees, the Priscillianists, and

some others.

But those pseudepigraphal books of heretics never were joined with the genuine writings of the apostles and evangelists. They were always distinguished from them, and were esteemed by all catholic Christians in general to be of little value, and no authority. As appears from our collections out of ancient authors, and particularly from the accounts given of those books by the learned bishop of Cæsarea at the beginning of the fourth century.

[ocr errors]

CHAP. XXV.

The Question considered, whether any sacred Books of the New Testament have been lost.

f

THERE is a question which has been proposed by some learned men: whether any sacred books of the New Testament, or any epistles of apostles and evangelists, written by Divine inspiration, have been lost? And some have taken the affirmative, particularly Mr. John Ens, and Mr. C. M. Pfaff, in a work published by him in the early part of his life. Herman Witsius likewise has argued on the same side in several of his works.

I. Here, in the first place, I observe, that some suppositions have been made, and propositions laid down by learned men, which may form a prejudice in favour of the affirmative side of the question, but afford no proof. Such things should not be advanced by fair disputants. As first, that the apostles of Christ were ever ready to serve all the exigencies of the

i

a Habemus hodieque horum temporum scriptores ecclesiasticos luculentissimos, Clementem Romanum, Barnabam, Hermam, Ignatium, Polycarpum.-Sed et apocrypha adhibent iidem aliquoties, quæ certum est in hodiernis non haberi Evangeliis. Ibid. n. 39, p. 67.

See this Vol. p. 102, 130, 131, &c.
See before, p. 464, note d

This Vol. p. 132, 133.

See Vol. ii. p. 370, 371, and this Vol. p. 130, 131.

f Et certe, pace et incolumi amicitiâ dissentientium id dictum sit, affirmativa nobis eligi debere videtur sententia, et concedi, quod multi divini libri perierint. Joh. Ens, Bibliotheca Sacra, cap. 4. sect. iv. p. 19. Ainst. 1710.

Itaque hoc misso, inspiciamus et rite perpendamus, quid probationi inserviat, ad evincendum, quod Apostoli plura exarârint scripta vere ovεusa et divina, quam nune extant. Id. ib. sect. vi. p. 22.

VOL. III.

8 Chr. Matth. Pfaffii Dissertatio Critica de genuinis Librorum N. T. Lectionibus, p. 46-48. Amst. 1709.

Coccejus asseveranter dicit, Judam, præter hanc epistolam, non scripsisse, neque necesse habuisse scribere, neque a Spiritu Sancto impulsum fuisse ut scriberet. Id mihi non videtur certum, imo nec probabile. Apostoli enim, quum universalis Ecclesiæ doctores et directores essent, et corpore ubique præsentes esse non possent, et frequenter sine dubie ab ecclesiis consulerenter, necesse habuerunt frequenter scribere. Non autem magis opus fuit omnes Apostolorum epistolas superstites manere, quam omnes sermones Christi. Sufficiunt quos habemus, ad perfectum canonem. Wits. Comment. in Ep. S. Jud. sect. xii. p. 463. Vid. Id. De Vita Pauli Apostoli. sect. 7. n. xi. sect. 8. n. xxi. et. sect. 12.

n. xvi.

i Prima observatio est, quod alacres et paratissimi fuerint

30

« AnteriorContinuar »