A CRITICAL HISTORY Of the TEXT of the New Testament WHEREIN Is firmly Establish'd the Truth of those Acts on which the Foundation of CHRISTIAN RELIGION is laid By Richard Simon Priest LONDON Printed for R. Taylor MDCLXXXIX THE PREFACE THe Church from the first and most early Ages of Christianity has been constantly furnished with some Learned Men by whose diligent care the Sacred Writings have been purged from those Faults which by the tract of Time have insensibly crept into them This kind of Labour which requires an exact knowledg of Books joyned with a strict enquiring into the Manuscripts is termed Critical in as much as it Judges and Determines the most Authentick Readings which ought to be inserted into the Text. By this means Origen acquired his Reputation not only in Greece but universally over the Eastern part of the World where the Bibles of his Correction are by the general consent preferred to all others St Jerom who may justly be stiled the Latin Origen has done very great Service to the Western Church by his Critical Correction of the Latin Bibles in Vse in those Churches Pope Damasus very sensible of his profound Learning obliged him to review the ancient Latin Version of the Gospels which was then in a very miserable Condition This look'd like too bold an Attempt and seemed above the force of any private Person who could never hope to escape the Hatred of a multitude of Persons in the free exercising his Censure of Books which had long stood in the peaceable Possession of an universal Reputation In short though it might perhaps be for the benefit of the Church it was yet a dangerous matter to attempt a Reformation of those ancient Errors which derive their Authority from their Age. Pius Labor Hieron Praef. in Evang. ad Dam. sed periculosa praesumptio judicare de caeteris ipsum ab omnibus judicandum senis mutare linguam caneseentem jam mundum ad initia retranere parvulorum 'T is a pious Work says that ancient Father but very hazardous that he exposes himself to the universal Censure who teaches old Men to change their Language and reduce the decaying World to a State of Infancy But considering on the one Hand the powerful Protection and Patronage of so great a Pope and being on the other abundantly convinc'd of the manifest defect of that Translation which had prevailed universally in the West he resolved rather to expose himself to the Malice of an infinite number of ignorant Persons than fail in the discharge of his (a) Quis enim doctus pariter vel indoctus cùm in manus volumen assumpserit à salivâ quam semel imbibit viderit discrepare quod latitat non statim erumpat in vocem me falfarium me clamitans elle sacrilegum qui audeam aliquid in veteribus libris addere mutare corrigere Hieron Praef. in Evang. ad Dam. Duty He knew very well the charge of Innovation and Forgery that would be drawn up against him for endeavouring to alter those ancient Books which till his time had remained perfectly inviolable But here he encouraged himself by the Precedents of Origen Pierius and some other able Criticks who had performed the very same thing in the Greek Original which he then attempted in the Latin Copies of the Gospel For which reason he stoutly deposed all those which after his Reformation remained Bigots to the ancient Latine Version Revertimur ad nostros bipedes asellos Hieron Epist ad Marcell illorum in aure buccinâ magis quà m citharâ concrepamus Illi legant spe gaudentes tempori servientes nos legamus spe gaudentes Domino servientes But time did Justice to that Father And 't is a very difficult matter at present to find any Copies of that Latine Version which was then in Vse in the Western Church Yet enough there are extant to be read as a Memorial to convince those who defend Errors meerly out of Veneration for their Antiquity that St. Jerome has done the Church no small Service in Correcting and Reviewing the ancient Latine Copies according to the strictest Rules of Criticism This we endeavour to demonstrate in this work and that the most ancient Greek Exemplars of the New Testament are not the best since they are suited to those Latine Copies which St. Jerome found so degenerous as to need an Alteration Father Morin and after him Father Amelot who take such pride in those Noble and Venerable Manuscripts on account of their great Antiquity never mind that a thousand or twelve hundred years can never warrant them correct since there is evident proof of their Corruption before that time It was necessary that I should examine to the bottom the Circumstances of these Greek Texts which have been produced to this Time. It is not sufficient to consult those Manuscripts with design only to mark their Antiquity and quote the different Readings There is required a great deal of Discretion and Judgment otherwise we shall mistake those Books which are altered for Primitive and Apostolical Exemplars which is the Case of the two Authors we are about to name Erasmus who was well enough furnished with those sorts of Manuscripts is nevertheless guilty of very gross Errors He accuses the Greeks without reason for correcting in some places their Copies by those of the Latin after their Re-union with the Roman Church This groundless Accusation can proceed from nothing but the want of knowledge of the Criticisms of those Copies which he consulted Beza who was Master of a greater Collection of Manuscripts of the New Testament than Erasmus though assisted too by both Robert and Henry Stephens has not well distinguished the worth of his Manuscript Copies whence I found my self in some places obliged to correct his Errors This Man was so prejudiced by his Religion as to accuse the Italians of Corrupting the old Text and forcing it to a Compliance with their Opinions This Critical History contains divers other Remarks of the like Nature upon the Manuscript Copies of the New Testament both in Greek and Latine My principal aim is to write a Supplement to the Defects of those who compile the different Readings out of the Manuscripts without distinguishing the Good from the Bad. To which intent it is necessary to read a great quantity and nearly examine them in a Critical manner This Art whose difficulty appears formidable to some Divines in this Age made part of their Occupation of some Ladies in St. Jerome's time Who not content to read the Scripture in the Vulgar Tongue dispersed among the People they diligently enquired after the correctest Copies learning those very Tongues in which they were writ I assert nothing which cannot be maintained by the Letters of those Pious Ladies and the answers of that Learned Father who has had oftentimes a difficult Task to satisfie those Questions they propose on matters purely Critical St. Jerome had advanced that the Apostles had never
of Justin and Irenaeus who lived some little time after that Book was Composed ought to be preferred to the Opinion of those Authors He further affirms (u) Non videtur propter parvam aliquam aut etiam magnam dissimilitudinem rationis scribendi in universum ac styli ab aliis ejusdem Joannis scriptis longè diversi generis debere aut posse dubitari quin ejus sit opus maximè cùm simul adsint tot alia testimonia conjecturae ut illi ipsi qui prorsus negarent ejus esse illudque rejecerunt coacti fuerint fateri à quopiam conscriptum fuisse qui persuadere voluerit istum ipsum Joannem illud conscripsisse Soc. ibid. that as to the difference of Stile betwixt that Work and those others which were written by St. John this Objection does not oblige him to give those Reasons which prove it to be St. John's since they appeared so convincing to those very persons who rejected the Book that they were forced to acknowledge that it was written by a Man who endeavoured to persuade others that St. John was the Author thereof This last Observation seems to be more subtil than solid a crime that is pardonable in the Unitaries who never applyed themselves to the study of the Ancient Ecclesiastical Authors In the last place the Commentaries on the Apocalyps made by the Calvinists are undeniable proofs that they do receive it into the number of Divine and Prophetical Books Besides they would be very sorry to be without that Prophecy Beza made a Discourse Treating expresly on that Subject by way of Preface to his Notes on that Work where he answers the Objections which Erasmus had published to diminish the Authority thereof That which he had not observed as to any other Books of the New Testament Calvin fearing that he should make himself ridiculous by his false Expositions of a Book that is so very obscure has taken the best side by not publishing any Commentary on the Apocalyps His example had no influence on his Followers for many amongst them did with a Prophetical tone lowdly recommend to the World their own Visions upon that Book Besides the Books of the New Testament which we have hitherto spoken of and that are generally received in all the Churches as Divine and Canonical some others have been read in many Churches which yet never had the same Authority Nevertheless it has so fallen out that those who have made Catalogues of the Sacred Books have not always observed this distinction For they have placed all of them in an equal rank for Books of the Holy Scripture There have been also some Fathers who quoted some Books of this sort as if they had been truely given by Divine Inspiration But it is easie to find even by the Writings of the Fathers that those Works were approved by none but particular persons whose Opinion cannot reasonably be looked upon as a Law. If I had not resolved to confine my Discourse to the Books of the New Testament which are generally approved of in all Churches I would have insisted at large on those other Books but I am obliged to keep within the limits of my first purpose I shall only observe that in a certain Catalogue of the Books of the Bible which is at the end of two very ancient Copies of St. Paul's Epistles there follows immediately after the Epistle of St. Jude (x) Judae Epistola Barnabae Epistola Joannis Revelatio Actus Apostolorum Pastor Actus Pauli Revelatio Petri. Catal. libror. Script S. ex Codd MSS. Bibl. Reg. S. Germ. the Epistle of Barnabas the Revelation or the Apocalyps of John the Acts of the Apostles the Book of the Pastor the Acts of Paul and the Revelation of Peter The number also of the Verses contained in each Book of the Bible is set down in the Catalogue And what is most of all observable is that the Epistle to the Hebrews is not comprehended therein It is nevertheless in those two Greek and Latin Manuscripts that are written with the same Hand as the rest of St. Paul's Epistles but it is placed by it self and after the Catalogue as if it did not belong to that Apostle In this matter they followed the Custom of some of the Western Churches CHAP. XX. The Objections of the Jews and other Enemies of the Christian Religion against the Books of the New Testament Inquiry is made if the Evangelists and Apostles made use of the Greek Version of the Septuagint in the Passages which they quote out of the Old Testament St. Jerom's Opinion upon the Matter That Father declared himself for the Hebrew Text of the Jews in opposition to that of the Septuagint THE Books of the New Testament having been maintained as well in general as in particular it is worth the while to examin the principal Objections that are made against those Books and at the same time against the Apostles who published them The Mahometans endeavour to evince the necessity of the coming of their Prophet from this that seeing the Canonical Books of the Jews and Christians are according to their Opinion wholly corrupted it was necessary that God should send a new Prophet upon the Earth to teach Men the True Religion But because they bring no solid reasons for the confirmation of what they alledge it is to no purpose to refute them The Jews and some Philosophers who are Enemies to the Christians have more particularly attacked the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles They have had the impudence to charge them with Forgery or at least with ignorance seeing as they object they have quoted the Books of the Old Testament otherwise than they are in themselves They further accuse them of annexing to the Passages they produce a sense that was very far from the mind of the Authors Hereupon they draw up the strongest objections they can against the Authority of the New Testament which of necessity must be answered As to the first Objections the Jews do suppose that when a publick Record is produced for confirmation of a Matter of Fact it is necessary that the very words of the Record be delivered in the same manner as they are in the Original or in faithful Copies but say they the Disciples of Jesus Christ have not done that For if the passages of the Old Testament which they have quoted in their Writings be compared with the Original Hebrew Text it will be found that in many places they bear a quite different meaning Whence they conclude that they are either chargeable with falshood or that their Writings have been altered and therefore that there is no credit to be given to them I answer this Objection that it was not necessary for the Apostles when they Preached the Gospel of Jesus Christ to make use of the Hebrew Bible On the contrary it was more for their purpose that they should make mention of the passages of the Old Testament so as they
were read in the Greek Copies that were in the Hands of the most part of the World. Very few of the Jews at that time understood the Hebrew Language whereas the Greek Language was spread through the whole Empire Since therefore Jesus Christ did not send his Disciples to Preach the Gospel to a handful of Learned Jews who understood the Hebrew but to all the Nations of the Earth the most part whereof spake Greek they ought not only to speak in that Language but also to report the passages of the Old Testament after the same manner as had been written for a long time in the same Language There was at that time a Greek Version of the whole Bible that had been made by Jews many Ages before and therefore could not be suspected And so the Evangelists and the Apostles could not justly be charged with falshood for quoting passages otherwise than they were in the Original since they made use of such Writings as were approved by the Jews and were in use amongst them It is true that if they to whom the Gospel was Preached had understood the Hebrew Language it had been better to quote the Original Hebrew than the Greek Version of the LXX because the Original ought always to be preferred to Translations But as things were then the Apostles acted most wisely in preferring the Greek Copy of the Bible to the Hebrew which was understood almost by none And therefore the Church from its first beginning had no other Scripture but the Ancient Greek Version and the whole Eastern Church the Syrians being excepted have no other at this day I do not think it necessary to prove that the Apostles in their Writings quoted the passages of the Old Testament according to the Greek of the Septuagint and not according to the Hebrew Text. It requires no extraordinary skill in both the Languages to make one capable of judging aright in this matter It is certain that (a) Crebrò dixisse me novi Apostolos Evangelistas ubicunque de Veteri Instrumento ponunt testimonia si inter Hebraicum Septuaginta nulla diversitas sit vel suis vel Septuaginta Interpretum verbis uti solitos Sin autem aliter in Hebraico aliter in Veteri Editione sensus est Hebraicum magis quà m Septuaginta Interpretes sequi Hieron prooem lib. 15. Comm. in Is St. Jerom once endeavoured to persuade the World to the contrary and to confirm his Opinion gave instances of some places of the Old Testament that were quoted in the New which yet are not as he alledged in the Original Hebrew But it is easie to judge by that Learned Father 's own words that he maintained that Opinion only to give the more Authority to a new Translation which he had made out of the Hebrew because the most knowing Men of his time did strongly oppose him as if he had designed to introduce the Jewish Religion into the Church It will appear therefore that St. Jerom in that place does give an answer to his Adversaries and endeavours as much as in him lies to make an honorable retreat Hieron ibid. Aemuli nostri doceant saith he assumpta aliquot testimonia quae non sint in Hebraeorum libris finita contentio est i. e. Let our Adversaries shew what testimonies are made use of that are not in the Hebrew Books and the Dispute is at an end I desire no other Witness of what I alledge but himself seeing he does establish for a general Maxim for all the citations out of the Old Testament that are not only made use of by the Apostles but also by their Disciples (b) Hoc autem generaliter observandum quòd ubicunque sancti Apostoli aut Apostolici viri loquuntur ad populos his plerunque abuti testimoniis quae jam fuerant in gentibus divulgata Hieron Qu. Heb. in Gen. That when the Apostles or Apostolical Men speak to the people they commonly make use of such testimonies as had been published before that time amongst the Nations That is to say of the Version of the Septuagint which being written in Greek was published amongst all those Nations which spoke the Language whereas the Hebrew Text was only read in the Jews Synagogues He proves by the same Principle that St. Luke when he wrote the Acts of the Apostles to declare to the Nations the first beginnings of the Christian Religion was to quote the Passages of the Old Testament in the same manner as they were in the Version of the Scripture which was before that time spread amongst the People There is therefore nothing so absurd as the Opinion of some Protestants who notwithstanding the agreement that is found betwixt the quotations of the Apostles and the Greek Version of the LXX maintain with no small Zeal that the Apostles reported the Passages of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew Text. They attribute that agreement to some Writers whom they suppose to have lived after the times of the Apostles and who according to their Opinion corrected the Version of the Septuagint in all such Passages as are quoted in the New Testament The Evangelists and the Apostles say they regarded the sense only and not the Words of Scripture If any one ask these Men the Reason why they maintain so strange a Paradox their answer will be but this (c) Quis credat spiritum Apostolorum spiritui Graeculi interpretis se subjecisse aut limpidos fontes coenosis Hellenistarum rivulis praetulisse ubi passim de capite aliquo Religionis adversus Judeos agebatur Apostolos relicto Canone Hebraeo Lesbiam Graecorum regulam usurpasse Auctor Diss apud Capp in qu. de loc parall that it cannot be imagined that the spirit of the Apostles should be subject to the spirit of a little Greek Interpreter and that they preferred the Streams to the Fountain by leaving the Hebrew Canon to follow an uncertain Rule especially when there was an occasion for defending the Fundamental Points of Religion against the Jews Thus some Protestants extreamly addicted to the Hebrew do argue agreeable to the Ideas they have framed about matters of Fact that are as clear as the day instead of examining the things in themselves Seeing Lewis Cappel has solidly refuted this Opinion which has not the least appearance of truth it will be to no purpose to spend time about it That Learned Protestant judiciously observed that the spirit of the Apostles is not subject to the spirit of an Interpreter (d) Piâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quadam sanctâ charitatisque plenâ prudentiâ Christianâ versionem tum receptam secuti sunt iis in locis in quibus parùm aut nihil omninò ad rem ipsam interest utrum textum Hebraicum an verò Graecam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Septuaginta versionem sequaris Lud. Capp qu. de loc parall pag. 450. but through a Pious condescendency and by a true Christian Prudence they followed the
Languages as seems almost impossible for one Man. 'T is not to be wondered that he has committed Mistakes having had the Misfortune to be brought up in the Church of Rome which uses the Holy Scriptures chiefly in order to corrupt them equalling if not preferring Traditions to them founding its Infallibility on its self being supported by the intricate Juggles of the Canonists and the Gibberish of the Schoolmen However if his Alloy be disliked this Advantage may be expected That the Learned of our Church which pays a due respect to the Scriptures and uncorrupted Antiquity and is accomplished with all kinds of Learning requisite will be hereby excited to refine on the Subject CONTENTS Of the First Part. Chap. I. THE Verity of the New Testament defended in general against the ancient Hereticks Reflections upon the Principle made use of by the Fathers to establish the Authority of these Books Page 1. Chap. II. Concerning the Titles that are at the Head of the Gospels and other Books of the New Testament whether these Titles were made by the Authors of these Books or whether they were since added pag. 12. Chap. III. Concerning Books that have been published under the Name of Jesus Christ and the Apostles Of several other Acts forged by the ancient Hereticks Reflections on the whole matter pag. 19. Chap. IV. The ancient Fathers have not produced the Originals of the New Testament in their Disputes against the Hereticks An Examination of Proofs that are brought to shew that these Originals have been kept in some Churches pag. 30. Chap. V. Of the Books of the New Testament in particular and first of the Gospel of St. Matthew The Original of this Gospel hath been written in the Hebrew Tongue which the Jews of Jerusalem spake at that time An Answer to the Reasons that are contray to this Opinion pag. 39. Chap. VI. The Jews of the Territory of Jerusalem at the time of Jesus Christ and the Apostles spake in the Chaldaick or Syriack Tongue An Answer to the Reasons that Mr. Vossius hath published against this Opinion At the same time several Difficulties are cleared appertaining to this matter pag. 46. Chap. VII Of the Sect of the Nazarenes and of their Hebrew or Chaldaick Copy of the Gospel of St. Matthew pag. 51. Chap. VIII Of the Ebionites Of their Copy of the Gospel of St. Matthew Of some other ancient Hereticks who have made use of this same Gospel pag. 72. Chap. IX Of the Greek Copy of St. Matthew and its Authority A Comparison of this Copy with the Hebrew or Chaldaick An Answer to the Objections of some Hereticks against this Gospel pag. 98. Chap. X. Of the Time and Order of every Gospel Some Greek Manuscript Copies are produced thereupon Of S. Mark and his Gospel which is commonly believed to be the second Of his Office of Interpreter to S. Peter pag. 83. Chap. XI In what Language S. Mark hath written his Gospel Of the twelve last Verses of this Gospel which are not found in several Greek Manuscript Copies pag. 91. Chap. XII Of the Gospel of S. Luke what hath obliged him to publish it since there were two others that had been written before his Of Marcion and his Copy of S. Luke's Gospel The Catholicks have also altered this Gospel in some places pag. 101. Chap. XIII Of the Gospel of S. John and of Hereticks that have rejected this Gospel Their Reasons with an Answer to them An Inquiry concerning the twelve Verses of this Gospel which are not found in some ancient Copies Several Greek Manuscript Copies are cited to clear this Difficulty Some Criticks have imagined without any grounds that the last Chapter of this Gospel did not belong to S. John. pag. 113. Chap. XIV Of the Acts of the Apostles that have been received in the Church Other Acts of the Apostles that have been forged pag. 126. Chap. XV. Of the Epistles of S. Paul in general Of Marcion and his Copy of these Epistles False Letters attributed to S. Paul. pag. 131. Chap. XVI Of the Epistle to the Hebrews in particular Whether it be S. Paul's and Canonical What Antiquity hath believed thereupon as well in the Eastern as in the Western Countries The Opinions of these later Ages concerning this Epistle pag. 142. Chap. XVII Of the Catholick or Canonical Epistles in general and in particular pag. 154. The Contents of the Second Part. Chap. XVIII A Critical Observation on a Passage in S. John's First Epistle Chap. v. ver 7. which is wanting in the most Greek Copies Eastern Editions and the most ancient Latin Copies The Preface to the Canonical Epistles in some Latin Bibles under the name of S. Jerom was not penn'd by that Father It cannot be proved that S. Cyprian had the Passage of S. John's Epistle in his Copy Page 1. Chap. XIX Of the Book of the Revelation What was the Belief of the Ancients concerning it The Hereticks that did reject it Their Reasons which are Examined There have been also Learned Catholicks of ancient time who have ascribed it to Cerinthus The Opinion of these latter times about the same Book pag. 14. Chap. XX. The Objections of the Jews and other Enemies of the Christian Religion against the Books of the New Testament Inquiry is made if the Evangelists and Apostles made use of the Greek Version of the Septuagint in the Passages which they quote out of the Old Testament St. Jerom's Opinion upon the matter That Father declared himself for the Hebrew Text of the Jews in opposition to that of the Septuagint pag. 25. Chap. XXI A Discussion of some other Objections against the Books of the New Testament The Evangelists and Apostles in the manner of their explaining the Passages of the Old Testament and applying them to the Messiah followed the Custom which then obtained amongst the Jews There are many Words in the New Testament which have a larger signification than they have in the Old and that can be attributed to nothing but to that usage and to a Tradition received amongst the Jews pag. 36. Chap. XXII A particular Examination of many Passages of the Old Testament cited by the Apostles in a sense that seems to be altogether foreign Some difficulties formed against their Writings are cleared some Principles are established which may answer the Objections of the Jews and the Emperor Julian pag. 46. Chap. XXIII Of the Inspiration of the Books of the New Testament A Refutation of the Opinion of Grotius and Spinosa The Cardinal of Perron has given a very bad Exposition of the Words of the second Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy Chap. 3. v. 16. which makes mention of this Inspiration The Disputes betwixt the Jesuits of Louvain and the Divines of the same place upon this matter Three Propositions of the Jesuits censured by the Doctors of Louvain and Douay A Defence of those Propositions against the Censure of those Divines pag. 59. Chap. XXIV An Examination of the Reasons that the Doctors of Louvain and Douay made use of in their Censure of the Propositions of the Jesuits of Louvain touching the Inspiration of the Sacred Writings A very free Opinion of a Learned Divine of Paris about the same thing pag. 71. Chap. XXV Spinosa's Objections against the Inspiration of the Books of the New Testam are examined pag. 80. Chap. XXVI Of the Stile of the Evangelists and the Apostles The Opinion of modern Writers and of the ancient Doctors of the Church upon this matter with many Critical Reflections pag. 84. Chap. XXVII Of the Language of the Hellenists or Grecians if that which bears that name be in effect a Language The Reasons of Salmasius against that Language do rather establish than destroy it The Greek of the New Testament may be called the Greek of the Synagogue the Jews Hellenists read in their Synagogues the Hebrew Text of the Bible as well as the Jews pag. 94. Chap. XXVIII A more particular Discussion of the Reasons alledged by Salmasius against the Language that is called Hellenistick Several Difficulties also relating to this matter are cleared pag. 103. Chap. XXIX Of the Manuscript Greek Copies in general and of those who have spoken of them Collections which have been made of divers Readings drawn from those Manuscripts Observations upon the whole matter The Hereticks have been accused sometimes but without any ground for corrupting the Books of the New Testament pag. 110. Chap. XXX Of the Greek Copies of the New Testament in particular The most ancient that we have at this day were written by the Latins and were used by them Those which were printed came from the Greek Churches The ancient Latin Version which was in the Churches of the West before St. Jerom were made by those first Copies which were not very correct Of the ancient Cambridge Copy why it does differ so much from other Greek Copies pag. 128. Chap. XXXI Of the second part of the Cambridge Copy which contains St. Paul's Epistles Examples of the various Readings that are in that second Part. Critical Reflections upon the whole matter pag. 144. Chap. XXXII Of other Greek Manuscript Copies of the New Testament Examples of the various Readings of those Manuscripts with Critical Reflections on those Differences pag. 156. Chap. XXXIII Of the Order of the Greek Manuscript Copies of the New Testament The Verses Chapters and other marks of distinction of those Copies The Canons which Eusebius added to the Gospels and the Use of those Canons pag. 175. FINIS
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 30. n. 17. boasted of this Name giving it out that they were poor in imitation of the Apostles the custom being in those times to sell their Goods and to lay them at their Feet This Name degenerated afterwards into that of a Sect which was a Branch of the Nazarenes and held certain particular Opinions but in the rest they agreed with them in the same Foundation of Religion as to every thing that concerned the Old Law which they kept equally with Christianity S. Epiphanius in the mean time will have it that there hath certainly been a Man called Ebion from whom the Ebionites took their original who lived at the same time with the Nazarenes and Cerinthians It may well be that this Father and all the others who have thought that there was indeed a Man named Ebion Author of the Sect of the Ebionites have had no better grounds whereon to establish this Ebion than a certain Spanish Historian who hath written the History of the Popes in his Language hath had in like manner to invent a Man called Hugo a Sacramentarian Arch-Heretick Hugo Haeresiarcha Sacramentarius (e) Hugo de quien se llaman los herejes de Francia Hugonotes Illescas lib. 6. de la Hist Pontif. fol. 453. from whom the Hereticks of France have been named Hugonots The same S. Epiphanius more exactly describes the original of these Sectaries whose beginning and first appearance he dates after the destruction of Jerusalem and at that time when the Primitive Christians that were called Nazarenes and were lately departed from this City came to dwell at Pella in the Province of Decapolis It appears from thence that the Ebionites are only an Off-spring of the ancient Nazarenes having nevertheless corrupted the purity and simplicity of the Faith of these primitive Christians Therefore they revised the original Hebrew of S. Matthew to make it more conformable to their Opinions It will not be amiss here to produce some Fragments of their Gospel which Epiphanius hath transmitted to us In the first place he saith in general (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Epiph. Haer. 30. n. 13. that the Gospel of the Ebionites was not entire but corrupted and mutilated They had taken out of it the Genealogy of Jesus Christ and all that follows to Chapter 3. of S. Matthew (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. ibid. beginning their Gospel with these words It came to pass in the days of Herod the King of Judaea that John came baptizing the baptism of repentance in the river Jordan who was said to be of the race of Aaron the priest the son of Zacharias and Elizabeth and all people came unto him The Baptism of our Saviour by S. John was related after this manner in the Gospel of the Ebionites (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evang. Ebion apud Epiph. ibid. After the people had been baptised Jesus came also and was baptised by John and as he ascended out of the water the Heavens were opened and he saw the Holy Spirit of God in the form of a Dove which descended and came towards him and a voice was heard from heaven saying thou art my beloved son in thee have I been well pleased And continuing (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evang. Ebion ibid. This day have I begotten thee and immediately a great light shone about the place and John having seen it saith unto him who art thou Lord And again a voice from heaven said unto him this is my beloved son in whom I have been well pleased and then John falling down before him said I pray thee Lord baptise thou me but he forbad him saying suffer it to be so for thus it becometh all things to be fulfilled We may judge by that which we have now produced of the Gospel of the Ebionites that the order of the words was not altogether the same as in our Copies and that there were besides some Alterations and Additions There is another Passage at the beginning of the Gospel from whence we may be able to take a better estimate thereof (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evang Ebion apud Epiph. ibid. There was a certain man Jesus by name of about thirty years of age who hath chosen us and being come to Caphernaum he entred into the house of Simon sirnamed Peter and opening his mouth he said When I passed along the lake of Tiberias I chose John and James the sons of Zebedee and Simon and Andrew and Thaddeus and Simon Zelotes and Judas Iscariot and I called thee Matthew sitting at the receit of custom and thou hast followed me I will then that you be twelve Apostles for a testimony unto Israel And John was baptising and the Pharisees came unto him and were baptised and all Jerusalem and John had his raiment os camels hair and a leathern girdle about his loins and his food was wild honey that had the taste of Manna as a cake dipt in oil S. Epiphanius here reproves the Ebionites for having corrupted the Gospel of S. Matthew in reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this alteration could have happened only in the Greek and not in their Hebrew or Syriack Copy wherein there is no such resemblance of words They must either have a particular Greek Translation which they had made for their own use or they must have adjusted ours to their Text. Furthermore these Sectaries were different from the Nazarenes with respect to the Holy Scriptures for whereas these received as hath been already observed all the Old Testament as it was in the Canon of the Jews the Ebionites on the contrary rejected all the Prophets They abhorred the Names of David Solomon Isaiah Jeremiah Daniel and Ezechiel they only adhered to the Pentateuch and they did not much regard that neither (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ebion apud Epiph. ibid. n. 18. What use said they can there be made of the Law after the coming of the Gospel And when they were asked why they had a veneration for Moses Abraham and the other ancient Patriarchs they answered That they therein followed the example of Jesus Christ It is probable that the Ebionites who received no other but the five Books of Moses and only considered Joshua in quality of his Successor were descended from some Samaritans who embraced Christianity in imitation of the Nazarenes Epiph. ib. n. 1. Thus Epiphanius hath observed that Ebion was infected with the Superstitions of the Samaritans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whereas they both retain the Old Law with the Gospel the Ebionites do only keep the Books of Moses because the Samaritans have never received any but these five Books as Canonical But the Nazarenes who passed from Judaism to the Christian Religion continued to read the whole Old Testament as they read it before in their Synagogues S. Epiphanius hath further remarked that these Ebionites
Clemens Alexandrinus hath placed it amongst the other Books of the Holy Scriptures but as it hath been already observed that this Father hath inserted in his Catalogue some Pieces that were not Canonical though they passed under the names of the Apostles it can only be inferred from thence that at least ever since the time of Clement this Epistle was attributed to the Apostle St. Jude When Eusebius makes mention of it in his Ecclesiastical History he doth not set it in the rank of counterfeit Acts but of those concerning which some Churches have doubted nevertheless there are none at this day that do not acknowledge it as Divine and Canonical It is intituled in the Syriack Copy which hath been Printed The Letter of Jude the Brother of James neither hath it any other Title in the Arabick Version published by Erpenius In the Arabick Printed in the Polyglott Bible of England is is Intituled The Catholick Epistle of the blessed Jude the Brother of the Lord. The End of the First Part. The Second Part will be Published in Five Days A CRITICAL HISTORY Of the TEXT of the New Testament WHEREIN Is firmly Establish'd the Truth of those Acts on which the Foundation of CHRISTIAN RELIGION is laid PART II. By Richard Simon Priest LONDON Printed for R. Taylor MDCLXXXIX A CRITICAL HISTORY OF THE New Testament PART II. CHAP. XVIII A Critical Observation on a Passage in S. John's First Epistle Chap. v. vers 7. which is wanting in the most Greek Copies Eastern Editions and the most ancient Latin Copies The Preface to the Canonical Epistles in some Latin Bibles under the name of S. Jerome was not penn'd by that Father It cannot be proved that S. Cyprian had the Passage of S. John's Epistle in his Copy THE Reflections which many Learned Men have made on that Passage in the First Epistle of S. John Chap. v. vers 7. have not discouraged me from examining it afresh and consulting the most part of the Greek and Latin Manuscripts that I could find about the same The Greeks at this day in their Copy entituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read as the Latin Church these words (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Joann c. 5. v. 7. For there are three that bear witness in Heaven 1 Joh. c. 5. v. 7. the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one Yet 't is hard to find among the Greeks any Manuscript Copies that have that Passage I speak not only of the Ancients but also of those of the latter times Erasmus alledged the Greeks had their Books more correct than the Latin Copies but he is mistaken as it shall appear by what follows in this Discourse 'T is much more probable that that Doctrinal Point was formerly written the Margin by way of Scolium or Note but afterward inserted in the Text by those who transcribed the Copies Such were my thoughts when I perused some of the Greek Editions and there is no less probability that it was supplied after the same manner in the antient Latin Copies which nevertheless happened not till after S. Jerom's time who is not the Author of that Addition which Socinus next to Erasmus had laid to his charge After the most diligent search in the King's Library and that of Mr. Colbert in which there are a great many good Manuscript Volumes I found no Copy that had that Passage in it tho I read seven of them in the Royal Library Codd MSS. Bibl. Reg. six whereof are marked 1885. 2247. 2248. 2870. 2871. 2872. Some of the Manuscripts have Notes but no Scholiast or Annotator does make mention of that Passage neither have I found it in five Manuscript Copies belonging to Mr. Colbert's Library Codd MSS. Bibl. Colb which are marked 871. 6123. 4785. 6584. 2844. Yet some of these Manuscripts are only in Paper and much later than the rest There is also one in 16 well written and I believe since the Impression Yet the Passage in question is not found therein any more than in the rest of the ancient Copies I could produce yet other Greek Manuscript Copies which I have seen whose various Readings I observed but that which most deserves our notice is that in the Margin of some of the King 's and Mr. Colbert's Copies there are small Notes set over against the said Passage which in all likelihood have slipped afterwards into the Body of the Text. Take an Example from the King's Copy marked 2247. over against these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is this Remark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By which we may perceive that the Author of the said Remark understood The Father the Word and the Holy Ghost to be signified by the Three Witnesses mentioned by S. John The Spirit the Water and the Blood And what was formerly written by way of Note passed afterwards into the Text as it often falls out In the same Copy over against these other words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Note is added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is One Deity One God. That Manuscript is about 500 Years old and there are but very few places therein that have Notes There is the like Remark in one of the Manuscripts belonging to Mr. Colbert's Library Numb 871. For besides these words that are set in the Margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One God One Deity the Scholiast has also added these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The testimony of God the Father and of the Holy Ghost This in my opinion is the original of the Passage in question which 't is very hard to find in the Greek Manuscript Copies tho at this day the read it in their Version This is much more likely than what Erasmus alledges that the Greek Copies he had occasion to inspect were much more correct than the Latin which obliged that judicious person to omit the forementioned Passage in his first Editions of the New Testament in which he was not altogether to be blamed not being obliged to insert in the Impression what he could not find in any of his Manuscripts He has nevertheless been charged with a design of favouring the Arrian Party by the omission James Lopes Stunica has mightily accused him for his unlucky rejecting the said Passage in his Edition (b) Sciendum est hoc loco Graecorum codices apertissimè esse corruptos nostros verò veritatem ipsam ut à primâ origine traducti sunt continere quod ex Prologo Beati Hieronymi super Epistolas Canonicas manifestè apparet Jac. Lop. Stun Annot. in Eras supposing that the Greek Copies had been corrupted in that place But this Spanish Critick We must in this place know that the Greek Copies are notoriously corrupted and that ours contain the very truth as they were translated from the Original who had read ancient Manuscripts does not quote any to justifie his own Sentiments He contents himself with an Appeal he makes to S. Jerome's Preface to the
Miracles of Jesus Christ are evident Proofs of his Mission And therefore if it should be supposed with them that the Passages we speak of are not always justly applyed it cannot be concluded from thence that the Christian Religion is built on a false Foundation That we may make a right judgment of the Reasonings of Jesus Christ and his Disciples in the Books of the New Testament we must have recourse to the practice of the Jews at that time and if it be proved that their manner of reasoning and applying to the Messias certain Passages of Scripture is agreeable to the usage of that time they cannot without great injustice be blamed They will be sufficiently acquitted of that which is charged upon them if we consult the ancient Books of the Jews especially the Chaldaick Paraphrases and the Medraschim or ancient Allegorical Commentaries They have in those Works attributed to the Messiah many Places of Scripture which seem to have a quite different sense if the Letter be only considered The Rabbins likewise give two senses to many Passages one of which is merely Historical and another that is more large which in some sort may be called Mystical or Allegorical although in effect it is as much literal in its own nature as the former Thus they expound the same Passage of David and of the Messias All their old Medraschim or Allegorical Commentaries which are the most ancient Expositions that they have of the Bible follow this Method Their Doctors never began to insist on the literal sense till they had occasion to dispute with the Christians and it was easie to make Answer to them according to no other Principles than those which they themselves had established Why then do they think it strange that the Evangelists and Apostles who came from amongst them should make use of the same Principles to oppose them Why do they perswade us that in the matter of the Messiah there ought to be no such Proofs used as are Founded on the Mystical Allegorical sense of Scriptures since they themselves have always observed that Method The truth is if the Jews be much press'd about those Passages of the Old Testament which they make use of to confirm the belief of a Messiah which they have placed amongst the Fundamental Articles of their Religion it will be hard enough for them to Answer those Objections that may be brought against them upon the point unless they have recourse to those Mystical and Allegorical senses which being Founded upon the Tradition of their Fathers ought to pass for real Proofs There has been a certain Rabbin amongst their ancient Doctors who absolutely denied that the Messiah should come because he did not believe that it was Founded upon the literal and evident Proofs of Scripture They did not for all that exclude him from their Communion by which it does appear that the Article was not yet at that time in the number of those they call Fundamental The Jews do renounce their Principle when they object against the Disciples of Jesus Christ that their Expositions are not purely literal but Allegorical and that there can nothing be concluded from an Allegory 'T is true that that which is meerly Allegorical cannot suffice as a positive Proof for the Confirmation of a Religion But when those Allegories are Founded on Tradition they may be used and applyed to Matters of Fact which are already agreed upon by that Tradition In this manner all the Objections of the Jews may be Answered without a particular enumeration of those Passages which they pretend to have been falsly applied to our Messiah in the New Testament for they cannot abdicate that Principle which is taken from their own Doctors and their Custom lest they themselves should renounce the belief of a Messiah to come Moses Bar-cepha a Syrian Author having considered this Truth (m) Sicut inter haereticos qui contendun minimè convenire ut Veteris Testamenti scripta mysticè atque aliter quà m de ipsis rebus interpretentur graviterque accusant eos qui contrà faciunt At qui si ita statuas multa ut consequantur absurda necesse est obfirmabitur Manetis Marcionis sententia qui dicebant Vetus Testamentum nequaquam ab auctore Deo Christi Patre esse Praetereà nisi in illo recondita fuerint arcana sensa unde potuere prisci Patres Prophetae aliique sancti viri intelligere Christum olim venturum Denique si ita cum illis haereticis sentimus profectò in Judaismum incidimus Mos Barcepha Comm. de Parad. part 1. c. 3. does put those in the number of Hereticks who alledge that the Old Testament ought not to be Mystically Explained but only Literally and according to the Historical Sense If that be so says that Author the Heresies of the Manichees and the Marcionites are thereby set up It cannot henceforth be shewn whence the ancient Fathers and the Prophets had the account which they gave us of the coming of the Messiah In a word he does assure us that that Opinion is mere Judaism To which it may be added that it is mere Sadduceism for the true Jews are all agreed that a Sense that is merely Literal and Historical separated from Tradition cannot in any wise confirm the Articles of their Religion This Principle is so true that the Antitrinitarians who refuse to receive the Traditions of the Catholicks in the Disputes betwixt them and who do only admit the Literal Expositions of Scripture without any dependance on Tradition do plainly see themselves obliged to acknowledge some other Sense than what is Literal when they are to enter into the Lists with the Jews This does plainly appear in the Works of Socinus Enjedine and of some other Unitaries In which they give evident proofs of the inconstancy of their Principle They did not foresee that whilst they framed certain Maxims against the Catholicks they did at the same time give Authority to Sadduceism and Manicheism Faustus one of the Heroes of the Manichean Party not finding in the Books of Moses any Passage which he could literally understand of Jesus Christ and otherwise perceiving that it was in plain terms asserted in the New Testament that Moses had written concerning Jesus Christ chose rather to say that the Writings of the Evangelists had been corrupted than to renounce his own Principle There was a greater Harmony manifest in his Reasonings and Maxims than in those of the Antitrinitarians who received Tradition in some things and in others did reject it They argue against the Jews in the matters of Religion after another manner than against the Catholicks seeing those things do consist in matters of Fact they cannot be proved merely by the light of Reason Tradition is likewise to be consulted And therefore so long as the Jews shall with bare Reasons oppose the Exposition of the Passages of the Old Testament which the Evangelists and the Apostles have cited in the New they
in any of the Prophets did believe (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Hom. 9. in Matth. that we ought not to involve our selves in the trouble of an endless search because there have been several Books of the Prophets lost which may be proved as he says by the History of the Chronicles The Author of the Imperfect Work on St. Matthew does observe that the Evangelist does not say (l) Dum dicit per Prophetas non per Prophetam manifestat quòd non certam auctoritatem Prophetae protulerit sed sensum Prophetarum colligens dixit aut fortè legerunt alios Prophetas ita dicentes qui non sunt nobis canonizati Auct Op. imp in c. 2. Matth. per Prophetam by a Prophet but per Prophetas by the Prophets to signifie that he did not mean the testimony of any Prophet in particular but only that it might be gathered from the Prophets in general He adds afterwards that there were probably at that time other Prophetical Books which were not placed in the Canon of the Sacred Writings The ground of this Answer seems to be that St. Jerome has in his Works made mention of some other Prophetical Books than those we have at this day and which were read by the Nazarene Sectaries who came from the first Christians of Jerusalem who were also called Nazarenes for whom St. Matthew writ his Gospel Nevertheless that Father had no recourse to this solution in his Commentaries upon this place where he plainly affirms the same thing with the Author of the Imperfect Work viz. That St. Matthew (m) Pluraliter Prophetas vocans ostendit se non verba de Scripturis sumpsisse sed sensum Nazaraeus sanctus interpretatur Sanctum autem Dominum futurum omnis Scriptura commemorat Hieron lib. 1. Comm. in Matth. c. 2. having cited the Prophets in general intended to shew that he made no mention of the words of any one in particular but only of the sense But seeing the word Nazarene does signifie Holy the Scripture does declare throughout that the Lord should be Holy. He does yet subjoyn another more particular explication and which appeared to be more probable as being founded on a Passage of the Prophet Esay Chap. 11. v. 1. (n) Possumus aliter dicere quod etiam eisdem verbis juxta Hebraicam veritatem in Esaiâ scriptum sit Exiet virga de radice Jesse Nazaraeus de radice ejus ascendet Hieron ibid. And there shall come forth a Rod out of the Stem of Jesse and a Nazarene vulg Branch shall grow out of his Roots I make no Question but that the Jews will condemn this Translation of the words of Esay as well as St. Matthew's citation because it is not in the Hebrew Nazaraeus Nazarene as St. Jerome has rendred it but netser which does signifie a flower as he himself had expounded it in the Version of that Prophet He likewise observed in his Commentary upon this place of Esay that the Hebrew word which does signifie Nazarene is written with the letter zain and that in this place it is written with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tsade where it does signifie a flower This critical Observation of St. Jerome upon the 11. Chap. of the Prophet Esay seems to destroy what he had observed in his Commentary upon the 2. Chap. of St. Matthew The truth is 't was the custom of that Learned Father in his Commentaries upon the Scripture rather to report that which he had read in other Commentators than to establish an opinion of his own And therefore 't is not surprising if we sometimes do find opposite opinions therein Nevertheless his Learning does afford us great help for finding out the sense of the most difficult Passages of the Sacred Writings The Opinion of those who believed that St. Matthew in that place had cited the Passage of Chap. 11. of the Prophet Esay seems in my opinion to be the most probable 'T is very likely that St. Jerome did apply it to the Nazarenes when he says in his Commentary upon that Prophet that the Learned amongst the Jews took it from that place Eruditi Hebraeorum de hoc loco assumptum putant Those Hebrews are the Sect of the Nazarenes who were called Hebrews and who were so in effect Seeing they read the Gospel of St. Matthew in the Chaldee or Syriack the allusion to the Hebrew word netser that is in Esay is better known in their Copy than in the Greek and it was also better perceived by those who had the Hebrew and Chaldaick Languages That we make a right judgment hereof that Passage of St. Matthew ought to be read in the Syriack Version which in that place should not differ from the Original Chaldee of St. Matthew But the Syrians do read these two words Nazareth and Nazarene alike with the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tsade And after this manner they ought in effect to be read in St. Matthew who intended not to signifie the Nazarites of the Old Testament whose name is written with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 zain He made a bare allusion according to the method of that time to the Hebrew word netser of Esay which does signifie a flower and which is written with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tsade as well as that of the City Nazareth 'T is of importance carefully to observe that the Jews do agree with the Christians that that Passage of Esay which speaks of that flower called in Hebrew netser is understood of the Messiah Which being known at that time to all the World St. Matthew who wrote in the Chaldee for the Jews of Jerusalem then newly converted who were accustomed to expositions of that nature made an allusion to this Hebrew word netser or flower 'T is but consulting the Jewish Talmud their Book entitled Zohar and their Ancient Medraschim or Allegorical Commentaries for we may there find the like Interpretations of Scripture to be extant founded on bare allusions and similitudes not only of words but even of letters If the Jews could but seriously reflect on all these considerations they would not brand with the title of either false or ridiculous the citation of St. Matthew who has say they perverted the words of the Prophet Esay to apply them to their Messiah For seeing that Evangelist writing for Jews who were enclining to embrace the Religion of Jesus Christ did follow the custom and usage that obtained at that time amongst them Unless we go back to that ancient custom we shall meet with great difficulties in the most part of the Passages of the Old Testament which the Evangelists and Apostles have cited in their Writings for the confirmation of their own Sentiments We ought to pursue this Method for answering the Jews solidly we are to represent to them the course their Fathers took which unless they renounce their Religion they cannot reject This Principle also may serve for the refutation of Julian's impious
were interpolations made therein than to attribute to the Apostles such things as they did not understand It is upon this supposed ground that the Manichees who found no express Passages in the Law of Moses that made mention of Jesus Christ rejected as false all those Places of the Pentateuch that were applied to him in the New Testament They did not consider that at the time of Christ and the Apostles there was a Mystical and Spiritual Sense approved of by all the Jews some Sadducees possibly excepted And with respect to this Sense the Writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles are to be Expounded And therefore they deceive themselves who pretend that there ought to be a Literal Sense in all the Citations of the Apostles especially in those which they bring in for Proofs It is true that a Passage of Scripture taken Allegorically cannot serve for a Proof but we speak here of such Allegorical Senses as were received and which were also founded on Traditions that were warranted by Authority They were therefore permitted to apply them to their Discourse and likewise to draw such Consequences from them as might promote their design in the same manner as the Pharisees made use of them in their Disputes against the Sadducees Those Allegorical Senses prove nothing for their own confirmation but suppose a belief already established upon which they were founded It is probable that Theodore de Mopsueste Expounded the Psalms and the Prophesies according to this Method and that he had regard to nothing when he was condemned as a favourer of the Jews but the Literal and Historical Sense which he gave to those ancient Prophesies They will not consider the Application he made thereof with the whole Church to the Messiah according to a Spiritual and Mystical Sense If we believe Facundus there is no justice done to that great Man who had a perfect knowledge of the Sacred Writings (q) Eum dicunt evacuasse omnes in Christum factas Prophetias quod Manichaeorum erroris est Fac. pro def tri cap. Conc. Calc lib. 9. c. 1. They accused him of destroying the Prophesies that related to Jesus Christ by an error like to that of the Manichees But he shews the falshood of this accusation by producing the very words of Theodore taken out of his Commentaries upon the Psalms Quod autem saith Facundus nec evacuet omnes in Christum prophetias palam est quia rursus in ejusdem Psalmi expositione dicit c. Whence he concludes (r) Non ergo Theodorus Judaicae impietatis arguendus est tanquam hominem putaverit Christum cùm potiùs Judaeos irrideat Fac. ibid. That it was hard to make Theodore pass for an impious person who believed with the Jews that Jesus Christ was a mere Man seeing he vigorously defended the contrary This is no place to inquire if Theodore was unjustly condemned as Facundus does assure us I have only made mention of the Passage that I might shew that great Men have of a long time acknowledged two Senses of Scripture as we have already made evident It is certain that the Christian Religion is founded on that of the Jews The Christians have this in common with them that they adore the same God and that they believe a Messiah promised in the Writings of the Old Testament which they receive equally And therefore the Christians who Expound those Writings in a Literal and Historical Sense cannot be blamed as if they favoured Judaism in exclusion of the Christian Religion seeing they acknowledged a second Sense called Spiritual and Mystical which they apply to the Messiah This latter Sense is the same that the Jews call deras In a word it is impossible to arrive at a perfect knowledge of the Christian Religion and the Principles upon which it is established so long as that of the Jews is not known to which the former does owe its Original Celsus Porphyrius Julian and the Jews have brought some other Objections against the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles The Principal is that which is drawn from the Genealogy of Jesus Christ Recorded in a different manner by St. Matthew and St. Luke They alledge that besides that these two Evangelists do not agree they have delivered manifest falsities But this aspersion has been so clearly wiped off by many Commentators upon the New Testament and also in the Volumes that purposely have been written for that end that it is needless to insist on it I shall only observe in general that it is easie to make answer to the Jews upon such objections as are drawn from Genealogies When they bring against the Christians the difference that is betwixt our Evangelists and the Books of the Old Testament their Mouths will be stopped if we shew them that there is no less in this matter betwixt the Chronicles which they attribute to Esdras and the rest of the Historical Writings of the Old Testament Their Rabbins who could not reconcile things that appeared so remote from one another are forced to own that the same Genealogies which are written in a different manner were taken out of Records that did likewise differ And may not we also affirm that the Evangelists Collected the Genealogy of Jesus Christ out of such Records as were amongst the Jews at that time but are not extant at this day And therefore it is better to leave the things as they are than to judg rashly of them or correct that Genealogy upon bare conjectures CHAP. XXIII Of the Inspiration of the Books of the New Testament A Refutation of the Opinion of Grotius and Spinosa The Cardinal of Perron has given a very bad Exposition of the Words of the second Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy Chap. 3. v. 16. which makes mention of this Inspiration The Disputes betwixt the Jesuits of Louvain and the Divines of the same place upon this matter Three Propositions of the Jesuits Censured by the Doctors of Louvain and Douay A Defence of those Propositions against the Censure of those Divines I Have Treated elsewhere of the Inspiration of the Sacred Writings in general But seeing I only Treated of them occasionally and by way of Answer to some Objections which were brought against the Critical History of the Old Testament I shall here Handle it more particularly with respect to the Writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles It is the common Belief of the Jews that the Books of the Old Testament were written by Persons who were Inspired which Belief was transmitted from the Jews to the Christians Upon which occasion Origen affirmed (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. lib. 5. cont Cels that both the one and the other did equally acknowledge that the Sacred Scripture was written by the Spirit of God. The Christians have also extended that Inspiration to the Books of the New Testament There are but very few Criticks who are of the Opinion that there is nothing of Inpiration in Scripture but only in
cited any Passage in the Old Testament which did not perfectly agree with the Hebrew Text. Eustochium Hieron Prooem in lib. 16. Comm. in Isai who perfectly understood the Greek and Hebrew Languages opposed him with such powerful Arguments that he was forced to own himself almost overcome with the strength of her Objections Quod cùm audissem quasi à fortissimo pugile percussus essem coepi tacitus aestuare It is no strange thing to find those Ages when Barbarism reigned over all Europe neglect Critical Studies Then they wanted abundance of those helps which they now enjoy to pursue those Studies which are absolutely necessary to a perfect Knowledg of Divinity But that which amazes me is that in this very Age this Art should still remain in contempt and those Men be thought no more than Grammarians who apply themselves to it Besides we cannot but see the manifest Errors of some Divines in this Age who know not the true Laws of Criticism It is worth observing that the ancient Hereticks have been perpetually accused of having corrupted the Books of the New Testament and perverted them to their own sence That has often been thought a wilful and designed Corruption which proceeded only from the fault of the Transcribers or difference of Copies The Ecclesiastical Writers of the first Ages have not done that strict Justice to the Hereticks of their times in relation to the New Testament that they have given the Jews in the Disputes about the different manners of explaining the Old Testament Those pretended Corruptions presently vanish upon Examination of the ancient Manuscripts and the Original of the various Readings Wherefore in this Piece I have justified the Arrians Nestorians and the rest of the Sectaries from that Imputation of having falsified the Originals of the Evangelists and Apostles to maintain their Innovations We have also plainly evinc'd by some considerable Examples that the most Learned Criticks of our Age are not exempted from those Prejudices in their declaring too freely those Hereticks falsifiers of the Text. The case of some other Sectaries is not the same who declared themselves openly against the Writings of Christ's Disciples which they have corrected and altered according to their own Idea's of the Christian Religion Some daring to forge Supposititious Gospels and Acts the better to give authority to their Fopperies It would be very pertinent for the better Distinction of all the Genuine Pieces of the New Testament to make a Collection of those ancient Acts and diligently examine them Wherefore we have not concealed any of those Arguments which those Hereticks or the other Enemies of Christianity have brought to destroy the Truth of those Books which were received by all the Catholick Churches But as it would be a pernicious thing to expose these ill things without administring Remedies too proper for the cure we have also produced the strongest Reasons which the Ecclesiastical Writers have brought against them We intreat the Protestants to make Reflection on these matters and observe those methods of the first Ages of the Church for establishing the Authority of the Sacred Writings They will find nothing impertinent in the Conduct Irenaeus Tertullian and the rest of the Defenders of those Writings did not object to the Enemies of the Christian Religion their private Spirit which perswaded them of the Divinity of the Holy Scripture but very substantial Reasons void of all such Fanaticism Tho they were sufficiently perswaded of the Divinity of the Holy Scripture they never objected to the Adversaries that it had imprest upon it such lively Characters of its Original that it was a very difficult matter not to acknowledg it when read with a Spirit of Submission and Humility Their Adversaries being Philosophers who consulted their natural Reason they opposed them from sure and indisputable Principles Again I thought in a Work of this nature not convenient to suppress the principal Objections of the Jews against the Books of the New Testament For although this miserable Nation is an Object of the contempt of the whole World yet has there appeared among them Men of great Address and Subtilty in the Disputes against the Christians which I have often found true in my own Experience when I have endeavoured to convince them by their own Principles Since their Plea for Prescription is better and their Pretensions are that the Disciples of Jesus the Son of Mary had no reason to change their Religion which was delivered them by the Fathers It is but necessary to examin what they object against the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles In this Critical History I have treated divers other important Questions And where I deviate from the Methods of the Divines of the School it is because I have found a more secure way I have employed all my strength to avoid the advancing any thing that is not grounded on authentic Records instead of which the School-Divinity teaches us to doubt of the most certain Our Religion consisting principally in Matters of Fact the Subtilties of Divines who are not acquainted with Antiquity can never discover certainty of such matters of Fact They rather serve to confound the Vnderstanding and form pernicious Difficulties against the Mysteries of our Religion Let it not seem strange to any Person that I recede from the Opinions which are generally received in the Schools and prefer to the Sentiments of whole Vniversities the new Opinions of some modern Divines which can hardly be taxed as novel when they are found conformable to the Ancient Doctors of the Church This I speak in reference to that Passage where I handle the Dispute which was formerly between the Divines of Louvain and Doway and the Jesuits of that Country concerning the inspiration of the sacred Books The Doctors of both Faculties censured the Propositions of the Jesuites of Louvain in a manner very injurious to the whole Society But after a due examination of the Reasons on which their grave Gentlemen founded their Censure I could hardly believe their Authority alone a sufficient Rule to oblige me to assent I propose Truth alone to my self in this Work without any Deference to any Master in particular A true Christian who professes to believe the Catholick Faith ought not to stile himself a Disciple of S. Austin S. Jerome or any other particular Father since his Faith is founded on the word of Jesus Christ contained in the Writings of the Apostles and constant Tradition of the Catholick Churches I wish to God the Divines of the Age were all of that opinion we then should not have seen so many useless Disputes which only prove the causes of Disorders in Church and State. I have no private Interest which obliges me to any Party the very name of Party is odious to me I solemnly protest I have no other intentions in composing this Work than the benefit of the Church and the establishing the most sacred and divine thing in the World. It is useless
they rejected the Writings of the Apostles against the Authority of all the Churches of the World and at the same time received the Apocryphal Books that had no Authority If any one continues this Father should oppose you and should make use of your own words that that which you alledge on your behalf is false and on the contrary that which is against you is true (m) Quid ages Quò te convertes Quam libri à te prolati originem quam vetustatem quam seriem successionis testem citabis Aug. ibid. what would you do How could you defend the truth of those Acts that you produce How could you prove their Antiquity not having any Witnesses in Tradition by whose Testimony they might be confirmed From whence he concludes (n) Vides in hac re quid Ecclesiae Catholicae valeat auctoritas quae ab ipsis fundatissimis sedibus Apostolorum usque ad hodiernum diem succedentium sibimet Episcoporum serie tot populorum consensione firmatur Aug. ibid. that it is absolutely necessary on this occasion to have recourse to the Authority of those Churches that were established ever since the primitive times of the Christian Religion and to the consent of Nations that have received the Books of the New Testament from the Apostles He observes further and more close to the purpose that if it were only disputed concerning the variety of Copies since they are but few in number it would be sufficient to consult the Copies of different Countries and if they did not agree in this point the greater number should be preferred before the lesser or the more ancient before the later Plures paucioribus aut vetustiores recentioribus praeferrentur But the Manicheans who judged not of the Truth of these Books but with relation to their own Ideas refused to submit to this Authority they consulted only their reason in matters of Fact wherein all Deference ought to be given to Authority therefore when any passage was urged to them that thwarted their Opinion they boldly affirmed that that part had been corrupted or that the Book wherein it was found had been composed by some Impostor under the name of the Apostles Faustus for example who avouched that after having diligently perused the Books of Moses he could not find therein any Prophecy that had any regard to Jesus Christ takes this method in answering the Texts of the New Testament Where express mention is made of these Prophecies Jesus Christ saith in speaking of himself Moses hath wrote of me Faustus answers to this Joann v. 46. that after a serious examination of this passage (o) Ratione cogebar in alterum è duobus ut aut falsum pronunciarem capitulum hoc aut mendacem Jesum sed id quidem alienum pietatis eraè Deum existimare mentitum Rectius ergo visum est scriptoribus adscribere falsitatem quam veritatis auctoritati mendacium Apud Aug. lib. 16. contra Faust c. 2. his reason obliged him to conclude either that it was false or that Jesus Christ had not spoken the truth and since it would be no less than impious Blasphemy to say that God could lie it would be more adviseable to attribute the falsification to the Writers themselves When it was demanded of this Heretick why he did not receive the Old Law and the Prophets whom Jesus Christ himself hath authorised in the New Testament by his words I am not come to destroy the Law or the Peophets Matth. v. 17. but to fulfil them he objected against the Testimony of S. Matthew because he is the only Evangelist that hath related this It is supposed saith he that this Discourse was delivered in the Sermon that Jesus Christ made on the Mountain In the mean time S. John (p) Testis idoneus tacet loquitur autem minùs idoneus Apud Aug. cont Faust lib. 17. c. 1. who was there present speaks not a word thereof and yet they would have S. Matthew who saw nothing to mention it He pretends that this hath been wrote by some other person and not by S. Matthew After this manner the Manicheans who sacrificed all to their Reason and almost nothing to Authority entirely destroyed the Books of the New Testament receiving them no farther than they were conformable to their Prejudices they had formed to themselves a certain Idea of Christianity after which they regulated the Writings of the Apostles They would have it that all that which could not be adjusted to this Idea had been inserted in their Books by later Writers who were half Jews Faustus saith Multa enim à majoribus vestris eloquiis Domini nostri inserta verba sunt Apud Aug. l. 33. cont Faust c. 3. quae nomine signata ipsius cum fide non congruant praesertim quia ut jam saepe probatum à nobis est nec ab ipso haec sunt nec ab ejus Apostolis scripta sed multa post eorum assumptionem à nescio quibus ipsis inter se non concordantibus Semi-Judaeis per famas opinionesque comperta sunt c. But S. Augustin represents to them in this very same passage that one must renounce common sense to argue after this manner on matters of Fact to which imaginary reasons ought not to be opposed (q) De quo libro certum erit cujus sit si literae quas Apostolorum dicit tenet Ecclesia ab ipsis Apostolis propagata per omnes gentes tantâ eminentiâ declarata utrùm Apostolorum sint incertum est hoc erit certum scripsisse Apostolos quod huic Ecclesiae contrarii haeretiot proferunt Auctorum suorum nominibus appellati longè post Apostolos existentium Aug. ibid. We cannot be certain saith he of any Book if once we call in question those Works that the Church that is extended throughout the whole World receives with a common consent and if on the contrary we authorise as Apostolical Books that dispute therewith and that carry the name of Writers who have lived a long time after the Apostles He charges them (r) Legunt Scripturas apocryphas Manichaei à nescio quibus fabularum sutoribus sub Apostolorum nomine scriptas quae suorum scriptorum temporibus in auctoritatem sanctae Ecclesiae recipi mererentur si sancti docti bomines qui tunc in hac vita erant examinare talia poterant eos vera locutos esse cognoscerent Aug. cont Faust lib. 22. c. 79. with making Fables and Apocryphal Works to pass for Apostolical Writings and he shews at the same time the falsity of these Acts because they have not any testimony of the Doctors of the Church that were then living He urgeth Faustus to prove what he hath alledged by Books that are Canonical and generally received in all the Churches Non ex quibuscunque literis sed Ecclesiasticis Canonicis Catholicis Aug. l. 23. adv Faus c. 9. This Holy Doctor calls this way
S. Matthaei Evangelium quod ipse descripserat ei indigitat atque Apostolum fidei auctorem se in patria habere ut adversariis repenat praecipit This is in a few words the discovery of this Vision of Bishop Anthimius who very opportunely caused St. Barnabas to appear tanquam Deum è Machina to oppose Petrus Fullo Patriarch of Antioch and that there might not remain any doubt of his Revelation he put into the hands of St. Barnabas the Gospel of St. Matthew Mr. le Mome a learned Protestant Mr. le Moine Prol. in var. opusc Gr. and well versed in the Oriental Languages assures us that it was written in Hebrew because St. Barnabas who had transcribed it for his own use was born a Jew and preached to those of his Nation But it is more likely that Anthimius who was not a Jew should forge a Greek one neither is it credible that it should have been publickly read in the Church of Constantinople if it had been written in Hebrew As for the deference that Baronius gives to the Testimony of the Monk Alexander Author of the Life of St. Barnabas this Cardinal is not very favourable to the said Monk in another part of his Annals where (i) Alexander Graecus auctor qui res Barnabae prosecutus est encomiasticè potiùs quam historicè c. Baron ann ch 51. n. 53. he speaks of him as an Inventor of Tales that hath not written the Life of this Holy Apostle as an Historian I could bring other Examples of the like Revelations that have as many Circumstances as that of Bishop Anthimius and yet for all this are never the more true Under the Reign of the Emperor Theodosius a Revelation was feigned to authorize the false Apocalypse that was attributed to S. Paul. It was also found under ground at Tarsus in Cicilia in the House of this Holy Apostle There were also a great number of Alexanders or Monks in Palestine that every where extolled this false Piece as if it had truly belonged to him whose Title it bore Soz. Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 19. But Sozomon who relates this History informs us at the same time that a Priest of the City of Tarsus who was a very old man had assured him that this was false Furthermore we do not find that the two greatest men of the Church I mean Origen and St. Hierom who have searched the ancient Copies of the Scriptures with so much care and diligence and have visited so many Churches in the East have ever spoken of Originals of the New Testament written with the hand of the Apostles which they would not have failed to do if there had been any in their times especially St. Hierom who consulted a very great number of Greek and Latin Copies when by order of Pope Damasus he revised the ancient Latin Version of the Gospels Where were then these pretended Originals It is true there was no talk as yet of the Revelation of Anthimius nor of the History of Monk Alexander This Father hath said well that the Latin Copies were all different one from another Tot enim sunt exemplaria penè quot codices Therefore (k) Hoc certe cum in nostro sermone discordat in diversos rivulorum tramites uno de fonte quaerendum est Hieron Praef. in Evang. ad Damas he judges it necessary in this great diversity of Copies to have recourse to the Original Greek from whence the Latin hath been taken but he makes no mention of these first Originals that Mr. Huet supposeth (l) Ex fide primigeniorum illorum exemplarium quae servabantur in Ecclesiarum tabulariis dirimebantur controversiae haesitantium dubitatio tollebatur D. Huet in Demonst Evang. pag. 642. primae edit to have been kept in the Archives of the Churches since the time of St. Ignatius by which saith this learned man they were regulated in their Controversies and Disputes The Jesuit Maldonat on the contrary proves by the same Passage of St. Ignatius (m) Illis primis temporibus ut ait Ignatius nonnulli erant qui adeò suspecta haberent omnia ut negarent se Evangelio nisi in Ecclesiae archivis invenirent credituros Maldon Praef. in Evang. cap. 2. that in these Primitive Apostolical times there were People who doubted of the truth of the Gospels at least if they could not find them in the Archives of the Church To conclude Tertullian and St. Augustin who have so vigorously disputed with the ancient Hereticks that destroyed the Verity of the Writings of the Apostles have never objected these Originals to them so that this is by no means necessary for the establishing of the Christian Religion as hath been above shewed CHAP. V. Of the Books of the New Testament in particular and first of the Gospel of S. Matthew The Original of this Gospel hath been written in the Hebrew Tongue which the Jews of Jerusalem spake at that time An Answer to the Reasons that are contrary to this Opinion IT is a constant Tradition founded on the general consent of all the Churches in the World that there are but four Gospels the first of which is that of S. Matthew Iren. l. 3. adv Haer. l. 11. Neque autem plura numero quà m haec sunt saith S. Irenaeus neque rursus pauciora capit esse Nevertheless there are found in these later times some Authors who have believed that S. Matthew is not the first that hath committed the Gospel of Jesus Christ to Writing They ground their Opinion on this Luc. i. 1. that S. Luke seems to accuse those of little care and exactness that had published Gospels before him and since this Accusation cannot fall on any of the three other Evangelists they conclude from thence that none of them had written before But we ought not to oppose an Inference that at most carries with it but a probability to the Testimony of all Antiquity Therefore Grotius (a) Refragatur vetustissimus librorum ordo apud omnes nationes refragatur traditio vetus Irenaeo Tertulliano testibus suffulta Grot. Annot. in c. 1. Luc. v. 1. rejects this Opinion as being contrary to the order of the four Gospels established at all times among all Nations and authorised by the most ancient Fathers Maldonat who attributes this Argument to Beza refutes it also with no other Reasons than that of Tradition and adds at the same time that (b) Si haereticis crederemus nihil in ipsa etiam Religione certum stabileque haberemus Maldon Praef. in Evang. c. 4. if we should refer our selves herein to Hereticks we should have no certainty in point of Religion It cannot be denied also at least without contradicting all Antiquity but that S. Matthew hath written his Gospel in Hebrew that is to say in the Language that the Jews of Jerusalem then spake that was called Hebrew and was either Chaldaick or Syriack (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pap. apud Euseb
seen in his time at Ephesus two Tombs of John. S. Jerom Hieron de Script Eccl. in Joann who often translates the words of Eusebius out of Greek into Latin hath also made this same Remark Reliquae autem duae saith he speaking of these two Epistles of S. John Joannis Presbyteri asseruntur cujus hodie alterum sepulchrum apud Ephesum ostenditur He adds nevertheless that some thought that these two Monuments were of S. John the Evangelist Nonnulli putant duas memorias ejusdem Joannis Evangelistae esse He repeats this same History when he makes mention of Papias and saith (ſ) Hoc autem diximus propter superiorem opinionem quam à plerisque retulimus traditam duas posteriores Epistolas Joannis non Apostoli esse sed Presbyteri Hieron de Script Eccles in Papiâ that he relates it for the sake of a a great number of persons that believed that this second John to whom the simple name of Priest is given was the Author of these two Epistles and not the Apostle However Athan. in Synops the Author of the Synopsis of the Holy Scriptures attributes these two last Epistles no less to the Apostle S. John than the first And it seems that the Latin Church that reads it in her Offices under the same Name hath authorised this Opinion which is likewise conformable to the Testimony of the most ancient Writers of this Church Therefore the Name of this Apostle Beati Joannis Apostoli is retained in the Latin Title of these three Epistles in the vulgar Edition In the Syriack Copy of these two last Epistles that have been Printed in the Polyglott Bible of England the simple Name of John is put whereas in the first it is read of John the Apostle This seems to have been done on purpose to distinguish the Authors of these Epistles In the Arabick Copy published by Erpenius these three Epistles are ascribed to the Apostle S. John who is named in the Title of the two first John the son of Zebedee and in the Title of the third John the Apostle Lastly Euseb Hist Eccl. lib. 3. c. 25. there have been raised no lest doubts in the Primitive Ages of the Church concerning the Epistle of S. Jude than of the preceding Letters for this reason Eusebius hath reckoned it in the number of those Books of the New Testament that were not generally received by all the Churches S. Jerom who hath made the same observation (t) Judas frater Jacobi parvam quae de septem Catholicis est epistolam reliquit quia de libro Enoch qui apocryphus est in ea assumit testimonium à plerisque rejicitur Tamen auctoritatem vetustate jam usu meruit inter Scripturas Sacras computatur Hieron de Script Eccles in Judâ adds that that which gave occasion to reject it was the Apocryphal Book of Enoch which is cited therein And that this nevertheless hath not hindered it from being placed in the rank of the Sacred Books its Antiquity and Use having given it this Authority In like manner it hath been generally received by all the Churches as well Eastern as Western The Unitarians and Protestants also have put it amongst the other Canonical Books of the New Testament Luther hath nevertheless doubted of it as well as of the Epistle of St. James but they that follow his Opinion are so far from rejecting it at present that they use their utmost endeavours to put a fair Construction on their Masters words Calvin after he hath acknowledged that the Ancients have differed very much amongst themselves touching this Epistle Calv. argum de ses Comm. sur l'ep de Sainte Jude expresseth himself thus However because the reading of it is very profitable and it contains nothing but what is agreeable to the purity of the Apostolical Doctrine and in regard also that it hath been accounted Authentick for a long time amongst all good People for my part I willingly place it in the number of the other Epistles Cajetan hath inserred from the above cited words of St. Jerom (u) Ex quibus apparet minoris esse aucloritatis hanc Epistolam iis quae sunt certae Scripturae Sacrae Cajet Comm. in Epist Jud. that this Epistle is of less Authority than these Writings of the Apostles of the verity of which we have been certainly assured but this might have been properly said in those ancient times when it was not approved by all the Churches whereas when this Cardinal wrote there were none that did not receive it as Divine and Canonical and therefore it hath no less Authority than the other Sacred Books that are comprehended in the Canon of the Church Grot. Annot in Epist Jud. Grotius did not believe that this Epistle was written by St. Jude the Apostle because the Author hath taken upon him only the quality of a Servant of Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he saith moreover that (x) Si Apostolica fuisset habita haec Epistola versa fuisset in linguas omnes recepta per omnes Ecclesias Grot. Annot. in Epist Jud. if it were certainly esteemed Apostolical it would have been Translated into all Languages and received by all the Churches therefore he judgeth that it belongs to Jude Bishop of Jerusalem who lived under the Emperor Adrian But the first words of this Epistle do declare to us that it can come from no other hand than that of the Apostle St. Jude since he calls himself Jude the servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James For to say with Grotius that these words Brother of James have been afterwards added by the Transcribers that it might be believed that this Jude was certainly an Apostle is to beg the question they that would prove that this hath been inserted by the Transcribers ought to produce good Copies of this Epistle or certain ancient Acts on which we might rely Any Man that should have a mind absolutely to reject the Epistle of St. Jude might easily say with as much reason as Grotius that he that hath forged it hath put therein the name of Jude the Brother of James Therefore Arguments that are purely Critical ought never to be opposed against Acts that are ancient and generally received by all the World. It is true that the Epistle of St. Jude is less quoted by the ancient Doctors of the Church than the most part of the other Books of the New Testament and that it is not found in the ancient Copies of the Syriack Version But it can be only concluded from thence that it was not at first received in all the Churches it might however have been published ever since the Primitive times of the Christian Religion under the name of St. Jude the Brother of James and yet not be Translated into all the Languages of the Churches because it was then doubted in the most part of these Churches whether it was his whose name it bore
〈◊〉 Word by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Decree and the other words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the breath of his mouth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Power so that according to the Literal Sense of that Passage the World was Created by the Will and by the Omnipotency of God. (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Heracl Cat. in Psalm 32. This saith Theodore is the Sense which does here present it self and he does afterwards add that according to the true Theological Sense we ought to understand the Word of God and the Holy Ghost We may also call that a Theological Sense which was given to many Passages of the Old Testament by Jesus Christ and his Apostles because it was agreeable to the Theology of the Jews of those times chiefly to that of the Pharisees who Composed the leading Sect and the most received amongst the People The Jews at this day do altogether follow their Opinions The first Christians who received the Sacred Writings from them have likewise imitated them in their manner of Expounding those Books Michael Servetus did also in many places of his Works acknowledge this Mystical and Spiritual Sense which he makes to go joyntly with the Literal He does alledge that by that way Jesus Christ may be clearly found in the Books of the Law. He thinks that there is nothing but what is Natural in the Application that St. Paul made of these words Psalm ci Thou hast created the earth from the beginning to Jesus Christ as the Creator of Heaven and Earth Which words saith he though in the opinion of some they have but a forced Sense when they are applyed to Christ yet that is the proper Sense as the Apostle does shew Hebr. i. He does insist somewhat long on this Subject Expounding in the same manner many other Psalms which he understands of Jesus Christ although it seems that according to the Natural Sense they ought to be understood in general of God. The like is to be judged of other Psalms though they by reason of their ignorance of Christ do otherwise expound them This is no place for to examin the Consequences which Servetus does draw from his Principle I brought his words only to shew that the greatest Enemies of Tradition are obliged in their Expositions of many Passages of Scripture to acknowledg a Theological Sense which can be founded on nothing but Tradition and common Belief seeing they do agree that they who are ignorant of Jesus Christ put others Senses on the Scriptures Faustus Socinus did not find a more short or effectual way than this to answer the objections that the Jews and other enemies of the Christian Religion make against the Books of the New Testament He does suppose it to have been constantly agreed upon (r) Saepè Spiritus Sanctus unâ praedictione aut affirmatione plura complecti voluit idque ut semper mos praecipuè vaticinationum fuit ad rem ipsam praedictam occultandam saltem aliquâ ex parte donec ipsa res existeret Soc. Lect. Sac. that the Passages of the Old Testament that are cited in the New have had several Senses it being true especially as to the Prophesies which according to his Opinion were so Composed that the things foretold might be concealed till their accomplishment should happen He further says that we ought not to think variety to be surprising seeing the Jews who opposed the Evangelists and Apostles do agree to it But I question if that Unitary can convince the Jews of this Truth if he build on no other Principles than those which he makes use of in his Disputing against the Catholicks Indeed to speak exactly there is but one Literal Sense of every particular Passage of Scripture That other Sense which admits of a greater latitude and which the Christians are obliged to own is founded on the received and warranted traditions of the Jews Seeing the Jews have as well as the Catholicks approved of Traditions of that kind they cannot accuse the Apostles of having wrested the true Sense of several Passages of Scripture by false Interpretations unless they themselves do renounce the Expositions of their own Doctors Let us now particularly examin some of those Passages which the Emperor Julian and the Jews have objected against the Christians The first that presents it self is taken from those Words of the Prophet Esay Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bring forth a Son Is vii 14. and thou shall call his name Emmanuel St. Matthew has applied them to the Messiah who was born of a Virgin and has rendred them after this manner Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bring forth a Son and they shall call his name Emmanuel The Jews do accuse this Evangelist of an unfaithful citation and also a false application of the words of the Prophet They say first that the Hebrew word Alma does not signifie a Virgin as St. Matthew has rendred it but simply a young Woman whether she be a Virgin or not which they endeavour to prove from other places of Scripture St. Jerom does assure us on the contrary that the Hebrew word (ſ) Alma non solùm puella vel virgo sed cum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 virgo abscondita dicitur secreta quae nunquam virorum patuerit aspectibus sed magnâ parentum diligentia custodita sit Linguâ quoque Punicâ quae de Hebraeorum fontibus emanare dicitur propriè virgo alma appellatur Hieron Comm. in Is lib. 3. c. 7. Alma does properly signifie a Virgin and also a Virgin hid or shut up and that it has likewise that signification in the Carthaginian Language which derives its Original from the Hebrew The learned observation of that Father is very pertinent not only to justifie St. Matthew but also to shew that in the Septuagint the Hebrew word Alma is very well Translated And therefore seeing it not necessary to prosecute this matter with a long train of critical observations nor run through all the places of the Old Testament in particular where this word Alma is found it will suffice to bring against the Jews their own ancient Greek Version which St. Matthew or rather his Interpreter has followed It cannot be said that those Jews who lived so long a time before Jesus Christ did by a false Translation on purpose corrupt the Sense of that place The accusations with which they charge St. Matthew fall on those of their own Nation They say in the second place that in the Hebrew it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. they shall call but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou shall call which does regard the young Woman who was to call her Son Emmanuel St. Jerom declares that all the ancient Interpreters have rendred it according to the Hebrew thou shalt call But at the same time does add (t) In multis testimoniis quae Evangelistae vel Apostoli de libris veteribus assumpserunt curiosiùs attendendum est non
(d) Populus ille in Aegypto exulans Christi ibidem exulaturi figura dici potest sicut nunc corpus mystieum Ecclesiae corporis naturalis Christi figura est Christus populo in eo similis est quod uterque Dei filius appelletur Mald. Comm. in c. 2. Matth. v. 15. The People of Israel saith Maldonat in the time of their exile in Egypt may be said to be a figure of Jesus Christ who was also to be there in Exile as at this day the Mystical Body of the Church is a Figure of the natural Body of the same Jesus Christ who is like to Israel in this that both the one and the other is called the Son of God. The Jews could not deny this Mystical and Spiritual sense which is founded on Theology and their Ancient Doctors and whereof there are Examples in the most part of their Writings And therefore all that they object against the Authors of the New Testament does fall on their own heads seeing the Evangelists and Apostles have only imitated them In their application of the Prophecies to the Messiah they followed a Method which was approved by the Jews especially by the Pharisees All that does remain of the Jews in the World if we except the Jews Caraites who are in a very small number derive their original from the Pharisees who besides the Literal and Historical sense of Scripture do acknowledg a Sublime and Mystical sense Whence it is that those senses are frequently to be found in the Commentaries of their Rabbins Origen in his Writings against Celsus maintained with all his might that sublime sense of the Prophecies He calls that sense a Mystical Theory of the Prophets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He says (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Orig. lib. 2. cont Cels that the Prophets did not confine their thoughts to the Historical sense which came first in view nor to the Words and bare Letter of the Law. He does moreover establish this general Rule (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. lib. 2. cont Cels that the predictions of the Prophets concerning the Messiah are different some being Enigmatical and others Allegorical or of some other sort there being also some of them that are Literal It will suffice as an Answer to the Jews who in their disputes against the Christians do very much insist on the Literal and Historical sense of the Prophecies to bring that which Origen upon the like occasion answered Celsus who brought in a Jew speaking in his Writings He does reproach him (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. ibid. that he does not make the Jew speak pertinently and according to the Character he had given him because he put such words in his mouth as did agree rather to a Samanitane or Sadducee than to a true Jew I always followed this Method when at any time I met with such Jews as impugned the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles in the manner as I have already shewn For perceiving that they were pressed by the very Principles of their own Doctors they never returned me any Answer but this that the Mystical and Allegorical Interpretations of their Ancient Masters gave a great advantage to the Christian Religion When I ask'd them if they would renounce the Principles of their Rabbins to embrace those of the Sadducees or even of the Caraites they declared to me that they had a very great aversion to Men of that stamp This way is to be taken in our disputes with the Jews about Religion They are mightily puzzled when ever this Method is employed against them because we fight against them with the same Arms that they themselves make use of against the Sectaries whom we have already mentioned To return to the testimonies of the Prophets that are cited in the New Testament St. Matthew has in the same second Chapter of his Gospel applyed to the Messiah that which is written in Jeremiah Chap. 31. which seems to have no such meaning if it be expounded literally A voice was heard in Rama a voice of lamentation and great weeping Rachel weeping for her Children and would not be comforted because they are not (h) Hebraei de abductione duarum tribuum Judae Benjamin interpretantur nec dubium est ex circumstantiis Jeremiae quin de illis intelligatur per Rachelem tota regio duarum tribuum significetur Mald. Comm. in c. 2. Matth. v. 18. The Jews Jerem. 31.15 as Maldonat affirms in their exposition of this Passage of Jeremy apply it to the carrying away of the two Tribes and there is no doubt but that is the true sense and that by Rachel all the Cities of those two Tribes are to be understood If it be so the Jews may say why has your Evangelist expounded it of the murder of the Children that happened upon the occasion of your Messiah 'T is easie to make Answer that as to that there is nothing that is extraordinary and which is not agreeable to the expositions of their own Authors Aderas to use their own terms or an Allegorical sense does very well agree to the murder of those Infants The similitude that was between those two Events gave an occasion to St. Matthew to apply that which had been already accomplished in the time of the Tribes of Judah and Benjamin This was observed by Crellius after Maldonat referuntur à Matthaeo saith that Unitary ad caedem Infantium Bethlehemiticorum propter rei similitudinem quia id quod olim quidem impletum fuit in aliis in illis infantibus impletum fuit Faustus Socinus who also believed that the Jews stood upon the literal sense of that Passage of Jeremy observed that Tremellius and Junius alledged that it could not be understood literally any other way than according to St. Matthew's Interpretation (i) Verùm nulla hîc est absurditas si duplici sensu intelligantur praedictiones Veteris Testamenti esse prolatae Imò hoc videtur proprium consentaneum praedictionibus esse Soc. Lect. Sac. But in that saith he there is no absurdity if two senses be admitted in the Prophecies of the Old Testament It does also appear that it is proper and agreeable to those Prophecies The truth is if those two senses be not owned we shall give an occasion to the Jews to accuse the Evangelists and the Apostles for having falsly applyed the Ancient Prophecies We find in the same Chapter of St. Matthew another citation out of the Prophets in general which seems to be more Foreign than any that has been yet taken notice of That Evangelist saith that Jesus came and dwelt in a City called Nazareth that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet he shall be called a Nazarene Seeing he named no Prophet in particular the difficulty is to know what Prophet it was who foretold that the Messiah should be called a Nazarene St. John Chrysostome who had not observed those words
course that they might not obstruct the Preaching of the Gospel If it be so that Father adds why was Apollo who was an Eloquent Man sent to the Corinthians To which he answers that he was not chosen because of his Eloquence but because he was mighty in the Scriptures and vigorously refuted the Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Chrysostom does very much insist upon this to shew that the Apostles were rude in their Expressions and unskilful in the Greek Tongue (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys ibid. When the Greeks shall accuse saith he the Disciples of Jesus Christ for not using a Discourse more polished than what the commonalty did pretend to and for being altogether unlearned we ought to grant all this and to enforce the like charge more than they He also reproves those of his time who alledged that St. Paul was a Learned and an Eloquent Man. He makes mention of a Dispute which was held about it in his time betwixt a Greek and a Christian He thought it was a ridiculous thing in the Christian to maintain that St. Paul understood the Greek Language perfectly All (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys ibid. that Dispute went upon a comparison of St. Paul with Plato The Graecian endeavoured to demonstrate that St. Paul was an illiterate Man. The Christian on the contrary was so silly as to undertake to prove that St. Paul was more Learned and Eloquent than Plato But as that Holy Bishop observes the Graecian on that occasion said what the Christian ought to have said the Christian on the contrary made use of such words as would have better become the Graecian It is no new thing to find Christians defend the purity of the Stile of the Apostles If Henry Stephen Phochen and some others had lived in St. Chrysostom's time he would have found also in them the like Conduct which he would not have failed to brand with the title of ridiculous He would have said to them as to those who lived in his days (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys ibid. that the same thing therefore may not befal you and that the Greeks may not deride us in Dispute let us accuse the Apostles of being illiterate persons for such an accusation is their praise And the truth is the Power of the Gospel did not consist in the Knowledge and Eloquence of the Apostles but in the Efficacy of the Word of God. The Mahometans admire the greatness and majesty of the Stile of their Alcoran The Christians on the contrary who acknowledge the most part of the Writings of the New Testament to be but simple and mean as to the Stile are nevertheless persuaded of the truth of their Religion which was Preached by Men (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys ibid. who were obscure and illiterate (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys ibid. This is no matter of defamation St Chrysostom does add when we speak of such Disciples of Jesus Christ It is rather matter of their praise who being such persons made themselves renowned through the whole World. And therefore Origen made no scruple to give some examples of the simple and mean Stile of the Apostles and also to observe their Solecisms which some Fathers have done after him He says that (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. Philoc. c. 4. the Apostles who were persuaded of their mean capacity as to human literature to which they had never applied themselves did freely declare the simplicity of their Stile and that they were very little acquainted with the Rules of Discourse although they were very skilful in the matters of Religion The same Father does observe in many places of his Works that St. Paul's diction is full of Hyperbates nay even of Barbarisms which made him obscure St. Irenaeus (n) Quoniam autem hyperbatis frequenter utitur Apostolus propter velocitatem sermonum suorum propter impetum qui in ipso est spiritûs ex multis quidem aliis est invenire Iren. adv Haer. lib. 3. c. 7. who also acknowledged those Hyperbates in that Apostles Stile did attribute the same to the readiness of his Discourse and to the vigor of that Spirit which was in him I should never have done if I should particularly relate all the Testimonies of the Greek Writers concerning the simple and low Stile of the Evangelists and the Apostles They have not so much as excepted St. Luke though it is generally believed that he had a more exact knowledg of the Greek Language than the rest of the Writers of the New Testament The Greek Scholiasts who have written on St. John observe after St. Chrysostom in the Prefaces which they prefix to that Evangelist that St. John was (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Schol. Gr. in IV. Evang. ex cod MS Bibl. Colb of a pitiful Village called Bethsaida in Galilee the Son of a poor Fisher who was altogether ignorant of that which the Men of the World call good Literature himself a rude and plain Fisherman who could neither speak nor write The Cardinal Toletus who writ a judicious Commentary upon St. John's Gospel speaks no otherwise of that Evangelists Stile in a Summary prefixed to his Commentary There he affirms that St. John (p) Minùs quà m caeteri Evangelistae Graecè locutus est Hebraicis phrasibus abundat Vnde fit ut Hebraici sermonis peritia non minùs quà m Graeci ad sensum sententiarum assequendum sit necessaria Franc. Tol. argum Comm. in Joann does speak worse Greek than the other Evangelists that he is stuffed with Hebraisms and that to understand him it is necessary to know the Hebrew as well as the Greek He desires us to (q) Attendendum est maximam vim in particulis causalibus illativis continuativis caeterìsque ejusmodi esse positam ut interdùm una particula integrum sententiae sensum contineat ostendat Tol. ibid. observe well the Causal Particles the Illatives the Conjunctives and others of that Nature which have a great force in all his Discourse because the Sense does sometimes wholly depend on those Particles Enjedine a subtil Unitary did also enlarge his Observations on the Stile of that Evangelist which he looked upon as very obscure and very hard to be understood (r) Si obscuritas concisa abrupta minimè sibi cohaerens ex allegoriis constans oratio sublimitas dicenda est fateor Joannem esse sublimem Nam vix ullam Christi concionem ab eo relatam invenias quae tota non sit allegerica intellectu difficillima Georg. Enjed. prooem in Joann If we saith he ought to call that greatness of Stile which is an obscure Discourse abridged and interrupted without any connection and which is full of Allegories I avow that in that Sense St. John's Stile is sublime for he makes no Harangue concerning Jesus Christ which is not Allegorical and very difficult to be understood He does strongly
matter (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. tom 15. Comm. in Matth. has observed this great diversity of the Greek Copies which he attributed partly to the negligence of the Transcribers and partly to the liberty that Criticks assumed in correcting the Books of the New Testament adding to and taking away from it according as they judged it convenient Indeed if it be remembred what was briefly said of it upon the occasion of the last Chapter of S. Mark and of the History of the adulterous Woman Chap. 8. of S. John we shall find evident proofs there of this observation of Origen which would further appear if we had several Copies of that time which we might compare with those that remain whereas we have very few that are above a thousand years continuance and which as we shall shew in the next Chapter do very much differ from those others we have at this day They have likewise all those Errors that we have observed That Father does add in the same place that he had in some sort remedied the diversity of the Greek Copies of the Septuagint Version which he had revised and corrected according to the ordinary Rules of Criticism He likewise declares in what manner he had gone through that great Work that had all the success that he could hope for But he did not the like as to the Books of the New Testament unless it be that he carefully searched for the most correct Copies and made many Critical Reflections on sundry places according as occasions did present themselves for that purpose Neither do we find that the Ecclesiastical Writers who lived after Origen made a distinction of two sorts of Editions of the New Testament as they have of two Editions of the Version of the Septuagint They made a difference betwixt that which was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vulgar which was publickly used and that which was corrected according to the Rules of Criticism They considered this latter as the true Edition of the Septuagint altho it was as yet very imperfect and the most part of the Oriental Churches made use of it for correcting their Copies Yet for all this Origen as well as several other Criticks did correct some Greek Copies of the New Testament and S. Jerom does sometimes cite them But it does not appear that his Critical Observations were in the place of a Law as to those Books as they were as to an ancient Greek Version of the Old Testament If it had been so we should have had a Massore of the Greek Text of the Writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles in the same manner as the Jews had of the Hebrew Text of the Bible We should not find so many different Readings as there are at this day For every one would have exactly followed Origen's Copy as the Jews followed the Copy that was corrected by their Doctors whom they commonly called Massorets And from hence it is that we find not at this day any ancient Hebrew Copies of the Scripture amongst them For they reformed them all by the Massore and seeing they hold it for infallible they wholly neglected their ancient Books They are so much persuaded that the Books of the Law which they now read are perfectly conformable to the Original of Moses that they do keep in their Synagogues any old Roll or Volume The Jews of the Portuguese Synagogue of Amsterdam have at least fifty Rolls of their Sepher tora or Book of the Law which for the most part are very well written but they are all new If any ask for ancient ones they take no notice because they are prepossessed with a Belief that there can be no difference betwixt the ancient and the modern It is not so amongst the Christians who have had no Massorets whom they altogether follow in copying their Greek Copies of the New Testament And therefore we ought not to be surprised to find therein a much greater number of various Renditions than in the Hebrew Copies of the Jews I dare also be bold to say that this manifold variety ought to gain a greater authority to them than if there had been no such difference For it is impossible that a Book which has passed through so many hands should always continue the same unless they have corrected it and afterwards follow exactly that Correction as it happened to the Jews in respect of the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament It is the advantage of a Book that there have been several different Copies thereof to the end that a better Judgment may be given of the true Rendition And upon this account the Books of the New Testament are to be preferred to the most part of the others because the Christian Religion having spread into so many different Countries every Nation has Copies and Versions thereof These are the different Copies by which we are to be guided at this day because we have not now the first Original We shall with all possible exactness examine the Greek Manuscript Copies and also the most ancient Versions which have been taken from the Greek We are not to depend upon one Greek Edition more than upon another if it be not founded on better Manuscripts We shall prefer the Editions which together with the Text do contain divers Renditions of sundry Copies It is a rare thing to find Greek Manuscripts where such variations are noted in the Margin for seeing those Books are read in the Churches they observe commonly no other Reading than what is authorised by custom They did content themselves to mark them in distinct Works especially in the Notes which they joyned to the Greek Text of the New Testament And therefore besides the various Manuscript Copies we ought to consult the Notes which it is easie enough to find in good Libraries Many Learned Criticks of the latter Days when the Study of the Greek Language was re-established applied themselves carefully to this Labor Valla was the first who made search for the Greek Copies of the New Testament and also for the Latin. Laur. Vall. Annot in Nov. Test Edit Basil in 8. an 1526. He cites many of them in his Remarks which Erasmus took care to Print at Basle and altho he does much insist upon the little Niceties of the Latin Grammar yet we are obliged to him for the new Discoveries which he has made to us in a time when Barbarity did still reign in Europe It was by the force of his Example that Erasmus was induced to write Notes on the New Testament where he cites a much greater number of Greek and Latin Manuscripts which he had read There is also annexed to some Editions of his New Testament a Collection of divers Readings taken from the Greek Copies He seemed to be better versed than Valla in this sort of Reasoning especially as to his knowledge of Manuscripts Nevertheless his Critical Reflections do speak the Author's liberty more than their own evidence When he meets