therefore most likely is, that Paul received this passage by tradition from the apostles or disciples of Christ, with whom it is certain he frequently conversed, and from whom he received many accounts of fact; and perhaps it is not unlikely he was then told it, when he went up to Jerusalem from Antioch, with the charitable collections of the Christians there for the indigent brethren at Jerusalem, Acts xi. 30.

II. A Saying in the Epistle of Barnabas, Chap. IV. ascribed to Christ.

Sicut dicit Filius Dei, Resista

mus omni iniquitati, et odio habe

amus eaт.

As the Son of God saith, Let us resist all iniquity, and hate it.

III. A Saying ascribed to Christ in the same Epistle, Chap. VII.

Οὕτω, φησὶν, οἱ θέλοντές με ἰδεῖν, καὶ ἅψασθαί μου τῆς βασιλείας, ὀφείλουσι θλιβέντες καὶ πολλὰ παθόντες λαβεῖν με.

So they, saith Jesus, who would sée me, and arrive to my kingdom, must receive me through the suffering of many troubles and afflictions.

The celebrated archbishop Usher 9 imagines it an evidence of the great antiquity of this Epistle under the name of Barnabas, that in it are cited several of the apocryphal books, the very names of which are now quite lost. Mr. Dodwell' asserts not only of Barnabas, but Clemens Romanus, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, the supposed writers of the first century, or apostolic age, that they promiscuously made use of our Gospels and other apocryphal books. Dr. Mill follows him exactly, and is somewhat more sanguine in his expressions. They, i. e. the apostolic fathers," says he, "cite and allege, "without any difference, the apocryphal gospels and the inspired books of the apostles." One would imagine they had very clear proof for the support of these assertions, and that Barnabas, Clemens, Hermas, Polycarp, and the rest, had named, or at least referred to some such writings or books. But of this I dare aver, there is not one single instance in all those fathers

66

a See the remaining part of the preface to an edition of this Epistle, which he intended to have published, but was consumed at Oxford, with all his notes, only a few in the corrector's hand, by

the great fire there, 1643. See the pre-
face to Dr. Fell's edition.

r Dissert. I. in Iren. §. 39.
Prolegom. in Nov. Test. §. 144. &c.

to be found; and though some of them have some passages not in our Gospels, yet there is not any reason to conclude they were taken out of others, as I shall shew in the particular examination of them: and first as to those of Barnabas, which are now under consideration, only first observing that Mr. Fabritiust supposes also that both these passages were taken out of some apocryphal gospel. I shall consider each of them distinctly.

As to the first, it is evident it could not possibly be any saying of Christ, because it is delivered in the plural number, LET US resist all iniquity, and let us hate it. These, I say, could not be the words of Christ, because his commands are never delivered in the plural number, as relating to himself and to his apostles; besides, it is absurd in the nature of the thing for a person under the character of Christ to command himself, especially considering that he was incapable of all sin. If therefore they were not the words of Christ, it is plain they are no more than the author's explication of some words of his; and though he prefix the words, Sic dicit Filius Dei," So 66 says the Son of God;" it is plain that they cannot be taken in their literal sense, but must mean, This is the command of Christ to us, or he has spoken to this purpose, that we should avoid and hate all sin; or it is the doctrine which he has delivered"; and so indeed it is in many parts of our Gospels, and the main design of them all, and therefore was not taken out of any apocryphal book.

As to the latter passage, it was either taken out of that passage of Paul and Barnabas, Acts xiv. 22. where it is said they exhorted the churches to continue in the faith, and say, we must all, through much tribulation, enter into the kingdom of heaven: which are very near the same words with those of the supposed Barnabas under consideration, and so that is falsely ascribed to Christ, which was said by Paul and Barnabas; or else the passage is an allusion to several places of our Lord's discourses, in which he assures his followers, that, in order to become his true disciples, they must depend upon a variety of

+ Cod. Apocryph. Nov. Test. par. 1. P. 330, 331.

u See instances of the like sort of

speech in Heins. Exercit. Sacr. in Act. XX. 35.

troubles and sufferings, as he does Matt. x. 18, 22. Luke xiv. 27. John xvi. 33. and in several other places; and this I suppose no one can think improbable, who considers how frequent these sort of citations are in the writings of the fathers, and particularly in this Epistle.

But if after all it should be thought these passages in the Epistle of Barnabas were taken out of some apocryphal gospel; I will add, that seeing it is no hard task to prove (as I hope fully in the next part of this work to do) that this Epistle was not the composure of Barnabas, but of some other person under his name, the credit of our canon cannot thereby be hurt; for the most that can follow from thence is, that the apocryphal books have been cited by some heretical impostor of the second century.

It will not be foreign to my purpose to insert here, that the author of this Epistle under the name of Barnabas saith, ch. v. that when Christ chose his apostles, he made choice of such ὄντας ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν ἁμαρτίαν ἀνομωτέρους, who were exceeding great sinners: which, though it be not asserted in either of our Gospels, yet seems to be collected from thence, viz. where Matthew is said to be a publican, Matt. ix. 9, 10.; Peter desires Christ to depart from him, because he was a sinful man, Luke v. 8. and where he is related to have denied Christ, Matt. xxvi. 70. &c. Paul styles himself a persecutor and blasphemer, and the chief of sinners, 1 Tim. i. 13, 15. This is well observed by Origen against Celsus to have been the meaning of Barnabas in this place, though Jeromey, by mistake, ascribes this to Ignatius, and not to Barnabas.

IV. A Saying ascribed to Christ in the second Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians, Chap. IV.

He is supposed to have been the same Clemens, who is mentioned by St. Paul as his fellow-labourer, Phil. iv. 3.

1. Διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα ἡμῶν πρασ σόντων εἶπεν ὁ Κύριος· Ἐὰν ἦτε μετ ̓ ἐμοῦ συνηγμένοι ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ μου, καὶ μὴ ποιῆτε τὰς ἐντολὰς μου, ἀποβαλῶ ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἐρῶ ὑμῖν· * Orig. contr. Cels. lib. 1. p. 49.

1. For this reason, that we might do these things, the Lord hath said, Though ye should be joined to me even in my bosom, and do not observe my command

y Lib. 3. adv. Pelag. c. 1.

V. Another Saying ascribed to Christ and Peter, in the same

VI. Another Saying ascribed to Christ, in the same Epistle, Chap. VIII.

VII. Another Saying ascribed to Christ, in the end of the same

Chapter.

VIII. Another Saying ascribed to Christ, in the end of that

Epistle.

5. Επερωτηθεὶς αὐτὸς ὁ Κύριος 5. The Lord himself being τινός, Πότε ἥξει αὐτοῦ ἡ βα- asked by a certain person, when

σιλεία, εἶπεν· Ὅταν ἔσται τὰ δύο ἓν, καὶ τὸ ἔξω ὡς τὸ ἔσω, καὶ τὸ ἄρσεν μετὰ τῆς θηλείας οὔτε ἄρσεν οὔτε θῆλυ.

66

his kingdom should come? replied, When two shall be one, and that which is without as that which is within, and the male with the female neither male nor female.

The consideration of these, or some of these passages, influenced Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Mill to assert as above, that Clemens and the other apostolical fathers promiscuously and indifferently made use of ours and other apocryphal gospels. "Clemens,” says Dr. Mill2, "both in his former epistle to the "Corinthians, and the fragment of his second epistle to them, (if it be his,) takes some testimonies out of those gospels “which were in use among the Christians before the publish"ing of our present Gospels, and some, as it seems, out of "ours, but in a mixed, confused manner," &c. But as in this latter assertion he and the learned writer, whom he follows, are most apparently mistaken, each of the apostolical fathers having plainly made use of our Gospels, (as I hope to shew hereafter,) so also in the former, as will appear by a particular criticism on the passages here produced, which must be those which he refers to, there being no other in the epistle that can be supposed to be taken out of apocryphal books. And whereas the doctor asserts, that Clemens in his former Epistle to the Corinthians cites apocryphal gospels, he is most notoriously mistaken; there being not one passage in that whole Epistle that with any reason can be supposed, or I believe ever has been supposed, to have been alleged out of such books.

But as to the passages in the second Epistle here produced, of which I have collected five:

The first, which is in Chap. IV. appears most plainly to be taken out of St. Luke's Gospel, ch. xiii. 25, 26, 27. The latter part of the passage is in almost the very same words, and perfectly the same sense, in ver. 27. and the former part is no less evidently a contraction of ver. 25, 26. and a very common of citing in the writings of the fathers. There is no need therefore to suppose this taken out of any apocryphal gospel; and I cannot but observe, that Dr. Mill himself, in another part of his work, viz. in his note on this place of Luke, (forProlegom, in Nov. Test. §. 139.

way