« AnteriorContinua »
to which I here add, that it has been thought by several learned men, that it is no other than the history of the adulterous woman, which is in St. John's Gospel, chap. viii. 1. &c. So Erasmus', Sixtus Senensisp, Beza9, Grotius',-father Simons, Dr. Hammondt, and many others; and indeed the opinion is so probable, that I have not met with any thing that is urged against it, except that the woman mentioned by Papias was accused before our Saviour of many crimes, (étà mortais ápagTiais draßanbelons,) but the woman mentioned by St. John is only accused of adultery. This is urged by Baronius u and Dr. Whitby*; the latter of whom, for this reason, supposes, that Papias speaks of the woman of Samaria; “ who," saith he, “ was accused of many such sins.” But to this it is
easy to answer : either,
1. That the evangelists do not always relate all the circumstances of a story, as is well known; and so perhaps the woman might be accused of some other crimes, which St. John has not mentioned: or,
2. Adultery being a complicated crime, which included several others, might be very justly thus expressed by Papias in his Commentaries: or,
3. Perhaps it may not be an unjust translation, if we render Tornais dpapriais great sins, rather than many sins; and in this sense the words might be very justly used for the crime of adultery; and that the word monùs is thus often used to denote magnitude as well as multitude, I dare affirm, and am able to prove by many instances. However,
4. Nothing can be more extravagant than Dr. Whitby's conjecture, that the woman spoken of by Papias and that of Samaria were the same; because,” says he, “ they were both “ accused of many crimes;" for it does not appear that the woman of Samaria was ever accused before Christ of
crimes at all. See the history, John iv.
Upon the whole, I conclude, that the same history which was written by John was expounded by Papias; whence there
* Annot. in Joh. viii. 3.
par. 1. c. 7. p.67. and 71.
+ Annot. in Joh. vii. 53
u Annal. ad Ann. Chr. 99. N. 9. apud Simon. loc. cit.
* Annot. in Joh. viii. 9.
is further evidence of that which I have above proved, (Chap. XXVII.) that Papias did not use the Gospel of the Nazarenes.
Whether this history of the adulterous woman, in the eighth chapter of St. John, be a genuine part of his writing, or an interpolation out of the Gospel of the Nazarenes, I shall not take upon me here to inquire; that question belonging rather to the text than the canon of the New Testament. It is certain that it is wanting in the Syriac version, and most ancient manuscripts; of which see above, Chap. XVII. and Dr. Mill's notes on the place. He who has a mind to read more on this may consult Erasmus, Grotius, Beza, Simon, Hammond, Whitby, and especially Dr. Mill, in the places above cited.
X. A Discourse ascribed to Christ by Papias, and some others,
who conversed with St. John the apostle, preserved in Irenæus adv. Heres. lib. 5.
33. Prædicta itaque benedictio ad The aforementioned blessing (viz. tempora regni sine contradictione the blessing of Isaac on his son pertinet, quando regnabunt justi Jacob, Gen. xxvii. 27, 28.) unsurgentes a mortuis : quando et doubtedly relates to the times of creatura renovata et liberata mul
that kingdom, in which the righttitudinem fructificabit universæ eous shall reign after their resurescæ, ex rore cæli et ex fertili
rection from the dead; when the tate terræ : quemadmodum pres- creature being made new, and debyteri meminerunt, qui Joannem livered from bondage, (see Rom. discipulum Domini viderunt, au- viii. 21. &c.) shall produce prodisse se ab eo, quemadmodum de digious quantities of all sorts of temporibus illis docebat Dominus, food, through the dews of heaven et dicebat : Venient dies, in qui- and the fruitfulness of the earth. bus vineæ nascentur, singulæ de- Agreeable to which the elders, cem millia palmitum habentes, et who saw John the disciple of our in uno palmite dena millia bra- Lord, have related, that they chiorum, et in uno vero palmite heard him declare what the Lord dena millia flagellorum, et in uno- said concerning those times, viz. quoque flagello dena millia bot
That he said [the following words], ruum, et in unoquoque botro The days will come, in which there dena millia acinorum, et unum- will spring up vines, each of which quodque acinum expressum da- shall have ten thousand branches, bit viginti quinque metretas vini.
and every one of these branches Et cum eorum apprehenderit ali- shall have ten thousand lesser
quis sanctorum botrum, alius cla- branches, and every one of these mabit : Botrus ego melior sum,
branches shall have ten thousand me sume; per me Dominum be- twigs, and every one of these twigs nedic. Similiter et granum
tri- shall have ten thousand clusters of tici decem millia spicarum gene
cluster of grapes raturum, et unamquamque spi- shall have ten thousand grapes, cam habituram decem millia gra- and every grape, when it is pressed, norum, et unumquodque granum shall yield five and twenty meaquinque bilibres similæ claræ sures y of wine; and when any of mundæ ; et reliqua autem poma the saints shall lay hold upon one et semina, et herbam secundum of these clusters, another shall cry congruentiam iis consequentem : out, I am a better cluster than et omnia animalia iis cibis uten- thee, take me, and by me bless the tia quæ a terra accipiuntur, paci- Lord; in like manner, one grain fica et consentanea invicem fieri, of wheat shall bring forth ten subjecta hominibus cum omni thousand ears, and every ear shall subjectione.
have ten thousand grains, and every grain shall yield ten pound of neat meal, and in a like proportion to these shall be the product of apples and seeds, and herbs according to their kinds, and also all animals, who feed upon these foods, which are the produce of the earth, shall be peaceable, agreeing with each other, and in a most perfect subjection to men.
These things, says Irenæusz, are related by Papias, a hearer of John, and acquaintance of Polycarp, in the fourth book of his work. XI. Another History and Saying of Christ, in the same place
of the same author. Et adjecit dicens, Hæc autem And he farther adds, (viz. Papias), credibilia sunt credentibus. Et saying ; But Judas, says he, who Juda, inquit, proditore non cre- betrayed him, did not believe dente, et interrogante; Quomodo these things, but inquired, How ergo tales genituræ a Domino per- the Lord could bring about such ficientur ? dixisse Dominum, Vi- an increase? The Lord replied, debunt qui venient in illa.
They who arrive to that state (or
come to that kingdom) shall see. These two passages seem indeed probably enough to have been in some ancient apocryphal gospel, were it not that Ire
y The word metretas is used John ii. 6. and contained at least 180 gallons of wine. See Godwin's Moses and
2 Loc. jam cit.
næus intimates they were received by tradition; and Papias dealt much in such stories, as Eusebius informs usa. pose I need be at no pains to prove that these were not the words of Christ; and I cannot but wonder Dr. Grabe should make any difficulty of disbelieving the tradition b. I will only make two or three-brief remarks on this head.
First, That the doctrine of the Millennium, or Christ's personal reign on earth, seems to owe its original to Papias. So Eusebius expressly says“; and perhaps on this account we meet with the title of Papianistæ among the heretics in Justinian's Code, lib. 1. tit. 5. leg. 5.
Secondly, The generality of the ancient Christians fell into this opinion. So Eusebius expressly saith d.
. Thirdly, Papias seems to have borrowed it from the Jews; for it is well known, and even from the Gospels, that they had the expectations of a temporal kingdom from the Messias; and their oldest writings assure us, they expected such things in it, as Papias and his followers did. See Galatin. Arcan. Cathol. Verit. 1. 10. c. 4.
Fourthly, It seems very probable, that as Papias was the author of this doctrine, so of this passage ascribed to Christ, and calculated to support ite.
XII. A Saying ascribed to Christ by Justin Martyr. Dialog.
cum Tryph. Jud. p. 267. . Διό και ο ημέτερος Κύριος Ιησούς Wherefore our Lord Jesus Christ Χριστός είπεν, Εν οίς αν υμάς κα
hath said: In whatsoever [actions ταλάβω, εν τούτοις και κρινώ. I shall find you, by them also I will
judge you. This is a
ery noted passage, and has been not only cited in several of the ancient books, but taken notice of by several of the moderns, insomuch that for this reason Justin is reputed to have made use of the apocryphal books. “Every body “ knows,” says Casaubonf, “ that Justin Martyr and the other “ fathers have frequently appealed to apocryphal books;” but I know not one instance which has been assigned for the proof a Hist. Eccl. 1. 3. C. 39.
• See Dr. Whitby's Treatise of the b Spicileg. Patr. t. 2. p. 231.
Millennium. c Hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 39.
i Exercit. adv. Baron, Annal. p. 54.
of this, besides the passage which we are now upon. It requires therefore consideration, and the more, because Justin, being one of the first Christian writers whose works are extant, his rejecting all other books besides those now received is a mighty confirmation of our present canon. But I come to the passage, and to inquire what has been said of it.
1. Langus (Justin's Latin translator) proposes two conjectures concerning this passage, viz. either that it is a citation of some words of Christ which are in John v. Luke xii. and xix. and more regard had to the sense and meaning of those places than the words; or else, that it was taken out of some apocryphal book 8.
The last of these conjectures I shall presently examine largely. As to the first, viz. that the passage is an allusion to some words of Christ; I observe, that though perhaps it may not exactly be the case, yet it is not very absurd ; indeed I know not certainly what places in the evangelists Langus refers to, because he only cites the chapters at large, and not the verses; but I suppose he meant those, John v. 27—30. and those in Luke xix. 11–27. in which places there is a plain declaration that Christ, who is constituted judge, would be no respecter of persons, but deal to every man according to his works. And this is the undoubted meaning of the Saying in Justin. I say therefore, this conjecture is not very absurd, because the fathers usually cite thus compendiously. But there seems to be this against it, that the passage is in the same words in many of the fathers; and it is hardly probable that they should paraphrase the same way.
2. Dr. Caveh supposes it taken out of the apocryphal Gospel of the Nazarenes.
3. Dr. Grabe is of the same opinioni.
4. Dr. Fell, in his notes on the same Saying of Christ, which is in g. 40. of the little book of Clemens Alexandrinus, entitled, Quis Dives Salvetur, says, Clemens took it out of some apocryphal gospel
But against this opinion I argue,
& Vid. Sylburg. Annot. in Loc. Justin.
b Hist. Liter. in Matth. p. 8. i Spicileg. Patr. t. I. p. 327.