cite or take any thing out of any apocryphal book; and therefore it is surprising he should do it here. He cites our present canon, and particularly our four Gospels, continually; I dare say, above 200 times; and is it likely he should appeal to an apocryphal gospel in this one place, and especially when he might have found that which was equally to his purpose in ours? I leave the reader, who is unprejudiced, to judge.

II. It is probable Justin Martyr took this passage out of the prophecy of Ezechiel, and that he did not himself prefix to it the words, Ὁ ἡμέτερος Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἶπεν, i. e. Our Lord Jesus Christ said, but only Kúpios elev, The Lord hath said; and that some scribe, ignorantly imagining these to be the words of Christ, inserted in his copy the words μérepos and Ἰησοῦς Χριστός.

First, For the proof of this, I appeal to the context, or series of Justin's discourse. In which a question is debated between Justin and Trypho, whether the Ebionites, or such who professed faith in Christ, and obedience to the ceremonial law, could be saved. Justin declares he thought they might, if they did not endeavour to pervert the Gentiles to their opin ion, but that those of the Jews who denied Christ, though they lived according to the Mosaic law, could not be saved without repentance in this life; for, says he, the goodness of God is such, that he will accept those who are truly penitent, as he declares by Ezechiel, but reject those who persist in their wickedness. Then follows the passage we are about, Wherefore the Lord saith; which also follows in Ezechiel in that place which Justin refers to; see Ezech. xviii. 26-30. And indeed it is remarkable, that this 30th verse is now in the Septuagint version more like the words of this passage than any of the preceding are to what Justin cites, as will appear by comparing them (Εκαστον κατὰ τὴν ὁδὸν αὐτοῦ κρινῶ ὑμᾶς, λέγει Κύριος). Nor would it be at all strange, if there were a much greater difference, considering how unlike the present copies of the Greek version are to those in Justin's time, and particularly to Justin's own copy of that translation; which every one who has read Justin cannot but observe with surprise; and those who have not may see in Vaillant's Dissertation concerning the places in the New Testament cited out of the Old, and Arch

bishop Usher's Syntagm. de Septuagint. Interp. c. 4. p. 42. &c. But,

Secondly, That which seems to put the matter past all doubt is, that Clemens Alexandrinusk citing the same passage, expressly cites it as the words of God the Father, and not of Christ, having just before also quoted the preceding verses in Ezechiel. This Dr. Grabe has also observed, which makes it somewhat unaccountable that he should in the very same paragraph suppose it taken out of the Gospel of the Nazarenes.

Thirdly, Considering the series of Justin's discourse, it would have been very absurd for him to have cited a saying of Christ to stop the mouth of Trypho, who was a Jew, and therefore would yield no regard to it, especially when he had several passages in the books of the Old Testament, which his adversary owned, to have produced, which were as much to his purpose, and really more particularly expressed his mind, than any words in the New.

XIII. A History of Christ's Baptism, related by Justin Martyr. Dialog. cum Tryph. Jud. p. 315.

Καὶ τότε ἐλθόντος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰορδάνην ποταμὸν, ἔνθα ὁ Ἰωάννης ἐβάπτιζε, κατελθόντος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ὕδωρ, καὶ πῦρ ἀν ήφθη ἐν τῷ Ἰορδάνῃ. Καὶ ἀναδύντος αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕδατος, ὡς περιστε ρὰν τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἐπιπτῆναι ἐπ ̓ αὐτὸν, ἔγραψαν οἱ ἀπόστολοι αυ τοῦ τούτου τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἡμῶν.

And when Jesus came to the river Jordan, where John was baptizing, as Jesus was descending into the water, a fire was kindled in Jordan. And when he came out of the water, the apostles of this our Christ have wrote, that the Holy Ghost did alight upon him as (or in the form of) a dove.

That which is peculiar in this relation, and not in our Gospels, is, that a fire is said to be kindled in Jordan, when Christ was going down into the river to be baptized; and something of the same nature we find there was in the Gospel of the Ebionites or Nazarenes, viz. that at Christ's baptism after the descent of the Holy Ghost, and the voice from heaven, a great light shone around the place. (See the passage at large out of Fpiphanius, in the foregoing Part, Chap. XXV. No. 11.) On is account some learned men have imagined this history to k In Lib. Quis Dives Salvetur, §. 40.

have been taken by Justin Martyr out of this apocryphal Gospel. Thus thought a certain learned friend of Mr. Dodwell1 and Dr. Millm; but herein they are most evidently mistaken, because Justin's account and that in the Ebionite Gospel do so very much disagree in circumstances. Justin relates, that as Christ was descending into the river, the fire was kindled, and then after that was the descent of the Holy Ghost, and the voice from heaven: on the contrary, this Gospel saith, that the light was not till after Christ had ascended out of the water, and the Spirit had descended, and the voice came down from heaven. Besides, if we look carefully into the passages, we shall easily perceive they are different, not only because of the disagreement, as has been said, in point of time, which there is between them, but because the subjects are quite different. The one speaks of a fire kindled in the river; the other of a great light encircling or shining around all the place; which are two things so different, that I suppose, if this had been observed, no one would have imagined that Justin took his account out of the Ebionite Gospel. But further, he who will be at the pains to consider what opinion Justin had of the Ebionites, and their scheme", will hardly persuade himself that father made use of their idle and silly apocryphal books. Nor is there any thing that I have seen to be urged on the other side, besides what Dr. Mill gathers from the words ygaÞav åñóσtoλ01, i. e. the apostles (speaking of several of them) wrote this, that Justin referred to the Gospel of the twelve apostles, which was the same with that of the Ebionites or Nazarenes. But it is easy to answer, that these words, the apostles wrote, respect only the latter part of the sense, viz. the Holy Ghost's alighting upon Christ in the form of a dove, and not the former, because the verb TπTνaι is in the infinitive mood, but the other verbs are in the third person; and for this reason Dr. Grabe°, from whom Dr. Mill borrowed this argument, rejects it, as not sufficient to prove the point. That therefore which seems most probable upon the whole is, that this circumstance at our Saviour's baptism was related by Jus

tin only as what he had received by tradition; and if I mistake not, this was founded upon that passage in three of our evangelists, viz. that the heavens were opened; by which I know not what else can be understood besides some lucid phenomenon in the air. Il semble Il semble que les nuages s'écarterent tout d'un coup, et qu'une flamme descendit de l'entre-deux. Au moins les hommes ne peuvent pas voir une autre ouverture du ciel, et l'on disoit communément, que le ciel s'ouvroit, lors que cela arrivoite: "It is probable that the clouds divided sud❝denly, and that a flame of fire descended from between them. "Otherwise men could not possibly see any opening of the “heaven; besides, we commonly say, the heavens are opened, "when there is such a phenomenon in them." Hence it might easily pass into a common opinion, that there was a fire at our Saviour's baptism; which, with the addition of one circumstance, is the same as Justin says.

It is necessary here to add, that this same history was also in the apocryphal book, entitled, The Preaching of Paul and Peter, in the passage above produced, Chap. XXX. No. 7. and seems to be referred to in the Latin poem of Juvencus upon the Gospels thus;

Hæc memorans vitreas penetrabat fluminis undas,

Surgenti manifesta Dei præsentia claret.

And Dr. Mill informs us also, that it is to be found in a very ancient manuscript at Paris.

XIV. A History of Christ, in his younger years, in Justin Martyr. Dialog. cum Tryph. Jud. p. 316.

Καὶ ἐλθόντος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰορδάνην, καὶ νομιζομένου Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ τέκτονος υἱοῦ ὑπάρχειν, καὶ ἀειδοῦς, ὡς αἱ γραφαὶ ἐκήρυσσον, φαινομένου, καὶ τέκτονος νομιζομένου· ταῦτα γὰρ τὰ τεκτονικά épya εipуáčeтo év ȧvoρúπosv, ἄροτρα καὶ ζυγὰ, διὰ τούτων καὶ

And when Jesus came to Jordan, and was reputed the son of Joseph the carpenter, and making a mean figure, (either in respect of his person or garb,) as the scriptures have foretold, (see Isa. liii. 1.) and himself was esteemed a carpenter, for he worked, when he was here on earth, at the carpen-.

P Cleric. Annot. in Matt. iii. 16.

τὰ τῆς δικαιοσύνης σύμβολα διδάσκων, καὶ ἐνεργῆ βίον.

ter's trade, making ploughs and yokes [for oxen, &c.]; thus making a pattern of righteousness, and a laborious life.

There is at this day extant a Gospel of the Infancy of our Saviour, (of which more hereafter,) in which we read of the actions and miracles of Christ, during the interval of his minority, and particularly of his working with his father in the carpenter's trade. Accordingly, Chap. XXXVIII. we read, that Joseph took him along with him to all the places where he was sent for to do business, to make gates and milk-pails, and sieves, and trunks; and that when Joseph intended to make any thing longer or shorter, wider or narrower, as soon as Christ put his hand to the work, it was instantly done, according to Joseph's intention, so that he had indeed but little occa sion to work, not being very dexterous at his trade. It may perhaps be thought, Justin took what he says out of some such apocryphal books; but inasmuch as this book was a forgery long after Justin's time, and it does not appear there was any such book in his time, it is much more probable, either that he relates only what he had received by tradition, or else that what he here saith was his gloss upon those words of Mark, chap. vi. 3. in which Christ is called by his own townsmen ó téxtwv, the carpenter. Origen indeed asserts, that it is no where to be read in the Gospels received by the churches, that Christ was a carpenter; which he never would so positively have asserted against Celsus, bantering our Saviour because he was a carpenter by trade, unless he was well assured of the fact. is probable therefore Christ was not called TexTwv, the carpenter, in any copies of St. Mark which Origen had seen; and accordingly, I observe, first, that in the parallel place in St. Matthew, chap. xiii. 55. he is not called TέxTwv, but téxtovos viòs, not the carpenter, but the carpenter's son. Secondly, That many ancient manuscripts in this place of Mark, instead of τέκτων, read ὁ τοῦ τέκτονος υἱὸς, viz. the carpenter's son. It is not to my present purpose to make any inquiries into the life of Christ before his public ministry; it is generally thought,

It

4 Οὐδαμοῦ τῶν ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις φερομένων Εὐαγγελίων τέκτων αὐτὸς ὁ ̓Ιησοῦς ἀναvirgarra. Contr. Cels. 1. 6. p. 299.