his charge against the Manichees, &c. for receiving the apocryphal, and rejecting the canonical books of the apostles, 215. he pronounces the Acts of Paul apocryphal, 376, n. his account of the Epistle to the Laodiceans, ii. 42, n.

Philip, his Acts and Gospel not extant in the writers of the first century, i. 333. pretended to be in the Vatican, ibid. n. his Gospel a forgery of the Gnosticks, and a fragment of it produced by Epiphanius, ibid. n. its abominable doctrines, 334, n. proved to be apocryphal, ibid. Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, his just observation on the forgeries of Leucius, i. 207, n. 213. a further account of them by him, 219. his account of the Hypotyposes under Clemens's name, 325. his account of the Acts of Thecla, written in verse by Basil of Seleucia, ii. 329, n. Pilate, Acts of. See Nicodemus. Du Pin, his censure of the story and Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, ii. 7, n. he rejects the Epistle of Paul and Seneca as spurious, 68, n. his sentiments of Barnabas's Epistle, 361, n.

Placæus, an absurdity of his concerning books canonical and apocryphal, i. 50.

Polycarp, his testimony concerning the four Gospels, iii. 2. cites St. Matthew, 24. 265. the Acts of the Apostles, 113.

Possevin rejects the Epistles of Paul and Seneca as spurious, ii. 68, n. Postellus and Bibliander, their account of the Protevangelion refuted, ii. 138.

Prayers for the dead, its antiquity and origin, ii. 343. Prideaux, dean, observes it was the custom of Mahomet to flatter the Christians on all occasions, i. 407. Procopius Cæsariensis, his relation of the Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, ii. 6, n. Protevangelion of James, published out of the Orthodoxographa of Jacobus Grynæus, ii. 86. is different from the ancient Gospel of Mary, &c. 113. was wrote by a Jew or Hellenist, 118. our author conjectures that this was the older book, and that the Birth of Mary was made out of it, 122. both are apocryphal, ibid, and proved so for several reasous, 125. instances of falsehoods in

this book, ibid. both these books apocryphal from their fabulous contents, 129. a collection of trifling n stories, 130. instances of things borrowed from canonical books, 131. several contradictions in it, 133. it is apocryphal because not in the Syriac version, 134. several MS. copies of it now extant in Europe, ibid. two in the French king's li brary, and five at Vienna, ibid. n. it was first made known in Europe by Postellus, and published by Bibliander, A. D. 1552. p. 135. rejected as spurious and apocryphal by most protestants and papists, 141. Ptolemais, its ancient names among the Israelites, i. 93.

Publicans, their office explained, iii. 235.

Q.

Quakers contend for the genuineness of Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans, ii. 28, n.

R. Relics, their original, ii. 218. much venerated by Austin, Jerome, Chrysostom, and others, ibid., a merry story from Chemnitius concerning them, 220, n.

Revelation, book of, why omitted in the public calendar for reading the scriptures, i. 53.

Richardson, Mr. his sentiments concerning the Nazarene Gospel, î. 252, n. detects a false assertion of Mr. Toland, concerning the Epistle of Barnabas, ii. 373, n.

Rivet, his censure of the story and Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, ii. 7, n. he rejects the Epistles of l'aul and Seneca as spurious, 68, n. Ruffin, apocryphal book mentioned by him, i. 32. his catalogue of canonical books, 55. his account of the Judgment of Peter, 293, n.

S. Salmeron, the Jesuit, contends for the genuineness of St. Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans, ii. 28, n. Satanas, its derivation, i. 91 Scaliger, his character and censure of Eusebius, ii. 16, n.

Schottus, A. a citation out of him concerning Seneca, ii, 65. he rejects the Epistles of Paul and Seneca as spurious, 68, n. Scythianus, the Gospel of, not extant, i. 110. mentioned by Cyril and Epiphanius, 335. he was founder of the Manichean sect, ibid.

Selden, Mr. in his Commentary on
Eutychius, produces a prayer of our
Lord, different from that in the Gos-
pels, ii. 24. an account of it taken
from the dean of Norwich's Life of
Mahomet, &c. 27.

Seleucus, his Acts of the Apostles not

extant, i. 110. he is the same with
Leucius, 212, n. 218, 336.
Seleuciani (called also Hermiani) their
tenets, &c. p. 218.

Seneca, his Epistles to Paul, ii. 45. ex-
tant in the fourth century, and cited
by Jerome and Austin only, 54, n.
he is ranked in the catalogue of
saints by the former, ibid. applaud-
ed by Tertullian for his treatise of
superstition, 66, n. cited by Lactan-
tius, ibid. n. highly commended by
Austin, ibid. n. a noble resolution
of his, iii. 160. See St. Paul.
Serapion, apocryphal books mentioned
aby him, i. 27. his account of the
Gospel of Peter, 287, n.

Sergius, a Nestorian, the principal as-
Asistant of Mahomet, in his Alcoran,
i. 406.

Servetians, denied the authority of St.
Matthew's Gospel, iii. 40.
Severus, what part of the New Testa-
ment he rejected, i. 7.
Severus Sulpitius makes mention of
the Acts of Paul and Thecla, ii.
329, n..

Sibyls, an account of them, and their
forged prophecies, i. 316.
Simon, Father, his defence of the an-
tiquity of the Syriac version, i.105, n.
his sentiments of the Gospel of the
Egyptians, 180, n. he condemns the
Gospel of Eve for apocryphal, 200,
n. his high opinion of the Nazarene,
or Hebrew Gospel, 249, n. wrong-
fully charges Eusebius with self-con-
tradiction, 329. condemns the Epi-
stles of Christ and Abgarus for spu-
rious, ii. 7, n. mentions two Greek
MSS. of the Protevangelion in the
French king's library, 134. his mis-
take in supposing the greatest part
of the scriptures, now extant, to be
mere abridgments, iii. 69. 189. in
supposing that the Gospels, and the
Epistles of St. Paul, were alone reck-
oned to belong to the New Testa-
ment in the time of Chrysostom,
116. his reason for thinking St.
Mark's Gospel not an epitome of
St. Matthew's, 186. one of the great-
est enemies to the scriptures, 189.
217.

Simonians, so called from Simon Ma-
gus, their Gospel, i. 336.
Sixtus Senensis, his sentiments con-
cerning the Gospel of the Egyptians,
i. 179, n. his mistake concerning
the traditions of Matthias, 229, n.
opinion concerning the Nazarene or
Hebrew Gospel, 249, n. his favour-
able opinion of the Preaching of
Peter, 310. cites two MSS. of the
Epistle of St. Paul to the Laodice-
ans, ii. 28, n. attempts to prove the
Epistle spurious, 43. his attempt to
reconcile Irenæus and Eusebius,
concerning the time when St. Mat-
thew wrote, iii. 45. a peculiarity in
St. John's style observed by him,

ΙΟΙ.

Sozomen, his fabulous account of the
Revelation of Paul, i. 282. says
Peter's Revelation was read yearly
in some churches of Palestine, 330,
n. but was rejected by the ancients
as spurious, ibid.

Spanheim, Mr. an observation of his
concerning Clemens Alexandrinus
and Origen, i. 4. an error of his
concerning the Anabaticon and Re-
velation of Paul, 279, n.
Spanheim, the younger, proves the
story and Epistles of Christ and Ab-
garus to be spurious, ii. 7, n, rejects
the Epistles of Paul and Seneca, 68,
n. a citation out of him concerning
the worship of the Virgin Mary, &c.
215, n. his opinion of the Acts of
Pilate, 282, n. his opinion of Barna-
bas's Epistle, 301, n.
Spinoza, one of the greatest enemies
to the scriptures, iii. 189. 217. as-
serted, that most of the books of the
Old Testament were abridgments of
larger records, 189.

Stapleton, the Jesuit, contends for the
genuineness of St. Paul's Epistle to
the Laodiceans, ii. 28, n.
Stephen, the Revelation of, not extant,
i. 110. declared apocryphal by Gela-
sius, 337.

Styles of authors various, with a dis-
sertation upon them, i. 69.
Suetonius, frequently violates the order
of time, iii. 150.

Syriac Version, i. 77. an historical ac-
count of it, ibid. when first known
among the Europeans, 78. the judg-
ments of learned men about it, 79.
an attempt to prove this version was
made in the apostles' times, 80. this
language is sometimes called Chal-
dee, sometimes Syriac, sometimes

T

Syro-Chaldaic; but most commonly by the writers of the New Testament, and first Christians, Hebrew, 82. it was the language of Syria and Mesopotamia, and of Jerusalem and Galilee in our Saviour's time, 83. Syriac and Chaldee are by the prophet Daniel synonymous languages, 85. this version has not the history of the adulterous woman mentioned in St. John, 100, n. nor the famous controverted text, 1 John v. 7. ibid. nor has the old version the four catholic Epistles, nor the Revelation, 101. this version was thought by Tremellius and bishop Walton to be made in the apostles' time, ibid. n. the antiquity of it confirms the purity of the printed copies of the New Testament, 106. is of great use in explaining many passages, ibid. the controverted text, 1 Cor. v. 9. paraphrased by the old Syriac translator, 127.

Syriac version of St. Matthew, in the same order as our present Greek copies, iii. 260. 268. made in the time of the apostles, ibid. Syriac then the language of the Jews, ibid. that which we now have is the ancient version, 273.

Syrians were the first idolaters mentioned in scripture, i. 98, n. among the Jews, that appellation denoted profane persons, ibid.

T.

Tatian, the Gospel of, not extant, i. III. mentioned by Eusebius and Epiphanius, 338, n. was a Harmony of the four Gospels, ibid. seems to be taken from the Hebrew Gospel, 339. an account of him and his principles, ibid. his Harmony of the four Gospels, iii. 4. 135. Terebinthus, afterwards called Manes, (the father of the Manichees,) styled himself the Paraclete, i. 342. Tertullian, apocryphal books mentioned by him, i. 27. his account of the Christian meetings, 60, n. interpretation of 1 Tim. iv. 3. vol. i. 187. account of Marcion's Gospel, 233, n. he cites the Acts of Paul and Thecla, 273, n. says the Gospel of Mark is affirmed by some to be that of Peter, 288, n. differs, in his account of Marcion's Apostolicon, from Epiphanius, ii. 34, n. and is in this mistaken, ibid. he applauds Seneca for his treatise on superstition, 66, n. appeals to, and often cites,

the Acts of Pontius Pilate, 279. is the first that mentions the practice of signing with the cross, 295. ranks the Acts of Paul and Thecla among apocryphal scriptures, 326, n. and declares it the forgery of an Asiatic presbyter, ibid. has expressly determined the number of Gospels in his time to be four, iii. 7. says the Gospel of St. Mark went under the name of St. Peter, 58. cites St. Mark, 66. his testimony concerning St. Luke's Gospel, 79. he ascribes to St. Luke the Acts of the Apostles, 110. cites them, 115. Tessarescaidecatites, why so called, ii. 278. their rise about the latter end of the third century, 285. Testament, books of the Old, always preserved by Providence safe and uncorrupted, iii. 256.

Thaddæus, the Gospel of, not extant, i. 111. declared apocryphal by Gelasius, 340, n.

Thecla, martyrdom of, how and by whom first published, i. 27. Vide Paul.

Themison, his catholic Epistle not extant, i. 111. mentioned by Apollonius, 341. he was a Montanist, ibid.

Theodotus Byzantius, apocryphal books mentioned by him, i. 27. his fragment of the Preaching of Peter, 303. a particular account of him and his heresies, 312. he cites the Revelation of Peter, 323, n. Theophilus Antiochenus, his references to St. Matthew, iii. 30. to St. John,

104.

Theophylact, makes no mention of the adulterous woman in John viii. vol. i. 100, n. his opinion concerning the Epistles to the Laodiceans and Ephesians, refuted, ii. 40. he asserts that Christ wrought no miracles in his infancy, 208, n.

Therapeutæ, an account of them from Mr. Whiston, i. 181. Thomas, the Acts, &c. under his name not extant, i. 111. mentioned by Epiphanius, Athanasius, and Gelasius, 344, n. not the same with those of Leucius Charinus, 345. a MS. of it said by Father Simon to be in the French king's library, and another by Dr. Grabe in our Bodleian, ibid. his Gospel mentioned by Origen, Eusebius, Cyril, Ambrose, Athanasius, Jerome, and Gelasius, 346, n. there were two Gospels under his

name, 347. his Revelation only men-
tioned, and declared apocryphal by
Gelasius, 348. other books under
his name condemned by Innocent I.
ibid.

Timothy, the Martyrdom of, an ex-
tract from it in Photius, iii. 2.
Tobit, Book of, guilty of a direct
falsity, i. 9.

Toinard, his Harmony cited, iii.
217.

Toland, Mr. his pretended catalogue

of canonical books not complete, i.
3. his false opinion concerning the
depository of the books of the pre-
sent canon till Adrian's time, 38, n.
he endeavours to confirm a conjec-
ture of Dr. Grabe concerning a
fragment of Barnabas's Gospel, 145.
his account of an Italian MS. he had
seen of it, ibid. a notorious false in-
ference of his detected by Dr. Man-
gey, 150, n. a malicious mistake of
his concerning the books reported
to be written by our Saviour, 167.
an instance of his inaccuracy in
quotations, 173, n. his disingenuity
in citing, as genuine, a forgery of
the Ebionites, 195, n. folly in plac-
ing among canonical books the Gos-
pel of Eve, 201, n. as also that of
Judas Iscariot, 209, n. a mistake of
his in esteeming the traditions of
Matthias as a written book, 229, n.
his sentiments of the Hebrew or
Nazarene Gospel, 250. his extrava-
gant positiveness and unpardonable
mistakes, 209, n. another concern-
ing Hegesippus, 260, n. another
very notorious in relation to Ori-
gen, 261, n. his unpardonable false-
hood in asserting that the fathers
appealed to the Nazarene as a true
Gospel, 263. the author's just re-
buke and admonition to him, ibid.
an instance of a notorious impos-
ture of his, 264, n. his false cita-
tions of St. Austin and Epiphanius
detected, 274, n. an ignorant blun-
der of his concerning the Anabati-
con and Revelation of Paul, 280, n.
his endeavour to prove that the Na-
zarenes were the only true Chris-
tians, 315. answered by Dr. Man-
gey, ibid. his fond opinion of the
Preaching of Peter, 310, n. he es-
teems Peter's Revelation as valuable
as several books of the present ca-
non, ibid. n. he injuriously charges
Eusebius with a mistake, 329. re-
fers to a citation out of Sozomen,

to prove Peter's Revelation not spu-
rious, 330, n. supposes that Reve-
lation to be a prophecy concerning
the Jews, and the state of the Chris-
tian church, 331, n. his ignorance
and malice in his distinction be-
tween Paraclete and Periclyte de-
tected, 343. he supports the charge
of the Mahometans against the
Christians, of having corrupted the
Gospel of Christ, 410. a notorious
blunder of his, in citing Austin con-
cerning the Epistles of Paul and
Seneca, ii. 58, n. his opinion con-
cerning Barnabas's Epistle, 361, n.
he falsely asserts that Clemens Alex-
andrinus and Origen cited the afore-
mentioned Epistle as scripture, 373,
n. his opinion that the first Chris-
tian writers had no certain canon,
which they cited, iii. 14. thought
that the Gospels of St. Mark and
St. Luke should be of no greater
authority than the works of the apo-
stolic fathers, 70. his mistake in
supposing that the Gospels lay a
long time concealed, 263. and that
the Nazarenes and Ebionites were
the same persons, 241.
Tradition, certainly the best method
to prove the truth of the sacred
books, i. 49. an objection to it an-
swered, 52.

Tremellius thought the Syriac version
to be made in the apostles' times, i.
101, n.

Truth, the Gospel of, not extant, i.

III. condemned by Irenæus, 348,
n. a forgery of the Valentinians,
349.

U.
Valentinus, Gospel of, not extant, i.
III. different from the Gospel of
Truth, 352.

Valesius, wrongfully charges Eusebius
with self-contradiction, i. 329, n.
his opinion of the Harmony of the
Orthodoxographa, 340. his opinion
concerning the Acts of Pilate, ii.
282, n.

Vossius, a mistake of his concerning
the language spoken in Jerusalem,
in our Saviour's time, rectified, i.
85. his opinion of Barnabas's Epi-
stle, ii. 358, n.

Usher, archbishop, proves Ignatius's
Epistle to be corrupted and interpo-
lated, i. 259, n. his sentiments of a
saying of Christ in the Epistle of
Barnabas, 357. his sentiments of
Barnabas's Epistle, ii. 356.

W.

Walther demonstrates the Epistles of Christ and Abgarus to be spurious, ii. 7, n. rejects the Epistles of Paul and Seneca as such, 68, n. cites the Acts of Pilate, 282.

Walton, bishop, thought the Syriac translation of the New Testament to be made in the apostles' time, i.

ΙΟΙ.

Wells, an opinion of his censured, iii. 213.

Whiston, Mr. a citation from him concerning the Constitutions of the Apostles, i. 6. his error concerning St. Mark's Gospel, 76, n. his sentiments of the Gospel of the Egyptians, and account of the Therapeutæ mentioned by Philo, 181, n. he wrongfully supposes the Egyptian Gospel, and Traditions of Matthias, to be used among them, 182, n. would have the Preaching of Peter canonical, 311, n. recommends Peter's Revelation as a sacred book, 325. his mistake concerning a saying of Christ, cited by most of the fathers, 386. his opinion of Barnabas's Epistle, ii. 363, n. his many curious and useful discoveries in his Harmony, iii. 136. mistaken in supposing that the former part of St. Matthew's Gospel is misplaced, ibid. his opinion that the evangelists intended to observe always the order of time, confuted, 142. he supposes St. Luke's Gospel to be perfectly in the order of time, 143. furnishes the author with a reason why the evangelists differ, 154. his argument, that, because St. Matthew for the most part writes in this order, he never recedes from it, 155. also, that the notes of time, &c. are as many in that part which is now misplaced, as in that which is in its proper order, 156. he supposed St. Mark's Gospel to be an epitome of St. Matthew's, 158. his own epitome

of the Gospel history, 186. the argument he derives from the last-mentioned supposition, 193. the branches of St. Matthew's Gospel which he thought misplaced, 195. he accounts for this disorder, by supposing that St. Matthew wrote on small pieces of paper, 216. his observation that the present Gospel of St. Matthew is a translation from the Hebrew, 238. he supposes the disorder to end, and the true order to begin, at the death of John the Baptist, 255. Whitby, Dr. his Examen of Dr. Mill's Various Lections, &c. i. 105, n. 354. his interpretation of 1 Cor. v. 9. rectified, 128. his remark on 1 Tim. iv. 3. p. 190, n. opinion of the Hebrew or Nazarene Gospel, 252, n. his mistake concerning the woman of Samaria, 367. believes the present Epistle to the Ephesians was formerly entitled to the Laodiceans, ii. 34, n. his opinion, that the Epistle to the Laodiceans and Ephesians was the same, refuted, 37. his exposition of John xxi. 21. p. 370. his explanation of the word xatskñs in St. Luke, iii. 146. he has considered the testimony of the fathers, concerning St. Matthew's Gospel having been first written in Hebrew, 239. shews that they were often mistaken, ibid.

Wilkins, Mr. an oversight of his in

the dedication of his translation of the third Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, and Paul's Epistle to them, i. 132.

Wisdom of Solomon, book of, a gross error in it, i. 9.

Writing, manner of, among the ancients, iii. 219. among the Jews, Greeks, and Romans, before and in our Saviour's time, 221.

X. Xenocharis, a corrupt way of writing Charinus, i. 222.