« AnteriorContinua »
surrection he gave us a plain instance in himself. Further, it is manifest, that man was created by the Father, and therefore not so abandoned to misery, but that he should be again sought after with care; for he was so sought after, as that by a a filial adoption he might obtain life. For God, who is the Lord of all, and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, first sent prophets to the Jews, to dissuade them from their sins, and incite them to righteousness: for when he intended the salvation of the house of Israel, he bestowed his Holy Spirit, and sent him into the prophets, who preached the worship of God not liable to error, and the birth [of Christ] for a very long time.
I shall not here enter into any particular criticism on these two letters, no mention being made of them within my prescribed time; only offer to the reader, who is curious in these things, a few cursory remarks I have made in reading them. As,
First, That if we suppose St. Paul did really write an epistle to the church of Corinth before either of those now received, and which he refers to in the words above cited, 1 Cor. v. 9. this Epistle here translated cannot be it, because there is in this no prohibition of associating with fornicators, which is supposed to have been in the other, and certainly was in it, if he ever wrote any. Hence it appears either to have been too great a compliment or oversight in Mr. Wilkins, the translator of these Epistles, in his dedication of them to Mr. La Croze, to desire his opinion, whether St. Paul did not refer to this Epistle of his in the forementioned place.
2dly, This Epistle, under the name of St. Paul to the Corinthians, is certainly spurious ; because,
1. It is not mentioned by any one writer of the primitive church in the first
four centuries, nor indeed by any Christian author in any age till the last. It is neither quoted, nor placed in any of their catalogues, nor read in any of their churches; and therefore, by Prop. III, IV, V, VI, must be judged apocryphal; as also because it is not in the Syriac copies of the New Testament, Prop. XV.
2. It contains things contrary to those which are certainly known to be true, and therefore apocryphal by Prop. VIII. Such is that intimation of the second coming of Christ being very near, in the beginning of the Epistle ; a notion which was very much espoused by some of the ancient heretics. See Dr. Hammond on 2 Thess. ii. 2.
3. It contains several things very unlike to, and different from St. Paul's known way of writing ; and therefore spurious by Prop. XI. Such for instance,
1.) Is the salutation in the beginning; “ Paul, a prisoner
to the brethren at Corinth-greeting;" a phraseology not known in his, or any of the first Christian salutations in their Epistles.
2.) The author's declaring that he received what he taught them from the former apostles, who conversed with Christ; whereas St. Paul very frequently assures the churches to whom he wrote, and particularly this church of Corinth, that what he preached among them, he received not from men, but by immediate revelation from the Lord. See 1 Cor. xi. 23. and Gal. i. 12. Eph. iii. 2, 3.
Thus much may suffice concerning the spuriousness of this Epistle under St. Paul's name. There is no need of any such remarks on the Corinthians' Epistle to Paul; since, if it were real and genuine, I know no claim it could make to canonical authority. Only one thing I cannot forbear observing, which is a very clear detection of the forgery. They desire Paul to be very speedy in visiting them at Corinth; whereas St. Paul was at that time, as he expressly calls himself, a prisoner. This does not seem very
Paul to have been at his own liberty. I shall only add, that Mr. La Croze supposes these Epistles forged either in the end of the tenth, or the beginning of the eleventh century.
CHAP. V. The Acts of Andrew received by the Encratites, Manichees,
Apostolicks, or Apotacticks, and Origenians, discussed, and proved apocryphal.
A. I PROCEED now to the particular examination of the lost apocryphal books, according to the order in which they are placed in the alphabetical table at the end of the first part; and so shall begin with that ancient book which was called,
The Acts of the apostle Andrew. N.B. IN considering this, as all the other apocryphal books, the method I purpose to observe is, first to produce all and every thing that is said of them by the ancient writers, and then to make the most suitable reflections I can.
This book is mentioned first by Eusebiusf. Τας ονόματι των αποστόλων προς Books published under the name των αιρετικών προφερομένας– of the apostles by hereticsως Ανδρέου πράξεις των ουδέν such as the Acts of Andrew-ουδαμώς έν συγγράμματα των κα- which are never thought worthy τα διαδοχής εκκλησιαστικών τις
to be cited in the works of any ανήρ εις μνήμην αγαγείν ήξίωσεν. ecclesiastical writer who taught Πόρρω δε που και ο της φράσεως in the church. Moreover, the παρά το ήθος το αποστολικόν εναλ phraseology and manner of writλάττει χαρακτήρ" ή τε γνώμη και ing, and the doctrines therein deη των εν αυτοίς φερομένων προαίρε- Orthodox faith, evidently demon
livered being very opposite to the σις πλείστον όσον της αληθούς ορθο- strate it to have been the forgery δοξίας απάδουσα, ότι δή αιρετικών of heretics; and s0 not only to ανδρών αναπλάσματα τυγχάνει, be looked upon as spurious, but σαφώς παρίστησιν· όθεν ουδ' εν νόθοις to be utterly rejected as impious αυτα κατατακτέον, αλλ' ως άτοπα and absurd. πάντη και δυσσεβή παραιτητέον. 2. By Philastrius, in his account of the heresy which he styles
apocryphas. Manichæi apocrypha beati Andreæ The Manichees make use of the apostoli, i.e. Actus quos fecit ve- Acts of St. Andrew, i.e. those niens de Ponto in Græciam, quos Acts which he made (or did) in conscripserunt tunc sequentes a- his journey from Pontus to Greece, postolum; unde et habent Mani- and which those disciples, which chæi, et alii tales, Andreæ beati followed him, wrote; from whence et Joannis Actus evangelistæ, be- the Manichees, and other such ati et Petri similiter apostoli, et sort of people, have the Acts of Pauli pariter apostoli: in quibus, St. Andrew, St. John the evangequia signa fecerunt magna, ut et list, as also the Acts of St. Peter canes et bestiæ loquerentur, et- and St. Paul the apostles : in iam et animas hominum tales vel- which, because they wrought great f Hist. Eccl. 1. iii. c. 25.
& Hæres. 87.
ut canum et pecudum, similes miracles, such as to make dogs and imputaverunt esse hæretici per- beasts to speak, these. wretched diti.
heretics imagined the souls of men to be like the souls of dogs
and beasts. 3. By Epiphanius, discoursing of the heretics called Encratitesh. Κέχρονται δε γραφαϊς πρωτοτύπως They principally made use of those ταϊς λεγομέναις Ανδρέου, και Ίω- scriptures, which are called the άννου πράξεσι, και Θωμά και ά- Acts of Andrew and John, and ποκρύφοις τισί, και οίς βούλονται Thomas, and some other apocryλόγους της παλαιάς διαθήκης. .
phal books, and only what they thought fit of the books of the
Old Testament. 4. By the same, speaking of the heresy of the apostolicksi. Ούτοι δε ταϊς λεγομέναις πράξεσιν They chiefly depended upon those 'Ανδρέου τε και Θωμά το πλείστον scriptures, which are called the έπερείδονται, παντάπασιν αλλότριοι Acts of Andrew and of Thomas, του κανόνος του εκκλησιαστικού υ- being altogether diferent from the πάρχοντες. .
canon of the church. 5. By the same, concerning the vile heresy of the Origeniansk. Κέχρονται δε αποκρύφους τισί, μά- They make use of several apocryλιστα ταϊς λεγομέναις πράξεσιν phal books, but principally those 'Ανδρέου, και των άλλων.
which are called the Acts of An
drew, and some others.
6. By pope Gelasius! Actus nomine Andreæ apostoli a- The Acts under the name of Anpocryphi.
drew the apostle are apocryphal. These are all the places where express mention is made of these Acts of Andrew; from whence it is easy, by the rules above laid down, to prove they were spurious and apocryphal, as being not found in any of the ancient catalogues of the sacred books, (Prop. IV.) nor appealed to by any Christian writer, (Prop. V.) nor read in any of their assemblies; (Prop. VI.) but on the contrary expressly condemned as an impious forgery, by every one that has mentioned them. There are not indeed any fragments of this book now remaining; yet it seems not difficult to guess at some things contained therein by h Hæres. 47. §. 1.
i Decret. de Apocryph. apud Grai Hæres. 61. §.1.
tian. Distinct. 15. et apud Concil. k Hæres. 63. §. 2.
Sanct. tom.iv. p. 1260.
the agreement of the above-mentioned heretics in receiving and esteeming it above all other scriptures. This cannot be supposed to have happened by mere chance, nor by any other means more probable, than that this book contained some doctrines or principles which were very conformable to the sentiments of those differing sects. What their opinions were, I need not here lay down; a bare casting the eye upon the accounts, which Epiphanius, in the places cited, and Austin, in his little book of heresies, gives of them, would be almost sufficient of itself to make one question the authority of any book which they had a more than ordinary esteem for. I shall only offer to the reader the observations I have made concerning the agreement between these differing sects, and then leave it to his own judgment to determine, whether it be not probable the Acts of Andrew contained some doctrines which were favourable to them all. The sects I am speaking of are those abovementioned, the Manichees, Encratites, Apotacticks, or Apo stolicks, and Origenians, who all, as has been proved, esteemed this apocryphal piece of Andrew above other scriptures; and the observations I have made, for greater clearness, I have placed in the following table.
The Manichees The Encratites assert- The Apostolicks, or | The Orige. asserted,
serted, 1. Two eternal 1. Two principles ; principles of all one of the Devil
, opthings, opposite posite to the works to each other, of God, and not subviz. God and the ject, but superior to Devil.
him. 2. The unlawful- 2. That marriage 2. The unlawful-2. That no ness of marriage, was of the Devil ; ness of all mar- person and esteemed it reckoned all mar-riages ; excluded should as bad as forni- ried persons as for- their communion marry;and cation.
nicators, and admit- all who did mar- that they ted no married per- ry.
only were sons to their com
who, like 3. That no per-3. That no person
Elijah, Eson should at any should eat flesh.
lisha, and time eat flesh.
John, did 4. That no wine 4. The same. should be drank.
marry. More of this sort may be seen in Epiphanius, Hæres. 47,