SECTION II. As the external form of the New Testament harmonises with that of the larger octavo editions of the authorised English Ver ON THE WRITINGS USUALLY CALLED THE APOCRYPHAL sion of the New Testament, the advocates of infidelity have I. It is not wonderful that, besides those which are admitted to be canonical books of the New Testament, there were many others which also pretended to be authentic. Men of the best intentions might think it incumbent on them to preserve, by writing, the memory of persons, facts and doctrines, so precious in their estimation, who might at the same time be deficient in the talents and information requisite to discriminate, and duly to record the truth. The sacred writers intimate that such men availed themselves of it, to attempt to undermine the credibility of the genuine books of the New Testament. The preface to the compilation, intitled "The Apocryphal New Testament," is, certainly, so drawn up, as apparently to favour the views of the opposers of divine revelation; but as its editor has DISCLAIMED any sinister design in publishing it, the writer of these pages will not impute any such motives to him. II. In order, however, that the reader may see HOW LITTLE the writings of the New Testament can suffer from this publication," a brief statement shall be given of the very satisfactory reasons, for which the apocryphal (or rather spurious) writings ascribed to the apostles have been deservedly rejected from the canon of Scripture. 1. In the first place, they were NOT acknowledged as authentic, nor were they much used, by the primitive Christians. writings of the apostolic fathers, that is, of Clement of Rome, IgnaThere are no quotations of these apocryphal books in the genuine tius, Polycarp, and Hermas, whose writings reach from about the year of Christ 70 to 108; nor are they found in any ancient catalogues of the sacred books. Some of them indeed are mentioned, but not cited by Irenæus and Tertullian, who lived in the second century Indeed the apocryphal books above mentioned are expressly, and in forgeries of heretics, and, consequently, as spurious and heretical. so many words, rejected by those who have noticed them, as the they known of their existence, because they would have afforded them much better opportunities than the genuine Gospels did, for indulging their malevolence. 3. Few or none of these productions, which (it is pretended) were written in the apostolic age, were composed before the second century, and several of them were forged so late as the third century, and were rejected as spurious at the time they were attempted to be imposed upon the Christian world. found in many of the large Svo. editions of the New Testament, printed in The title page is surrounded with a broad black rule, similar to that the last century, and the different books are divided into chapters and verses, with a table of contents drawn up in imitation of those which are found in all editions of the English Bible. had already begun, even in their time, to appear; and gave warning that others would arise, less pure in their motives. Luke says that many had taken in hand to write gospels (Luke i. 1.); Paul cautions the Galatians against other gospels than that which they had received from him (Gal. i. 6-9.): and warns the Thessalonians not to be troubled by any letter as from him, declaring that the day of Christ is at hand." (2 Thess. ii. 2.) In the ages following the apostles, the apocryphal writings, which were published under the names of Jesus 2. The enemies of Christianity who were accustomed to cite Christ and his apostles, their companions, &c. (and which are passages from the four gospels for the sake of perverting them, mentioned by the writers of the first four centuries under the or of turning them into ridicule, have never mentioned these names of gospels, epistles, acts, revelations, &c.) greatly in-productions; which we may be sure they would have done, had creased. Most of them have long since perished,' though some few are still extant, which have been collected (together with notices of the lost pieces) and published by John Albert Fabricius, in his Codex Apocryphus Novi Testamenti, the best edition of which appeared at Hamburg, in 1719-1743, in three parts, forming two volumes, 8vo. Of this work the Rev. and learned Mr. Jones made great use, and, in fact, translated the greater part of it in his "New and Full Method of settling the Canonical Authority of the New Testament." The apocryphal books extant are, an Epistle from Jesus Christ to Abgarus; his Epistle, which (it is pretended) fell down from heaven at Jerusalem directed to a priest named Leopas, in the city of Eris: the constitutions of the Apostles; The Apostles' Creed; the Apostolical Epistles of Barnabas, Clemens or Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp; the Gospel of the Infancy of our Saviour; the gosbel of the birth of Mary; The prot-evangelion of James; the gospel of Nicodemus; the Martyrdom of Thecla or Acts of Paul; Abdias's History of the Twelve Apostles; the Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans; the Six Epistles of Paul to Seneca, &c. Of these various productions, those of which the titles are printed in Italics are comprised in the publication, intitled "The Apocryphal New Testament, being all the Gospels, Epistles, and other Pieces now extant, attributed in the first four centuries to Jesus Christ, his Apostles, and their companions, and not included in the New Testament by its compilers. Translated and now collected into one volume, with Prefaces and Tables, and various Notes and References. London, 1820."-Second edition, 1821, Svo. The writings ascribed to Barnabas, Ignatius (at least his genuine epistles), Polycarp, and Hermas, ought not in strictness to be considered as apocryphal, since their authors, who are usually designated, the Apostolical Fathers, from their having been contemporary for a longer or shorter time with the apostles of Jesus Christ, were not divinely inspired apostles. The first epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, indeed, was for a short time received as canonical in some few Christian churches, but was soon dismissed as an uninspired production; the fragment of what is called the second epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, Dr. Lardner has proved not to have been written by him. These productions of the apostolical fathers, therefore, have no claim to be considered as apocryphal writings. 1 See an alphabetical catalogue of them, with references to the fathers by whom they were mentioned, in Jones on the Canon, vol. i. pp. 119-123. Another apocryphal book, purporting to be the Acts of the Apostle Thomas, has lately been discovered at Paris. It was published at Leipsic in 1923, by Dr. J. C. Thilo. That St. Paul did not write any epistle to the Laodiceans see Vol. II. Part VI. Chap. III. Sect. VII. § II. This is a misnomer; for all the apocryphal writings are not included n the publication in question. • In 1698 Mr. Toland published his Amyntor, in which he professed to give a catalogue of books, attributed in the primitive times to Jesus Christ, servations relating to the canon of Scripture." his apostles, and other eminent persons "together with remarks and obHe there raked together whatever he could find relating to the spurious gospels and pretended sacred books which appeared in the early ages of the Christian church. These he produced with great pomp, to the number of eighty and upwards; and though they were most of them evidently false and ridiculous, and carried the plainest marks of forgery and imposture, of which, no doubt, he was very sensible, yet he did what he could to represent them as of equal authority with the four gospels, and other sacred books of the New Testament, now received among Christians. To this end he took advantage of the unwary and ill-grounded hypotheses of some learned men, and endeavoured to prove that the books of the present canon lay concealed in the coffers of private persons, till the latter times of Trajan or Adrian, and were not known to the clergy or churches of those tinies, nor distinguished from the spurious works of the heretics; and that the Scriptures, which we now receive as canonical, and others which we now reject, were indifferently and promiscuously cited and appealed to by the most ancient Christian writers. His design, in all this, manifestly, was to show, that the gospels and other sacred writings of the New Testament, now acknowledged as canonical, really deserve no greater credit, and are no more to be depended upon, than those books which are rejected and exploded as forgeries. And yet he had the confidence to pretend, in a book he afterwards published, that his intention in his Amyntor, was not to invalidate, but to illustrate and confirm the canon of the New Testament. This may serve as one instance out of many that might be produced, of the insincerity of this opposer of revelation, whose assertions have been adopted by infidels of the present day. Many good and satisfactory refu tations of Toland were published at that time by Dr. Samuel Clarke, Mr. Nye, and others, and especially by the learned Mr. Jeremiah Jones in his "Now and Full Method of settling the Canonical Authority of the New From this work the following refutation of the pretensions of the apocryphal Testament," in 2 vols. 8vo., reprinted at Oxford in 1798. in 3 vols. 8vo. books of the New Testament has been principally derived, as well as from Dr. Lardner, who in different parts of his works has collected inuch curious information respecting them. The passages being too numerous to be cited at length, the reader will find them indicated in the fifth index to his works, article Apocryphal Books. Six months AFTER the publication of the second edition of this work, the late Rev. Thomas Rennell, who so ably distinguished himself by his powerful writings against the atheistical physi ologists of this age, published "Proofs of Inspiration, or the grounds of distinction between the New Testament and the apocryphal volume, occasioned by the recent publication of the Apocryphal New Testament by Hone, London, 1822." 8vo. As the arguments produced in this learned tract are necessarily similar to those stated in the former part of this volume, as well as in the present article of this Appendix, this brief notice of Mr. R's pamphlet may suffice. these books." To the same purpose says Ambrose ;10 having mentioned several of the apocryphal books, he adds, "We read these, that they may not be read (by others); we read them, that we may not seem ig. norant; we read them, not that we may receive them, but reject them, and may know what those things are of which they (heretics) make such boasting." 6. Sometimes, perhaps, these books may be cited by the Fathers, because the persons against whom they were writing received them, being willing to dispute with them upon princi ples out of their own books. 7. It may, perhaps, be true, that one or two writers have cited a few passages out of these books, because the fact they cited was not to be found in any other. A brief statement of the dates of the pieces contained in the Apocryphal New Testament (with the exception of the writings of the apostolic fathe hich are omitted for the reason already stated), will demonstrate this fact. Thus, the pseudo-Epistles of Abgarus prince of Edessa, and of Jesus Christ, were never heard of, until published by Eusebius in the fourth century. Though an Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans was extant in the second century, and was received by Marcion the heretic, who was notorious for his mutilations and interpolations of the New Testament, yet that now extant is not the same with the ancient one under that title in Marcion's Apostolicon, or collection of apostolical epistles. It never was extant in Greek, and is a production of uncertain, but unquestionably very late, date.-Mr. Jones conjectures it to have been forged by some monk, not long before the reformation;2 and, as is shown in page 441 and 442. infra, it was compiled from several passages of St. Paul's Epistles.-The six Epistles of Paul to Seneca, and eight of the philosopher to him, were never heard of, until they were mentioned by Jerome and Augustire, two writers who lived at the close of the fourth century; and who do not appear to have considered them as genuine.3-In the third or perhaps the second century a Gospel of the Birth of Mary was extant and received by several of the ancient heretics, but it underwent many alterations, and the ancient copies varied greatly from that now printed in the apocryphal New Testament which was translated by Mr. Jones from Jerome's Latin Version, first made at the close of the fourth century. This gospel of the birth of Mary is for the most part the same with the Prot-evangelion, or Gospel of James (which, nevertheless, it contradicts in many places); and both are the production of some Hel-productions is much stronger than the external evidence: for, lenistic Jew. Both also were rejected by the ancient writers.-The two Gospels of the Infancy (the second of which bears the name of Thomas) seem to have been originally the same; but the ancient gospel of Thomas was different from those of the infancy of Christ. They were received as genuine only by the Marcosians, a branch of the sect of Gnostics, in the beginning of the second century; and were known to Mohammed or the compilers of the Koran, who took from them several idle traditions concerning Christ's infancy.5-The Gospel of Nicodemus, also called the Acts of Pilate, was forged at the latter end of the third or the beginning of the fourth century, by Leucius Charinus, who was a noted forger of the Acts of Peter, Paul, Andrew, and others of the apostles.6-The Apostles' Creed derives its name, not from the fact of its having been composed, clause by clause, by the twelve apostles (of which we have no evidence), but because it contains a brief summary of the doctrines which they taught. It is nearly the same with the creed of Jerusalem, which appears to be the most ancient summary of the Christian faith that is extant; and the articles which have been collected from the catechetical discourses of Cyril, who was Bishop of Jerusalem in the fourth century. The Acts of Paul and Thecla, though ranked among the apocryphal scriptures by some of the primitive Christians (by whom several things therein related were credited), were in part the forgery of an Asiatic presbyter at the close of the first or at the beginning of the second century, who confessed that he had committed the fraud out of love to Paul, and was degraded from his office; and they have subsequently been interpolated.7 4. When any book is cited, or seems to be appealed to, by any Christian writer, which is not expressly and in so many words rejected by him, there are other sufficient arguments to prove that he did not esteem it to be canonical. For instance, though Origen in one or two places takes a passage out of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, yet in another place he rejects it, under the name of the gospel of the twelve apostles, as a book of the heretics, and declares that the church received only FOUR GOSPELS. Further, though several of these apocryphal books are mentioned by Clement of Alexandria as well as by Origen, yet Clement never does it as attributing any authority to them, and some. times he notices them with expressions of disapprobation. In like manner, though Eusebius mentions some of them, he says that they were of little or no value, and that they were never received by the sounder part of Christians. Athanasius, without naming any of them, passes a severe censure upon them in general; and Jerome speaks of them with dislike and censure. St. John tells us (xxi. 25.) that our Lord did many other things besides those which he had recorded: the which, says he, if they should be written every one, I suppose the world itself could not contain the books which should be written. Some accounts of these actions and discourses of Christ were unquestionably preserved, and handed down to the second century, or farther, by tradition, which though inserted afterwards into the books of the heretics, may be easily supposed to have been cited by some later writers, though at the same time they esteemed the books which contained them uninspired, and not of the canon. This was the case with respect to Jerome's citing the Hebrew Gospel, which he certainly looked upon as spurious and apocryphal III. The INTERNAL EVIDENCE for the spuriousness of these independently of the total absence of all those criteria of genuineness, which (it has been shown in the preceding part of this volume) are clearly to be seen in the canonical books, it is evident that the apocryphal productions, ascribed to the apostles, are utterly unworthy of notice; for, 1. They either propose or support some doctrine or practice contrary to those which are certainly known to be true;-2. They are filled with absurd, unimportant, impertinent, and frivolous details;-3. They relate both useless and improbable miracles;-4. They mention things, which are later than the time when the author lived, whose name the book bears;-5. Their style is totally different from that of the genuine books of the New Testament;-6. They contain direct contradictions to authentic history, both sacred and profane ;-7. They are studied imitations of various passages in the genuine Scriptures, both to conceal the fraud and to allure readers; and, 8. They contain gross falsehoods, utterly repugnant to the character, principles, and conduct of the in spired writers. 1. The apocryphal books either propose or support some doctrine or practice contrary to those which are certainly known to be true, and appear designed to obviate some heresy, which had its origin subsequent to the apostolic age. One of the doctrines, which these spurious writings were intended to establish, was, the sanctity of relics. As a striking proof of this, we are told in the first Gospel of the Infancy, that when the Eastern magi had come from the East to Jerusalem, according to the prophecy of Zoradascht, and had made their offerings, the lady Mary took one of his swaddling clothes in which the infant was wrapped, and gave it to them instead of a blessing, which they received from her as a most noble present. As bandages, of a similar nature and efficacy, were preserved in some churches with the most superstitious reverence, the purpose for which the above was written was obvious. The corrupt doctrines relative to the Virgin Mary form an essential part in the scheme of some of these designers. Those who believed, or affected to believe, that the Virgin was exalted into heaven, who adopted the notion of her immaculate conception, and her power of working miracles, found but little countenance for their absurdities in the genuine Gospels. It was a task too hard for them to defend such tenets against their adversaries, while the canonical books were the only authority they could appeal to. Hence a Gospel was written De Navitate Maria (the Gospel of the birth of Mary),12 in which her birth is foretold by angels, and herself represented as always under the peculiar protection of Heaven. Hence in the Gospel attributed to James, which assumed the name of Prot-Evangelium, as claiming the superiority over every other, whether canonical or apocryphal, the fact of the immaculate conception is supported by such a miracle, as to leave no doubt upon the most incredulous mind. Hence, too, in the Evangelium Infantia, or Gospel of the Infancy, the Virgin, who is simply said by St. Matthew to have gone 10 Legimus, ne legantur; legimus, ne ignoremus; legimus non ut taneamus, sed ut repudiemus, et ut sciamus qualia sint in quibus magnifici isti cor exultant suum. Comment. in Luc. i. 1. 11 Infancy, iii. 2. Apoc. New Test. pp. 2, 3. It may be proper to state that the translations of the spurious gospels, acts, and epistles, contained in the publication here cited, are taken, irithout acknowledgracnt from Mr. Jones's New Method of settling the Canon, though divided into chapters (which are different from his), and also into verses, in imitation of the editions of the genuine New Testament. The translation of the epistles of the apostolic fathers (which form no part of our inquiry) is acknowledged to be that of Archbishop Wake; and is divided into verses in a Legimus, ne quid ignorare videremur, propter eos qui se putant similar manner. aliquid scire, si ista cognoverint. Homil, in Luc. i. 1. 12 Apoc. New Test. pp 1-8. In further corroboration of the design of exalting the Virgin Mary, she is sometimes made to work miracles herself, is almost always made the instrument or means of working them, and the person applied to, and receiving the praise of the work, while Joseph stands by as an unconcerned spectator, and is never mentioned. But what is most remarkable, is, that she is canonised, and called always (not only by the author of the Gospel, but by those who were perfect strangers to her before in Egypt, and elsewhere) diva Maria and diva sancta Maria; which we know not how better to translate, than in the language of her worshippers, the Lady St. Mary. And aged Simeon in his prayer, which is here chap. ii. v. 25.3 and recorded in Luke ii. 2834. is introduced as stretching out his hands towards her, as though he worshipped her. But of all this the first ages were ignorant; nor in the first centuries after Christ do we find any thing of this prodigious deference to the Virgin: this was an invention of later ages, and was not heard of in the church before the fourth or fifth century, nor was it so common as this book supposes till some centuries after. into Egypt, is represented as making her progress more like a divinity | consumed. In another of these ingenious productions, when Elizathan a mortal, performing, by the assistance of her infant Son, a variety beth wished to shelter her infant son from the persecution of Herod, of miracles, such as might intitle her, in the minds of the blind and she is said to have been thus wonderfully preserved:- Elizabeth also bigotted, to divine honours."2 hearing that her son John was about to be searched for, took him and went up into the mountains, and looked around for a place to hide him; and there was no secret place to be found. Then she groaned within herself, and said, O mountain of the Lord, receive the mother with the child. For Elizabeth could not climb up. And instantly the mountain was divided and received them. And there appeared an angel of the Lord to preserve them."13 Various miracles are said to be wrought both by Mary and her son, particularly by the latter, who is represented as employing his powers to assist Joseph in his trade (he being but a bungling carpenter), especially when he had made articles of furniture of wrong dimensions.14 The various silly miracles attributed to the apostles throughout these writings, are so many arguments to prove that the compilations containing them are apocryphal,-or more correctly, spurious; and that they are either the productions of the weak est of men, who were fondly credulous of every report, and had not discretion enough to distinguish between sense and nonsense, or between that which was credible and that which was utterly unworthy of credit: or else that these compilations are the artful contrivance of some who were more zealous than honest, and who thought by these strange stories to gain credit to their new religion. 4. Things are mentioned, which are later than the time in which the author lived, whose name the book bears. 2. Whoever has perused with candour and attention the memoirs of the four evangelists, cannot but be struck with the natural and harmless manner in which they relate every fact. They never stop to think how this or that occurrence may be set off to most advantage, or how any thing unfavourable to themselves may be palliated. Nothing ludicrous, no impertinent or trifling circumstances are recorded by them. Every thing, on the contrary, proves that they derived the facts which they have related from infallible and indisputable sources of information. Far different was the conduct of the compilers of the apocryphal gospels. The unimportant, impertinent, and frivolous details with which their pages are filled, plainly prove that they were not possessed of any real and authentic information upon the subject, which they undertake to elucidate and clearly invalidate their pretensions as eye-witnesses of the transactions which attended the introduction of the religion of Jesus Christ. Thus, in the pseudo-gospel of the Birth of Mary, we have an idle tale of Christ's ascending the stairs of the temple by a miracle at three years of age, and of angels ministering to Mary in her infancy. So in the prot-evangelion ascribed to James the Less, we are presented with a dull and silly dialogue, between the mother of Mary and her waiting-maid Judith, and with another equally impertinent, between the parents of Mary. We have also in the same performance an account of Mary being fed by angels, and a grave consultation of priests concerning the making of a veil for the temple. The pseudo-gospel of the Infancy, and that ascribed to the apostle Thomas, present childish relations of our Saviour's infancy and education, of vindictive and mischievous miracles wrought by him, of his learning the alphabet, &c. &c.10 3. In the pseudo-gospels of Mary, of the Infancy, and of Thomas (which have been already cited), numerous miracles are ascribed to the mother of Jesus, or to himself in his infancy, which are both USELESS and IMPROBABLE. The proper effect and design of a miracle is to mark clearly the divine interposition; and as we have already seen, the manner and circumstance of such interference must be marked with a dignity and solemnity befitting the more immediate presence of the Almighty. When, therefore, we observe any miraculous acts attributed to persons, not exercising such a commission, performed upon frivolous or improper occasions, or marked by any circumstance of levity or inanity, we conclude that the report of such miracles is unworthy our attention, and that the reporters of them are to be suspected of gross error or intentional deceit. Thus we smile with contempt, at the prodigies of a writer, who gravely relates, as a stupendous miracle, that a child, at the age of three years, ascended without assistance the steps of the temple at Jerusalem, which were half a cubit each in height.12 In the same Gospel, in supposed accommodation to a prophecy of Isaiah, which is most grossly misinterpreted, a declaration from heaven is alleged to have taken place in favour of Joseph the reputed father of Jesus, similar to that which, upon the strongest grounds, we believe to have been made in honour of Jesus at his baptism. The bandage which was mentioned in p. 438. as having been presented by Mary to the magi, is, of course, represented as the instrument of a miracle, being cast into a fire, yet not 11 Infancy, v. vi. Apoc. New. Test. pp. 25-28. Maltby's Illustrations of the Truth of the Christian Religion, p. 40. Apoc. New Test. p. 23. 4 Ch. iv. 6. Apoc. New Test. p. 4. • Ibid. v. 2. Prot-evangelion, ii. 2-6. Apoc. New Test. p. 9. Ibid. vii. 2-4. p. 11. Ibid. viii. 2. p. 12. Ibid. ix. 1-4. p. 13. 10 Apoc. New Test. pp. 21-43. Mr. Jones has given a list of thirty-two trifling and absurd stories, which are found in the pseudo-gospels of the infancy, different from the above. On the Canon, vol. ii. pp. 216-219. and in pp. 152, 153. he has given twelve others from the prot-evangelion, and the Gospel of Mary. See also pp. 347. 404-406. 454. 11 See pp. 95. 98. supra. 12 Gospel of Mary, iv. 6. Apoc. New Test. p. 4. v. 13-17. Ibid. p. 5. Thus the epistle under the name of our Saviour to Abgarus15 is manifestly a forgery, for it relates that to have been done by Christ which could not possibly have been done till a considerable time after Christ's ascension. Thus, in the beginning of the epistle a passage is cited out of St. John's Gospel, which was not written till a considerable forasmuch as you have believed on me whom you have not seen; for it time after our Lord's ascension: the words are, Abgarus, you are happy, is written concerning me, That those who have seen me should not believe on me, that they who have not seen might believe and live. This is a manifest allusion to those words of our Saviour to Thomas (John xx. 29.), Blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed. Here indeed that which the epistle says is written concerning Christ, but in no other passage of the New Testament. The same proof of forgery occurs in the Gospel of Nicodemus,16 in which the Jews style Pilate, your highness,-a title which was not known to the Jews or used among them at that time;-in the story of Christ going down into hell to recover and bring thence the patriarchs;17-in the profound veneration paid to the sign of the cross, particularly the practice of signing with the sign of the cross, which is here said to be done by Charinus and Lenthius,18 before they enter upon their relation of the divine mysteries:-and in Christ's making the sign of the cross upon Adam and upon all the saints in hell19 before he delivered them from that state. It is to be observed that the practice of signing with the cross, though very common in the fourth and following centuries, was not at all known till towards the end of the second century, when by Mr. Jones in various parts of his New Method of settling the Cait was mentioned by Tertullian. Similar anachronisms are pointed out nonical Authority of the New Testament, to which want of room compels us necessarily to refer the reader. See also § 1. p. 363. supra, for some additional instances of anachronism. 5. The style of the authors of the New Testament, we have already seen,20 is an indisputable proof of its authenticity. Whereas the style of the pseudo-evangelical compilations is totally different from, or contrary to, that of the genuine writings of the author or authors whose names they bear. Every page of the apocryphal New Testament confirms this remark; but especially the pretended gospel of Nicodemus, and the epistles of Paul to Seneca. 13 Prot-evangelion, xvi. 3-8. Apoc. New Test. p. 19. 14 And Joseph, wheresoever he went in the city, took the Lord Jesus with him, where he was sent for to work, to make gates or milk-pails, or sieves, or boxes; the Lord Jesus was with him, wheresoever he went. shorter, or wider or narrower, the Lord Jesus would stretch his hand And as often as Joseph had any thing in his work to make longer or towards it, and presently it became as Joseph would have it; so that he had no need to finish any thing with his own hands, for he was not very skilful at his carpenter's trade. On a certain time the king of Jerusalem sent for him and said, 'I would have thee make me a throne, of the same dimensions with that place in which I commonly sit.' Joseph obeyed, and forthwith began the work, and continued two years in the king's palace, before he finished it. And when he came to fix it in its place, he found it wanted two spans on each side of the appointed measure. Which when the king saw, he was very angry with Joseph; and Joseph, afraid of the king's anger, went to bed without his supper, taking not any thing to eat. Then the Lord Jesus asked him, 'What he was afraid of? Joseph replied, 'Because I have lost my labour in the work which I have been about these two years.' Jesus said to him, 'Fear not, neither be cast down; do thou lay hold on one side of the throne, and I will the other, and we will bring it to its just dimensions.' And when Joseph had done as the Lord Jesus said, and each of them had with strength drawn his side, the throne obeyed and was who stood by saw, they were astonished, and praised God. The throne brought to the proper dimensions of the place: which miracle, when they was made of the same wood which was in being in Solomon's time, viz. wood adorned with various shapes and figures." 1 Infancy xvi. (xxxviii. Xxxix. of the chapters adopted byJones and other writers). Apoc. N. T. p. 36. 15 Apoc. New Test. p. 44. 16 Nicodemus i. 7. Ibid. p. 45. 18 Ibid. xii. 24. p. 61. 20 See pp. 48, 49. supra. 17 Ibid. xvii.-xix. pp. 65-67. 19 Ibid. xix. 11. (2.) Nothing can be more unlike the known style of the confessedly genuine epistles, than is the style of the spurious epistles bearing the names of Paul and Seneca, in the apocryphal New Testament. This is so obvious to every one who is at all acquainted with those two writers, that it is unnecessary to multiply examples. The epistles attributed to Paul have not the least vestige of his gravity, but are rather compliments and instructions. Further, the subscriptions of the letters are very unlike those used by the supposed authors in their genuine epistles. Thus, in the first epistle of Seneca, the subscription is, Bene te valere, frater, cupio, I wish your welfare, my brother," which was an appellation exclusively in use among Christians. And in Paul's fifth epistle, to Seneca, he concludes with, Vale, devtoissime magister,-Farewell, most respected master; which is not only contradictory to Paul's usual mode of concluding his letters, but also most barbarous Latinity, such as did not exist in the Roman language till several hundred years after the time of Paul and Seneca. (1.) The names given in the pseudo-gospel of Nicodemus to those | and acting in direct contradiction to the whole of his conduct, and who are represented as being Jews, are not Jewish, but either Greek, zealous endeavours to advance the interests of Christianity. But, be Roman, or of other foreign countries. Such are the names of Summas, sides, it has happened here, as commonly in such cases: want of Datam, Alexander, Cyrus,' Asterius, Antonius, Carus or Cyrus, Crip-memory betrays the forgery. Although the author, so unlike Paul, pas or Crispus,2 Charinus, and Lenthius,3 which evidently indicate in this place wishes not to discover the Christian religion to the em imposture. Further, the Gospel of Nicodemus is not extant in Greek: peror, yet in another epistle, viz. the sixth of Paul, he is made to that which is now extant is evidently a translation into very bald and advise Seneca to take convenient opportunities of insinuating the barbarous Latin.4 Christian religion and things in favour of it, to Nero and his family: than which nothing can be a more manifest contradiction. Similar gross and glaring contradictions occur in the Gospel of Nicodemus. To instance only one or two, which are very notorious. In chap. ii. 14,10 the twelve men, Eliezer, Asterius, Antonius, &c. declare themselves to be no proselytes, but born Jews; when Pilate tendered them an oath, and would have had them swear by the life of Cæsar, they refused, because, they say, we have a law that forbids our swearing, and makes it sinful to swear; yet, in ch. iv. 7. the elders, scribes, priests, and Levites are brought in swearing by the life of Caesar without any scruple ; and in ch. ii. 23.12 they make others, who were Jews, swear by the God of Israel; and Pilate gives an oath to a whole assembly of the scribes, chief priests. &c. ch. xx. 33 This seems a manifest contradiction. Another is, that in ch. xi. 15.4 Pilate is introduced as making a speech to the Jews, in which he gives a true and just abstract of the Old Testament history relating to the Israelites, viz. what God had done for them, and how they had behaved themselves to him. Whereas the same Pilate, ch. xxii. 25, is made to be perfectly ignorant of the Bible, and only to have heard by report that there was such a book; nor can it be said, that Pilate here only refers to the Bible kept in the temple; for the manner of speech shows he was ignorant of the contents of the book: I bave heard you have a certain book, &c. and this is in itself very probable. Such indeed is the whole of it, besides what is taken out of our preFurther, this book contains many things contrary to known truths. sent genuine Gospels. Who, for instance, will credit the long story, ch. xv.-xviii.16 of Christ's going down to hell, and all the romantie fabulous relations of what happened in consequence of it? Who will believe that Christ there signed Adam and the Patriarchs with the sign of the cross, and that all the holy Patriarchs were in hell till that time? &c. Besides, in other places there are notorious falsehoods; as that is, to make the Jews understand our Saviour as saying, that he would destroy Solomon's temple, ch. iv. 4.17, which they could not but know had been destroyed several hundred years before. To make the name Centurio to be the proper name of a man who came to Christ, when it is certain it was the name of his post or office, &c. To make the words of Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 55., O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? to be the words of Isaiah, ch. xxi.; and to make Simeon (ch. xvi. and xvii.) to be a high priest, which it is certain he was not. 6. The apocryphal books ascribed to the apostles and evangelists contain direct contradictions to authentic history both sacred and profane. Thus, in the beginning of the epistle of Abgarus,8 that monarch is made to confess his faith in Christ as God, and as the Son of God; in the latter part he invites Christ to dwell with him in his city, because of the malice of the Jews, who intended him mischief. Now this is a plain contradiction; for had he really thought him God, he must certainly think him possessed of Almighty power, and consequently to be in no need of the protection of his city. This seems to be as clear a demonstration as subjects of this sort are capable of receiving; nor are we aware of any objection that can be made, unless it be that Peter, who had confessed him to be the Son of God (Malt. xvi. 16.), yet when he came to be apprehended thought it necessary to interpose with human force to attempt his rescue. (Matt. xxvi. 51. compared with John xviii. 10.) To which it is easy to answer, that whatever opinion Peter, or indeed any of the apostles, had of Christ before this time, they seem now to have changed it, and by the prospects of his danger and death to have grown cool in their opinion of his Almighty power, else they would never all have forsaken him at his crucifixion, as they did. But nothing of this can be supposed in the case of Abgarus, who cannot be imagined to have 7. The striking contrast between truth and falsehood is altered his sentiments in the interval of writing so short an epistle. naturally heightened, when those passages come under conAgain, several parts of the above cited letters, which profess to be ad-sideration which are borrowed from the genuine Scriptures, dressed to Seneca, suppose Paul to have been, at the time of writing, at and, with more or less deviation from the original, adapted to Rome: whereas others imply the contrary. That he was then at Rome is implied in the first words of the first letter, in which Seneca tells the purposes of the apocryphal writers. 18 Paul, that he supposed he had been told the discourse that passed the day before between him and Lucilius by some Christians who were present: as also in the first words of Paul's Epistle, and that part of Seneca's second, where he tells him, He would endeavour to introduce him to Cæsar, and that he would confer with him, and read over together some parts of his writings; and in that part of Paul's second, where he hopes for Seneca's company, and in several other places. But, on the other hand, several parts of the letters suppose Paul not at Rome, as where Seneca (Epist. iii.) complains of his staying so long away, and both Paul and Seneca are made to date their letters, when such and such persons were consuls: see Paul's fifth and sixth, and Seneca's sixth, seventh, and eighth epistles. Now, had they both been in the same city, nothing can be more unreasonable than to suppose that they would have dated thus: what need could there be to inform each other who were consuls? Paul, therefore, is supposed to be and not to be at Rome at the same time, which is a manifest contradiction. Besides this contradiction, the very dating of their letters by consulships seems to be no small evidence of their spuriousness, because it was a thing utterly unknown that any person ever did so; nor does one such instance occur in the epistles of Seneca, Cicero, or any other writer. To which we may add, that, in these letters, there are several mistakes in the names of the consuls who are mentioned; which clearly prove that these epistles could not have been written by Paul and Seneca. Another circumstance which proves the epistles ascribed to the Apostle to be a gross forgery, is that the latter is introduced as intreating Seneca not to venture to say any thing more concerning him or the Christian religion to Nero, lest he should offend him.9 Now it is utterly improbable that Paul would obstruct Seneca in his intentions of recommending Christianity to the emperor Nero; and it is directly contrary to his known and constant zeal and endeavours for its propagation. Would he not rather have rejoiced in so probable an opportunity of spreading the knowledge of Christ, and by the means of one so near to, and so much in favour with, the emperor, have procured the liberty for himself and the other Christian converts of exercising their religion freely? To imagine the contrary is to suppose the Apostle at once defective in his regards to himself and the whole body of Christians, Thus, the simple fact contained in Matt. i. 19. is expanded through a chapter and a half of the prot-evangelion 19 Again, the plain narrative of Luke ii. 16. is not thought sufficient for the great event, which was just before related, and accordingly it is thus improved in the Gospel of the Infancy:-" After this, when the shepherds came, and had made a fire, and they were exceedingly rejoicing, the heavenly. host appeared to them, praising and adoring the supreme God; and as the shepherds were engaged in the same employment, the cave at that time seemed like a glorious temple, because both the tongues of angels and men united to adore and magnify God, on account of the birth of the Lord Christ. But when the old Hebrew woman saw all these evident miracles, she gave praises to God, and said, I thank thee, O God, thou God of Israel, for that mine eyes have seen the birth of the Saviour of the world."20 The short and interesting account which is given by the genuine evangelist at the end of the same chapter, is considered, by the author of a spurious Gospel, as by no means adequate to the great dignity of our Saviour's character, nor calculated to satisfy the just curiosity of pious Christians. We are therefore informed, that Jesus in his conference with the doctors in the temple, after explaining the books of the law, and unfolding the mysteries contained in the prophetical writings, exhibited a knowledge no less profound of astronomy, medicine, and natural history.21 Hence, too, 10 Apoc. New Test. p. 48. 19 Ibid. p. 61. 13 Ibid. p. 70. 14 Ibid. p. 53. 18 Ibid. pp. 69, 70. 16 Ibid. pp. 63-66. 1 Ibid. p. 49. 18 Bp. Maltby's Illustration, pp. 48, 49. 19 Ch. xiii. xiv. of the editior of Fabricius, but x. xi. of the Apoc. N. T. pp. 14, 15. 11 Ibid. p. 49. 20 Infancy, i. 19-21. (iv. of Fabricius's edition). Apoc. New Tes. p. 22. 21 Gospel of the Infancy (li. lii. of Fabricius), xx. xxi. of Apoc. New Testament, pp. 39-41. The latter part is so curious, and forms such a contrast to the sober narrative of the sacred historians, and indeed of all serious history, that we cannot resist the temptation of transcribing it. "When a certain astronomer who was present asked the Lord Jesus, 'Whether he had studied astronomy? The Lord Jesus replied, and told him the number of the spheres and heavenly bodies, and also their triangular, square, and sextile aspect; their progressive and retrograde motion; their size, and several prognostications; and other things, which the reason of man had never discovered. There was also among them a philosopher well skilled in physic and natural philosophy, who asked the Lord Jesus 'Whether he had studied physic? He replied, and explained to him physics and metaphysics, also those things which were above and below the power of nature; the powers also of the body, its humours, and their effects; also the number of its members, and bones, veins, arteries, and nerves; the several constitutions of body, hot and dry, cold and moist, and 12. And do all things without sin. in the Gospel attributed to Nicodemus, the particulars of our Saviour's | the Lord, so think and act in fear, In the prot-evangelion, there are not fewer than twelve circumstances stolen from the canonical books, and in the Gospel of the birth of Mary six circumstances;2 and by far the greater part of the pretended Gospel of Nicodemus is transcribed and stolen from other books. Nothing can be more evident to any one who is acquainted with the sacred books, and has read this Gospel, than that a great part of it is borrowed and stolen from them. Every such person must perceive, that the greatest part of the history of our Saviour's trial is taken out of our present Gospels, not only because it is a relation of the same facts and circumstances, but also in the very same words and order for the most part; and though this may be supposed to have happened accidentally, yet it is next to impossible to suppose a constant likeness of expression, not only to one, but sometimes to one, and sometimes to another of our evangelists. In short, the author seems to have designed a sort of abstract or compendium of all which he found most considerable to his purpose in our four Gospels; though he has but awkwardly enough put it together.3 But the most flagrant instance, perhaps, of fraudulent copying from the canonical books, is to be found in the pretended epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans, almost every verse of which is taken from the great apostle's genuine writings, as will appear from the following collation, which is taken from Mr. Jones's work on the Canon, whose translation is reprinted without acknowledgment in the Apocryphal New Testament." The Epistle of St. Paul to the La odiceans. 1. Paul an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, to the brethren which are at Laodicea. 2. Grace be to you, and peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 3. I thank Christ in every prayer of mine, that ye continue and persevere in good works, looking for that which is promised in the day of judgment. 4. Let not the vain speeches of any trouble you, who pervert the truth, that they may draw you aside from the truth of the Gospel which I have preached. 5. And now may God grant, that my converts may attain to a perfect knowledge of the truth of the Gospel, be beneficent, and doing good works which accompany salvation. 6. And now my bonds, which I suffer in Christ are manifest, in which I rejoice, and am glad. 7. For I know that this shall turn to my salvation for ever, which shall be through your pray er, and the supply of the Holy Spirit. 8. Whether I live or die; (for) to me to live shall be a life to Christ, to die will be joy. 9. And our Lord will grant us his mercy, that ye may have the same love, and be like minded. 10. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have heard of the coming of The places in St. Paul's genuine 2. Galat. i. 3. Grace be to you, and peace from God the Father, 4. Galat. i. 7. There be some that trouble you, and would per- 13. And what is best, my beloved, rejoice in the Lord Jesus Christ, and avoid all filthy lucre. 14. Let all your requests be made known to God, and be steady in the doctrine of Christ. 15. And whatsoever things are sound, and true, and of good report, and chaste, and just, and lovely, these things do. 16. Those things which ye have heard, and received, think on these things, and peace shall be with you. 17. All the saints salute you. 18. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen. 19. Cause this epistle to be read of the Colossians to be read among to the Colossians, and the Epistle you. 441 ed, &c. work out your salvation with fear; 11. Phil. ii. 13. For it is God who worketh in you. 12. Phil. ii. 14. Do all things without murmuring, &c. ver. 15. that ye may be blameless. 13. Phil. iii. 1. Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. 14. Phil. iv. 6. Let your requests be made known unto God. things are honest, whatsoever 15. Phil. iv. 8. Whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, &c. which ye have both learned and 16. Phil. iv. 9. Those things received, and heard and seen,— do, and the God of peace shall be with you. 17. Phil. iv. 22. All the saints salute you. 18. Galat. vi. 18. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with your spirit. Amen. 19. Col. iv. 16. that it be read also in the church And when this Epistle is read amongst you, cause of the Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the Epistle from Laodicea. New Testament is established by the accounts of countries, 8. Lastly, as the credibility of the genuine books of the firmed by the relations of contemporary writers, both friends governors, princes, people, &c. therein contained, being conand enemies to Christians and Christianity (and especially by the relations of hostile writers); so the spuriousness of the pseudo-evangelical writings is demonstrated by their containby the narratives of those writers who were contemporary with ing GROSS FALSEHOODs, and statements which are contradicted the supposed authors of them. emperor (Nero) was delighted and surprised at the thoughts and sentiThus, in the fourth of Seneca's epistles to Paul, we read that the ments in Paul's epistle to the Churches; and in the fourth of Paul's epistle to the philosopher, that the emperor is both an admirer and favourer of Christianity. These assertions are notoriously false, and Contrary to the unanimous relations of heathen and Christian writers Mary contains at least two gross falsehoods and contradictions to hisconcerning Nero and his regard to the Christians. The Gospel of torical fact; and not fewer than seven equally glaring instances exist in the pseudo-gospel or prot-evangelion of James; six others occur in the two gospels of Christ's infancy, which relate things notoriously and holy doctrine, which prohibited revenge, and promoted univercontrary to the benevolent design of Christ's miracles, and to his pure sal charity and love. Lastly, for it would exceed the limits of this article (already perhaps too much extended) to specify all the absurd falsehoods contained in the spurious writings which we have been considering;-the Acts of Paul and Thecla directly falsify the doctrines and practice of the Apostle, concerning the unlawfulness of marriage, (which he is here said to have taught, though the reverse is evident to the most cursory reader of his epistle); and concerning the preaching of women-Thecla being said to be commisto the practice of both Jews and Gentiles, but also to St. Paul's posisioned by him to preach the gospel, though it was not only contrary tive commands in his genuine epistles. 10 But what proves the utter him to have been a man of unimpeachable veracity, is introduced in spuriousness of these Acts of Paul and Thecla,-if any further proof were wanting,-is the fact that Paul, whose life and writings bespeak them as uttering a wilful and deliberate lie. That he is so introduced is evident; for after an intimate acquaintance between Paul and is presently made to deny her, and to tell Alexander, I know not the Thecla, and their having taken a journey together to Antioch,12 he woman of whom you speak, nor does she belong to me. But how contrary this is to the known and true character of St. Paul every one must see. He, who so boldly stood up for the defence of the Gospel against all sorts of opposition, who hazarded and suffered all things beloved, as ye have always obey-never would so easily have been betrayed to so gross a crime, as to for the sake of God and a good conscience, which he endeavoured to 10. Phil. ii. 12. Wherefore, my keep void of offence towards God and man, most unquestionably make a sacrifice of the credit of his profession, and the peace of his conscience, at once upon so slight a temptation and provocation. Nor will it be of any force to object here, that in the received Scriptures, 6. Phil. i. 13. My bonds in this shall turn to my salvation 8. Phil. i. 20, 21. Whether it 9. Phil. ii. 2. That he be likeminded, having the same love. the tendencies of them: how the soul operated upon the body; what its various sensations and faculties were: the faculty of speaking, anger, de sire; and, lastly, the manner of its composition and dissolution; and other things, which the understanding of no creature had ever reached. Then that philosopher arose, and worshipped the Lord Jesus, and said, 'O Lord Jesus, from henceforth I will be thy disciple and servant."" 1 Gospel of Nicodemus iii. 11--14. Apoc. New Test. p. 48. They are enumerated by Mr. Jones. on the Canon, vol. ii. pp. 153-156. See Jones on the Canon, vol. ii. pp. 349, 350, where the above remark is confirmed by many examples. 4 Vol. ii. pp. 33-35. VOL. I. Apoc. New Test. pp. 73, 74. 3 K Epist. viii. in Apoc. New Test. p. 76. 11 Ch. xiv. xvii.-ii. vi. of Apoc. New Test. pp. 80. 84. |