Dr. Lightfoot, in another part of his works, has a quite different conjecture concerning the passage of St. Paul under debate, which though perhaps it be entirely groundless, may not be unworthy of the learned reader's notice. It is, in fhort, a fort of compounding the matter between thofe, who imagine a former Epiftle to the Corinthians now loft, and those who think the contrary. I fhall think it fufficient, having having said so much on this head already, to give the reader a translation of the Doctor's own words: "The Apostle," fays he," had fent Timothy to the Corinthians, before he wrote "this Epiftle to them (chap. iv. 17.) and it is probable he "had sent some Epistle by him, in which he had written "thus (viz. the words of verse the ninth; that they should "not keep company with fornicators.) But when Stephen, "Fortunatus and Achaicus came, and laid before him the "ftate of the Church at Corinth, and gave him both letters "and certain queftions from that Church, inasmuch as "they knew Timothy was not yet arrived at Corinth, he

comprehends and fuperfedes (or fuppreffes) that former "Epiftle in this. So that in fome fenfe you may truly fay "that Epiftle is loft, inafmuch as an exact copy of it is not "now extant; but in another sense you cannot truly say so, "because all things which were contained in that Epistle, we "have in that which is now extant, and many other things " befides."

Hor. Hebr. in 1 Cor. v. 9.

CHAP.

CHA P. IV.

An Epiftle, under St. Paul's Name, to the Corinthians, and of the Corinthians to St. Paul, now extant in an Armenian Manufcript, tranflated out of Mr. La Croze's Latin into English, with fome Remarks.

HE preceding pages being taken up with an enquiry into that important queftion, whether St. Paul wrote any Epiftle to the Church of Corinth, before either of those which are now extant; it will not be foreign to the fame purpose to obferve, that there are now extant in the world an Epiftle under the name of St. Paul to the Corinthians (different from the received ones) and an Epiftle under the name of the Church of Corinth to St. Paul. It is not indeed properly my business here to make any enquiry into Apocryphal pieces now extant ; that being left for the third Part of this work, and the loft books only proposed to come under confideration here. But inafmuch as these two Epiftles will not in any other part of this work come within my proposal to be difcuffed, designing only to enquire into those pieces which are mentioned by fome writer of the first four centuries, whereas thefe are not by any, I hope it will not be unacceptable, if I digress a little here: and, fince I have been difcourfing so much on a lost Epistle of St. Paul's to the Corinthians, prefent the reader with these two antient pieces, which I believe have not yet appeared in our language, nor till lately in Europe, adding fome short reflections on them.

The firft account, as far as I know, of them in print, is that of the learned Dr. Gregory in the Preface to his notes on fome paffages of Scripture: "I have seen," fays he, "the third "Epiftle of St. Paul to the Corinthians in the Armenian " tongue, beginning, Paul a fervant of Jefus Christ, &c. " and an Epistle of the Corinthians to St. Paul in the fame "tongue, beginning, Stephen, &c. to our Brother Paul greet"ing." In a Latin marginal note, he adds, that the manu

script with an Italian verfion was in the library of Sir Gilbert North. The famous Archbishop Ufher faw the fame manuscript in the fame learned gentleman's custody, and only informs us farther, that it was wrote at Smyrna, taking a small fentence out of the Epiftle of the Corinthians to Paul. In the year 1715, Mr. David Wilkins tranflated both Epiftles out of the Armenian tongue into Latin, from a manuscript in the library of Mr. Masson at Utrecht, which are fince printed by Fabritius, with another Latin version made by Mr. La Croze, library keeper to the King of Pruffia, in the year 1716, from which, as being the laft, and, as he says, a more literal and exact verfion than the former, I have made the following one in English.

The EPISTLE of the CORINTHIANS to ST. PAUL.

S

N. B. I place this first, because the other is evidently
defigned as an Answer to this.

TEPHEN, and the prefbyters who are with him, Neme

nus, Eubulus, Theophilus, and Nomefon, to our Brother Paul, greeting. Certain men, whofe names are Simon and Clobeus, are come to Corinth, who by their artful and delufive speeches have very much shocked the faith of some, to which it is incumbent on you to make answer yourself; for we have neither heard from you, or any other Apostle, fuch doctrines. But this one thing we know, that we faithfully retain (or observe) whatever we learnt from you, or the other (Apoftles.) We esteem it a very great inftance of divine compaffion to us, that you are still in the body with us, and that we may again hear you, (or from you.) As foon therefore as may be, either write to us what we must stedfastly hold (as truth), or else, let it not be long before you vifit us in person.

a Vid. Not. in Epist. Ignat. ad Trall. §. 84.

Fabrit. Cod. Apoc. Nov. Teft. Par. 3. p. 667.

See his Remarks upon thefe Armenian Epiftles, in Fabrit. Cod. Apoc. Nov. Teft. Par. 3. p. 680. & p. 683.

We

1

We believe in the Lord, and that he fhewed himself in a manifeft manner, and has delivered us from the hands of the evil one. But their words are erroneous; for they say, there is no neceffity of reading the Prophets; That God is not Almighty; That there will be no refurrection of the dead; That flesh is not by any means made by God; That the body of Jefus Christ was not born of the virgin Mary; and laftly, That the world was not made by God, but by fome angel. Endeavour therefore, Brother, to come speedily to us, that the city of Corinth may continue without offences, and the folly (or ignorance) of those men may be brought to a juft contempt before all. Farewell in the Lord.

The EPISTLE of PAUL to the CORINTHIANS.

PAUL

AUL, a prifoner of Jefus Chrift, to the Brethren at Corinth, haraffed with various trials, greeting. I do not at all wonder, that ye are so foon accofted with fuch, who would draw you afide to impiety. For as our Lord Jefus is about foon to haften (or perfect) his coming, there are (or ras ther will be) thofe, who both change and defpife his commandments. But I from the beginning did teach you the very fame things, which I received from the former Apostles, who had conftant converfation with our Lord. I fay then, that our Lord Jesus was born of the virgin Mary, of the seed of David, according to that which the Holy Spirit fent into her by the Father from heaven declared, namely, that Jefus fhould appear in the world, and by his flefh fhould work deliverance for all flesh, and raise us again from the dead; of which refurrection he gave us à plain inftance in himself. Farther, it is manifeft, that man was created by the Father, and therefore not so abandoned to mifery, but that he should be again fought after with care; for he was fo fought after, as that by a filial adoption he might obtain life. For God, who is the Lord of all, and the Father of our Lord Jefus Christ, first sent Prophets to the Jews, to diffuade them from their fins, and incite them to righteousness: for when he intended the falvation of the houfe of Ifrael, he bestowed his Holy

VOL. I.

L

Holy Spirit, and fent him into the Prophets, who preached the worship of God not liable to error, and the birth (of Chrift) for a very long time.

I fhall not here enter into any particular criticism on these two letters, no mention being made of them within my prefcribed 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 Epiftle to the Church of Corinth before either of thofe now received, and which he refers to in the words above çited, I Cor. v. 9. this Epistle here tranflated 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 overfight in Mr. Wilkins, the tranflator of thefe Epiftles, in his dedication of them to Mr. La Croze, to defire his opinion, whether St. Paul did not refer to this Epiftle of his in the forementioned place.

2dly. This Epiftle under the name of St. Paul to the Corinthians, is certainly spurious; because,

I. It is not mentioned by any one writer of the primitive Church in the firft four centuries, nor indeed by any Chriftian author in any age till the laft. 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 Syriack copies of the New Teftament, 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 fecond coming of Chrift being very near, in the beginning of the Epiftle; a notion which was very much efpoufed by fome of the antient hereticks. See Dr. Hammond on 2 Theff. ii. 2.

3. It contains feveral things very unlike to, and different from St. Paul's known way of writing; and therefore spurious by Prop. XI. Such for instance,