Chrift himself, reckons one entitled The Parables and Sermons of Chrift, as mentioned by Eufebius, Hift. Eccl. 1. 3. c.39. At first view of this, one would be ready to conclude, that ·. fome fuch book under this title there certainly was written by our Saviour, feeing it is mentioned by fo credible an author as Eufebius. But let the reader observe here a plain instance either of the unfairness or blundering of that filly writer; for it is evident Eufebius never thought any thing of fuch a book, either wrote by Christ, or that went under his name. The paffage referred to is this; speaking of Papias, and his fondnefs for traditions, he adds, Καὶ ἄλλα δὲ ὁ αὐτὸς συγΓραφεὺς, ὡς ἐκ παραδόσεως αδράφε εἰς αὐτὸν ἥκοντα, παρα]έ θειται ξένας τέ τινας παραβολὰς το Σωτῆρος, καὶ διδασ καλίας αὐτε, καί τινα ἄλλα μυθικώτερα, &c. That writer farther declares, &c. Among these one was the Millennium. It is ftrange Mr. Toland would either fuffer himself to be fo much impofed upon, or endeavour to impofe upon his readers a thing fo very grofs, as to call that a book written by Chrift, and cite Eufebius for it, when Eufebius expressly fays, it was no book at all, but only fome fabulous traditionary ftories of Chrift, which the credulous Papias had collected. I take it then for granted, that we have no mention of any books as written by our Saviour till the fourth century; which premifed, I come to enquire, what mention is made of ⚫hem there. Numb. Numb. XII. The EPISTLE of CHRIST to PETER and PAUL. T. AUSTIN difputing against the Pagans intimates, that they pretended to have feen or read fome books which were written by Christ. His words are these a Ita vero ifti defipiunt, ut in illis libris, quos eum fcripfiffe exiftimant, dicant contineri eas artes, quibus eum putant ea feciffe miracula, quorum fama ubique percrebuit ;Quid quod etiam divino judicio fic errant quidam eorum, qui talia Chriftum fcripfiffe vel credunt, vel credi volunt, ut eofdem libros ad Petrum et Paulum dicant, tanquam epiftolari titulo prænotatos. a; They are fo ftrangely infatuated, as to affert, that in those books which they suppose Chrift to have written, are contained those arts, by which he wrought his celebrated miracles.They are fo blinded by the judgment of God upon them, who believe or would have others believe that Chrift wrote fuch books, as to fay, that the books are wrote in the form of an Epif tle to Peter and Paul. It is not very difficult to form a judgment concerning these fpurious pieces; and indeed the folly of them is fo well demonftrated by St. Austin, that I need do little more than give the reader his words. He firft feems to question the fincerity of their relation as to the fact: "If they have, fays he, any " fuch books which they affirm Chrift to have written, let them "produce them to us. They must neceffarily be very useful and "edifying books, which were written by one whom themselves "efteemed as a man of the greatest wisdom. If they are afraid "to produce them, it is a fign they are bad; and if they are bad, they could not be written by the wifeft of men; but "fuch they confefs Chrift to have been, therefore Chrift did not "write any fuch book.-A little after, Why do not they who affirm they have read fuch books do fome fuch works, as they * De Confenf. Evang. Lib. 1. c. 9, 10. T. Opp. 4. "with wonder own he did by them ?" In the rest of the chapter this pious Father fhews it impoffible that this book fhould not be a forgery, by this good argument, that St. Paul was not a Chriftian until a confiderable time after Chrift's afcenfion, and so could not be joined with Peter, as a Difciple of Chrift, and receive a letter from him, unless it was fent by poft from heaven. It is manifeft therefore this book must be reckoned Apocryphal and spurious by Prop. IV, V, and VI. as alfo by Prop. VIII. it containing things contrary to certainly known and undoubted truths, which being such also as are subverfive of the whole defign and doctrine of Chriftianity, viz. That Chrift wrought his miracles by magical arts, prove it Apocryphal by Coroll. Prop. VIII. Whether this book was forged by a Heathen or a Christian, is not very easy to determine. St. Austin supposes the latter "; which indeed seems the more probable conjecture, and because it is a very ingenious one, it may be worth while to transcribe it. "Perhaps," fays he, " it was the contrivance of "fome, who fancied by writing fuch books, under the names "of Chrift and his Apoftles, they could gain fome weight "and authority from fo glorious a name to thele execrable "arts; but were fo infatuated in their impudent impofture, "as justly to expose themselves to the laughter of children, " and those who were only able to read (in gradu lectorum) "the Christian books. For when they had resolved to forge "fuch a Letter under the name of Chrift to his Apostles, "they contrived to inscribe it to those to whom it was most likely to be believed that Chrift would have wrote, viz. "those who were moft familiar with him, and fo most worthy of having fuch a fecret committed to them; hereupon << they presently thought of Peter and Paul, because, I fup"pose, they had often seen these two pictured with Christ, "seeing the paffion of Peter and Paul on the same day is fre"quently and folemnly celebrated at Rome." See Auguft. c. 9. lib. cit. b I interpret this of a Chriftian, because he makes a plain oppofition between thefe, and thofe whom he calls inimici nominis Chrifti, i. e. Heathens. If If this conjecture be just, we see an instance of the pious frauds of the first Christians in forging books, which I affigned as one reason of the great number of Apocryphal pieces, in the first part of this work, chap. iv. Numb. XIII. Another BOOK under the NAME of F this we have fome account in another part of the laft Primo mihi difcutiendum oc- I judged it neceffary first to difcufs a queftion moved by fome [Pagans], Why we [Chriftians] can produce no books written by Christ himself? For fo they would perfuade us, that he wrote fome other fort of book (different from the Evangelifts), which they efteem, and in which he appears to have thought nothing to the prejudice of their Gods, but on the other hand himself to have worshipped them with magical ceremonies, and that hisDifciples did not only affert false things of him, in saying, That he was the God by whom all things were made, when he was no more than a mere man, though of most extraordinary wisdom, but that he did not teach thofe things concerning their Gods which they (pretended to have )learnt. it was certainly wrote by St. Austin, though it be not in my edition. It would feem at first view, the book here mentioned was the fame with the foregoing, each of them treating concerning the magick of Chrift; but, if I mistake not, there is a probable reafon at least to conclude them to have been different, becaufe St. Auftin fuppofes the former to have been composed by fome impious Chriftian; but this he could not poffibly conceive to have the fame original. It is poffible a Chriftian fo called (for there were many in those days little more so than in name) might conceive a magical book, and publish it under the name of Chrift, which is the case in respect of the former book; but it is impoffible a person should take upon him the Christian name, and write a book to prove Chrift a worshipper of the idol Gods, to countenance the Heathens in their idolatry, and to make all his Apostles and Disciples impoftors and liars, which is the cafe with refpect to the book now under confideration. However this be, it was certainly Apocryphal by Prop. IV, V, VI, and VIII. After reading what has been said concerning these two magical books afcribed to Chrift, I hope no one will be furprised at the mention of them; nor is it ftrange, fuch forged accounts fhould be published, when we find that as the Jews objected to our Saviour himself, that he wrought his miracles by the power of devils, Matt. xii. 24. fo both Jews and Gentiles endeavoured to spread the fame malicious lies in the first ages of Christianity. Celfus frequently makes this impious objection, that Chrift learned his magical arts from the Egyptians, among whom he had his education. The fame we meet with frequently as made by others in the writings of Eufebius, Arnobius, Austin, &c. The Jews have a trite idle fable to the fame purpose, That in the reign of Queen Helena there was a stone in the temple of Jerufalem, on which the ark was formerly placed, on which was engraved v Wi. e. the name Jehovah, in fuch letters that it might a Vid. Origen. contra Celf. I. 1. p. 30. & 1. 8. p. 384. & Spencer. Annot. in lib. 1. p.7. Contr. Hieroc. & Demonft. Evang. 1. 3. §. 6. c Contr. Gent. 1. 1. p. 15. Loc. fuprà cit. & Serm. xi. in Matth. p. 38. Tom. Opp. 10. be |