the deftruction of the city, which supposes the pool ftill standing.

(3.) Suppose the pool was destroyed, and John to have known it, there is no impropriety in using the verb isì, nothing being more common among writers, than to use verbs in the prefent tense to denote the preterperfect tenfe. This is efpecially remarkable in, and observed by all the criticks on, the New Teftament. See inftances in Glaffius, Gram. Sacr. 1. 3. Tract. 3. Can. 48.

(4.) Several of the antient manuscripts and versions read the verb in the paft time. (See Dr. Mill Annot. in loc.) and fo Nonnus paraphrases the place,

Ἦν δέ τις εὐποίητος ἐν εὐνδρῳ προβατικῇ

Εὐρυτενὴς ἀσάμινθος

III. St. John's Gospel was tranflated into Hebrew. The credit of this depends upon what we read in Epiphanius, in the three feveral places referred to at the bottom of the page.

b

IV. St. John's Gospel was admired by the Platonifts. Amelius fwore, the Barbarian (fo the Grecians called all but themselves) was in the right in his account of the WORD, &c. and Austin tells us, he was informed by Simplicianus, Bishop of Milan, that a certain Platonist faid, the beginning of St. John's Gospel deferved to be written in letters of gold, and to be read in all publick affemblies.

V. The Style of St. John's Gospel was judged by Dionyfius Alexandrinus, to be elegant and pure in respect of the Greek, and the whole compofure to be beautiful in words and thoughts, without any barbarifms, folecifms, or idiotifms in it, the author being endowed both with the advantage of learning, and words, or eloquence. Some of the moderns have very pofitively determined otherwife; Grotius and Dr. Cave have

e

d Apud Eufeb. Hift. Eccl. 1. 7.

c. 25.

Annot. in Joan. Titul. f Lib. cit. §. 16.

told

told us, one after the other, That his Greek generally abounds with Syriacifms, his difcourfes many times abrupt, fet off with frequent antithefes, connected with copulatives, paffages often repeated, things at first more obfcurely propounded, and which he is forced to enlighten with subsequent explications, words peculiar to himself, and phrases used in an uncommon fenfe. How juft this is, I fhall leave to the reader to determine, only adding a remark of Sixtus Senenfis &, That St. John had this peculiarity in his style, to make the last word of the former fentence, to be the first of the next.

CHAP. XV.

St. John's Gospel proved by feveral Arguments to be Canonical. An Objection against it refuted. It was not wrote by Gerinthus.

HAT which remains farther, is to evidence the Ca

Tonical authority of St. John's Gofpel, by the Propo

fitions which are laid down in the firft Part, viz.

Arg. I. St. John's Gospel is to be esteemed Canonical by Prop. IV. because it is found in all the Catalogues of Sacred books, which we have among the writings of the primitive Chriftians. See what is faid under this argument in treating of the preceding Gospels, and how it is in the Catalogue of Origen, Eufebius, Athanafius, Cyril, that of the council of Laodicea, Epiphanius, Gregory Nazianzen, Philaftrius, Jerome, Ruffin, Austin, that in the third council of Carthage, and in the books under the name of Dionyfius the Areopagite. Vol. I. Part I. Ch. VIII.

a Bibl. Sanct. lib. 6. Annot. 173.

b See Vol. I. of this work, Part I. Ch. XII. p. 8o.

Arg.

Arg. II. The Gospel of St. John is Canonical, because it is rited and appealed to as Scripture, in the writings of the primitive Chriftians, by Prop. V.

I shall here, as in treating of the former books, fhew the feveral places of those antient authors, who have cited this Gofpel. It is cited;

I. By CLEMENS ROMANUS.

I find but one place in his Epistles, wherein he appears to have cited St. John, viz. Epift. I. §. 49. he manifeftly ufes those words of this Gofpel, Ch. x. 15.

II. By BARNABAS.

The author of this Epiftle feems plainly to have made use of this Gofpel, Ch. VII. for he there not only mentions the circumftance of our Saviour's being pierced at his crucifixion, which is related only by St. John, (xix. 34.) but manifeftly applies that prophecy, Zech. xii. 10. And they fhall look upon me whom they have pierced, to this circumftance of Chrift's paffion; as St. John alfo does, ver. 37. What ftrengthens and feems to render this evidence undeniable is, that the author cannot be supposed to have thus applied the prophecy from his own reading of it in the prophet; for he, not being a Jew, understood not the Hebrew, but must be supposed to have cited (as he usually does) out of the LXX. Version. Now the LXX. have rendered this place very different from the Hebrew, and that through a blunder or mistake in their reading, confounding with and with in one and the fame word, reading, viz. 17p instead of 17p7, and fo tranflating καταρχήσαντο, they infulted, intead of ἐξεκέντησαν, they pierced; as St. John following the Hebrew does rightly tranflate. This obfervation of the LXX.'s mistake, was first made by Jerome, and after him by Erafmus, Beza, Lightfoot, Hammond,

a Ad Pammach. de optimo Genere Interpret. c. 3. An inftance of a like miftake committed by the LXX. the learned may obferve, Amos ix. 12.

where instead of the Hebrew words,

i. e. that יירשו. שארית אדום

they may pojefs the remnant of Edom,

mond, and other critics on John xix. 37. Hence it is plain, that the author of this Epiftle did certainly use St. John's Gofpel; and what is farther remarkable to my purpose, uses the very fame verb. I am fenfible indeed, that fome of the old Greek copies have these words, as St. John; but it is plain from Jerome, that it was not fo in the old LXX. and if it was fo in the Verfions of Aquila, Symmachus, or Theodotion, these were made after the time, in which the author of this Epiftle is supposed to have wrote.

V. By THEOPHILUS ANTIOCHENUS.

In his fecond book to Autolycus, he cites John i. 1, 2, &c. and introduces it thus, Διδάσκεσιν ἡμᾶς αἱ ἅγιαι γραφαί, καὶ πάντες οἱ πνευματοφόροι, ἐξ ὧν Ἰωάννης λέγει, &c. i. e. So the holy Scriptures teach, and all the inspired writers, among whom is John, who faith, In the beginning was the word, &c.

VI. BY IRENEUS.

I have obferved above, treating of St. Matthew's Gospel, that Feuardentius, at the end of his edition of this Father, has made with great exactnefs an index of moft of the citations, made by Irenæus from St. Matthew. The fame is to be faid of his index of St. John, in which though he has not collected all, yet he has most of, the references made to it. I have examined all thofe, and obferved feveral others, and dare affirm, that Irenæus has appealed to, or cited this Gofpel, in above one hundred and twenty feveral places. It would be needless to transcribe them. I fhall felect only those places, where St. John's Gospel is referred to by name, viz.

1 John i. 1, &c. Adv. Hæref. lib. 1. c. 1. lib. 2. c. 2. lib. 3. c. 11. &c. lib. 5. c. 18. lib. 3. c. 8. lib. 3. c. 18, &c.

I will only observe farther from this antient Father, that he feveral times cites this Gofpel under the exprefs and diftinguishing name of SCRIPTURE, or THE SCRIPTURE; fo for inftance, citing John i. 3. (lib. i. cap. 19.) he introduces it thus, Quemadmodum Scriptura dicit, i. e. As THE SCRIPTURE SAITH. Again, citing John xiv. 6. (lib. 3. c. 5.)

a

Though the words do indeed

introduce another text, yet it is

evident they are also to be referred to this.