ページの画像
PDF
ePub

CHAP. XX.

The Gospel of Mary and the Protevangelion of James proveď Apocryphal, because of the many idle and fabulous Things which they contain. A Collection of thefe. The Protevangelion is Apocryphal, because it contains feveral Contradictions; and both are so, because they are not in the Syriack Verfion.

THE

ARG. V. THE Gospel of the Birth of Mary, and the Protevangelion of James, are Apocryphal by Prop. IX. because they contain things ludicrous and trifling, fabulous and filly relations. To collect all these would be almost the same as tranfcribing the whole books themselves; because, befides what is taken out of the received Canonical books, they contain little but things of this nature. I fhall think it fufficient to prefent the reader with a few remarkable inftances.

A Collection of feveral trifling Stories and fabulous Relations in the Protevangelion of James, and the Gospel of the Birth of Mary.

In the Protevangelion are the following.

1. The ftory of Joachim's fafting forty days and forty nights in the wilderness (ch. i.), appears an idle forgery in imitation of the faft which Mofes and Chrift kept of forty days and nights in the wilderness, Exod. xxiv. 18. Matt. iv. 3.

2. The prayer of Anna (c. iii.) seems very trifling; and if it were really conceived by her, yet very unworthy the notice of an infpired writer.

3. The Virgin's walking nine fieps at fix months of age, ch. vi.

4. God's fending down power from heaven to the Virgin to leap and dance upon the third step of the Altar, ch. vii.

5. The Virgin's being fed, and receiving her food from the hand of an angel, ch. viii.

6. A dove flying out of Jofeph's rod, and lighting upon his head, ch. ix.

7. The Virgin's hearing the angel's fongs, ch. xv.

8. The ceafing of all forts of motion at our Saviour's birth, and the ridiculous account of the aftonishment of the air, fowls stopping in the midst of their flight, men who fat at table not eating, their hands lift up to their mouths, and not having power to put any. thing in, their eyes all upwards, the fhepherd's lifting up his hand to fmite the sheep, and his hand continuing lift up, the kids with their mouths at the water, and not being able to drink, ch. xviii.

9. Elizabeth's praying that the mountain should open, and the mountain opening accordingly to receive her, ch. xxii.

In the Gospel of the Birth of Mary, I only obferve the idle account,

1. Of the Virgin's familiarity with angels, and her receiving daily vifits from them, c. vii.

2. Of the dove's defcending from heaven, and pitching upon the top of Jofeph's rod, c. viii.

3. Of the Virgin's knowing the countenance of the angels, c. ix.

ARG. VI. The Gospel of the Birth of Mary, and the Protevangelion of James, are Apocryphal by Prop. XIV. because they appear plainly to be stolen or transcribed out of several parts of the received and Canonical Scriptures. I fhall endeavour to fhew the fact first, and then the force of the confequence.

As to the fact, it seems evident by the instances following.

Inftances in the Protevangelion of accounts borrowed from the
Canonical books.

1. Joachim's fafting forty days and forty nights, ch. i. feems to be taken from the faft of Mofes, Exod. xxiv. 18. Elijah, 1 Kings xix. 8. and our Saviour, Matt. iv. 2. who are recorded to have fafted during the fame space of time precisely.

2. The

[ocr errors]

2. The Story of Anna's barrenness, her praying for a child (ch. ii. iii.), her devoting him to the temple (ch. iv.), seems all to be taken from the hiftory of Hannah (1 Sam, i.), where we meet with the very fame relations.

3. The account of Joachim's making a great feast, when the child, which his wife after long barrennefs had brought forth, was a year old, ch. vi. seems to be taken from the like hiftory of Abraham's making a feaft, when Ifaac the child, which Sarah after long barrennefs bare to him, was weaned, Gen. xxi. 8.

4. Anna's being made to fing a fong of praise on account of her child, feems to be founded on Hannah's prayer or fong, 1 Sam. ii. 1, &c. and the thoughts are agreeable, as the phrafe is taken from that of Rachel, Gen. xxx. 23.

5. The ftory of Zacharias the High-priest being dumb, (ch. x.) is formed from that of Zacharias, the Baptift's father, Luke i. 20, 62, &c.

6. The angel's falutation of the Virgin (ch. xi.), is the fame, and in the very fame words, with that, Luke i. 28.

7. The angel's relation to Mary (ch. xi.) of the conception and birth of Christ, and of the conception of John by Elizabeth, is exactly the fame with that in Luke i. 30-39. and expreffed in almoft all the fame words.

8. The account of Mary's going to Elizabeth, the child's leaping in her womb thereupon, her speech to Mary, &c. feems plainly taken out of Luke i. 39, &c.

9. Jofeph's reafoning concerning Mary's being with child, and the angel's appearing to him (ch. xiv.), is a plain paraphrase of Matt. i. 19, &c.

10. The charge from heaven given to Salome not to publish the miracle wrought for her by touching Chrift (ch. 20.), seems taken from our Saviour's frequent commands to those for whom he wrought miracles, not to publifh what he had done for them, and particularly from that charge which he gave

[blocks in formation]

upon the working the very fame miracle (viz. curing a withered hand), Matt. xii. 16.

II. The hiftory of the wife men, with its various circumftances and confequences, ch. xxi. and Herod's killing the children, ch. xxii. appears a manifeft tranfcript of the second chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, only with this confiderable difference, that the circumftance of our Saviour's being wrapped in fwaddling clothes, and laid in a manger at his birth, because there was no room in the inn, which is related by St. Luke (ch. ii. 7.), is here most aukwardly applied to Mary's hiding the child from the search of Herod, and that in the very words of St. Luke; a plain instance of a forgery.

12. The ftory of Simeon (ch. xxiv.), viz. his having a revelation that he should not die till he should fee Chrift, seems to be taken from Luke iv. 26. not only because the sense, but the very words in the Greek are the fame.

Inftances in the Gospel of the Birth of Mary of accounts borrowed from the Canonical books.

1. The Hiftory of Joachim and Anna devoting their child to the fervice of God in the temple, ch. i. and vi. is the fame with that of Anna, 1 Sam. i. See the former inftances, Numb. 2.

2. The phrafe, ch. iii. Thy prayers are heard, and thine alms come up before God, which is made use of by the angel to Joachim, is the very fame with that which the angel made ufe of to Cornelius, Acts x. 4.

3. The character given to Anna, Luke ii. 37. viz. that she did not depart from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers, is manifeftly borrowed hence, and made by the angel to be the future character of the Virgin Mary, c. iv.

4. The compendium of the song of praife, which Joachim and Anna fang to God for the promise of a child, viz. that he exalted the humble, is borrowed from the fong of Mary, Luke i. 52. in which she praised God for the promise of her bringing forth Chrift.

5. The angel's falutation to Mary (ch. ix) is the fame with that, Luke i. 28, 29.

6. Jofeph's

6. Jofeph's hesitating what to do (ch. x.) is a manifest paraphrafe of Matthew i. 19.

From thefe inftances it is very evident that the author or authors of the Gofpel of the Birth of Mary, and the Protevangelion of James, formed a very large part of those books from, and accommodated them to, feveral hiftories of the Old and New Teftament. It is manifeft they borrowed their circumftances hence, and for the most part applied them to other different ftories, which, as it is impoffible ever to have happened by chance or without defign, manifeftly demonstrates the whole composure to be a mere fable and fiction; and confequently Apocryphal: for as inspiration and extraordinary affiftance is needlefs in fuch a cafe, fo to fuppofe a perfon infpired who composes out of another's work, and publishes it as his own, is to make the Holy Spirit concur to the production of a mere cheat and impofture. They are therefore Apocryphal by Prop. XIV.

[ocr errors]

ARG. VII. The Protevangelion of James is Apocryphal by Prop. VII. because there are in it feveral contradictions. For instance,

Ch. xi. We read, that the angel came to Mary, gave her a particular account of her conception, and the manner of it; and yet ch. xiii. when Joseph accuses her of being with child, fhe folemnly fwears, she was utterly ignorant how she came to be with child. This is so palpable a contradiction, that I know not any thing can be said in favour of it, unless that the Virgin lied in denying her knowledge; but this cannot be suppofed confiftent with the opinion the author of this book had of the Virgin.

Ch. xvii. xviii. It is faid the place where the Virgin. brought forth was in a defert place, and in a cave; but this is not only contrary to Scripture and fact, but to another partof the Protevangelion, where the author tranfcribing the fe

aThis I find, fince my firft writing, is alfo obferved by Rivet, as a contradiction, and what proves the

book Spurious. Critic. Sacr. 1. 1. c. 4. p. 131.

cond

« 前へ次へ »