that at once dying in the fame liquor, he made feveral pieces of cloth of the different colours which he had a mind; on which account the dyers in Perfia honour him as their patron, and call a dye-houfe the Shop of Chrift. Let the reader remember here, that we have a story of our Saviour's dying cloth in both the preceding Gofpels of his Infancy, viz. in that of Cotelerius, Chap. VII. and that of Mr. Sike, Chap. XXXVII. and that in this place Chrift is faid to have dyed several cloths of different colours in the fame furnace and liquor.

2. Sir John Chardin, in his Travels to Perfia, tells us, that the legends of the Perfians contain not only that which is found concerning Chrift in the Gospels, but also the fables which are in the legends of the Oriental Chriftians, and particularly in an Armenian legend, intitled, The Gospel of the Infancy, which is nothing but a heap of fabulous miracles; among others, that Jefus Chrift feeing Jofeph under very great concern that he had fawed a board of cedar too short, said to him, Why art thou fo much concerned? Give me the board to hold at one end, and do thou pull the other; and fo he made it longer.—That having been fent to fchool to learn his A, B, C; when the mafter would have made him fay A, he stopped him, and faid to the mafter, Tell me first why the first letter of the alphabet is made thus: upon which the mafter calling him a little prattler, he answered, I will not fay A, till you have told me why the first letter is thus made. The mafter being then angry, Jefus faid to him, I will tell you it myself: the first letter of the alphabet is formed of three perpendicular lines upon one line going across them (the Armenian A is made fo, almost like an m turned upfide down, viz. thus, III) to fhew us, that the beginning of all things is one Being in three Perfons.

Here I would also obferve to the reader, that, if I mistake not, the foundation of both thefe ftories is in the preceding Gofpels. The first, concerning the piece of wood, which Jofeph had fawed too short, being made longer by Joseph's pulling at one end, and Chrift's pulling at the other, seems to me manifeftly taken from the Gospel published by Mr. Sike, Ch. XXXVIII,

Apud Fabrit. Cod. Apocr. N. T. tom. 3. p. 418, 419.

XXXIX, where we read, that when Jofeph went abroad to work as a carpenter, and wanted any piece of wood to be made longer or shorter, Jefus, whom he took along with him, would ftretch out his hand, and it became according to his wish; and particularly, when he had made the King's throne too short, and was in great distress, Jesus bad him take one fide, and himfelf took the other, and by pulling it thus, they brought it to its proper length.

The other story, viz. that concerning Chrift's learning his alphabet, and refufing to say on till his master had told him the meaning of the letter, is plainly founded upon, and almost the fame with that in both the preceding Gofpels, viz. in that of Mr. Sike, Ch. XLVIII, XLIX. and that of Cotelerius, Ch. VI.

3. Like to the last is that other Mahometan tradition concerning Chrift in his infancy, which Mr. Hilfcher has related 2, viz. that when Chrift's schoolmafter had, according to the ordinary custom said before him, In the name of the most Merciful, Jefus asked him, What was the meaning of the three letters B, S, M, in the word Befmi? And when the master did not know, he told him, B fignified Bahah Allah (viz. the Majefty of God), S fignified Sannah Allah (viz. the Highness of God), M fignified Molcoho (viz. the Kingdom of God). This Mr. Hilfcher cites from Meracci, a famous commentator on the Alcoran; and there is no question but it is of the fame original with the preceding.

From all this it is evident the Mahometans were acquainted with the Gospel of Chrift's Infancy; and very probably the more fo, because Mahomet had referred to it, or cited out of it in his Alcoran. The notion commonly prevailing among them is, that the true Gospel is not among the Chriftians now,

2 Schediafm. de Studiis Chrifti arep papus, inter Mifcellan. Lipf. T. V. p. 23, &c. apud Fabrit. Cod. Apoc. N. T. tom. 3. p. 424, and p. 427.

بستم

b The Arabick word Befmi, fignifies In the Name; and the firit words of the chapters in the Alcoran begin, In the name of God moft gracious and merciful.

but

but was taken up by Chrift to heaven with him; and duquel il n'eft resté que ce qui en eft cité dans l'Alcoran, viz. of which (fays Mr. Herbelot) they fuppofe nothing left but what is cited in the Alcoran and accordingly in an Arabick Treatise, intitled Kafchf al Dhonoun, Mr. Herbelot tells us, that the "Muffulmans difent que l'Evangile qui commence par Bif

milah, &c. c'eft-à-dire, Au nom du Pere, et du Fils, et du "Saint Efprit, n'eft pas celui que Dieu a envoyé à Jefu «Chrift; car celui-ci, difent-ils, commence par Bifmilah, "&c. Au nom de Dieu clément et miséricordieux, et ne contient " que des Enfeignemens; au lieu que le premier n'eft qu'une "Hiftoire de fa Vie, écrite par quatre de fes Difciples: i. e. "That the Muffulmans fay, that the Gospel which begins with

the word Bifmilah, &c. viz. In the name of the Father, and "the Son, and the Holy Ghoft, is not that Gospel which God "fent by Jefus Chrift; for that, fay they, begins Bifmilah, &c. "viz. In the name of God moft gracious and merciful, and " contains nothing but the Doctrines of Chrift; instead of "which, the former is nothing but a Hiftory of his Life, written by four of his Difciples." Mr. Fabritius, in a note on this place of Mr. Herbelot, fays, Intelligitur Evangelium Infantiæ, quod ex Arabico vertit Henricus Sike, viz. That the Arabick author meant the Gospel of the Infancy, translated by Mr. Sike, when he speaks of a Gofpel which begins thus, In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoft. But in this he is most manifeftly mistaken; because, according to the author, this Gofpel contained an account of the Life of Chrift, written by four of his Difciples, which is not in the Gospel of the Infancy, although it begins with those words; which it was very ufual for authors or tranfcribers to prefix or fubjoin to their books.

CHAP. XXV.

The Gospels of Christ's Infancy are spurious and Apocryphal : not received by the antient Chriftians: the Design of them false. Chrift wrought no Miracles in his Infancy: this proved from the Silence of the Scriptures and Fathers: from the exprefs Declaration of Scripture, viz. John ii. 11. That text critically difcuffed. Intimations in Scripture, that our Saviour wrought no Miracles in his Infancy: pofitive Assertions of the Fathers (viz. Epiphanius, Nonnus, Chryfoftom, and Theophylact) to the fame Purpose.

V. THE Gofpels of our Saviour's Infancy are Apocryphal :

For,

ARG. I. They were not acknowledged as authentick by any of the antient Chriftians, who are to be our judges in these matters. Prop. III.

They are not mentioned in any of the antient catalogues of facred books, and therefore are to be esteemed Apocryphal by Prop. IV. Not cited in any of the antient Chriftian writings, and fo Apocryphal by Prop. V. Not read in their Churches, and fo Apocryphal by Prop. VI.

ARG. II. Thefe Gospels are Apocryphal, because the whole contexture of them is falfe, or contrary to certainly known truth. Prop. VIII.

The contexture and design of these Gospels is to relate a large feries of miracles and wonderful actions, wrought by our Saviour during his infancy, or before he entered upon his publick ministry; but it is certain by the most incontestable evidence, that our Saviour wrought no fuch miraculous actions, nor indeed any one miracle during the whole of his infant ftate, or before he was about thirty years old. For the proof of this I fhall urge,

1. The universal and perfect filence of the Scriptures of the New

New Testament, as to any fuch actions wrought by
Chrift in his infancy.

2. The universal and perfect filence of all the first Christian writers.

3. The pofitive declaration and intimation of Scripture to the contrary.

4. The pofitive affertion of feveral Fathers to the contrary.

1. The univerfal and perfect filence of the Scriptures of the New Teftament, as to any miraculous actions wrought by our Saviour in his infancy, is no inconfiderable proof that none were wrought by him. For had there been any fuch multitudes of miracles wrought by our Saviour, as these Gospels pretend, it is not poffible to fuppofe his own difciples and companions should have been so entirely unacquainted with them, as not to have known any one of them. It cannot be with any reafon imagined, but that they who had the greatest intimacy with him, and his mother too, would have fometime heard fomewhat concerning the many strange and surprising miracles, which these Gospels afcribe to him in his infant ftate; especially confidering that they were so particularly informed as to the circumftances of his wondrous conception and birth. Now had they known them, the fame reafons which influenced them to publifh his other miracles, would have influenced them alfo to publish thefe; which as they have not done, nor said any thing of this fort, except his disputing' with the doctors, Luke ii. 47. I think it reasonable to conclude that our Saviour wrought none.

2. The fame may be fairly concluded from the universal and perfect filence of all the first Chriftian writers in this matter. Had our Lord wrought fuch numbers of mighty works in his infancy, it is prepofterous to imagine, that in a century or two they fhould be quite buried and forgot. Can it be thought none of them would have been remembered, and transmitted down through an age or two? none of them be found out by the zealous Chriftians of those times, who were so studious

to