to know whatsoever related to Jefus Chrift? And if they were then known, it is no less prepofterous to imagine, that no footsteps, no intimation of them should be found in any of the Chriftian writings. But it is certain, that if we fearch all the firft records and monuments of Chriftianity, we fhall not find any one inftance, except that forgery exprefsly charged upon the Gnofticks (about his learning the alphabet) by Irenæus adv. Hæref. 1. 1. c. 17.

Though they continually urge our Saviour's miracles, done in his publick miniftry, to support their new religion against the objections of the Heathens, yet they never make any ap peal to any done in his infancy; which I think would at least have been as serviceable, if not more serviceable to their purpole, than the former. Yea, and though it was particularly objected against Christ by Celfus, and others, that he was a magician, and learned his magical arts of the Egyptians, among whom he was brought up, yet even on this occafion we find no mention of the miracles which he wrought in Egypt; whereas nothing would have been a more demonftrative anfwer to them, than to have inftanced in those miracles which he wrought there; and to have fhewn, that as they could not poffibly have been performed by any art of magick, so they were performed in his infancy when he was incapable to learn any thing, and when it was impoffible he fhould have learnt thofe arts b.

3. It is yet more evident, that Chrift wrought no miracles in his infancy, from the express declaration and intimations of Scripture to the contrary.

(1.) The express declaration I refer to, is that in St. John's Gofpel, ch. ii. v. 11. where we read, This beginning of miracles did Jefus in Cana of Galilee, and manifefted forth his glory; and his Difciples believed on him. Before I come di

Vid. Orig. cont. Celf. 1. 1. R. 30. et 1. 8. p. 384. et Spencer. Annot. in lib. I. p. 7.

See the former Volume, Part II. Ch. XIV. p. 191, 192, And befides the places there cited, in which the Heathens charge Chrift

as a magician, out of Eufebins, Arnobius, and Austin, see Lactant. 1. 5. c. 3. Auguft. de Confenf. Evang. 1. 1. c. 8, 9, 10, 14. and Elmenhorft's Notes on the place of Arnobius there cited.

realy

rectly to the proof which I intend from this text, I must premise, that though it may seem contrary to the methods of ftrict reasoning, to call and make use of St. John's Gospel as Scripture, before I have (which is to be done in the next part) proved it to be Canonical; yet, confidering all collateral circumstances, it can be no way unfair to suppose him a true hiftorian, and not mistaken in a plain matter of fact, which is all I defire or fuppofe here; and, this premised, I say, this text abfolutely overthrows the Gospels of the Infancy, and proves, that our Saviour wrought no miracles before the time of his entrance upon his publick ministry, viz. when he was about thirty years old; for St. John's words are not capable of any other construction, than that the miracle which Chrift then wrought at Cana in Galilee, viz. his turning water into wine, was the firft miracle which he wrought, Ταύτην ἐποίησε τὴν ἀρχὴν τῶν σημείων, i. e. as it is well tranflated by the old Syriack interpreter, VORAN (2) was 3:0 viz. This was the firft fign which Jefus wrought. And indeed, as Grotius on the text well observes, Ante aufpicationem muneris figna fupervacua fuiffent, miracles had been fuperfluous, or to no purpofe, before he entered upon his publick ministry.

I confefs, there is another glofs upon the text; and I find fome would have it, that the words only mean, that this was the first miracle which Chrift wrought in that place, viz. in Cana; but that he had wrought other miracles before elsewhere. This opinion is mentioned by Beza 2, Chemnitius, Dr. Collins, and others; but this is contrary to the plain contexture of the words; and if they meant thus, why does the Evangelift add, he thereby manifefted his glory, as though he now first began by miracles to appear glorious? Besides, it is incredible that the Apoftle fhould call this his firft miracle in Cana; because neither he, nor any of the other Evangelifts tell us of any other miracles which he did there.

I find also another objection, which is taken from ver. 3.

Annot. in loc. Harmon. Evangel, tom. 1. 1. 2. cap. 26. p. 97.

с

English Annotations on the

place.

where

where, when the Virgin perceived wine wanting, fhe fays, They have no wine, and ver. 5. where she says to the fervant, Whatsoever he faith unto you, do it; from whence they conclude, she expected a miracle, and was confident that Chrift would work one to supply the want; and that she was thus perfuaded, because she had feen him work miracles before, and, as they imagine, that she had seen him on fome occafion in an extraordinary manner supply the necessities and indigences of the family, when he lived private with Jofeph. This opinion I find mentioned by Chemnitius 3, Dr. Lightfoot, Dr. Whitby, but espoused by Le Clerc d.

"Elle lui demandoit qu'il fuppléât par un miracle ce qui "manquoit à ces gens là, comme Eliè avoit autrefois aug"menté l'huile de la veuve de Sarepta. Pour faire cette de"mande à Jefus Chrift, il falloit que la Sainte Vierge eût été " temoin de quelque miracle fait en particulier par fon Fils; car on voit par le v. 11. qu'il n'en avoit encore point fait en public: viz. She requested of Chrift that he would supply "what was wanting by a miracle, as Elijah had heretofore in

་

༥

creafed the widow of Sarepta's oil. In making this request to Jefus Chrift, it must be implied, that the holy Virgin had before feen fome miracle wrought by her fon in private; for it appears by v. 11. that he had not yet wrought any in pub"lick." To the fame purpose Dr. Collins on ver. 3. Though Chrift had done no publick miracle, yet what the Virgin might have feen of him in thirty years, while he lived at home with ber, we cannot tell.

To which I anfwer, that if our Saviour wrought no publick miracle, it makes not against what I contend for, nor at all for the credit of the Gospel of the Infancy, the miracles which are related there being fufficiently publick. But the truth is, there is no foundation for the opinion, becaufe fhe might well afk this question upon her certain knowledge that he was the Son of God, and the Meffiah, though fhe had never feen him

a Lib. cit. p. 100.

b Second part of the Harmony of the Evangelifts on John ii. 3. p.

109.

Annot. on John ii. 11.

a See his French Teftament, and his Notes on John ii. 3. and 11.

do

do any miracle; but befides, she had lately had sufficient intimation that he now would work miracles, and manifeft his glory by John's teftimony, and the Spirit's defcending upon him, and from what he had said but the day before, John i. 51. From henceforth ye shall fee the heavens opened, and the Angels of God afcending and defcending upon the fon of man. "In this

he plainly told his Disciples (says Doctor Lightfoot) there "prefent (and there is very good ground to fuppofe her there "in the company too), that they fhould fee [ar gr] from "that time fome divine and heavenly manifeftation of him" and that he would now begin to fhew himself, in his act❝ings and working of wonders, agreeable and suitable to one "that had heaven and angels at his will and attendance. "Upon this it is that she builds her requeft, &c."

Upon the whole then I think it is very evident, that our Saviour wrought no miracle before this in Cana, of turning the water into wine, in the beginning of his publick ministry ; and confequently, that all those stories in the Gospels of Chrift's Infancy are false and spurious, and therefore the Gofpels themselves Apocryphal by Prop. VIII.

I fhall only obferve farther here, that in fearching among the criticks on the preceding text, I have observed two of them, who not only explain it as I have done, but apply it to the fame purpose, viz. Eftius and Chemnitius, who hence conclude the spuriousness of the accounts of our Saviour's Infancy; whofe judgments I cannot here omit.

The first (viz. Eftius, on John ii. 3.) speaks to this purpofe: "It is a question (says he) whether Mary ever faw her "fon work a miracle before this time, when he turned water "into wine. One would be apt to think fhe had, because "the fo confidently requests him to work a miracle, as though "it were fomewhat ufual to her. But on the contrary, the

Evangelift declares Chrift to have wrought his first miracle "now; for the book of the Infancy of our Saviour, in which "are related certain miracles wrought by Chrift, has been rejected by the Church as Apocryphal. So that we are to con

a Loc. jam cit.

«clude

.

"clude, that Chrift never wrought any miracle, which was "seen, before this time: and as to the Virgin's petition, it "proceeded from her great faith in her fon, as the Son of "God, according as the Angel had told her a."

Again on these words, ver. 11. This beginning of miracles did Jefus, he notes, Mendax igitur eft liber de Infantia Salvatoris, viz. That the book of our Saviour's Infancy appears from hence to be lying and falje.

The learned Chemnitius expreffes himself more largely to the following purpose: "Some fuppofe our Saviour "wrought miracles before this in Cana; but Chryfoftom "has very juftly difproved this opinion, and refuted the "groundless ftories of our Saviour's Infancy; for the Evange"lift fays, that by this miracle Christ began to manifeft his "glory, fo that his Difciples believed on him: but the miracles "of our Saviour's Infancy, if he had wrought any, would "have been more wonderful and famous, as being wrought "by a boy, than those which he wrought afterwards; so that "his glory would have been before manifefted to Ifrael; al"though the Baptift fays, he was fent to manifeft it, John i. " 31."

The antient editor of Jerome's works ufes the fame argument against the book of Chrift's Infancy, viz. that Chrift wrought no miracle before this in Cana; and thinks the argument fo good, as for that reason to omit inferting it among Jerome's works; though he fays he found it in a MS. among Jerome's works, as tranflated by him. See Par. II. Tract. VI. Epift. 82. Fol. 140. after the Epiftle of Jerome to Chromatius and Heliodorus.

(2.) As it is evident from the express declaration of Scripture, that Chrift wrought no miracle in his infancy; so there are feveral intimations in the facred writings, from whence the fame may be fairly deduced; for inftance,

1.) Mark iii. 21. we read, that when our Lord's friends, si wap' aute, i. e. his kinfmen, or as the Syriack interpreter