ページの画像
PDF
ePub

CHAP. V.

Another Lord's Prayer, different from that in the Gospels, taken out of Mr. Selden's Commentary on Eutychius, produced in Arabick and English. This proved Spurious by feveral Arguments.

AF

FTER the Epiftle under our Saviour's name to Abgarus, I judged it would not be improper to infert here a prayer afcribed to our Saviour by the Mahometans, called by them, The Prayer of Jefus the Son of Mary. I am not able to make any large conjecture concerning its original, because I know no more of it than that Mr. Selden, who, I believe, is the only publisher of it, faith, Defcriptas penes me habeo fingularum hebdomades dierum preces Mahumedanis formatas, quibus titulus eft Preces Dierum. Atque his fubjunguntur formulæ precationum binæ, altera Abrahæ Patriarchæ tributa, altera Domino noftro Jefu Chrifto, velut Dominica altera; viz. "That " he had certain Arabick forms of prayer by him in manu"script, which were composed by the Mahometans, and in"titled, the Daily Prayers; to which there were annexed two ❝ forms of prayer, one ascribed to the Patriarch Abraham, the "other to our Lord Jefus Chrift, as though it were another "Lord's Prayer." For the fake of the curious in these studies, I have inserted it here in Arabick, with as just a translation as I was able to make of it.

Num. II.

A PRAYER OF CHRIST.

دعا

ابن مریم عبسي

عليهم السلام كان يقول اللهم اني اصبحت لا استطيع

See his Commentary on Eutychius's Arabick Annals of Alexandria,

P. 58.

دفع

دفع ما اكرة وما أملك نفع ما ارجو واصبح الاجر بيد غيري واصبحت مرتهنا بعملي فلا فقير افقر مني الي عفوك يا كريم اللهم لا تشمت في عدوي ولا قسوبي صديقي ولا تجعل مصيبتي في ديني ولا تجعل الدنيا اكبر همي ولا مبلغ علمي ولا تسلط علي من لا يرحمني برحمتك يا ارحم الرحمين

The Prayer of Jesus the Son of Mary.

Upon them be Peace. He faid,

"O GOD, I am not able to extirpate (or overcome) that " which I abhor, nor have I attained to that good (or useful“ nefs) which I defired, but others, and not I, have their re"ward in their hands. But my glory abideth in my work. "There is no one in more indigent (or miserable) circum"ftances than I am. O moft high God, grant me pardon. "O God, fuffer me not to be a reproach to mine enemy, nor "bring upon me the contempt of my friend: and let not my "piety be attended with (or occafion me) troubles. And let "not this world be my main delight (or what I aim princi"pally at). And suffer not such a one to have his will (or "rule) over me, who will have no mercy upon me, for thy mercy fake, O thou most merciful (who pitieft all thofe "that need mercy).”

[ocr errors]

This is, as far as I could make it, a just translation out of the Arabick; but because I am fenfible of my ignorance in this language, and have ventured in some places to differ from Mr. Selden's translation, I judged it proper to give the reader his alfo in his own words, viz.

Precatio Jefu filii Mariæ.

SUPER quibus pax fit. Dixit, Deus, non poffum depellere id quod averfor, nec adquifivi bonum illud quod fpero. Et

mercedem

mercedem in manu habent alii præter me. Sed pignus eft, feu manet in opere meo (id eft, ut puto, Opera mea velut pignus manent, necdum accepi id, cujus nomine oppignerata funt) neque eft quifquam pauper me pauperior. Indulgentiam tuam, o venerande. Deus, ne opprobrio mihi finas effe inimicum meum, nec vilipendat me amicus meus. Neque ponas afflictionem meam in religione mea. Neque fac, ut mundus fit maximum ftudium meum, aut faftigium fcientiæ meæ. Neque præfice mihi eum, qui non miferebitur mei, pro mifericordia tua, o miferantiffime miferefcentium.

As I fuppofe no one at all acquainted with Chriftianity can believe this prayer genuine, and compofed by our blessed Saviour, fo I fhall not spend much time about it: it is fufficient to prove it spurious,

I. That no one of the primitive writers of Chriftianity did receive, acknowledge, or so much as hear of this prayer. If we fearch them throughout, from the Apoftles' time downwards, I may fafely affirm we fhall not find the leaft intimation or any footsteps of any fuch prayer, or indeed any prayer, known under the common name of The Lord's Prayer, befides that which we have in St. Matthew and St. Luke's Gospel. On the other hand,

II. It was a conftantly received opinion among the antients, that our Lord left nothing in writing behind him, but what his Apofties and the Evangelifts wrote. This we find in Origen 2, Jerome, Austin ‹, &c. So that it clearly follows from Prop. IV, V, VI. that this prayer is fpurious. Befides,

III. The whole contexture of the prayer is difagreeable to, and inconfiftent with, the character of our Saviour. To instance only in one or two things: the first sentence seems to me a manifeft confeffion of fin; and if it be not borrowed from thofe words of St. Paul, Rom. vii. 15, 19. What I would, I

a Contr. Celf. 1. 1. p. 34.
b Comment. in Ezek. c. 44.

De Confenf. Evang. lib. 1. č. 7.

do

do not; but what I hate, that do I, &c. (which I am inclined to believe) is plainly of the fame defign and import with it. And accordingly one of the petitions is for pardon of fin, as I suppose the Arabick word is is best translated (vid. Castell. Lexic. Polyglott. ad Voc. who renders it condonatio delicti) But how inconfiftent is this with the character of Christ! Had he made prayers for the pardon of his fins, how could he, as confcious of his being perfectly clear from all fin, have challenged his enemies to convince him of any one fin, as he does, John viii. 46? How could he have made that atonement and fatisfaction for fin, which the first principles of Chriftianity fuppofe he did? In a word, if these be the words. of Chrift, and part of any prayer of his, we must fuppofe all those affertions of his Apoftles concerning him, that he was without fin, fuch as are found 2 Cor. v. 21. Hebr. iv. 15. 1 Pet. ii. 22. 1 John iii. 5. to be all gross imposture and falsehood. I conclude therefore, by Prop. II. Cor. II. and Prop. VIII. that this prayer is fpurious, and of the fame fort with those Apocryphal pieces, viz. The Gospel of the Nazarenes, and The Preaching of Peter and Paul; which, as they contained like intimations as this prayer, viz. that Chrift was a finner, I have by the fame argument proved to be Apocryphal. See above, Part II. Ch. XXV. Numb. 15. p. 277. compared with Ch. XXIX. p. 301. and Ch. XXXIII. Numb. 7. p. 352. compared with Ch. XXXIV. p. 359.

I might eafily collect the fame inference from the other petitions; but omitting this, I shall only observe, that the doxology or conclufion of the prayer is evidently of a fort different from any that were used either by our Saviour, or those of his time, and seems fo like the conclufions of feveral chapters in the Alcoran, that as it appears by what is already said, that the prayer is a forgery, fo it is very probable it was a forgery of the Mahometans, who, as appears from feveral parts of this work, forged no finall number of hiftories and fayings of Jefus Chrift. See the Appendix at the end of the firft voluine, and the Gospel of our Saviour's Infancy in this part.

The foregoing prayer being taken out of Mr. Selden's commentary on Eutychius, obliges me to give the reader the following

following account from the Dean of Norwich's Life of Mahomet, p. 271, 272. viz. “That these annals of Eutychius

were published at Oxford in Arabick and Latin by Dr. Po"cock, A. D. 1656. at the charge of Mr. Selden, and this is "the meaning of these words in the title page, Johanne Sel"deno Chorago; for he, who was the Choragus in the play, al"ways was at the charges of exhibiting the fcenes; and there"fore, Mr. Selden having borne the expences of that charge"able edition, the moft worthy and learned author acknowledged it by those words in the title page; which several "having mistaken to the robbing him of the honour of hist "work, as if Mr. Selden had begun the tranflation, and Dr. "Pocock had finished it, I cannot but do juftice to that wor

[ocr errors]

thy perfon now with God, as to clear this matter." But notwithstanding this, the commentary, out of which I have taken this prayer, is unquestionably Mr. Selden's; and in the title page of my edition, published 1642. (viz. fixteen years before that which Dr. Prideaux fpeaks of) I find it thus, Ex Arabico nunc primum typis edidit ac Verfione et Commentariis auxit Joannes Seldenus.

CHAP. VI.

St. Paul's Epifle to the Laodiceans. Owned as genuine by feveral learned Men. An Epiftle under this Title extant in the Beginning of the fecond Century. Marcion's Apoftolicon. The Epifle now intitled, To the Ephefians, formerly intitled, To the Laodiceans, according to Tertullian. This credited by Grotius, Dr. Hammond, Dr. Whitby, Dr. Mill. Tertullian mistaken in this Matter.

THIS

HIS Epiftle under the name of St. Paul to the Laodiceans, although it be apparently compiled out of the genuine and Canonical Epiftles of that Apoftle, requires a place

in

my collection; for befides that it paffes under fo fplendid

and

« 前へ次へ »