Chap. XXVIII. is made to be perfectly ignorant of the Bible, and only to have heard by report that there was such a book; nor can it be faid, that Pilate here only refers to the Bible kept in the Temple; for the manner of speech fhews he was ignorant of the contents of the book; I have heard you have a certain book, &c. and this is indeed in itself very probable.

3. It is Apocryphal by Prop. VIII. as it contains many things contrary to known truths. Such is indeed the whole of it, befides what is taken out of our prefent genuine Gospels. Who, for inftance, will credit the long ftory Ch. XVIII, &c. of Chrift's going down to hell, and all the romantick fabulous relations of what happened thereupon? Who will believe that Chrift there figned Adam and the Patriarchs with the fign of the cross, and that all the holy Patriarchs were in hell till that time? &c. Befides, in other places there are notorious falsehoods; ; as that is, to make the Jews understand our Saviour, as faying that he would deftroy Solomon's Temple, Ch. IV. which they could not but know had been destroyed several hundred years before. To make the name Centurio to be the proper name of a man who came to Chrift, when it is certain it was the name of his poft or office, &c. To make the words of Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 55. O death, where is thy fting? O grave, where is thy victory? to be the words of Ifaiah, Ch. XXI. and to make Simeon (Ch. XVI. and XVII.) to be a High-priest, which it is certain he was not. See above in this part, Ch. XIX. Arg. IV. Inft. 7.

4. It is Apocryphal by Prop. IX. as it contains many trifling, filly, and ludicrous relations: fuch is that of the standards or colours bowing to Chrift as he passed by, Ch. I. Chrift's kissing Jofeph, and confining him to his house for forty days, Ch. XV. Such are all the accounts from hell, viz. The fpeeches of the Prophets, Seth's ftory of going to God at the gates of Paradife, for ointment to anoint his father Adam for the head-ach; The dialogues between the devils; Chrift's taking Adam by the hand out of hell; Chrift's giving the thief the fign of the cross for a passport to heaven, and ordering him to fhew it the angel at his coming to the gates; The exact agreement of the writing of Lenthius and Charinus, Ch. XXVIII. infomuch that there was

not

not one letter different, either more or less, in the writing of either, though they wrote separately; a story, as Mr. Fabricius (in loc.) well obferves, like, and I add, very probably formed from, that trite ftory of the feventy Greek tranflators, who made their verfion in seventy separate columns, without the difference of fo much as one word. See Juftin Martyr, Paræn. ad Græc. p. 13, 14.

5. It is Apocryphal, because it contains feveral things which were later than the time, in which it pretends to be written. Such feems to be the title or compellation (Ch. I.) wherewith the Jews addrefs Pilate; Rogamus magnitudinem vefiram; We intreat your highness, &c. a phraseology not known to the Jews, or used among them at that time. Such is the exprefs mention of original fin, a phrase not known among Christians in those early days. Such is the ftory of Chrift's going to hell to recover and bring thence the Patriarchs. Such the mighty veneration that is paid to the fign of the cross, and particularly the practice of figning with the fign of the cross, which is here faid to be done by Charinus and Lenthius, Ch. XVII. before they enter upon their relation of the divine myfteries; and Chrift's making the fign of the cross upon Adam and upon all the faints in hell, before he delivered them from that state, Ch. XXIV. Concerning which practice of figning with the cross, I would obferve, that though in the fourth and following centuries it was prodigiously common among Chriftians, by means of that noted history of Conftantine's seeing the fign of the cross in the air ; yet, as far as I can find, Tertullian is the first who has mentioned it. There is indeed, in the works under the name of Dionyfius Areopagita, in the Epiftle under the name of Martial (Bishop of the Lemovices in France, who lived within thirty or forty years of our Saviour's time), to the people of Bourdeaux, and in the pretended Conftitutions of the Apostles, mention of the use of the fign of the cross in

baptism and on other occafions: but I regard not the authority of fuch books as thefe, being all of very late original, and will not make any fcruple to affert this practice not to be mentioned by any fooner than Tertullian. He who would fee the account of the Fathers concerning this matter, may confult Pamelius in his notes on Cyprian, Epift. 56. n. 31. and Epift. 63. n. 39. and the fame author on Tertull. de Coron. Milit. c. 3. n. 40. and especially the learned Durant. de Ritib. Ecclef. Cathol. 1. 2. c. 45.

6. It is Apocryphal by Prop. XIV. because for the moft part it is transcribed and stolen out of other books. Nothing can be more evident to any one who is acquainted with the facred books, and has read this Gospel, than that a great part of it is borrowed and ftolen from them. Every fuch perfon must perceive, that the greatest part of the hiftory of our Saviour's trial is taken out of our prefent Gospels, not only because it is a relation of the fame facts and circumstances, but also in the very fame words and order for the moft part; and though this may be supposed to have happened accidentally, yet it is next to impoffible to suppose a conftant likeness of expreffion, not only to one, but sometimes to one, and sometimes to another of our Evangelifts. In fhort, the author feems to have defigned a fort of abstract or compendium of all which he found most confiderable to his purpose in our four Gospels; though he has but aukwardly enough put it together.

Under this head I obferve farther, that, to cover the impofture the better, those things which were spoke according to the Scriptures, by or of one perfon or thing, are by this author often referred to another. So, for inftance, what Chrift faid to the Jews, For which of thefe (good) works do ye ftone me? John x. 32. is alluded to in that of Pilate, Ch. II. Will they kill him for a good work? The words of Chrift, John xv. 24. that he had done the works which no other perfon had done, are put into the mouth of Nicodemus, Ch. V. The fpeech of Gamaliel, Acts v. 38, 39, Refrain from thefe men, and let them alone; for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, is here

afcribed

very

afcribed to Nicodemus, Ch. V. And though the inftances which Gamaliel mentions are Theudas and Judas Galilæus, and instead of these are put the magicians of Egypt; yet the fame words that Gamaliel fays of his inftances, v. 36. this author fays of his, viz. They all perished and came to nought, and all who believed them. Again, what Christ said to his difciples, Matt. xiv. 27. when they were affrighted at the fight of him walking upon the sea, Be not afraid, it is I; and to his difçiples, when they saw him after his resurrection, Luke xxiv. 39. he is made here to say to Jofeph, Ch. XV. That which our Lord faid Matt. xxiii. 39. Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye fhall fay, Bleffed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; this author expounds as relating to Christ's resurrection; and therefore, after his being rifen again, puts it into the mouth of Jofeph, Ch. XV. Because John is faid to be the voice (porn, which is in the feminine gender) of one crying in the wilderness, Ifai. xl. 3. and Matt. iii. 3. therefore he is represented in hell as a little female hermit, Ch. XVIII. Many other fuch inftances, he who has a mind, may eafily collect. From all which it is evident, this author compiled his book out of our prefent facred books, and confequently by Prop. XIV. that it is Apocryphal.

7. It is Apocryphal, because it is not in the Syriack Verfion, by Prop. XV.

Thus I have endeavoured to fhew the fpurioufnefs of this Gospel, and offered such obfervations as I judged most pertinent and confiderable in order thereto. I fhall close my difcourse on it with the few following mifcellaneous remarks, viz.

1. The names which are in this Gospel given to those which were Jews, are not Jewish, but either Greek or Roman, or of · foreign countries. Such are the names Summas, Datam, Alexander, Cyrus, Ch. I. Asterius, Antonius, Caras or Cyrus, Crippus or Crispus, Ch. II. Chariņus and Lenthius, Ch. XVII. This feems to be no inconfiderable evidence of the imposture.

2. The oration under the name of Epiphanius, intitled, Εἰς τὴν θεόσωμον ταφὴν τῷ Κυρίῳ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησῦ Χρισῦ, καὶ εἰς τὸν Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἀπὸ ̓Αριμαθαίας, καὶ εἰς τὴν ἐν τῷ Αδῃ τῷ Κυρία κατάβασιν, μετὰ τὸ σωτήριον πάθος, παραδόξως γεγενημένην, η Oration on the Burial of the Divine Body of our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chrift, and on Jofeph of Arimathea, and our Lord's marvellous Defcent into Hell after his Crucifixion contains the fub

ftance of what is related in this Gofpel concerning Chrift's journey to hell, and delivering the faints thence, and particularly the account of his leading Adam out, the confufion of the infernal princes, the other faints following Adam, the application of feve ral texts of Scripture to this event, &c. Befides this, I observe in this Oration, that Nicodemus is introduced as affifting JoSeph of Arimathea at the funeral of Chrift, and bringing with · him myrrh and aloes for that purpose, which is also related in this Gofpel, Ch. XI. I fhall not make any conclufions. hence, but leave the hint to the improvement of the learned; only adding, that it seems very probable to me, though I cannot find it observed either by Coke or Rivet, that this oration is fuppofititious, and belonged to fome other Epiphanius, different from him anong whose works it is placed ".

3. The prefent Latin copies of this Gospel seem to be a tranflation out of Greek. This (to omit other inftances) seems evident, because we fo frequently in it meet with quia in the fense of quod, i. e. to fignify as the English particle that, and not as because, which yet it properly does. The reafon of this tranflation feems to me the ambiguity of the Greek particle TI, which anfwers both to quia and quod; but as it can hardly be thought a person who chose to write in Latin, would be guilty of fuch a mistake, I conclude this probably to have been. a tranflation, and, for the reafon mentioned, out of Greek. Add to this, that this sense or use of the particle quia for quod is common ufque ad naufeam, in many or moft of the old Latin tranflations of the Greek Fathers; and I have noted it in above twenty places in this Gofpel.

See it among his works, vol. 2. p. 259, &c.

b It is rejected as spurious by Dr. Cave, Hift. Lit. vol. 1. p. 186. 4. Tive