« 前へ次へ »
non by Origen and Clemens Alexandrinus, the only two Fathers who have made use of it: it was never read in any of the Christian Churches till the time of Jerome, and then only in fome few among the Apocryphal Scriptures; it contains several things which are absolutely false, of which I have produced ten instances; it contains a great number of trilling, filly, and idle things, and is not in the Syriack Version. This I have endeavoured to prove ; all which laid together, does (I think) afford us as much evidence as can be expected in things of this fort, that the high opinions, which many learned men have entertained of this Epistle, are groundless, and that it is not to be looked upon either as a sacred book, or any thing like a sacred book of the New Testament.
I have nothing farther to add concerning this Epistle, unless it be to conjecture, that, because only Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen have cited it, it was forged at Alexandria ; and because there are so many pious frauds in it, that it was the forgery of some such person as corrupted the books of the Sibyls, and that it was written about the middle of the second century,
Ι Ν D E X
Τ Ο Τ Η Ε
A ABGARUS, King of Edeffa,
his Epistle to Christ, with Christ's Answer, 2. An account of it by Eufebius and Ephraem Syrus, 4,6. thought spurious by several learned men, 7, n. and proved so by six several argu
ments, 10. AHMED-IBN-IDRIS, a Mahometan
writer, says, the Gospel of our Saviour's Infancy was used by some Christians, as the other four
Gospels, 167, n. ASTERIUS, a writer of the fourth century,
his account of the brazen statue of our Saviour, erected by the woman, whom he cured
of the issue of blood, 26, n. ATHANASIUS, his account of a · picture of Christ, presented by
Nicodemus to Gamaliel, 26, n. AUSTIN, cites the Epistles of Paul
and Seneca, 62. highly commends Seneca, 74, n. he entertained a prodigious veneration for reliques, 256. makes mention of Thecla, 390.
B BARCLAY ROBERT, his Apo.
logy for the Quakers, &c.- noted,
403. BARNABAS, the Epistle of, cited
by antient Fathers, generally esteemed by the learned as genuine, and adjudged by some of cqual authority with the books of the Canon, 412. The testimonies of the antients, 413. and sentiments of the moderns, concerning it, 422. This Epistle proved to be wrote by an original Gentile, 432. A remark on 1 Pet. iv. 3. p. 433. it was wrote after the destruction of Jerufalem, 436. Barnabas was one of the 70 Disciples, 436. Explication of Jolin xxi. 21. and Matt. xvi. 28. p. 438. This Epistle is Apocryphal, because not found in any Catalogue of the sacred books of the New Tela tament, 440. nor cited by the primitive Christians as Scripture, 440. nor read by them as the word of God. 443. one part con
tradicts another, 444. it contains things which are falle, 445, Three visible mistakes in it produced and detected, 448. Five instances of things trilling and filly, 454.
It is Apocryphal, because not in the Syriack Version, &c. 461. A conjecture, that it was forged at Alexandria by some person that corrupted the books of the Sibyls, about the middle of the second century,
462. BARONIUS rejects the Epistles of
Paul and Seneca, as fpurious, 77, n. esteems the history of Paul
and Thecla, as genuine, 392, n. BELLARMINE rejects the Epistles
of Paul and Seneca, as fpurious,
77, n. BERNARD, Dr. his opinion of Bar
nabas's Epistle, 427. his assertion that it was read in the churches, together with Canonical books,
refuted, 443, n. Beza, his opinion on John ii. 11.
p. 238, n. BIBLIANDER. Vide POSTELLUS.
ceans among the forgeries of the Manichees, 49, n. rejects the Epistles of Paul and Seneca as fpurious, 77, n. his opinion of the Epistle of Barnabas, 428, n. Ex
position of John xxi. 21. p. 438, CEDRENUs, his account of the seal,
which Chritt affixed to his Epi
stle to Abgarus, 7, n. CELIBACY, its octrine confirmed
out of the Acts of Paul and
Thecla, 392, n. CHARDIN, Sir John, his account
of the Gospel of the infancy of Christ, in an Armenian legend,
232. CHEMNITI US censures the Epistles
of Christ and Abgarus as spurious, 8, n. his judgment on John ii. 17. p. 238, n. condemns for fpurious the accounts of our Saviour's infancy, 241, n. proves that there was no adoration of fered to the Virgin Mary, till the fourth or fifth century, 254, n. nor reliques known to the primitive Christians, 255, n. A merry story of his concerning the latter,
258. CHRIST, an Epistle under his name
to an Arabian King, translated out of Syriack into Greek, and preserved in the writings of Eusebius, 2, n. 4. An account of the feal (consisting of seven Hebrew letters) which he used, &c. 7, n. These Epistles, esteemed by leveral learned men, spurious and Apocryphal, 8, n. and proved by several arguments to be so, 9. the main objection concerning it answered, 18. A conjecture, that the history of these Epistles is an interpolation into the works of Eusebius, with several argu. ments to support it, 19. A fragment concerning Christ's picture, which he sent to Abgarus, taken out of the Orthodoxographa, 22. A relation of a miracle wrought by it, 23, n. The story of this picture was common among the writers of the sixth and following centuries, ibid.
A digression out of Monsieur Durant, coule
CANTERBURY, present Archbi
shop of, demonstrates the story
pistle, &c. 458. CASAUBON, a mistake of his con
cerning the Arabick translation of Mark iii. 21. corrected by De Dieu, 242. his opinion concerning the Acts of Pilate, 333, n. he censures the Epistle of Barnabas, and the primitive Fathers, for quoting, and too frequently making ute of, the Sibylline
books, 461, n. Cave, Dr. his opinion concerning
the history of the Epistles of Christ and Abgarus, 8, n.
He reckons the Epistle to the Laodi
dicts it, 4424
cerning four pictures of Christ, miracles ascribed to his infancy, made during his life on earth, forgeries and lies, 245, n. He 24. A prayer of his (probably entertained a great veneration for a Mahometan forgery) different reliques, 256. cites the Acts of from that in the Gospels, 27. Pilate, 330, n. mentions the Acts proved (purious, 29, n.
of Paul and Thecla, 391, n. Christ's Infancy, the Gospel of, CLARKE, Dr. S. his opinion of
published and translated by Mr. Barnabas's Epistle, 429, n. re-
for Clemens Romanus, 419. he
COLLYRIDIANI, whence so named, ture, and the universal filerice of 253 the first Christian writers, 236. COTELERIUS, his fragment of the and from St. John's Gospel, ch. Infancy of Christ, 221. His opi. ii. 11. p. 237. That text criti nion of Barnabas's Epiftle, 426. cally discussed, 238. Intimations LA CRoze, Monsieur, cites a fyin Scripture, that Christ wrought
nod, held in the diocese of Anga. no miracles in his infancy, 241. mala, in the mountains of MalaThis positively afferted by several bar, A. D. 1599, which conFathers, 243, n. These Gospels demns the Gospels of Christ's Inproved Apocryphal from the tri fancy, &c. 167, n. 258, n. His fing stories, and many falsities in opinion of those Gospels,-ibid. n. them contained, 246. because Cross, the practice of signing with, they contain things later than the by whom first mentioned, 348, time in which they pretend to be 406. written, 251. because of the pro
CYPRIAN makes mention of The. digious respect paid by them to
cla, 389. the Virgin Mary, 252. The
D opinions of Dr. Mill, Mr. La Croze, and the author, concern. Darius Comes, in an Epifle to ing these Gospels, 258, t.
Austin, seems to refer to the let-
racle wrought by Christ was in
faubon in the Arabick transla 389. His testimonies concern-
tion of Mark iii. 21. p. 242, n. ing the Epistle of Barnabas, 420.
out of him concerning feveral nion concerning the Acts of Pi.
late, 333, n.
FABRICIUS, Mr. his censure on
the story and Epistles of Christ
and Abgarus, 9, n.
He was of
opinion, that the Epistle to the
of Paul and Seneca as fpurious, Epistle to the Philippians, 48, n.
rejects the Epistles of Paul and
Seneca as fpurious, 77, n.
collection of the sentiments of
ing the Protevangelion, 164. He
takes the Gospel of Thomas for
the Infancy of Christ, 167, n.
His opinion of the Acts of Pilate,
FELL, Bishop, his sentiments con-
n. His vindication of the allego-
ries, contained in that Epistle,
account of Thecla, 390,
7, n. and also the Gospel of
accounts of the miracles wrought Infancy, 228. declares the Acts
his infancy, 240, n. of Paul and Thecla Apocryphal,
city of Edesfa, that it should never Grabe, Dr. his arguments for the
nuine, 392. contradicts himself,
A character of Eusebius by mention of the Acts of Paul and
Thecla, 391, n.
titled to the Ephesians, was for-
Three citations 38, n. refuted, 41. His observa