« 前へ次へ »
there is nothing in this story that will prove it a forgery of that time; for the book may be supposed extant long before, but by this artifice of the Monks imposed upon the world, as more valuable and extraordinary. .
The Anabaticon therefore, and the Revelation of Paul, being one and the fame book, it only remains now, that I endeavour to prove it Apocryphal : and that it is fo, is evident by Prop. IV, V, and VI. 'I add also, by Prop. VIII, as the whole design of it was contrary to a known and undoubted fact. 2 Cor. xii. 4, &c. St. Paul there says, he heard unutter. able words (ãēritu empacota ü ģx ifov dvdpmw recrão an) which it was not in the power of any man to declare : which if it be true (as the book itself supposes), then they attempted in writing what was utterly impossible to be wrote, and so unhappily blundered, as that the whole design of their work was a mere contradiction to the title. (See Austin above.)
Tertullian a has a passage in his Book against the Hereticks, which (if my judgment do not much fail me) may be very justly applied to this Revelation of Paul ; and if it may, will afford a good argument to prove it Apocryphal. He is treating concerning the harmony of the Apostles' doctrines; and then adds", Sed et fi in tertium usque Yea, and though Paul was cælum ereptus Paulus, et in taken up to the third heaParadisum delatus, audiit quæ- vens, and being brought into dam illic ; non possunt videri Paradise, heard some certain ea fuiffe, quæ illum in aliam things there, they cannot be doctrinam instructiorem præ- thought such, as would make ftarent; cum ita fuerit con- him capable of preaching any ditio eorum, ut nulli homi- new doctrines; seeing they' num proderentur.. Quod fi ad were of that fort, that they alicujus conscientiam manavit could not be revealed or comnescio quid illud, et hoc se municated to any man. Bit
if any one imagine he have the I knowledge of these strange ree
va De Præfcript. adv. Hæret. c. 24.
b Loc, cit.
aliqua hærefis sequi affirmat, velations, and there be any aut Paulus secreti proditi reus fort of Hereticks, who declare est, aut et alius poftea in Pa-' 'they will be governed by them, radisum ereptus debet oftendi, (let them consider), that eicui permissum sit eloqui quae ther Paul must have been Paulo mutire non licuit. guilty of betraying the secret
committed to him, or else they must produce some other person, who has since been taken up to Paradise, who had permission to speak those things freely, of which St. Paul durft not utter a word. ,
: Nothing can be more probable, than that these words have a reference to the written Revelations we are treating of. It is certain by the passage, that there were some who pretended to know what St. Paul saw in the third heavens, and that there were a peculiar fort of Hereticks, who governed themselves according to them. How little different this is from what Epiphanius above fays of the Gnosticks and Caianites, every unprejudiced reader will acknowledge, who compares the places. In this interpretation I have the satisfaction to agree with Pamelius a, who remarks on these words of Tertullian thus : You see there have been some who affirmed they both knew and read in a writing of St. Paul's own, the secrets he heard in Heaven; affirming that he both preached them, and committed them to writing. This learned writer afterwards cites the place of Epiphanius concerning the Anabaticon, that of Austin and Gelasius concerning the Revelation, as all speaking of one and the same book.
Upon the whole then, it is evident it was a spurious piece; and that as neither Paul did nor could write it, so neither could any one else give any true account of what that book pretended to. I only add, that Dionysius Alexandrinus, a noted writer-early in the third century, assures us ', Ilains dià rão
a Annot. in Loc. Tertull.
o Apud Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. lib. vii. c. 25. 2
ŠTIS chão imobiņu cevrós to xai weqi tūv simonarúrt Ewr aútã, às èx évéyqarte ræd'autás. That though Paul in his Epistles has made some mention of his Revelations, yet he never committed them to writing ; and that as Mr. Du Pin says, the Egyptians boast of having this Revelation by them to this very daya : so Dr. Grabe b tells us of a manuscript in the library of Merton Col
lege in Oxford, intitled thus, The Revelation of Paul, (contain· ing what passed) in those three days; when upon his being
called and converted by Christ, he fell upon the ground, and law nothing ; being an account of the Revelations he had from St. Michael, concerning the various and dreadful punishments of purgatory and bell, and who it was that first prevailed upon the Lord to grant res to the fouls in purgatory on every Lord's day afterwards, to the end of the world. But neither of these were the old Revelation, of which I have been treating, but much later forgeries.
..CH A P. XXXI.
The Aets of Peter; 'or, The Travels of Peter, and the Recogni
tions of Clemens, differing Titles of the same Book now extant. The Preaching and Doĉtrine of Peter the fame Book. The Gospel of Peter. Mark's Gospel formerly ascribed to Peter; and the Reasons of it. Peter's Gospel not composed by Leucius, as Dr. Grabe and Dr. Mill suppose, but a Forgery of the Hereticks called Docetæ, and perhaps the same as the Gospel of Bafilides. This proved probable by several Arguments.
Numb. XLVIII. The ACTS of PETER. I TNDER the name of this Apostle I find mention among
the antients of several spurious pieces; and particularly by several of certain Acts; viz.
I. By Eusebius a. Τόγε μην των επικεκλημένων It is certain, that the book Πέτρα πράξεων -- -Β’ όλως intitled, The Arts of Peterεν τους καθολικούς ισμεν σα
is not by any means to be
reckoned among the Canoniραδεδομένου ότι μήτε αρχαίων
cal books; inasmuch as none μήτε των καθ' ημάς τις εκ- of the antients, nor any of our κλησιαστικός συγΓραφεύς ταϊς Εcclefialtical writers, have εξ αυτά συνεχρήσατο μαρτυ- taken teftimonies out of it. βίαις.
2. By Athanafius 6. Tα της νέας διαθήκης αν- The Apocryphal books of the τιλεγόμενα ταυτα, περίοδοι New Teftament are there, Πέτρα---παραγεγραμμένα
The Aets (or Journeys) of
Peter, &c. They are all εισί σάντως και νόθα και
falie, fpurious, and to be reαπόβλητα, και εδέν τέτων των
jected; none of those Apoαποκρύφων μάλιςα έγκριτον cryphal books of the New ή επωφελές, εξαιρέτως της νέας Teftament have been either διαθήκης αλλά πάντα δί- approved, or are ufeful, but χα των ανωτέρω διαληφθέντων they have all been judged και έγκριθέντων παρα τους Apocryphal, 1. C. rather to be
concealed than read, by the παλαιούς σοφούς, αποκρυφής
antient wise men and Fathers, μάλλον ή αναγνώσεως ως which contain any thing conαληθώς άξια, τά τε άλλα, trary to the books above reκαι αυτα τα καλάμενα εν αυ- cited; as alfo all other Gofτους Ευαγέλια, εκτός των πα- pels befides thofe four deliραδοθέντων ημίν τεσσάρων τύ- vered to us. των.
3. By Jeromed in the Life of Peter. I Libri autem ejus, e quibus But those (other) books unus Actorum ejus inscribi- (called) Peter's, among which tur, alius Evangelii, tertius one is His Aets, another his
a Hift. Eccl. lib. 3. c. 3.
the Canonical books, which he had
PART II. Prædicationis, quartus Apo- Gospel, a third his Preaching, calypseos, quintus Judicii, in- a fourth his Revelation, a ter Apocryphas Scripturas re- fifth his Judgment, are reckputantur.
oned among the Apocryphal
Scriptures. 4. By Epiphanius a, concerning the Ebionites. Xpartão de xai arraus tiri They make use of some other βίβλοις, δηθεν ταις περιόδοις books, fuch as thofe called καλεμέναις Πέτρα, ταϊς δια
who fich The Aets (or Journeys) of PeKapevt recebeicuis, vo
ter, wrote by Clemens, in
which they have left very little θεύσαντες μεν τα εν αυταίς,
that is true, but inserted many oriya dè can I sve tá GAUTES. fpurious accounts.
5. By Gelasius, in his Decree. Itinerarium nomine Petri A- The Fourneys under the name : postoli, quod appellatur sancti of Peter the Apostle, which are
Clementis libri octo (alii de- called The eight (other copies tem) Apocryphum, :
read ten) Books of Clemens, are Apocryphal.
6. By the same, a little after. Actus nomine Petri Apostoli The Acts under the name of Apocryphi.
Peter the Apostle are Apocryphal.
Concerning these Asts of Péter it seems very hard to form any certain determination : I have here recited the testimomies of the Aets and Periods, or Travels of Peter, together, as of one book. The latter title undoubtedly belongs to that book now extant, called, The Recognitions of Clement; and whether the former also did not, I confess I cannot tell. For though Gelasius does indeed mention them as distinct, yet it is observable, that in the first editions of that Pope's Decree there was no such distinction, nor any mention at all of the Asts of Peter. Dr. Grabe b supposes them to have been dif
a Hæres. 30. 9. 15.
o Spicileg. Patr. t. 1. p.78.