« 前へ次へ »
in a great measure its teftimony to the truth of Chriftianity. The Evangelifts did not fee one another's Gospels.
| C H A P. XI.. If it be allowed, that St. Mark did epitomize St. Matthew, it will not follow that our present copies of St. Matthèw are misplaced, and contrary to the ora der originally intended by the Evangelis.
CHA P. XII. The particular branches of St. Matthew's Gospel, which Mr. Whifton supposes misplaced. Four propositions for the discovering the true order of time in the Gospel-history. Several of those branches, which Mr. Whifon fuppofes misplaced, are so far from that, that they are in the exact order of time, in which they came to pass. Instances of this produced.
CHA P. XIII. None of those branches, which are not according to
the order of time, in this part of St. Matthew's Gospel, are misplaced. This evidenced by considering several of them.
CHA P. XIV. Mr. Whifton's method of accounting for the disorder he
fuppofes in this part of St. Matthew's Gospel, viz. that St. Matthew wrote it on small pieces of paper; that thefe were confusedly put together by those, who did not perfectly understand the true series of the history. Mr. Toinard of the same opinion. The improbability of it, proposed to be
Shewn from the antient way of writing. The most antient methods considered.
CHA P. XV. That St. Matthew did not write his Gospel on small
pieces of paper, proved by a large differtation on the manner, in which the antients wrote their books. The ordinary method was to write upon large skins, which were faftened together, and rolled up. This the practice of the Jews long before, and in our Saviour's time. The words opened and closed the book, Luke iv. 17, 20, discussed. The words, bring the parchments, 2 Tim. iv. 13. confidered. It does not appear that the Jews made use of paper, or any other material besides that mentioned, to write their books upon.
Ĉ HA P. XVI. Mr. Whifton's Atrange fuppofition, of St. Matthew's
writing this part of his Gospel on small pieces of paper, confuted from the confideration of their number and unequal fize. A table of them, by which it appears, that they were at least twenty in number, of very different sizes. Some contained several chapters, others but a few verses, others but one verse. The improbability of St. Matthew's writing thus. The size of the parchment rolls, on which the Jews wrote.
C H A P, XVII. Mr. Whiffon's observation, that our present Greek
copies of this Gospel, are a translation out of Hebrew, and for that reason more liable to the dif
order order which he supposes, considered. St. Matthew did not write his Gospel in Hebrew, though it is asserted by all the Fathers. The Fathers have frequently (one after another) fallen into the same mistake in matters of fact. How they came to fall into this mistake, viz. by taking the Gospel of the Nazarenes and Ebionites for the true authentick Gospel of St. Matthew. The Fathers were under a fort of necessity of believing this mistake.
CHA P. XVIII. The Fathers fell into the mistake, that St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew, because none of them, except Origen, Jerome, and Epiphanius, understood that language. They were upon that account unable to compare the Gospel of the Nazarenes with their own Gresk copies, and discover its Spuriousness. This confirmed by a remark, that none of the Fathers, who assert St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew, have cited the Gospel of the Nazarenes, except the three mentioned, who understood that language. The reasons assigned, why they (Epiphanius, Jerome, and Origen) fell into the same mistake. Papias, the first Christian writer who' asserts this, was a very fabulous and credulous person; yet was followed by many of the Fathers in his mistakes (as Eusebius observes) by reason of his antiquity. His testimony in this matter, proved by one part of it to be false.
CH A P. XIX. Several arguments by which it appears probable, that St. Matthew did not write his Gospel in Hebrew.
The Greek was the most common language, and, for that reason, that Gospel was most likely to be useful therein. Supposing it a translation, makes its inspiration dubious. It is not probable, that the original Hebrew would ever have been loft. The Hebrew one we have now, is certainly a translation out of Greek.
CHA P. XX. Though St. Matthere's Gospel be fupposed a transa
tion out of Hebrew, yet it was not, for that reafon, more liable to disocation or disorder.
CHA P. XXI. Several arguments to prove, that our present Greek co
pies of St. Matthew are not at all transposed or difordered, fince that Evangelist's first writing. No book ever was thus disordered. It does not seem agreeable to the care, which Divine Providence always exercised towards the facred books, to permit this to have happened to St. Matthew's Gospel. No other part of St. Matthew's Gospel disordered, and therefore not this. The disocations, which Mr. Whifton fupposes, could not happen to this Gospel in the Apostles' time.
CHA P. XXII. The disorder Mr. Whiston supposes in the former part
of St. Matthew's Gospel, could not posibly happen after the Apostles' time, because of the great number of copies, that were spread abroad in the world in their time. The time when St. Matthew wrote, and the distance between that time and St. John's
death, confidered. That the Gospels were very much dispersed in the Apostles' time, largely proved. Mr. Hobbes, Mr. Toland, and Mr. Dodwell's notion of the Gospels being a long while unknown and concealed, confuted by feveral arguments.
CHA P. XXIII. St. Matthew's Gospel, in our present copies, was not
disordered and misplaced since the Apoftles' time, because the Syriack Version, which was made in the Apostles' time, is in the fame order with our present copies. An attempt to prove, that the Syriack Verfon was made in that time. Syriack was the language of the Jews, in the Apostles' time. Great numbers of Jews were converted to Chriftianity, and therefore needed a Version in that language.
CH A P. XXIV. The Syriack Version, which we now have, is the same which was made in the Apostles' time. This proved by three arguments. The Syrians, from whom we had it, believed it to be the fame. It is improbable the antient Verhon should be loft : it wants the parts of the New Testament, which were laft written.