Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

νων και των τεττιγων, και εις ύπνον καταφερωμεθα, επιλανθανόμεθα της οικείας πατρίδος και της εις το νοητον αναγωγης, by the των τεττίγων, the middle kind, or genesiurgic τεττιγες are indicated; but in the former passage which we have cited, Hermeas alludes to the first, or celestial kind.

P. 179. 1. 11 from the bottom: ειδεναι δε δει, οτι το μεν θείον αμέσως πασι παρεστι, ημεις δε αμεσως τω θείῳ συναφθηναι ου δυναμεθα, μη δια μέσου τινος, οιον του δαιμονιου, ωσπερ επι του φωτος δεόμεθα του αερος του διακινουντος ημιν το φως. Here, for διακινουντος, it is necessary to read διακονούντος : and then the passage will be, in English: "It is requisite to know that Divinity is present with all things without a medium, but it is impossible for us to be conjoined with him without the intervening agency of a certain nature, such as that of demons; just as with respect to the light (of the sun) we are in want of the intervention of air, to administer to us the light.” P. 180. 1. 3 from the bottom: ωσπερ δε τῳ κανονι το διαστροφον κρίνεται, και τη ορθή το παρα την ορθην, τον αυτον τροπον ωσπερ εικονα ανηλθεν ο φιλόσοφος την αληθειαν, ᾗ και τα ομοια και τα παρηλλαγμένα κρινομεν. ούτως οφείλει ο ρήτωρ κανονα εχειν το αληθες. In this passage, for εικόνα, it appears to me to be obviously necessary to read xavova. F. 199. 1. 20. πανταχου γαρ εν τῳ Τιμαιῳ δε ενθειάζει τους Αιγυπτίους ως αρχαίους. Here for εκθειάζει it is requisite to read εγκωμιαζει, as will be manifest from a perusal of the beginning of the Timæus. Ρ. 202. 1. 29. οπερ ουν τοις θεοις ο κοσμος, τουτο και τῳ σπουδαιῳ ἡ περι τάξεως ενεργεια. In this passage, for τάξεως, it is necessary to read πραξεως; for what Hermeas says is this, “ that what the world is to the Gods, that the energy of action, or the practic energy, is to the worthy man.” For, as the energy of divinity about the world is directed to that which is external, so likewise is the energy of the worthy man when directed to practical affairs. P. 185. 1. 4 from the bottom: το γαρ υπερεχον αεί δαίμονα δει καλειν, οιον του λογου δαιμονα το λογικον, του νου τον θεον. Here for του λογου it is obviously requisite to read του αλογου; for the meaning of Hermeas is, that it is always necessary to call that which transcends (another thing) the dæmon (of that thing). Thus, for instance, the rational is the damon of the irrational nature, and divinity is the dæmon of intellect." Ρ. 195. 1. 5. οθεν Ιπποκρατης βουλομενος δειξαι, οτι ουκ εστιν απλουν (το σωμα), ειπεν ει εν ην το σωμα, ουκ αν ηλγησεν, ει δε συνθετον, εκ ποσων και συγκειται και ποιων οτι εκ τεσσάρων στοιχείων, θερμού, ψυχρού, και υγρου. In this passage, after υγρου, the words και ξηρου are manifestly wanting; for the four first qualities which Hippocrates attributed to the humors, are, the hot and the cold,

σε

the moist and the dry. And in the last place, in p. 204. 1. 9. Hermeas says, το γαρ σοφον καλειν υπερβαίνει τα ανθρωπινα μέτρα παντων δε των Πυθαγόρου και περι τι επιστημόνων σοφων καλουμένων, ο Πυθαγορας ελθων, το θειον μόνον σοφον εκάλεσεν, ως εξαίρετον το ονομα τω θεω απονείμας, τους δε ορεγομενους σοφιας, φιλοσοφους εκαλεσεν. In this passage, for των Πυθαγόρου, it appears to me to be necessary to read των προ Πυθαγόρου; for then the meaning of Hermeas will be, "that all those prior to Pythagoras, who had a scientific knowledge of any thing, were called wise; but Pythagoras, when he came, gave the appellation of wise to divinity alone, as thus ascribing to God a transcendent name; and those who aspire after wisdom he denominated philosophers." T.

BIBLICAL CRITICISM

On the First and Second Chapters of St. Matthew; comprising a view of the leading Arguments in favor of their Authenticity, and of the principal Objections which have been urged on the subject. By LATHAM WAINEWRIGHT, M. A. F. S. A. of Emman. Coll. Cambridge, and Rector of Gt. Brickhill, Bucks, &c.

FEV

No. I.

Ew circumstances perhaps have been ultimately more favorable to the interests of Christianity, than the numerous objections which have at different times been urged against the divinity of its origin. Other religions have been indebted for their propagation and support to the sword of conquest, and the countenance of the civil authority; but when left to depend on the unassisted influence of their intrinsic merit, have either utterly ceased to exist, or have, at best, been confined to some insignificant and unlettered sect. What to them has proved the source of ruin or contempt, has to the religion of Christ been the uniform occasion of advancement and triumph. The more its evidence has been submitted to the test of examination and inquiry, the more its doctrines have been exposed to the scrutiny of dispassionate reason, in the same proportion have they obtained the approbation and belief of the wise, and have been

able to resist the secret machinations of interested malice, and the undisguised attacks of prejudice and power. If indeed our holy religion, amidst the formidable obstacles which opposed its progress, has ever had cause to be seriously apprehensive for its security and honors, it has arisen, not from the violence of its external enemies, not from the subtle efforts of men whom interest has led to conceal their animosity, but from the divisions and contests of those who have loudly asserted the truth of its claims, and who have been foremost in the ranks of its avowed partizans. To separate from each other solely on account of some frivolous differences of opinion, and to form themselves into distinct elasses and denominations, either from a desire of increasing individual importance, or from a mistaken pride in controverting the creed of the multitude, has been too frequent a practice among the followers of Christ, from the era of his death to the present hour. But this, like many other evils which at the time excited no slight degree of alarm, has been productive of unintentional good. Amidst the vehement contentions of the early sects respecting the foundation of their speculative tenets, or the external discipline of the church, they all professed to resort to one mode of determining their dif ferences by making their final appeal to the same authority, and by acknowleging the writings of the apostles to be the only standard of their faith and practice. The same zeal by which they were actuated in disputing the orthodoxy of their immediate opponents, naturally created the utmost vigilance and jealousy in protecting the sacred writings, which all parties equally admitted to be inspired, from surreptitious interpolation and from every artifice which could affect the integrity of the original text. To this spirit of caution, so unremittingly exercised by the primitive adherents to the Christian faith, it was owing that a few of the books of the New Testament which are now considered to be of equal authority with the others, were not at first acknowleged to be canonical. These, it is well known, were the Second Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third Epistles of St. John, the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude, and the Apocalypse. It is sufficiently obvious, ever, that their subsequent admission into the Canon, at no very considerable interval, must have been the result of a strict inquiry into their pretensions, and of a full conviction that they were the genuine productions of the authors to whom they are ascribed; while, at the same time, it contributes to confirm our confidence in the remainder of the New Testament, by showing the high degree of improbability that any spurious composition

how

claiming divine derivation, could long succeed in escaping detection. In truth, both ecclesiastical history, and the proem to St. Luke's Gospel, acquaint us with the existence of other Gospels and other writings assuming to be inspired, during the apostolic age. Some of these compositions' were contempo

* Of the numerous apocryphal works which appeared during the four first centuries, while some are entirely lost and are known to us only from the description of ancient authors, and the fragments which have been preserved by the latter, others have reached the present times, and afford curious specimens of human folly and fraud. Among those which have been destroyed by the ravages of time, the following are some of the most remarkable: The Gospels of St. Peter and of Judas Iscariot; the Gospel according to the Hebrews; the Gospel according to the Egyptians; the preaching of Peter; the revelation of Peter; the acts of Paul and Thecla; the Gospel of Marcion; the revelation of Cerinthus; the Gospel according to the twelve apostles; the Gospels of Thomas, of Matthias and of Basilides; the preaching of Paul; the acts of Paul; the acts of Peter; the acts of Andrew and John; the Gospels of Bartholomew, of Tatian, and of Apelles; the Gospel of the Nazarenes, which the learned have determined to be only another name for the Gospel according to the Hebrews; the Gospel of the Ebionites; the Gospels of Eve, of Philip, and of Jude; an Epistle of Christ produced by the Manichees; a Hymn of Christ which he is said to have taught his disciples, received by the Priscillianists; the judgment of Peter; the revelation of Paul, and the revelation of Stephen. Of the apocryphal books which are still extant, the following catalogue will be found to contain the principal: the letter of Abgarus king of Edessa to Christ, and our Saviour's answer; six Epistles of Paul to Seneca, and eight from the latter in reply; the constitutions of the Apostles; the Creed of the Apostles; the Gospel of the infancy of Christ; the ProtEvangelion of James; the Gospel of the birth of Mary; the Gospel of Nicodemus, or the acts of Pilate; the martyrdom of Thecla, published by Dr. Grabe from a Ms. in the Bodleian, and supposed to be no other than the acts of Paul and Thecla mentioned by Tertullian; St. Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans; and Abdias's history of the twelve apostles. Amidst so incongruous a mass of writings, some of them coeval perhaps with the primitive church, it might appear to be no very easy task to discriminate our own authentic books from those of a spurious character. Nothing, however, can be established on a firmer basis than the genuineness of our canonical scriptures, as we possess an uninterrupted series of quotations from them, handed down in the writings of the Fathers from the earliest period, where the authenticity of the former is either expressly affirmed or evidently implied. If to this irrefragable proof we add that afforded by the oldest Syriac and Latin versions, which are referred by some divines to the first, and by others to the beginning of the second century, the Diatessaron of Tatian composed in the middle of the second century, the catalogues of the canonical scriptures contained in the works of the Fathers of the third and fourth centuries, and the testimony of Heathen and Jewish authors, we shall have a body of evidence in favor of the authenticity of the New Testament, to which no

[ocr errors]

rary with the publication of our own Scriptures, while others are known to be the indisputable forgeries of a later period; and in order to attract the notice and secure the belief of Christian converts, they were confidently ascribed either to the apostles themselves, or to persons who were known to have enjoyed their friendship. Of this indeed we may rest persuaded, that could any diligence of research have proved these writings to be genuine, they would have been received with all that ardor and confidence which the venerable names attached to them would naturally inspire. But though many of them contained an admixture of truth with falsehood, yet the vigilant examination to which they were of necessity made to submit, would soon disclose the futility of their pretensions; and they were accordingly rejected as unworthy of admission into the catalogue of canonical works publicly recognised by the primitive Christians. Admitting, as we unquestionably must, that the highest degree of vigilance and circumspection was exercised by the early followers of Christ in the formation of that Canon of Scriptures which was for ever to regulate the faith and to involve the salvation of succeeding generations,' it must require

other compositions in existence can lay claim, and which completely excludes the pretensions of those fictitious writings enumerated in this note. Respecting the writings of the apostolic Fathers, a great diversity of opinion has prevailed; and though vast learning has been displayed in establishing the authenticity of many of them, there are others which are universally admitted to be spurious; some divines, indeed, have not scrupled to question the authority of all of them.

Respecting the origin of the term canonical, as applied to the Scriptures, there are three different opinions. The learned French critic Dupin observes, that as one signification of the Greek word Kavav, is a catalogue, the books of the New Testament were termed canonical, because the catalogue of them was called the canon. To this, however, it is replied that there is no authority to show that the word Kavav was used in this sense till the fourth century, long prior to which the same term was applied to the sacred volume.

The eccentric Whiston imagined that the books of the New Testament were called canonical because they are enumerated in the last of the apostolical constitutions or canons, forgetting that for the same reason many apocryphal writings would be entitled to that appellation. To this it may be added that these constitutions have long ceased to be considered as genuine.

The third and best reason alleged for the original application of the term is this, that the word canon, both in Greek and Latin, properly signifies a rule or standard by which other things are to be tried; and as the sacred books are acknowleged by all Christians to be the standard of their faith and practice, the collection of them obtained at an early period the title of canon. The precise period when our present canon was

« PředchozíPokračovat »