CH. V. Gofpel according to the Hebrews was reckoned the true and authentie Gofpel of Matthew. To this Hebrew tranflation of St. Matthew's Gofpel, poffibly, are owing divers things faid by the ancients: as that Matthew published his Gospel at Jerufalem, or in Judea, for the Jewish believers, and at their request, before he went abroad to other people. I fay, I do fufpect the truth of thefe, and fome other like things, faid of St. Matthew, and his Gofpel. All which may have had their rife from the Hebrew edition of his Gofpel, which they imagined to be the original. For I think, that St. Matthew's, and all the other Gofpels were writ, and intended, for believers of all nations. His Gofpel was writ for the Jews, but not for them only, but for Gentils alfo: as manifeftly appears from the Gospel itfelf, or the things contained in it. I am also ready to fay, with (c) Mr. Bafnage, that I do not know where it was published, whether in Judea, or fomewhere elfe. But as I think, the Nazaren Gospel to be St. Matthew's Gospel tranflated from Greek, with (d) the addition of fome other things, taken from the other Gofpels, and from tradition: fo I reckon, that the Gofpel of Matthew, writ in Greek, was the Gospel, which first came into their hands, and which they gladly received, and made ufe of. I fay again, the notion of St. Matthew's writing in Hebrew, probably, had it's rife from the Hebrew edition of his Gofpel. For allowing that date of his Gofpel, which to me appears molt probable, I cannot conceive the reafon, why Matthew fhould write in Hebrew any more than any of the other Evangelifts. For it may be reckoned highly probable, or even certain, that he undertood Greek, before he was called by Chrift to be an Apoftle. Whilft a Publican, he would have frequent occafions both to write and speak Greek. And could not discharge his office, without understanding that language. true. This Hebrew Gofpel may likewife have been the caufe, why fo many ancient Chriftian writers fay, that Matthew wrote first. This may be But I do not think it was faid upon the ground of any certain knowledge, or good information. I apprehend it not to be eafie to fay, which Gofpel was firft writ. For all the first three Gofpels were writ about the fame time. And St. Luke's, for any thing that I know, may have been writ firft. Which (e) was the opinion of Mr, Bafnage. In Evangelio, juxta Hebræos... quo utuntur ufque hodie Nazareni, fecundum Apoftolos, five ut plerique juxta Matthæum. Adv. Pelag. l. 3. fub in T. 4. p. 533. (c) Annum tamen perinde atque locum, ubi a Matthæo conditum eft, in incerto effe, faciles patimur. Ann. 64. num. xii. (d) Diftinguendum enim inter hoc Evangelium, quale initio fuit, & illud, quale paullatim fiebat, Nazaræis varia addentibus. . . Primitus nihil habuit, hifi quod in Græco nunc legimus... Porro Nazareæi plufcula fuis locis interferuerunt, quæ ab Apoftolis vel Apoftolicis viris, fando accepiffent. G. J. Vof. De Geneal. J. C. cap. ii. num. i. (e) Ann. 60. num. 31, СНАР. L. writers of the first three centuries, that are come down trus there any reason to think, that he was named in any other as no notice is taken of him by Eufebe, or Jerome, who inw tings of ancients now loft, both catholics and heretics. faid, that Matthew wrote in Hebrew, prefently adds: wards tranflated him into Greek, is uncertain." And al te of a tranflator, fince given, are too late to be credited, and za zere very improbable. In the Synopfis afcribed to Athas, DI TE WE till long after his time, it is faid, "That (u) Motors Com tranflated into Greek by James, the firft Bishop of is very improbable. It would be more reafonable to 6. Once more, I apprehend, we may difcern the that St. Matthew's Gospel was writ in Hebrew. T tranflation of his Greek Gospel into Hebrew. We ne (a) in very early days of Chriftianity there was a many, not examining it particularly, nor indeed ... want of understanding the language, imagined, t Hebrew. Jerome exprefsly tells us, that (b) by (t) Vol. x. p. 89. (u) Vol.si: f) Quis in Græcum transfuderit, incertum e Ariftione aut Joanne prefbytero accepit, aut tr Scripturæ Jacobo fratri Domini diferte adfcrible lactus, ex fama duntaxat, Joanni Evangelifte. L tiam, feu magis verifimilem, accedo. Satis e.. in Hebræorum ufum linguâ ipforum patria Epifcopo primario Jacobo, Epifcopo Hierof per provincias, in quas difperfi erant ex get r aliis in ufu familiari, tranflatum fuiffe, &c. P (γ) Μετέφρασε δὲ τῦτο ἰωάννης ἀπὸ τῆς ἑβραι Yeti. Theoph. Pr. in Matth. p. 2. D. (z) Mat Evangelium Græce a Joanne ar Annalium p. 328. et Prole Eutychi Matth (a) zare aus, e xii. T. r L CH. V. Gofpel according to the Hebrews was reckoned the true and authentie Gofpel of Matthew. To this Hebrew tranflation of St. Matthew's Gofpel, poffibly, are owing divers things faid by the ancients: as that Matthew published his Gofpel at Jerufalem, or in Judea, for the Jewish believers, and at their request, before he went abroad to other people. I fay, I do fufpect the truth of these, and fome other like things, faid of St. Matthew, and his Gofpel. All which may have had their rife from the Hebrew edition of his Gofpel, which they imagined to be the original. For I think, that St. Matthew's, and all the other Gofpels were writ, and intended, for believers of all nations. His Gospel was writ for the Jews, but not for them only, but for Gentils alfo: as manifeftly appears from the Gospel itself, or the things contained in it. I am alfo ready to fay, with (c) Mr. Bafnage, that I do not know where it was published, whether in Judea, or fomewhere elfe. But as I think, the Nazaren Gospel to be St. Matthew's Gospel tranflated from Greek, with (d) the addition of fome other things, taken from the other Gofpels, and from tradition: fo I reckon, that the Gospel of Matthew, writ in Greek, was the Gofpel, which first came into their hands, and which they gladly received, and made ufe of. I fay again, the notion of St. Matthew's writing in Hebrew, probably, had it's rife from the Hebrew edition of his Gofpel. For allowing that date of his Gofpel, which to me appears moft probable, I cannot conceive the reason, why Matthew fhould write in Hebrew any more than any of the other Evangelifts. For it may be reckoned highly probable, or even certain, that he undertood Greek, before he was called by Chrift to be an Apoftle. Whilst a Publican, he would have frequent occafions both to write and speak Greek. And could not discharge his office, without understanding that language. This Hebrew Gofpel may likewife have been the cause, why fo many ancient Chriftian writers fay, that Matthew wrote firft. This may be true. But I do not think it was faid upon the ground of any certain knowledge, or good information. I apprehend it not to be eafie to fay, which Gospel was firft writ. For all the first three Gofpels were writ about the fame time. And St. Luke's, for any thing that I know, may have been writ firft. Which (e) was the opinion of Mr. Bafnage. In Evangelio, juxta Hebræos... quo utuntur ufque hodie Nazareni, fecundum Apoftolos, five ut plerique juxta Matthæum. Adv. Pelag. l. 3. fub in T. 4. p. 533. (c) Annum tamen perinde atque locum, ubi a Matthæo conditum eft, in incerto effe, faciles patimur. Ann. 64. num. xii. (d) Diftinguendum enim inter hoc Evangelium, quale initio fuit, & illud, quale paullatim fiebat, Nazaræis varia addentibus... Primitus nihil habuit, hifi quod in Græco nunc legimus. . . Porro Nazarei plufcula fuis locis interferuerunt, quæ ab Apoftolis vel Apoftolicis viris, fando accepiffent. G. J. Vol. De Geneal. J. C. cap. ii. num. i. Of the Time, when the Apostles left Judea, to go and preach the Gospel in other Countreys. S many ancient Chriftian writers, whom we have lately quoted, A fay, that St. Matthew, having preached fome, while in Judea, was defired by the believers there, to leave with them in writing, before he went away, a hiftorie of what he had taught by word of mouth: this may not be an improper place to enquire, how long it was after the afcenfion of Jefus, before Matthew, and the other Apoftles, left Judea, to go abroad into foreign countreys. And first of all, we will obferve fome remarkable paffages of ancient writers, relating to this matter. And then, fecondly, we will confider what light the book of the Acts may afford upon this fubject. Clement of Alexandria, about 194. quotes from a work, entitled the Preaching of Peter, this paffage: "Therefore (a) Peter fays, that the "Lord faid to the Apoftles: If any Ifraelite will repent, and believe "in God through my name, his fins fhall be forgiven. After twelve "years go ye out into the world, that none may fay: We have not "heard.' The next paffage is that of Apollonius, undoubtedly, in part contemporarie with Clement, and placed by Cave at the year 192. by me at 211. as near the time of his writing against the Montanifis. "Moreover, fays (b) Eusebe, he relates as from tradition, that our "Saviour commanded his Apoftles, not to depart from Jerufalem for "the space of twelve years." Which paffage has been already cited in this (c) work. By these two paffages Cave was induced to think, that (d) for twelve years after Chrift's afcenfion the Apostles did not depart from the neighborhood of Jerufalem. Suppofing our Saviour to have been crucified, and to have ascended to heaven in the year 29. of the vulgar æra, which was a common opinion of the ancients, these twelve years ended in the year 41. Supposing those great events to have happened in the year 33. which is a common opinion of learned moderns, those twelve years would reach to the year 45. Befide thofe two paffages alleged by Cave, and other learned men, I shall take notice of some others alfo. Origen says in general, "That (e) when the Jews did not receive the word, the Apostles went to the Gentils." Chryfoftom (α) Διὰ τυτό φησιν ὁ πέτρος, ειρηκέναι τον κύριον τοῖς ἀποτόλοις• Εάν μεν τις θελήση το Ισραήλ μετανοήσαι [forte μετακινήσας] διὰ τὸ ὀνόματός με πισίνα ειν ἐἰς τὸν θεὸν, ἀφεθήσονται αὐτῷ ἁιμαρτίαι. Μετα δώδεκα ἔτη ἐξέλθετε εἰς τόσο pov, μý tis fiπn' Oux soar. Clem. Str. 1. 6. p. 636. Confi Cav. H. L. T. i. p. 5. et Grabe Spic. T. i. p. 67. (b) H. E. 1. 5. cap. 18. p. 136. (d) Hift. Lit. T.i. p. 5. et 13. (e) (c) Ch. xxxi. Vol. iii. p. 16. . . μη παραδεξαμένων ἰυδάνων τὸν λίγον, απεληλύθεσαν εις τα έθνη. Υπ Matth. T.i. p. 225. E. Huet. VOL. II. D. Chryfoftom in a homilie upon Acts xi. 19. and what follows, fpeaks to this purpose." They heard, that Samaria had received the word, and they fent Peter and John. They heard what had happened at Anti"ach, and they fent Barnabas. For (f) that was a great distance. And "it was not fit, that the Apoftles fhould go fo far as yet, left they "should have been esteemed deferters, and thought to have fled from "their own people. But it then became neceffarie for them to feparate, [or go from thence] when the Jews fhewed themselves to be "incurable.' In the Pafchal Chronicle are the expreffions, fpeaking of Paul. "Af"terwards (g) he coming to Jerufalem with Barnabas, and finding there "Peter, and the reft of the Apoftles, with James the Lord's brother, the "Apostles fend an epistle to Antioch in Syria, establishing their church. "And Paul and Barnabas carry the epiftle to Antioch, as the Acts fhew. "By this it appears, that the Apostles then wrote their catholic epiftles, "before their difperfion." Such are the paffages of ancient writers, which must be reckoned to be of fome weight. Let us now observe the historie in the Acts. And it feems to me, there is reason to conclude, that the Apostles ftaid in Judea, till after the Council at Jerufalem, of which an account is given in the xv. chapter of that book. For St. Luke does continually speak of the Apostles, as being at Jerufalem, or near it. Acts viii. 1. And at that time, there was a great perfecution against the church which was at Jerufalem. And they were all fcattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the Apostles. One of thofe perfons, who then left Jerufalem, was Philip, the Deacon and Evangelist: who went to Samaria, and preached Chrift unto them, and with good effect. Whereupon at ver. 14. Now when the Apostles, which were at Jerufalem, heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they fent unto them Peter and John. This needs no Comment. Here is proof, that when the rest of the difciples were feattered abroad, Peter and John, and the other Apoftles, were still at Jerufalem. In Acts ix. 26... 30. is St. Luke's account of Paul's coming to Jerufalem, after his converfion. Where he fays, that the difciples were afraid of him..... But Barnabas took him and brought him to the Apofiles. St. Paul speaking of the fame journey, Gal. i. 18. 19. fays: Then after three years I went up to Jerufalem, to fee Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the Apostles faw I none, fave James the Lord's brother. Here we find, that at this time, three years after his conver fion, () Πολύ γὰρ τὸ διάσημα, καὶ ἐκ ἔδει τῆς ἀποφύλες τέως χωρισθῆναι ἐκεῖθεν, ἵνα μὴ νομισθῶσιν εἶναι φυγάδες, καὶ τὰς αὐτῶν πεφευγέναι· τότε αναγκαίως χωρίς ζωνται, ὅτε λοιπὸν ανίατα ἔχειν ἐδόκει τα κατ' αυτές. 1η Λ. hom. 25. Tom. 2 p. 202. 203. (g) Μετέπειτα ἐλθὼν ἐις ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ βαριάδα, καὶ ἐυρῶν πέτρον καὶ τὰς λοιπὲς ἀποτόλος ἅμα ἰακώβῳ τῷ ἀδελφῳ τα κυρία, γράφουσιν ἐπιτολὴν ὁι αποςόλοι εις αντιόχειαν τῆς συρίας, θεμελιέντες τὴν αὐτῶν ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ διακονεσι τὴν ἐπιτολὴν εἰς ἀντιόχειαν αυτός πᾶυλος καὶ Βαρνάβας, ὡς δηλᾶσιν αι πράξεις. Εκ τοτε δείκνυται, ὅτι καὶ τὰς καθολικὰς αὐτῶν ὁι αποσόλοι τότε γράφεσιν πρὸ τῆς διαστα Tapas duty. Chr. Pafch. p. 233. B. C. |