Diotrephes, that ambitious man, who caft malicious and virulent reflections upon the Apoftles, is likewife ranked among the herefiarchs (1). The author of this accufation is indeed too modern to be relied on (m). We may however eafily guefs, from the defcription St. John gives of him, that he was one of thofe falfe teachers whom St. Paul complains of (n). As for Demas, who accompanied him for fome time, and afterwards forfook him, he is only charged with having loved this present world (). St. Epiphanius hath accufed him, but without any proof, of believing that JESUS CHRIST was only a mere man.

From all that hath been faid, one may eafily judge, that the Apoftles were expofed to more troublefome perfecutions from thofe hereticks and falfe brethren, than from the Jews and heathens themselves, though it must be owned they were not attended with fo many acts of cruelty. But martyrdom added a luftre to the church, whereas by herefies it was disfigured and difgraced. After all, we ought not to think it strange that fo many herefies fhould arife even in the time of the Apoftles. For, 1. This is what was foretold by JESUS CHRIST as well as by St. Paul and St. Peter (*). 2. St. Paul fays, that there must needs be herefies (p). Whereby we are not to understand an abfolute neceffity. But the Apostle's meaning is only this, that, confidering the corruption and perverseness of men, herefies are unavoidable; just as when our Saviour faid, Offences muft needs come (q). But waving this confideration, it is only reflecting on the ftate and condition of thofe that at first embraced the gofpel to difcover that it was next to impoffible but that fects and herefies fhould arife.

The Jews coming out of the fynagogue, brought the same spirit into the church. And the different fects that were among them, proved fo many feeds of diffenfion and difcord. Such of the Sadducees as embraced Christianity were not cafily brought to believe the refurrection. The Pharifees being extremely zealous for the ceremonial law, and their own traditions, could not but give the Chriftian religion fome tincture of this zeal. The cabala gave birth to the monftrous opinions of the ones. The heathens, on the other hand, that had been brought up in the fchools of the philofophers, introduced into the Chriftian inftitution, the fubtilties of the Platonick philofophy, and of the other fects (r). Perhaps alfo the disputes that happened between them might occafion a mixture, or rather a confufion of ideas, which gave rife to ill-grounded and incoherent fystems.

There are befides in the Chriftian religion fome truths that exceed human apprehenfion, and require fuch a degree of faith as new converts are not always capable of. Thus Cerinthus could not believe that JESUS CHRIST was born of a virgin, because he looked upon it as an impoffible thing (s). The fame religion recommends us to duties that feem contrary to men's natural inclinations. And this was enough to make

make Simon and the gnosticks reckon martyrdom as a piece of weakness and folly (*).

As in thofe early times there was no canon of the books of the New Teftament, and that befides all inftruction was delivered vivâ voce, people were more apt to misunderstand, or forget things, than now, when they have them laid open before their eyes in a book. And even after the canon had been compiled, and approved of by the church, fome difficult paflages might give rife to different notions, and even to fects, if this diverfity of opinions was accompanied with perverseness and obftinacy, as it is generally known to be. Add to this, that copies of the facred writings being then very fcarce, there were perfons that took the liberty of forging gofpels as they thought fit. Laftly, This might be occafioned by a fpirit of contradiction, and an ambitious defire of diftinguishing one's felf from the croud, which, as we have before obferved, was the cafe of Diotrephes.

3. St. Paul fhews of what ute herefies may be to the church, namely, that they who are approved may be made manifeft (t). As in all numerous affemblies there will always be fome wicked perfons, that may for a long time conceal their pernicious difpofitions, it is proper there fhould happen occafions of discovering and finding them out. Befides, as St. Chryfoftom hath well obferved (u), truth receives a great luftre by being oppofed by falfhood. When there arofe any falfe prophets under the Old Testament, it ferved only to render the true ones more illuftrious. It is much the fame with men as with trees, when they have once taken deep root, they grow the ftronger by being fhaken with ftorms and tempefts. Had the truths of the gospel been expofed to no manner of contradiction, men might infenfibly have fallen into an ignorance or neglect of them. But their being contradicted, hath induced Chriftians to collect all their stock of knowledge, ftrength, and affiftance, in order to defend them against their adverfaries.

Of the Verfions of the New Teftament.

HE ancient verfions of the New Teftament may also serve to if not from the originals themselves, at least from antienter copies than any we now have, as St. Auguftin hath obferved (a). The fame author tells us, that even in the earliest times of Chriftianity, feveral had attempted to tranflate, as well as they could, the Greek text

of

Orig. contr. Celf. I. vi. It was against this error of the gnoflicks that Tertullian wrote his book entitled Scorpiace.

(t) 1 Cor. xi. 19.

(a) Aug. de Doctr. Chr. ii. 11, 15.

(~) Chrys. in Acta Hom. 54.

The Italick

of the Old and New Teftament. But among all these verfiverfion. ons, he prefers that which he calls the Italick (*), undoubtedly because it was made in Italy, or for the ufe of the Latins. As it was used in the church till the fixth century, there are feveral fragments of it extant in the quotations of thofe Latin fathers that wrote before that time. There are fome parts of it to be seen in the margins of fome ancient manufcripts. Dr. Mill fuppofes that it was done by feveral hands in the fecond century, by order of pope Pius I. who was an Italian (†).

1

To this verfion fucceeded that of St. Jerom, which comThe Vulgate. monly goes under the name of the Vulgate. This father having obferved that the Italick verfion was extremely faulty, and that there was a vaft difference between the copies that were difperfed in the world, undertook towards the end of the fourth century, by order of pope Damafcus, to revife this tranflation, and render it more conformable to the original Greek; he began by the New Teftament, and published at firft only the four Gofpels. He declares that he ufed a great deal of care and circumfpection in this work, never varying from the Italick verfion, but where he thought it mifreprefented the fenfe (b). But as the Greek copies he had, were not fo ancient as thofe from which the Italick verfion had been made, fome learned authors are therefore perfuaded that it would have been much better, if he had gathered all the copies together, and by comparing them, have reftored that tranflation to its original purity.

There was, for inftance, in the Italick verfion (6), Give us our daily bread; now instead of the word daily, which very well expreffes our Saviour's meaning, St. Jerom not well apprehending the fignification of the original (*) Greek term, hath rendered it by one (†) that fignifies above our fubfiflence; whereas the true meaning of it is, of the time to come, or for the next day. There are feveral other places, wherein St. Jerom feems to have departed from the Italick tranflation, without any manner of reafon (). The Epifles, and the reft of the books of the New Teftament, were published by him fome few years after. But it is plain that he never put the finishing hand to this work, and even that he left fome faults in it, for fear of varying too much from the ancient verfion, fince he renders in his commentaries fome words otherwise than he had done in the tranflation. This verfion was not introduced into the church but by degrees, for fear of offending weak perfons (d). Rufinus, notwithstanding he was St. Jerom's profeffed enemy, and had exclaimed

(*) St. Jerom calls it the Common and Vulgar. Gregory the Great, the Ancient. (†) Dr. Mill's Proleg. fol. 41, etc. You have there an account of the qua lities of this verfion; and how far it may be of ufe for discovering the true reading of the original Greek.

(b) Hier. Præf. ad Damas. (c) Matth. vi. 11.

(*) ἐπιάσιον.

(+) Superfubftantialem. St. Jerom himself tells us, that there was in the Hebrew gofpel of the Nazarenes, our bread of the next day, which answers to the origical Greek word.

() For an inftance of this, fee our note on Ephef. i. 6.

(d) Aug. Ep. ad Hieron. 82.

exclaimed very much against this performance; was yet one of the first to prefer it to the Vulgar, as is manifeft from his commentary on Hofea, at leaft if it be his. This tranflation gained at last fo great an authority, by the approbation it received from pope Gregory I. (4) and the preference that prelate gave it above the other, that it came thenceforward to be publickly used all over the western churches, as we learn from Ifidorus Hifpalenfis (e), who was cotemporary with Gregory. Though this verfion is not reckoned authentick (f) among us, yet it is certainly of very great confequence, and may ferve to illuftrate feveral paflages both of the Old and New Teftament.

verfion.

The Syriac verfion is generally acknowledged to be very The Syriac ancient, but people are not agreed about the time when it was made. If we will believe thofe Syrian Chriftians that made ufe of it (§), part of the Old Testament was tranflated in the time of Solomon (*), and the reft under Agbarus king of Edefla, by Thaddeus and the other apoftles. Some authors (g), in the editions they have given of the Syriac New Teftament, have carried up the antiquity of it as high as the apoftolical times, but without alledging any proof. As the fecond epistle of St. Peter, the fecond and third of St. John, that of St. Jude, and the Revelations, (which have been called in question for ä long time) are not in this verfion; it is very probable that it was made before the canon of the New Teftament had been made and approved of by the church. It is fuppofed that Melito bishop of Sardis (4), who lived towards the end of the fecond century, hath made mention of a Syriac verfion; but in this there is no certainty. Ephrem a Syrian author, who wrote commentaries upon the holy fcriptures in the Syrian tongue, quotes fome paffages out of the facred writings in the fame language, which feems to prove that in his time the bible was tranf lated into Syriac. As there were in the earlieft ages of Chriftianity fome Chriftians beyond the Euphrates, moft of whom, as not being fubject to the Roman empire, understood neither Greek nor Latin, Mr. Simon fuppofes, that they foon got a verfion of the New Teftament. This verfion having been made from the Greek, and from very ancient manuscripts, may be of the fame fervice as the Italick and Vulgate. It may also serve to correct the Vulgate in fame places, as having been made from ancienter copies that word, for inftance, which is by St. Jerom rendered fuperfubftantial (i), hath by the Syrian interpreter been tranflated the bread which is needful for us, which very well expreíles our bleffed Saviour's meaning.

According to the account given by feveral learned authors (k) of the Armenian verfion, there is none

(4) Greg. I. Ep. ad. Leandrum Expof. in Job. c. 3. (e) Ifidor. Hifpal. Divin. Off.

(f) It was never declared fuch till the council of Trent. (§) That is, the Neftorians, Jacobites, and Marionites.

The Armenian verfion..

more

(*) For the ufe of Hiram king of Tyre. See Dr. Frid. Corn. Par. 2. B. 1.

under the year 277. § 10.

(g) Tremellius, Trottius. () Matth. vi. 11.

(b) See Dr. Mill's Proleg. p. 127.

(4) Mr. Simon, Dr. Mill, Father le Long.

more valuable among all the ancient ones. But nothing can give a better or greater idea of it than a (†) letter which we shall here com