صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني
[ocr errors]

name of Barnabas, who had shared with him many fatigues and difficulties in the service of the gospel, though he was not an Apoftle.

I do not therefore difcern any good reafon from the New Teftament, why Barnabas fhould be reckoned an Apoftle. But quite otherwise. The fenfe of the primitive Chriftians is agreeable hereto. Few or none of them have thought Barnabas an Apostle.

Clement of Alexandria has quoted Barnabas (m) five or fix times. Twice he calls him Apoftle. In another place he calls him the apoftolic Barnabas, who was one of the feventy, and fellow-laborer of Paul. These are the highest characters, which he intended to give to Barnabas, and what he means, when he calls him Apoftle, as is fully fhewn in the place juft referred to.

By Tertullian, as cited by us (n) formerly, Barnabas is plainly reckoned no more, than (9) a companion of Apostles.

[ocr errors]

Eufebe, in a chapter concerning thofe who were difciples of Christ, fays: "The (p) names of our Saviour's Apoftles are well known from "the Gofpels. But there is no where extant a catalogue of the seventy difciples. However, it is faid, that Barnabas was one of them, who "is exprefsly mentioned in the Acts, and in Paul's epiftle to the Gala "tians." That learned writer therefore did not know, that Barnabas Iwas an Apostle. In (q) another place of the fame work, his Ecclefiaftical Historie, he quotes a paffage from the feventh book of Glement's Inftitutions or Hypotopofes, where Barnabas is ftiled one of the feventy. In his Commentarie upon Ifaiah (r) Eufebe computes fourteen Apoftles, meaning the twelve, and Paul, added to them, and equal to them, and James the Lord's brother, Bishop of Jerufalem, whom Eufebe did not think to be one of the twelve. Nor does he here fay, that (s) he was equal to them, or Paul. However, from all thefe places we can be fully affured, that our learned Ecclefiaftical Hiftorian did not fo much as fufpect Barnabas to have been an Apostle, in the highest sense of

the word.

Jerome, in the article of Barnabas, in his book of Ecclefiaftical Writers, fays, he (t) was ordained with Paul an Apostle of the Gentiles. But authors, who write in hafte, as Jerome often did, do not always express themselves exactly and properly. Jerome did not think, that Barnabas was equally an Apoftle with Paul. This may be concluded from what there follows: He wrote an epiftle for the edification of the Church, which is read among the apocryphal fcriptures. If Barnabas had been an Apoftle, ftrictly speaking, Jerome would not have faid, he wrote an epistle for the edification of the Church. Which any man might do. Nor would his epistle have been reckoned apocryphal, as Jerome here, and elsewhere

(n) P. 606.... 608.

...

calls

(m) Vol. ii. p. 521... 523. (0) Volo tamen ex redundantia alicujus etiam comitis Apoftolorum teftimonium fuperducere, idoneum confirmandi de proximo jure difciplinam Magiftrorum. Exftat enim & Barnabæ titulus ad Hebræos. Tertull. de Pudicit. cap. 20. p. 741.

[ocr errors]

. . . Τῶν δὲ ἑβδομήκοντα μαθητῶν κατάλογα μὲν ἐδεὶς ἐδαμή φέρεται. Λέσ γελαί γε μὴν εἰς αὐτῶν βαρνάβας, κ. λ. Η. Ε. Ι. 1. cap. xii.

(q) L. 2. cap. i. p. 38. D.

(s) See Vol. viii. p. 154. 155+

(r) Comm. in Ef. p. 422.
(See Val, x. p. 142. 143.

I.

...

4.

(u) calls it. When Jerome fays, that Barnabas was ordained with Paul an Apoftle of the Gentiles; it is likely, he refers to the hiftorie in Acts xiii. of which I have already said all that is needful. Theodoret, as formerly quoted, fays: "The (x) all-wife Deity com"mitted the culture of a barren world to a few men, and those fisher"men, and publicans, and one tent-maker." And to the like purpose often. Which fhews, that he did not reckon Barnabas an Apoftle in the fulleft meaning of the word. If he had, he must have added, and one Levite. The fame obfervation may be applied to Chryfoftom, who (y) in his many paffages fhewing the wonderful progreffe of the gofpel, often mentions the Apostles Peter, a fisherman, and Paul a tent-maker, but never Barnabas à Levite.

a

If then Barnabas was not an Apostle, an epiftle writ by him cannot be received as canonical, or a part of the rule of faith: forafinuch as no men, befide Apoftles, have the privilege of writing epiftles, or other works, preceptive, and doctrinal, that fhall be received by the churches, in that quality. This has been faid several times in the course of this (z) work. And I ftill think it right.

Mark (a) and Luke, apoftolical men, may write hiftories of our Lord's and his apoftles preaching, and doctrine, and miracles, which fhall be received as facred, and of authority. But no epiftles, or other writings, delivering doctrines and precepts, (except only in the way of hiftorical narration,) can be of authority, but those writ by Apoftles.

[ocr errors]

Says Jerome of St. John: "He (b) was at once Apostle, Evangelift, "and Prophet: Apostle, in that he wrote letters to the churches as a "mafter: Evangelift, as he wrote a book of the Gospel, which no other "of the twelve Apoftles did, except Matthew: Prophet, as he faw "the Revelation in the ifland Patmos, where he was banished by Do"mitian."

Frederic Spanheim, in his Differtation concerning the twelve Apoftles, readily acknowledgeth this to be one prerogative of Apoftles: "That (c) they may write epiftles, which shall be received as canonical, "and be of universal and perpetual authority in the Church,'

[ocr errors]

3. Barnabas does not take upon himself the character of an Apostle, or a man of authority.

Near the beginning of the epiftle he says: "I (d) therefore, not as a

(u) See again, as before, Vol. x. p. 143.

(x) Vol. xi. p. 96. See also p. 97. 99. 103.

(y) See Vol. x. p. 366. . 370.

[ocr errors]

(z) See Apoftles in the alphabetical Table of principal Matters.

(a) See Vol. ii. p. 525.

(b) Vel. x. p. 101.

"teacher,

(c) Decimus nobis character apoftolicæ insgoxs eft poteftas fcribendi ad ecclefias plures, vel ad omnes, ros nadone wires, hujufmodi epiftolas, quæ in canonem referri mererentur, id eft, quæ forent canonicæ, univerfalis et perpetuæ in Ecclefia auctoritatis. Diff. prima de Apoftol. Duod. num. xi. Opp. T. 2. p. 310.

(d) Ego autem non tanquam doctor, fed unus ex vobis, demonftrabo pauca, per quæ in plurimis latiores fitis. Barn. ep. cap. i.

VOL. II.

B

"teacher, but as one of you, fhall lay before you a few things, that you "may be joyful."

And somewhat lower: "Again, (e) I entreat you, as one of you." He writes as a man, who had gifts of the Spirit, but not that full measure, which was a prerogative of Apoftles." He (f) who put the "engraffed gift of his doctrine in us, knows, that no man has received "[or learned] from me a truer word. But I know, that you are "worthie."

I fhall add a few more very modeft expreffions, not suitable to an Apostle.

"Thus (g) as much as in me lies, I have writ to you with great plainneffe. And I hope, that according to my ability, I have omit"ted nothing conducive to your falvation in the prefent circum"ftance."

In the last chapter: "I (b) befeech you: I afk it as a favour of you, "whilft you are in this beautiful veffel of the body, be wanting in none "of these things.'

[ocr errors]

And still nearer the conclufion. "Wherefore (i) I have endeavoured "to write to you, according to my ability, that you might rejoice.

Upon the whole, this epiftle well anfwers the character given of Barnabas in the Acts, particularly, ch. xi. 24. He was He was full of the Holy Ghost. The writer of this Epiftle had the gift of the Spirit, though not that measure, which was peculiar to Apoftles. He was full of faith. The writer of this epiftle had an earneft zeal for the truth and fimplicity of the gospel. He was alfo a good man. In this epiftle we obferve the mildneffe and gentleneffe, by which Barnabas feems to have been diftinguished. But we do not difcern here the dignity and authority of an Apoftle.

Confequently, this epiftle may afford edification, and may be read with that view. But it ought not to be efteemed by us, as it was not by the ancients, a part of the rule of faith.

(e) Adhuc & hoc rogo vos, tamquam unus ex vobis. I'. cap, 4.

(γ) Οἶδεν ὁ τὴν ἔμφυτον δωρεὰν τῆς διδαχῆς αυτό θέμενον ἐν ἡμεῖν ἐδεὶς γνησίο ἕτερον ἔμαθεν ἀπ' ἐμὲ λόγον. Αλλὰ διδα, ὅτι ἄξιοι ἐσὲ ὑμεῖς. Cap. 9.

(β) Εφ' ὅσον ἦν ἐν δυνατῷ καὶ ἁπλότητι δηλῶσαι ὑμῖν ἐλπίζει με ἡ ψυχὴ τῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ με μὴ παραλελοιπέναι με τι τῶν ἀνηκόπων ὑμῖν εἰς σωτηρίαν, ενεςώτων. Cap. 17.

(h) Ερωτῶ ὑμᾶς, χάριν αιτέμενΘ. κ. λ. Cap. 21.

[ocr errors]

(1) Διὸ μᾶλλον ἐσπέδασα γράψαι, ἀφ ̓ ὧν ἐδυνήθην, εἰς τὸ εὐφρᾶναι ὑμᾶς. Ibid.

С НА Р.

CHA P. III.

Of the Method, in which the Canon of the New Teftament has been formed. **** HE canon of the New Teftament is a collection of books, Twrit by feveral perfons, in feveral places, and at different times. **** It is therefore reasonable to think, that it was formed gradually. At the rife of the Chriftian Religion there were no written fyftems or records of it. It was firft taught and confirmed by Chrift himself in his moft glorious miniftrie: and was ftill farther confirmed by his willing death, and his refurrection from the dead, and afcenfion to heaven. Af terwards it was taught by word of mouth, and propagated by the preaching of his Apoftles and their companions. Nor was it fit, that any books fhould be writ about it, till there were converts to receive and keep them, and deliver them to others.

If St. Paul's two epiftles to the Theffalonians were the first written books of the New Testament, and not writ till the year 51. or 52. about twenty years after our Saviour's afcenfion, they would be for a while the only facred books of the new difpenfation.

As the Chriftians at Theffalonica had received the doctrine taught by Paul, not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God. 1 Theff. ii. 13. they would receive his epiftles, as the written word of God. And himself taught them fo to do, requiring, that they should be folemnly read unto all the holy brethren. 1 Theff. v. 27. He gives a like direction, but more extenfive, at the end of his epiftle to the Coloffians. iv. 16. requiring them, after they had read it amongst themselves, to caufe it to be read alfo in the church of the Laodiceans: and that they likewife read the epiftle, that would come to them from Laodicea.

All the Apostle Paul's epiftles, whether to churches or particular per, fons, would be received with the like respect by those to whom they were fent, even as the written word of God, or facred fcriptures. And in like manner the writings of all the Apostles and Evangelists.

They who first received them would, as there were opportunities, convey them to others. They who received them, were fully affured of their genuinneffe by those who delivered them. And before the end of the first centurie, yea not very long after the middle of it, it is likely, there were collections made of the four Gospels, and most of the other books of the New Teftament, which were in the hands of a good number of churches and persons.

From the quotations of Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and other writers of the fecond centurie, of Origen in the third, and of Eufebius in the fourth centurie, it appears, that the greatest part of the books, which are now received by us, and are called canonical, were univerfally acknowledged in their times, and had been fo acknowledged by the elders and churches of former times. And the reft, now received by us, though they were then doubted of, or controverted by fome, were (a) well known, and approved by many. And Athanafius, who lived not long after Eufebius, (having flourished from the year 326. and afterwards)

[ocr errors]

(a) See Eusebius Vol, vții. p. 96. 97.

wards) received all the fame books, which are now received by us, and no other. Which has also been the prevailing fentiment ever fince.

This canon was not determined by the authority of Councils. But the books, of which it confifts, were known to be the genuine writings of the Apostles and Evangelifts, in the fame way and manner that we know the works of Gefar, Cicero, Virgil, Horace, Tacitus, to be theirs. And the canon has been formed upon the ground of an unanimous, or generally concurring teftimonie and tradition.

In the course of this long work we have had frequent occafion to observe, that the canon of the New Testament had not been fettled by any authority univerfally acknowledged, particularly, not in time of (b) Eu febius, nor of (c) Auguftin, nor of (d) Caffiodorius: but that nevertheless there was a general agreement among Chriftians upon this head.

That the number of books to be received as facred and canonical had not been determined by the authority of any Council, or Councils, univerfally acknowledged, is apparent from the different judgements among Christians, in feveral parts of the world, concerning divers books, particularly, the epiftle to the Hebrews, and the Revelation: which were received by fome, rejected, or doubted of by others. Not now to mention any of the Catholic Epiftles. There was no catalogue of the books of scripture in any canon of the Council of Nice. Auguftin (e) giving directions to inquifitive perfons, how they might determine, what books are canonical, and what not, refers not to the decifions of any Councils. Caffiodorius, in the fixth centurie, has (f) three catalogues, one called Jerome's, another Auguftin's, another that of the ancient verfion. But he refers not to the decree of any Council, as decifive. And it seems to me, that in all times Christian people and churches have had a liberty to judge for themfelves, according to evidence. And the evidence of the genuinneffe of most of the books of the New Teftament has been fo clear and manifeft, that they have been univerfally received.

The genuinneffe of these books, as before faid, is known in the fame way with others, by teftimonie or tradition. The first teftimonie is that of those who were contemporarie with the writers of them. Which teftimonie has been handed down to others.

That in this way the primitive Chriftians formed their judgement concerning the books proposed to be received as facred fcriptures, appears from their remaining works. Says Clement of Alexandria: "This

(g) we have not in the four Gospels, which have been delivered to us, "but in that according to the Egyptians." Tertullian may be feen largely to this purpose. Vol. ii. 576... 581. I pafs on to Origen, who fays: "As (b) I have learned by tradition concerning the four Gofpels, "which alone are received without difpute by the whole Church of God "under heaven." So Eufebe, in his Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, often obferves, what books of the New Teftament had been quoted by the ancients, and what not. And having rehearsed a catalogue of books uni

verfally

(b) Vol. viii. p. 105. (e) Vol. x. p. 207.

(g) Vol. ii. p. 496. and 529.

(c) Vol. x. 207. . . 211.
(ƒ) Vol. xi. p. 303... 306.
(b) Vol. iii. p. 235.

(d) Vol. xi. 279.

« السابقةمتابعة »