Hebrews was reckoned the true and authentic gospel of Matthew. To this Hebrew tranflation of St. Matthew's gofpel, poffibly, are owing divers things faid by the ancients as that Matthew publifhed 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 written, and intended, for believers of all nations. His gofpel was written for the Jews, but not for them only, but for Gentiles alfo: as manifeftly appears from the gospel itfelf, or the things contained in it. d I am also ready to fay, with Mr. Bafnage, that I do not know where it was published, whether in Judea, or fomewhere elfe. But as I think, the Nazarene gofpel to be St. Matthew's gofpel tranflated from Greek, with the addition of fome other things, taken from the other gofpels, and from tradition fo I reckon, that the gospel of Matthew, written in Greek, was the gofpel which came first into their hands, and which they gladly received, and made ufe of it. I fay again, the notion of St. Matthew's writing in Hebrew, probably, had its 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 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 understood Greek, before he was called by Chrift to be an apoftle. Whilst a publican, he would have frequent occafions both to write and fpeak Greek; and could not difcharge his office without understanding that language. que Matthæi authenticum. Hier. in Matth. cap. xii. T. IV. P. I. p. 47. In Evangelio juxta Hebræos... quo utuntur ufque hodie Nazareni, fecundum Apoftolos, five ut plerique juxta Matthæum. Adv. Pelag. 1. 3. fub in T. IV. p. 533. Annum tamen perinde atque locum, ubi a Matthæo conditum eft, in incerto effe, facile patimur. Ann. 64. num. xii. d Diflinguendum enim inter hoc Evangelium, quale initio fuit, et illud, quale paullatim fiebat, Nazaræis varia addentibus... Primitus nihil habuit, nifi quod in Græco nunc legimus.... Porro Nazaraei plufcula fuis locis interferuerunt, quæ ab Apoftolis vel Apoftolicis viris, fando accepiffent. G. J. Voff. De Geneal. J. C. cap. ii. num. i. This Hebrew gospel 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 eafy to fay, which gofpel was first written; for all the first three gofpels were written about the fame time and St. Luke's, for any thing that I know, may have been written firft; which was the opinion of Mr. Bafnage. e CHA P. VI. Of the Time, when the Apostles left Judea, to go and preach the Gospel in other Countries. As many ancient chriftian writers, whom we have lately quoted, 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 history of what he had taught by word of mouth: this may not be an improper place to inquire, how long it was after the afcenfion of Jefus, before Matthew, and the other apostles left Judea, to go abroad into foreign countries. 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 '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.' * Ann. 60. num. 31. e Μετα δώδεκα ετη εξέλθετε εις κοσμον, μη * Δια τετο φησιν ο πετρος, ειρηκεναι τις είπη Ουκ τον κύριον τοις αποτόλοις" Εαν μεν εν ηκέσαμεν. 1. 6. p. 636. Conf. Cav. H. L. ́ τις θέληση τα ισραηλ μετανοησαι [forte T. I... 5. et Grabe Spic. Τ. Ι. μετανόησας] δια τα ονόματος με πισεύειν εις τον θεον, αφεθήσονται αυτῷ αμαρτία. p. 67. Vol. VI. F The The next paffage is that of Apollonius, undoubtedly, in part cotemporary with Clement, and placed by Cave at the year 192, by me at 211, as near the time of his writing against the Montanists. Moreover, fays Eufebius, he relates as from tradition, that our Saviour commanded his apoftles, not to depart from Jerufalem for the fpace of twelve years.' Which paffage has been already cited in this work. By thefe two paffages Cave was induced to think, that for twelve years after Chrift's afcenfion the apoftles did not depart from the neighbourhood of Jerufalem. Suppofing our Saviour to have been crucified, and to have afcended to heaven in the year 29 of the vulgar æra, which was a common opinion of the ancients, thefe twelve years ended in the year 41. Suppofing 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 fhall take notice of fome others alfo. Origen fays in general, That when the Jews did not receive the word, the apostles went to the gentiles.' Chryfoftom in a homily 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 Antioch, and they fent Barnabas; for that was at 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 neceffary for them to feparate, [or go from thence] when the Jews fhowed themfelves to be incurable.' In the Pafchal Chronicle are thefe expreffions, fpeaking of Paul. Afterwards he coming to Jerufalem with Barnabas, bH. E. 1. 5. cap. 18. p. 135. c Vol. II. p. 371. e d Hift. Lit. T. I. p. 5. et 13. . . . μη παραδεξαμένων ιεδαίων τον 23709 απεληλύθεσαν εις τα εθνη. In Matth. Τ. 1. p. 225. E. Huet. 4 Πολύ γαρ το διάσημα, και ४५ εδει τις αποτολές τεως χωρίσθηναι εκείθεν, να μη νομισθώσιν είναι φυγάδες, και τες and αυτών πεφευγέναι τότε αναγκαίως χέριζονται, οτε λοιπον ανίατα έχειν ει εδικες τα κατ' αυτες. In Act. hom. 25. tom. IX. p. 202, 203. 8 Μετέπειτα ελθών εις ιεροσόλυμα μετα βαρνάβα, και εύρων πετρον και τις λοιπες αποτολές αμα ιακώβω τῳ αδελφω τε κύριε, γράφουσιν επισολήν οι αποδο λοι εις αντιόχειαν της συρίας, θεμελιέντες ' and finding there Peter, and the reft of the apostles, with 'James the Lord's brother, the apoftles fend an epiftle to 'Antioch in Syria, establishing their church. And Paul and 'Barnabas carry the epiftle to Antioch, as the Acts fhow. By this it appears, that the apoftles 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 hiftory in the Acts. And it seems to me, there is reafon to conclude, that the apostles stayed in Judea, till after the council at Jerufalem, of which an account is given in the xvth chapter of that book. For St. Luke does. continually speak of the apoftles, 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 evangelift: 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 Here is proof, that when the reft of the difciples were scattered abroad, Peter and John, and the other apoftles, were ftill at Jerufalem. comment. 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, fpeaking 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 converfion, Paul faw two apoftles only, Peter and James. But St. Luke's words, as feems to me, imply, that all the apoftles were then at Jerufalem, though Paul faw two only, the reft for fome reafons declining to fhow themfelves in perfon to him. Dr. Doddridge has this note upon ch. ix. 27. 'Paul την αυτών εκκλησίαν, και διακονεσι την αυτών οι αποτολοι τότε γράφεσιν, προ επιτολήν εις αντιοχειαν αυτος παυλος και της διασπορας αυτών. Chr. Pafch. Βαρνάβας, ως δηλεσιν αι πράξεις. Εκ p. 233. Β. C. τότε δείκνυται, οτι και τας καθολικας F 2 himfelf himself tells us, that upon his going up to Jerufalem, he faw no other apoftles but Peter and James. Gal. i. 19. Beza well obferves, we are quite uncertain on what occafion the reft were then abfent from Jerufalem. Had they been there, though Paul ftayed but about a fortnight, he would no doubt have feen them.' Nevertheless the folution of this difficulty appears to me very eafy. The apoftles were now all at Jerufalem, or near it but they lived privately, because it was a time of perfecution. The great perfecution against the church, which began with the death of Stephen, was not yet over; the apoftles therefore could not appear abroad without danger and it was fufficient, that they fpoke to Paul, and received him by Peter and James; which I take to be the true import of St. Luke's expreffion: But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles. After Peter had been at the houfe of Cornelius, it is faid, Acts xi. 1. And the apostles and brethren that were in Judea, beard, that the gentiles alfo bad received the word. Another proof, that all the apoftles, or moft of them, were still at Jerufalem. But I do not fuppofe, that the apoftles, like many other of the Jewish believers, were offended at what Peter had done. Or, if they were at firft fomewhat offended, they were foon, and easily fatisfied, and were very willing to teftify their approbation of Peter's conduct. From the twelfth chapter of the Acts we know, that James fon of Zebedee, and brother of John, and Peter, were at Jerufalem, in the year 44, or thereabout, near the end of the reign of Herod Agrippa: the former of whom was beheaded, and the other imprifoned. And at ver. 17, is mention made of another James, fuppofed to be the Lord's brother, and always refident at Jerufalem. From the account of the council of Jerufalem, and of the occafion of it, all the apoftles appear to have been then in Judea, and at Jerufalem, or in its neighbourhood. Acts xv. 2. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no fmall diffenfion and difputation with them, they determined, that Paul, and Barnabas, and certain others of them, should go up to Jerufalem, unto the apostles and elders about this question Ver. 4. And when they were come to Jerufalem, they were received of the church, and or even the apostles and elders.... Ver. 6. And the apostles and elders came together, that is, met in council, fer to conficer of this matter.... Ver. 22. Then pleafed it the apostles, and eluers, with the whole church, to fend chofen men of their own company |