{251}
name, was solely for the purpose that all the people might hear that the Father would reveal all things regarding his Son to the son of Nave.
This name being given to him when he was sent to spy out the land, Moses said: "Take a book in thy hands, and write what the Lord saith, that the Son of G.o.d will in the last days cut off by the roots all the house of Amalek." This, of course, is a falsification of the pa.s.sage, Exodus, xvii. 14, for the purpose of making it declare Jesus to be the "Son of G.o.d." Then proceeding in the same strain, he says: "Behold again Jesus is not the son of Man, but the Son of G.o.d, manifested in the type and in the flesh. Since, therefore, in the future, they were to say that Christ is the son of David," (and here follows the pa.s.sage we are discussing) "fearing and perceiving clearly the error of the wicked, David himself prophesied: "The Lord said unto my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool." And again, thus speaks Isaiah: "The Lord said to Christ my Lord, whose right hand I have held, that the nations may obey Him, and I will break in pieces the strength of kings."
Behold how David calleth Him Lord, and the Son of G.o.d." And here ends the chapter and the subject. Now it is quite clear that the pa.s.sage occurs, not as a reference to any such dilemma as that in Matthew, xxii.
41 ff., but simply as one of many pa.s.sages which, at the commencement of our era, were considered prophetic declarations of the divinity of Christ, in opposition to the expectation of the Jews that the Messiah was to be the son of David,(1) and, as we have seen, in order to prove his point the author alters the text. To argue that such a pa.s.sage of a Psalm, quoted in such a manner in this
{252}
epistle, proves the use of our first Synoptic, is in the highest degree arbitrary.
We have already pointed out that the author quotes apocryphal works as Holy Scripture; and we may now add that he likewise cites words of Jesus which are nowhere found in our Gospels. For instance, in ch. vii. we meet with the folio wing expressions directly attributed to Jesus. "Thus he say": "Those who desire to behold me, and to attain my kingdom, must through tribulation and suffering receive me.""(1) Hilgenfeld(2) compares this with another pa.s.sage, similar in sense, in IV Ezra, vii.
14; but in any case it is not a quotation from our Gospels; (3) and with so many pa.s.sages in them suitable to his purpose, it would be amazing, if he knew and held Matthew in the consideration which Tischendorf a.s.serts, that he should neglect their stores, and go elsewhere for such quotations. There is nothing in this epistle worthy of the name of evidence even of the existence of our Gospels.
3.
The Pastor of Hennas is another work which very nearly secured permanent canonical rank with the writings of the New Testament. It was quoted as Holy Scripture by the Fathers and held to be divinely inspired, and it was publicly read in the Churches.(4) It has a
{253}
place, with the "Epistle of Barnabas," in the Sinaitic Codex, after the canonical books. In early times it was attributed to the Hermas who is mentioned in the Epistle to the Romans, xiv. 14, in consequence of a mere conjecture to that effect by Origen;(l) but the Canon of Muratori(2) confidently ascribes it to a brother of Pius, Bishop of Rome, and at least there does not seem any ground for the statement of Origen.(3) It may have been written about the middle of the second century or a little earlier.(4)
{254}
Tischendorf dismisses this important memorial of the early Christian Church with a note of two lines, for it has no quotations either from the Old or New Testament.(1) He does not even suggest that it contains any indications of acquaintance with our Gospels. The only direct quotation in the "Pastor" is from an apocryphal work which is cited as Holy Scripture: "The Lord is nigh unto them who return to him, as it is written in Eldad and Modat, who prophesied to the people in the wilderness."(2) This work, which appears in the Stichometry of Nicephorus amongst the apocrypha of the Old Testament, is no longer extant.(3)
CHAPTER II. THE EPISTLES OF IGNATIUS--THE EPISTLE OF POLYCARP
Although, in reality, appertaining to a very much later period, we shall here refer to the so-called "Epistles of Ignatius," and examine any testimony which they afford regarding the date and authenticity of our Gospels. There are in all fifteen epistles bearing the name of Ignatius.
Three of these, addressed to the Virgin Mary and the Apostle John 2, exist only in a Latin version, and these, together with five others directed to Mary of Ca.s.sobolita, to the Tarsians, to the Antiochans, to Hero of Antioch, and to the Philippians, of which there are versions both in Greek and Latin, are universally admitted to be spurious, and may, so far as their contents are concerned, be at once dismissed from all consideration.(1) They are not mentioned by Eusebius, nor does any early writer refer to them. Of the remaining seven epistles, addressed to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrnaeans, and to Polycarp, there are two distinct versions extant, one long version, of which there are both Greek and Latin texts, and another much shorter, and presenting considerable variations, of which there are also both Greek and Latin texts. After a couple of centuries of discussion, critics
{256}
almost without exception have finally agreed that the longer version is nothing more than an interpolated version of the shorter and more ancient form of the Epistles. The question regarding the authenticity of the Ignatian Epistles, however, was re-opened and complicated by the publication, in 1845, by Dr. Cureton, of a Syriac version of three epistles only--to Polycarp, to the Ephesians, and to the Romans--in a still shorter form, discovered amongst a large number of MSS. purchased by Dr. Tattam from the monks of the Desert of Nitria. These three Syriac epistles have been subjected to the severest scrutiny, and many of the ablest critics have p.r.o.nounced them to be the only authentic Epistles of Ignatius, whilst others, who do not admit that even these are genuine letters emanating from Ignatius, still prefer them to the version of seven Greek epistles, and consider them the most ancient form of the letters which we possess.(1) As early as the sixteenth century, however, the strongest doubts were expressed regarding the authenticity of any of the epistles ascribed to Ignatius. The Magdeburg
{257}
Centuriators first attacked them, and Calvin declared them to be spurious,(1) an opinion fully shared by Dallaeus, and others; Chemnitz regarded them with suspicion; and similar doubts, more or la.s.s definite, were expressed throughout the seventeenth century,(2) and onward to comparatively recent times,(3) although the means of forming a judgment were not then so complete as now. That the epistles were interpolated there was no doubt. Fuller examination and more comprehensive knowledge of the subject have confirmed earlier doubts, and a large ma.s.s of critics either recognize that the authenticity of none of these epistles can be established, or that they
{258}
can only be considered later and spurious compositions.(1)
Omitting for the present the so-called Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, the earliest reference to any of these epistles, or to Ignatius himself, is made by Irenaeus, who quotes a pa.s.sage which is found in the Epistle to the Romans (ch. iv.), without, however, any mention of name," introduced by the following words: "As a certain man of ours said, being condemned to the wild beasts on account of his testimony to G.o.d: "I am the wheat of G.o.d, and by the teeth of beasts I am ground, that I may be found pure
{259}
bread."(1) Origen likewise quotes two brief sentences which he refers to Ignatius. The first is merely: "But my love is crucified,"(2) which is likewise found in the Epistle to the Romans (ch. vii.); and the other quoted as "out of one of the Epistles" of the martyr Ignatius: "From the Prince of this world was concealed the virginity of Mary,"(3) which is found in the Epistle to the Ephesians (ch. xix). Eusebius mentions seven epistles,(4) and quotes one pa.s.sage from the Epistle to the Romans (ch.
v.), and a few words from an apocryphal Gospel contained in the Epistle to the Smyrnaeans (ch. iii.), the source of which he says that he does not know, and he cites from Irenaeus the brief quotation given above, and refers to the mention of the epistles in the letter of Polycarp which we reserve. Elsewhere,(5) he further quotes a short sentence found in the Epistle to the Ephesians (ch. xix.), part of which had previously been cited by Origen. It will be observed that all these quotations, with the exception of that from Irenaeus, are taken from the three Epistles which exist in the Syriac translation, and they are found in that version; and the first occasion on which any pa.s.sage attributed to Ignatius is quoted which is not in the Syriac version of the three Epistles occurs in the second half of the fourth century, when Athanasius, in his Epistle regarding the Synods of Ariminum and Selucia,(6) quotes a few words from the Epistle to the Ephesians (ch. vii.); but although foreign to the Syriac text, it is to be noted that the words are
{260}
at least from a form of one of the three epistles which exist in that version.(1) It is a fact, therefore, that up to the second half of the fourth century no quotation ascribed to Ignatius, except one by Eusebius, exists, which is not found in the three short Syriac letters.
As we have already remarked, the Syriac version of the three epistles is very much shorter than the shorter Greek version, the Epistle to the Ephesians, for instance, being only about one-third of the length of the Greek text. Those who still maintain the superior authenticity of the Greek shorter version argue that the Syriac is an epitome of the Greek.
This does not, however, seem tenable when the matter is carefully examined. Although so much is absent from the Syriac version, not only is there no interruption of the sense and no obscurity or undue curtness in the style, but the epistles read more consecutively, without faults of construction or grammar, and pa.s.sages which in the Greek text were confused and almost unintelligible have become quite clear in the Syriac. The interpolations of the text, in fact, had been so clumsily made, that they had obscured the meaning, and their mere omission, without any other alteration of grammatical construction, has restored the epistles to clear and simple order.(2) It is, moreover, a remarkable fact that the pa.s.sages which, long before the discovery of the Syriac epistles, were pointed out as chiefly determining that the epistles were spurious, are not found in the Syriac version at all.3 Archbishop Usher, who only admitted the authenticity of six epistles, showed that much interpolation of these letters took place in the
{261}
sixth century,(1) but this very fact increases the probability of much earlier interpolation also, at which the various existing versions most clearly point. The interpolations can be explained upon the most palpable dogmatic grounds, but not so the omissions upon the hypothesis that the Syriac version is an abridgment made upon any distinct dogmatic principle, for that which is allowed to remain renders the omissions ineffectual for dogmatic reasons. There is no ground of interest upon which the portions omitted and retained by the Syriac version can be intelligently explained.(2) Finally, here, we may mention that the MSS.
of the three Syriac epistles are more ancient by some centuries than those of any of the Greek versions of the Seven epistles.(3) The strongest internal, as well as other evidence, into which s.p.a.ce forbids our going in detail, has led the majority of critics to recognize the Syriac version as the most ancient form of the letters of Ignatius extant, and this is admitted by many of those who nevertheless deny the authenticity of any of the epistles.(4)
Seven epistles have been selected out of fifteen extant, all equally purporting to be by Ignatius, simply because only that number was mentioned by Eusebius, from whom for the first time, in the fourth century,--except the general reference in the so-called Epistle of Poly-carp, to which we shall presently refer,--we hear of them. Now neither the silence of Eusebius regarding the eight epistles, nor his mention of the seven, can have much weight in deciding the question of their authenticity. The only point which is settled by the reference
{262}
of Eusebius is that, at the date at which he wrote, seven epistles were known to him which were ascribed to Ignatius. He evidently knew little or nothing regarding the man or the Epistles, beyond what he had learnt from themselves,(1) and he mentions the martyr-journey to Rome as a mere report: "It is said that he was conducted from Syria to Rome to be cast to wild beasts on account of his testimony to Christ."(2) It would be unreasonable to argue that no other epistles existed simply because Eusebius did not mention them; and on the other hand it would be still more unreasonable to affirm that the seven epistles are authentic merely because Eusebius, in the fourth century,--that is to say, some two centuries after they are supposed to have been written,--had met with them. Does any one believe the letter of Jesus to Abgarus Prince of Edessa to be genuine, because Eusebius inserts it in his history(3) as an authentic doc.u.ment out of the public records of the city of Edessa There is, in fact, no evidence that the brief quotations of Irenaeus and Origen are taken from either of the extant Greek versions of the epistles; for, as we have mentioned, they exist in the Syriac epistles, and there is nothing to show the original state of the letters from which they were derived. Nothing is more certain than the fact that, if any writer wished to circulate letters in the name of Ignatius, he would insert such pa.s.sages as were said to have been quoted from genuine epistles of Ignatius, and supposing those quotations to be real, all that could be said on finding such pa.s.sages would be that at least so much might be genuine.(4) It is a total
{263}
mistake to suppose that the seven epistles mentioned by Eusebius have been transmitted to us in any special way. These epistles are mixed up in the Medicean and corresponding ancient Latin MSS. with the other eight epistles, universally p.r.o.nounced to be spurious, without distinction of any kind, and all have equal honour.(1) The recognition of the number seven may, therefore, be ascribed simply to the reference to them by Eusebius, and his silence regarding the rest.
What, then, is the position of the so-called Ignatian Epistles? Towards the end of the second century, Irenaeus makes a very short quotation from a source unnamed, which Eusebius, in the fourth century, finds in an epistle attributed to Ignatius. Origen, in the third century, quotes a very few words which he ascribes to Ignatius, although without definite reference to any particular epistle; and, in the fourth century Eusebius mentions seven epistles ascribed to Ignatius. There is no other evidence. There are, however, fifteen epistles extant, all of which are attributed to Ignatius, of all of which, with the exception of three which are only known in a Latin version, we possess both Greek and Latin versions. Of seven of these epistles--and they are those mentioned by Eusebius--we have two Greek versions, one of which is very much shorter than the other; and finally we now possess a Syriac version of three epistles only(2) in a form still shorter than the shorter Greek version, in which are found all the quotations of the Fathers, without exception, up to the fourth century. Eight of the fifteen
2 It is worthy of remark that at the end of the Syriac version the subscription is: "Here end the three Epistles of Ignatius, Bishop and Martyr;" cf. Cureton, The Ancient Syriac Version, &c, p. 25.
{264}
epistles are universally rejected as spurious. The longer Greek version of the remaining seven epistles is almost unanimously condemned as grossly interpolated; and the great majority of critics recognize that the shorter Greek version is also much interpolated; whilst the Syriac version, which so far as MSS. are concerned is by far the most ancient text of any of the letters which we posses, reduces their number to three, and their contents to a very small compa.s.s indeed. It is not surprising that the vast majority of critics have expressed doubt more or less strong regarding the authenticity of all of these epistles, and that so large a number have repudiated them altogether. One thing is quite evident,--that amidst such a ma.s.s of falsification, interpolation, and fraud, the Ignatian Epistles cannot in any form be considered evidence on any important point.(1)
We have not, however, finished. All of these epistles, including the three of the Syriac recension, profess to have been written by Ignatius during his journey from Antioch to Rome, in the custody of Roman soldiers, in order to be exposed to wild beasts, the form of martyrdom to which he had been condemned. The writer describes the circ.u.mstances of his journey as follows: "From Syria even unto Rome I fight with wild beasts, by sea and by land, by night and day; being bound amongst ten leopards, which are the band of soldiers: who even receiving benefits become worse."(2) Now if this account be in the least degree true, how is it possible to suppose that the martyr could have found means to write
{265}
so many long epistles, entering minutely into dogmatic teaching, and expressing the most deliberate and advanced views regarding ecclesiastical government? Indeed it may be asked why Ignatius should have considered it necessary in such a journey, even if the possibility be for a moment conceded, to address such epistles to communities and individuals to whom, by the showing of the letters themselves, he had just had opportunities of addressing his counsels in person.(1) The epistles themselves bear none of the marks of composition under such circ.u.mstances, and it is impossible to suppose that soldiers such as the quotation above describes would allow a prisoner, condemned to wild beasts for professing Christianity, deliberately to write long epistles at every stage of his journey, promulgating the very doctrines for which he was condemned. And not only this, but on his way to martyrdom, he has, according to the epistles,(2) perfect freedom to see his friends.
He receives the bishops, deacons, and members of various Christian communities, who come with greetings to him, and devoted followers accompany him on his journey. All this without hindrance from the "ten leopards," of whose cruelty he complains, and without persecution or harm to those who so openly declare themselves his friends and fellow believers. The whole story is absolutely incredible.(3) This conclusion, irresistible in itself, is, however, confirmed by facte arrived at from a totally different point of view.
{266}
It has been demonstrated that, most probably, Ignatius was not sent to Rome at all, but suffered martyrdom in Antioch itself(l) on the 20th December, a.d. 115,(2) when he was condemned to be cast to wild beasts in the amphitheatre, in consequence of the fanatical excitement produced by the earthquake which took place on the 13th of that month.(3) There are no less than three martyrologies of Ignatius,(4) giving an account of the martyr"s journey from Antioch to Rome, but they are all recognised to be mere idle legends, of whose existence we do not hear till a very late period.(5) In fact the whole of the Ignatian literature is a ma.s.s of falsification and fraud.
We might well spare our readers the trouble of examining further the contents of the epistles of pseudo-Ignatius, for it is manifest that they cannot afford testimony
{267}
of any value on the subject of our inquiry. We shall, however, briefly point out all the pa.s.sages contained in the seven Greek Epistles which have any bearing upon our synoptic Gospels, in order that their exact position may be more fully appreciated. Teschendorf(1) refers to a pa.s.sage in the Epistle to the Romans, c. vi., as a verbal quotation of Matthew xvi. 26, but he neither gives the context nor states the facts of the case. The pa.s.sage reads as follows: "The pleasures of the world shall profit me nothing, nor the kingdoms of this time; it is better for me to die for Jesus Christ, than to reign over the ends of the earth.