❝tion, is that in which it is faid the Mef"fiah came. The pomp, therefore, of a

high condition, is the pomp in which "it is faid he came not, although he had "it in his power to come. The expreffions,

therefore, clearly imply that our Lord, "'ere he came, had the power to choose "in what condition he would be born."

after the defcent of the Spirit of God upon him at his baptifm.

John came

As to the phrafe coming, it is used to exprefs the miffion of any prophet, and it is applied to John the Baptift as well as to Chrift, of which the following paffages are examples. Matt. xi. 18, 19. neither eating nor drinking, &c. The Son of man came eating and drinking, &c. i. e. not locally from heaven, but as other prophets came from God. Chrift fays of John, Matt. xxi. 32. John came unto you in the way of righteousness. John the evangelist, alfo fays of him, John i. 7. The fame came for a witness, &c.

Admitting that fome one circumftance in the prophecies which Clemens quotes, rigorously interpreted, should allude to the birth of Chrift (though I fee no reason to think fo) we are not authorized to conclude that Clemens attended to, that in particular, but to the general fcope of the whole, which is evidently defcriptive of his public life only.

In the second section of this epiftle we find the phrase the fufferings of God; but

this is language fo exceedingly fhocking, and unfcriptural, that it is hardly poffible to think that it could be ufed by any writer fo near to the time of the apostles; and Junius, who was far from having my objection to it, was of opinion that the whole paffage was much corrupted, and that, instead of anuala aula i, e. 9, we ought to read μαθηματα αυτών.

Whatever may be thought of this epiftle by any of the moderns, it appears that, after the council of Nice, it was not thought to be favourable to the orthodoxy of thofe times. Photius, in his account of it, fays that, it is liable to cenfure for three things, the last of which is, that "

fpeaking of our high-priest and mafter Jefus "Chrift, he did not make use of expref"hons fufficiently lofty, and becoming a God, though he no where openly blafphemes him."

Of the writings of the other apoftolical Fathers, the epistle of Barnabas would cer

• Οι αρχιερέα και προς άλην τον κύριον ημών Ιησεν Χρισον εξονομάζων, εδε τας θεοπρεπεις και υψηλότερος αφήκε περί αυτά φωνας. εμην εδα απαρακαλύπίως αυτόν εδαμη εν τέλος βλασφημεί. biblioth, ca. p. 306.

VOL. I.

H

tainly

tainly be entitled to the greatest confideration, if it was genuine ; but it is almost certainly spurious, and unquestionably interpolated, besides, that the time in which it was written cannot be ascertained. Probably, however, it is not very ancient. My observations on this subject will be chiefly copied from the learned Jeremiah Jones, who, being a believer in the doctrine of the trinity, cannot be excepted against as an unfair judge in this case.

That the writer of this epistle was not Barnabas, the companion of Paul, who was a Jew, but some Gentile, appears, from the constant opposition between the Jews and the Gentiles in the course of the work, and from the writer always ranking himself with the latter *. It is also evident from there being no Hebraisms in the style of the work, and from its being written after the destruction of Jerusalem. For he speaks of the temple as being then destroyed t, and it is highly improbable that Barnabas should have survived that event.

he says,

*

Jones on the Canon, vol. I. p. 526. + Sect. 16.

ter,

That this epiftle was not, in early times, confidered as the genuine production of Barnabas, the companion of Paul, appears from its not being found in any of the catalogues of the canonical books of the New Testament*. It is, likewise, almost certain that this epiftle could not be written by Barnabas, or indeed any refpectable wrifrom the extreme weakness and absurdity of many parts of it, especially from his finding in the two first letters of the name of Jefus, and the figure of the cross, the number 318, which he says, was the number that Abraham circumcifed (but which was the number of those that Abraham armed, in order to purfue the kings who had plundered Sodom) T, which makes the figure of the cross being 300, in the Greek method of notation, and I H 18. This curiofity he fpeaks of as having been imparted to him by divine inspiration, and as certain a truth as any that he had divulged †.

* Jones on the Canon, vol. 1. p. 534.

* Δηλοι εν τον μεν Ιησεν εν τοις δυσι γραμμασι, και εν ενι τον ταυρον . Οιδεν, ο την εμφύλον δωρεαν της διδαχης αυτά θεμενος εν ημιν. Ουδεις γνησιώτερον εμαθεν απ' εμε λογον. αλλα οίδα, ότι άξιοι εσε Vuais. Sec. 9. p. 30.

H 2

The

1