power he did these things, and concerning his new doctrine, and about the meanness and despicableness of his outward appearance, and how he humbled himself, and died, and lessened his deity; how many things he suffered from the Jews, and how he was crucified, and descended into hell, and rent asunder the inclosure never before separated, and arose, and raised up the dead who had been buried many ages; and how he descended alone, but ascended to his Father with a great multitude; and how he is set down on the right hand of the Father with glory in the heavens; and how he will come again with glory and power to judge the living and the dead." Abgarus therefore issued out orders that all the citizens should come together early the next morning to hear the preaching of Thaddeus. And after that he commanded that gold and silver should be given to him; but he did not receive it, saying: "When we have left our own things, how should we receive those things which belong to others?" This 'was done in the four hundred and thirtieth year. These things translated from the Syriac language, word for word, we have placed here, as we think, not improperly.'

6

Thus I have now translated this whole history from Eusebius at large, thinking that to be the shortest way to a good conclusion, and that all my readers may be the better able to judge of the remarks that shall be made.

с

Various are the opinions of learned men concerning this history, some receiving it as true, or at least being favourable to it; others rejecting it as false and fabulous. I shall put down here the following observations.

1. In the first place, then, I think, we are not to make any doubt of the truth of what Eusebius says, that all this was recorded in the archives of the city Edessa in the Syriac language, and was thence translated into Greek. Eusebius has been supposed by some to say that himself translated it from the Syriac: but that is not clear; nor is it certain that he understood Syriac; much less have we any reason to say that he was at Edessa, and took this account from the archives himself.

2. This history is not mentioned by any before Eusebius: not by Justin Martyr, nor Tatian, nor Clement of Alexandria, nor Ŏrigen, nor by any other; nor does Eusebius give any hint of that kind; he had it from Edessa; it was unheard of among the Greeks till his time; but, having received it, he thought it might be not improperly transcribed into his Ecclesiastical History.

3. It is not much taken notice of by succeeding writers. It is not mentioned, I think, by Athanasius, nor Gregory Nyssen, or Nazianzen, nor Epiphanius, nor Chrysostom; Jerom has once mentioned it, and will be cited by and by: but he has not inserted, in his catalogue of ecclesiastical writers, either Jesus, or Abgarus; neither of whom would have been omitted if he had any respect for the epistles here produced by Eusebius. This affair is indeed mentioned, or referred to, by Ephrem the Syrian, in his Testament: but that is not a work of so much authority as has been supposed by some: and it is interpolated in several places, both in the Greek and Syriac copies of it; as was observed formerly.

e

4. This whole affair was unknown to Christ's apostles, and to the believers, their contemporaries, both Jews and Gentiles, as is manifest from the early disputes about the method of receiving Gentile converts into the church. If Jesus Christ had himself written a letter to a heathen prince, and had promised to send to him one of his disciples, and if that disciple had accordingly gone to Edessa, and there received the king and his subjects into communion with the church without circumcision, there could have been no room for any doubt or dispute about the method of receiving Gentile converts to Christianity. Or if any dispute had arisen, would not this history of the visit of Thaddeus have been alleged? which would have been sufficient to put all to silence. Nor is there any room to say that this visit of Thaddeus at Edessa was after

2 Και εσμικρυνεν αυτό την θεότητα. p. 35. Α. Cav. H. L. Grabe Spic. Assem. Bib. Or. T. i. p. 554. Abp. Wake's introduction to his Translation of the Apostolical Fathers. ch. ix. Tillem. Mem. Ecc. St. Thomas. T. i. p. 360. Addison of the Christian religion, section i. num. viii. p. 280.

J. Basnage. Hist. de l'Eglise. 1. 21. ch. ii. p. 1312. Hist. des Juifs. Vol. i. p. 200. S. Basnag. Ann. 29. n. xxxviii-xlii. Fr. Spanh. H. E. T. i. p. 578. et 794. Pagi ann. 244. n. vii. Cleric. H. E. p. 332. et Bib. ch. T. xvi. p. 99. Fabr. Cod. Apocr. N. T. T. i p. 319. &c. Philip. Jacob. Sklerandr. H.

Antiq. Ec. Chr. cap, vii. not. 65. J. Jones upon the canon of the N. T. Vol. 2. p. 1. &c. Du Pin. Diss. Prelim. Tom. ii. Vid. et Vales. Annot. in Euseb. Colonia La Religion Chrêt. authorisée par les Payens. T. 2. p. 339, &c.

d Tous les écrivains ecclesiastiques, qui ont été depuis J. C. jusqu'au temps d'Eusèbe, ne nous parlent ni près ui loin de cette Histoire, ni de ces Epîtres. Et qui croira, qu'ils n'en eussent rien dit, si elle leur eut été connue ? &c. Sueur. Histoire de l'Eglise, et de l'Empire. A. J. C. 31. T. i. p. 103. &c.

e See Vol. ii. p. 480, 481.

St. Peter's going to the house of Cornelius, or after the council of Jerusalem: for it is dated in the three hundred and fortieth year, that is, of the era of the Seleucidæ, or of the Edessens: which is computed to be the fifteenth or sixteenth year of the reign of Tiberius, and the year of Christ 29; when, according to many ancient Christians, our Lord died, and rose again, and ascended to heaven. Indeed I think it is impossible to reconcile this account with the history in the Acts of the apostles.

a

5. If Jesus Christ had written a letter to king Abgarus, it would have been a part of sacred scripture, and would have been placed at the head of all the books of the New Testament: but it was never so respected by any ancient Christian writers. It does not appear in any catalogues of canonical books which we have in ancient authors, or in councils. In the decree of the council of Rome, in the time of pope Gelasius, in the year 496, the epistle of Christ to Abgarus is expressly called apocryphal. Nor does Eusebius himself upon any occasion reckon it up among canonical scriptures, received by those before him. The titles of the chapters of his Ecclesiastical History are allowed to be his own. The title of the chapter which has been just transcribed from him is this: A History concerning the Prince of the Edessens. It was a story which he had received; and he afterwards tells us particularly where he had it. And in the first chapter of the second book of the same work, having mentioned the choice of Matthias in the room of Judas, and the choice of the seven deacons, and the death of St. Stephen from the Acts, he recites again briefly the history before told concerning Abgarus, and says: This we have learned from the history of the ancients. Now we return to the sacred scripture;' where he proceeds to relate from the Acts what followed after the martyrdom of St. Stephen. In short, though Eusebius would not pass over this affair without notice, he seems not to have placed any great weight upon it: and succeeding writers have better understood his meaning than some of late times, who have shewn so much regard to this relation.

6. It was the opinion of many of the most learned and ancient Christians, that our Lord wrote nothing: therefore this epistle was unknown to them, or they did not suppose it to be genuine. To this purpose speak Origen, Jerom, and Augustine.

C

d

с

7. There are several things in this epistle to Abgarus which are liable to exception.

(1.) At the beginning of the epistle our Lord is made to say: Abgarus, thou art happy, 'forasmuch as thou hast believed in me though thou hast not seen me. For it is written concerning me, that they who have seen me, should not believe in me, that they who have not seen me might believe in me and live.' Says Du Pin, and to the like purpose say others: Where' are those words written? Does not one see that he who made this letter alludes to the words of Jesus Christ to St. Thomas: "Blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed?” 'John xx. 29. Words which were not spoken by Jesus Christ until after his resurrection, and which were not written until long afterwards: which manifestly shews the forgery of this epistle.'

(2.) Our Lord here seems to speak more clearly of his resurrection, or being taken up to heaven, than he does to the disciples in the gospels.

(3.) Christ here defers to cure Abgarus of his distemper. He tells him that some time hereafter he would send one of his disciples to him, who should heal him.' Which is altogether unworthy of the Lord Jesus, and different from his usual and well-known conduct, who never refused to grant the requests of those who sought to him, and expressed faith in his power. Instead of what is here said to Abgarus, after commending his faith, our Lord would have added and said: Henceforth thou art healed of thy distemper:' or, be it unto thee according to thy faith: or, as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee.'

This we can conclude from similar cases, recorded by authentic witnesses: Matt. viii. 13; xv. 28; Mark vii. 29.

8. There are several other things in this history which are very liable to exception. (1.) It is said that, after our Lord's resurrection and ascension, Thomas sent to Edessa Thaddeus, one of Christ's seventy disciples. But Thaddeus was an apostle, as we learn from Matt. x. 3, and Mark iii. 18. It is likewise here said that Judas, called also Thomas, sent

b

a

*Thaddeus.' Upon which Valesius observes: Thomas, who was one of the twelve, was also called Didymus, as we learn from St. John: but that he was also called Judas, is no where said but in this place: for which cause this story is justly suspected.' Jerom, speaking of this matter, says, Ecclesiastical history informs us that the apostle Thaddeus was sent to Edessa to Abgarus king of Osrohene, who by the evangelist Luke is called Judas brother of James: Luke vi. 16; and Acts i. 13; and elsewhere is called Lebbeus; Matt. x. 3. So that he had three names.'

(2.) When Thaddeus comes to Edessa, he does not go immediately to the king, to whom he was sent, as might be reasonably expected: but he goes to the house of Tobias, where he stays some while, and works many miracles; which being noised abroad, the king hears of him, and sends for him. All this is very absurd. If Thaddeus, a disciple of Jesus, had been sent to the king of Edessa, he ought and would have gone to him directly, or would have made application to one of the courtiers to introduce him to the prince. This therefore cannot be true history, but must be the invention of some ignorant though conceited person.

(3.) It looks not a little fabulous,' says Mr. Jones, that upon Thaddeus's appearing before the king he should see somewhat extraordinary in his countenance, which none of the company else could perceive. Eusebius calls it opapa peya, a great vision: Valesius renders it divinum * nescio quid, some divine appearance.'

(4.) The account in the history, says the same laborious author, that Abgarus designed to make war upon the Jews for crucifying Christ, seems very unlikely: because it is plain he was prince only of a small city, and that at a vast distance from Judea: and therefore could 'never be so extravagant as to imagine himself able to destroy so powerful a nation as the Jews then were.'

(5.) Abgarus is said to have had a grievous and incurable distemper, for which he desired relief of Jesus. This is said over and over. But what the distemper was is not said. Learned moderns, who are not wanting in invention for supplying the defects of ancient history, say, some of them, that it was the gout, others the leprosy. However, presently after the cure of the prince, we are told of one Abdus, son of Abdus, whom Thaddeus cured of the gout.

(6.) We read not of any other city or country, in the first three centuries, where the people were all at once converted to the Christian faith. If the people of Edessa had been all Christians from the days of the apostles, it would have been known before the time of Eusebius. And I may add, that if this story, told by our ecclesiastical historian, had been esteemed credible, it would have been much more taken notice of by succeeding writers than it is.

(7). I forbear to remark, as I might upon that expression of Thaddeus in his discourse with Abgarus: Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, fulfilled the will of the Father:' or upon what is here said of Christ's descent into hell.

9. The observations which have been already made are sufficient to shew that the letter of Abgarus to Jesus Christ, and our Lord's rescript, cannot be reckoned genuine. The whole history is the fiction of some Christian at Edessa in the time of Eusebius, or not long before. The people of Edessa were then, generally, Christians, and they valued themselves upon it. And they were willing to do themselves the honour of a very early conversion to the Christian faith. By some one or more of them, united together, this history was formed, and was so far received by Eusebius as to be thought by him not improper to be inserted in his Ecclesiastical History. Nor could I omit to take some notice of it, as great regard has been shewn to it by some. But all my readers may perceive that I bring not in this thing as a testimony of the first antiquity: though it may afford good proof of the Christianity of the people of Edessa, at the beginning of the fourth century, when Eusebius flourished, or before.

a Thomas quidem, qui fuit unus ex duodecim, dicebatur Didymus, teste Joanne Evangelistâ. Sed eumdem Judam esse cognominatum, alibi, quod sciam, non reperitur. Itaque et hoc nomine narratio ista merito in suspicionem venit. Vales. in loc. p. 21.

b Thaddæum Apostolum, Ecclesiastica tradit historia missum Edessam ad Abgarum regem Osroënæ, qui ab Evangelistâ Lucâ Judas Jacobi dicitur, et alibi appellatur Lebbæus, quod interpretatur corculus. Credendumque est eum fuisse trinominem. Hieron. in Matt. x. 3. Tom. 4. P. i. p. 35.

Cet Abgare est qualifié tantôt Toparque, ou Prince, et

tantôt Roy. Procope en dit bien des choses, qui sont agréables, mais qui sentent fort la fable.

Ce prince étoit travaillé d'une maladie fâcheuse et incurable, (ce que Procope entend de la goutte, et les nouveaux Grecs de la lèpre), &c. Tillem. as before. M. E. T. i. p. 361. d The conversion of the whole city is implied in what is above transcribed; and so Eusebius understood it; for he says, in the first chapter of the second book, p. 39. A. EIGETI τε νυν εξ εκείνα ή πασα των Εδεσσηνων πόλις τη το Χριστ προσανάκειται προσηγορία,

599

CHAP. II.

OF THE KNOWLEDGE WHICH THE EMPEROR TIBERIUS HAD OF OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST.

I. The Acts of Pontius Pilate, and his letter to Tiberius. II. The story of Thamus, in Plutarch, concerning the death of Pan, considered.

1. JUSTIN MARTYR, in his first Apology, which was presented to the emperor Antoninus the Pious, and the senate of Rome, about the year 140, having mentioned our Saviour's crucifixion, and some of the circumstances of it, adds: And that these things were so done you may know from the Acts made in the time of Pontius Pilate.'

a

Afterwards, in the same Apology, having mentioned some of our Lord's miracles, such as healing diseases and raising the dead, he adds: And that these things were done by him you 'may know from the Acts made in the time of Pontius Pilate.'

Tertullian, in his apology about the year 200, having spoken of our Saviour's crucifixion and resurrection, and his appearances to the disciples, and his ascension to heaven in the sight of the same disciples, who were ordained by him to preach the gospel over the world, goes on: Of all these things, relating to Christ, Pilate, in his conscience a Christian, sent an account. to Tiberius, then emperor.'

d

In another chapter or section of the same Apology, nearer the beginning, he speaks to this. purpose: There was an ancient decree, that no one should be received for a deity unless he was first approved of by the senate. Tiberius, in whose time the Christian religion had it's rise, having received from Palestine in Syria an account of such things as manifested our Saviour's divinity, proposed to the senate, and giving his own vote as first in his favour, that he should be placed among the gods. The senate refused, because he had himself declined that honour. Nevertheless the emperor persisted in his own opinion, and ordered that if any, ⚫ accused the Christians they should be punished.' And then adds: ' And then adds: Search,' says he, your own writings, and you will there find that Nero was the first emperor who exercised any acts of severity toward the Christians, because they were then very numerous at Rome.'

It is fit we should now observe what notice Eusebius takes of these things in his Ecclesiastical History. It is to this effect:

When the wonderful resurrection of our Saviour, and his ascension to heaven, were in the mouths of all men, it being an ancient custom for the governors of provinces to write to the emperor, and give him an account of new and remarkable occurrences, that he might not be ignorant of any thing; our Saviour's resurrection being much talked of throughout all Palestine, Pilate informed the emperor of it, as likewise of his miracles, which he had heard of; and that, being raised up after he had been put to death, he was already believed by many to be a god. And it is said that Tiberius referred the matter to the senate; but that they refused their consent, under a pretence that it had not been first approved of by them; there being an ancient law that no one should be deified among the Romans without an order

* Και ταύτα ότι γεγονε, δύνασθε μαθειν εκ των επί Ποντίο Πιλατε γενόμενων ακτών. J. M. Ap. i. p. 76. C. Paris. 1636. num. 36. p. 65. Bened.

* Ότι δε και ταύτα εποίησεν, εκ των επι Πόντιο Πιλατε γενόμενων ακτών μαθείν δύνασθε. Ib. p. 84. C. Paris. num. 48. p. 72. Bened.

Dehinc, ordinatis eis ad officium prædicandi per orbem, circumfusâ nube in cœlum est ereptus, multo melius quam apud vos asseverare de Romulis Proculi solent. Ea omnia super Christo Pilatus, et ipse jam pro suâ conscientiâ Christianus, Cæsari tunc Tiberio nuntiavit. Tertull. Ap. c. 21. p. 22. C.

d Ut de origine aliquid retractemus ejusmodi legum. Vetus erat decretum, ne qui deus ab Imperatore consecraretur,

nisi a Senatu probatus. Scit M. Æmilius de deo suo Alburno. Facit et hoc ad causam nostram, quod apud vos de humano arbitratu divinitas pensitatur. Nisi homini deus pla-cuerit, deus non erit. Homo jam deo propitius esse debebit. Tiberius ergo, cujus tempore nomen Christianum in seculum intravit, annuntiata sibi ex Syriâ Palæstinâ, quæ illic veritatem istius divinitatis revelârant, detulit ad Senatum cum prærogativâ suffragii sui. Senatus, quia non ipse probaverat, respuit.. Cæsar in sententiâ mansit, comminatus periculum accusatoribus Christianorum. Consulite commentarios vestros. Illic reperietis, primum Neronem in hanc sectam, tum maxime: Romæ orientem, Cæsariano gladio ferocîsse. Ib. cap. 5. p. 6.. Euseb. H. E. 1. 2. cap. 2.

of the senate; but indeed because the saving and divine doctrine of the gospel needed not to ' be confirmed by human judgment and authority. However, Tiberius persisted in his former 'sentiment, and allowed not any thing to be done that was prejudicial to the doctrine of Christ. These things are related by Tertullian, a man famous on other accounts, and particularly for his skill in the Roman laws. I say he speaks thus in his Apology for the Christians, written by him in the Roman tongue, but since translated into Greek. His words are these: "There was an ancient decree, that no one should be consecrated as a deity by the emperor, unless he 'was first approved of by the senate. Marcus Æmilius knows this by his god Alburnus. This is to our purpose, forasmuch as among you divinity is bestowed by human judgment. And if God does not please man, he shall not be God. And, according to this way of thinking, man must be propitious to God. Tiberius therefore, in whose time the Christian name was first known in the world, having received an account of this doctrine out of Palestine, where it began, communicated that account to the senate: giving in at the same time his own suffrage in favour of it. But the senate rejected it, because it had not been approved by themselves.. Nevertheless the emperor persisted in his judgment, and threatened death to such as should accuse the Christians." Which,' adds Eusebius, could be no other than a disposal of Divine Providence that the doctrine of the gospel, which was then in its beginning, might be preached all over the world without molestation.' So Eusebius. I forbear as yet to take particular. notice of what is said of this matter by later writers.

a

Divers exceptions have been made by learned moderns to the original testimonies of Justin Martyr and Tertullian. Is there any likelihood,' say they, that Pilate should write such things to Tiberius concerning a man whom he had condemned to death? And, if he had written them, is it probable that Tiberius should propose to the senate to have a man put among the number of the gods upon the bare relation of a governor of a province? And if he had proposed it, who can make a doubt that the senate would not have immediately complied?. So that, though we dare not say that this narration is absolutely false, yet it must be reckoned at the least doubtful.' So says Du Pin.

b

These and other difficulties shall be considered.

Now therefore I shall mention some observations.

In the first place, I observe that Justin Martyr and Tertullian are early writers of good repute. That is an observation of bishop Pearson. These testimonies are taken from the most public writings, Apologies for the Christian religion, presented, or at least proposed and recommended, to the emperor and senate of Rome, or to magistrates of high authority and great distinction in the Roman empire.

Secondly, It certainly was the custom of the governors of provinces to compose Acts, or memoirs, or commentaries, of the remarkable occurrences in the places where they presided.

In the time of the first Roman emperors there were Acts of the Senate, Acts of the City or People of Rome, Acts of other cities, and Acts of governors of provinces. Of all these we can discern clear proofs and frequent mention in ancient writers of the best credit.

d

Julius Cæsar ordered that Acts of the Senate, as well as daily Acts of the People, should be published.

Augustus forbade publishing the Acts of the Senate.

There was an officer, himself a senator, whose province it was to compose those Acts.

The Acts of the Senate must have been large and voluminous, containing not only the

* Δηλος ων εκείνοις, ὡς τῷ δογματι αρέσκεται. Ἡ δε συγκλητος, επει ουκ αύτη δεδοκιμακεί, απώσατο. p. 41. C. b Bib. des Aut. Ec. T. i. p. 24 a.

Nibil igitur est, quod in hac historia refelli possit. Et, cum Tertullianus adeo gravis, adeo antiquus auctor, adeo rerum Romanarum peritus fuerit, tutius multo est istam Tiberii ad Senatum de Divinitate Christi relationem amplecti. Pearson. Lection. in Acta Apost. iv. sect. xv. p. 65.

d Inito honore, primus omnium instituit, ut tam Senatûs quam populi diurna acta conficerentur. Sueton. Jul. Cæs.

c. 20.

e Auctor et aliarum rerum fuit; in queis ne acta Senatûs publicarentur. Sueton, Aug. c. 36.

Fuit in Senatu Junius Rusticus, componendis patrum actis

delectus a Cæsare; eoque meditationes ejus introspicere creditur. Tacit. Ann. 1. 5. cap. 4.

Nescio an venerint in manus vestras hæc vetera, quæ et antiquorum bibliothecis adhuc manent, et nunc maxime a Minuciano contrahuntur; ac jam undecim, ut opinor, Actorum libris, et tribus Epistolarum, composita et edita sunt. Ex his intelligi potest, Cn. Pompeium et Marcum Crassum, non viribus modo et armis, sed ingenio quoque et oratione valuisse, &c. Tacit. seu quis alius, in Dialog. de Orator. c. 37.

Acta Senatus vocabant commentarios, Græce rouvruata, quibus breviter inscriptum quidquid apud Patres diceretur, agereturque... Venio ad populi, &c. Lipsii Excurs. ad Taciti libr. v. annal. cap. 4.