« 上一页继续 »
I need not transcribe at length Jerom’sx account of Agrippa. He calls him a ‘ very learned man ;’ and laces the rise of the heresy of Basilides at Alexandria 1n the time of Adrian; which is agreeable to what Eusebius writes in his Chronicle at the seventeenth year of Adrian, and 133d of our Lord, that? Basilides then dwelt at Alexandria. Agrippa must have written whilst Basilides was living. Theodoret:z says that Agrippa wrote likewise against Isidorus, son of Basilides: whether he means the fore-mentioned work, is uncertain. When Agrippa sa s that ‘ Basilides com osed four and twenty books upon the gospel ;’ it is dou tful whether he intends any of our gospels, or a gospel written by Basilides himself. We may
ave another opportunity to examine that point more particularly. There is nothing remaining of this learned man, except what was in the account given by Eusebius in the above-cited passa e, of which I have transcribed a part.
IV. Aristo, of ella in Palestine, is cited by‘l Eusebius, as saying, that, after the conquest of ‘ Judea by Adrian, ‘ the Jews were rohibited by the edicts of that emperor to ‘ behold so mucli as afar off their native soil.’ Aristo is generally supposedb to be the author of a dialogue, entitled, ‘ A Dispute of Papiscus and Jason,’ expressly mentioned by ” Celsus the Epicurean, in his books against the christian religion, written about the middle of the second century, or some time after. Celsus says it was a book ‘ not so much worthy of laughter, as of pity and aver‘ sion.’ Origen says, in answer to this, that ‘ whoever will ‘ read that little book, without prejudice, will find it not ‘ worthy of either hatred or laughter; in which a chris‘ tian is introduced arguing with a Jew from the Jewish ‘ scri tures; and showing that the prophecies concerning ‘ the essiah agree to Jesus, although the adversary stre~ ‘ nuonsly maintained his point against him.’ I
This dialo ue is twice quoted byd Jerom, but without mentioning tie name of the author. It was translated by one Celsus into Latin; but his translation, as well as the original, is lost. The Latin preface only of Celsus to his translation is remaining, and is published at the end of St. Cyprian’s works. There was a Celsus, bishop of Iconium, in the third century, who is mentioned in° Eusebius; but there is no proof that he is the author of this translation. All that we can be certain of, saysf Cave, concerning him is, that he wrote in times of persecution, and before the Roman emperors embraced the christian religion; as appears from several passages of the preface. Tillemont too thinks it very probable that he lived while the church was under ersecution, at least before the council of Nice. Some pYace it about the time of St. Cyprian. But whenever the translator lived, we have sufficient assurance, from Celsus the Epicurean, that the dialogue itself was written before, or about, the year 140; or, as Cave says, 136. I shall only add, that the translator informs us, in his preface, thatg Jason was a Hebrew christian, Papiscus a Jew of Alexandria; that Papiscus was convinced by the arguments set before him, and desired of Jason to be baptized. They who desire to know more of *this dispute may consult, beside, hCave, iTillemont, kGrabe, lFabricius, and the authors referred to by him.
‘ Agrippo, cognomento Castor, vir valde doctus, 8m. De V. I. e. 21.
Y Basilides hazresiarches in Alexandria commoratur, a quo Gnostici.
’ Haeret. Fab. ]. i. c. 4. sub fin.
‘ Apts'rov ti lItMatoc is'opzt. n. A. l. iv. e. 6. p. 118. D.
b This is taken chiefly upon the credit of Maximus, a writer of the seventh century. Vid. Cave, Hist. Lit. P. l. p. 34.
‘ Oiav do Kal- Hammcov rwog Irat Iadovog av'rLXo'ytav eymuv, I- X. Ap. Orig. c. Cels. 1. iv. p. 199.
4 Quiestion. Hebr. in Genesim. pr. et Comm. in Gal. iii. 13.
V. Soter, successor of m Anicetus in the see of Rome, flourished, according to Cave, about the ear 164. Eusebiusn has taken no notice of any writing of l’iis, beside a letter to the Corinthians; written by him, as it seems, in the name of the church of Rome, as St. Clement’s had been long before. He speaks of it in his account of the several letters of Dionysius, bishop of Corinth; one of which was to the church of Rome, addressed to Soter, their bishop at that time: in which he informs them, that their late epistle had been read in the public assembly of the church of Corinth on the Lord’s day, and that it should be so read often. The passage has been transcribed° already. Dionysius not only commends the letter of the church of Rome, but the church itself, and Soter their bishop, for an excellent custom, which had long since obtained among them, of sending relief to foreign churches in necessity, and to their brethren in the mines. This passage too we shall have occasion to produce hereafter.
'-‘ H. E. 1. vi. c. 19. p. 222. B. ' Ubi supra.
B‘lllud praeclanim atque memorabile gloriosumque Iasonis Hebraei christiam, et Papisci Alexandri Judaei disputationis occurrit,_-p. 31. B.
"_ Hist. Lit. i Mem. Ecc. T. ii. P. 1. Saint Luc. Evangeliste, p. 248—251. k Spicil. Patr. T. ii. p. 127. ' Bibl. Gr. T. v. p. 187. “‘ Ens. H. E. l. iv. 0. 22. p. 142. C.
" lbid. c. 23. p. 145. 13. ° Ch. ii. p. 33.
VI. I have already? mentioned the letter of Dion sius of Corinth to the church of Gnossus in Crete, an his admonition to Pinytus their bishop. Eusebiusq likewise informs us, that ‘ Pinytus wrote an answer to that letter, ‘ wherein he eatly commends Dionysius: but at the same ‘ time desires im to impart to them more solid food, and in ‘ some future letter to write more perfect instruction for the ‘ nourishment of the people under his care; lest, being ever ‘ accustomed to milky discourses, they grow old in a child‘ ish discipline.’
Jerom has likewise an article for Pinytus in his catalogue of Illustrious Men; and gives much the same account of this answer to Dionysius, calling' it ‘ an elegant epistle.’ He says, Pinytus flourished in the time of M. Antoninus and Commodus. As we have no account of any writing of his, beside this epistle, I make no scruple of placing him at the same year with Dionysius, his contemporary. It mag be considered whether here be any allusion to I Cor. iii. . or to Heb. v. 12, 13. Pinytus is mentioned by Eusebius, in another lace,s with Dionysius of Corinth, Philip, Apollinaris, Me ito, Musanus, Modestus, and other eminent persons of that time.
VII. We formerlyt mentioned also a letter of the same Dionysius to the church of Gortyna in Crete, of which Philip was bishop. Of him Eusebius“ soon after says, that ‘ he composed a most elaborate work a ainst Marcion.’ St. Jerom has an article for‘1 this writer, and commends his piece; and says he flourished in the times of Marcus Antoninus and Commodus.
VIII. One of the letters of Dionysius of Corinth was written to the church of Amastris, together with the other churches in Pontus. Eusebiusw informs us, that in that letter Dionysius mentions by name Palmas, their bishop. In another place, writing of the controversy about the time of keeping Easter, at the year 196, he says: ‘ There"
P Ch. xii. p. 144-147.
‘1 Hpog fiv 6 Iva-rog avnypatpwv, Savpalu pew mt arodexsrat for vavmov' awnrapaxaku dc “boo-repay 1,511 1rore paradtdovat rpo¢1|g, rakewrepotg
‘ is also a letter of the bishops in Pontus, over whom Pal‘ mas presided, as being the most ancient.’ It may be supposed that this letter was composed by him.
IX. Eusebius having, in the forecited passage concerning Philip, said that ‘he composed a most elaborate work ‘ against Marcion,’ adds: ‘ Asy did also Ireneeus and M0‘ destus ; which last did most excellently, and beyond the ‘ others, detect his frauds, setting them in the fullest light ‘ before all the world.’ St. JeromZ says, ‘Modestns, who ‘ lived in the time of M. Antoninus and Commodus, wrote ‘ a book against Marcion, which is still extant. There are ‘likewise other works under his name, but they are re‘ jected by the learned as supposititious.’ We know nothing more of them: there are no such now.
X. Soon after,3 Eusebius says, that there was extant in his time a ‘ very eloquent piece of Musanus, written to ‘ some brethren who were gone over to the heresy of the ‘ Encratites.’ Jeromb speaks to the same urpose of this work, and says it was written in the time 01PM. Antoninus. Theodoretc calls Mnsanus a ‘ defender of the truth,’ and says he wrote against the Severeans, which were a branch of the Encratites. Both these writers are placed by Cave at the year 176.
XI. Claudius Apollinaris was bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, of whom Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History writes to this purpose: ‘ At‘1 the same time flourished also ‘ Melito bishop of Sardis, and Apollinaris bishop of Hie‘ rapolis, men of great reputation: each of which severally ‘ presented apologetical discourses for the christian religion ‘ to the fore-mentioned emperor, Antoninus,] who ‘reigned at that time.’ In the next chapter Eusebius speaks thus of his works: ‘Although there are many ‘ books of Apollinaris still extant, and in the hands of ‘ many, I am acquainted with these following only: An ‘ Oration to the fore-mentioned emperor [this is his Apo‘ logy]; Five books against the Gentiles; Two books of ‘ Truth; Two against the Jews; and the books which he ‘ afterwards wrote against the Phrygian heresy, which not ‘ long after gave great disturbance, but was then making ‘ as it were its first appearance, Montanus being as yet ‘ employed in laying the foundation of that error with his ‘false prophetesses.’ Serapion, not long after bishop of ‘ Antioch,e styles him the ‘ blessed Claudius Apollinaris, ‘ who was bishop of Hierapolis in Asia.’ And it may be argued, from his expressions, that what Apollinaris had written against the Moutanists was in the epistolary way. Eusebiusf informs us, that Apollinaris had mentioned the extraordinary deliverance and victory which M. Antoninus obtained in the year 174. He does not say in which of his books this affair was mentioned, though his Apology may be reckoned as likely a place for it as any.
y L_ iv_ c_ 25_ ' De V. I. c. 32.
‘ lbid. c. 28. b Ibid. c. 31. ° Hm. Fab. l. i. c. 21. _ d L. iv. c. 26. in.
Jerom in hisg Catalogue says, Apollinaris flourished in the time of M. Antoninus, ‘ to whomh he presented an ex‘ cellent book for the christian faith.’ He reckons his works as Eusebius does, exce t that he omits the two works ‘ against the Jews,’ whic are wanting likewise in some manuscriptsi of Eusebius. Apollinaris is mentioned again by Jerom, in anotherk place, together with Ireneeus, and other the most eminent christian writers: ‘ who,’ he says, ‘ had shown in their works the origin of the several ‘ heresies, and from what sects of the philosophers they ‘ had sprung.’
Theodoret has mentioned the writings of Apollinaris against the Montanists, and says, ‘ he‘ was a man worthy of ‘ praise, and that he had added to the knowledge of reli‘ gion the study of polite literature.’ In another placem he speaks of Apollinaris having written against those Encratites which were called Severians, from Severus, who, after Tatian, made some additions to the peculiar notions of that sect.
Photius speaks of three“ books of Apollinaris, which he had read; Against the Gentiles, Of Piety, and Of Truth; and commends his style. The second, Of Piety, is mentioned no where else that I know of. Photius says, likewise, that there were other writings of his which deserved to be taken notice of, but he had not seen them.
We have seen enough to satisfy us, that this author flourished in the reign of Marcus Antoninus, about the same time with Melito. And Eusebius in his Chronicle, at the
p. 187. A. r L. v. c. 5. p. 169. C. D.
8 De V. I. c. 26. “ Cui et insigne volumen pro fide christianorum dedit. ' Vid. Vales. Annot. in 100 Euseb.
k Ad Magnum, ep. 83. al. 84. l Avnp aEis'lrawog, not 1r 0g ry 7111mm row .95th mt 'rm/ szQw 1rauieuzv wpooetkywwg. Hazr. Fab. . iii. cap. 2. “‘ Ibid. 1. i. cap. 2.
" l'Ipog 'EXAqvag, rat mp: Eva'sfiuag, xai mp; Akrleemg. PhOt. C. 14.