The Lost and Hostile Gospels: An Essay on the Toledoth Jeschu, and the Petrine and Pauline Gospels of the First Three Centuries of Which Fragments RemainBaring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History
The Lost and Hostile Gospels: An Essay on the Toledoth Jeschu, and the Petrine and Pauline Gospels of the First Three Centuries of Which Fragments Remain
Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
Apocryphal Gospels
The Church of Rhossus was neither heretical nor schismatical; it formed
part of the Catholic Church, and, no objection was raised against its use
of a Gospel of its own, till it was suggested that this Gospel contained
errors of doctrine. No question was raised whether it was an authentic
Gospel by Peter or not; the standard by which it was measured was the
traditional faith of the Church. It did not agree with this standard, and
was therefore displaced. St. Epiphanius and St. Jerome assert, probably
unjustifiably, that the orthodox did not hesitate to amend their Gospels,
if they thought there were passages in them objectionable or doubtful.
Thus they altered the passage in which Jesus is said to have wept over
Jerusalem (Luke xix. 41). St. Epiphanius frankly tells us so. “The
orthodox,” says he, “have eliminated these words, urged to it by fear, and
not feeling either their purpose or force.”(411) But it is more likely
that the weeping of Jesus over Jerusalem was inserted by Luke in his
Gospel at the time of reconciliation under St. John, so as to make the
Pauline Gospel exhibit Jesus moved with sympathy for the holy city, the
head‐quarters of the Law. The passage is not in Marcion’s Gospel; and
though it is possible he may have removed it, it is also possible that he
did not find it in the Pauline Gospel of the Church at Sinope.
St. Jerome says that Luke xxii. 43, 44, were also eliminated from some
copies of the Canonical Gospel. “The Greeks have taken the liberty of
extracting from their texts these two verses, for the same reason that
they removed the passage in which it is said he wept.... This can only
come from superstitious persons, who think that Jesus Christ could not
have become as weak as is represented.”(412) St. Hilary says that these
verses were not found in many Greek texts, or in some Latin ones.(413)
But here, also, the assertion of St. Jerome and St. Hilary cannot be taken
as a statement of fact, but rather as a conclusion drawn by them from the
fact that all copies of the Gospel of St. Luke did not contain these two
verses. They are wanting in the Gospel of our Lord, and may be an addition
made to the Gospel of St. Luke, after it had been first circulated. There
is reason to suppose that after St. Luke had written his Gospel,
additional matter may have been provided him, and that he published a
second, and enlarged, edition of his Gospel. Thus some Churches would be
in possession of the first edition, and others of the second, and Jerome
and Epiphanius, not knowing this, would conclude that those in possession
of the first had tampered with their text.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account