Page:1902 Encyclopædia Britannica - Volume 25 - A-AUS.pdf/546

 498

APOCALYPTIC

AND

APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE The Logia (g.v.).—This name is given to the sayings Its present form is due to an orthodox revision which contained in a papyrus leaf by its discoverers Grenfell and discarded, so far as possible, all Gnostic traces. Lipsius Hunt. They think the papyrus was probably written (Smith’s Diet, of Christ. Biog. ii. 703) assigns it to the latter about a.d. 200. According to Harnack, it is an extract half of the 2nd century, but Zahn (Gesch. Kan. ii. 771), on good grounds, to the earlier half. The latter scholar from the Gospel of the Egyptians. Gospel of Nicodemus.—This title is first met with in shows that probably it was used by Justin (Dial. 88). the 13th century. It is used to designate an apocryphal At all events it circulated among the Marcosians (Irenseus, writing entitled in the older MSS. viroyvgg.o.Ta rov Hcer. i. 20) and the Naasenes (Hippolytus, Befut. v. 7), Kvpiov rjgMV "Igaov Xpurrov -pay^rra Itti IIovtIov and subsequently among the Manichaeans, and is frequently HiAdrou: ” also “ Gesta Salvatoris Domini . .. . inventa quoted from Origen downwards (Horn. I. in Luc.). If the Theodosio magno imperatore in lerusalem in prsetorio stichometry of Nicephorus is right, the existing form of Pontii Pilati in codicibus publicis.” See Tischendorf, the book is merely fragmentary compared with its original Evangelia Apocrypha1, pp. 333-335. This work gives an compass. Gospel of the Twelve.—This gospel, which Origen knew account of the Passion (i.-xi.), the Resurrection (xii.-xvi.), (Horn. I. in Luc.), is not to be identified with the Gospel and the Descensus ad Inferos (xvii.-xxvii.). Chapters i.-xvi. are extant in the Greek, Coptic, and two Armenian according to the Hebrews (see above), with Lipsius and versions. The two Latin versions and a Byzantine recen- others, who have sought to reconstruct the original gospel sion of the Greek 1contain i.-xxvii. (see Tischendorf, from the surviving fragments of these two distinct works. Evangelia Apocrypha, pp. 210-458). All known texts The only surviving fragments of the Gospel of the Twelve go back to a.d. 425, if one may trust the reference to have been preserved by Epiphanius (Hcer. xxx. 13-16, 22 : Theodosius. But this was only a revision, for as early as see Preuschen, op. cit. 9-11). It began with an account of 376 Epiphanius {Hasr. i. 1) presupposes the existence of a the baptism. It was used by the Ebionites, and was like text. In 325 Eusebius (//. E. ii. 2) was acquainted only written, according to Zahn (op. cit. ii. 742), about a.d. 170. with the heathen Acts of Pilate, and knew nothing of a II.—Acts and Teachings of the Apostles. Christian work. Tischendorf and Hofmann, however, find Acts of Andreiv.—These acts (referred to by Euseb. evidence of its existence in Justin’s reference to the "Akto. HtAdrov (Apol. i. 35, 48), and in Tertullian’s mention of II. E. iii. 25; Epiph. Hoer. xlvii. 1, &c.) are ascribed to the Acta Pilati (Apol. 21), and on this evidence attribute the authorship of Leucius. For a complete discussion of our texts to the first half of the 2nd century. But these the various documents see Lipsius, Apokryphen Apostelreferences have been denied by Scholten, Lipsius, and geschichten, i. 543-622; also James in Hastings’ Bible Lightfoot. Recently Schubert has sought to derive the Diet. i. 92-93. The best texts are in Bonnet’s Acta Apostoelements which are found in the Petrine Gospel, but not in lorum Apocrypha, 1898, II. i. 1-127. Acts of John.—These acts (cf. Eusebius, II. E. iii. 25 ; the canonical gospels, from the original Acta Pilati, while Zahn exactly reverses the relation of these two works. Epiph. Hcer. xlvii. 1), which recount many marvellous Rendel Harris (1899) advocated the view that the Gospel acts of John, his exile, and death, spring from the same of Nicodemus is a prose version of the Gospel of Nico- period and authorship as the Acts of Peter. For a disdemus, written in Homeric centones as early as the 2nd cussion of this work see Zahn, Gesch. Kanons, ii. 856century. Lipsius and Dobschiitz relegate the book to 865; Lipsius, Apok. Apostelgesch. i. 348-542. The oxdy the 4th century. The question is not settled yet (see complete text is to be found in Bonnet, Acta Apost. Lipsius in Smith’s Diet, of Christ. Biography, ii. 708- Apocrypha, 1898, pp. 151-216. See James, Anecdota, ii. 709, and Dobschfitz in Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, iii. pp. i.-xxv., 1-25 (1897). Acts of Paul.—These acts, which claim to have been 544-547). Gospel o/Pefer.—Before 1892 we had some knowledge written by Linus, are assigned by Zahn to the years of this gospel. Thus Serapion, bishop of Antioch (a.d. 150-180. See Gesch. Kanons, ii. 865-891, and Lipsius, 190-203) found it in use in the church of Rhossus in Acta Apost. Apoc. 1891; Apok. Apostelgesch. ii. 70 sqq. Acts of Paul and Thecla.—These were written, according Cilicia, and condemned it as Docetic (Eusebius, II. E. vi. 12. Again Origen (In Matt. tom. xvii. 10) says that to Tertullian (De Baptismo, 17) by a presbyter of Asia, it represented the brethren of Christ as His half-brothers. who was deposed from his office on account of his forgery. In 1885 a long fragment was discovered at Akhmim, and This, the earliest of Christian romances (probably before published by Bouriant in 1892, and subsequently by Lods, a.d. 150), recounts the adventures and sufferings of a Robinson, Harnack, Zahn, Schubert, Swete. Harnack virgin, Thecla of Iconium. Lipsius discovers Gnostic holds that Justin used this gospel, and hence assigns its traits in the story, but these are denied by Zahn (Gesch. composition to the beginning of the 2nd century; Sanday Kanons, ii. 902). See Lipsius, op. cit. ii. 424-467; Zahn (op. cit. ii. 892-910). The best text is that of Lipsius, to 125, Zahn to 130, and Swete and Chase to 150. Gospel of Thomas.—This gospel professes to give an Acta Apost. Apoc. 1891, i. 235-272. There are Syriac, account of our Lord’s boyhood. It appears in two recen- Arabic, Ethiopic, and Slavonic versions. Gnostic Acts of Peter.—These acts are first mentioned sions. The more complete recension bears the title 0wp,a ’IcrpaghiTOv dhAoerdc^on pr/ra els to. TratStKa rov HLvplov, by Eusebius (H. E. iii. 3) by name, and first referred to and treats of the period from the 7th to the 12th year by the African poet Commodian about a.d. 250. Yet (Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocrypha11, 1876, 140-157). The Harnack assigns their composition to this period mainly more fragmentary recension gives the history of the child- on the ground that Hippolytus was not acquainted with hood from the 5th to the 8th year, and is entitled 2uy- them; but even were this assumption true, it would not ypagpa tov aylov diroaToXov Goyxa Trept rqs vadnKgs prove the non-existence of the acts in question. The dvacrTpoejirjs tov Kvpiov (Tischendorf, op. cit. pp. 158-163). literary relationship between these acts and the Leucian Two Latin translations have been published in this work Acts of John have been shown by Lipsius, Zahn, and by the same scholar—one on pp. 164-180, the other under James. According to Photius, moreover, the Acts of the wrong title, Pseudo-Matthcei Evangelium, on pp. 93- Peter, also, were composed by this same Leucius Charinus, 112. A Syriac version, with an English translation, was who, according to Zahn (Gesch. Kanons, ii. 864), wrote published by Wright in 1875. This gospel was originally about 160 (op. cit. p. 848). These acts deal with Peter’s still more Docetic than it now is, according to Lipsius. victorious conflict with Simon Magus, and his subsequent