Epiphanius fays farther concerning the Ebionites, that "they deteft the pro"phets *." This, however, I think altogether as improbable, as what he says of their revering water as a god. He is the only writer who afferts any fuch thing, and as far as appears from all other accounts, the Ebionites acknowledged the authority of all that we call the canonical books of the Old Teftament. Symmachus, whose translation of the fcriptures into Greek is fo often quoted, and with the greatest approbation, by the learned Fathers, was an Ebionite; and Jerom fays the fame of Theodotion. They both translated the other books of the Old Teftament, as well as the Pentateuch, and, as far as appears, without making any diftinction between that and the other books; and can this be thought probable, if they had not confidered them as entitled to equal credit? Befides, our Saviour's acknowledgment of the authority of the whole of the Old Tef

* A [Κλημης] γαρ εγκωμιαζει Ηλιαν, καὶ Δαβίδ, και Σαμ ψων, και πανίας της προφήτας, ως είοι βδελυτίονται. Hær. 30. p. 139.

tament

tament is fo exprefs, that I cannot readily believe that any chriftians, Jews efpecially, acknowledging his authority, would reject what he admitted.

CHAPTER XII.

Of Men of Eminence among the Jewish Chriftians.

THOUGH it is probable, that the Jewish chriftians in general were poor, and therefore had no great advantage of liberal education, which might be one means of preferving their doctrine in fuch great fimplicity and purity; yet it appears that there were fome men of learning among them. Jerom mentions his being acquainted with fuch during his refidence in Palestine; and there are three perfons among them who diftinguished themselves by tranflating the Old Teftament from Hebrew into Greek, viz. Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus; though the last of them only was a native of Palestine, and born a Samaritan. Eufebius fays, that "Theodotion and Aquila were both Jewish "profelytes, whom the Ebionites follow

66

ing, believe Chrift to be the son of Jofeph *." According to Epiphanius, Theodotion was firft a Marcionite, and then a Jewish convert. Aquila is said to have flourished about the year 130, Theodotion about 180, and Symmachus about 200. Whatever was thought of the religious principles of these men, the greatest account was made of their verfions of the Hebrew fcriptures by learned christians of all parties, especially that of Symmachus, which is perpetually quoted with the greateft refpect by Origen, Eufebius, and others. Jerom, fpeaking of Origen, fays, that “be"fides comparing the verfion of the fep"tuagint, he likewife collated the verfions "of Aquila of Pontus, a profelyte, that "of Theodotion an Ebionite, and that of Symmachus, who was of the fame fect; "who alfo wrote commentaries on the gofpel of Matthew, from which he en

Ως Θεοδόμων ηρμήνευσεν ο Εφέσιος, και Ακύλας ο Πούλικος, αμφότεροι Ιεδαίοι προσηλύΐοι· οις κατακολέθησανίες οι Εβιωναιοι, εξ Ιωσηφ αυτον γεγενησθαι φάσκεσι. Hift. lib. 5. cap. 8. P. 221.

+ Θεοδόλιων τις Ποντικα απο της διοδοχης Μαρκίωνος τε αιρεσι axe т8 Ewwie. De Menfuris, Opera, vol. 2. p. 172,

"deavoured

1

"deavoured to prove his opinion*." In great eftimation was Symmachus held, that Austin says the Nazarenes were fometimes called Symmachians.

fo

I referve the account of Hegefippus to the laft, because it has been afferted that, though he was a Jewish chriftian, he was not properly an Ebionite, but orthodox with respect to his belief of the trinity. But that he was not only a Jewish chrif tian, but likewise a proper Ebionite, or a believer in the fimple humanity of Chrift, may, I think, be inferred from feveral circumftances, befides his being a Jewish christian; though, fince Origen fays that none of them believed the divinity of Christ, we ought to have fome pofitive evidence before we admit that he was an exception.