Mr. William Whiston, who ltas given an Eng lish translation of this work in his Authentic Recora's, considers it to be a genuine production, and one of the concealed (as he interprets the word apocryphal) books of the O. T., maintaining that if this and the book of Enoch were not written after the destruction of Jerusalem (which he holds to be a wild notion), they are of neces sity genuine and divine. Cave (Hist. Liter.) was at first disposed to place the work in the year A.D. 192, but he subsequently regarded it as more probably written near the commencement of the 2d century. That the work was extant in the time of Origen appears from his observation We find the like sentiment in another little book, called the Testanient of the Twelve Patriarchs, although it is not in the canon,' viz., that by sin ners are to be understood the angels of Satan (Boma. in 7os. comp. with Testament. Reuben., sec. 3). Jerome also observes that there had been forged revelations of all the patriarchs and prophets. Tertullian has also been supposed to refer to it. It is cited by Procopius of Gaza, about A.D. 520; and in the Stichometry of Nice phorus (about A.D. SOO) it is said to contain in thc Greek 5roo, and in the Latin 4Soo, stichs verses [VERsE]. Dr. Dodwell, from its Hellen istic character, ascribes it to the 1st century. The recent investigations of Dr. Nitzsche (De Testa ?newels duodecinz Patriarcharum, Wittenb. r8to), however, seem to leave no doubt of its having been the work of a Jewish Christian, about the begin ning of the 2d century. The desigm of the writer was evidently to convert the tvvelve tribes to the Christian faith. For this object are introduced the apocalyptic elements. The time of Christ's appearance is predicted. The Messiah is repre sented as both priest and king, and with this view chamcterised as equally sprung from the tribes of Judah and Levi. He is to appear, after many calamities, as the common Saviour of Jews and Gentiles. It also contains revelations purely Chris tian, as the everlasting reign of Christ, the general resurrection, and the last judgment. The Apoca lypse of John is referred to, if not expressly cited ; and the apocalyptical portions have evidently this for their groundwork, together with the book of Daniel, and that of Enoch, which is expressly cited as a work of authority (Levi, 2 ; Naphthali, 5), and is consequently an earlier production.
There was an altered and interpolated English translation of this book, published (as a genuine work of the twelve patriarchs) in Bristol by Richard Day, in 1813.
The FOURTH BOOK OF EZRA. [ESDRAS.] The ancient romantic fiction, entitled the SHEP HERD OF DERMAS, is not without its apocalyptic elements. These, however, are confined to book i• 3, 4 ; but they are destitute of signification or originality [HERMAS].
The BOOK OF ENOCH is one of the most curious of the spurious revelations, resembling in its out ward form both the book of Daniel and the Apo calypse ; but it is uncertain whether this latter work or the book of Enoch was first written [ENocki].
There was an APOCRYPHAL REVELATION OF ST. JOHN extant in the time of Theodosius the Grammarian, the only one of the ancients who mentions it, and who calls it a pseudepigraphal book. It was not known what had become of it, until the identical work was recently published from a Vatican as well as a Vienna manuscript, by Birch, in his Auctarimn, under the title of The Apocalypse of the Holy Apostle and Evan gelist John the Divine.' From the silence of the ancients respecting this work, it could scarcely have been written before the 3d Or 4th century. Liicke has pointed out other internal marks of a later age, as, for instance, the mention of incense, which he observes first came into use in the Chris tian Church after the 4th century (although here the author of the spurious book may have taken his idea from Rev. v. 8 ; viii. 3); also of images and rich crosses, which were not in use before the 4th and 5th centuries.' The name patriarch, applied here to a dignitary in the church, belongs to the same age. The time in which Theodosius himself lived is not certainly known, but he cannot be placed earlier than the sth century, which Liicke conceives to be the most probable age of the work itself. Regarding the object and occa sion of the work (which is a rather servile imitation of the genuine Apocalypse), in consequence of the absence of dates and of internal characteristics, there are no certain indications. Birch's text, as well as his manuscripts, abound in errors ; but Thilo has collated two Paris manuscripts for his intended edition (see his Acta Thome; Proleg., p. lxxxiii.) Assemann (Biblioth. Orient., tom.
pt. i. p. 282) states that there is an Arabic version among the Vatican MSS.—W. W.