passover, as the moderns have done, in the middle, between that mentioned in the 2d chapter, and the final one in the 18th, and consequently two years' preaching at the least. Besides, it is no where intimated, or ever supposed, that Christ assisted at any such third passover; which failure, if there had been one, is not to be imagined of him who fulfilled all righteousness, and was the perfect pattern of obedience to his Father's law. To warxa, was probably a Το πασχα, marginal note of one, who thought to explain what "feast of the Jews' John meant; and soon crept into the text here with as little reason as it has in other places; for example, ch. ii. 23, and xix. 14. Whereas he in all appearance intended here, that that feast was approaching, which Jesus, in v. 1, went to celebrate; and that is by Cyril and Chrysostom very justly supposed to be pentecost.

These two amendments being admitted, the whole progress of that last year of our Saviour's life will be found to be orderly and distinctly related by John, with the several journeys he made to Jerusalem, at the great feasts of the Jews; beginning with,

1. The passover, or 14th of Nisan, ch. ii. 13, which by our computation fell that year, P. J. 4728, A. D. 25, on Monday the 2d of April.

2. The pentecost, or the 6th of Sivan, on Wednesday, the 23d of May, mentioned first in ch. vi. 4, as nigh; and again in v. 1, when Jesus went to it, and on the Sabbath following, May 26, healed the cripple at Bethesda.

3. The scenopegia, or feast of tabernacles, on the 15th of Tisri, answering to Thursday, the 27th of our September, in ch. vii. 14, in the middle of which feast, or on Sunday, the 30th of September, Christ began to teach in the temple.

4. The encania, or feast of reconsecrating the temple, by Judas Maccabæus, and celebrated by the Jews ever after in memory of it, on the 25th of Casleu, which was that year, Wednesday, the 5th of December. Ch. x. 22.

5. The Messiah's last passover, at which he was sacrificed, the year following, P. J. 4739, which fell that year on Friday, the 22d of March. Ch. xiii. &c.

In this manner the history of John is cleared of perplexity, and reconciled with the other evangelists; so that all the four concur in comprehending, within the compass of one year, or little more, all the public transactions of our Lord, in sermons, miracles, disputes, and sufferings. From whence it will follow, if Jesus was 30 years old, and was baptized in January, P. J. 4738, that he must have been put to death according to the prophecy of Daniel, An. P. J. 4739.

No. IV.

PREFACE TO THE ENGLISH HARMONY.

(See supra, p. 18, Note †.)

IN this English edition of the Harmony of the Evangelists, the text is a copy of the Greek; the entire history, with all the incidents and discourses, collected from all the evangelists, being distin

guished by a larger character, and the collateral accounts of the same things being printed in a smaller character, in separate columns; so that they may be read and compared, or omitted at pleasure.

In this edition I have, however, attempted several things for the benefit of those who are unlearned, but of a liberal turn of mind; having found by my acquaintance with such persons, that some assistance would be of real use to them in reading the gospels, though a perpetual paraphrase and copious notes would be tiresome and disgusting. may have failed in my attempt, but I have endeavoured to consult the real wants of a most respectable class of Christians.

With this view I have, in the first place, corrected our common version throughout, wherever I thought it necessary, either on account of its giving a wrong sense, or for the sake of changing some obsolete words and phrases. An intire new translation I thought unnecessary; and indeed it would not have been easy to make one, the general character of which would give more satisfaction, or more happily express the simplicity of the original writers of the gospel history, who were the farthest in the world from being writers by profession. I have taken care, however, to insert at the bottom of the page, what the common version is, except that I have not noticed the constant change that I have made of Holy Spirit for Holy Ghost, and of dæmon for devil, when the original was damperion, &c. These occurring so often, the notice would have been tiresome. Other corrections of a trifling nature may also have passed without particular notice. In this correction of the English version, I must acknowledge my obligations to Michael Dodson, Esq., the worthy nephew of Judge Foster, and who to the studies peculiar to his profession, adds those of an infinitely more sublime and liberal nature, those of the learned Christian.

In the second place, I have partly collected, and partly supplied myself, and from the communications of a few of my friends, notes on those passages that seemed to require some illustration, not for the learned, as I have observed before, but for the more liberal of the unlearned readers; though some of the notes are more calculated for the use of the learned.

In these notes I have been more particularly assisted by my friend the Rev. Mr. Turner of Wakefield; and had not approaching age and infirmities prevented, he would have executed the whole of this part of the work; from which those who are acquainted with his valuable criticisms in the Theological Repository could not but have formed great expectations. One of the happiest circumstances in my life was my neighbourhood to him when I lived at Leeds. To his encouragement and assistance those who approve of my theological writings are considerably indebted, and without him the Theological Repository, one of the most useful works I ever undertook, would hardly have been thought of. Such friendships as these are enjoyed long after personal intercourse ceases. They are not those of the world, and will last and improve when the world shall be no more. Mr. Turner's notes are distinguished by a capital T subjoined to them. Others signed J were furnished by Dr. Jebb.

In the third place, I have given an occasional paraphrase, espe

cially of those discourses of our Saviour recorded by John, where the connexion of the parts is not very apparent, and which the mode of paraphrasing is better adapted to explain than any criticisms in the form of notes. This paraphrase being simply intended to express the real meaning of the writer, I have seldom used many more words, and sometimes fewer, than my author. To paraphrase a plain narrative I thought quite superfluous, and more likely to introduce uncertainty and obscurity, than to throw light.

With respect both to the paraphrase and notes, I would only give my readers one caution, which is, that they would not reject my interpretation of particular passages, because, at first sight, they may appear not to be natural; for this first impression may arise from nothing more than former fixed associations of ideas, which may have no foundation in truth. And, judging from myself, I can assure my readers, that those interpretations which for some time appear the most unnatural and forced, may in time come to appear perfectly natural, and indisputably the true sense. A Papist thinks any other interpretation of the words, This is my body, than the most literal one, or that which implies the doctrine of transubstantiation, to be exceedingly unnatural.

I have every where supposed what is called Satan, or the devil, in the Gospels, to be an allegorical personage, or the principle of evil personified. This will, in some cases, appear unnatural; but let those persons who now think so, only consider the repeated and strong personification of the Holy Spirit, or Comforter, as a being sent by the Father or the Son, and by some thought to be the third person in the Trinity, and yet that it is now generally supposed to mean nothing more than a divine power or energy, and perhaps they will not think the personification stronger or harsher in the one case than in the other.

No. V.

ON THE CAUSES OF TRANSPOSITION.

(See supra, p. 73.)

THEY who have been much employed in transcribing from books or writings lying before them, will, I believe, be aware, how easy it is to commit mistakes and make transpositions in their copies, by fixing their eye on a wrong place, when it is lifted up to the exemplar in order to proceed: especially will this happen, when the mind

* By Vigilius, the Rev. W. Turner, (see supra, p. 509,) who happily says, in his introduction to these remarks:

"If any thing in the world ought to be a public property, it is knowledge: if any kind of knowledge ought peculiarly to be diffused, it is the knowledge of those Scriptures which were given for universal instruction and improvement. It seems a kind of sacrilege to withhold and make a private property of any new discoveries which may open to us in this province: especially as we know not, how much we may owe to the guidance and illumination of him who giveth to every man seve rally, as he will, but giveth to every man to profit,' or do good withal.'” Theol. Repos. 1769, I. p. 46.

grows fatigued by long employment, or its attention is dissipated and distracted by intervening circumstances.

Now, as before the invention of printing, all books were transcribed, and, for the most part, by persons who gained their livelihood by this business, it is no wonder, that mistakes of this kind sometimes happened in their transcripts; or, that when they happened, the writers did not choose to correct them properly; as rasures and blots would disgrace the appearance of their books, and render them less saleable. They thought it enough, if they inserted what had been overlooked, in the best manner they could, though somewhat out of its proper place. I suppose, that they who are conversant with ancient manuscripts, find in them not a few instances of transpositions of words, clauses of sentences, whole sentences, and larger portions, even whole pages, occasioned by the haste or inadvertency of the librarians or writers, and uncorrected through self-interest.

It seems reasonable to suppose, that like corruptions might happen to the more early copies, which are now perished by time or accident, and that they would be continued in all the transcripts which were made from them; as the scribes would not think it their business to correct, unless particularly directed, and seldom were able to correct properly. If then, all the manuscript copies of ancient books now remaining, or which were used by the editors of the several printed editions, were such only, as, besides the mistakes of their several transcribers, retained the corruptions of the more ancient copies from whence they were taken, we cannot hope for their direction to enable us to discover and rectify those corruptions.

Here, then, seems a proper employment for the attention and judgment of the true critic, in order to restore the works of the ancients to their original purity and integrity. Much has been happily effected in this way by the sagacity of learned moderns with regard to the Greek and Roman classics; particularly many confused passages have been restored to their proper order, and thereby obscurities removed, and the original spirit, form and beauty of sentiment and expression displayed.

Is it not also reasonable to suppose, that the ancient, not excepting even the first transcripts of the sacred books, might suffer like depravations from the haste and inattention of mercenary scribes, and that the copies taken from them would retain those depravations, and increase the number with new ones; especially, when we consider, in relation to the books of the New Testament, the long and severe persecutions the Christians suffered, and the diligence wherewith their adversaries sought for the sacred books in order to destroy them, whereby the copies would become few, kept concealed, and transcribed in fear, in haste, and often by persons unpractised in the business?

When afterwards more quiet and secure times ensued, and the demand for copies of the sacred writings increased, it is not to be supposed, that the booksellers and scribes would take much pains to seek out the purest and most authentic books, of which they would be but indifferent judges; but would take such as came in their way, or were recommended to them, to copy after. If then a

few of the more eminent booksellers happened to get books which had all been transcribed from the same faulty exemplar, it is easy to see, what a number of copies, all retaining the faults of their common original, would soon arise, and how widely they would be dispersed. It is not impossible, that this, or some other such cause, may have occasioned a concurrence, not only of all the manuscripts now in being, but also of the ancient versions, in exhibiting readings of the sacred text, which, notwithstanding such concurrence, may be erroneous.

If, then, by only changing the situation of a sentence, or clause of a sentence, in a passage of the holy writers, which appears at present confused and obscure, we can render it regular and easy, and produce a new force and beauty in the sentiments; certainly, it will be no presumption to conclude, that this was the original reading, though all the MSS. and versions may exhibit the present.

Many learned men have been aware of disorders by means of transpositions in several texts of the New Testament, and have endeavoured to rectify them by conjectural emendations, of which Mr. Bowyer has given us a large collection in his late edition of the Greek Testament.

No. VI.

A LETTER FROM THE REV. MR. JOHN PALMER * TO DR.

IN your excellent Harmony John i. 33, with Matt. iii. 13.1

66

Macclesfield, August 1st. 1777.

you do not see how to reconcile Will you lose so much of your time as to learn how I reconcile them, and give me your opinion upon it?

John, who was the cousin of Jesus must have been very well acquainted with him before his baptism; he must have known his temper and manner of life, and have entertained great expectations concerning him. It appears to me absurd to suppose the contrary, for reasons which will readily occur to you. He had learned, as we may reasonably suppose, (from Luke i. 43,) of his mother Elizabeth, that his cousin was a personage much superior to himself; for which reason when Jesus went to be baptized by him, " He forbade him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?" But by the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Jesus at his bap

Having been favoured with a letter from the Rev. Mr. John Palmer, late of Macclesfield, [See Vol. XIX. pp. 523-527,] on a difficulty which I had noted in my Dissertations, relating to John the Baptist knowing or not knowing Jesus previous to his baptism, I have, with his consent, inserted it in this work, thinking that it really solves the difficulty, and also throws considerable light on that part of the evangelical history. (P.)