According to the common digest of our Bibles, there are no such words found, but in the Book of Zechariah; (excepting that Jeremiah also bought a field, chap. xxxii ;) whereupon Origen is greatly perplexed. Jerome and Augustine think it a fault of the scribe, and so do Eusebius, Erasmus, and Beza: the last of whom conceives that either the Evangelist cited only "the prophet," (not naming which prophet,) as the ancient Syriac reads it; or else that the Evangelists, or their scribes, anciently writing such well known things as names of prophets by abbreviations, (as e for Ζαχαρις,) some later scribes heedlessly turned (e into Is, whereby the following scribes wrote Jeremiah, instead of Zechariah. Others, conceiving it ought to be written Jeremiah, inasmuch as all the Greek copies known to us have it so, do conclude, that either this prophecy was at first delivered by Jeremiah, but preserved till the Apostles' times only by tradition; or that Jeremiah, prophesying this thing, and not laying it up (as the manner was) in the archives of the temple, Zechariah afterwards prophesied the same, and left it in writing among the sacred records; he being a great imitator in language and matter of Jeremiah, as Grotius gives many instances. Or, this quotation might be taken out of both Jeremiah and Zechariah; or, Zechariah might have two names.

To all these, let me add my suggestion. And first, note, that it is confessed of all, that the Jews might

commit some faults in some letters and points, in penning some of the copies of their Hebrew Bibles : as the most ancient Samaritan copy of the Pentateuch, and the Arcanum Punctationis (set forth by Erpenius) do clearly evince. Next, that the inspired Evangelists do correct some of those faults: as in Psalm xxii, 16, where the Hebrew copies read כרי as a lion, and St. John (Rev. i, 7) reads it כארי they pierced; and therefore our translators have boldly, but justly, corrected the Psalm. So again Isa. xxix, 13 is rectified by Matt. xv, 9;-Jer. xxxi, 32 by Heb. viii, 9;— and Amos ix, 12, by Acts xv, 17. May not therefore our Evangelist Matthew rectify in this quotation the wrong placing it by the Jews in the volume of the prophet Zechariah, when (as he here intimates) it should be placed in the Book of Jeremiah ?

Now, whoever attentively weighs it, will at least perceive, that chapters ix, x, xi, commonly accounted part of Zechariah's prophecies, belong to more ancient times than those of Zechariah: namely, to the times before the Jews' captivity in Babylon. For in chap. ix, 1, 2, &c. is pronounced the burden of the Lord on the land of Hadrach and Damascus, and Hamath, and Tyrus, and Zidon, and Askelon and Gaza, and Ashdod, &c. of the Philistines; the most of which peoples (if any of the names of the places remained) were not extant after that return of Judah from the Babylonish captivity, performed in Zechariah's time. In chapter x. is plainly prophesied the carrying away of Judah into captivity, with a promise of their subsequent return; whereas now, in Zechariah's time, they are already returned. And in chapter xi. is foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, and also the captivity of the

Instead of "For the time of figs was not yet," read-" For where he was, was a time of figs."

That the Greek will bear this, note that the body of the words is, ε γαρ ην καιρος συκων. Now the ancient Greeks did not write the aspirates, accents, &c; and why our later scribes, copying out the Greek Testament, have been so bold as to accent & thus, οὐ, which signifies not; and did not rather write it oὑ, which signifies where; I can see no reason. All reason indeed pleads, that it must be read as above written: for our Saviour had as much reason to curse

all the fig-trees in that country, as well as that one, had it not been then a time of figs in that region. But it was a time of figs then and there in general; though this fig-tree, by its backwardness, merited the curse: for the time of this miracle was that of the Passover, (our Easter,) when, even in SO

cold

a climate as England, young figs appear; but in the hot country of Judea figs are the forward sign of the spring, as may be seen from Cant. ii, 12, 13.

As for making one verb ήν to serve to two nouns, it is not worth mention to any scholar.

John xviii, 28.

"And they themselves went not into the Judgement Hall, lest they

should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover."

This needs no alteration: what I would observe is, that the Passover here signifies not the Lamb, eaten on one certain night by all alike; for this Christ had already eaten with his disciples, before he was in hold: but it signifies an ox or ram, offered at the same time that the Lamb was, and which might be eaten two days. Unless this be so distinguished, Christ will be condemned of a breach of the law, as if he had not eaten the Passover.

Read the last clause, - " I live by ' faith on (or concerning) the Son of God." As if the Apostle should say, "I live, spiritually, by what I believe concerning the Son of God;"-or,

66

by that, my faith, which is founded on the Son of God." This order of words is exactly justified by the Greek; and the change of the word of into on or concerning is constrained by the sense. For we do not live by Christ's personal faith, (as some, who are scholars have erroneously said,) First, because Christ's personal faith, does not advantage us, unless there be in us a faith to receive Christ; as the Scriptures abundantly testify. Secondly the just must live by his faith," that is by his own faith which is in himself." Thirdly the Apostle speaks in the very text, of Christ living in him ;which is, by faith in the believer : see Ephes. iii, 17. So that this genitive case (" of the Son of God,") is not active, to signify Christ as the subject, acting that faith in himself; but is passive, to signify that Christ is the object of our faith built on him. Thus Acts iii, 16, "Through faith of his name” τη πισει το ονοματος αυτε,) which our translators render "through faith in his name." So Phil. iii, 9,-" Having that righteousness which is through faith of Christ," that is, through faith concerning or in Christ; (the Greek allows me to put out the word 'the;') as if the sentence should run thus"Not having mine own righteousness, &c. but the righteousness of Christ through faith."

،

1 Tim. iii, 16, and iv, 1-3.

Read-" And confessedly (ομολογεμενως) great is the mystery of 'godliness, God manifested in the • flesh, &c. But the Spirit speaketh • verbatim (ρητως, or, in the written ' word) that in the latter times (or • seasons) some shall apostatize from ' the faith, giving heed to errone'ous spirits, and doctrines touching 'dæmons, (or deified souls of deceas' ed men, &c.) through the hypocrisy of liars, having seared consciences, 'forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats." All I intend to notice on chap. iii, 16, considered by itself, is its relation to chap. iv, 1; the antithesis being, that though many have confessed this mystery of godliness, (viz. God manifested in the flesh,) yet, notwithstanding, the Spirit speaketh in express words, that some shall apostatize from their confession of that faith. Some ancient Greek copies do indeed unite these chapters.

But my eye is chiefly intent on chap. iv, 1-3; wherein I am forced to depart from our English Bibles. First, in the order of the words; which makes " speaking lies in hypo

crisy, &c." to answer to "giving heed to seducing spirits, &c. and doctrines of devils." But the first mentioned words (speaking lies, &c.) are in the genitive case, (ψευδολογων,) and consequently they cannot agree with the words 'giving heed,' which are in the nominative case-προσεχοντες. Nor do they mend the matter that say, those last genitives (speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their consciences seared, forbidding marriage, &c.) should be construed with that first genitive, devils: for it were most improper to say, that the devils have consciences seared, &c. Therefore we must adopt another translation; wherein we make εν ὑποκρισει (in hypocrisy,) to note the cause and means of this apostasy, (through hypocrisy ;) and ψευδολογων, speaking lies, to be as the latter of two substantives, hypocrisy being the former; and so all the last genitives, (having their consciences seared, forbidding meats, &c.) to agree with the first genitive liars. Further, the Apostle here intends to set forth the apostasy of the christian Church in the latter times; and it is not likely that he would only give instances of petty, circumstantial errors, (such as forbidding meats and marriage,) and omit the fundamental errors of those times, which other Scriptures tell us plainly to be spiritual fornication, viz. idolatry. Neither are errors about meats and marriage peculiar to the latter times; but such as were extant in the Apostles' days, as their Epistles intimate. See 1 Cor.

2. As I have departed from the order of the words, so must I from the translation of some of them; viz. " of devils." First 'of' must be rendered touching, or concerning: seeing it is not an active genitive case, signifying devils to be the authors of those doctrines; but a passive genitive, to signify the subject matter of those doctrines, that should be sown in the latter days. For though it is true, that the devil is the author of erroneous opinions; yet that is common to all ages, and not peculiar to the last days. For so rendering the genitive we have many instances: let one, for brevity's sake, suffice; viz. Heb. vi, 2. "The doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of the resurrection of the dead;" means concerning baptisms, &c. If any object, that devils are persons, and therefore that Heb. vi, 2 is not pertinent, let such consider Acts xiii, 12; where the genitive of a person is to be rendered passively. The words are"The deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord:"-that is, evidently, at the doctrine concerning the Lord Christ. Tit. ii, 10, is another instance.

Secondly, Δαιμονιων (which our common translation renders devils) we must translate dæmons; which in its own nature and derivation signifies no such evil as a devil: for Δαιμων (demon,) is as much as to say Δαημων, (damon) i.e. one that knows much, or is skilful. In the gentile theology it constantly signifies deastros;-that is, an inferior sort of deified powers, of a middle nature between the sovereign gods and mortal men; and so of a middle office, viz. to be mediators between them both. For their highest gods they called Θεοι, whom they supposed to be in the heavens, (distinguishing them by the titles, dii superi, dii cœlestes';) and therefore, for their sublimity and purity, not to be profaned with approach of earthly things, or with the care or management of the affairs of mortal men. The original of these dæmons was, the deified souls of men after death: for (say they)

،

"when those happy men of the golden age of the world were departed this life, great Jupiter pro'moted them to be dæmons; that is 'to be keepers, protectors, and 'patrons of earthly mortals, overseeing good and evil works, giving riches, &c." Further, they would have all those that died valiantly in the field, to be accounted of the golden age, and to be made dæmons; and all such as lived virtuously likewise. Abundant antiquity shows, that the souls of these dæmons (or sancta animalia, as they also called them) were worshiped throughout every city of the heathens; who built certain images, pillars, &c. in honour of them, in order that they might thus find them ready for their use. For assurance of this, let the reader look into Plato in Sympos. &c. Plutarch de Defect. Orac. &c. Hesiod, Origen contra Celsum, Augustine de Civ. Dei, Eusebius de Præp. Evangel.

The holy Scriptures use the same distinction, in reproving the idolatries of the times. For example, in Numb. xxv, their celestial sovereign gods are called, the host of heaven; the other inferior sort are called baalim, that is lords. The same distinction exists in 2 Chron. xxxiii, 3; 2 Kings xxiii, 5; and Psalm cvi. Thus again we are told of the Israelites, "that they joined themselves ' to Baal Peor, (Baal coming of the 'old Belus, the deceased monarch,) ' and ate the sacrifices of the dead." And in Deut. xxxii, 17, the Septuagint has-" Israel in their apostasy sacrificed to dæmons, and not to God." Many more places of the Old Testament may be referred to, containing allusion to these dæmons and to the worship offered to them : see 1 Kings xviii; Lev. xix, 18; Deut. xiv, 1; Isa. viii, 19; lxv, 3, 4; Jer. xvi, 6; xli, 5; xlviii, 37.