Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

35. If then, in the language of the Scriptures, they are called Gods, who only act by a commiffion from God (and furely the language of the Scriptures is not to be arraigned); 36. With what pretence can you fay of him who comes into the world with a more immediate and extraordinary commiffion from God than any Prophet before him, Thou blafphemeft, when all that the fays amounts to no more than calling himself the Son of God, and claiming fuch a power as you might expect that a fon might receive from a father? 37. And that I am in this fenfe the Son of God, I appeal to the works which he has empowered me to do,' &c.

It appears from Matth. xvi. 16. xxvi. 64. and the parallel paffages, that the phrafe, or title, The Son of God, was fynonymous with that of The Meffiah. We are, therefore, of opinion, that the latter part of the paraphrase of ver. 36. would have been better expreffed and claiming fuch a power as you might justly expect the Meffiah to have. Then it would naturally follow, v. 37. If the works that I perform do not prove that a fupernatural, a divine power accompanies me, reject my pretenfions as falfe and groundlefs. 38. But if they do, though you pay no regard to my affertions, let the works which my Father has empowered me to do, convince you that what I faid before is true, viz. that I and he are one, or, in other words, that it is as if the Father was in me, and I in him ; fo intimate is the communication that fubfifts between us.' The following Note by Mr. Turner, on John v. 36. and following verfes, was inadvertently omitted in its proper place. It deferves to be copied.

Jefus refers to three kinds of evidence which the Father had given of his miffion. First, The miracles he empowered him to work, ver. 36. Secondly, The voice from Heaven, and the defcent of the Spirit on him in a visible form at his baptifm, of which many had been witneffes, verfe 37, 38. And Thirdly, The predictions of the Prophets, verse 39. If we read the words in the latter part of the 37th and the 38th verfes interrogatively, they will appear to refer to what happened at the baptifm of Jefus, and to contain a very striking sentiment. Have ye neither heard his voice at any time, nor feen his appearance? And have ye not his word remaining in you, that ye believe not him whom he hath fent? i. e. Do ye not remember what he then faid; or hath it left no impreffion on you?'

We fhall close our extracts with a Note, by Dr. Priestley, on Mark viii. 38. which we recommend to the attention of our Readers on the fame account as he recommends the text itself.

• Whofoever shall be ashamed of me, &c.] I would recommend this aweful warning to the particular confideration of Chriftians in this age, in which fo many perfons of eminence in the world, and espe cially in literature and philofophy, are fceptics and unbelievers, and in which, therefore, the temptation to be ashamed of the Chriftian name is, in some circumstances, peculiarly ftrong. In this fituation it is highly criminal to deny, or conceal our real belief of Chriftianity, or whatever we confider as belonging to it. And thankful we ought to be, that this' (fcil. fhame) is the greatest part of the

per

perfecution that we have at this day to expect. Our ancestors had much greater trials.'

It cannot be expected in fuch a work as the present, that every note or explanation fhould be equally important, or give univerfal fatisfaction. Different perfons, and even the fame person at different times, will think differently on this, as well as on other subjects, according to their feveral present views and fentiments. Joy in heaven, &c. Luke xv. 7. 10. and the Wedding garment, Matth. xxii. 11. feem to us to require a Note full as much as many other expreffions which Dr. Priestley has judged it neceffary to explain. Nor is it to be thought that the fame attention and ability fhould be uniformly difcovered. In a few places we have obferved the Text and Notes, and the Notes and Paraphrase not to agree with each other. This, we think, fhould have been avoided. In the Paraphrafe of John xvi. 23, 24. the omiffion of in my name,' or as it is juftly explained, ver. 26. as my difciples, renders the explanation of that paffage imperfect and unfatisfactory. It cannot be thought that the Apoftles had fo long neglected to pray to God in the manner in which our Lord had directed them. But they had not yet addreffed themselves to God as the difciples of Chrift. In this character he directs them, for the future, to offer up their petitions; and affures them, their prayers would be fo favourably received, that there would be no occafion, even for him, to fecond their requests, because God himself loved them, &c.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

We are forry to have occafion to observe, that this work is in feveral places incorrectly printed. Befide the mistakes noted and corrected at the end, we have obferved the following: The Note, p. 7, V. 20.' should have been inferted p. 10, and marked V. 80.' P. 8, Luke i. 57. fhould have begun the following fection. Matth. vi. 24. and Luke xvii. 37. are entirely omitted. P. 69, Note, Matth. xii. 5. we have, profane not the Sabbath: inftead of, profane the Sabbath. Ibid. V. 12.' προσαυχη τω θεώ, for, προσευχη το θεό. Ρ. 73, Note, V. 9. Des. P. is mifplaced. P. 190, Note, V. 29, at the end, Luke xi. 48. Sect. LV.' fhould be added. P. 216, Reference c. and d. are omitted in the margin. Matth. xi. 1. fhould have concluded the preceding section. Indeed the divifion of the Harmony, or rather History, into fections, might, in our opinion, be altered confiderably for the better. Surely the parable, Matth. xx. 1, &c. ought never to be feparated from the last verse of the preceding chapter, of which it is a profeffed illuftration. The refpect that we are known to have for the Author, and the general character that we have given of this publication, render it almoft needlefs for us to obferve, that we notice thefe things, not to disparage the work, but merely from a defire that when a fecond edition is called for, it may be rendered still more complete and unexceptionable. We conclude with fuggefting,

that,

that, though the prefent work is well calculated for the benefit of both the learned and unlearned, we think, that if Dr. Priestley would take his corrected verfion of the Gofpels out of the form of a Harmony, and publish them and the Acts of the Apoftles, with notes at the bottom of each he would perform a ftill more useful and acceptable fervice to the Public.

page,

ART. II. Vetus Teftamentum Hebraicum; cum variis Lectionibus. Edidit Benjaminus Kennicott, S T. P. Edis Chrifii Canonicus, et Bibliothecarius Radclivianus. Tomus Secundus. Folio. Vol. II. 41. 4s. Boards. Oxonii, e Typographeo Clarendoniano. Sold by Rivington in London. 1780.

WE

E have already given an account of the firft volume of this great work, in our Review for Auguft, 1776: where the general principles on which it proceeds are defcribed, with the addition of fome extracts and particular observations, that appeared to us peculiarly to merit the attention of our Readers. As from that firft volume, and the plan propofed, we were fully convinced that the work was likely to prove of uncommon importance, we are happy in feeing the publication of this fecond volume, which completes the whole.

That we do not, without reason, congratulate the Public on the completion of this moft valuable and interesting undertaking, will be manifeft, when to our obfervations already published on the former part, fhall be added fuch as offer themfelves on the latter part; and alfo on the General Dissertation, in Latin, with which it is accompanied. Indeed, this Differtation being an account of the work, of its nature and manner of conducting it, as given by the learned Author himself; it will be moft eligible to proceed, in the remarks we shall make, according to the order of things obferved in that Differtation.

Dr. Kennicott's General Differtation (which is fold feparately * from the work itfelf) begins with expreffing his gratitude to God, for continuing his life through the twenty years in which he has been devoted to this great defign; and, as we learn from a note fubjoined, through nine years more, spent in examining the Hebrew manuscripts, and recommending a collation of them. Our Author having thus ftarted a fubject entirely new, and which, therefore, though it excited in fome men great hopes as to its advantages, alarmed others with fears of unfavourable confequences; he is here very careful to prove, that the work was undertaken not by an enemy to revelation, but by a friend; by one who is firmly perfuaded of the divine authority of the Old Teftament.

But though Dr. Kennicott believes that the originals of these facred books were true; yet he is fo far from attributing the

* Price 7 s. fewed.

fame rectitude to the tranfcripts from these originals, that he gives several reasons why the contrary may well be prefumed: fuch as, the almost infinite number of these transcripts, and the great distance of many of them from the originals in point of time; as well as the great fimilitude of several letters, which is very obfervable both in the Samaritan and the Hebrew alphabets. His words on this fubject are thefe: Quæ vero de ipfis prophetarum autographis dicta funt, eadem de exemplaribus inde exfcriptis non pariter funt dicenda: multo etiam minus, ubi jam codices ifti fuiflent exfcripti multoties, et ætate ab autographis longius diftarent exemplaria. Nullum habemus remotæ antiquitátis Scriptórem, in quo non multùm et graviter ex librariorum incuriâ peccatum fit; dum in recentiore quôque codice nova fere femper fuccrefcit errorum feges. Sed quod ad codices V. T. attinet; multa funt, quæ iftam adaugent fufpicionem. Scimus horum codd. exemplaria numero fuiffe pene infinita: in quibus exfcribendis, per annos faltem 2000, et per, totum terrarum orbem, infinita pene erat opera librariorum; quos omnes neceffe eft eruditione, diligentiâ, fide, a fe invicem multum diverfos fuiffe. Ipfæ etiam Hebraicarum literarum formæ errorem facile admittunt. Et quot quantique errores ibi funt expectandi; ubi fex vel feptem literæ fex vel feptem aliis literis funt quam fimillima? Hoc et de antiquo Veteris Tefta menti Alphabeto, a quo minùs difceffum inter Samaritanos, verum eft; et nunc quoque (tot quanquam gradationibus gradatim factis) de quadrato Judæorum hodierno conftat.'

In opposition to Lord Bolingbroke's maxim, That if the Scriptures had been from God, they would always have been preServed in their primitive purity; Dr. Kennicott fhews, that neither the wisdom nor goodness of the Supreme Being fuffers, from the fuppofition that many errors have crept into the prefent text: because the most important matters are ftill fecure, and certain; and men have always been able to learn from the Bible a rule both of faith and practice. This pofition he illuftrates by an appeal to the antient churches, both Greek and Italian, and the modern churches of both Proteftant and Roman Catholics: fince, amongst all these, their facred books taught them what they must do to be faved; though they contained many errors, the correction of which was very defirable. He then proceeds to fhew, that as the integrity of the facred books could not have been preferved, without a MIRACLE, perpetual as to time, and univerfal as to place, which would confequently be a greater miracle than any in the Bible; and as many corruptions, in tranfèripts made from tranfcripts ever fince the year 400 before Chrift, were unavoidable: it is happy, that feveral verfions, made 1500 or 2000 years ago, will correct fome of

thefe

these corruptions, and that the Hebrew manuscripts still extant will correct others.

Though thefe objections of infidelity do thus admit of the most fatisfactory reply, it is the lefs furprifing that objections fhould be made to an inquiry after various readings; when it was the general opinion, that the true text was already eftablifhed. For it certainly was the general opinion, about fifty years ago, that the text of the Old Teftament was entirely, or nearly, perfect. This matter, though exceedingly important, was ftrangely taken for granted; and, which is ftill more ftrange, the abfolute integrity of the Old Teftament was then believed by many, who did not believe the fame of the New Teftament. For the collations of the manufcripts of the New Teftament, which had happily been made, and received with due gratitude by the learned, rendered it impoffible to deny, that there were fome errors in every fingle Greek copy both written and printed. And yet, notwithstanding this demonstration as to the New Teftament; a blind perfuafion of the impeccability of Jewish transcribers, or at leaft of the abfolute purity of the printed Hebrew text, poffeffed the minds of many learned men.

[ocr errors]

But, though fuch was the doctrine held by many, and a profeffion of the belief of it had been required by fome focieties; yet were there others among the learned, and thefe not a few, who, in this century as well as in former times, had expreffed themselves convinced, that numerous miftakes had been made in Hebrew manufcripts; many of which were admitted into all the printed copies. That this difference of opinion might be the better understood, and that men might come better prepared for confidering and making the proper use of this vaft collection of various readings, Dr. Kennicott has presented us with a furprifing detail of Teftimonies; which exhibit the opinions both of the Jews and Chriftians, as to the Hebrew text, from the earliest times down to the prefent. The introduction to these teftimonies is thus expreffed: Ergo, quæ ex utraque parte dicta fuerint a me accuratius explicanda funt; ut de impreffis V. T. editionibus, et de hac inftituti noftri ratione, rectius judicari queat. Methodus maxime perfpicua (nam in re tantâ perfpicue potius quam eleganter fcribere ftudendum eft) qua fententiæ optimorum et celebratiffimorum criticorum de textu Hebraico poffunt enumerari, hæc effe videtur: ut in duas claffes, JUDÆORUM fc. et CHRISTIANORUM, dividantur; atque ut antiquiores et recentiores auctores in utraque claffe, ordine quodum chronologico, proferantur. JUDÆORUM igitur teftimonia, primò producenda, conditionem textûs Hebraici oftendent per hæc 5 temporum intervalla. Periochæ funto-1. A Malachia ætate, ante Chriftum natum circiter 420, ufque ad Chriftum natum. 2. A Chrifto, ufque ad annum poft Chriftum 500.

« ZurückWeiter »