with the use of common Expofitors and Commentators. He will stand in need of fome more general accounts of the • History and Designs of this facred book *. Whoever, for inftance, is unacquainted with the age and authority of the different Verfions, is not qualified to apply them to the purpofe of forming a right judgment of thofe various readings, upon which interpretations are grounded. If we know not the defign of each Apoftle in compiling his Gofpel, and writing his Epiftle, we cannot perfectly underftand him. If we know not whether there are Hebraifms in the Apoftolical Writings, we shall be at a lofs what credit to give to thofe Expofitors who illuftrate the Greek text from the Hebrew, and other Oriental Languages. The following work is intended to remove fuch ignorance.'

In the method and difpofition of his work, our learned Author feems peculiarly to have aimed at brevity; notwithftanding which, he is far from being obfcure. He firft treats in general of the genuine Antiquity, the Language, the various Readings, the Manufcripts, the principal Editions, the Marks of Diftinction, the Afpirations and Accents, the ancient Verfions, and the divine Inspiration of the Books of the New Teftament. After endeavouring, fomewhat more fully, to illuftrate this laft point, which is the foundation of our religion; he proceeds, in the latter part of his undertaking, to give an Introduction to each individual book; in doing which, he seems to have attained the end propofed by him, of being as concife and useful as poffible.-Indeed, fome Readers may poffibly think him too concije: but then it fhould be remembered, that he intended this book as the fubject of his public Lectures to his Pupils; and, therefore, was not unwilling to leave fome points to be more amply difcuffed in thofe Lectures themfelves, of which the prefent work contains, as it were, only the heads.-A laudable method this! of training up Pupils intended for the facred Ministry of the Chriftian Church: and, perhaps, not altogether unworthy the attention of more ancient Univerfities, than this infant one of Gottingen,which owes its existence to the paternal affection of our prefent auguft Sovereign, its illuftrious founder.

Some tolerable idea of the state of the world at the time of writing the Holy Scriptures, feems alfo indifpenfibly requifite to prevent mistakes in the perufal of them. From a want of this neceffary knowlege, we remember to have heard of a man who turned Papift, merely, (as he himfelf alleged) becaufe be happened to read, in the Acts of the Apolles, that St. Paul was a Roman!

That

That our Readers may be able to form fome notion what expect from a perufal of thefe Lectures, we shall lay before lem an abstract of their contents.

In the first fection, (for the work is no otherwife divided an into fections) the title of New Covenant, or Teftament, explained.-The Author next proves the Writings of the poftles and Evangelifts to be, ancient and genuine, from a ariety of convincing arguments: and particularly fhews, hat the Divinity of the books of the New Teftament was onfirmed by Miracles. For the Epiftles refer to certain miraculous gifts, faid to have been imparted by the impofition of hands, and conferred by God, in confirmation of the doctrine of the Apoftles.' And- is it poffible, that a Deceiver, of a found understanding, fuch as St. Paul's Epiftles fhew him to have poffeffed, fhould refer the enemies of his religion, and doctrines, not only to the miracles, which he pretends to have wrought, but to miraculous gifts, which he pretends to have communicated to them; if they had it in their power to answer, that they knew nothing of thefe miraculous gifts?

In the 12th, 13th, and 14th chapters of the first to the Corinthians, he reprehends the abuse of certain miraculous gifts of Tongues, and prescribes a better application of them. If he actually wrote this to the Corinthians, and they had na miraculous gifts, no knowlege of foreign tongues, then St. Paul is not an impoftor, but a madman, which is not the charge of unbelievers against him.-But if these miracles be true, then the doctrine, and the book in confirmation of which they were wrought, are divine; and the more certainly fo, as there is no room for deception. A Juggler 'may perfuade me, that he performs Miracles, but he can never perfuade me, and a whole body of men of found intellects, that he has communicated to us the gift of working • Miracles, and fpeaking foreign Languages, unless we can ⚫ work the Miracles, and fpeak the languages.'

In fect. 5, he speaks of the Language of the New Testament, the books of which were all written in Greek, except, perhaps, the Gofpel of St. Matthew, and the Epiftle to the Hebrews; which, our Author thinks, were first publifhed in the Hebrew Dialect, then in ufe at Jerufalem. But the Hebrew text being loft, he allows to the Greek Tranflation [if, indeed, it be a Tranflation] the authority of an Original.

Sect.

Sect. 6, proves the Greek of the New Teftament to be in termixed with Hebraifms and Syriafms: but this, he obferves (fect. 7.) is no real blemish in the ftile of the New Teft ment. For barbarisms, or words and phrafes taken from an other language; are then only blemishes of ftile, when the Writer endeavours to be elegant, or when they render h language obfcure. But in the. New Teftament, nicety and elegance of language was both unnceffary and useless.

grounds a prefumption in favour of the Chriftian doctrine. that the Apostles neither preached nor wrote in flattering and enticing language, to win the mind by infiduous arts of fpeech; confequently the firft Chriftians were not con verted by any thing pleafing to their ears, but by a convic tion refulting from arguments; 1 Cor. ii. 1-15.'

Moft of the Writers of the New Teftament, he obferves, were Jews by birth. They could not, therefore, without s Miracle, avoid a mixture of Hebrew with the Greek in their ftile. And fuch a Miracle [if exhibited] would have been not only ufclefs, but pernicious; for any one, who was not prepoffeffed with an opinion of the divine inspiration of these books, would be apt to raise a doubt of their authenticity, from this very circumftance, that they were not written in the ftile which might have been expected from their pretended Authors.

In fect. 11, he obferves, that the Writers of the New Tel tament frequently quote paffages from the Old, either in proc of their doctrine, or to fhew, that the predictions of Prophets are fulfilled. These quotations being chiefly taken from the Septuagint verfion, it is therefore of great ufe, to be wel acquainted with that verfion, which Bretinger's is, according to our Author, the best edition.-The Apoftles (we are told) do not, however, in their quotations, always adhere exactly to the very words, but fometimes change them, as they frequently quoted merely from their memory. See Heb. i. 6. Pfal. xcvii. 7.

Sect. 12, takes it for granted, that the Antographa, or original Manufcripts of the New Teftament, are now loft; tho' many of the firft Chriftians are faid to have appealed to them, while they were known to be extant, as they certainly were for fome ages. Indeed, there are not yet wanting perfons who fuppofe that Gofpel of St. Mark, which is fh preferved at Venice, is an original Manufcript: but our Author afferts it to be fo entirely illegible, that it is not yet decid ed, whether the letters wherein it is wrote, are Greek of 1 atin.

Sea

Sect. 13, allows that falfe readings have crept into the Cos of the New Teftament. For tho' it be undeniable, that firft Chriftians bestowed great pains upon thofe Copies, et nothing less than a repeated Miracle, could poffibly preat the admiffion of fome errors, and the increase of them th the multiplication of Copies. But this doth not affect e grounds of our Faith, which is not fhaken, or rendered certain, by the many various readings in the New Teftaent; on the contrary, it is faid, (fect. 14.) to have been e opinion of judicious men, that the large collection of em, made by Dr. Mill, hath removed many doubts about' e genuinefs of paffages. The Collectors, therefore, of va-, ous readings, deferve the thanks of all fenfible Divines. or it must be admitted, that fome paffages, otherwise obure, have been illuftrated by a reading, which the diligence f thofe learned men hath difcovered,

In fect. 15, we are acquainted with the fources from whence fe readings may be fuppofed to proceed. Some of which re faid to be,

1. Negligence of Tranfcribers,-who fometimes committed niftakes in Orthography, fometimes exchanged words or others, which appeared to them to be of the fame ignification; fometimes they were mifled by the fimilar trokes of letters, fometimes by the fimilar found or pronuniation of words; for it frequently happened, that the Trancribers had not the text before them, but were dictated to, or the convenience of employing feveral Transcribers at

nce.

2. When two Sentences were nearly alike in their words and import, it may have happened, that one of them has been corrupted from the other, either thro' the negligence, or the ignorant caution of the Transcriber.

3. Variations may have been introduced by conceited Tran[cribers, who not having knowlege fufficient to understand an expreffion, have ventured what they call a critical Conjecture, and fubftituted other words nearly refembling it in sound and letters. A liberty this, not wholly difufed even among the learned of the prefent age!

4. Many false readings have arisen from hence, that ignorant Tranfcribers have removed into the Text, what they found in the Margin of their Original. It is ufual, every one knows, to explain an obfcure paffage, or to fupply a defect in Hiftory, by a marginal Note. How eafy, then, was it for an ignorant man to miftake this for a part of the Context,

which

which had been inadvertently omitted, and fo was added the Margin !

In fect. 16.-19, feveral principles are laid down, by whic to decide in various readings.-But, after all, fuch ancien Manufcripts, as are prior in date to the invention of Print ing, are juftly affirmed (fect. 20.) to be the pureft fountain from whence the true and genuine reading muft be drawn.

We are next prefented with a fhort, but accurate, 20 count of the moft remarkable, and beft efteemed Manufcript ftill in being amongst which the preference is given to th Codex Vaticanus or Romanus, which contains the whol Bible, both Old and New Teftament, in Greek; and i juftly efteemed by the learned, an inestimable remain of th carlieft antiquity.

The Codex Alexandrinus, he fays, was brought from Alexandria to Conftantinople, in the laft century, by th Greek Patriarch, Cyrillus Lucaris, who has merited immorta honour from the learned world, by delivering the Manuferipts of the New Teftament to Sir Thomas Roe, Ambassador from Charles the firft, as a prefent to the King of Eng land. This valuable Manufcript, which is ftill depofited in the Royal Library, [except it has lately been removed into the British Mufæum] is fuppofed to have been transcribed by the hand of an Egyptian Lady of diftinction, named Thecla. upwards of thirteen hundred years ago: and our Author brings fome very strong arguments to fhew, that the date of it must have been prior to the year 364.-The two Manufcripts above-mentioned are the most efteemed of any now

extant.

Infect. 23-28, we have an account of a great number o other Manufcripts of the New Teftament, fill to be feen is the public Libraries of Italy, Germany, England, France and other countries; which account is closed with fome cu rious obfervations upon Manuferipts in general.

Sect. 29, 30, fhew how far the ancient verfions, and th writings of the Fathers, may be of use, in fettling the ga nuine readings and in fect. 31, we meet with fome ingeni ous obfervations upon critical Conjectures.

In fect. 32-34, we have an accurate account of a gre number of learned Collators and Examiners of the vario readings; together with obfervations and remarks upon for of the principal printed editions of the New Teftament.

4