Josephus distinctly states that the time that elapsed from the flood to Abraham's birth was a period of 292 years.

On examining the above, it appears to me that Cainan was inserted into the Greek text after the time the 70 made the translation, as another name for Salah, on account of his being the fourth from Noah after the flood; in like manner as Cainan was the fourth from Adam before the flood; and the proof for this is, that the corrupters have placed 100 in addition to the 35 years mentioned in the Hebrew text, the age of Arphaxad when Salah was born.

That the time of the birth of the patriarchs has been vitiated to a great extent in the Greek text, both before and after the flood, will appear convincingly true, if we allow the following considerations to have their just weight upon our minds. In the first place, to suppose the Greek chronology to be correct, it must follow, as a consequence, that nearly the whole of the patriarchs would be born about the 200th year of their respective fathers' ages; now, this is a thing, in my opinion, altogether improbable. Had this been generally the case, there must, at that rate, have been few inhabitants upon the earth before the flood; but the Bible demands our assent to an opposite belief; it informs us that even at the early period of time when Cain killed his brother Abel, there were many inhabitants living; otherwise, how could he have said,

66

every one that findeth me shall slay me ;" and, in the next place, when we take into consideration the common law of human nature, and that the life of mankind was shortened after the flood, there is no probability, that about 130 years, as given by the Greek text, was the true time at which nearly the whole of the patriarchs, after the flood, and before Abraham, are said to have arrived, at the birth of those named.

When all the circumstances connected with the time given by the Hebrew text are taken into consideration, they certainly stamp it with the impress of truth; but it is not too much, however, to affirm that the very reverse of this applies to the time given in the Greek

text.

Taking into consideration the total of the time,

before the flood, as given by the Hebrew and Greek texts, as well as that by Josephus, it appears that the units, tens, and hundreds of the Hebrew text, squares with the units, tens, and hundreds given by Josephus ; but in Josephus' text it has 2 instead of 1 thousand, as the Hebrew text has it. This proves that Josephus must have given in his original manuscript the same time as in the Hebrew text, and I have no doubt the transcribers of his Greek text made it assimilate to the corruptions that existed in the Greek translation of the Bible, as far as they could do; and the proof of this is, that the different time of the births in Josephus' text to the birth of Noah, when taken collectively, are 1656 years, clearly showing, by this calculation, that Noah was 1000 years old at the flood; whereas Josephus distinctly says, in another part of his Antiq., that Noah died when he was 950 years, and this time squares with the Hebrew text. In the total time from the flood to the birth of Abraham, Josephus distinctly states, in Antiq., vi. 5,: "Abraham was the tenth from Noah, and was born in the 292d year after the Deluge." Here it is clear that the corrupters of Josephus neglected to make this number agree with the corruptions made in the time of the generations since the flood, which amounts to 993 years. There is also here a two-fold proof that the name Cainan was not known to Josephus when he wrote, for he is not numbered from Noah to Abraham, nor is any time left for him in the total years 292, as given by Josephus, and which number agrees with the Hebrew text, which proves that Josephus' text was originally in accordance with the Hebrew text.

C

Thou chargest those who say that St. Luke was wrong in placing Cainan in his Gospel, as not believing in St. Luke's inspiration. Such a charge against St. Luke, by whomsoever made, is certainly very wrong, seeing that neither thyself nor they can prove that Cainan was in St. Luke's original manuscript, because a copy or copies of his Gospel has been found without Cainan being inserted.

That eminent Greek scholar, Greville Ewing, Minister, Glasgow, makes the following remarks concerning the Septuagint, in his Greek Grammar, prefixed to his Greek and English Lexicon, page 139: "The five books of Moses are in this version very well translated; the other books are, upon the whole, inferior. They are very literal, but they have been executed with various degrees of skill and accuracy; in some passages of the prophetical parts especially, the translators appear to have been ignorant of the meaning, but have endeavoured, nevertheless, to transfer it, by a literal rendering of each word in its order, which, while it is hardly intelligible Greek, cannot be supposed properly to express what the interpreters had not perceived." "It is

thought by some that the confusion which occurs in the Septuagint at the end of Exodus, chapters 36 to 39, the difference between the Septuagint and the Hebrew in Isaiah, xix. 18, and the addition, Exod. i. 2, have been occasioned by the disputes between the Jews of Judea and those of Egypt, who had built a temple in that country similar to the temple in Jerusalem."

From this quotation it appears that the interpreters of the Septuagint were ignorant of the prophetical meaning of some parts, and it is evident they did not perceive the prophetic character of the first chapter of Genesis, which made them alter, in the translation, the tenses of the original Hebrew text from the future to the past tense; but if those who made the alteration in the tense, or mistranslated it, were aware of its prophetic character, which is more probable, then this would show that this wrong translation or alteration was made after the coming of Christ, and that it was the enemies of Christianity that made this wrong translation or alteration in the Septuagint of the first chapter of Genesis, for the purpose of destroying its prophetic figurative representation-which clearly showed that Christ the Sun of Righteousness did arise on this world on the fourth day; proving that the time given in the Hebrew text is the true time: and the first chapter of Genesis, also shows, in a prophetic figurative sense, the spiritual, moral, and material creation of the whole human family, during the first great week of their creation on this planet. Particular attention will be directed to this subject, in an appendix to this Letter.

If the disputes concerning the temple occasioned alterations in the Greek version, how much more likely is it that the Alexandrian Jews, or others, for the purpose of throwing the time of Christ on earth out of due time, would make alterations as to the time of the birth of the patriarchs, both before and after the flood? And an additional reason for doing this would be, to give a colouring of equal antiquity to the