44. Pilate, amazed that he was so soon dead, i de Пλar ἐθαύμασεν, ει ηδη τεθνηκε. E. T. And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead. Raphelius, with whom agrees bishop Pearce, has shown, by examples from Xenophon and Eusebius, that the conjunction & is, in some cases, properly translated that. We have a strong evidence that this is the meaning here, from the question put to the centurion, whether Jesus had been dead, aλ, any time, not non, already. That there are two MSS. which read non, is, perhaps, not worth mentioning.

CHAPTER XVI.

2. About sun-rise, avatuλart& 78 8. E. T. Atthe rising of the sun. Vul. Orto jam sole. This expresses too much; for let it be observed, that it is not the preterperfect participle that is here used by the Evangelist, but an aorist. Nor is there a word in the Gr. (except in a very few copies) nor in any other ancient version, answering to jam in the La. The E. T. place, to follow the Cam. which reads avareλλr But this reading is peculiar to that copy.

seems, in this

in the present.

8. Getting out, fled, iğinσai raxu ¿Quɣov. E. T. Went out quickly, and fled. But the word razu is wanting in a great number of MSS. some of them of principal note, in several of the best editions, and ancient versions, particularly the Vul, and both the Sy. It is also rejected by Mill and Wet.

16. He who shall believe, & #15evcas. E. T. He who believeth. The Gr. aorists have not always the power of the preterite; but, agreeably to the import of the name, are frequently indefinite in regard to time. Here they are better rendered by the present, as in the E. T. than by the past; the present, with us, being often used indefinitely. Had the words immediately preceding related to a judgment to come, the most proper tense, here, in Eng. for expressing the Gr. aorist, would have been the future perfect; that is, a future which is past, in respect of another future referred to. He who shall have believed, shall be saved. In this manner all the La. translators, except Ar. have expressed it: Qui crediderit. But, as the words immediately preceding are an order to the apostles, with which the words of this passage are connected, as regarding what is necessarily conse

quent on the execution of that order (for of necessity they would be either believed or disbelieved), the time is, in our idiom, best expressed by a simple future. Though the future perfect could not be accounted improper, it is so complex [He who shall have believed, and shall have been baptized], that, unless where perspicuity renders it necessary, it is better to avoid it. The later Fr. translators (though that tense be, in their language, a degree simpler than in ours) take this method. P. R. Sa. and Si. though translating from the Vul. and Beau. say Celui qui croira, not qui aura cru.

2 He who shall believe he who will not believe, i isevrasarishtas. E. T. He that believeth-he that believeth not. The change of the future from shall to will, may, to a superficial view, appear capricious; but I imagine the idiom of the language requires this distinction, between a positive and a nega. tive condition. It is accordingly expressed in the same manner in the G. E. A sovereign might properly say to his minister, Publish, in my name, this edict to the people; if they shall obey it, they shall be rewarded, but if they will not obey, they shall be punished. In the former part of the declaration, it is not the will that is required, so much as the performance: in the latter part, a threat is annexed to the non-performance, merely on account of the obstinacy, that is, pravity, of will, by which it is occasioned. This distinction particularly suits the the nature of the present case. The belief that results not from evidence, but from an inclination to believe, is not styled faith, so properly as credulity, which is always accounted an extreme. Nor is that unbelief, or even disbelief, criminal, that is not justly imputable to a disinclination to believe, in spite of evidence, which is termed incredulity, and is as much an extreme as the other. It is required, not that our will operate in producing belief (ample evidence is afforded for this purpose, as mentioned in the two subsequent verses), but that our will do not operate in a contrary direction, to prevent or obstruct our believing. God alone gives light, he requires of us only that we do not shut our eyes against it. It may be thought an objection to this explanation, that it would imply, that there is a demerit in the unbelief that is punishable, at the same time that there is no merit in the faith that is to be rewarded. This is doubtless the case. There is no positive merit in faith; and if, when compared with

infidelity, there may be ascribed to it a sort of negative merit, the term is evidently used in a sense not strictly proper. But this is no objection to the explanation given above. These contraries do not stand on a footing entirely similar. Death, we know, is the wages of sin; but eternal life, which is the same with salvation, is the gift of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

3. Shall be condemned, xxraxgionσeral. E. T. Shall be damned. But this is not a just version of the Gr. word. The term damned, with us, relates solely to the doom that shall be pronounced upon the wicked at the last day. This cannot be affirmed, with truth, of the Gr. naranpww, which corresponds exactly to the Eng. verb condemn. It may relate to that future sentence, and it may not. All the La. translations I know, Vul. Ar. Zu. Er. Cas. Cal. Be. say, condemnabitur. But if the word had been damnabitur, it would have made no difference, as these two La. verbs are synonymous. It is not so with the Eng. words, to damn, and to condemn. I cannot help observing, that though the Itn. and Fr. languages have verbs exactly corresponding, in the difference of their meanings, to the two Eng. verbs, their translators have, very properly, preferred the more general term. Dio. says, Sara condannato: G. F. L. Cl. Beau. P. R. Si. Sa Sara condamné. In regard to the more modern Eng. versions, they have all replaced the proper word condemned, except Wes. who retains the term of the common translation. Ch. xii. 40. N. It is still worse to render the simple verb xpivey (2 Thess. ii. 12) to damn; that verb properly signifying not so much as to condemn, but to judge, to try: though sometimes used by a figure, the cause for the consequence, to denote to punish.

Jerom has observed, that there were few of the Gr. copies, he had seen, which had the last twelve verses of this chapter. They are still wanting in many MSS. and are not comprehended in the canons of Eusebius. But they are in the Sy. version, the Ara. and the Vul. and were in the old Itc. and other ancient versions. They are in the Al. and Cám. MSS. They are, also, in The.'s Commentaries. But what weighs most with me, I acknowledge, is, that the manner wherein so ancient a writer as Irenæus, in the second century, refers to this Gospel, renders it highly proba. ble that the whole passage was read in all the copies known to him. In fine autem evangelii, ait Marcus, " Et quidem Domi

nus Jesus, postquam locutus est eis, receplus est in cælos, et

"sedet ad dexteram Dei." Adv. Hær. lib. iii. cap. 11. The verse quoted is the nineteenth, and the chapter has but twenty. It deserves our notice, that there is not a single MS. which has this verse, that has not, also, the whole passage from the eighth to the end; nor is there a MS. which wants this verse, that does not also want the whole. No authority, of equal an. tiquity, has yet been produced upon the other side. It has been conjectured, that the difficulty of reconciling the account, here given, of our Lord's appearances, after his resurrection, with those of the other Evangelists, has emboldened some transcribers to omit them. The plausibility of this conjecture, the abruptness of the conclusion of this history, without the words in question, and the want of any thing like a reason for adding them, if they had not been there originally, render their authenticity, at least, probable. Transcribers sometimes presume to add and alter, in order to remove contradictions, but not, as far as I can remember, in order to make them.

NOTES

CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY.

THE GOSPEL BY LUKE.

CHAPTER I.

1. THINGS which have been accomplished amongst us, w πεπληροφορημένων εν ήμιν πραγματων. Ε. T. Things which are most surely believed among us. Vul. Quæ in nobis completa sunt rerum. Lu. So under uns ergangen find. Be. Rerum quarum plena fides nobis facta est. As the greater part of modern interpreters, who have written since, both abroad and at home, adopt, with Be. the latter method of translating, it is proper to assign my reasons for joining Lu. Ham. and the few who, with the Vul. prefer the former. The verb angoPogew admits, in Scripture, two interpretations. One is, to perform, fulfil, or accomplish; the other, to convince, persuade, or embolden, that is, to inspire with that confidence which is commonly consequent upon conviction; and hence the noun angoPogia denotes conviction, assurance, con, fidence. The passive wangoPopcoμas is accordingly either to be performed, &c. or to be convinced, &c. Now, as it is only of things that we can say, They are performed, and of persons, They are convinced, there can be little doubt in any occurrence, about the signification of the word. But, in the way in which Be. and others have rendered this verse, neither of these senses is given to the term. That they have purposely avoided the first signifi cation, they acknowledge; nor can it be denied that, aware of the absurdity of speaking of things being convinced, persuaded, or emboldened, they have eluded the second. For this reason, they have adopted some term nearly related to this meaning, but not coincident with it, or have disguised the deviation by a periphrasis. Our translators have rendered weλnpoPognμevav most surely believed, after Er. quæ certissimæ fidei sunt. But where