CHAP. XII.

The particular Branches of St. Matthew's Gospel, which Mr. Whiston fuppofes misplaced. Four Propofitions for the discovering the true Order of Time in the Gospel Hiftory. Several of thofe Branches which Mr. Whiston supposes misplaced, are fo far from that, that they are in the exact Order of Time, in which they came to pass. Inftances of this produced.

N the following pages a Mr. Whiston proceeds to fhew,

Gospel are, which he fuppofes mifplaced in our prefent copies, and contrary to the order, originally intended by the Evangelift. They are contained in that part of the history, which is from the twenty-third verfe of the fourth, to the end of the thirteenth chapter.

For the use of those, who may not have Mr. Whiston's book, I thought it proper particularly to fet them down; that the reader himself may, from the rules hereafter laid down, judge concerning those, which I do not particularly confider.

The periods of St Matthew's Gospel, which, according to Mr, Whiston, are misplaced in our prefent copies.

1. The Sermon near the mount, in the fifth, fixth, and feventh chapters; together with fome verses at the end of the fourth, and part of the eighth chapter belonging thereto.

2. The voyage to the Gergefenes, towards the end of the eighth chapter.

3. The healing of the paralytick, the calling of Levi, his feaft, and the difcourfe at it, in the former part of the ninth chapter.

4. The healing Jairus's daughter, with the woman that

a P. 103, 104, &c.

VOL. III.

had

had the flux of blood in the way thither, of two blind men as he went thence, and of a dumb demoniac just afterwards; towards the conclufion of the ninth chapter.

5. The miffion and inftruction of the twelve Apoftles, in the tenth chapter.

6. The meffage from John in prifon, with our Saviour's answer, and the following discourses, in the eleventh chapter.

7. The vindication of the difciples plucking the ears of corn, with the healing the withered hand on the Sabbath, and Christ's avoiding the defigns against him, in the beginning of the twelfth chapter.

8. The healing a blind and dumb man, and Chrift's vindication of himself from the imputation of cafting out devils by Beelzebub, with many discourses and parables following, in the reft of the twelfth, and almoft the whole thirteenth chap

ter.

9. The cure of the leper, juft after the Sermon on the

mount.

10. The cure of Peter's wife's mother, towards the middle of the eighth chapter.

11. Chrift's answer to two, that were ready to follow him, fucceeding the former.

12. His coming the fecond time to Nazareth, in the end of the thirteenth chapter.

These are the twelve branches of St. Matthew's Gospel, every one of which Mr. Whifton fuppofes to be misplaced, and put, in our prefent copies, out of their true and originally intended order. Any one that confiders these several branches, their number, fize, &c. will be furprized to find fuch diforders here, and not fo much as one fingle diforder in all the other part of this, or either of the other Gospels. But of this I fhall fay more hereafter. My business now shall be to confider the matter of fact, viz. whether these several periods are mifplaced, or not. In order to the more clear difcuffing of which question, I fhall lay down the following propofi

tions.

Prop.

Prop. I. Sometimes each of the three Evangelifts, St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke, have related matters in a dif ferent order of time, from that in which they came to pass:

That feveral portions of St. Matthew's Gospel are not now according to the order of time, in which the things came to pass, is, I think, agreed by all, except the whimfical Ofiander, and after him Molineus, and Codomannus...That St. Luke did not defign in all things to obferve the order of time, has been already proved". That St. Mark did not is alfo evident, because he in feveral particular inftances agrees with the order of St. Luke, which is not the order of time, as has been already hinted, and will more fully appear hereafter.

II. The principal and almost only methods of discovering, whether any particular matter be in its proper order of time, or not, in the Gospel History, are these two, viz..

1. By confidering the phrases of transition or connexion, by which it is joined, either to that which precedes, or that which follows it, or both.

2. By comparing it with the fame history, in one or more of the other Gofpels.

This is fufficiently evident to any one, who has in the leaft confidered the harmony of the Gofpels. Sometimes there are indeed fome circumftances in the story itself, which infallibly direct us, where it is to be placed; but this is what happens but very rarely in the Gospel history.

III. The phrafes, by which the Evangelifts do connect one flory or difcourfe to another, are very often fuch, as do not at all imply an immediate fucceffion, in point of time, to that which precedes it in the hiftory.

For the proof of this, I need only refer the reader, to what has been already faid above, Ch. V. and defire him withal to confider, that the phrafes or notes I mean, are fuch as these; καὶ ἐγένετο· ἰδὼν δέ· καὶ ἐλθῶν· περιπατῶν δέ· καὶ ἀνοίξας τὸ τόμα· &c. and it came to pafs; and Jefus feeing; and Jefus coming; as he walked; and opening his mouth; &c. These are evidently fuch, as can be no way notes of the order of time. I would

P. 30, &c.

only

only observe here further, that such as these are generally the phrases, that connect the parts of the Gospel history.

IV. On the other hand, fometimes two ftories or difcourfes are connected by fuch a phrafe, as does neceffarily imply the immediate fucceffion of one to the other, in point of time.

This will be evident by mentioning a few of them: they are fuch as thefe; καταβάντι δὲ αὐτῷ ἀπὸ τὸ ὄρος· καὶ ἰδῇ· ταῦτα αὐτῷ λαλέντος αὐτοῖς· ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ· &c. And when he was come down from the mountain; and behold; while he spake these things unto them; behold there came; in that hour or inftant &c.

Coroll. Hence it follows, that, if any two of the Evangelifts appear to relate a fact in a different order from the third, and do not make use of such a note, as necessarily joins it with the preceding or subsequent part of the history; the other Evangelist, who does use such a note, must be supposed to have obferved the order of time."

This obfervation is not only very just and reasonable, but neceffary; the want of which has apparently produced many miftakes in the compilers of Gospel harmonies, who have too often made the agreement of two Evangelifts (commonly St. Mark and St. Luke) the rule of placing a ftory, without regarding the manner of its connection with the preceding or following story.

These things premised, I will endeavour to prove the twą following particulars, which will be a fufficient confutation of Mr. Whifton's propofition.

I. Several of those branches, which Mr. Whifton fuppofes mifplaced, and contrary to the order originally intended by St. Matthew, are fo far from that, that they are not out of the proper order of time, in which they came to pass.

II. It does not appear, that any of those, which are in our prefent copies placed contrary to the order of time, are contrary to the order originally intended by St. Matthew.

1. Several of those branches, which Mr. Whiston supposes misplaced, and contrary to the order originally intended by St. Matthew, are fo far from that, that they are not out of the

proper

proper order of time, in which they came to pass. This will appear by the two following inftances.

1. The history of the person whom our Lord cured of his leprofy, Matt. viii. 2-5. is not mifplaced, but in the proper order of time in which it came to pafs. It is placed by St. Matthew (fuppofing our present copies of that Gospel to be right) as what happened immediately upon our Saviour's descent from the mountain, where he had been preaching; whereas, fays Mr. Whifton, that miracle was fome months before that fermon. I own indeed, feveral of the Gospel harmonizers are of the fame opinion, and the reason why they are fo is, because they found St. Luke (and perhaps St. Mark) to have placed this ftory a confiderable time before the Sermon on the mount. This indeed is true; but then it must be observed, that these two Evangelists have related this miracle without any express notation of the time, when it was wrought. There is no circumftance, nor phrafe, which connects it, either to the foregoing or the following part of the hiftory: fee Mark i. 40. and ii. 1. and Luke v. 12, 17. On the other hand, as it ftands in our present copies of St. Matthew (as Mr. Whiston rightly obferves), it is immediately fubjoined to the Sermon on the mount, in fuch a manner, as implies it to have happened just upon Chrift's defcent from the mount. I appeal then to any unprejudiced person, whether it be not more reasonable to suppose, the other two Evangelists have placed this ftory out of the order of time, as fometimes they are wont to do; than that it is transposed in our present copies of St. Matthew. This (viz. the prefent order of St. Matthew) will be abundantly confirmed, if we confider, that there is a very good reafon to be affigned, why the two other Evangelifts have related this story out of its proper order; viz. because it was wrought in a place, where the other miracles, which they had just before given an account of, were done. They had before been giving an account of two miracles, which our Lord had

a Hæc autem eadem leprofi miraculofe fanati hiftoria narratur a Marco c. i. 40. et a Luca c. v. 12. fed folus Matthæus hujus miraculi

Q3

tempus atque ordinem fignificat his verbis, Cum defcendiffet de monte, &c. Et ecce, &c. Car. Mar. de Veil. ad loc.

wrought