Luke, 19. 1, And Jesus entered, and passed through Jericho. (right.)

John, 19. 1, And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which had been blind from his birth. (wrong.)

Heb. 3. 3, For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses.

Heb. 7. 24, But this man, because he contínueth ever, hath an unchangeable

priesthood.

Similar instances might be indefinitely multiplied from the edition of 1611 (the first), shewing to what an extent the principle of uniformity in this respect was neglected either by the translators or the publishers. But the fact seems to have arrested attention within the space of about twenty-five years after the translation appeared, and the whole work was in 1638, or thereabouts, subjected to a most rigid collation with the original with a special view to correct errors of this description, and to carry out, in its minutest details, the plan of the translators. The result was an immense number of alterations in the English text. From an investigation instituted on this head by the American Bible Society it appears that the Italicizing process was introduced in as many as from eight to ten thousand instances over and above those which had originated with the translators; and the form in which the current editions of the English Bibles have come down to us is the fruit of this ancient thorough-going recension. But no documents remain to inform us by whom this work was executed, or by what authority. That it has been ably and faithfully done, will be evident to any one who shall undertake, as the writer of this was not long since called to do, to compare the present state of the English text with the Hebrew and Greek originals. In scarcely a single instance was a variation from the translators' edition detected, but it was manifestly for the better, and such as the application of their own principles not only justified, but required. Yet in a very few cases, occurring in the first edition, of which the following are the principal, it must perhaps be admitted that their equivocal use of Italics tends in some degree to obscure the sense.

Mark, 10. 40, But to sit on my right hand, and on my left hand is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared.

This mode of rendering would seem to make dubious our Lord's right to bestow rewards. The original undoubtedly represents our Saviour as saying, 'To sit, &c. is not mine to give, but (or, except) to those for whom it is prepared.' The clause, 'it shall be given to them,' ought evidently to have been inserted in Italics as it is correctly, but inconsistently, in Mat. 20. 33, where the original is precisely the same. In the modern editions the typography in the two cases is uniform.

Heb. 10. 38, Now the just shall live by faith; but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.

Here there is nothing in the original to answer to 'any man;' consequently whether the interpretation be right or not, the words on the translators' own principles ought to have been marked as supplied. More especially was this requisite in a passage, which it must have been certain would be made use of for the purpose of supporting particular views of controverted doctrines. The alteration in the type has indeed been made in subsequent editions, although the weight of critical authority is still in favour of another rendering, 'Now the just

C*

shall live by faith; but if he draw back my soul shall have no pleasure in him.” The present mode of translating is referred to Beza, who is supposed to have been governed in adopting it by his theological opinions. The Bibles of Coverdale, Matthewes, Taverner, Cranmer, Becke, in which they are sustained by the Lat. Vulgate, agree in presenting the following words; But the just shall live by faith; and if he withdraw himself, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.' The Geneva Bible of 1560 was the first English version in which this construction appeared, and this was undoubtedly derived from Beza's Lat. version which was published at Geneva four years before.

II. THE PENTATEUCH.

§ 1. Title, and Divisions.

The term Pentateuch, under which title are included the five books usually ascribed to Moses, is derived from the Greek IIevrarsoxos Pentateuchos, a compound of revre pente, five, and revxos teuchos, an implement or volume, i. e. the fivefold volume. The Hebrew appellation is “An Awn the five-fifths of the law; or abbreviated on the five-fifths. Each book by itself was called a fifth. The more common Hebrew name of the Pentateuch is hattorah, the law, so called because the books contain the civil and sacred laws of the Hebrew nation. This collective designation of the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, is of very remote antiquity, though we have no certain information when or by whom it was first introduced. As however the names of these books are evidently derived from the Greek, and as the five books of Moses are expressly mentioned by Josephus, who wrote only a few years after Christ, we have every reason to believe that the appellation Pentateuch was prefixed to the version of the Septuagint.

The several books constituting the Pentateuch were probably composed in one continued work, as they form, to this day, but one rolled volume in the Hebrew manuscripts. In that form, however, they were marked by divisions into what were termed Parashahs or Parshioth (Heb. 5 parashah, plural

parshioth), i. e. separations, sections, divisions, from Chal. perash, to distinguish, divide, discriminate. Of these, which are plainly indicated in all editions of the Heb. Bible, either by the letters DDD (p) or boo (s), there were fifty-four, one being read every Sabbath-day in the Synagogue. (See Note on Gen. 6. 8.) Each of these larger sections is further denoted by its first, or first important, word, which serves as a title to it. Thus the title of the first Parashah in Genesis is in the beginning, the word with which it begins; that of the second, Gen. 6. 9, Noah; that of the third, Gen. 12. 1, 73-73 go for thyself, &c. These titles are generally written as a running capton at the head of the page immediately after the title of the book. Of the Parashahs there are 12 in Genesis, 11 in Exodus, 10 in Leviticus, 10 in Numbers, and 11 in Deuteronomy, making 54 in all. It is probable that the Heb. names of the books

vayikra ויקרא,shemoth שמות,bereshith בראשית .of the Pentateuch, viz

a bemidbar, haddevarim, &c. were originally the titles of the

0),

sections or Parashahs with which their commencements coincide. These Parashahs were subdivided into smaller sections termed Sederim (Heb i. e. orders or ranks, denoted by the Heb. p or s.

At what time, or by whose means, the five leading portions of the Pentateuch came to be popularly distinguished as five separate books, bearing each of them a distinct title, we have no means of ascertaining. As they are designated by their present Greek appellations in the version of the Septuagint, it is certain that the distinction is at least as ancient as the era of that work, and how much earlier it may have obtained, we know not. As it is a matter of little practical moment it may safely be left among many other unsolved problems of biblical archæology.

§ 2. Author, Authenticity, &c.

The claim of Moses to the authorship of the Pentateuch was a matter of universal tradition, and never called in question either by Jews or Christians, for at least three thousand years after its publication, till Thomas Hobbes of England, about A. D. 1650, advanced the bold hypothesis that the first five books of the Bible, were called the books of Moses, not because he wrote them, but because they relate to transactions in which he acted a prominent part. Subsequent to the time of Hobbes, the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch has been assailed by a multitude of learned men, among whom the most distinguished are Spinoza, Simon, Leclerc, Volney, Hasse, Nachtigall, Vater, Bertholdt, De Wette, and Gesenius, all of whom, though broaching different theories by which to account for the composition of the work, agree in denying its authorship to Moses. For a complete refutation of the objections and arguments urged on this score, our limited space compels us to refer to the principal authorities in which the subject is formally treated, such as Horne's and Jahn's Introductions, Marsh's Lectures, Graves on the Pentateuch, &c. A condensed, but very clear and satisfactory view of the arguments impugning the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch, with an able refutation in popular form, will be found in Prof. Stowe's 'Introduction to the Study of the Bible.'

We shall at present content ourselves with barely adverting to the main sources of evidence which go to prove Moses the author of the Pentateuch. These are,

1. The unanimous and uncontradicted testimony of antiquity.

2. He is designated in several parts of the work itself as the author; Ex. 17. 14.-24. 4-7.-34. 27. Num. 32. 2. Deut. 31. 9, 19—24.

3. This is confirmed by the evidence of almost all the sacred writers of the Old Testament; Josh. 1. 7, 8.-8. 34, 35. Judg. 3. 4. 2 Kings, 23. 25. 2 Chron. 30. 16. Ezra, 8. 3. Neh. 1. 7, 8, et al. To this is to be added the testimony,

4. Of Christ and his Apostles; Mat. 19. 7. Luke, 16. 29.-24. 27. John, 1. 17. -7. 19. Acts, 3. 22.-28. 23. Rom. 10. 5, et al.

5. The whole series of historical events pertaining to the Hebrew nation rests upon the authority of these books, and demonstrates that they emanated from Moses.

6. The contrary hypotheses are self-contradictory, and entirely without foundation.

7. All the objections to the authenticity of these books are susceptible of an easy and satisfactory answer.

The five books of Moses are written in pure Hebrew, with some diversity of style, such as naturally springs from the diversity of the subjects of which it treats; but throughout with the utmost simplicity, combined with an admirable force and vividness of expression. Of their inspiration and canonical authority no doubt has ever been entertained by the Church. Moses conversed with God 'face to face, as man speaketh unto his friend;' Ex. 33. 11; he was privileged to address God at all times, Ex. 25. 22. Num. 7. 89.-9. 8; and was invested with the power of working miracles, Ex. 8. 19, et al. He affirms that what he delivered was by the command, and at the suggestion of the Almighty; and the sacred writers of the New Testament uniformly acknowledge the inspired authority, and divine legation of Moses. The Pentateuch, immediately after its composition, was deposited by the ark in the tabernacle, Deut. 31. 26; it was read every Sabbath day in the synagogues, Luke, 4. 16. Acts, 13. 15, 27.-15. 21. and in the most solemn manner every seventh year, Deut. 31. 10, et seq.; the supreme ruler in Israel was obliged to copy it, Deut. 17. 18, 19.—27. 3; the people were commanded to teach it diligently to their children, Lev. 10. 11. Deut. 6. 6--9, and it was preserved by the Israelites with the most vigilant care, as the divine record of their civil and religious polity. Its being thus guarded as a sacred deposit, is the surest guaranty that is has descended to us in a general uncorrupted purity.

III. THE BOOK OF GENESIS.

§ 1. Title, General Scope, and Date.

We have already on a previous page adverted to the manner in which the Hebrew titles of the five books of Moses may have originated. Whether this were the fact or not, yet according to the existing arrangement in all printed copies of the Hebrew Bible these books are named from the first word occurring in each. The original title of the present, therefore, is bereshith, in the beginning, from its commencing words. But in the Greek, which is followed in our version, the title is Tavers genesis, generation, or production, from the account of the origin of the visible creation with which the book opens. The Greek titles of the remaining books of the Pentateuch bear a similar relation to their contents, as will appear when we come to treat of each in its turn.

The claim of Moses to the authorship of this book is of course made out by the same arguments which go to ascertain the entire Pentateuch as his production. As these have been already considered, it will be unnecessary here to repeat them. The general scope of the book is to give an authentic though brief history of the creation and the early ages of the world to the flood, and thenceforward to trace more particularly the origin and the varied fortunes of that remarkable people who were chosen by God as the depositaries of the true reli gion and of the promise of the Messiah. The following synopsis, arranged in historical and chronological order, will give a condensed view of its contents, which cover a period of 2369 years.

1. The Creation, chap. 1. 2.

2. Institution of the Sabbath, and Fall of Man, chap. 2. 3.

3. History of Adam and his Descendants till the Deluge, chap. 4.

4. Genealogy of the Patriarchs, chap. 5.

5. State of the World iminediately preceding the Deluge, chap. 6,7. 1-5.

6. The Deluge, chap. 7.5, to end, 8. 1-13.

7. The Covenant with Noah, chap. 8. 13, to end, 9. 1—18.

8. Noah prophesies the Fate of his Sons, chap. 9. 18, to end.

9. The Confusion of Tongues, and Dispersion of Mankind, chap. 9. 1-10, 10.

11. 10-27.

10. The Life of Abraham, chap. 11. 27.-25. 11.

11. From the Death of Abaham to the Selling of Joseph, chap. 25. 11.-36. 13. History of Joseph and his Family in Egypt, chap. 37.-47. 27.

14. Death of Jacob and of the Patriarchs, chap. 47. 27.-50.

Although it cannot reasonably be questioned that this book, as well as the rest of the Pentateuch was written by Moses, yet it is by no means agreed at what time it was written. Eusebius and some eminent critics after him have conjectured that it was written while he kept the flocks of Jethro his father-inlaw, in the wilderness of Midian. But the more probable opinion is that of Theodoret, that Moses wrote it after the exode from Egypt and the promulgation of the Law from Mount Sinai, as previous to the call related Ex. 3, he was only a private individual and not endowed with the spirit of prophecy. Without that spirit he could not, it is supposed, have recorded, with so much accuracy, the history of the creation and the subsequent events to his own time, nor could he have foretold so many signal events then future. But it is as impossible as it is of little consequence to determine the truth on this point. Sufficient is it for us to know, that Moses was under an influence of inspiration in the composition of his history, which secured the infallible truth of all his statements.

§ 2. Was the book of Genesis compiled from more ancient documents?

This is a question entirely distinct from that of the genuineness and authenticity of the book. Moses may have been its author, and all its statements absolutely true, and yet it may have contained passages which he did not write. In a historical work extending through a period of more than two thousand years, it would be very natural that quotations should be made from preceding writings of authentic character, provided any such were in existence; and though we are not expressly informed that any did exist, yet very plausible reasons may be urged in support of the hypothesis from the style and structure of the narrative itself. It is clear that Moses must have derived his knowledge of the events which he records in Genesis, either from immediate divine revelation, or from oral tradition, or from written documents. The nature of many of the facts related, and the minuteness of the narration, render it extremely improbable that immediate revelation was the source from whence they were drawn. That his knowledge should have been derived from oral tradition, appears morally impossible, when we consider the great number of names, ages, dates, and minute events, which are recorded. The conclusion then seems fair that he must have obtained his information from written documents coeval, or nearly so, with the events which they recorded and composed by persons intimately acquainted