fem of fins. And in ch. xx. 28. our Lord fays: The Son of man came... to give his life a ransom for many. 14. There is also an expreffion used by him once or twice, Intimating, that it was fome confiderable space, fince the time of the event and his writing about it. ch. xxviii. 8. Wherefore that field was called the field of blood to this day. Having related the affair of the foldiers, and the directions. given to them by the Jewish council to fay, that his difciples came by night, and ftole him away, he adds: And this faying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day, ver. 15. Such an expreffion does not denote any certain period: but one would think, that, in this case, thereby must be intended a confiderable space of time, more than eight, or ten, or fifteen years. 15. I formerly fhowed divers advantages of the late publication of the gofpels. The life of Jefus could not be forgotten in thirty, or forty years. His life and death. were very public, as well as very extraordinary. His refurrection and afcenfion were moft publicly attefted by his apoftles, and others, as we know from the book of the Acts. And from that time forward there were many, who were continually speaking of the things faid and done by him, and of the evidences of his refurrection and exaltation. They were foon known to multitudes of people, finall and great, and men of all ranks and characters. As St. Paul fays to Feftus, in a very great affembly. Acts xxvi. 26. For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for I am perfuaded, that none of these things are bidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner. And was it not the cry at Theffalonica? Acts xvii. 6. These that have turned the world upside down, are come hither also. The account of St. Paul's manner of living at Rome, about the years 61, and 62, is, that he dwelt two whole years in his own bired boufe, and received all that came in unto him, ... teaching thofe things, which concern the Lord Jefus Chrift, Acts xxviii. 30, 31. Whilft there were men, who at the hazard of their lives taught, and others that embraced, the things concerning the Lord Jefus, they could not be forgotten. And if about thirty years after our Lord's afcenfion, his hiftory was written by eye-witneffes, or their companions, it was foon enough: yea, it was the fittest time of all. At the year See vol. IV. p. 240–245. fixty, of our Lord's nativity, according to the vulgar æra, and later, there certainly were enough fuch perfons, as thofe juft mentioned, ftill living, to record his words and works, and more, who were willing, and defirous to read written hiftories of him, than before: and alfo more to tranfcribe and copy out thofe hiftories for their own use, and for the ufe and benefit of others, than in any preceding time. V. It remains, that we confider in what language this gofpel was written: because many of the ancients, whofe teftimonies have been lately recited, though they allow the other gofpels to have been written in Greek, have delivered it as their opinion, that this gofpel was written in Hebrew. Of this I have already fpoken feveral times, particularly, in the chapter of Papias, and in the chapter of Origen, and of Eufebius of Cæfarea; where alfo the opinions of divers learned moderns were alleged, who think it was written in Greek. To them I now add Le Clerc, who has an argument upon his head, proper to be confulted by those who have leifure, but too long to be inserted here: and his learned fucceffor Mr. Wetstein, who fays, 'Here we are of opinion, that the Fathers do not fo properly bear teftimony, as deliver their own conjecture: which needs not to be admitted, if it be not fupported by good reasons, or may be refuted by probable arguments. Suppofing, and taking it for granted, that Matthew wrote for the Jews in Judea, they concluded that he wrote in Hebrew. But there is no weight in that reason. The < m Quod enim putant neceffe fuiffe ut Hebræis fcribens Hebraice fcriberet, verum non eft: cum conftet eo tempore linguam Græcam per totum Imperium Romanum, et in Judæa præfertim, in ufu fuiffe. ... Videntur ergo vetutiffimi Patres, et inter eos Papias, homo fimplex et credulus, re non explorata, inani Nazaræorum jactantiæ fidem habuiffe.... Nullum fane in noro Matthæo reperitur indicium, unde colligi poffit, ex alia in aliam linguam fuiffe converfam. Plurima vero aliud fuadent. Wet flen. N. T. tom. I. p. 224. "Greek p. 119. 'Greek language was at that time much ufed throughout the whole Roman empire, and particularly in Judea. 'Papias, who firft advanced this opinion, was a weak and 'credulous man. Nor are there in our Greek gospel any 'marks of its being a tranflation from another language.' Mr. Jones has a long argument, well deferving to be read, fhowing, that this gofpel was originally written in Greek. Mr. Bafnage is of the fame fide, and has argued exceeding well for it: I fhould tranfcribe him if I had room; as I have not, I refer to him. Says Dr. Jortin: In the time of Chrift and his apoftles the Greek was really the univerfal language: the New Teftament is a proof of it, if proof were wanting. And this is one reafon amongst many others, why St. Matthew See Wetstein's 'probably wrote his gofpel in Greek. N. T. p. 224. St. Matthew, ch. v. 47, 48. fays: "O. TEλuvau Ἔσεσθε εν υμεις τελειοι . . . that is, be not τελώναι, but TESIS. Videtur autem Matthæus vocem TEXεo hic adhibuiffe, ut TEATIS opponeret. Wetstein. Add to this, that Texans and Texis are both derived from the fame word, TEXOS. So again, ch. vi. 16. we find an antithefis in the words, apang01 Ta zpisuka, oпws Çavao. Eleganter dicitur: Tegunt faciem, ut appareant, &c. Wettein. And many others of the fame fentiment might be mentioned, who are men of great learning and good judgment. I fhall now propofe fome obfervations relating to this point. 1. If St. Matthew did not write till about thirty years. after our Lord's afcenfion, we must be led to think, he would ufe the Greek language. That he did not write fooner, I fuppofe to have been shown to be very probable. If indeed there were good reasons to think, his gospel was written within the space of eight years after Chrift's afcenfion, we might well conclude, that he wrote in Hebrew. But, to me it seems, that we may be fully fatisfied, that Matthew did not write within that space, nor fo foon as fifteen years after our Lord's afcenfion, nor till fome good while after See his Vindication of the former part of St. Matthew's gofpel, ch. 17-19, p. 180-186, Ann. 64. n. xiii. See his Difce urfes concerning the Chriftian Religion, p. 176. note (o) the third edition. wards. wards. St. James, refiding at Jerufalem, writes an epistle about the year of Chrift 60, as is fuppofed: it is addreffed to the twelve tribes fcattered abroad; and he writes in Greek, as is allowed. Why, then, fhould not St. Matthew use the fame language? 2. There was very early a Greek gofpel of St. Matthew. It is quoted, or referred to by Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Juftin Martyr, not now to mention any others: none of whom intimate, that they made ufe of a tranflation. 3. Though many of the ancients fay, that St. Matthew wrote in Hebrew, they feem not to have fully believed it: for they have shown very little regard to the Hebrew edition of it. This has been particularly fhown in the chapters of Origen, Eufebius of Cæfarea, and Jerom, the most likely of any of the ancients to make use of that edition, if they had been perfuaded, that it was authentic and original. 4. There are not in our Greek gofpel of St. Matthew any marks of a tranflation: fo faid Mr. Wetstein in the paffage juft tranfcribed; and this obfervation was before made by us in the chapter of Papias. 5. There is no where any probable account, who tranflated this gospel into Greek. No particular tranflator was mentioned by Papias, as inay be concluded from the accounts given of his books by Eufebius. Nor is any translator of this gofpel named by Irenæus, Eufebius, or any of the writers of the first three centuries, that are come down to us. Nor is there any reason to think, that he was named in any other forafmuch as no notice is taken of him by Eufebius, or Jerom, who faw many writings of ancients now loft, both catholics and heretics. Jerom having faid, that Matthew wrote in Hebrew, prefently adds: Who • afterwards tranflated him into Greek, is uncertain.' And all the accounts of a tranflator, fince given, are too late to be credited, and are likewife very improbable. In the Synopfis afcribed to Athanafius, but not written till long after his time, it is faid, That Matthew's gofpel was tranflated into Greek by James, the first bishop of Jerusalem.' ม Vol. II. p. 110. : Vol. V. p. 37. Which is very improbable. It would be more reasonable to imagine, that he tranflated it out of Greek into Hebrew. But as that is not faid by the ancients, fo neither have we reason to say it. Moreover, the fame reasons, as one may think, which would induce James to make a Greek translation, should have induced Matthew to write in Greek. Nevertheless Dr. Mill has pitched upon that person for the tranflator, and formed an argument thereupon which only ferves to show, that there is nothing, for which fomething may not be faid by thofe, who indulge themselves in fuppofitions without ground. Theophylact informs us, that in his time it was faid, that John translated this golpel into Greek: but it was only a common report; and indeed it could be no more. However, out of a regard to fuch reports and teftimonies, Mr. Lampe has very properly reckoned a translation of this gospel among the works falfly afcribed to St. John. 6. Once more, I apprehend, we may difcern the origin of this opinion, that St. Matthew's gofpel was written in Hebrew. There was foon made a tranflation of his Greek gofpel into Hebrew. We have feen proofs, that in very early days of Chriftianity there was a Hebrew gofpel: and many, not examining it particularly, nor indeed being able to do it, for want of understanding the language, imagined, that it was first written in Hebrew. Jerom exprefsly tells us, that by many in his time the gofpel according to the Hebrews - Μετέφρασε δε τετο ιωαννης απο της εβραίδος γλωττης εις την ελληνίδα, ως ayi. Theoph. Pr. in Matt. P. 2. D. * Quis in Græcum transfuderit, ufu familiari, tranflatum fuiffe, incertum eft. Papias de hoc nihil &c. Proleg. num. 66. ab Ariftione aut Joanne prefbytero accepit, aut tradidit. Auator Synopfeos S. Scripturæ Jacobo fratri Domini diferte adfcribit hanc verfonem. Theophylactus, ex fama duntaxat, Joanni Evangelifte. Ego ad priorem illam fententiam, feu magis verifimilem, accedo Satis enim probabile eft, Evangelium in Hebræorum ufum linguâ ipforum patriâ primum exaratum, ab ipforum Epifcopo primario Jacobo, Epifcopo Hierofolymitano, in fermonem Græcum, per provincias, in quas difperfi erant ex gente ifta plurimi, Judæis pariter ac aliis in z Matthæi Evangelium Græce a Joanne Evangeliita verfum effe, refert Eutychius, tom. I. Annalium, p. 328. et Nicetas præfatione ad Catenam in Matthæum. Lampe Prolegom. in Joan. 1. i. cap. 7. num. 31. a See vol. II. p. 144. In Evangelio, quo utuntur Nazareni et Ebionitæ, quod nuper in Græcum de Hebræo fermone tranftulimus, et quod vocatur a plerif que |