Page images
PDF
EPUB

66

several parts of the writings of the Old Testament transposed and disordered. The former tells us, "that if we will observe "how little regard is had to the order of time, in the five "books of Moses, we shall easily perceive that the several parts of it were confusedly set together d." The latter tells us, "that we are not to attribute to Moses, the little order "which is to be found in some places of the Pentateuch: it is," says he, "more probable, that, as in those times the books were "written on little scrolls or separate sheets, that were sewed "together, the order of these sheets might be changed e." Mr. Whiston in another book (viz. his Accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies) is of the same opinion concerning the books of the Old Testament; "I must," says he, "be so free and fair "to confess, I cannot every where look upon the present "order, either of the histories or prophecies of the Old Testa"ment, to have been the original one, or that which was in"tended by the penmen of them f." How direct a tendency such an opinion as this has, to weaken the authority and lessen the value of these sacred books, is but too evident. Mr. Whiston does himself call his proposition a new and strange one, and is very careful to guard himself against those censures and imputations to which so bold an assertion did expose him. He easily foresaw, that so severe an attack made upon one, and by consequence upon all the sacred writers, must needs meet with the warmest resentment from every mind that had just value for the inspired volume. After a close and impartial consideration of Mr. Whiston's proposition, I not only concluded it false, but very injurious to the honour of this Gospel, and therefore resolved (according to my ability) to vindicate this part of the Gospel history from so great an injury. This is the design of the following discourse. It were to be wished some more able person had undertaken this work sooner, when Mr. Whiston's book first came out. But if his assertion be proved false, it is better now than not at all; Sat cito, si sat bene.

I should do Mr. Whiston injustice, if I did not here mention, that he has changed his opinion in respect of St. Matthew's

d Tractat. Theolog. Polit. c. 9.

• Critic. Histor. of the Old Testam.

b. I. c. 5. p. 40.

f Page 67.

Gospel being originally written in Hebrew; but I must desire the reader also to observe, that the information Mr. Whiston was pleased to give me of this, was after I had wrote all I designed on that head.

The reader will observe, that the Greek words in the following discourse are all printed without their usual accents %. I do not think it needful to make any long apology for this; only would observe, that they are but a late appendage to the language, and not found in any manuscripts, which are a thousand years old. The original design of them was, to assist and direct in the pronunciation of the language; but it not being at all needful for us to pronounce it as the Grecians did, the accents are to us useless, and no more necessary in Greek than Latin.

[In this edition the accents are preserved.]

THE

CONTENTS.

CHAP. I.

THE design and principal authors of Gospel Harmonies. The design of the following treatise.

CHAP. II.

Mr. Whiston's proof considered. The question thereupon stated. Mr. Whiston's first argument, viz. that St. Matthew designed to observe the order of time, answered. St. Luke's words, chap. i. 1. do not prove that either of the Gospels we now receive were intended according to the order of time.

CHAP. III.

The writers of the Gospel-history did not intend or observe the order of time in their writings. This proved particularly of St. Luke, by several instances. The phrase write in order, Luc. i. 1. discussed.

CHAP. IV.

The practice of other historians, as well as the evangelists, to neglect the order of time. Several instances out of the Old Testament history. Instances out of profane authors. Several reasons why the evangelists neglect the order of time.

CHAP. V.

It does not follow,

Mr. Whiston's second argument considered. that because St. Matthew, for the most part, observed the order of time, therefore he did in every particular. The third argument discussed; the notes of time Mr. Whiston mentions do not prove the order of time.

CHAP. VI.

Mr. Whiston's proof of the main proposition considered. It supposes St. Mark's Gospel an epitome of St. Matthew's. This the opinion of most learned men, but certainly false. That St. Mark

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

СНАР. Х.

If it be allowed that St. Mark did epitomise St. Matthew, it will

not follow that our present copies of St. Matthew are mis-

placed, and contrary to the order originally intended by the evangelist.

CHAP. XII.

The particular branches of St. Matthew's Gospel, which Mr. Whiston supposes misplaced. Four propositions for the discovering the true order of time in the Gospel-history. Several of those branches, which Mr. Whiston supposes misplaced, are so far from that, that they are in the exact order of time in which they came to pass. Instances of this produced.

CHAP. XIII.

None of those branches, which are not according to the order of time, in this part of St. Matthew's Gospel, are misplaced. This evidenced by considering several of them.

CHAP. XIV.

Mr. Whiston's method of accounting for the disorder he supposes in this part of St. Matthew's Gospel, viz. that St. Matthew wrote it on small pieces of paper; that these were confusedly put together by those who did not perfectly understand the true series of the history. Mr. Toinard of the same opinion. The improbability of it, proposed to be shewn from the ancient way of writing. The most ancient methods considered.

CHAP. XV.

That St. Matthew did not write his Gospel on small pieces of paper, proved by a large dissertation on the manner in which the ancients wrote their books. The ordinary method was to write upon large skins, which were fastened together and rolled up. This the practice of the Jews long before and in our Saviour's time. The words opened and closed the book, Luke iv. 17, 20. discussed. The words bring the parchments, 2 Tim. iv. 13. considered. It does not appear that the Jews made use of paper, or any other material besides that mentioned, to write their books upon.

CHAP. XVI.

Mr. Whiston's strange supposition of St. Matthew's writing this part of his Gospel on small pieces of paper, confuted from the consideration of their number and unequal size. A table of them, by which it appears that they were at least twenty in number, of very different sizes. Some contained several chapters,

« PreviousContinue »