« PredošláPokračovať »
That St. Mark was the second Evangelist ; that his Gospel was resised or even dictated by St. Peter ; that it was compiled for a mixt society of Jewish and Gentile converts, and according to all appear. ances published at Rome or in Italy : and that it was published about the end of the year 56 or of 60.
Pages 23. 168.
That the next Evangelist, St. Luke, wrote with a more peculiar view to the converted Gentiles, and, as it seems likely, in Achaia,
Page 24. That St. John had seen the three former Gospels, and bore testimony to the truth of them ; and wrote his own, probably after the destruction of Jerusalem, in Asia Minor.
THE MOST USEFUL EDITIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
1. Mill. Fol. Oxon. 1707.
Vol. 2. Halæ. 1806, with his Symbolæ Criticæ. 6. Alter. 2 vol. 8vo. Viennæ. 1787. 7. Matthæi. 12 vol. 8vo. Rigæ. 1788. 8. Birch. Quatuor Evangelia. 4to. Havniæ. 1788. 9. Griesbach. 8vo. Cum selecta lectionum varietate. Cantabrigiæ,
GREEK CONCORDANCES TO THE NEW TESTAMENT.
1. Rob Stephens. Fol. 1599. 2. Schmidius. Fol. Gothæ. et Lipsiæ. 1717, which is the most useful. 3. Dr. John Williams. 4to. Lond. 1767.
USEFUL LEXICONS FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT.
1. Suicer. Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus. Amst. 1728. 2 vol. Fol. 2. Mintert. 4to. Francofurti. 1728. 3. Parkhurst. Greek and English. 4to London. 4. Schleusner. Noy: Lexicon in N. T. 8vo. 2 Tom : 1801.
EXPLANATION OF MARKS AND ABBREVIATIONS.
The words which, in the judgement of Griesbach, should probably, though not certainly, be expunged, are included in brackets.
R. T. signifies the received text : viz. that of the Elzevir edition 1624.
N. t. the text of archbishop Newcome.
S. Professor Symonds's Observations on the Expediency of revising the present Version.
A Table of the Books of the New Testament, as they are divided by Eusebius
into those, the Authenticity of which had never been called in question, and
MATTHEW. ROMANS. PHILIPPIANS. 2 TIMOTHY.
GALATIANS. 2 THESSALONIANS. I PETER.
Acts. EPHESIANS. 1 Timothy.
DISPUTED BOOKS ;
Concerning which Dr. Lardner says, “ that they should be allowed to be
publicly read in Christian Assemblies, for the Edification of the People,
EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.
EPISTLE OF JAMES.
TABLE of the birth of Jesus Christ, the son of DAVID, the son of ABRAHAM*. 2 ABRAHAM begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob ; and 3 Jacob begat Judah and his brethren ; and Judah begat
Phares and Zara, by Tamar; and Phares begat Hezron ; 4 and Hezron begat Aram ; and Aram begat Aminadab ;
and Aminadab begat Naashon ; and Naashon begat Sal5 mon ; and Salmon begat Boaz, by Rahab ; and Boaz 6 begat Obed, by Ruth ; and Obed begat Jessé ; and Jessé
begat king DAVID; and king David begat Solomon, by 7 her that had been the wife of Uriah ; and Solomon begat
Rehoboam ; and Rehoboam begat Abijah ; and Abijah 8 begat Asa ; and Asa begat Jehoshaphat; and Jehoshaphat
begat Jehoram ; and Jehoram begat Ahaziah ; and Aha
zich begat Joash ; and Joash begat Amaziah ; and Ama. 9 ziah begat Uzziah ; and Uzziah begat Jotham ; and Jo
Epiphanius says, that Cerinthus and Carpocrates, who used the gospel of the Ebionites, wbieh was probably the original gospel of Matthew, written in the Hebrew language for the use of the Jewish believers, argued fiom the genealogy at the beginning of the gospel, that Christ was the son of Joseph and Mary; but that the Elionites had taken away even the genealogy, beginning their gospel with these worls: “ And it came to pass in the days of Herod the king, etc. See Epiph. Hæres. 30. N. 13. Jones on the Canon, vol. i. pt. 2. ch. 25. It is probable, therefore, that the first six. teen series of this chapter are genuine: and that they were found at least in the copies el Cerinthus and Carpocrates. And, indeed, it can hardly be supposed that an author writing for the instruction of Hebrew christians, would have omitted to trace the descent of Chnst from Abraham and David, upon which they justly laid so great a stress. Archie bishop Newcome adds the names in V.48. from 1 Chron. iii. 11, 12. And he suspects v. 17 to have been a marginal note anciently taken into the text. See the annotations to his Harmony, sect. 9. The eighteenth verse begins a new story, which continues to the end of the second chapter. This could not have been written by the author of the genealogy, for it contradiets his design, which was to prove that Jesus, being the son of Joseph, was the descendant of Abraham and David, whereas the design of this narrative is to show that Joseph, the reputed father of Jesus, was not his real father. This account, therefore, of the miraculous conception of Jesus Christ, must have been wanting in the copies of Cerinthus and Carpocrates as well as in those of the Ebionites : and if the genealogy be genuine, this narrative must be spurious.