about to erect. Cas. renders it very properly nisi mutati fueritis, and has in this been followed by some Fr. translators.

it

6. An upper millstone, μvλ oviz. E. T. A millstone. All the La. translators have rendered it mola asinaria, a millstone turned by an ass. All the foreign translations I have seen, adopt this interpretation. That given by Phavorinus appears to me preferable. He explains μux vix the upper millstone. Or alone was a common name for the upper, as μvan was for the nether millstone. Ma might denote either. Sometimes an adjective was joined to o, when used in this sense, to prevent ambiguity. Xenophon calls it ovaλets. In the same way appears that Mt. adds to uva, millstone, the epithet ovixos, to express the upper. I own that, in the version, the last mentioned term, after the example of other Eng. translators, might have been dropt, as not affecting the import of the sentence. But as Mr. has employed a different phrase, dos vivos, which expresses the thing more generally, I always endeavour, if possible, that the Gospels may not appear, in the translation, more coincident, in style and manner, than they are in the original.

7. Wo unto the world. L. vi. 24, 25, 26. N.

10. Their angels. It was a common opinion, among the Jews, that every person had a guardian angel assigned to him.

12. Will he not leave the ninety-nine upon the mountains, and go. όχι αφεις τα εννενηκονταεννέα επι τα οξη πορευθεις. Ε. Τ. Doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains. Vul. Nonne relinquit nonagintanovem in montibus, et vadit. The Sy. to the same purpose. The Gr. is susceptible of either interpretation, according as we place the comma before, or after, π тa opn. The parallel passage, L. xv. 4. which has no ambiguity, decides the question. What is here called apn is there ερημος. Both terms signify a hilly country, fitter for pasture than for agriculture. Mr. i. 3. N.

17. Acquaint the congregation with it, είπε τη εκκλησια. Ε. Τ. Tell it to the church. I know no way of reaching the sense of our Lord's instructions, but by understanding his words so as they must have been understood, by his hearers, from the use that then prevailed. The word xxλnia occurs frequently in the Sep. and is that by which the Heb. bp kahal is commonly trans

in

lated. That word we find used in two different, but related senses, in the O. T. One is for a whole nation, considered as constituting one commonwealth or polity. In this sense the people of Israel are denominated πατα ή εκκλησία Ισραελ, and πασα ή εκκλησία Θεό. The other is for a particular congregation or assembly, either actually convened, or accustomed to convene, the same place. In this sense it was applied to those who were wont to assemble in any particular synagogue; for every syna. gogue had its own εκκλησία. And as the word συναγωγή was some. times employed to signify, not the house, but the people; those two Gr. words were often used promiscuously. Now as the nature of the thing sufficiently shows that our Lord, in this direc tion, could not have used the word in the first of the two senses above given, and required that every private quarrel should be made a national affair, we are under a necessity of understanding it in the last, as regarding the particular congregation to which the parties belonged. What adds great probability to this, as Lightfoot and others have observed, is the evidence we have that the like usage actually obtained in the synagogue, and in the primitive church. Whatever foundation, therefore, there may be, from those books of Scripture that concern a later period, for the notion of a church representative; it would be contrary to all the rules of criticism, to suppose that our Lord used this term in a sense wherein it could not then be understood by any one of his hearers; or that he would say congregation, for so the word literally imports, when he meant only a few heads or directors. L. Cl. renders this passage in the same manner, dites le a l'assemblé. But in ch. xvi. 18. where our Lord manifestly speaks of all, without exception, who, to the end of the world, should receive him as the Messiah, the Son of the living God, I have retained the word church, as being there perfectly unequivocal. Simon, in effect, gives the same explanation to this verse, that I do: for, though he retains the word eglise in the version, he explains it in a note, as importing no more than the particular assembly or congregation to which the parties belong.

18. Whatsoever ye shall bind, ira sav donte. The promise made especially to Peter, ch. xvi. 19. is made here to all the apostles. It is with them our Lord is conversing through the whole of this chapter. The Jewish phraseology seems to warrant

the explanation of binding and loosing, by prohibiting and permitting. The connection here would more naturally lead us to interpret it, of condemning and absolving, thus making it a figurative expression of what is spoken plainly, J. xx. 23. Whose sins soever ye remit, they are remitted to them; and whose sins soever ye retain, they are retained. It is not impossible that, under the figure of binding and loosing, both may be comprehended. It is a good rule, in doubtful cases, to translate literally, though obscurely, rather than run the hazard of mistranslating, by confining an expression to a meaning of which we are doubt. ful whether it was the author's.

23. The administration of heaven, ʼn ßarížia vwv spavav. Diss. V. P. I. § 7.

25. That he, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, should be sold. A custom, for the satisfaction of creditors, which, how cruel soever we justly account it, was, in early ages, established by the laws of many countries, in Europe, as well as in Asia, republican, as well as monarchical.

29. I will pay thee. The common Gr. adds παντα, all. But this word is not found in many MSS. several of them of principal note, nor in some ancient versions and editions. Mill and Wetstein have both thought proper to reject it.

34. To the jailors, tois Batavisans. E. T. To the tormentors. The word Braviss properly denotes examiner, particularly one who has it in charge to examine by torture. Hence it came to signify jailor, for on such, in those days, was this charge commonly devolved. They were not only allowed, but even commanded, to treat the wretches in their custody, with every kind of cruelty, in order to extort payment from them, in case they had concealed any of their effects; or, if they had nothing, to wrest the sum owed, from the compassion of their relations and friends, who, to release an unhappy person, for whom they had. a regard, from such extreme misery, might be induced to pay the debt; for, let it be observed, that the person of the insolvent debtor was absolutely in the power of the creditor, and at his disposal.

35. Who forgiveth not from his heart the faults of his brother, εαν μη αφητε έκατος τω αδελφω αυτε απο των καρδίων ύμων τα παραπε There is nothing in the Vul. answering to the

τωματα αυτων.

three last words. The same may be said of the Ara. the Cop.

the Sax. and the Eth. versions.

They are wanting also in the

Cam. and three other MSS.

CHAPTER XIX.

1. Upon the Jordan. Ch. iv. 15. N.

4. When the Creator made man, he formed a male and a female, ο ποιησας, αρσεν και θήλυ εποίησεν αυτός. Ε. Τ. He which made them, made them male and female. But they could not have translated the clause differently, if the Gr. expression had been άρρενας και θηλείας εποίησεν αυτους. Yet it is manifest that the sense would have been different. All that this declaration would have implied is, that when God created mankind, he made people of both sexes. But what argument could have been drawn from this principle to shew that the tie of marriage was indissoluble? Or how could the conclusion annexed have been supported? For this cause a man shall leave father and mother-Besides, it was surely unnecessary to recur to the history of the creation, to convince those Pharisees of what all the world knew, that the human race was composed of men and women, and consequently, of two sexes. The weight of the argument, therefore, must lie in this circumstance, that God created at first no more than a single pair, one of each sex, whom he united in the bond of marriage, and, in so doing, exhibited a standard of that union to all generations. The very words, and these two, shew that it is implied in the historian's declaration, that they were two, one male and one female, and no more. But this is by no means implied in the common version. It lets us know, indeed, that there were two sexes, but gives us no hint that these were but two persons. Unluckily, Eng. adjectives have no distinction of number; and through this imperfection, there appears here, in all the Eng. translations I have seen, something inconclusive in the reasoning, which is peculiar to them. In our idiom, an adjective, construed with the pronoun them, or indeed with any plural noun or pro noun, is understood to be plural. There is, therefore, a necessity, in a case like this, if we would do justice to the original, that the defect, occasioned by our want of inflections, be supplied, by giving the sentence such a turn as will fully express

the sense.

This end is here easily effected, as the words male and female, in our language, may be used either adjectively or substantively. And when they are used as substantives, they are susceptible of the distinction of number.

5. They two shall be one flesh, EcoVTal of duo els capra resav. This is a quotation from Gen. ii. 24. in which place it deserves our notice, that there is no word answering to two in the present Masoretic editions of the Heb. Bible. But, on the other hand, it ought to be observed that the Samaritan copies have this word, that the Sep. reads exactly as the Gospel does. So do also the Vul. the Sy. and the Ara. versions of the O. T. It has been observed of this passage, that it is four times quoted in the N. T. to wit, here, in Mr. x. 8. 1 Cor. vi. 16. and Eph. v. 31. and in none of them is the word do wanting. The only ancient version, of any consideration, wherein it is not found, is the Chaldee. But with regard to it, we ought to remember, that as the Jewish Rabbies have made greater use of it, in their synagogues and schools, than of any other version, they have had it in their power to reduce it, and in fact have reduced it, to a much closer conformity, than any other, to the Heb. of the Masorets. It is well known how implicitly the Rabbies are followed by their people. And they could not have adopted a more plausible rule than that the translation ought to be corrected by the original. But as there can be no doubt about the authenticity of the reading in the N. T. I think, for the reasons above named, there is the greatest ground to believe, that the ancient reading in the O. T. was the same with this of the New.

7. Why did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and dismiss her? By the manner in which they put the question, one would imagine that Moses had commanded both, to wit, the dismission and the writing of divorcement; whereas, in fact, he had only permitted the dismission; but in case they should use the permission given them, commanded the writing of divorcement. 8. Untractable disposition, exλngoxapdiav. Diss. IV. § 22.

12. Let him act this part who can act it, dovaμEVOS XOPELV, χωρειτών E. T. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. This expression is rather dark and indefinite. Xape, amongst other things, signifies, to receive, to admit, to be capable of. It