2 In the Holy Spirit and fire, v TrevμATI άyiw xai rugi. Hey. with holy wind and fire. This most uncommon, though not en tirely new, version of that learned and ingenious, but sometimes fanciful, interpreter, is supported by the following arguments: 1st, The word eva, which signifies both spirit and wind, has not here the article by which the Holy Spirit is commonly distinguished. 2dly, The following verse, which should be regard ed as an illustration of this, mentions the cleansing of the wheat, which is by the wind separating the chaff, and the consuming of the chaff by the fire. 3dly, The three elements, water, air, and fire, were all considered by the Jews as purifiers, and, in respect of their purifying quality, were ranked in the order now named, water the lowest, and fire the highest. The mention of the other two gives a presumption that the third was not omitted. The following answers are submitted to the reader: 1st. The article, though often, for distinction's sake, prefixed to ylov `wenvμa, is, when either the scope of the place, or the other terms employed, serve the purpose of distinguishing, frequently omitted. Now this purpose is more effectually served by the epithet avior, holy, than it could have been by the article. In ch. i. 18. and 20. the miraculous conception is twice said to be εκ πνεύματος άγιο, without the article. Yet Hey. himself has rendered it, in both places, the Holy Spirit. Further, I suspect that no clear example can be produced of this adjective joined to vua, where the meaning of evμa is wind. At least I have never heard of any such. 2dly, The subsequent verse is certainly not to be understood as an illustration of this, but as farther information concerning Jesus. This verse represents the manner in which he will admit his disciples; the next, that in which he will judge them at the end of the world. 3dly, I can see no reason, on the Dr.'s hy. pothesis, why air or wind should alone of all the elements be dignified with the epithet holy. Fire, in that view, would have a preferable title, being considered as the most perfect refiner of them all. Yet in no part of the N. T. is mention made of either holy water or holy fire. Now as it is acknowledged that μ commonly signifies spirit, and when joined with ayor the Divine Spirit, the word, by all the laws of interpretation, considering the peculiarity of the attribute with which it is accompanied, must be so understood here. It is however but doing justice to

that respectable author to observe that he does not differ from others, in regard to the principal view of the passage, the effusion of the Holy Spirit; only he thinks that the literal import of the word up in this place is wind, and that the spirit is but suggested to us, by a figure.

3 And fire, nai wup. These words are wanting in several MSS. but they are found in a greater number, as well as in the Sy. the Vul. and all the ancient versions.

AUTY.

12. His winnowing shovel is in his hand, ov to #TVOV EV TY XEIPT E. T. Whose fan is in his hand. Vul. Cujus ventilabrum in manu sua. In the old Vul. or Itc. the word appears to have been pala, properly a winnowing shovel, of which mention is made Isa. xxx. 24. This implement of husbandry is very an. cient, simple, and properly manual. The fan (or van, as it is sometimes called,) is more complex, and being contrived for raising an artificial wind, by the help of sails, can hardly be considered as proper for being carried about in the hand.

15. Thus ought we to ratify every institution, &TW πρETOV ESIV ἡ μιν πληρωσαι πασαν δικαιοσυνην. E. T. Thus it becometh us to ful. fil all righteousness. In the opinion of Chrysostom, and other expositors, dixaloovv signifies in this place divine precept. It is the word by which a mishpat, in Heb. often denoting an institution or ordinance of religion, is sometimes rendered by the Seventy. I have chosen here to translate the verb xanpwouι rather ratify than fulfil, because the conformity of Jesus, in this instance, was not the personal obedience of one who was comprehended in the precept, and needed with others the benefit of purification, but it was the sanction of his example given to John's baptism, as a divine ordinance.

16. No sooner arose out of the water than heaven was opened to him, ανέβη ευθυς απο του ύδατος, και ιδου ανεώχθησαν αυτω δι ουρανοί. E. T. Went up straightway out of the water, and lo the heavens were opened unto him. That the adverb 95, though joined with the first verb, does properly belong to the second, was justly remarked by Grotius. Of this idiom, Mr. i. 29. and xi. 2. are also examples.

CHAPTER IV.

1. By the devil, iño T8 diacon. Diss. VI. P. I. § 1—6.

3. A son of God, i 78 918. E. T. The son of God. It does not appear to be without design that the article is omitted both in this verse and in the sixth. The words ought therefore to be rendered indefinitely a son, not emphatically the son. In the parallel passage in L. iv. 3. there is the same omission. And though in the 9th verse of that chapter we find the article in the present common Gr. it is wanting in so many ancient MSS. and approved editions, that it is justly rejected by critics. Whether we are to impute Satan's expressing himself thus to his ignorance, as not knowing the dignity of the personage whom he accosted, or to his malignity, as being averse to suppose more than an equality with other good men (for he does not acknowledge even. so much); certain it is, that the passage he quotes from the Psalms, admits a general application to all pious persons. The omission of the definite article in this place is the more remarkable, as in the preceding chapter in both Gospels, the appropria tion of the term vs by means of the article, in the voice from heaven, is very strongly marked, ¿ vios μov ò ayaπntos. See N. on ch. xiv. 33. xxvii. 54.

2

Loaves, agros. E. T. Bread. Apres, used indefinitely, is rightly translated bread; but when joined with is, or any other word limiting the signification in the singular number, ought to be rendered loaf; in the plural it ought almost always to be rendered loaves. Even if either were proper, loaves would be preferable in this place, as being more picturesque. Our transla tors have here followed the Sy. interpreter, who seems to have read αρτος.

4. By every thing which God is pleased to appoint, exɩ xavrı ρήματι εκπορευομενω δια στόματος Θεου. E. T. By every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. The whole sentence is given as a quotation. It is written. The place quoted is Deut. viii. 3. where Moses, speaking to the Israelites, says, He humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord, doth

a much greater number.

to pass.

man live. It is evident that the Jewish lawgiver is speaking here of the food of the body, or sustenance of the animal life; as it was this purpose solely which the manna served, and which could not, in our idiom, be denominated a word. The reader may observe that the term word in the passage of the O. T. quoted is, in our Bible, printed in Italics, to denote that there is no corresponding term in the original. It might therefore have been lite rally rendered from the Heb. every thing. In the Sep. from which the quotation in the Gospel is copied, the ellipsis is supplied by pηua. But let it be observed, that in scripture both the Heb. dabar, and the Gr. ρημα and sometimes λyoç, mean in. differently word or thing. Take the following examples out of L. i. 37. Ουκ αδυνατήσει παρα τω Θεω жav pnux. Nothing is impossible with God.—ii. 15. Let us now go to Bethlehem, and see this thing, To pηua TOUTO, which is come The phrase το εκπορευομενον (or εξελθον) εκ του τοματος, is oftener than once to be met with, in the version of the Seventy, for a declared purpose, resolution, or appointment. See Num. xxxii. 24. 1 Sam. i. 23. But nothing can be more express to our purpose than Jer. xliv. 17. Ποιησομεν παντα λογον ός εξελευσε THI EX TOU SOμATOS μav. E. T. We will do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, wavra λoyov, in Heb. 22, col hadabar, every word, that is, we will do whatsoever we have purposed. The version I have given is, therefore, entirely agreeable both to the sense of the passage quoted, and to the idiom of holy writ. I may add, that it is much better adapted to the context than the allegorical explanation which some give of the words, as relating purely to the spiritual life. The historian tells us that Jesus had fasted forty days, that he was hungry, and in a desert, where food was not to be had. The tempter, taking his opportunity, interposes, "If thou be the Messiah, convert "these stones into loaves." The question was simply, What, in this exigence, was to be done for sustaining life? Our Saviour answers very pertinently, by a quotation from the O. T. pur porting, that when the sons of Israel were in the like perilous situation in a desert, without the ordinary means of subsistence, God supplied them with food, by which their lives were preserv. ed, (for it is not pretended that the manna served as spiritual nourishment), to teach us that no strait, however pressing, ought to shake our confidence in him. Beau. and the anonymous Eng, translator in 1729, exhibit the same sense in their versions.

6. Lest, μηποτε. E. T. Lest at any time. From an excessive solicitude, not to say less than the original, words have been explained from etymology, rather than from use; in consequence of which practice, some versions are encumbered with expletives, which enfeeble, instead of strengthening, the expression. Of this kind is the phrase at any time, which, in this passage, adds nothing to the sense. The compound uTore, in the use of the sacred penmen, rarely signifies more than the simple μn, lest. It is used by the Seventy in translating a Heb. term that imports no more. In the Psalm referred to, it is rendered simply lest. And to go no farther than this Gospel, our translators have not hesitated to render it so in the following passages, vii. 6. xiii. 29. xv. 32. xxv. 9. xxvii. 64. Why they have not done so in this, and most other places, I can discover no good reason.

7. Jesus again answered, It is written, ¿On avʊw i Inσous waλiv γεγραπται. E. T. Jesus said unto him, It is written again. The words in the original are susceptible of either interpretation, the difference depending entirely on the pointing. I place the comma after παλιν, they after Ιησους. This was the second answer which Jesus made, on this occasion, to the devil. It is not easy to say in what sense the words quoted can be said to have been written again. The punctuation is not of divine authority, any more than the division into chapters and verses.

2 Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the proof, ovx exxelβάσεις Κύριον τον Θεόν σου. E. T. Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. What we commonly mean by the word tempting, does not suit the sense of the Gr. word expat in this passage. The Eng. word means properly either to solicit to evil, or to provoke ; whereas the import of the Gr. verb in this and several other places is to assay, to try, to put to the proof. It is thus the word is used, Gen. xxii. 1. where God is said to have tempted Abraham, commanding him to offer up his son Isaac for a burnt offer ing. God did not solicit the patriarch to evil, for, in this sense, as the Apostle James tells us, i. 13. he neither can be tempted, nor tempteth any man. But God tried Abraham, as the word ought manifestly to have been rendered, putting his faith and obedience to the proof. His ready compliance, so far from being evil, was an evidence of the sublimest virtue. It was in desiring to have a proof of God's care of them, and presence with them,

VOL. IV.