three hundred and sixty. This statement agrees exactly with that of the Greek version; for, according to it, From the Creation to the Deluge were ..... the Deluge to the birth of Abraham the birth of Abraham to his leaving Haran This agreement is very remarkable; and as Demetrius wrote only about sixty-six years after the Septuagint translation was made, it is not to be supposed that at so early a period any material differences between the Greek and the Hebrew scriptures could have taken place; * nor, supposing the Septuagint numbers to have differed from the Hebrew at first, can we imagine that in this brief space a new and corrupt system could, by possibility, have obtained such authority as to be selected by an historian for a guide, in preference to old, well known, and authentic records. Eupolemus, also, who wrote about fifty years after the last-mentioned author, states, that it was five thousand one hundred and forty-nine years from Adam to the fifth year of Demetrius, king of Syria. This agrees exactly with the reckoning of Demetrius, and the chronology of the Septuagint. Still more important is the testimony of Josephus. This author, who was himself of the family of the priests, was perfectly acquainted with the Hebrew scriptures, as well as with the Septuagint, of which version he has given us an account. He published his great work on Jewish history and antiquities, A. D. 90; and assures us, not only that the Septuagint was carefully examined and publicly approved, but also that he had translated the substance of his history from the Hebrew scriptures. Yet, with few and unimportant exceptions, his chronology agrees with the Septuagint, as may be seen by a reference to the tables. * RUSSELL'S "Connexion," vol. i. p. C6. We have, therefore, a series of testimonies extending from about sixty years after the Septuagint translation was made, to the latter part of the first century, a period of above three hundred years, which unite in affirming the numbers of the LXX., and—from the circumstances in which the translators of this version were placed, and their entire acquaintance with the Hebrew-thereby warranting the conclusion that at this time the discrepancies which harass us had no existence, and that both versions agreed in teaching the chronology of the modern Septuagint. There is another branch of evidence which we regard as of the greatest importance. During the first century, the New-Testament scriptures were written under the plenary inspiration of the Holy Ghost. The authors of these books frequently refer to the Old-Testament writings; and we may reasonably conclude that, in regard to chronology, and every other subject, they would certainly quote from the purest text of Moses and the prophets; yet, when we examine such quotations, as far as they relate to the subject under consideration, we find them uniformly at variance with the present Hebrew text, and in agreement with the LXX. We call attention to a few instances. The first text to which we refer is that in Luke iii. 35, 36: Sala, which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad." The corresponding passage in Gen. xi. 12, is thus given in the Hebrew Bible: "And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah;" omitting entirely the name and generation of Cainan. The Septuagint, however, renders the passage thus: "And Arphaxad lived a hundred and thirty-five years, and begot Cainan ; .........and Cainan lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot Sala." The Septuagint, therefore, is found in perfect agreement with the Gospel, while the Hebrew and Samaritan omit the generation. This is a point of great consequence. We do not mean to argue from this fact, that the circumstance now stated invests the Septuagint generally with an authentic character. We do not contend that it legitimatizes the general scheme of chronology which that version exhibits. But we do think that this quotation, or confirmation of the LXX. by the inspired evangelist, authenticates this particular text. We have never heard any doubt cast on this passage of St. Luke. It is found in every copy and version; and, if written by the sacred penman, we cannot see how a believer in real inspiration can doubt the truth of the fact recorded in the Septuagint, or refuse to admit that we have here an evident omission in the Hebrew. Our view on this subject is strikingly confirmed by the able translator of the "Septuagint Version into English." In his preface, he says: "In reply, then, to the question, 'How far does the apostolic quotation of a part of the Septuagint, warrant the inspiration of the whole?' we venture to state, that it is no warrant at all. What the Holy Ghost touches it hallows: beyond this, the translation, whatever its excellence, comes into our hands as the work of fallible man." * The passage to which we have just adverted has been so hallowed, and is therefore undoubtedly authentic. We next turn to Exodus xii. 40, which, according to the present Hebrew, reads: "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years." This is clearly contrary to fact, as they dwelt in Egypt but two hundred and fifteen years. This text has consequently given immense trouble to commentators, who have been greatly puzzled to find a solution of the difficulty. The Septuagint does this by supplying an omission in the text it reads, "And the sojourning of the children of Israel, while they sojourned in the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan, was four hundred and thirty years." This true and consistent sense is confirmed by apostolic authority; for St. Paul makes this period extend from the promise made to Abraham, until the exodus. (Gal. iii. 17.) There is another passage which, in fact, contains the only chronological statement found in the New Testament. We * "The Septuagint, in English, by SIR L. C. L. BRENTON, BArt." chap. v. Bagster. will give it, and its bearing upon our argument, in the words of a celebrated writer. Having referred to the evidence of Demetrius and Eupolemus, already given, he observes: "The united testimony of these two eminent historians carries with it a strong degree of conviction in favour of the agreement which must have subsisted, in their time, between the original Hebrew scriptures and the authorized version, in reference at least to the relative antiquity and succession of events. Nor is there any ground to suspect, that the smallest change was introduced into either text during a lapse of more than three hundred years afterwards: for the only chronological statement that is handed down to us in the New Testament corresponds with the numbers of the Septuagint, while it is directly at variance with those of the modern Hebrew. We allude to the narrative of St. Paul, as recorded in the thirteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. This holy man, when addressing the Jews at Antioch, reminded them, that God had brought their fathers out of Egypt with a high hand, and about the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Chanaan, he divided their land to them by lot. And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet. And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years. And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their king.' "The apostle here declares, that from the division of the land until Samuel the prophet, was about the space of four hundred and fifty years.' If to that sum we add the years that passed between the exode and the partition of the promised inheritance, and also the time that the government of the Hebrews was exercised by Samuel, Saul, and David, with the first three years of Solomon, we shall find that, in estimating the period from the departure of the children. of Israel out of Egypt to the foundation of the temple, the historical outline given by St. Paul accords precisely with the numbers of Josephus, and consequently with the numbers contained in the Greek and Hebrew scriptures, as they existed in his days. "From exode to the division of lands......... 46 years. "Now Josephus relates, that the temple was begun in the fourth year of Solomon, five hundred and ninety-two years after the people were delivered from Egyptian bondage; and it is worthy of especial remark, that, in regard to the dates of these memorable occurrences, we have found the judgment of the historian confirmed by the narrative of an inspired apostle. Such a complete agreement in regard to very ancient epochs is hardly to be expected; but when it does occur, it leaves no room for doubt that the several writers must have followed an authority essentially the same; and that the archives whence they derived their materials had not yet been tampered with by the deceitful genius of hypothesis and controversy."+ We might add to this evidence, but we forbear; and with a few observations shall close this branch of the inquiry. What are the facts which we have elicited? That the Hebrew scriptures, as they were held by the Jewish church, were translated into Greek about two hundred and eighty years before the Christian era: that this translation obtained the universal approbation of the Jewish authorities: that for nearly four hundred years no whisper of complaint at unfaithfulness in the translators, or discrepancy in the chronological numbers, was heard from any quarter; and that the most eminent historians living in different parts * Yet archbishop Usher, following the modern Hebrew, makes this period but four hundred and eighty years. + RUSSELL'S "Connexion," vol. i. p. 67. |