Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

ART. I. A Harmony of the Evangelifts in English; with Critical Differtations, an occafional Paraphrafe, and Notes for the Ufe of the Unlearned. By Jofeph Priestley, LL. D. F. R. S. 4to. 12 S. Boards, Johnfon. 1780.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

T is now more than three years fince Dr. Prieftley published a Harmony of the Evangelifts in Greek, to which is prefixed a Preface and Critical Differtations in English. Of that publication we gave a general account in our Review for February 1778. In this English edition of the Harmony, as the Doctor acquaints us in his Preface, the text is a copy of the Greek, the intire hiftory,' as in that, with all the incidents and discourses, collected from all the Evangelifts, being diftinguished by a larger character, and the collateral accounts of the fame things being printed in a smaller character, in separate columns; so that they may be read and compared, or omitted at pleasure.' In this edition fome things are likewise added for the benefit of those who are unlearned, but of an inquifitive and liberal turn of mind; fuch as an occafional paraphrafe, and notes, on fuch paffages and expreffions as feem to ftand in need of illuftration. The Preface and Critical Differtations, publifhed with the Greek edition of the Harmony, are with great propriety prefixed to the prefent. The Preface contains many ingenious and judicious obfervations upon harmonizing in general, upon the variations in the accounts which different Evangelifts give of the fame facts, and upon the methods taken by different harmonifts to reconcile them to each other. The variations, or rather, apparent inconfiftencies in the accounts which different Evangelifts give of the fame facts, Dr. Priestley juftly confiders as an infuperable objection to the notion VOL. LXIV. generally

[ocr errors]

G

generally entertained of their infpiration as writers: upon which fubject he has fome pertinent and ftriking remarks. We are tempted to tranfcribe the two following paragraphs, as containing matter worthy the attention of every liberal minded Chriftian:

[ocr errors]

Admitting that, if the whole credibility of the Gospel hiftory, as we receive it, refted on divine, independent of human teftimony, fomething might be gained, it is evident that we now receive the Gospel history on the faith of human teftimony only. For the early Tranfcribers of the Gofpels were no more infpired than our Printers; and in the courfe of time that has elapsed from the firft promulgation of Chriftianity to the prefent age, copies of the Gofpel have been fo often tranfmitted from one to another, that a fucceffion of human authorities fo great as to exceed all computation, muft have intervened fince the first writing of the Gospels to their coming into our hands, Since therefore divine Providence has thought proper to intruft this valuable depofit in human hands for fo many centuries, how can it be thought inconfiftent with the fame plan, to convey it to us in the fame manner from the very beginning; the Apostles being naturally as capable of relating and writing an account of what they heard and faw, as other perfons could be to copy the account after them?' Pref. p. xi.

I own, I can fee no meaning, or confiftency, in the appointment of witnesses, to accompany our Lord, in order to tranfmit to pofterity an authentic and credible account of his life, doctrine, and miracles, if, after all, it was the intention of the Divine Being to fuperfede this teftimony, by books bearing sufficient marks of fupernatural infpiration. In reality, one fingle book, the Divine infpiration of which was fully proved, would render all other evidence fuperfluous.' P. xii.

The fubjects of the Critical Differtations are, the time of the birth and of the death of Chrift, the duration of his public miniftry, and the order of the events related in the Gofpel hiftory. With refpect to the duration of our Saviour's miniftry, it is now well known, that Dr. Priestley has adopted Mr. Mann's opinion on the fubject, which was, indeed, the opinion of Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, Origen, and other early Chriftian writers, viz. That he preached no longer than one year, or one year, and a few months. This hypothefis he has fupported with great judgment and ability, by fettling with precifion the year of the death of Chrift, as to which point he thinks Mr. Mann to have been mistaken; by reciting, in brief, the evidence that Mr. Mann has produced in fupport of his fcheme, confirming it with remarks of his own, and alleging fome additional arguments in its favour; by replying to the objections that have been raised against it; and by confidering and comparing the

notes

notes of time, the probable order of the events, and the length of time that was neceffary for the tranfactions contained in the Gospels. The following is the fubftance of Dr. Priestley's additional arguments in fupport of this hypothefis, and nearly in his own words:

1. Some very fhort periods of our Lord's public miniftry appear, according to the accounts of all the Evangelifts, to have been very full of business; and from the manner in which' they • describe his usual way of life, it fhould feem that the greatest part of his time was thus fully employed.'—' If, now, our Lord had paffed three or four years in this manner, and the twelve Apostles' and the feventy alfo' had been teaching and working miracles in'-' different places for the fame space of time, fuch a number of miracles would have been performed, as that either there could have been no unbelievers left in Judea; or, fuch a refentment would have been raised in the minds of the Jewish rulers, as, without a miracle, could not but have terminated in his death long before.'

2. It is also more easy to account for the prejudices of the Apostles, and their ignorance of the true nature of Chrift's kingdom, even at and after our Lord's death, on the fuppofition that his miniftry was of a short, than that it was of a long duration.'

3. If our Lord preached three or four years; and, confequently the Evangelifts have fometimes paffed over the events of whole years at a time, is it not surprising that none of them fhould ever connect those distant parts of their narrative by such phrases as the year following, after one, or after two years, &c.

&c.'

4. If Jefus had been preaching and working miracles, both in Judea and in Galilee, almost a year before the death of John the Baptift, Herod, who reigned in Galilee, could not but have heard of him; and therefore could not but have known that he was not John that was rifen from the dead.'

[ocr errors]

5. All our Lord's journeys that the Evangelifts give us any account of, agree in fo many circumftances, that they are evidently the fame, and are fuppofed fo to be by all Harmonists. Now fince these four hiftorians have felected very different events in our Saviour's life, is it not surprising, that all his journeys to Jerufalem make no more than four; three of which, at least, every Jew was obliged to make in the compafs of every year? John, who fupplies many of the deficiencies of the other Evangelifts, only makes up the number of them to four. He fupplies many new difcourfes, and new incidents, but no more journeys to Jerufalem than thofe above mentioned.'

Of these arguments it must be allowed, that the first, the fourth and the fifth, deferve attention. The fecond and third

G 2

have

have but little weight. A fufficient answer to the third in particular, might be extracted from Dr. Priestley's own remarks on the neglect of chronological order in the Evangelical hiftories, and the reafons which he has affigned for that neglect. With refpect to his replies to the objections that have been made to this hypothefis, we fhall have occafion to confider them hereafter. His calculation of the time neceffary for the tranfactions recorded in the Gofpels, is too long to be tranfcribed. We gave our Readers the conclufion of it in our Review of the Greek Harmony. We beg leave to obferve, as we go on, that Dr. Priestley is miftaken in afferting, that, in addition to those fathers who held the fame opinion with himself, quoted by Sir Ifaac Newton,' Mr. Mann adds the teftimony of Justin Martyr, and Valentinus the Heretic.' In the paffage alluded to, Mr. Mann mentions only Clemens of Alexandria; Tertullian, Origen, Africanus, Lactantius, and before them all in time, Valentinus, the learned heretic' contemporary with Juftin Martyr.'

-

About a year after the publication of Dr. Priestley's Greek Harmony, Dr. Newcome, then Bishop of Offory, now of Waterford, publifhed An Harmony of the Gospels, in Greek alfo, to which he fubjoined obfervations tending to fettle the time and place of every tranfaction, and to establish the series of facts*. His Lordship, unfatisfied with the arguments produced in support of Mr. Mann's hypothefis, adjusted his Harmony to the more common opinion, that our Saviour's public ministry continued three years and a half, and included in that space of time four Paffovers: and in his observations he adverted particu-larly to Dr. Priestley's reasoning on the fubject, advancing several strong, if not infuperable objections to his fyftem. Dr. Priestley has prefixed to the prefent publication a letter addreffed to Dr. Newcome in reply to his remarks. In this letter Dr. Priestley recapitulates the principal arguments he had employed in his previous differtations in fupport of Mr. Mann's opinion, with fome farther illustration; endeavours to invalidate the Bishop's objections to it; invites him to a free and full discusfion of the fubject; and points out fome particulars, to which in that cafe he wishes his Lordship more especially to attend. Dr. Priestley had obferved, in his Differtations, p. 52, that our Lord's tarrying in Judea, John iii. 22. could not have been for any long time, because the other Evangelifts make no mention of it, &c. Dr. Newcome obferved, in anfwer, that the Evangelifts often omit very important events. To this Dr. Priestley replies,

*Of this judicious and elegant publication our Readers will find a particular account in the Review for October 1779.

<Not

• Notwithstanding the great omiffions that your Lordship ob❤ ferves there are in fome parts of the Gospel hiftory, it must certainly be thought very improbable, that Matthew, Mark, and Luke fhould have known of this long ftay of Jefus in Judea, and not have noticed it. Other omiffions are generally of fuch things as were fimilar to such as they had noticed before, or of what, on fome other account, they might deem unneceffary after what they had related. But here would be an omiffion of what may almost be called the very firft open publication of the Gospel, and of the first public miracles.'-The Doctor afterwards obferves, that, in Galilee, the Gospel is always faid to have begun ; and in proof of this, he refers to Luke xxiii. 5. and Acts x. 37-39. He had referred in his Differtations to Matth. iv. 17. Then, having enlarged upon the improbability that Herod fhould not have heard of Jefus till after the death of John, if he had preached almost two years before that event, he adds, This argument is not a reductio ad abfurdum, of the fame kind with those of Euclid: but let any perfon confider all the circum-, ftances of this cafe, efpecially that Herod was not a Roman, but a Jew, furrounded by Jews, and not unattentive to his religion, who had even taken fome pleasure in hearing John preach, for we read, Mark vi. 20. that he did many things (probably things that John had recommended) and heard him gladly, that this preaching of Jefus had been always near his own dominions (for it was probably in his way to Galilee), and that the whole country of Judea at that time, including all Galilee, was not much larger than Yorkshire; and I think he muft pronounce that the thing is hardly, in fact, lefs credible, and that a plan of a Harmony labouring under this difficulty (and in fact every Harmony except that of Mr. Mann is thus circumftanced) cannot deferve much attention. I think I may venture to challenge any person to draw out a plan of a Harmony that shall extend the public miniftry of Chrift to more than one complete year, in such a manner as that this one difficulty, not to mention many others, shall not be infuperable.'

Matth. iv. 23. it is faid, Jefus went about all Galilee, &c. Dr. Newcome thought a month was a moderate space of time for the tranfactions to which the Evangelift refers. Upon this, Dr. Priestley, among other things, observes,

Surely, my Lord, in this, as in a former cafe, you lay too great ftrefs on general expreffions, which, after all, you yourself cannot fuppofe to be understood quite literally; for all Galilee cannot mean here every town and village in Galilee; and, if it must be restricted, why may it not be to the places in the neighbourhood of Capernaum, efpecially Chorafin and Bethfaida, which were probably within a few miles of Capernaum? Our Lord himfelf feems to lead to this conftruction, by faying, after

« AnteriorContinuar »