Page images

copies it was written, “ which was spoken by the prophet, saying," &c.

I crave leave to mention an observation, that may support the former of these two suppositions, viz. that originally • the son of Barachias' was wanting in St. Matthew, as well as in St. Luke. The ancient christians seem to have been very much divided in their opinion, who was the Zacharias here spoken of. Many christians in St. Jerom's time thought he was Zacharias the father of John the Baptist ; borrowing this notion (as hei adds) from some apocryphal books of no autbority. In the copies of St. Matthew's gospel in his time, he was styled the son of Baracbias, as in ours; but the Nazarene christians, being Jews by birth, and understanding the history of their own nation, bad it in their gospel, * Zacharias the son of Jehoiada.' This indeed was the truth, but it seems to have been an insertion.

But this is left to the reader, to judge of as he thinks fit. It is highly probable, that one of these may be the case; either that Jehoiada not being well known, Barachias was put in bis room: or else, that the son of Barachias' was added.

There being so probable an account of this reading, I hope there remains no farther scruple about this text.

There is another interpretation of these words, which some have inclined to, namely, that Zacharias here mentioned is Zacharias, whose death Josepbus bas given us the bistory of, and that our Saviour spoke of him by way of prophecy: But as there can be no objection, which I am concerned with, formed against the evangelists from this sense of the words, 1 bave taken no notice of it.

Besides, I think it is by no means the true sense of the place. Whitby observes very well • that Christ speaks here * of the prophets, whom they had slain, not of one who was

to be slain a little before the destruction of Jerusalem ; • for then none of the people could bave understood bis meaning

By the whole tenor of our Saviour's discourse, the Zacharias he speaks of is excluded from the number of those that were to be slain. If Zacharias, whom Josephus speaks of, was as good a man as he represents him, and did faithfully reprove the wickedness of the prevailing party of his nation, he might be one of those holy and wise men,' whom our Saviour foresaw would be slain by the Jews : but he can never be the Zacharias wbom our Saviour mentioned by name; for he is one of those prophets which had been slain before, and whose blood would be required of them.

i Comm. in Matt. xxiii. 36.



IT will be proper in the next place to consider the objection relating to Theudas. The ap

The apostles were brought before the council at Jerusalem, Acts v. 34-36. “ And when they took counsel to slay them, Gamaliel commanded to put the apostles forth a litile space; and said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves, what ye intend to do as touching these men. For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody, to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain, and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.”

This speech of Gamaliel was made not long after our Saviour's ascension : Ludovicus Cappellus places it in the beginning of Caligula's reign ; Whitby b and others, three or four years sooner, in the 20th of Tiberius, A. D. 34. And Gamaliel here speaks of Theudas, as having given disturbance before Judas of Galilee, who in the days of the taxing drew away much people. This refers doubtless to the assessment made by Cyrenius after Archelaus was deposed, when Judea was reduced to a Romano province: which happened in the sixth or seventh year of ihe christian æra. It was at this time that Judas, whom Josephus calls Judas Gaulanites, and likewise Judas the Galilean, raised disturbapces in that country.

But Josephus gives us an account of an impostor called Theudas, when Cuspius Fadus was procurator in Judea ; and therefore not before the fourth year of Claudius the * Spicileg. in Act. v. 36.

Whitby, Par. on this text. Jos. Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. ult. l. xviii. cap. 1. De B. Jud. lib. vii. cap. 8. sect. 1.



Roman emperor, A. D. 44, that is, seven years after Gamaliel's speech was made, according to Cappellus's computation, and ten years after it, according to Wbitby's.

Josephus's words are these : · Whilst Fadus was procu. rator of Judea, a certain impostor, called Theudas, persuaded • a very great multitude, taking their effects along with • them, to follow hiin to the river Jordan : for be said he * was a prophet, and that, causing the river to divide at his

command, he would give them an easy passage over. By • these speeches he deceived many : but Fadus was far from * suffering them to go on in their madness; for he sent out • a troop of horse, who, coming upon them unexpectedly, • slew many, and took many prisoners. Theudas bimself

was among the latter ; they cut off his head, and brought • it to Jerusalem. These things happened in Judea, while • Cuspius Fadus was

It may therefore be pretended, that St. Luke has made a mistake. The Theudas whom Josephus mentions appeared not till several years after Gamaliel's speech was made : nor bas Josepbus said any thing of any other. The person Gamaliel speaks of, is of the same name ; le likewise • boasted bimself to be somebody,' that is, a prophet: he was slain, and his followers were scattered. In these particulars Gamaliel and Josephus agree, therefore they mean the same person, but they differ most widely about the time; for which reason St. Luke must have been mistaken.

Divers solutions have been offered of this difficulty.

1. Some say, St. Luke might put the affair of Theudas into Garnalieľ's speech by way of anticipation. He kuew very well, that Theudas did not appear till after this time : but this being a very proper instance, and suitable to the main scope and design of the speech which Gamaliel made, he inserted it himself. But this is not at all agreeable to the simplicity of St. Luke's varration, especially considering bow particular he is as to the number of Theudas's followers : “ to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves." And one would think Valesius was at a loss for exainples of anticipation, when the only one he pro

1 Φαδε δε της Ιεδαιας επιτροπευοντος, γοης τις ανηρ, Θευδας ονοματι, πειθει τον πλεισον οχλον, αναλαβοντα τας κτησεις έπεσθαι προς τον Ιορδανης ποταμον αυτια προφητης γαρ ελεγεν ειναι, και προσαγματι τον ποταμον σχισας, διοδον εφη παρεξειν αυτοις ραδικιν και ταυτα λεγων πολλες ηπατησεν 8 μην ειασεν αυτες της αφροσυνης ονασθαι Φαδος, αλλ' εξεπεμψεν ελην ίππεων επ' αυτος, ήτις, απροσδοκητος επιπεσασα, πολλες μεν ανειλε, πολλες δε ζωντας ελαβεν αυτον τε τον θευδαν ζωγρησαντες αποτεμνεσι την κεφαλην, και κομιζεσιν εις Ιεροσολυμα τα μεν εν συμβαντα τοις Ιεδαιοις κατα της Κυσπιε Φαδα της επιτροπης χρονες, ταυτα εγενετο. Αnt. lib. XX. cap. 4. sect. 1.


duces is out of a poet, and that has scarce any resemblance with this before us.e

2. Some think that Josephus has been mistaken, and has misplaced Theudas's insurrection. Tbis solution Valesius prefers before the former, and it is approved likewise by Le Clerc. They understand Gamaliel to say, Before • these days,': that is, a little while ago, rose up Theudas,

boasting himself to be somebody.' And if you look farther back, h • before this man (not " after this man,” as we • render it,) rose up Judas of Galilee.'-Thus, according to Valesius, Josephus has not misplaced this event of Theudas above twelve years; but according to Mr. Le Clerc, the error is greater, for he supposes he rose up? A. D. 28.

But this kind of solutions appears to me perfectly arbi. trary, and not to be untying, but cutting the kuot; and I freely own I have no right to them. It is very unlikely, that Josephus should have been mistaken about ihe time of that Theudas's insurrection wbich he gives an account of : he may have made mistakes in chronology; but Josephus is very express here, that this affair happened in the time of Fadus, when be himself must have been seven years


age. And in my opinion these learned men give a wrong meaning to two expressions in Gamaliel's speech. It is not necessary to understand those words, · Before these days rose

Theudas,' of a • little wbile ago,' two or three years before : these common phrases are loose and undetermined in all languages, and signify sometimes a shorter, at others, a longer space of time; and the subject matter of the discourse, or the coherence of things, or some light from abroad, can alone determine what the space of time intended is. It

Alia quoque conciliandi ratio excogitari potest; si dicamus B. Lucam in eo loco κατα προληψιν locutum esse. Quæ quidem figura occurrit interdum apud antiquos scriptores, exempli causâ apud Virgilium, cum dicit:

-portusque require Velinos. Atqui, cum hæc dicerentur Æneæ, nondum condita erat Velia. Vales, Annot. in Euseb. H. E. ). ii. c. 11.

Clerici Histor. Eccl. A. D. 23. n. 60. 8 Προ γαρ τατων των ημερων ανεση Θευδας. Que verba rem nuper ac novissime factam demonstrant. Vales. ubi supra.

Sed quoniam Casaubonus negat Græcos unquam ita locutos fuisse, producendus est testis omni exceptione major. Is est Clemens Alexandrinus, qui, in lib. vii. Stromat. sub finem, eodem prorsus modo locutus est quo B. Lucas. --Nam Marcion iisdem quidem temporibus vixit quibus Basilides et Valentinus. Verum tanquam senior cum illis adhuc junioribus versatus est. Addit, deinde, μεθ' ον Σιμων επ' ολιγον κηρυσσοντος τε Πετρε υπηκεσεν. “Post quem Simon prædicantem Petrum audivit aliquamdiu. Quis non videt in hoc Clementis loco post hunc idem valere atque ante hunc,-sed et geographiæ scriptores, quoties terrarum situm et populorum nomina describunt, eodem loquuntur modo. Dicunt enim pera TotES ELOLV EKELVOL.

Id. ibid.


is said, Acts ix, 22, 23, But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which were at Damascus.

-And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took council to kill him." By these “ many days" can be meant but a short space of time, as appears from Gal. i. 17, 18. St. Paul tells Felix, Acts xxiv. 10, “ Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself :" though it is likely, Felix had not then been in Judea above five years. And yet it might be said very properly, that he had been there many years ;' since in five years time, a governor may be supposed to gain a good insight into the laws and customs of bis province, and the temper of the people; as also, because very often governors were removed in a shorter space of time. When Pilate's soldiers had marched into Jerusalem with ensigns, the Jews went from thence in a great body to Pilate at Cæsarea, and there made “supplica• tions,' Josephus i says, ' many days. But it appears presently afterwards, that on thek sixth day from their arrival, Pilate seated bimself on bis tribunal and granted their petition. So Josephus relates this in his Antiquities : in bis War these earnest supplications continued • five whole days! • and nights.

Thus these phrases, that seem to import a long duration, are much limited by the connexion of a discourse, or by the nature of the things spoken of: and other phrases, that denote ordinarily a shorter duration, must be understood sometimes with great latitude. There is an example in Jeremiab, chap. xxxi. 31, “ Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel." Ver. 33, “ After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts.'

I suppose no one think's these promises or predictions were to be accomplished presently. Porphyry says, ' that many of the ancients had been sup* posed to understand the sounds of birds and other animals, . and Apollonius TM of Tyana not long ago.' Apollonius died before the end of the first century of the christian æra : Porphyry was not born till the 232d or 233d year of the same æra. Every one must be sensible, with what latitude Porphyry's 'not long ago’ is to be understood. I place another remarkable example from Cicero in the margin.°

TOLEJE VOL ETL Tollas nuepas. Ant. l. xvii. cap. 4. sect. 1. Κατα έκτην ημεραν- -αυτος επι το βημα ηκε. ib. Επι πεντε ημερας και νυκτας ισας ακινητοι διεκαρτερον. 1. ii. c. 9. sect. 2. η “Ως επι μεν των παλαιων ο Μελαμπος,-και οι τοιοτοι, 8 προ πολλα δε Atollwvios ó Tvavevç. Porphyr. de Abst. I. iii. c. 3.

'n Vid. Luc. Kolsten. de Vit. et Script. Porphyr. cap. 2.

• Quid ea, quæ nuper,



[ocr errors]


« PreviousContinue »