Upon the whole, I continue to think that at least a month muft be allowed for Jefus's abode in Judea.

Let us fuppofe that Cana was fituated to the West beyond Nazareth and Sephoris, and that its diftance from that part of Judea in which Jefus dwelt was fifty or fixty miles. On this journey Jefus paffed probably two whole days in Samaria, John iv. 40, 43: and if a Sabbath intervened, and fome attention was occafionally paid to his miniftry (John iv. 34), it cannot have occupied less than fix or seven days.

Jefus's prefence in Cana is notified at Capernaum, distant about twenty-three miles. One of Herod's court attends Jefus, requests that he would heal his fon, receives affurance that his fon fhould live about one in the afternoon according to our computation, and the next day meets his fervants coming from Capernaum to inform him of his fon's recovery. Jefus therefore must have remained at Cana a few days: let us fay four.

Luke iv. 15, Jefus teaches in the fynagogues of Galilee: and this teaching is diftinct from that in his circuit through Galilee after the call of Peter, &c. Luke iv. 43, 44. It is alfo diftinct from his teaching in the fynagogue at Nazareth; for it precedes it. Cum jam in Galilææ fynagogis aliis magnam fibi auctoritatem comparaffet, tum venit Nazareth. Chemn. Harm. p. 351. In thefe public inftructions not lefs than two Sabbaths, or eight days, can be employed.

Luke iv. 16. Jefus is one Sabbath at Nazareth; and probably his benevolence led him to pafs a few days there previous to that Sabbath. We will fuppofe him then to have continued four days in his own city.

Then, Matth. iv. 13, Jefus goes more than twenty miles from Nazareth to Capernaum and dwells there: for which we muft allow fome weeks, perhaps three. But it is objected that Jefus could not refide here for any long time, because, Matth. viii. 20, he intimates that he had no fixed habitation during his public miniftry. See Dr. Priestley's Harm. p. 54. Anfw. The words do not import that Jefus did not refide long in any place during his miniftry; but that he did not refide any where in a place of his own, that he had only a contingent and precarious habitation.

After this Jefus went about all Galilee, Matth. iv. 23, and the parallel verfes; his fame spread through all Syria, and they brought to him all their fick; ib. ver. 24; and particularly in a certain city he healed a leper, which occafioned him to remain out of the city in defert places, where they came to him from every quarter. Then he returned to Capernaum, healed a paralytic, and called Levi, A month is a moderate fpace of time for thefe tranfactions.

But

But Dr. Priestley objects (Harm. p. 55.) that Mark defcribing the very fame progrefs, in language fimilar to that of Matth. i. 38, 39; yet fays, ii. 1, that he entered again into Capernaum after fome days only. And, p. 140, 141, he places fix days between Jefus's departure from Capernaum and his return to it.

But it has been fhewn in loc. on the authority of the best critics, that ding imports as much as I fuppofe: and if as few days as Dr. Prieftley allows had been meant, the number would probably have been expreffed as Matth. xvii. 1. Luke ix. 28. John xii. 1.

The time allowed by Dr. Priestley for all the tranfactions, from leaving Judea, John iv. 3, to the arrival at Capernaum, Mark ii. 1, is only fifteen days. Harm. p. 140, 141. Let us fay now that from that part of Judea where Jefus dwelt to Cana was fifty miles, from Cana through Nazareth to Capernaum thirty miles, and let us allow that the progrefs about GaJilee did not exceed even feventy miles; and during these fifteen days, Jefus must have journied ten miles each day, including Sabbaths. I have endeavoured to fhew that we cannot, with any probability, affign a fhorter period for the incidents during this interval than ten weeks to which must be added five weeks for the continuance in Jerufalem during the paffover, and afterwards in Judea and fome of the phrases used by the Evangelifts are of fuch a latitude as to juftify the plan of this and many other Harmonies in extending this whole time to almoft a year. See John xxi. 25.

But, Ex. xxxiv. 22, wheat harveft was fifty days after barley harveft; and therefore, fuppofing the tranfaction of $33, "that is, Matth. xii. 1, &c. to have happened at this later harvest, it cannot be reduced to the fame year with the paffover mentioned § 20," that is, John ii. 13.

Jerome, indeed, fuppofes wheat harveft three months after barley harveft: fee Harmer, Obf. on Scripture, 2d Ed. i. 40: who obferves, "Nor can I eafily believe their wheat harvest was delayed to the clofe of July at prefent at Aleppo, barley harvest commences about the beginning of May, and the wheat as well as that is generally over by the 20th. In Barbary it comes at the latter end of May, or the beginning of June. Agreeably to this, Raimond de Agiles giveth us to understand that a great part of their harveft at Ramula or Ramah, was gathered in before the 6th of June in 1099." See alio p. 68, 69: where Fulcherius is quoted as faying, that the harvest at Ramula was ripe, but not gathered in, about the middle of May, 1102; and Haffelquift is faid to have eaten half ripe ears of wheat roafted on the 14th of May, N. S. And I find in Shaw, 4to. p. 335: "Barley, all over the Holy Land, was in

full

full ear in the beginning of April; and about the middle of that month it began to turn yellow; particularly in the southern districts. But wheat was very little of it in ear; and in the fields near Bethlehem and Jerufalem, the ftalk was little more than a foot high." Mr. Mann's note on Luke vi. 1, is, “ It was ἐν σαββατῳ δευτεροπρώτῳ, which could not be later than April. Philo de vita Mofis, 1. 2, fays, Barley and wheat in that country are ripe at the vernal equinox, p. 503. Ifidorus of Pelufium fays, at the time of the Jewish paffover. V. Petav. var. Differt. 1. 2. c. 11." Engl. ed. p. 169. See Philo, p. 686, ed. Par. 1640, where wheat and barley are faid to be ripe, TEXEIcovstada, in the first month. [His note in the Latin ed. is, Ἐν σαββάτῳ δευτεροπρώτῳ, feu poft pafcha primo, itaque Aprilis 7°, quo tempore fegetes in Judæa maturæ erant. Lev. xxiii. 10.] Dr. Priestley has extended this time to the third Sabbath after the whole pafchal feftival. Harm. p. 140, 141.

There is no difficulty as to the remaining part of our Lord's miniftry a paffover being mentioned, John vi. 4; and Mark vi. 39, and the parallel places, implying that it was fpring: (fee the Obfervations on § 63:) and our Lord being crucified at another paffover.'

Bifhop Newcome juftly confiders the difcourfe on the Mount, Matth. v. 6, 7, as the fame with that Luke vi. and places it, according to St. Luke's arrangement, immediately after the appointment of the twelve apoftles. In anfwer to an objection drawn from the difference in the difcourfes themselves, he introduces the following remarks on the coincidence of expreffion which may be obferved in the narratives of different Evangelifts.

66

It is plain,' fays his Lordfhip, that the oppofitions and amplifications in St. Luke are virtually contained in St. Matthew and Grotius fays, me, ne diverfas effe narrationes putem, movent-Exordium idem, eademque peroratio." He might have added, that there is great fimilarity in the order throughout, and that St. Luke has not one precept diftinct in every part. The truth is, thefe difcourfes differ no more than the two prayers delivered by our Lord, Matth. vi. 9, &c. and Luke xi. 2, &c. if we take the latter from MSS. and not from the prefent text; which is accommodated to Matthew, as many places in the Gofpels are to parallel ones. The famenefs of phrafe in the relations of the Evangelifts may be accounted for from this caufe. Homonymiis et redundantiis Anfam fubinde præbuere collationes privatæ, et deinceps magis folennes Harmoniæ Evangelicæ, pio et utili ftudio circa tertium feculum a Tatiano primum, dein Eufebio adornata; unde cognatæ voces, in margine primum adfcriptæ, exinde in textum admittebantur. Hac de re querelam primum inftituit D. Hieron.

Hieron. præf. ad 4 Evan. ad Damafum. "Magnus hic in noftris codicibus error inolevit, dum quod in eadem re alius Evangelifta plus dixit, in alio quia minus putaverint, addiderunt. Vel dum eundem fenfum alius aliter expreffit, ille qui unum e quatuor primum legerat, ad ejus exemplum ceteros quoque exiftimavit emendandos." Pref. to Bp. Fell's Greek Teftament. Oxf. 1675. Dr. Prieftley has ingeniously fuggefted another reafon for coincidence of expreffion and of arrangement in the Evangelifts; that, before they wrote, detached memoirs of Jesus's hiftory might have been committed to writing by the apoftles themselves, or by others from the mouths of the apoftles, which might have ferved as common originals. Harm. p. 72, 73, 87.'

The Bishop, in a note which we cannot tranfcribe or abridge, endeavours to prove that Levi's feaft fucceeded his call by an interval of at leaft fix months; he replies, we think, fatisfactorily to the objections which have been made to this arrangement; and obferves from Chemnitius, that these two events were feparated in all the ancient Harmonies, from Tatian in A. D. 170, to Gerfon in A. D. 1400.

Bishop Pearce, in his Commentary on the Gospels, &c. obferves that the phrafe is To Tepav is fometimes ufed when the place to which it refers, was on the fame fide of the water, provided a small bay or arm of the fea was crofled to reach it. Bishop Newcome has a note on the fituation of Bethfaida and the neighbouring towns, p. 28, the fubftance of which, though without intention, very much confirms his Lordship's remark. Dr. Newcome thus reconciles Matth. xvi. 4, and Mark vi.

12.

St. Mark means that Jefus ftrongly refufed the Pharifees and Sadducees fuch a particular fign from heaven as they at that time required; probably a sign that Jefus was to work out for them a temporal deliverance, fays Lardner: Cred. 1. 2. 90. ed. 3. Jewish Teftim. 1. 62. However, St. Matthew adds, that hereafter there would be a moft decifive proof of his milion. Both Evangelifts agree that, according to our Lord's manner, no prefent fign would be granted at their demand.'

In our review of Bithop Pearce's Commentary we gave our Readers his Lordship's learned and judicious note on Matth. xxvii. 63, to prove that μET TOEs nuiças is fometimes equivalent to T TeíTη nμśça. To the authorities which Dr. Pearce has alleged, Dr. Newcome adds, Deut. xiv. 28, comp. xxvi. 12: John xx. 26: Matth. xxvi. 2: xxvii. 63, 4: Mark xiv. 1. H. Stephens ther. voc. μετα, μεθ ̓ ἡμέρας δύο, fecundo poft die. Et Plin. Cæfa fpina Egyptiaca anno tertio refurgit, pro his Theophrafti, ὅταν δὲ κοπη, μετὰ τρίτον ἔτις Uus dvabe8λasons. And R. Stephens voc. poft. Cic. 3 Att. 7.

Eo

Eo die pueri tui mihi a te literas reddiderunt: et alii pueri, poft diem tertium ejus diei, literas alias attulerunt. h. e. Tertio die poftquam priores acceperam. See alfo a like mode of expreffion, Luke ii. 21, compared with chap. i. 59."

Dr. Newcome is of opinion that the journey mentioned Luke ix. 51. xiii. 22. xiv. 25. xvii. 11, 12, was one and the fame journey; and from the feries of the hiftory concludes, that it was not our Lord's laft journey to Jerufalem, but that which he took when he went up to the feast of dedication. John

X. 22.

His Lordship separates the inftitution of the cup in the Lord's Supper from that of the bread, and places in the interval, John, chap. xiv. His reafons are, that the bread was broken, &c. εσθιόντων αὐτῶν, while they were eating, the cup given μετα To devno, after they had fupped; that the apostles being deeply affected by fo expreffive a fign or fymbol of his body broken, the difcourfe in John, c. xiv. was very pertinent; and that John xv. follows not unfuitably the inftitution of the cup. This we mention as a fingular opinion rather than as a probable circumftance.

We could willingly notice our Author's sentiments and remarks upon feveral other interefting paffages of the Evangelical hiftory; but we pass them over in order to lay before our Readers the refult of his inquiries respecting the transactions of that day on which our Lord arose from the dead.

The series of events,' fays his Lordship, is this: On the morning of the first day of the week, about the beginning of the fourth divifion of the night, Jefus rifes from the dead. A great earthquake happens about the time of his refurrection; and an angel appears, who rolls away the ftone from the mouth of the cave, fits on it, and ftrikes the keepers with great fear.

After Jefus's refurrection, many bodies of the faints arise from their graves, and appear to many in Jerufalem.

Mary Magdalene, Mary the Mother of James, Salome, Joanna, and certain other women, go very early to the fepulchre, intending to pay honour to the body of Jefus by embalming it. On the way, they confult about removing the ftone, which they knew was rolled against the mouth of the fepulchre; but on their approach they find it removed; they enter into the cave, and two angels fuddenly appear to them, one of whom fits on the right hand, and mildly addreffes them.

Being commanded to affure the difciples of Jefus's resurrection, and that he would go before them into Galilee; they return to Jerufalem, and relate all these things to the eleven, and all the reft, and Mary Magdalene herself communicates them to Peter and John.