ple. (48.)

itself.

cordingly, when they found that the second temple fell short, deserve to be compared with Homer, on account of his beauat least in their opinion, of the model of the temple de- tiful conceptions, his illustrious comparisons, and his extenscribed by Ezekiel, they supposed the prophecy to refer, at sive knowledge of various subjects, particularly of architecleast in part, to the period now mentioned: and, doubtless, ture. Bishop Lowth, in his twenty-first lecture on the sacred the temple and temple worship were a figure of Christ's poetry of the Hebrews, gives us the following description of church, frequently represented in the New Testament under the peculiar and discriminating characters of this prophet. the metaphor of a temple, in allusion to the beauty, sym"Ezekiel," says he, "is much inferior to Jeremiah in elemetry, and firmness of that erected by Solomon, to its or- gance; in sublimity he is not even excelled by Isaiah: but derly worship, and to the manifestations of the divine pre-his sublimity is of a totally different kind. He is deep, vesence there vouchsafed. This section comprises the last hement, tragical; the only sensation he affects to excite is nine chapters of Ezekiel's prophecy; which are thus ana- the terrible; his sentiments are elevated, fervid, full of fire, lyzed by Dr. Smith :2 indignant; his imagery is crowded, magnificent, terrific, Sometimes almost to disgust; his language is pompous, solemn, austere, rough, and at times unpolished: he employs frequent repetitions, not for the sake of grace or elegance, but from the vehemence of passion and indignation. Whatever subject he treats of, that he sedulously pursues, from that he rarely departs, but cleaves as it were to it; whence the connection is in general evident and well preserved. In many respects he is perhaps excelled by the other prophets; but in that species of composition to which he seems by nature adapted, the forcible, the impetuous, the great and solemn,not one of the sacred writers is superior to him. His diction is sufficiently perspicuous, all his obscurity consists in the nature of the subject. Visions (as for instance, among others, those of Hosea, Amos, and Jeremiah) are necessarily dark and confused. The greater part of Ezekiel, towards the middle of the book especially, is poetical, whether we regard the matter or the diction." His periods, however, are frequently so rude, that Bishop Lowth expresses himself as being often at a loss how to pronounce concerning his performance in this respect. In another place the same learned prelate remarks, that Ezekiel should be oftener classed among the orators than the poets; and he is of opinion that, with respect to style, we may justly assign to Ezekiel the same rank among the Hebrews, as Homer, Simonides, and Eschylus hold among the Greeks.

(12-27.)

Ch. xl. contains a description of the two outer courts, and of the cham.
bers belonging to them (1-47.), together with the porch of the tem
Ch. xli. describes the measures, parts, and ornaments of the temple
Ch. xlii. describes the priests' chambers and their use, and the dimen
sions of the holy mount on which the temple stood.
Ch. xliii. represents the glory of the Lord as returning to the temple,
where God promises to fix his residence, if his people repent and for-
sake those sins which caused him to depart from them. (1-11.) The
measures of the altar and the ordinances relating to it are set down.
Ch. xliv. describes the glory of God as actually returned to the temple,
and reproves the Jews for suffering idolatrous priests to profane the
temple with their ministrations. (1—14.) Ordinances are then given
for the deportment of God's true priests, and the maintenance due to
Ch. xlv. appoints the several portions of land for the sanctuary and its
ministers (1—5.), for the city (6.), and for the prince (7, 8.); and insti-
tutes various ordinances concerning the provisions for the ordinary
Ch. xlvi. (16-21.) gives directions concerning the inheriting of any part
of the prince's portion, and also concerning the boiling and baking any
part of the holy oblations.

them. (15-31.)

and extraordinary sacrifices. (9-25. xlvi. 1-15.)

Ch. xlvii. contains the vision of the holy waters issuing out of the tem ple, and their virtue (1-12.); a most beautiful emblem of the gradual progress of the Gospel, and of the power of divine grace under it, which is capable of healing all but the incorrigibly impenitent and hypocrites; who, in verse 11., are compared to marshy ground, which, after all the care or culture that can be bestowed upon it, continues barren and unprofitable. The extent and division of the Holy Land are then described, which is to be indiscriminately shared between the Israelites and proselytes sojourning among them (13-23.); mystically denoting the incorporation of the Gentiles into the same church with the Jews. (Compare Eph. iii. 6.)

Ch. xlviii. comprises a description of the several portions of land belong: ing to each tribe (1-7. 23-29.); together with the portions allotted to the sanctuary (8-14.), the city (15-19.), and the prince (20-22.); and also the measures and names of the gates of the new city.

(30-35.)

The points in these prophecies, which are principally worthy of attention, are the following:

1. That the prophet, more than one hundred miles distant from the scene, should have announced the beginning of the siege of Jerusalem on the very day it took place; and, like Jeremiah, should have constantly predicted the conquest and destruction of the city, and the carrying away of the inhabi

tants.

2. That he should have foreseen also the flight of Zedekiah through the broken walls at night, together with these circumstances; viz. that he should be overtaken by the Chaldæans, and that he should not be slain, but carried into their country, which, however, he should not see. This was verified by Nebuchadnezzar's causing his eyes to be put out. 3. That moreover, like Jeremiah, he should plainly predict the return of the Jews to their country, and their perseverance in the worship of God,-events so remote and in themselves improbable, and also the conquest of Idumæa by the Hebrews.

4. That he should have announced not only the demolition of Tyre, to be rebuilt no more (for the new city was founded upon an island), but also that its ruins should be thrown into prediction which Alexander unconsciously veri

the sea;

fied.

5. Lastly, that like Jeremiah, he should have foretold the advent of Messiah the great son of David, at a period when David's family were deprived of royal dignity.

V. Most biblical critics concur in opinion as to the excellency and sublimity of Ezekiel's style. Grotius observes, that he possessed great erudition and genius; so that, setting aside his gift of prophecy, which is incomparable, he may

edly in the Revelation of St. John, who not only describes the heavenly sanctuary by representations taken from the Jewish temple (see Rev. xi. 19. xiv. 17. xv. 5.8), but also transcribes several of Ezekiel's expressions (Rev. iv. 2, 3. 6. xi. 1, 2. xxi. 12. &c., xxii. 1, 2.); and borrows his allusions from the state of the first temple, not of the second temple which existed in our Saviour's time; as if the former had a more immediate reference to the times of the Gospel. Compare Rev. iv. 1. &c. with Ezek i. 6. et seq.

-Lowth on Ezek. xl.

1 Reeves and Lowth on Ezek. xl. View of the Prophets, pp. 153, 154.

• Præf. ad Ezechiel. in Crit. Sacr. tom. iv. p. 8.

From this high praise of Bishop Lowth's, his learned annotator, Michaelis, dissents; and is so far from esteeming Ezekiel as equal to Isaiah in sublimity, that he is disposed to think the prophet displays more art and luxuriance in amplifying and decorating his subject, than is consistent with poetical fervour, or, indeed, with true sublimity. Michaelis further pronounces Ezekiel to be in general an imitator, who possesses the art of giving an air of novelty and ingenuity, but not of grandeur and sublimity, to all his compositions; and is of opinion that, as the prophet lived at a period when the Hebrew language was visibly on the decline; and also that, if we compare him with the Latin poets who succeeded the Augustan age, we may find some resemblance in the style, something that indicates the old age of poetry. In these sentiments the English translator of Bishop Lowth's lectures partially acquiesces, observing that Ezekiel's fault is a want of neither novelty nor sublimity, but of grace and uniformity; while Eichhorn minutely discusses his claims to originality. Archbishop Newcome, however, has completely vindicated the prophet's style. He observes, with equal truth and judgment, that Ezekiel is not to be considered as the framer of those august and astonishing visions, and of those admirable poetical representations which he committed to writing; but as an instrument in the hands of God, who vouchsafed to reveal himself, through a long succession of ages, not only in divers parts constituting a magnificent and uniform whole, but also in different manners, as by voice, by dreams, by inspiration, and by plain or enigmatical vision. If he is circumstantial in describing the wonderful scenes which were presented to him in the visions of God, he should be regarded as a faithful representer of the divine revelations, for the purpose of information and instruction, and not as exhausting an exuberant fancy in minutely filling up an ideal picture. The learned prelate thinks it probable that Buzi, the prophet's father, had preserved his own family from the taint of idolatry, and had educated his son for the priestly office in all the learning of the Hebrews, and particularly in he study of their sacred books. Being a youth at the time of his captivity,-a season of life when the fervour of imagination is natural in men of superior endowments,-his genius led him to amplification, like that of some of the Roman poets; though he occasionally shows himself capable of the austere and concise style, of which the seventh chapter is a remarkable instance. But the Divine Spirit did not overrule the natural bent of his mind. Variety is thus produced in the

Bishop Lowth's Lectures, vol. ii. pp. 89-95.

SECT. IV. § 2.]

sacred writings. Nahum sounds the trumpet of war; Hosea when he treats of the advent of the Messiah, whom he is sententious, Isaiah sublime, Jeremiah pathetic, Ezekiel emphatically terms "the desire of all nations." copious. This diffuseness of manner in mild and affectionate exhortation, this vehement enlarging on the guilt and consequent sufferings of his countrymen, seems wisely adapted to their capacities and circumstances, and must have had a forcible tendency to awaken them from their lethargy.1 | I.

SECTION IV.

ON THE PROPHETS WHO FLOURISHED AFTER THE RETURN OF
THE JEWS FROM BABYLON.

§ 1. ON THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET HAGGAI.
I. Author and date.—II. Argument and scope.-III. Analysis
of its contents.-IV. Observations on its style.

BEFORE CHRIST, 520-518.

I. NOTHING is certainly known concerning the tribe or birth-place of Haggai, the tenth in order of the minor prophets, but the first of the three who were commissioned to make known the divine will to the Jews after their return from captivity. The general opinion, founded on the assertion of the pseudo-Epiphanius, is that he was born at Babylon, and was one of the Jews who returned with Zerubbabel, in consequence of the edict of Cyrus. The same author affirms that he was buried at Jerusalem among the priests, whence some have conjectured that he was of the family of Aaron. The times of his predictions, however, are so distinctly marked by himself, that we have as much certainty on this point as we have with respect to any of the prophets.

II. The Jews, who were released from captivity in the first year of the reign of Cyrus (Ezra i. 1. et seq.), having returned to Jerusalem and commenced the rebuilding of the temple (Ezra ii. iii.), were interrupted in their undertakings by the neighbouring satraps, who contrived to prejudice the Persian monarch (the pseudo-Smerdis) against them (Ezra iv. 1. with 24.) until the second year of Darius. Discouraged by these impediments, the people ceased, for fourteen years, to prosecute the erection of the second temple, as if the time were not yet come, and applied themselves to the building of their own houses: but God, disposing that sovereign to renew the decree of Cyrus, raised up the prophet Haggai about the year 520 before Christ; and, in consequence of his exhortations, they resumed the work, which was completed in a few years.

Further, in order to encourage them to proceed in this undertaking, the prophet assured them from God, that the glory of this latter house should far exceed the glory of the former.

III. The book of the prophet Haggai comprises three distinct prophecies or discourses, viz.

DISCOURSE 1. The prophet reproves the delay of the people in
rebuilding the temple; which neglect he denounces as the
reason why they were punished with great drought and un-
productive seasons. (i. 1-12.) He then encourages them to
undertake the work, and promises them Divine assistance.
(13-15.)
DISCOURSE 2. The prophet further encourages the builders by a
promise, that the glory of the second temple should surpass
that of the first; and that in the following year God would
bless them with a fruitful harvest. (ii. 1-19.) This pro-
phecy was fulfilled by Jesus Christ honouring the second
temple with his presence, and there publishing his saving doc-
trine to the world. See Luke xix. 47. xx. 1. xxi. 38. John
xviii. 20.2

DISCOURSE 3. The prophet foretells the setting up of the Mes-
siah's kingdom under the name of Zerubbabel. (ii. 20—23.)
IV. The style of this prophet is for the most part plain
and prosaic, and vehement when he reproves; it is, however,
interspersed with passages of much sublimity and pathos

Archbishop Newcome's Preface to his Translation of Ezekiel, pp. xxvii. xxviii. To justify the character above given, the learned prelate descends to particulars (which we have not room to specify), and gives opte examples, not only of the clear, the flowing, and the nervous, but also of the sublime. He concludes his observations on the style of Ezekiel by stating it to be his deliberate opinion, that, if the prophet's "style is the old age of the Hebrew language and composition, it is a firm and vigor. one, and should induce us to trace its youth and manhood with the most assiduous attention." Ibid. pp. xxviii.-lxii. W. Lowth's Commentary on Haggai.

§ 2. ON THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET ZECHARIAH. Author and date.—II. Analysis of its contents.—III. Observations on its style.-IV. The last six chapters proved to be genuine.

BEFORE CHRIST, 520-518.

I. ALTHOUGH the names of Zechariah's father and grandfather are specified (Zech. i. 1.), it is not known from what tribe or family this prophet was descended, nor where he was born; but that he was one of the captives who returned to Jerusalem in consequence of the decree of Cyrus, is unquestionable. As he opened his prophetic commission in the eighth month of the second year of Darius the son of Hystaspes, that is, about the year 520 before the Christian æra, it is evident that he was contemporary with Haggai, and his authority was equally effectual in promoting the building of the temple. From an expression in ch. ii. 4. we have every reason to believe that Zechariah was called to the prophetic ministry when he was a young man.

II. The prophecy of Zechariah consists of two parts, the first of which concerns the events which were then taking place, viz. the restoration of the temple, interspersing predic tions relative to the advent of the Messiah. The second part comprises prophecies relative to more remote events, particularly the coming of Jesus Christ, and the war of the Romans against the Jews.

PART I. contains the Prophecies delivered in the second Year of
Darius King of Persia. (i.—vi.)
DISCOURSE 1. An exhortation to the Jews who had returned
from captivity, to guard against those sins which had drawn
so much distress upon their ancestors, and to go on with the
building of the temple (i. 1-6.), which it is predicted that
Darius should permit (7-17.); and that the Samaritans
should be compelled to suspend their opposition to the build-
ing. (18-21.) Further to encourage the Jews in their work,
the prophet foretells the prosperity of Jerusalem (ii. 1—–5.),
and admonishes the Jews to depart from Babylon before her
destruction (6-9.), promising them the divine presence.
(10-13.) These promises, though primarily to be under-
stood of the Jews after their return from Babylon, are secon-
darily and principally to be understood of the restoration of the
Jews, and their conversion to the Gospel.

DISCOURSE 2. Under the type of Joshua the high-priest, clothed
with new sacerdotal attire, is set forth the glory of Christ as
the chief corner-stone of his church. (8-10.)
DISCOURSE 3. Under the vision of the golden candlestick and
two olive trees is typically represented the success of Zerub-
babel and Joshua in rebuilding the temple and restoring its
service. (iv.)

DISCOURSE 4. Under the vision of a flying roll, the divine judg-
ments are denounced against robbery and perjury (v. 1—4.);
and the Jews are threatened with a second captivity, if they
continue in sin, (5—11.)

DISCOURSE 5. Under the vision of the four chariots, drawn by several sorts of horses, are represented the succession of the Babylonians, Persians, Macedo-Greek and Roman empires (vi. 1-8.), and by the two crowns placed upon the head of Joshua are set forth primarily, the re-establishment of the civil and religious polity of the Jews under Zerubbabel and Joshua; and, secondarily but principally, the high-priesthood and kingdom of Christ, here emphatically termed the Branch (9-15.), who is to be both king and high-priest of the church of God.

PART 2. Prophecies delivered in the fourth Year of the Reign of Darius. (vii.—xiv.)

DISCOURSE 1. Some Jews having been sent to Jerusalem from the exiles then at Babylon, to inquire of the priests and prophets whether they were still bound to observe the fasts that had been instituted on account of the destruction of Jerusalem, and which had been observed during the captivity (vii. 1-3.),-the prophet is commanded to take this occasion of enforcing upon them the weightier matters of the law, viz. judgment and mercy, lest the same calamities should befall them which had been inflicted upon their fathers for their neglect of those duties. (4-14.) In the event of their obedience, God promises the continuance of his favour (viii. 1—8.) ;

they are encouraged to go on with the building (9-17.), and are permitted to discontinue the observance of the fasts which they had kept during the captivity. (18-23.) DISCOURSE 2. Contains predictions of the conquest of Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine, by Alexander the Great (ix. 1-7.), and of the watchful providence of God over his temple in those troublesome times. (8.). Whence he takes occasion to describe, as in a parenthesis, the advent of Christ (9, 10. with Matt. xxi. 5. and John xii. 15.); and then returning to his former subject, he announces the conquest of the Jews, particularly of the Maccabees, over the princes of the Grecian monarchy. (11—17.) Prosperity is further promised to the Jews (x. 1-3.), and their victories over their enemies are again foretold. (4-12.) It is probable that this prophetic discourse remains to be fully accomplished in the general and final re

storation of the Jews.

siah.

DISCOURSE 3. predicts the rejection of the Jews for their rejection of Messiah, and valuing him and his labours at the base price of thirty pieces of silver. (xi.) This prediction was literally fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. (Compare Matt. xxvi. 14, 15. and xxvii. 3-10. with Zech. xi. 11-13.) The Jews themselves have expounded this prophecy of the MesDISCOURSE 4. comprises a series of prophecies, relating principally to the latter times of the Gospel. The former part of it (xii. 1-9.) announces the preservation of Jerusalem against an invasion in the last ages of the world, which most commentators think is that of Gog and Magog, more largely described in the thirty-eighth and thirty-ninth chapters of Ezekiel. The grief of the Jews, for their fathers having crucified the Messiah, on their conversion, is then foretold (10-14.), as also the crucifixion itself, and the general conversion of the Jews. (xiii.) The destruction of their enemies, predicted at the beginning of this prophetic sermon, is again foretold (xiv. 1—15.); and the prophecy concludes with announcing the final conversion of all nations to the Gospel, and the prosperity of the church. (16-21.)

2. It is urged, that many things are mentioned in these chapters, which by no means correspond with Zechariah's time; as, when events are foretold, which had actually taken place before that time. But it may be questioned, whether those subjects of prophecy have been rightly understood; and whether that, which has been construed as having reference to past transactions, may not in reality terminate in others of a later period, and some perhaps which are yet to come.

3. Another argument is drawn from ch. xi., which contains a prophecy of the destruction of the temple and people of the Jews; a prophecy, "which (it has been said) is not agreeable to the scope of Zechariah's commission, who, together with his colleague Haggai, was sent to encourage the people, lately returned from captivity, to build their temple, This, it is granted,

and to restore their commonwealth."
was the general scope of Zechariah's commission in the first
eight chapters; nor would it have been a fit time to foretell
the destruction of both the temple and commonwealth, while
they were but yet building. But, between the date of these
first chapters and that of the succeeding ones, many circum-
rise to a commission of a very different complexion from the
stances might have occurred, and certainly did occur, to give
and fourth years of the reign of Darius; to the latter, no
foregoing. The former are expressly dated in the second
date at all is annexed. Darius is supposed to have reigned
thirty-six years; and the Jews have a tradition that the three
prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, did not die before
the last year of that king's reign. Adınitting, then, Zecha-
riah to have prophesied again towards the close of his life,
he may well be supposed to have published without any in-
congruity, after such an interval, what would not altogether
have accorded with the period and purport of his first com-
mission. And as there is good reason to believe that this
was the case; so upon this ground we may also not improba-
bly conclude him to have been that very Zechariah of whom
our Saviour spake (Matt. xxiii. 35.) as slain between the
temple and the altar. For he was, according to our Saviour's
description, the son of Barachias, and comes in-where,
from what is said of him he might naturally be expected-
at the close of that series of prophets (for there were none
after him until the coming of Christ) who were put to death
in the faithful discharge of their duty. That he was become
obnoxious to his countrymen, may be collected from ch. xi. 8.
And, if the records of the Old Testament are silent concern-
ing his death, let it be remembered that it was a very small
part of them, if any, that was written after that event.

III. Zechariah is the longest of the twelve minor prophets. His style, like that of Haggai, is for the most part prosaic, though more obscure towards the beginning on account of his types and visions. But the difficulties arising from his alleged obscurity may be accounted for by the fact, "that some of his predictions relate to matters which are still involved in the womb of futurity: no wonder, then, that these fall not within the reach of our perfect comprehension. Others there are, which we have good reason to believe have already been fulfilled, but do not appear with such a degree of 4. Lastly, upon the same supposition, the allowed difevidence, as they probably would have done, if we had been ference of style and manner may be accounted for, not only better informed concerning the time and facts to which they as arising from the diversity of the subject, but from the dif relate. With respect to the emblems and types that are ex-ferent age of the author; who may well be credited to have hibited, they are most of them of easy and determinate ap- he was but a youth, as he is said to be in ch. ii. 4. written with more dignity in his advanced years, than when plication. And in favour of the importance of his subject matter, it must be acknowledged that, next to Isaiah, Zechariah is the most evangelical of all the prophets, having more frequent and more clear and direct allusions to the character and coming of the Messiah, and his kingdom, than any of the rest. Nor in his language and composition do we find any particular bias to obscurity, except that the quickness and suddenness of the transitions are sometimes apt to confound the boundaries of discourse, so as to leave the less attentive reader at a loss to whom the several parts of it are to be ascribed. But upon the whole we shall find the diction remarkably pure, the construction natural and perspicuous, and the style judiciously varied according to the nature of the subject; simple and plain in the narrative and historical I. Author and date.-II. Occasion and scope of his prophecy. parts; but in those that are wholly prophetical, the latter chapters in particular, rising to a degree of elevation and grandeur scarcely inferior to the sublimest of the inspired writings."

IV. The diversity of style observable in the writings of this prophet has induced many modern critics to conclude that the last six chapters could not have been written by Zechariah: but their objections, however formidable in appearance, admit of an easy and satisfactory solution.

1. It is alleged that the evangelist Matthew (xxvii. 9.) cites a passage now found in Zech. xi. 13. as spoken, not by Zechariah, but by Jeremiah. But it is more probable (as we have already shown in the first volume of this work), that the name of Jeremiah has slipped into the text through some mistake of the transcribers.

Dr Blayney's Translation of Zechariah, Prel. Disc. pp. xv. xvi.

Upon the whole this conclusion may be drawn; that, setting aside the doubtful authority of St. Matthew's text, there is nothing else to be found sufficient to invalidate the title of Zechariah to the chapters in question; and, conse quently, that it was not written by Jeremiah, as Mede, Dr Hammond, and others have supposed, nor before the time of that prophet, as Archbishop Newcome conjectured, whose opinion was adopted by Archbishop Secker, and also by

Doederlein.

$3. ON THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET MALACHI.

-III. Analysis of its contents.-IV. Style.

BEFORE CHRIST, 436--420.

I. CONCERNING Malachi, the last of the minor prophets (which name signifies my angel or my messenger), so little is known, that it has been doubted whether his name be a of the Lord, a messenger, a prophet. From a comparison proper name, or only a generic name, signifying the angel of Haggai (i. 13.) with Malachi (iii. 1.), it appears, that in those times the appellation of Malach-Jehovah, or the messenger of the Lord, was given to the prophets. The Septuagint translators have rendered Malachi his angel instead of my

2 Dr. Blayney's Translation of Zechariah, pp. 35-37. The genuineness of the latter part of the prophecy of Zechariah is satisfactorily proved, by a minute examination of its language, style, poetical structure, argument, and scope, by Dr. F. B. Koester, in his Meletemata Critica in Zecharia Prophetæ Partem posteriorem, cap. ix.-xiv. pro tuenda ejus authentià. Svo. Gottingæ, 1819.

CHAPTER V,

ON THE APOCRYPHA.4

1. Account of the First Book of Esdras.-H. Of the Second Book of Esdras.-III. Of the Book of Tobit.-IV. Of the Book of Judith V. Of the rest of the Chapters of Esther.-VI. Of the Book of Wisdom.-VII. Of the Book of Ecclesiasticus.— VIII. Of Baruch.-IX. Of the Song of the Three Children.-X. Of the History of Susanna.-XI. Of Bel and the Dragon. -XII. Of the Prayer of Manasses.-XIII. Of the Book of Maccabees.

I. Ir is not known at what time the FIRST BOOK OF ESDRAS | Nehemiah, which, however, it contradicts in many instances. was written it is only extant in Greek, and in the Alexandrian manuscript it is placed before the canonical book of Ezra, and is there called the first book of Ezra, because the events related in it occurred prior to the return from the Babylonish captivity. In some editions of the Septuagint it is called the first book of the priest (meaning Ezra), the authentic book of Ezra being called the second book. In the editions of the Latin Vulgate, previous to the council of Trent, this and the following book are styled the third and fourth books of Esdras, those of Esdras and Nehemiah being entitled the first and second books. The author of this book is not known; it is compiled from the books of Ezra and Jahn's Introduction, p. 435.

II. In what language the SECOND BOOK OF ESDRAS was ori2 Archbishop Newcome's Minor Prophets, p. xliii. Kennicott, Disser-ginally written, it seems impossible at this distant period to tatio Generalis, § 14. p. 6. Dr. Hales's Analysis of Chronology, vol. ii. determine with certainty. Morinus conjectures that it was Hebrew, or perhaps Chaldee, from which it was translated into Greek, and thence into Latin: and this conjecture he

grounds upon what he considers to be its evidently Jewish | inculcates, have imparted to it an interest, which has rendered style and phraseology. Archbishop Laurence thinks it highly it one of the most popular of the apocryphal writings. probable that the Latin version was immediately and literally IV. The BOOK OF JUDITH professes to relate the defeat of taken from the Greek it is indisputably of very high anti- the Assyrians by the Jews, through the instrumentality of quity. It is also extant in an Arabic translation, the date of their countrywoman Judith, whose genealogy is recorded in which is unknown, and in an Ethiopic version (where it is the eighth chapter; but so many geographical, historical, called the first book of Esdras), which cannot be traced and chronological difficulties attend this book, that Luther, higher than the fourth century: both, however, seem to be Grotius, and other eminent critics, have considered it rather taken from the Greek, and differ considerably from the Latin as a drama or parable than a real history. Dr. Prideaux, version which last, in the judgment of Dr. Laurence, may however, is of opinion that it carries with it the air of a true be advantageously corrected by the other two. In the Ethio- history in most particulars, except that of the long-continued pic version, it is termed the first book of Esdras. Both this peace said to have been procured by Judith; which, accordand the Arabic versions have only from Chapter III. to Chap-ing to the account given in this book, must have continued ter XIV. inclusive. The remaining chapters, as found in eighty years. But, as the Jews never enjoyed a peace of so the Latin Vulgate, have clearly no connection with it, but long continuance since they were a nation, he is disposed to form two separate apocryphal pieces, and are thus dis- allow that circumstance to be a fiction, though he is inclined tinguished in almost all the manuscripts of the Vulgate, to think that the book in other respects is a true history. In though they are now printed as part of the second book of opposition to this opinion, it has been contended by HeidegEsdras. ger, Moldenhawer, and others, that if it were a true history, The author of this book is unknown; although he person- some notice of the victory it records would have been taken ates Ezra, it is manifest from the style and contents of his by Josephus, who is on no occasion deficient when an opporbook that he lived long after that celebrated Jewish reformer. tunity presents itself of magnifying the achievements of his He pretends to visions and revelations, but they are so fanciful, countrymen. Philo is equally silent concerning this book Indigested, ridiculous, and absurd, that it is clear that the and its author. The time when and the place where he Holy Spirit could have no concern in dictating them. He be- lived are totally unknown. Dr. Prideaux refers the book to lieved that the day of judgment was at hand, and that the souls the time of Manasseh; Jahn assigns it to the age of the of good and wicked men would all be delivered out of hell Maccabees, and thinks it was written to animate the Jews after the day of judgment. Numerous rabbinical fables occur against the Syrians. Grotius refers it to the same period, in this book, particularly the account of the six days' crea-and is of opinion that it is wholly a parabolic fiction written tion, and the story of Behemoth and Leviathan, two mon- in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, when he came into strous creatures that are designed as a feast for the elect after Judæa to persecute the Jewish church, and that its design the day of resurrection, &c. He says that the ten tribes are was to confirm the Jews, under that persecution, in their gone away into a country which he calls Arsareth (xiii. 40 hope that God would send them a deliverer. According to 45.), and that Ezra restored the whole body of the Scrip- him, by Judith is intended Judæa: by Bethulia the temple tures, which had been entirely lost. (xiv. 21.) And he or house of God; and by the sword which went out thence, speaks of Jesus Christ and his apostles in so clear a manner, the prayers of the saints; Nebuchadonosor denotes the that the Gospel itself is scarcely more explicit. On these devil; Assyria his kingdom, that is, pride: Holofernes means accounts, and from the numerous vestiges of the language of Antiochus Epiphanes, who was the devil's instrument in the New Testament, and especially of the Revelation of that persecution, &c. &c. But such conjectures, as an able Saint John, which are discoverable in this book, Molden- commentator3 remarks, however ingenious, are better calcuhawer and some other critics conclude that it was written by lated to exhibit the powers of fancy and the abuse of learnsome converted Jew, in the close of the first or early in the ing, than to investigate truth, or throw light on what is unsecond century, who assumed the name of Esdras or Ezra. certain and obscure. But Archbishop Laurence considers those passages to be interpolations, and observes that the character which the unknown writer gives of the Messiah is a very different one from what a Christian would have given. He is therefore of opinion that this book was written by a Jew, who lived before the commencement of the Christian æra; and that, as an authentic record of Jewish opinions on several interesting points almost immediately before the rise of Christianity, it seems to deserve no inconsiderable attention.2 This book was rejected as apocryphal by Jerome.

III. Concerning the author of the book of TOBIT, or the time when he flourished, we have no authentic information. It professes to relate the history of Tobit and his family, who were carried into captivity to Nineveh by Shalmaneser; but it contains so many rabbinical fables, and allusions to the Babylonian demonology, that many learned men consider it as an ingenious and amusing fiction, calculated to form a pious temper, and to teach the most important duties. From some apparent coincidences between this book and some parts of the New Testament, Moldenhawer is disposed to refer it to the end of the first century: but Jahn and most other commentators and critics think it was written about one hundred and fifty or two hundred years before the birth of our Saviour. According to Jerome, who translated the book of Tobit into Latin, it was originally written in Chaldee by some Babylonian Jew. It was probably begun by Tobit, continued by his son Tobias, and finished by some other individual of the family; after which it was digested into the order in which we now have it. There is a Greek version of this book extant, much more ancient than Jerome's Latin translation: for it is referred to by Polycarp, Clement of Alexandria, and other fathers, who lived long before the time of Jerome. From this Greek version the Syriac translation was made, and also that which is found among the apocryphal books in our English Bibles. Although the book of Tobit has always been rejected from the sacred canon, it was cited with respect by the early fathers of the Christian church: the simplicity of its narrative, and the pious and moral lessons it Primi Ezræ Libri Versio Ethiopica. General Remarks, pp. 280a Ibid. pp. 309, 310. 320.

282. 291

The book of Judith was originally written in Chaldee, and translated into Latin. Besides this translation, there are two others,—one in Greek, and the other in Syriac; the former is attributed to Theodotion, but is certainly much older, for it is cited by Clement of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians, who flourished sixty years before Theodotion. The Syriac version was made from the Greek, whence also our present English translation was made.1

V. THE REST OF THE CHAPTERS OF THE BOOK OF ESTHER, which are found neither in the Hebrew nor in the Chaldee," were originally written in Greek, whence they were translated into Latin, and formed part of the Italic or old Latin version in use before the time of Jerome. Being there annexed to the canonical book, they passed without censure, but were rejected by Jerome in his version, because he confined himself to the Hebrew Scriptures, and these chapters never were extant in the Hebrew language. They are evidently the production of an Hellenistic Jew, but are considered both by Jerome and Grotius as a work of pure fiction, which was annexed to the canonical book of Esther by way of embellishment.5

From the coincidence between some of these apocryphal chapters and Josephus, it has been supposed that they are a compilation from the Jewish historian; and this conjecture is further confirmed by the mention of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, who lived no long time before Josephus. These additions to the book of Esther are often cited by the fathers of the church; and the council of Trent has assigned them a place among the canonical books.

VI. "THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON" is commonly ascribed to that Hebrew monarch, either because the author imitated his sententious manner of writing, or because he sometimes speaks in his name, the better to recommend his moral precepts. It is, however, certain that Solomon was not the author, for it was never extant in Hebrew, nor received into

a Mr. Hewlett, in his Preface to the book of Judith.

Grotii Præfatio ad Annotationes in Librum Judith, apud Crit. Sacr. tom. v. p. 50. Moldenhawer, Introd. ad Vet. Test. pp. 155-155. Dr. Prideaux's Connection, vol. i. pp. 36-40. Jahn, Introd. ad Vet. Fred. pp. 554-561. From the subscription to the book of Esther in LXX., it seems to have been translated B. c. 163. ; at which time it is probable the apocryphal parts were first interpolated.