the writings of the New Teftament were read in the Churches, where Juftin Martyr lived, they were read in Syria; and if they were read in Syria, they were read in the Syriack language, because no other was there understood, and confequently a tranflation of the New Teftament into Syriack was made out of Greek in Justin Martyr's time, i. e. within a few years of the Apostles' time.

h

It cannot be improper here to add, that in the book which goes under Juftin Martyr's name, called Quæft. & Respons. ad Orthodox. I find mention of a Syriack translation of the Old Teftament, as there is also in St. Austin's famous book De Civit. Dei, 1. 15. c. 13. I might argue from hence the great probability of a Verfion being made of the New also into the fame tongue; but, I confefs, I queftion the genuineness of that book, there being fomething in it certainly later than Juftin; and yet I cannot but think the learned Dr. Cave's conjecture concerning it deferves confidering, that perhaps it may be that piece of Juftin's, which Photius calls Solutiones Summaria Dubitationum adverfus Religionem, only much interpolated. This conjecture feems probable, which, though the learned Doctor proposes as his own', was made long before him by Andr. Rivet, from whom it is evident he borrowed it, though he mentions not his name. This is the more obfervable, because that learned writer in the page before treats Sandius very roughly, for propofing an opinion of Rivet's in the fame place as his own, without mentioning Rivet's name'.

h Hift. Liter. in Juftin. Martyr.

i Loc. cit.

* Critic. Sacr. lib. 2. c. 5. §. 3. That opinion is, that this book cannot be Juftin's, becaufe he, being a Samaritan, would never have inter

preted the Syriack word Ofanna by μεγαλωσύνην ὑπερκειμένην, when it is evidently of another fignification. Vid. Quæft. & Refponf. ad Orthod. Quæft. 50.

CHAP.

CHAP. XVII.

The Syriack Verfion proved to be made in or near the Apoftles' Times from fome internal Evidences.

Obf. 5.THE Syriack Version of the New Testament now extant is very probably the fame, which was made in or near the Apostles' time.

1. This is conftantly afferted by the Syrian Churches from whom we had it. See the Hiftory of it above.

2. There was no more probability of the Syrian Churches lofing their tranflation, than of the Western Churches lofing their Greek copies. For the fame reason as the Greek copies did multiply, the Syriack ones would multiply too; and for the fame reason that care would be taken to preferve the one, care would be taken to preferve the other. They were both esteemed the Word of God, though in different languages; and in the nature of things it seems morally impoffible, that the Churches of Antioch, Jerufalem, &c. could ever lose a treasure of so much value, and which they fo much efteemed, as they did these facred writings. Add to this, that the Jewish Targums made about this time were fafely preserved; and the Christians cannot, with any reason, be supposed less careful of their facred books than the Jews.

3. There are internal characters in the tranflation itself, which evidence its very great antiquity, or its being made near that period which I have affigned it: for inftance,

I. The first inftance in the Syriack verfion which I propose as proving that antiquity of it, which I contend for, is the tranflation of the name Ptolemais, as it is in our Greek copies, Act xxi. 7. by the name Acu, or Aco; for it may as juftly, or indeed more justly, be pointed with the vowel Dfekopho, than Ezozo.

Now to make out what I defign, I obferve the most antient name of this place among the Ifraelites was y Aco, or Acco,

Judg. i. 31. This name undoubtedly continued long in use, and afterwards changed into Ptolemais; though at what time, or on what occafion, I cannot certainly tell. Mr. Reiland TM, and after him Dean Prideaux ", fay it was repaired by Ptolemy Philadelphus, and from him had its new name Ptolemais. This was about 250 years before Chrift; and seems a very probable account; I fay probable only, because I know not what antient author relates it. However this be, it is certain, the former name was antiquated and out of ufe among the Romans, and they called it Ptolemais. So we find by Pliny, Ptolemais Claudii Cæfaris colonia quæ quondam Ace; and Stephanus Περὶ πόλεων: Πτολεμαΐς, πόλις Φοινίκης, ἐκαλεῖτο δὲ wgóTepor 'Ax P: Ptolemais was formerly called Ace. How the termination fhould change into e, is very eafily accounted for; such changes being common, when a word is taken out of one language into another 9.

0

Now why the Syriack interpreter should translate it Aco, and not retain Ptolemais, can be accounted for no other way, but by supposing the perfons, for whom his Verfion was made, were more acquainted with one name than the other. Upon any other fuppofition, it would have been abfurd for him to have changed it. I argue then hence, that this Version muft be made either before, or very soon after the destruction of Jerufalem; because till that time one may fuppofe a people (viz. the Jews) to retain the old name Aco ftill, out of a fondness, very predominant in that people, for its antiquity: but how they, or indeed any other part of Syria, could after the Roman conqueft call it by a name different from the Romans, seems to me impoffible to conceive. Befides, it was, as Pliny fays, a Roman colony, even in Claudius's reign, and therefore very remarkable; and fo in confequence muft in thirty or forty years more (in which time the conqueft alfo was) be much more known by the name Ptolemais, by which the Romans called it. To fuppose therefore that this translation, in which

m Palæstin. Illuftrat. 1. 2. c. 7. "Connect. of Hift. of the Old and New Teftam. Par. 2. Book 2. P. 61.

• Natur. Hiftor. 1. 5. c. 19. » Apud Fuller. Miscell. Sacr. 1. 4. c. 15.

Vid. Fuller, 1. 4. c. z.

we

we meet with this old name inftead of the new one, was made at any great distance of time after the deftruction of Jerufalem, is to fuppofe the tranflator acting quite contrary to the design of his translation; and, instead of a name well known to all, to substitute an antiquated name, which could be known but to few. On the other hand, fuppofing it made about the period I affign, it was a very proper tranflation, being made for those, who were wont to call this place by this name, as indeed it appears out of the Talmud in many places the Jews in our Saviour's time were wont to do'. I only add farther, that Josephus, though a Jew, both in his History and Antiquities of the Jewish War, whenever his occafion led him to mention this place, calls it as St. Luke does in the place above-cited in the Acts, Ptolemais, and never Ace, nor Aco: unless perhaps where he is relating the history of the Ifraelites' first entrance into this country; there indeed,' as it was proper, in transcribing the history of the Ifraelites' poffeffions in Canaan, he mentions this city under the name of 'Apx, which undoubtedly ought to be read 'Ax, as one of the best of English criticks, Mr. Fuller ", has conjectured and proved; though Bochart thinks the letter ought not to be caft away, and opposes Mr. Fuller herein *.

II. The next argument for that antiquity of the Syriack Verfion, which I have affigned, I collect from its translation of the Greek words “Eλanv, “EJvn, 'Edunòs, and their adverbial derivatives 'Exausi and 'Ennas. After a careful examination of all those places in the original Greek, where either of these words occur, and a comparison of them with the feveral translations of them in the Syriack Verfion, there feems to me the most just reason to conclude,

1. That the author of this Verfion was one, who had been formerly a Jew.

2. That he lived either before, or not long after the deftruction of Jerufalem by Titus, and the difperfion of the Jews.

Now before these I must premise a few remarks concerning the meaning of those Greek words in the writings of the New Teftament.

(1.) The word "EXA in the New Teftament is made use of by the writers of it to denote all the world befides the Jews. The word properly fignified a Greek; but ever fince the Grecian conquefts by Alexander, the Greeks became the most noted people, and the Jews, who had but very little acquaintance with the world, called all nations by their name. Hence we find frequently the diftinction of all mankind into 'loudates xal "Envas, into Jews and Greeks, or (as our tranflators, regarding the fenfe more than the words, do well enough render it) Jews and Gentiles: juft as the antient Greeks divided all mankind into 'Ελληνας and Βαρβάρους 2. But this remark is fo obvious and well known, that I shall infift no farther on it.

(2.) The word "Ern in the New Testament denotes in a peculiar fenfe all nations befides the Jews. Thus the old Hebrews in their language distinguished themselves from all others, by calling them man and by, i.e. the nations. It would be fuperfluous to produce inftances of this, there being scarce a page in the New Teftament, where there are not one or more instances.

(3) In the ideas of both these words the Jews implied fomething that was bad; or, which is the fame thing, they looked upon all the world as profane, finners, unclean, &c. They esteemed themselves as a peculiar people, privileged above all the world, only in covenant with God, and fo only in hope of his favour; no names therefore were thought bad enough for the people of other countries; uncircumcifed and reprobate of God were with them fynonymous terms; and they could fay nothing of a perfon among themselves that would found worse, than to liken him to a man of another nation. This is fufficiently evident out of the New Testament; for instance, when our Saviour speaks of a reprobate abandoned perfon, unfit for z Thucyd. 1. 1. §. 3. Not. 5. in Scholiis. Strab. 1. 14. p. 977. Vid. et Rom. i. 14.

A&.

y Rom. i. 16. ii. 9. iii. 9. xix. 10, 17. 1 Cor. i. 22. Gal. iii. 28. and many other places.

x. 32.