thing thereon; and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, for the time of figs was not yet."

He obferves, that the difficulties which attend the relation of this occurrence, may be comprehended under three heads. • First, Confidering our Saviour only as man, it appears very extraordinary, that he should expect to find figs, when the feafon of figs was not yet.

Secondly, It appears to be inconfiftent with our Saviour's character, to curfe the fig-tree at all for not bearing figs; more efpecially, as it is faid, the feafon of figs was not yet.

Thirdly, This paffage feems to imply, that our Saviour did not know that the tree had no figs upon it till he came up to it; which is thought to be contradictory to other actions recorded of our Saviour, by which it appears that he was omniscient."

To obviate the firft difficulty, he obferves, that the word napos fometimes fignifies only in general the fit and proper time for any event to come to pafs, without any conftant or periodical revolution, for which he quotes Acts i. 7. "It is not for you to know, xpores n xapes, the times or feafons which the Father has put in his own power. And if xaços is here taken in this fenfe, he fays all difficulties vanish at once.

But he obferves farther, that yap, which in the paffage in queftion is rendered for, as a reason, is frequently used as a mere expletive, and sometimes only as a pofitive affirmation. And he quotes Dr. Shaw's travels to prove, that the fig-tree produces, at three different times of the year, three kinds of figs in fucceffion, and that the fruit of the fig-tree precedes the leaves, He infers, that Jefus might reasonably expect to find figs upon a tree which had leaves, though the feafon, emphatically called the season of figs, was not yet come.

From the whole, fays he, it is evident, that our Saviour, feeing, in March, a fig-tree at a diftance, having leaves, might reasonably expect to find fruit upon it, though it was not the feafon of figs, becaufe leaves did not ufually appear till after the

fruit.

In answer to the fecond objection, he obferves, that if it was confiftent with our Saviour's character to wifh, and caufe the fig-tree to wither at all, for not bearing figs, the former objection having been removed, no additional difficulty will arise from its not being the feafon of figs. It was not confiftent with our Saviour's character to curfe the fig-tree through pique or paffion, because, being hungry, he was difappointed of food; and the Author obferves, that this could not be his motive; because the same exertion of power which caufed the fig-tree to wither, would have caused it immediately to produce fruit. But it was confiftent with his character, miraculously to cause a figtree to wither, that he might forcibly inculcate an important truth

H 4

truth to his difciples, juft as he was about to leave them; and this appears from the whole of the context to have been his motive; for it is faid, in verfe 20, that In the morning as they paffed by, they faw the fig-tree dried up by the roots. And Peter, calling to remembrance, faith unto him: Mafler! behold the figtree which thou curfedft is withered away. And Jefus anfwering faith unto them, have faith in God. For verily, I fay unto you, wh foever fhall fay unto this mountain, be thou removed, and be thou caft into the fea: and fall not doubt in his heart, but feali believe that thofe things which he faith fhall come to pass, he fhall have whatsoever he faith.' What then can be more evident, fays this Author, than that our Saviour worked this miracle, to ftrengthen the faith of his difciples, and fhew them, that if they did but continue ftedfaft in their belief, the fame power should be granted likewife to them.

The Author obferves, that the third objection relates only to a particular doctrine among Chriftians, whether Chrift was omnifcient, which feems inconfiftent with his expectation of finding figs, where no figs were to be found, though omnifcience is imputed to him in other parts of fcripture. To obviate this objection, he fuppofes, that it was not confiftent with the fcheme of redemption for Chrift conftantly to exert his power of omnifcience upon earth, for that his temptation, and agonies in the garden, and on the crofs, were not lefs incompatible with the power and purity of that Being who was with the Father before the world was, and by whom every thing was made which was made, than his not knowing every thing. He proceeds to refer fome actions of the fame Being into an human nature, and others into a divine nature, and with many orthodox divines, to fuppofe Chrift neceffarily to know, and neceffarily to be ignorant of the fame thing, at the fame time, in confequence of thefe two natures, fublifting in what they call one perfon. But as under this head he has faid nothing that has not been advanced, denied, oppofed, and defended, as long as polemic divinity has been written, no account of it can, with propriety, be given in a Review of new Books. Suppofing Chrift to be liable to mistake, as man, and yet to be invefted with fupernatural powers, as evidences of a divine miffion, this event will perhaps appear mere clear in the following paraphrafe, than the Author of the Differtation before us has made it.

When Jefus was coming from Bethany, with his difciples, he was hungry, and feeing a fig tree at a distance, with leaves upon it, which ufually preceded the fruit, he imagined that he fhould find figs upon it, though the feafon of figs was not yet come: but when he came he found leaves only. This inftance of mistake and difappointment naturally tended to render him cheap in the eyes of his difciples, and therefore he made it the occafion

occafion of exerting a fupernatural power, which should affert his dignity, and compel their reverence. He faid, "Let no man eat fruit of thee hereafter, for ever;" and the next morning they faw the fig-tree dried up from the root.

This Author indeed infinuates, that Chrift might know there were only leaves on the tree, and yet appear to be ignorant; if,' fays he, Chrift intended to work the miracle, for the reafon I have affigned, it was neceflary that his difciples fhould be induced, by fome circumftance, to take particular notice of the tree, that the miracle might be more manifeft; and what circumftance could be more likely to occafion an attentive ob-, servation, than their looking for figs among the leaves, and finding none? But, admitting Chrift to be omnifcient, how can we account for his teaching his difciples one truth, in a manner that should lead them to doubt of another? His omniscience was a truth to which their delegated power of working miracles was fubordinate: it was one of the principles which this power was to evince; and it would have been happy both for us and for them, if, fuppofing the facts to be as they are here flated, Chrift had told them his ignorance was feigned, when he applied the miracle, which he feigned ignorance for an occafion to produce.

In the introduction to the third Differtation, the Author endeavours to apologize for the errors of our English tranflation of the Bible, which he fays are many; but he has faid nothing to obviate the difficulty which muft arife from fuppofing a'miraculous revelation to depend for its ufe upon the human power of tranflators, who, as this Author allows, are by necellary infirmity fometimes ignorant and fometimes idle.

He fays that many errors of our tranflators are ftill unrectified, and that paffages may be found which, though they have efcaped all commentators, convey a fenfe in the tranflation directly contrary to that of the original:

In these inftances the world has been fo far from having a revelation of truth, that it has had a revelation of falfehcod: the divine infpiration of Evangelifts and Apoftles has not only been ineffectual for good purpofes, but has been the means of propagating errors under the highest fanction: There are paffages,' fays this Author, which contain admonitions without meaning, and propofitions which involve contradictions; affertions which countenance vice, and affirmations which are inconfiftent with the attributes of God, not in the English verfion only, but all others of which I have any knowlege, fo numerous that to rectify all would require a volume.'

The Author has contented himfelf with pointing out one inftance under each of thefe claffes, and correcting the error.

In

In these instances it must be acknowledged that a revelation of the divine will was not published by the difciples of Christ seventeen centuries ago, but during the courfe of the laft month by Becket in the Strand. And it is furely to be regretted, that the whole Chriftian world will, instead of the eternal truths which lie concealed in facred writ, continue to have admonitions without meaning, propofitions which are contradictory, affertions which countenance vice, and affirmations which are inconfiftent with the divine attributes, till this Author fhall reaffume his labours, and cease to be content with giving fo much less than what he infinuates to be in his power.

In proportion as the labours of this gentleman, and other labours of the fame kind are important, they injure the credit of the work they explain, and while they prove that no man has yet known what is revealed, they render the divine authority of revelation doubtful; for it is very difficult to conceive that those who wrote by the inspiration of the spirit of wisdom and truth, should exprefs themselves fo as eventually to inculcate error and falfehood.

The paffages which this Author has corrected, are Philipians ii. 29, 30. where he fays, the words Your lack of service to me,' fhould be your lack of fervice by me.' Philipians, iii. 1, 2, 3. where beware of Dogs, should be beware left your members be defiled by circumcifion, James ii. 10. where offend in one point, fhould be waver or ftumble in one point; the account of the change of water into wine at the marriage feaft, in which the word bowo, which we render well drunk, does not express the having drunk much in a small space of time, which implies excefs, but the having confumed much wine, because the feaft had continued many days; which removes the objection that a miracle was wrought to fupply the company at this feaft with more wine, when they were drunk already;-and Mark xvi. 16. he that believeth, and is baptifed, fhall be faved; but he that believeth not shall be damned; where, for fhall, he fays we should read will. Those who wish to see in what manner thefe emendations are fupported, muft have recourse to the book.

In the fourth Differtation on Chrift's temptation in the wilderness, the Author advances this ftrange propofition, that it is a tranfaction the leaft underflood, of any relative to our Saviour, and yet the most important of any to his followers. That what is most important in revelation fhould be leaft intelligible, feems to be wholly inconfiftent with the only view that providence could be fuppofed to have in giving us a revelation at all. It is remarkable that all advocates for Christianity, who pretend to new interpretations, explode every other with as much exultation as an Infidel; which gives too much colour for faying that the old

interpretations were not really more fatisfactory, before a new one was devised, than afterwards, but that, they were defended merely because to give them up was to give up the cause. This Author joins the Infidels in expofing the abfurdity of this story, as it has always hitherto been understood, whether of a reality or of a vifion; if his interpretation therefore is not established, the triumph of the Infidel is compleat. He endeavours to fhew that no expreffion in the account of this tranfaction neceffarily fuppofes the perfonal appearance of Satan, and that it is totally inconfiftent with the whole Scripture phraseology to fuppofe the actions here related of him to have been actually and literally performed.

He fays, that the fuppofition of Satan's perfonal appearance is inconfiftent with the relation of the firft circumftance in the tranfaction. It is never fuppofed that the words Jefus was led up by the fpirit into the wilderness,' are to be taken in a literal fenfe, yet the fame word by which St. Matthew expreffes Chrift's being led by the fpirit, is ufed by St. Luke to exprefs his being taken by the Devil up into an high mountain, and he thinks there cannot be a greater contradiction than to fuppofe, that this word when referred to one Being, implies only a mental impulfe, and when to another, the exertion of a phyfical force. He cites feveral paffages of the New Teftament, to fhew that many things are imputed to Satan, which Satan did not literally perform; I would have come to you, fays Paul, but SATAN hindered us; SATAN entered into Judas Iscariot, SATAN cometh and taketh the word out of their hearts; the DEVIL walketh about as a roaring lion; refift the DEVIL, and he will flee from you, and many others. This temptation of Chrift by Satan, he therefore fuppofes to be exactly of the fame kind with ours, and the account given by the Evangelifts to be to the following effect.

When Jefus Chrift, after his baptifm, had received the effufion of the holy fpirit, it was fuggefted to him by the spirit to go into the wilderness. There he fafted forty days and nights, and had various temptations during that space of time. But at the expiration of the forty days, being harraffed by fatigue, debilitated by abftinence, and importuned by the preffing calls of hunger, very agreeably to his human nature, in fuch a fituation, where no human means of refreshment could be obtained, he began to confider, that if he was the fon of God, if there was now a fuperior nature united to his human, whe ther he fhould not, without waiting for any direction from above, or the impulfe of the fpirit, endeavour to use supernatural means for the fupply of his prefent neceffities, by converting the ftones of the wilderness into bread. But he determined not to do it, on further reflection. For he confidered, that this

miraculous